u. -S THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES GIFT OF 'alter Hothman THE ORIGIN O F PRINTING. IN TWO ESSAYS: L The Subftance of Dr. Middle ton's DifTertation on the Origin of Printing in England. II. Mr. M eer man's Account of the Invention of the Art at Harleim, and its Progrefs to Mentz. WITH OCCASIONAL REMARKS; AND AN APPENDIX. THE SECOND EDITION: With Improvements. LONDON: Printed for W. BOWYER and J. NICHOLS, in Red-Lion- Paifage, Fleet-Street. M D C C L X X V I. z [ iii ] E Laeh, a Carthufian Monk, a ML copy of which was in the library of Gerard Jo. Voffius (fee lib. iii. de H'tjlor. Latin, c. 6.); and afterwards continued to the year 1474, when it was firft printed at Cologn, typis Arnoldi ter Hutrnen. It was re-pub- lifhed in 1481, by Heinricus Wirczburc de Vach, a Cluniac Monk, without mentioning the name either of the printer or of the place of publication. We are told, indeed, in a colophon, that the book was publifhed fub Ledovica Gruerie Comite magnified ; but, as the country whence this illuftrious nobleman aflumed his title was unknown to the learned edi- tor of the Ortgxnti Typographic^, it will be no eafy talk for an Englifhman to difcover it : nor is it of much confequence ; as t;his edition, though fomewhat enlarged, was milerably in- terpolated throughout, and particularly fo in the account of the invention of Printing. It is plain, however, that Caxton had one at leaft, or more probably both of thefe editions be- fore him, when he wrote his Continuation of the Poly chronic an, as he mentions this work in his preface, and adopts the fenti- ments of its editor. (See Meerman, vol. ii. p. 37. and his Docununta, N VII, XXIV, and XXV.). N. 1 (Recule, OF PRINTING. ii (Recule, &c. ibid.), and whence books had been firlt printed with date, the year before [F}. To the (ilence of Caxton, we may add that of the Dutch writers : for it is very ftrange, as Mr. Chevillier obferves, if the ftory of the record be true, " That Adrian Junius, who has collected all the groundlefs ones that favour the pretenfions of Harleim, (hould never have heard of it." (L'Origine de rimprimerie de Paris, c. i. p. 25.) [F] Caxton tells us, in the preface to The Hiflory of Troye, that he began that tranflation March 1, 1468, at Bruges; that he proceeded on with it at Ghent ; that he fmifhed it at Cologn, 1471; and printed it, probably, in that city with his own types. He was thirty years abroad, chiefly in Holland ; and lived in the court of Margaret duchefs of Burgundy, fifter of our Edward IV. It was therefore much eafier to print his book at Cologn, than to crofs the fea to learn the art at Oxford. But further, there was a fpecial occafion for his printing it abroad. CorfelUs had brought over fo far the art of printing as lie had learnt it at Harleim, which was the method of printing on wooden fcparate types, having the face of the letter cut upon them. But the art of cajiing metal types being divulged in 1462 by the workmen of Mentz, Caxton thought proper to learn that advantageous branch before lie returned to England, This method of cafi- ingthe types was fuch an improvement, that they looked on it as the original of printing; and Caxton, as moft others do, afcribes that to Mentz. Caxton was an afliftant with Turner in getting off Corfellis ; but it is no where fuppokd that he came with him into England, See Meerman, vol. ii. p. 34* B, C 2 But M THE. ORIGIN But thirdly ; the rnoft direct and internal proof of its forgery, is its afcribing the origin of Printing to Harleim ; p where John Guttemberg, the inventor, is faid to have been perfonally at work when Corfellis was brought away, and the art itfelf to have been firft carried to lVJentz by a brother of one of Guttem- berg's workmen [G] ;" for it is certain beyond all doubt, that Printing was firft invented and propagated from Mentz. Caxton's teftimony feems alone to be decifive ; who, in the Continuation of the Poly- chronicon, fol. 433 [H], fays, " About this time (viz. anno 1455) the crafte of emprynting was firft: found in Mogounce in Almayne, &c." He was abroad in the very country, and at the time, when the firft project and thoiight of it began, and the rudeft effays of it were attempted ; where he con- tinued for thirty years, viz. from 1441 to 147 1 : and, as he was particularly curious and inquifitive after this new art, of which he was endeavouring to get a perfect information, he could not be ignorant of the place where it was firft exercifed. This confutes what Palmer conjectures, to confirm the credit of the record, " That the compiler might take up with the common report, that patted current at tjie time in Holland, in favour qf Harleim -, or probably re- [G] See the words of the record as printed above, p. 5. [H] The teftimony of Caxton will perhaps not appear fo very decisive as Dr. M. imagines, if the circumftances mentioned above, in the note [EJ, p. 9, io, are candidly cqnfidered. And fee the Second Effay, paflim* N. ceive OF P R I N T I N G. 13 eeive it from Caxton himfelf ;" (Hift. of Printing, book iii. p. 3x8:) for it does not appear that there was any fuch report at the time, nor many years after; and Caxton, we. fee, was better informed from his own knowledge; and, had Palmer been equally curious, he could not have been ignorant of this teftimony of his in the very cafe. Befides the evidence of Caxton, we have another contemporary authority, from the Black Book, or Regifter of the Garter, publifhed by Mr. Anftis, where, in the thirty-fifth year of Henry VI, anno 1457, it ls ^ a ^ " I n tms Y ear f 0Llr mo ft pius king, the art of printing bookes firft began at Mentz, a famous city of Germany." Hift. of Garter, voL.ii. p. 161. Fabian likewife, the writer of the Chronicle, an author of good credit, who lived at the fame time with Caxton, though fome years younger, fays, '* This yere, (viz. 35 Henry VI,) after the opynyon of dyverfe wryters, began in a citie of Almaine, named Mogunce, the crafte of empryntynge bokys, which fen that tyme hath had wonderful encreace.'* Thefe three teftimonies have not been produced be- fore, that I know of; two of them were communi- cated to me by Mr. Baker, who of all men is the moft able, as well as the moft willing, to give informa- tion in every point of curious and uncommon hiftory. I need not purfue this queftion any farther ; the teftimonies commonly alledged in it may be fcen in Mr. Maittaire, Palmer, &c. I fhajl only obferve, that i 4 THE ORIGIN' we have full and authentic evidence for the caufe of Mentz, in an edition of Livy from that place, anno 1518, by John Scheffer, the fon of Peter, the partner and fon-in-law of John Fauft: where the patent of PRIVILEGE GRANTED BY THE EMPEROR TO THE PRIN- TER ; the prefatory epiftle of Erafmus , the epiftle dedi- catory to the prince by Ulrich Hutten , the epiftle to the reader of the two learned men who had the care of the edition ; all concur in aflerting the origin of the art to that city, and the invention and firft exer- cife of it to Fauft : and Erafmus particularly, who was a Putchman, would not have (leaded againjl [I] his own [I] It muft be allowed that the edition of Livy (which, by the bye, Dr. Middleton has antedated, it being publifhed in 1 5 19) is indeed a full and authentic evidence for the caufe of Mentz. The feveral authorities Dr. Middleton has referred to are preferred by Mr. Meerman, in his Documenta, N XLVII. The emperor's patent, dated Dec. 9, 15 18, begins thus : il Maximili anus, &c. honefto noflro, & facri Imperii fideli nobis dilecto Johanni Scheffer, Chalchographo Mogun- tino, gratiam noftfSw Csefaream, & omne bonum. Cum, fkut dotti & moniti fumus fide dignorum teftimonio, inge- niomm Chalcographiae, authore avo tuo, inventum, feli- cibus increments, in univerfum orbem promanaverit, &c." It is faid by Ulrich Hutten, in the dedication to Albert the archbilhop, " Si vel locum voluit Livius aliquem fuo decorare egreffu, quern debuit urbi, artis omnium, quae uf- que funt, aut unquam fuerunt, prastantissim.* inven- trici ac alumna (impressori am puto, quam hsec dedit) prarferre ?" In the epiftle to the reader by Nicholas Car- bach 1 us, OF PRINTING, t$ own country, had there been any ground for the claim of Harleim. But to return to the Lambeth record : as it was never beard of before the publication of Atkins's book, fo it has never fince been feen or produced by any man , though the Regifters of Canterbury have on many occafions been diligently and particularly fearched for it. They were examined without doubt very carefully by archbifhop Parker, for the compil- ing his .Antiquities of the Britifh Church -, where, in the life of Thomas Bourchier, though he congratu- lates that age on the noble and ufeful invention of eachius, Jo.Scheffer is mentioned as " Chalcographus, a cujus avo Chalcographe in hac primum urbe invent a cxercitaque eft." Erasmus's words are, " Quorum princeps fuiffe fertur Johannes Faust, avus ejus, cui Livium hunc debemus; ut hoc egregium decus partim ad Johannem Scheffer, velut hereditaria jure devolvatur, partim ad Mo- cuNTiAC^E civitatis gloriam pertineat." And Fabian, be- fore him, fays, after the opinion of diverse wri- ters. So that it is probable there was feme report (whether upon Harleim's claiming the honour of -printing on wooden types firft, or not) that Mentz was not the place where Printing was firft invented, though the united force of the above authentic teftimonies might feem to confirm its claim to that honour. It may be nearer the truth, if we fuppofe (to apply the words of Ulrich Hutten a little differently from his intention) that Harleim was the inventrix, and Menfz the alumna of Printing; though the improvements made in the art by the latter were lb very conliderable, as to tlelerve the name of a new invention. N. Printing, 16 THE ORIGIN' Printing, yet he is filent as to the introduction of it into England by the endeavours of that archbifhop ; nay, his giving the honour of the invention to Straf- burg clearly Ihews that he knew nothing of the ftory of Corfellis conveyed from Harleim, and that the record was not in being in his time. Palmer himfelf owns, " That it is not to be found there now j for that the late earl of Pembroke allured him, that he had employed a perfon for fome time to fearch for it, but in vain.'* (Hift. of Printing, p. 314.)* On thefe grounds we may pronounce the record to be a forgery; though all the writers above-mentioned take pains to fupport its credit, and call it an authen- tic piece. (See Contents, p. vi.) Atkins, who by his manner of writing feems to have been a bold and vain man, might poilibly be the inventor ; for he had an interefl in impofing it upon the world, in order to confirm the argument of his book, that Printing was of the Prerogative Royal ; in oppofition to the Company of Stationers, with whom he was engaged in an expenfive fuit of law, in de- fence of the King's Patents, under which he claimed feme exclujive powers of Printing. For he tells us-, p. 3, " That, upon canfidering the thing, he could not but think that a public perfon, more eminent than a mercer, and a public purfe, muft needs be con- cerned in fc* public a good : and the more he confider- ed, the more inquifitive he was to find out the truth." So that he had formed his hypothefis before he had found his record 5 which he publifhed, he fays, " as a friend OF PRINTING. 17 a friend to truth ; not to fufFer one man to be entitled to the worthy atchievements of another ; and as a friend to himfelf, not to lofe one of his beft argu- ments of entitling the King to this An." But, if At- kins was not himfelf the contriver, he was impofed upon at leaft by fome more crafty , who imagined that his intereft in the caufe, and the warmth that he (hewed in profecuting ir, would induce him to fwallow for genuine whatever was offered of the kind [K]. We [K] On the other hand, is it likely that Mr. Atkins would d^vc to forge a record, to be laid before the king and council, and which his adverfaries, with whom he was at law, could difprove ? (2.) He fays he received this hiftory from a per- fon of honour, who was fome time keeper of the Lambeth Library. It was eafy to have confuted this evidence, if it was falfe, when he publifhed it, Apr. 25, 1664. (3.) John Bagford (who was born in England 165 1, and might know Mr. Atkins, who died in 1677), in his Hiftory of Printing at Oxford, blames thofe who doubted of the authenticity of the Lambeth Mf. ; and tells us that he knew Sir John Birkenhead had an authentic copy of it, when in 1665 [which Bagford by fome miftake calls 1664, and is followed in it by Meer- man] he vvjs appointed by the houfe of commons to draw up a bill relating to the exercife of that art. This is con- firmed by the Journals of that houfc, Friday, 0&. 27, 1665, vol. VIII. p. 622 ; where it is ordered that this Sir John Bir- kenhead fhould carry the bill on that head to the houfe of lords, for their confent. The act was agreed to in the upper houfe on Tuefcay Oft. 31, and received the royal afient on the fame day ; immediately after which, the parliament was prorogued. See Journals of the Houfe of Lords, Vol. XI. D pj 700, i8 T H E O R I G I N We have now cleared our hands of the record y but the book (lands firm, as a monument of the ex- ercife p. yco. It is probable then that, after Mr. Atkins had pub- lished his book in April 1664, the parliament thought pro- per, the next year, to inquire into the right cf the King's prerogative; and that Sir John Birkenhead took care to infpe& the original, then in the cultody of Arch- biihop Sheldon : and, finding it not fufficient to prove what Mr. Atkins had cited it for, made no report of the Mf* to the houfe ; but only, moved, that the former law fhould be renewed. The Mf. was probably never returned to the proper keeper of it; but was afterwards burnt in the fire of London, Sept. 13, 1666. (4.) That Printing was praftifed at Oxford, was a prevailing opinion long before Atkins. Bryan Tvvyne, in his Apologia pro Antiquitate Aca- demies Oxonienfis, publifhed 1608, tells us, it is fo delivered down in ancient writings', having heard probably of this Lambeth Mf. And king Charles ] i in his letters patent to the Univerfity of Oxford, March 5, in the eleventh of his reign, 1635, rnentions Printing as brought to Oxford from abroad. As to what is objected, " that it is not likely that the prefs fhould undergo a ten or eleven years fleep, viz. from 1468 to 1479," it is probably urged without foundation. Corfellis might print feveral books without date or name of the place, as Ulric Zell did at Cologn, from 1467 to 1473, and from that time to 1494. Corfellis's name, it may be faid, appears not in any of his publications ; nor does that of Joannes Peterfhemius. See Merrman, vol. I. p. 34; vol. li. p. 21 27, kc. Further, the famous Shakespeare, who was born in 1564, and died .1616, in the Second Part of Henry VI. Aft OF PRINTING. 19 ercife of printing in Oxford fix years older than any book of Caxton with date. The fa& is ftrong, and what Act. iv. Sc. 7, introduces the rebel 'John Cade, thus upbraid- ing Lord Treafurer Say : " Thou haft moft traiteroufly corrupted the youth of the realm, in creating a grammar- fchool ; and whereas before, our forefathers had no other book, but the fcore and the tally, thou haft caufed Print- ing to be ufed ; and, contrary to the king, his crown, and dignity, thou haft built a paper-mill." Whence now had Shakefpeare this accufation againft Lord Say ? We are told in the Poetical Regifter, vol. II. p. 231. ed. Lond. 1724, that it was from Fabian, Pol. Vergil, Hall, Holling- siied, Grafton, Stow, Speed, &c. But not one of thefe afcribes Printing to the reign of Henry VI. On the contrary, Stow, in his Annals, printed at London, 1560, p. 686, gives it exprefsly to William Caxton, 147 1. " The noble fcience of Printing was about this time found in Ger- many at Magunce, by one John Guthemburgus a knight. One Conradus an Almaine brought it into Rome : William Caxton of London mercer brought it into England about the yeare 1471, and firft pradYifed the fame in the Abbic of St. feter at Weftminfter ; after which time it was Iikewife prac- ti fed in the Abbies of St. Auguftine at Canturburic, Saint Albons, and other monafteries of England." W r hat then fhall we fay, that the above is an anachronifm arbitrarily put into the mouth of an ignorant fellow out of Shake- fpeare' s head? I could believe fo, but that we have the re- cord of Mr. Atkins confirming the fame in K. Charles the Second's time. Shall we fay, that Mr, Atkins borrowed the flory from Sakefpeare, and publifhed it with fome improve- ments of money laid out by Henry VI ; from whence it D 2 might *o T H E O R I G I N what in ordinary cafes panes for certain evidence of the age of books ; but in this, there are fuch contrary facts to balance it, and fuch circumftances to turn the might be received by Charles II, as a prerogative of tha crown ? But this is improbable, fince Shakefpeare makes Lord Treafurer Say the instrument of importing it, of whom Mr. Atkins mentions not a word. Another difference there will ftill be between Shakefpeare and the Lambeth Mf, ; the Poet placing it before J449> in which year Lord Say was beheaded; the Mf. between 1454 and 1459, when Bour-r chier was Archbifhop. We rauft fay then, that Lord Say firft laid the feheme, and fent fome one to Harleim, though without fuccefs ; but after fome years it was attempted hap- pily by Bourchier. And we muft. conclude, that as the ge- nerality of writers have overlooked the invention of Print- ing at Harleim with wooden types, and have afcribed it to Mentz where metal types were firfl; made ufe of; fo in Eng- land they have paffeel by Corfellis (or the firft Oxford Printer, whoever he was, fie the note [P], p. 24), who printed with wooden types at Oxford, and only mentioned Caxton as the original artift who printed with metal types at Weflminfter. See Meerman, vol, II, p. vii, viii. It is flrange that the learned Commentators on our great Dramatic Poet, who are fo minutely particular upon lels important cccafions, fhould every one of them, Dr. Johnson excepted, pafs by this curious paffage, leaving it entirely unnoticed, And how has Dr. Johnsqn trifled, by flightly remarking, that " Shake- speare is a little too early with this accufation !" The great Critic had undertaken to decypher obfolete words, and inveitigate unintelligible phrafes; but never, perhaps, be- ftqvyed a thought on Caxton or Corfellis, on Mr. Atkins or {he authenticity of the Lambeth Record. B. & N. fcale. OF PRINTING. 21 fcale, that, to fpeak my mind freely, I take the date in queftion to have been falfified originally by the printer, either by defign or miftake, and an x to have been dropt or omitted in the age of its impreffion. Examples of the kind are common in the Hiftory of Printing. I have obferved feveral dates altered very artfully after publication, to give them the credit of greater antiquity. They have at Harleim, in large quarto, a tranflation into Dutch of Bartholomew de proprietatibus rerum, printed anno mccccxxxv, by Jacob Bellart : this they mew, to confirm their claim to the earlieft printing, and deceive the un- fkilful. But Mr. Bagford, who had feen another copy with a true date, difcovered the cheat ; by which the l had been erafed fo cunningly, that it wa$ not eafy to perceive it [L]. But, bcfides the frauds of an after-contrivance, there are many falfe dates origi- nally given by the printers , partly through defign, to [L] See Mr. Bagford's Papers. Mr. Maittaire, Annal. Typogr. torn. I. p. 190, mentions an edition of this book at Cologn in mcccclxx. The copy which he had {cen was in the earl of Oxford's library, and came afterwards into the hands of Mr. T, Ofborn ; in whofe Catalogues it frequently appeared, with the date mcccclxx. Mr. Meer- man, who was convinced that this date rauft either be a miftake or an impofition, had the curiofity (when, in 1759, be refided at London in a public capacity) to examine Mr. Ofborn's book ; which proved to be the edition of jmcccclxxxiii (which Mr. Maittaire has alio taken notice of), with the four laft numerals very artfully erafed. See JylEERMAN, vol, I. p. 59. N. raife 22 THE ORIGIN raife the value, of their works, but chiefly through negligence and blunder. There is a Bible at Augfburg, of the year 1449, where the two lad figures are tranf- pofed, and fhould (land thus, 1494 : Chevillier (Orig. de l'lmprim. de Paris, c. v. p. 96.) mentions three more; one at Paris of 1443 ; another' at Lyons, 1446; a third at Bafil, 1450 ; though Printing was not ufed in any of thefe places till many years after. Olandi defcribes three books with the like rniftake from Mentz-:-and Jo. Koelhoff, who firft printed about the year 1470 at C.ologn, has dated one of. his books anno mcccc. with a c omitted ; and another, anno 1458 , which Palmer (Hift. of Printing, p. 179) imputes to defign, rather than miftake [M]. . . But' . [M] Mr. Meerman, after fixing the invention of Printing beyond a doubt in the fifteenth century, takes nptice of a Ger- man tract, von^dem-Qyrurgm, 1397. This, he obferves, and forne other fimilar inflahces, may beyond doubt be pro- nounced ..forgeries; -a-nd-^here will be little, danger of a mj.flake, if we: extend this affertion to all books in general that have an earlier'date than MCCCCLVII, when the Pfalter was publi flied at Mentz, which is the firft work that is known to have a date to it. See Maittaire, Annal. Typogr. torn. I. p. 2. Marchand, Hift. de l'lmprim. p. 113. Nau- daeus, Addit. a. l'Hift. de Louis XI. p. 110. Some writers have afcribed the origin of Printing to the Eaft, and affixed a much earlier period to its invention; particularly P. Jovius, Hift. lib. xiv. p. 226. ed. Florent. 1550, from whom Ofo- rius and many others have embraced the fame opinion. But thefe have evidently confounded the European mode of Printing, with the engraved tabids which to this day arc I ufed OF PRINTING. 23 But what is mod to our point, is a book from the famous printer, Nicolas Jenfon , of which Mr. Mait- taire gave the firft notice, called Decor Puellarunv; printed anno mcccclxi. All the other works' of Jenfon were publifhed from Venice between the years mcccclxx and mcccclxxx; which juftly railed a fufpicion, that an x had been dropt from the date of this, which ought to be advanced ten years forward ; fmce it was not credible, that fo great a mafter of the art, who at once invented and perfected it, could lie lb many years idle and unemployed. The fufpicion ap- peared to be well grounded, from an edition of Tully's Epiftles at Venice, the firft work of another famed printer, John de Spira, anno mcccclxix [N] ; who, in the four following verfes, at the end of the book, ufcd in China. The invention of thefe tablets has been afcribed by many writers even to an earlier period than the commencement of the Chriflian aera ; but is with more pro- bability affigncd, by the very accurate Phil. Couplet, to the year 930. The Hiftoria S'menfis of Abdalla, written 5ti Perfic in 131 7, fpeaks of it as an art in very common ufe. Sec Meerman, vol.1, p. 16.210,219; vol. II. p. 186. N. [N] And yet, in the Catalogue of the Karkian Library, vol. III. p. 321, a book is mentioned as printed at Venice a year before this of John de Spira, viz. Fr. Maturantii, de comporundis verfibus Hexametro et Pentamctro, Opufculum, 1468, with the following remark.: " This editon of Matu- ".ranttus is not taken notice of by any Author; and by " the date of mcccclxviii it feems to be the fit ft book. " printed by Rotdolt of Venice; as alfo the firft book " printed at Venice with any date, except Decor Pucllamw, *< whole date I believe to be falfe." B. & N. claims 24 THE ORIGIN claims the honour of being the firft who had printed in that city^: " Primus in Adriaca formis impreflit aenis Urbe libros Spira genitus de ftirpe Johannes. In reliquis fit quanta, vides, fpes, lector, habenda, Qiium labor hie primus calamis fuperaverit artem." It is, I know, the more current opinion, confirmed by the teftimony of contemporary writers, that Jen- Jen was the firft printer at Venice [O] : But thefe vcrfes of John de Spira, publifhed at the time, as well as the place, in which they both lived, and in the face of his rival Jenfon, without any contradiction from him, feem to have a weight too great to be over- ruled by any foreign evidence whatfoever. But whilft I am now writing, an unexpected in- ftance is fallen into my hands, to the fupport of my opinion ; an Inauguration Speech of the Woodwardian Trofefjor, Mr. Mafon, juft frefh from the prefs, with its date given ten years earlier than it mould have been, by the omiffion of an x, viz. mdccxxiv, and the very blunder exemplified in the laft piece printed at Cambridge, which I fuppofe to have happened in the firft from Oxford [P]. Thefe [OJ Maittaire, Annal. Typ.tom. I. p. 36, &c. It. Append, ad torn. I. p. 5, 6. [P] The following curious remarks, on this pafiage of Dr. Middleton, appeared in The Weekly Miicellany, Saturday, April 26, 1735, in a letter figned Oxonjdes : ueen Elifabetfj's Reign. From the perufal of which, though I found no reafon to make any alteration of moment in the prefent Treatife, yet I had a pleafure to obferve a perfect agreement between us in the chief points on which my argument turns, and to find my own opinion confirmed by the judgmentrof fo able an antiquary. Dr. MlDDLETON. [T] An Olympiad was undoubtedly the fpace of four years compleat, and a Lujlrum of five. But many of the moderns have confounded them, by including each within four years. Selden, De Jure Nat. & Gentium, 1. iii. p. 360, ed. 1J25, obferves the fame ; but takes notice that the mif- take OF PRINTING. 33 Oxford book, the year of the Olympiad is not dif- tinguifhed as in that of Venice ; fo that it might poflibly take was comrrioii to both terms, each of them being fome- times reckoned as four years, fometimes as five : " Perfimilem in luftris & olympiadibus, quibus nunc quin- quennia, nunc quadriennia tribuuntur, fupputandi rationem nemo nefcit." Noris takes notice that Ovid confounds the fpace of the Olympiad with the Luftrum, Trift. IV. x. 95. " Ovidius, fcribens fe anno aetatis quinquagelimo exato, in exilium deportatum, ait, " Poftque meos ortus Pifaea vinftus oliva Abllulerat decies prsemia viftor eques ;*' ubi Pifeorum quadrienncs Olympiades cum Romanis Luftris confundit." Cenotaph. Pifan. p. 2. ed. 168 r. On the other hand, a Luftrum is fuppofed to contain only four years, by H. Glareantis in Chronologia Dion. Halicarn. p. 759, ed. Sylburg. and by Erafmus Schmidius in his Prolegomena ad Pindarum, p. 15 : " Et ab hoc an- norum quatuor completorum circuitu etiam relgxtlefii no- minabatur, plane ut apud Romanos Lustrum, quod et ipfum erat quatuor annorum completorum fpatium, ubi quarto quoque exa&o anno populus Romanus luftrabatur." The Luftrum is fuppofed to have contained only four years in Pliny, N. H. ii. 47 : " Et eft principium Luftri ejus Temper intercalari anno Caniculse ortu." But he applies the word in a borrowed fenfe, to exprefs not only the periodical returns, but the cleanfing office of the winds, in that refpedl like the Luftrum. But the proper fenfe of thefe words among the an- cients was, that an Olympiad fignilied four years, and F a Luftrum 34 THE ORIGIN poffibly be printed fomewhat earlier, and nearer to the reft in order of time : but, as the feventh verfe feems to refer a Lujlrum five. The firft is proved by demonftrable authority, becaufe the Grecians inferted their intercalary month of xlv days after three years of 354 days ; and ap- pointed thefe games on the fourth year , for the regular notoriety of the fat. Blondel, Rom. Cal. liv. II. c. 4; and Prid. Connect, part I. book v. p. 222. ed. fol. There are other authorities without number : 'Oxu|x7nc4{ z:\npS-rcu xulat TfV/apa? p^povs?, Diod. Sic. 44. A. ed. Rhodom. ; and no one ever read of above the fourth year of the I, II, III, IV, or any other Olympiad. But this period of an Olympiad Dr. Middleton allows. That the Lustrum contained five years is clear, I think, from undoubted teftimony : in vain elfc would Horace have told the girl fhe need not fhun him as being too rampant, iince he was arrived at the eighth Luftrum, which furely is more probably at xl years of age than xxxn : " Fuge fufpicari, Cujus octavum trepidavit aetas Claudere Lustrum." Lib. II. Od. iv. 22. So again, from Auguftus's conqueft of Alexandria, U. C. 724. to his victory over the Rhoeti, U. C. 739 (as Dio relates, lib. LIV.), Horace defcribes " Fortuna Lustro profpera terTio Belli leeundos reddidit cxitus." Lib. IV. Od. xiv. 37. Where Acron indeed iuppofes the Lustrum to be a term of onlv four years, reckoning xn years from Auguftus's firft coniulfliip to the end of the civil wars ; in which he is fol- lowed, as we obfcrved before, by Glareanus. But, which- soever it is, profe writers are exprefs for five years. Varro fays, " Luftrum nominatum tempus quinquennale a luendo, ;'. e. OF PRINTING. 35 refer to the ftatute i Richard III, prohibiting the Italians from importing and felling their wares in England /'. e. folvendo, quod quinto quoque anno vetigalia et tributa per cenfores folvebantur." See likewife Horace, I. IV. Od. i. ver. 6. It muft be owned, Antonius Nebriffeniis, in his Quinqua- gena, c. xx, printed in the Critici Sacri, torn. IX. ed. Amft. labours to prove a Lujirum to be only four years, from two or three paflages in the Roman poets, who fometimes take the liberty of lb applying it ; but with much better authority is it fixed to be five years by jo. Caflellio, in his Variai Le&iones, c. xix. See Fax Artium, torn. IV, c. 19, Dr. Middleton refumes this fubjeft in his Roman Senate^ A, D. 1747, parti, p. 107, 8vo. [vol. III. p. 429, of the 4to edition of his works] ; and fays, that " as the cenfus was fuppofed to be celebrated every fifth year; and as it was accompanied always by a LuJIration of the people ; fo the word Lvjlrum has conjlantly been taken y both by ancients and moderns, for a term of five years." Yet we fh,all, find no, good ground for fixing fo precife a fignification^ to it ; but, on the contrary, that the Cenfus and Luftrum, were, for the moft part, held irregularly and uncertainly, at very different and various intervals of time, as the particular exi- gencies of the ftate required," But, 1. We have feen it was " not conftantly taken for a term of five years both by atir cients and moderns ;" fo that this Ctnic of four years is not solely Dr. Middleton's, though he will fuffer no one elfe to fhare in the honour of it. 2. If it was conjlantly taken fo both by ancients and modems, one would think that iliould determine the period; though the Roman-, might, for parti :ular exigencies of ftate, vary from the prefer i bed F 2 time 3 6 .THE ORIGIN-, England by retail, &c. excepting books written or printed , which act pafled in 1483 ; fo it could not be printed before that year. The third verfe refcues from oblivion the name of an Englifh printer, Thomas Hunte, not mentioned before by any of our Eng- lifh writers, nor difcovered in any other book. But what I take for the mod remarkable, and lay the greatevr. ftrefs upon, is, that, in the fixth verfe, " the art and ufe of Printing is affirmed to have been firft fet on foot and praclifed in this ifland by our own countrymen [U] :" which mpft confequently have time of the ceremony. 3. Mr. Hooke has fhewn (Obfer- vations, in Anivver to L'Abbe Vertpt, &c. p. 153, 157), " that there is good reafon to believe, the feven firft Luf- trums, after the eftablifhment of the commonwealth, were regularly held every five years : confequently that there was fufheient ground in fact for fixing the term of five years to the word Lujlrum. For the firft. seven Luftrums, under the confuls, will carry us through an interval or* exactly thirty five years, from A. U. 245." The Doctor had no occafion to have laboured this point, here at leaft ; hut his plenary knowledge in the Roman conftitution would not fuffer him to bear any contradiction in it. B. [U] We fhall make no apology for introducing one more remark from Oxonides : " Dr. Middleton's tranilation of the fixth verfe is a fenfe, I believe, Rood never thought of. His verfes feem rather defigned to extol bis own prefs than that of Caxton ; and the meaning I take to be no more than this, that the Art of Printing, for which the Vene- tians, and particularly Jenfon, had been fo famous, was now OF PRINTING, 37 have a reference to Canton j who has no rival of this country to difpute the honour with him. And fo we are furnifhed at laft, from Oxford itfelf, with a teftimony that overthrows the date of their own book. THEODORicRooD,we fee, came from Cologn (where Caxton had refided many years, and inftructed him- felf in the Art of Printing) in 1471 : and, being fo well acquainted with the place, and particularly the printers of it, might probably be the inftrument of bringing over this or any other printer a year or two before (if there really was any fuch) to be now practifed with equal fuccefs in England. Our Differ- jtator's quotation from Caxton will prove but little, unlefs he can ftiew, that no printer, at any place, ever talked of the novelty of his art, without being the firft importer of it. As to his citations from other later writers, who men- tion Caxton as our firft printer, it may be fufficient to anfwer in his own words, that " it is very unfafe to truft to common hiflory, and necefTary to recur to original tefti- monies, if we would know the ftate of facts with cxactnefs." Our ingenious Author has himfelf detected feveral miftakes, which our writers have univerfally fallen into, and taken up from each other. If we confider that our Oxford Printer met with very fmall encouragement, printed probably but few books, and did not put his name to thofe, it is no wonder that his name and memory fhoukl be foon loft ; nor will it be furprizing that Caxton fhould run away with the credit of being the hrft printer here, who lived many years in great repute, printed a very confiderable number of books, and flourifhed in the funfhine of the court !" N. employed 3 8 THE ORIGIN employed at Oxford ; and the obfcure tradition of this fact give rife to the fiction of the Record. But, however this be, it feems pretty clear that Caxton's being fo well known at Cologn, and his fetting up a prefs at home immediately after his return from that place, which could hardly be a fecret to Rood, muft be the ground of the compliment paid to our country, and the very thing referred to in the verfes [X], [X] The whole fcope of the above colophon fliews that the words of the fixth verfe are not to be taken in too literal a fenfe : " Jenfius, a Frenchman, taught the art of Printing to the Venetians : but Britain learnt it from her own ingenuity." Neither of thefe circumftances is ftri&ly true. Jenfon, who began printing at Venice A. D. mcccclxx, was preceded two years by Joannes dc Spira ; who fays himfelf, in the edition of Cicero's Epiftles ad Familiares, mcccclxix, that " he firft taught it to the Venetians :" (though the book above referred to, p. 23, note [N], may fecm to afFeft his claim). Whether Caxton or Corfellis brought Printing into Britain, the art was learnt abroad, The fenfe then of the poet feems to be, that as Jenfon, a foreigner, had brought Printing to great piefedtion at Venice, the Englifh were indebted, to a native for ii- milar improvements. To denote this excellence, he calls the impreflion of Thomas Hunte celatos iibros, books en- craved ; ufing that term to fet his Printing in an advan- tageous light, who, with his partner Rood, would in time excell the Venetians. A like compliment is paid by Ni- colas Gupalitinus to Clemens Patavinus, in the preface to an edition of Mcfuas, De Medicinis univerfaitbus, Vcn, mcccclxxi. See Mee&man, vol. II. p. 35, 36. B. & N, We OF PRINTING. 39 We have one book more, without the n#me of printer or place, which, from the comparifon of the types with thofe of Rood, is judged to be of his printing, and added to the catalogue of his works by Mr. Lewis in his Mf. Papers, viz. " Expoficio ac moralifacio tertij capituli trenorum Iheremie prophete. Fol. mcccclxxxii." And at the end of the index, " Explicit tabula fuper opus trenorum compilatum per Johann. Latteburij ordinis minorum." But the identity of the letter in different books, though a probable argument, is not always a certain one for the identity of the prefs. Befides this early Printing at Oxford, our Library gives us proof of the ufe of it likewife, about the fame time, in the city of London, much earlier than our writers had imagined, with the names of two of the firjl printers there, that none of them take notice of; John Lettou and Will, de Machlinia. Of the firft, we have, " Jacobus de Valencia in Pfal- terium, &c. excuf. in civitate Londonienfi, ad ex- penfas Johannis Wilcock, per me Johannem Lettou mcccclxxxj. fol." Of the fecond j " Speculum Chriftiani, &c." and at the end ; " Ifte libellus im- prefllis eft in opulentiflima Civitate Londoniarum per Willelmum Machlinia, ad inftanciam necnon ex- penfas Henrici Urankerberg mercatoris." quarto : without date, but in a very coarfe and Gothic cha- racter, more rude than Caxton's : and from both thefe printers in partnerfhip, we have the firft edi- 7 tion 40 THE ORIGIN tion of the famous Littleton's Tenures j printed at London, in a fmall folio, without date j which his great Commentator, the Lord Chief Juftice Coke, had not feen or heard of: for, in the Preface to his Inftitutes, he fays, " That this work was not pub- lished in print either by Judge Littleton himfelf or Richard his fon ; and that the firft edition, that he had feen, was printed at Roan in Normandy, ad inftan- ciam Richardi Pynfon, printer to King Henry VIII." We have this edition alfo in our Library, but it is undoubtedly later by thirty or forty years than the other we are fpeaking of ; which, as far as we may collect from the time noted above, in which Joh Lettou printed, was probably publilhed, of at lead put to the prefs, by the author himfelf 9 who died in 1481. Whilft Printing was thus going forward at Weft- minfter, Oxford, and London, there was a prefs alfo employed at St. Alban's, by the Schoolmafter of that place ; whofe name has not had the fortune to be tranfmitted to us, though he is mentioned as a man of merit, and friend of Caxton. He had drawn up, and printed in Englifh, a Book of Chronicles, com- monly called " Fructus Temporum, anno 1483 ;" which I have never been able to meet with : but in a later edition of it, after his death, there is the fol- lowing colophon : " Here endyth this prcfent cronycle of Englond with the frute of tymes, compiled in a booke and enprynted by one fometyme Scolemayfter of St. Al- bons, O F P R I N T I N G. 4* bons, on whoos foule God have mercy, and newly enprynted at Weftmeftre by Wynkyn de Worde, MCCCCLXXXXVII. It was the fame fchoolmafter, without doubt, who printed three years before in Latin : " Rhetorics nova Fratris Laurentij Gulielmi de Soana ordinis minorum, compilata in aima Univerfi- tate Cantabrigiae arm. 1478, impreffa apud Villain Sti Albani. mcccclxxx." This was once in bifnop More's library, being defcribed in the printed catalogue of his other rare books [Y] : but it is now loft, or ftolen from that noble collection , which, by an example of munifi- cence fcarce to be paralleled, was given to our Uni- verfity by his Majefty King George the Firft, and will remain a perpetual monument of the great mind and publick fpirit of that Prince. The fame book is mentioned by Mr. Strype among thofe given by archbifhop Parker to Corpus-Chrivu college in Cambridge-, but the words, compilata in Univerjitate Cantabrigiae, have drawn this learned Anti- quary into the miftake of imagining, that it was printed alfo that year at our Univerfity, and of doing us the honour of remarking upon it, " So ancient was Printing in Cambridge. 35 Life of Archbifhop Parker, p. 519. We have one piece however in our library from this prefs, in a fmall folio, and at the end of it the following advertifement : [Yl C.J.ai, Libror. Manufcriptor. Angl. Oxon. p. 391. G " There 42 THE ORIGIN lC There in thys boke afore ar contenyt the bokys of haukyng and huntyng with other plefuris dy verfe. And alfo of coote armuris a nobull werke. And here now endyth the boke of blafyng of armys, tranflatyt and comply t togedyr at Saynt Albons MCCCCLXXXVI." After the firft treatife of hawking and hunting, &c. is added, " Explicit Dam Julyans Barnes in her boke of huntyng." Though her name be fubjoined to the firft part only, yet the whole is conitantly afcribed i to her, and paries for her work. She was of a noble family, lifter to Richard lord Berners of EfTex, and priorefs of Sopwell nunnery near St. Alban's : me lived about the year 1460, and is cele- brated by Leland and other writers for her uncom- mon learnings and accomplilhments, under the name of Juliana Berners. I fhall now return to Mr. Caxton - , and Mate as briefly as I can the pofitive evidence that remains of his being the firft printer of this kingdom ; for what I have already aliedged is chiefly negative or circum- ftantial. And here, as J hinted at letting out, all our writers before the Restoration, who mention the in- troduction of the art amongft us, give him the credit of it, without any contradiction or variation. Stovve, in his Survey of London, fpeaking of the 37th year of Henry VI, or 1453, fays, " The noble Science or Piintir.g was about this time found at Magunce by Jo!i. Guttemberg, a knight; and William Caxton ')t ; London, mercer, brought it into England about the OF PRINTING. 43 the year 147 1, and firft practifed the fame in the abbey of Weftminfter." Truffel gives the fame ac- count in the Hiftory of Henry VI -, and Sir Richard Baker in his Chronicle : and Mr. Howell, in his Lon- dinopolis, defcribes the place where the Abbot of Weftminfter fet up the firft prefs for Caxton's ufe, in the Almonry or Ambry. But above all, the famous Joh. Leland, Library-keeper to Henry VIII, who by way of honour had the title of The Antiquary, and lived near to Caxton's own time, exprefsly calls him " The firft Printer of England" (De Script. Brit, p. 480), and fpeaks honourably of his works : and as he had fpent fome time in Oxford, after having firft ftudied and taken a degree at Cambridge, he could hardly be ignorant of the Origin and Hiftory of Printing in that Univerfity [Z]. I cannot forbear [Z] Leland calls Caxton, The frji Printer of England ; meaning, that lie was the firft who praclifed that art with. fufile Typc: y and corifequently firft brought it to perfection ; and this is not inconfiftent with Corfellis's having printed earlier at Oxford with feparate cut Type; in JVood, which was the only method he had learnt at Harleim. In like manner, the epitaph on Theodoric Martens, who prac- tifed this art at Aloft above fixty years, ?,nd died May 28, 1534, aged more than eighty, defcribes him as the Inventor of Printing : " Qui artem chara&erizandi e Superiori Ger- mania, Galliaque, in Inferiorem banc Germaniam tranftu- lit;" that is, on metal types, which were unherfally ufed in Germany and Gaul when Martens was a young man, and were ftyled, by way of eminence, ars imprejforia, or cbaracleri- r.andi. See Meerman, vol. I. p. 97, 98. yoI. II. p. 34. N. G 2 adding, 44 THE ORIGIN adding, for the fake of a name fo celebrated, the more modern teftimony of Mr. Henry Wharton, (Append, ad Cave, Hilt. Liter, p. 49 ;) who affirms " Caxton to have been the firft that imported the Art of Printing into this kingdom." On whofe autho- rity, I imagine, the no lefs celebrated M. Du Pin ftyles him likewife the firlt printer of England. (Ecclef. Hid. Cent. xiv. p. 71. ed. Engl.). To the atteftation of our hiftorians, who are clear in favour of Caxton, and quite filent concerning an earlier prefs at Oxford, the works of Caxton himfelf add great confirmation : the rudenefs of the letter ; irregularity of the page , want of fignatures \ initial letters, &c. in his fir ft impreflions, give a prejudice at fight of their being the firft productions of the art amongft us. But, befides thefe circumftances, I have taken notice of a paffage in one of his books, (Recule, &c. in the end of the third book), that amounts in a manner to a direct testimony of it. 44 Thus end I this book, &c. and for as moche as in wrytyng of the lame my penne is worn, rn) n hande wery, and myn eyen dimmed with overmoche lokyng on the whit paper and that age crepeth on me dayly and alio becaufe 1 have promyfid to dyverce gentilmen and to my frendes to addreffe to hem as haftely as I might this fayd book: Therefore 1 have practyfed, and ierned at my grete charge and difpenfe to ordeyne this fiyd book in pryntc after the maner and forme as ye may here [:"., and is not wreton with penne and yoke as other bokes ben to thende that every OF PRINTING. 45 every man may have them attones, for all the bookes of this ftorye, named, the Recule of the hiftoryes of Troyes, thus empryntid as ye here fee, were begonne in oon day and alfo finilhed in oon day, &c." Now this is the very fiyle and language of the firfi Printers, as every body knows, who has been at all conver- fant with old books. Fauft and Schoeffer, the inven- tors, fet the example in their firft works from Mentz ; by advertifmg the publick at the end of each, rt That they were not drawn or written by a pen (as aH books had been before), but made by a new art and invention of printing, or ftamping them by characters or types of metal fet in forms." In imitation of whom, the fucceeding printers, in moft cities of Eu- rope, where the art was new, generally gave the like advertisement \ as we may fee from Venice, Rome, Naples, Verona, Bafi), Augiburg, Louvain, &c. ]ult as our Caxton, in the inftance above. In Pliny's Natural Hiftory, printed at Venice, we have the following verfes : " Quern modo tarn rarum cnpiens vix lector haberet ; Quiqj etiam fractus pcene legendus eram : Reftituit Veneris me nuper Spira Johannes ; Exfcripiitq; libros sere notante meos. Fcfla manus quondam, moneo, calamufq-, quiefcat: Mamq-, labor ftudiocefllt&ingenio.MccccLXviiii." In a Spanilh hiftory of Rodericus Santius, printed at Rome : ' ; Dc mandato R. P. D. Roderici Epifcopi Palen- tini A'jfloris hujus libri, ego Udalricus Gallus ILie cui^iTio aut pennis eund. librum imprefii." At 46 THE ORIGIN At the end of Cicero's Philippic Orations : cc Anfer Tarpeii cuftos Jovis, unde, quod alis Conftreperes, Gallus decidit ; Ultor adeft Uldricus Gallus : ne quem pofcantur in ufum, Edocuit pennis nil opus effe tuis. Imprimit ille die, quantum non fcribitur anno. Ingenio, haud noceas, omnia vincit homo." In Eufebius's Chronicon, printed in Latin at Milan : * c Omnibus ut pateant, tabulis impreffit ahenis Utile Lavania gente Philippus opus. Hactenus hoc toto rarum fuit orbe volumen, Quod vix, qui ferret tcedia, fcriptor erat. Nunc ope Lavanis numerofa volumina noftri ire perexiguo qualibet urbe legunt." And as this is a flrong proof of his being our firfi "Printer ; fo it is a probable one, that this very book was the Firjl of his printing. I have never feen the "Liber Fejlialis, a book without date, which Mr. Palmer (Hift. of Printing, p. 340), takes for his firfi : but the reafons affign.ed for it feem to agree full as well to the Recule of the Hiftories of Troy : and, had he met with this perfect in the end of the third book, he would probably have been of another mind. Caxton had iinifhed the tranflation of the two firit books at Cologn in 147 1 : and, having then good leifure, relblved to tranflate the third at the fame place (Recule, &c. end of the lecor.d book); in the end of which, we have the paifage recited above. OF PRINTING. 47 above. Now, in his other books tranflated, as this was, from the French, he commonly marks the pre- cife time of his entering on the traaflation , of his finilhing it; and of his putting it afterwards into the prefs : which ufed to follow each other with little or no intermiflion, and were generally compleated within the compafs of a few months. So that in the prefent cafe, after he had finifhed the tranfiation, which mult be in, or foon after, the year 1471, it is not likely that he would delay the imprefiion longer than was necefTary for the preparing of his materials ; efpecially as he was engaged by promife to his friends, who feem to have been prefting and in hafte, to deliver copies of it to them as foon as poffible. But as in the cafe of the Firjl Printer, fo in this of his Firjl Work, we have a teftimony alfo from him- felf in favour of this book : for I have obferved that, in the recital of his works, he mentions it the firft in order, before " the Book of ChefTe," which feems to be a good argument of its being actually the firft. " Whan I had accomplished dyvers werkys and hyftorys tranflated out of frenfhe into englifhe at the requeue of certayn lordes ladyes and genrylmen, as the Recuyel of the Hiftoryes of Troyc, the Book of ChefTe, the Hiftorye of Jafon, the Hiftorye of the Mirrour of the World I have fubmyfed myfelf to translate into englifhe the Legende of Sayntes, called Legenda Aurea in latyn and Wy- lyam Erie of Arondel defyred me and promyfed to take a refonable quantyte of them fente to me a 4 worfhipful 4 8 THE ORIGIN worfhipful gentylman promyfmg that my fayd lord ihould duryng my lyf geve and graunt to me a yerely fee, that is to note, a buck in fommer and a doo in wynter, &c." (Maittaire, Supplem. ad Tom. I. Annal. p. 440, not. 4.). All this, added to the common marks of earlier antiquity, which are more obfervable in this than in any other of his books that I have yet feen, viz. the rudenefs of the letter ; the incorreftnefs of the lan~ gnage \ and the greater mixture of French words, than in his later pieces j makes me conclude it to be his firfi work ; executed when he came frefh from a long refidence in foreign parts. Nay, there are fome cir- cumftances to make us believe, that it was actually printed abroad at Cologn, where he finifhed the translation, and where he had been pratlijing and learning the Art : for, after the account given above, of his having learnt to print, he immediately adds, " Whiche book I have prefented to my fayd re- doubtid lady Margrete, Ducheffe of Burgoyne, &c. and flie hath well acceptid hit, and largely rewarded me, &c." which feems to imply his continuance abroad till after the impreflion, as well as the trans- lation of the book[AA]. The conjecture is much ftrengthened by another fact attefted of him ; That he did really print at Cologn the firft edition of " Bartholomaeus de proprietatibus rerum," in Latin: [AA] It is not faid, or iuppofed, that Caxton came over with Corfcllis, though he was an afi'iflant with Tumour in getting him off. See above, p. 4. B. which Of Hinting. 49 which is affirmed by Wynkyn de Worde, in an Englifh edition of the fame book, in the following lines [BBJ : " And alfo of your charyte beare in remembraunce The foule of William Caxton firft printer of this boke^ In laten tongue at Coleyn himfelf to advaunce^ That every well difpofyd man may thereon loke^ I have never feen, or met with any one who has feen^ this Latin edition of Bartholomseus by Caxton. It is certain that the fame book was printed at Coldgn by Jo. Koelholf, and the firft that appears of his printings in the year 1470 [CC], whilft Caxton was at the place, and bufying himfelf in the art : and, if we fup- pofe him to have been the encourager and promoter of the work, or to have furniilied the expence of ir< he might poffibly on that account be confidered at home as the author of it* It is now time to make an end, left I be cenfured for fpending too much pains on an argument fo in- confiderable ; where my only view is, to fet right [BB] Maittaire, Annal. Append, ad Tom. 1. p. 31. [CC] Ibid. p. 296. This fuppofition is entirely over- thrown by an undoubted proof of the date mcccclxx, iri the copy Dr. Middleton refers to, having been altered! from mcccclxxxiii, by an erafure. See Note [L], p. it. It is however extremely probable, from the verfes of Wyn- kin de Worde, that the firji edition of this book Was printed by Caxton at Cologn, without the name of place or printers- See Meermajc, vol. I, p. 59, 60. N,- H fomft' 50 THE ORIGIN fome little points of hi (lory, that had been falfely or negligently treated by our writers, to which the courfe of my studies and employment engaged me to pay fome attention : and, above all, to do a piece of justice to the memory of our worthy countryman William Caxton ; nor fuffcr him to be robbed of the glory, fo clearly due to him, of having"^/? imported into this kingdom an art of great ufe and benefit to mankind : a kind of merit, that, in the ienfe of all nations, gives the belt title to true praife, and the belt claim to be commemorated with honour to posterity : and it ought to be infcribed on his monument, what I find declared of another printer, Bartholom&us Bottonus Of RegglO ; PRIMUS EGO IN PATRIA MODO CHARTAS /ERE SIGNAVI, ET NOVUS EIBLIOPOLA FUI, &C. (Maittaire, Append, ad torn. I. p. 432. in not.) He had been bred very reputably in the way of trade, and ferved an apprenttcefhip to one Robert Large, a mercer ; who, after having been lherifF and lord mayor of London, died in the year 1441, and left by will, as may be feen in the Prerogative-office, xxi in marks to his apprentice William Caxton : ' a considerable legacy in thofe days, and an early testi- monial of his good character and integrity. From the time of his matter's death, he fpent the following thirty years beyond fea, in the bulinefs of merchandize: where, in the year 1464, we find him employed by Edward IV, in a publick and honour- able negotiation, jointly with one Richard Whitehill, efqj to tranfact and conclude a treaty of commerce between OF PRINTING. 51 between the king and his brother-in-law the duke of Burgundy, to whom Flanders belonged. The com- miffion ftyles them, u Ambafllatores, Procuratores, Nuncios, & Deputatos fpeciales ," and gives to both or either of them full powers to treat, &c. [DD]. Whoever turns over his printed works, mult con- tract a refpect for him, and be convinced that he pre- ierved the fame character through life, of an honeft, modeft man ; greatly induftrious to do good to his country, to the beft of his abilities, by fpreading among the people fuch books as he thought ufcful to religion and good-manners, which were chiefiy tranf- lated from the French. The novelty and ufefulnefs of his art recommended him to the fpecial notice and favour of the great ; under whofe protection, and at whofe expence, the greaceft part of his works were publifhed. Some of them are addreffed to king Ed- ward the Fourth ; his brother the Duke of Clarence , and their filter the Dutchefs of Burgundy ; in whofe fervice and pay he lived many years, before he began to print ; as he oft acknowledges with great grati- tude. He printed likewife for the ufe, and by the exprefs order, of Henry the Seventh ; his ion Prince Arthur; and many of the principal nobility and gentry of that age: all which confirms the notion of his being the firft Printer \ for he would hardly have been lb much careiTc-d and employed, had there been an earlier and abler artifl: all the while at Ox- [DD] Rymer, Feed. torn. XI. p. 536. Item Maittaire, Annul. Typ. Append, ad torn. 1. p. ^. H 2 ford, 52 THE ORIGIN ford, who yet had no employment at all for the fpace of eleven years. It has been generally afTerted and believed, that all his books were printed in the Abbey of Weftminfter ; yet we have no aflurance of it from himfelf, nor any mention of the place before the year 1477 : fo that he had been printing feveral years, without telling us where. There is one miftake, however, worth the correcting, that the writers have univerfally fallen into, and taken up from each other; That John Iffip was the abbot who firft encouraged the art, and entertained the artift in his honfe : whereas I find upon enquiry, that he was not made abbot till four years after Caxton's death , and that Thomas Milling was abbot in 1470, made bifhop of Hereford a few years after [1474], and probably held the abbey in commendam till the year 1485, in which John Eftney next fucceeded :.ib that Milling, who was reputed a great fcholar, muft have been the generous friend and patron of Caxton, who gave that liberal recep- tion to an art fo beneficial to learning [EE]. This (hews how unfafe it is to truft to common hiftory, and how neceffary it is to recur to original teftimonies, where we would know the ftate of facts with exaclnefs. Mr. Echard, at the end of Edward the Fourth's reign, among the learned of that age, mentions William Caxton as a writer of Englifh Hiftory ; but feems to doubt whether he was the fame with the printer of that name. Had he ever [EE] Willis's Hiftory of Mitred Abbeys, vol. I. p. 206* looked OF PRINTING, 53 looked into Caxton's books, the doubt had been cleared , or had he confulted his Chronicle of Eng- land [FF], which it is ftrange that an Englifh Hifto- rian could neglect, he would have learnt at lead to fix the beginning of that reign with more exactnefs, as it is noted above, juft two years earlier than he has placed it in his Hiftory of England [GG]. There [FF] With deference to the opinion of Caxton, it is placing his authority too high, when moft, if not all, our Englifh Chronicles are made to fubmit to his, and a new aera is prefcribed to one of our kings by it. It is needlefs to appeal to contemporary hiftorians, where we are capable of producing demonitration. We have already vindicated the true reading of our old Almanacks, and exterminated a falfe one from Caxton's Chronicle. But the Doftor raifes a triumph on his great difcovery ; and poor Echard is fingled out to be lafhed, for not reading this Chronicle, or not making the fame ufe of it as the Doftor does. See above, Note [D], p. 8. B. & N. [GG] Juji one year, Dr. Middleton fhould have faid ; Echard fixing it very right, 4 March, 146 1, according to the common computation in tbofe days, (i. e. 1 460- 1 ) ; the Doctor 1459, according to our computation, (i. e. 1459-60). But this gentleman feems reiblved to be at variance with that Hiftorian as far as poffible. He gives us his doubts ; but fo much the worft fide of them, that it is but juft to let the Hiftorian fpeak for himfelf : " In this reign fiourifhed John Harding and William Caxton, both writers of the Englifh Hiftory. And that which now began to give encouragement to Learning, was the famous Art of Printing, which was iirft found out in Germany by John Gutten- Berghen about 1440, or fomewhat later, and was brought intq 54 THE ORIGIN There is no clear account left of Caxton's age : but he was certainly very old, and probably above fourfcore, at the time of his death. In the year 147 1 he complained, as, we have feen, of the infirmities of age creeping upon him, and feebling his body , yet he lived twenty-three years after, and purfued his bufinefs, with extraordinary diligence, in the abbey of Weftminfter, till the year 1494 [HH], in which he died j not in the year following, as all, who write of him, affirm. This appears from fome verfes at the end of a book, called, " Hilton's Scale of Perfection," printed in the fame year : u Infynite laud with thankynges many folde I yelde to God me focouryng with his grace This boke to finyfhe which that ye beholde Scale of Perfeccion calde in every place Whereof th'auclor Walter Hilton was And Wynkyn de Worde this hath fett in print In William Caxftons hows fo fyll the cafe, God reft his foule. In joy ther mot it ftynt. ImprefTus anno falutis MccccLXxxxiiii." Though he had printed for the ufe of Edward IV, and Henry VII ; yet I find no ground for the notion into England by William Caxton, a mercer of London, and probably the fame with the Hiftorian, who firft prac- tifed the fame hi the Abbey of Weftminfter 146 1, and the nth of this reign." The Hiftorian writes fo agreeably to the Doctor's hypothefis, that one would think he need not be fo much afliamed of his company. B. 6c N. [HH] No longer than the year 1491, as Mr. Ames has iinee proved from his epitaph, and the edition of Catah Biblioth. Had. vol. III. p. 127. B. which OF PRINTING. 55 which Palmer takes up, that the firft printers, and particularly Caxton, were fworn fervants and printers to the crown : for Caxton, as far as 1 have obferved, gives not the lead hint of any fuch character or title ; though it feems to have been inftituted not long after his death : for of his two principal workmen, Ri- chard Pynfon and Wynkin de Worde, the one was made Printer to the King , the other, to the King's mother the Lady Margaret. Pynfon gives himfelf the firft title, in " The Imitation of the Life of Chrift," printed by him at the commandment of the Lady Margaret, who had tran dated the fourth book of it from the French, in the year 1504. : and Wyn- kin de Worde affumes the fecond, in " The {qvcti Penitential Pfalms," expounded by bifhop Fifher, and printed in the year 1509. But there is the title of a book given by Palmer, that feems to contradict what is here faid of Pynfon : viz. " Pfalterium ex mandato vi&oriofifiimi Angliae Regis Henrici Septimi, per Gulielmum Fanque, Im- prefTorem Regium, anno mdiiii j" which, being the only work that has ever been found of this printer, makes it probable, that he died in the very year of its imprefTion, and was fucceeded immediately by Richard Pynfon : whofe ufe of the fame title fo foon after fhews the writers to be miftaken in this, and feveral other particulars relating to his hiilory, as well as that of Wynkin de Worde, which it is no; my prefect bufmefs to explain. ESSAY [ 5* 1 ESSAY II. Mr. MEERMAN's ACCOUNT o t The ORIGIN of PRINTING. WITH REMARKS. IT may feem lbmewhat ftrange that the original of Printing has hitherto eluded all the refearches of the Learned 5 and that this Art, which has given light to all others, mould irielf remain in obfeurity. And yet the wonder will ceafe, it we confider thac it was invented as a more expeditious method of multiplying books than by writing, which it was at firft defigned to counterfeit ; and confequently was concealed for private interett, rather than revealed to the honour of the proprietor and the advantage of the publick. As Mr. MiERMAif has endeavoured to reconcile hzze difficulties on this head in his valuable Origina Yrpcgrapiuif . we {hall briefly lay them before the Englim Reader, by which he will fee the many mif- takes of everr one 01 our lateft writers on the : jb^f: ; and that the difficulties have arilen, not {o much from the want of historical evidences as from not attending to :he true lenfe of then] ; from overlooking the art O F P R I N T I N G. 57 in that imperfect date, when it exifted but as an em- bryo not born into day-light. The three cities, Mr. Meerman obferves, which have the fairefl claim to this honour, are Harleim, Mentz, and Stralburgh : to each it is to be afcribed in a qualified fenfe; the improvements the one made upon the other entitling them all, in Tome fort, to tbe merit of the invention. The firft teftimony of the inventor is that recorded by Hadrian Junius, in his Batavia, p. 253, ed. Lugd. Bat. 1588; which, though it hath been rejected by many, is of undoubted authority. Junius had the re- lation from two reputable men , Nicolaus Galius [A], who was his fchoolmafter ; and Quirinius Talefius, intimate and oorrefpondent. He afcribes it to js the Con of John (jEdituus, or Cuftos, of the cathedral at Harleim, at that time a refpectable office), upon the teftimony of Cornelius, fometime a fervant to Laurentius, and afterwards bookbinder ' -. '. feems to be the fame who is called Clan L:i- Gael t Scalenus Harlcmi, as it is in the FafVj of : ' l S3*> J 533: r --' J 55:- Q?init . ;alled Mr. ^uiryn Dirkfzsoit. He ; - . . 1 - 1 iSMUs, as appear; [l v. 1519. torn. III. Oper. p. 1222. He . ; and C 2 5? 2 B_t in the yubks of He k'.lit-J by the Sp; " . . - - . There are fou-e I- .--. of : : ty ti. TaLESIUS, irj ;:/;.'* /...;_;- 1 : /: . N. J to 5 8 THEORIGIN to the cathedral, an office which had before been performed by Franciican fryars. His narrative was thus : " That, walking in a wood near the city (as the M citizens of opulence ufe to do), he began at firft to " cut fome letters upon the rind of a beach- tree ; " which, for fancy's fake, being imprelTed on paper, " he printed one or two lines, as a fpecimen for his " grandchildren (the fons of his daughter) to fol- " low. This having happily fucceeded, he medi- " tated greater things (as he was a man of ingenuity " and judgement) , and firft of all, with his fon-in-Iaw u Thomas Peter (who, by the way, left three fons, " who all attained the confular dignity), invented a " more glutinous writing-ink, becaufe he found the i( common ink funk and fpread; and then formed " whole pages of wood, with letters cut upon them ; " of which fort I have feen fome efiays, in an ano- " nymous work, printed only on one fide, intituled, " Speculum noflra falutis ; in which it is remarkable, " that in the infancy of Printing (as nothing is com- " plete at its firft invention) the back fides of the pages " were pafted together, that they might not by their " nakednefs betray their deformity. Thefe beachen " letters he afterwards changed for leaden ones, and " thefe again for a mixture of tin and lead \_fianneas\ " as a lefs flexible and more folid and durable fub- Marci Tulii Ciceronis Paradoxa finit, J In the Verfus xii Sapientum, fapient?/j fnpient Les Eculfons de SchoyiFer, at the end 1 . . . : 1 "aj t-tj ' r 1 \ r (wanting.) ot the Ode or Horace, appear (in red.) J v 5 ' The titles of Three Precepts cf Friend/hip are tranfpofed in the firft edition, and right in the lecond 5 and many other variations, too minute to mention. Mr, fat, without the red line. OF PRINTING. 63 " that was pofiible, on Chriftmas-eve, when every one '* was cuftomarily employed in luftral facrifices, fcizes ** the collection of types, and all the implements his " mafter had got together, and, with one accomplice, *' marches off to Amfterdam, thence to Cologn, and ** at laft fettled at Mentz, as at an afylum of fecurity, " where he might go to work with the tools he had " ftolen. It is certain that in a year's time, viz. in *' 1442, the ~Do5lrinale of Alexander Gallus, which " was a Grammar much ufed at that time, together " with the Trails of Peter of Spain, came forth there, *' from the fame types as Laurentius had made ufe of ** at Harleim." Thus far the narrative of Junius, which he had fre- quently heard from Nicolaus Galius ; to whom it was related by Cornelius himfelf, who lived to a great age, and ufed to burft into tears upon reflecting on the lofs his mafter had fuftained, not only in his fubftance, but in his honour, by the roguery of this fervant, his former aflbciate and bedfellow. Cornelius, as appears by the Mr. De Bure adds, that in the copy of 1465, which Cle- ment examined, the Four Lines of 'Title are wanting ; and therefore imagines this may be a third edition : but they may have been accidentally omitted, as thofe lines are in red in the other copies; and therefore this is moft probably net a different edition. He fuppoles alfo a fourth edition, as he has feen a copy on vellum, in which the word incipii is omit- ted in the title of the Paradoxes. Its being on veiliHD, however, is no criterion of a neiv edition. Dr. Aikewhad a fine copy of the edition of 1^65, which Dr. Hunter bought for thirty pounds. A copy on vellum of that of 1466 is in the Britilh Mufeum. B. & N. regi Iters 64 T H E O R I G I N regifters of Harleim cathedral, died either in 15 15 or the beginning of the following year ; fo that he might very well give this information to Nicolaus Galius, who was fchool-mafter to Hadrian Junius. Though this circumftance is probable as to the main fact, yet we muft fet afide the evidence of it in fome particulars. The firft obvious difficulty is no- ticed by Scriveriusj " that the types are faid to be made of the rind of beach, which could not be ftrong enough to bear the impreftion of the prefs." This is removed, if, inltead of the bark, we fubftitute a bough of the beach. The idea of the bark, when Junius wrote this, was perhaps ftrong in his mind, from what Virgil tells us (Eel. v. 13.) of its being ufual to cut words on the bark of a beach ; and thence he was eafily led to make a wrong application of it here. 2. The letters were at firft wooden, and are faid to be afterwards exchanged for metal types , from which the wine-pots were formed, remaining in the time of Junius. According to tradition, Printing was carried on in the fame houfe long after the time of Laurentius : thofe pots might therefore be formed from the wafte metal of the printing-houfe, after the life of fufile types became univerfal. But Laurentius feems to have carried the art no farther than feparate wooden types. What is a remarkable confirmation of this, Henry SpiECHEL,who wrote, in the fixteenth cen- tury, a Dutch poem intituled Hertfpiegel, exprefles him- felf thus : " Thou firfl.-, Laurentius, to fupply the de- ^ feel: of wooden tablets, adapted!!: wooden types, and I u afterwards OF PRINTING, 6*5 u afterwards didft connect them with a thread, to imi- " rate writing. A treacherous fervant furreptitioufly V obtained the honour of the difcovery. But Truth " itfelf, though deftitute of common and wide-fpread " fame ; Truth, I fay, ftill remains." No mention in the Poem of metal types ; a circumftance which, had he been robbed of fuch, as well as of wooden ones, would fcarcely have been pafied over in filence. When Lauren tjus firft devifed his rough fpecimen of the art, can only be guefied at. He died in 144.0, after having published the Speculum Belgicum and two editions of Donatus, all with different wooden types ; which it is probable (confidering the difficulties he had to encounter, and the many artifts whom he muft neceffarily have had occafion to confult) coft hirri fome years to execute ; fo that the firit efiay might be about 1430, which nearly agrees with Petruj Scriverius, who fays, the invention was about tea or twelve years before 1440 [CI. 3. What [C] Scriverius's account is fomewhat different from that of Junius. He tells us, u that Laurentius, walking in the " wood, picked up a fmall bough of a beech, or rather of " an oak tree, blown off by the wind; and, after amufing " himfelf with cutting fome letters on it, wrapped it up " in paper, and afterwards laid himfelf down to fleep. When * l he awaked, he perceived that the paper, by a fhower of rain iritii in p. 8. 1. 2, 3. There are neither diftinctions non points, which are feen in the other work*s of Lauren- tius ; and the letter i is not marked with an accent, but with a dot at the top. The lines throughout are uneven. The fhape of the pages not always the fame, not (as they fhould be) rectangular, but fometimes rhomb-like, fometimes an ifofcek trape- zium ; and the performance feems to be left as a fpecimen both of his piety and of his ingenuity in this efTay of a new-invented art. Mr. Meerman has given an exact engraving of this fingular curiofity. There are four other credible teftimonies, who lived before Junius, that confirm the relation [E] of max, vol. I. p. 77. For the introduction of folios and fig- natures, fee note [QJ*, p. 27, 28. To which we may add, that Mr. Meerman thinks the firft inftance of either folios or running-titles was in the " Sermones Leon, de Utino, " Paris, 1477 ;" though the ufe of folios is fo obvious, that they are moft probably to be found in very old Mlf. N. ] E] Coaeval almoft with Cornelius was Ulric Zell, a native of Hanover, the firft: who practifed Printing, at Cologn, who attained the rudiments of the art by offi- ciating as Corrector of the Prefs under Fuft or Gutenberg, as appears by the Chronicon of Cologn, a work written under his own infpedtion. Zell being a German, and profefTedly an advocate for the caufe of Mcntz, his tcfli- mony in favour of Harleim (where he allows the foun- dation of the art was laid) will be acknowledged unexcep- tionable, Sec Meerman, vol.1, p. 60. B. & N. K 2 Cornel im, U THE ORIGIN Cornelius, and yet feem to derive their authority from a different channel ; and who all mention thes theft of Laurentius's fervant, and his fetting-up at Mentz (fee Meerman's Documenta, lxxxi lxxxiv) 3 viz. 1. f Zurenus, in Joannis van Zuyren reliquiae* " ex opufculo deperdito, cui tit. Zurenus junior, five " de prima, et inaudita haclenus vulgo, et veriore 8. Kempis was printed at Harleim in 1472, and was the laft known work of Laurentius's defcendants, who foon after difpofed of all their materials, and probably quitted the em- ployment ; as the ufe of fufile types was about that time univerfally diffufed through Holland by the fettling of Martens at Aloft, where he purlued the art with reputa- tion for upwards of fixty years. Peter and Andrew, the two eldeft grandfons of Laurentius, pcrifhed in the civil war of 1492. See Meerman's Index primus, B. & N. Harleim, Of PRINTING, 73 Harleim, which no one was permitted to pafs at night unexamined, or through the feveral other towns in the way to Mentzj and, 3. on his having been permitted to exercife the art after his arrival in that city, without being molefted by any judicial com- plaint from thofe whom he had robbed. To this it may be anfwered, that Junius wrote in a very figurative manner ; and, to exprefs his abhor- rence of the crime in the ftrongeft light, accufed the robber of having ftolen " the collection of types, and u all the inftruments his matter had got together." But furely much lefs would effectually have anfwered the purpofe of this unfaithful fervant. Skilled as he muft have been in every department of the bufinefs, it could be no difficulty for him to get proper work- men, in any country, who could (by his inftrnc- tions) fupply him with a prefs, and every thing elfe that was bulky. All that he really wanted was, a [mall quantity of wooden types, as a pattern to cut others from. Thefe he might pack up in a little parcel, either late at night, or early in the morning ; which it would be an eafy matter to conceal till the city gates were opened. And indeed no time could be more fuitable .to fuch a purpofe than that which is affigned to it , fince, no bufinefs being performed either on that or the following day, he would be far out of their reach when the lofs mould be dis- covered ; and it is highly probable that (Corne- lius and the other fervants of the family being em- ployed in their religious duties) he had an oppor- L tunity 74 THE ORIGIN tunity of being fome hours alone in the houle, am! of plundering unmoleited whatever he had occa- fion for. Perhaps he even obtained permifiion from the family of his deceafed mafter to take a journey to Amfterdam cr Mentz, for which fome plaufible pretence might readily be formed. However this was, it would be eafy to prevent the difcovery of his fraud till he mould be fafe out of the territories of Hol- land. It was his bufinefs therefore to take the fhorteft route (through Amfterdam and Cologn) to Mentz, his native city. Here he fixed his refidence, and hid little to apprehend from the tribunal of Harleim, whofe fentence (if any fuit was ever entered again ft him) could extend no farther than, to banifli him from a country which he never more intended to re-vifit. Having fhewn that a theft was actually committed, it will be necefiary to inquire who was the guilty perfon. Jt is clear from all accounts that his name was John [H]. Zurenus cxprefsly calls him a fo- reigner ; and there is little doubt of his being a na- tive of Mentz : why elie mould he have chofen to fettle in that city, at a diftance from his family [H] It is fome what lingular, that many of the earlieft Printers were thus named ; as, Geinsfleich fenior and junior, Fust, Meidenbachius, and Petershemius ; a circumftance which induced the Leipfic Printers toconfecratc St. John the Baptift's anniverfary to feftivity, as is ob- ferved by Jo. Storius, in a Differtation preferred by Wolfius, Monum. Typogr. torn. II. p. 475, in not, N. and OF PRINTIN G. 75 and friends, whole afiiftance he would need in fo new and arduous an undertaking ? What his fumame was,. is an interefting inquiry. Junius, after fome he- fetation, afcribes it to John Fust , but with in- juftice: for he was a wealthy man, who afiifted the firft printers at Mentz with money ; and though he afterwards was proprietor of a printing-office, yet he never, as far as appears, performed any part of the bu- finefs with his own hands ; and confequently he could: never have been a fervant to Laurentius. Nor is tho conjecture of Scr i verius better founded, which fixes it upon John Gutenberg, who (as appears by au- thentic teftimonies) refided at Strafburg from 1436 to 1444, and during all that period employed much, fruitlefs labour and expence in endeavouring to at- tain this art. Mr. Meerman once thought, " it " might poflibly be either John Meidenbachiu3 " (who, we are told by Seb. Munster and the au- " thor of Chronographia Mcguntinenfis, was an af- " fiftant to the firft Mentz printers) ; or John Peter- " sheimius (who was fometime a fervant to Fust " and Schoeffer, and fet up a printing-houfe at l( Francfort 1459) > or ' i a ^ly> f me other perfon, li who, being unable through poverty to carry on " the bufinefs, difcovered it to Geinsfleich at "Mentz." But more authentic intelligence after- wards convinced him there were two perfons of this name, who appear to have been brothers, and that the junior was diftinguiflied by the additional appel- lation of Gutenberg. Thcfe were both printers ; L 2 and 7 6 THE ORIGIN' and their hiftory fhall be given in as ftiort a compafs as poflible [I]. All things being fully confidered, it appears that John Geinsfleich fenior was the difhoneft fervant, who was born at Mentz, and who, in the papers publilhed by Kohlerus, we find there in the yeaF 1441, and not before : for though he was of a good family, yet was he poor, and feems to have been obliged, as well as his brother, to have fought his livelihood in a foreign country ; and perhaps was [I] There were two John Geinsfleiches of Mentz, the fenior called Geinsfleich y-olt \^oy}M\ the other dif- tinguifhed by the name pf Gutenberg. They were both poor; though of a family diftinguifhed by knighthood. They were both married men, and were moft probably brothers, as it was not uncommon in that age for two bro- thers to have the fame Chriftian name. Thefe both ap- pear in a difreputable light. The ekleft robbed his mafter, with many aggravating circumftances. The youngeft vva remarkably contentious ; and, after entering into a contrail of marriage with Anna, a noble girl of The Iron Gate^ re 7 fufed to marry her till compelled by a judicial decree j and afterwards cared not what became of the lady, but left her behind at Strafburgh when he removed to Mentz. He had not only frequent quarrels with his wife ; but with An- drew Drizehen, Andrew Heilmann, and John Riff, all of whom were affociated with him at Strafburg in his different employments of making of looking-glaffe?, poli lining of precious Hones, and endeavouring to attain the art of Printing : and with thefe he involved himfelf in three law-fuits, See Meerman, vol. I. p. 163, he. N. content OF PRINTING. 77 content to be under Laurentius, that, when he had learnt the art, he might follow it in his own. But, to Jeave conjecture, we may produce fome certain tefti- monies. i. It is what Junius himfelf fays, that the perfon who ftole the types did it with a view to fet up elfe- where ; nor is it likely that he would either make no uie of an art he had feen fo profitable to Lauren- tius, or that he would teach it to another, and fubmit to be again a fervant. 2. The Lambeth Record (which is printed above, p. 3, from Mr. Atkyns) tells us, that " Mentz gained " the art by the brother of one of the workmen of *" Harleim, who learnt it at home of his brother, " who after fet up for himfelf at Mentz." By the ftricteft examination of the beft authorities, it is plain- that by thefe two brothers the two Geinsfleiches: muft be meant. But as the younger (who was called Gutenberg) was. never a fervant to Laurentius, it muft be the fenior who carried off the types, and inftructed his brother in the art ; who firft applied himfelf to the bufinefs at Straiburg, and afterwards joined his elder brother, who had in the mean time fettled at Mentz. What is ftill ftronger, two Chronologers of Straf- burgh, the one named Dan. Speklinus, the other anonymous (in Meerman's Documenta, N lxxxv, lxxxvi), tell us exprefsly, that John Geinsfleich (viz. the fenior, whom they diftinguilh from Guten- berg ) 3 having learnt th? art by being fervant to its M 7 8 THE ORIGIN firjl inventory carried it by theft into Mentz, his native country. They are right in the fad, though mis- taken in the applicationof.it; for they make Straf- burg the place of the invention, and Mentelius the inventor, from whom the types were jftolen : but this is plainly an error; for Geinsfleich lived at Mentz in 1 44 1, as appears from undoubted testimonies ; and could not be a fervant to Mentelius, to whom the beforementioned writers afcribe the invention in 1440, though more antient ones do net attempt to prove that he began to print before 1444 or 1447. Nor will the narrative agree better with Gutenberg, who was an earlier printer than Mentelius ; iince, among the evidences produced by him in his law-.fuit, 1439, no Geinsfleich fenior appears, nor any other fer- vant but Laurentius Beildek. The narration therefore of the theft of Geinsfleich, being fpread by various reports through the world, and fubfifting in the time of thefe Chronologers, was applied by them (to ferve the caufe they wrote for) to Strafburg ; but ferves to confirm the truth, fince no writer derives the printing fpoils from any other country than Hol- land or Alfatia. The Chronologers have likewife, inftead of Fust, called Gutenberg the wealthy man ; who, from all circumftances, appears to have been poor. They alfo call ScHOEFFERthe fon-in-law of Mentelius ; when it is clear that he married the daughter of Fust. Printing being introduced fromHarleim into Mentz, GeinsflSich fenior fet wi$& all diligence to carry OF PRINTING. 79 it on , and publifhed in 1442 Alexandri Galu Dottrinale\]L\ and Petri Hispani Trattatus; two works, which, being fmall, beft fuited his circum- ftances, and for which, being much ufed in the fchools, he might reaionably expect, a profitable fale. This has been difputed by many writers, becaufe none of theie editions have been found. But they undoubtedly were publifhed, though without the name of place or printer j as the preceding books at Harleim were printed, and the following ones at Mentz, till the year 1457 > anc * therefore, if any at prefent remain in the collections of the curious, they are only difcovcrable to fuch as are well-acquainted with the types of Laurentius. Nay, it is poffible that the copies may be all torn and deftroyed, having been ufed only by fchool-boys ; as hath happened to both the Harleim editions of Donatus ; or the re- [K] Erasmus teftifies that thefe trah were received in fchools, when he was a young man, Ep. g^Henr. Bouil- lum, Aug. 31, 15 1 3, Opp. torn. III. p. 103. Of this Grammar of Alexander de Villa Dei, written in verfe, fee among others Jo. Alb. Fabricius, Bibliotb. Lat. med. et infim. Latinit. lib. I. and Jo. Leichius in Supplem. Maittairii, at the end of Orig. Typogr. Lipf. p. 1 19. feq. Of Peter of Spain, who flourifhed in the clofe of the XHIth century, fee Nich. Antonius's Biblicth. Hi/pan. vet. lib. VIII. c. 5. p. 52 ; and of his Parva Lcgicalia, or Thcfaurus Sophifmatum, which Junius here points out, Sir Thomas More's Apology for the Folly of Erasmus deferves to be read, torn. III. Opp. Erasmi, p. 1897, &feq. See Meerman, vol. I. p. 94. B, maindcr go THE ORIGIN mainder of them were fuppreffed by the Mentz prin- ters, whofe improvement in the art had rendered thefe books ufelefs : or, if any of them are ftill re- maining, they are hidden in obfcurity, as many Others of the firft eflays of printing ; fome of which Mr. Meerman difcovered, which none have before men- tioned [L] , and more, it is hoped, will be brought to light [L] In proof of this affcitian, Mr. Meerman particu- lary mentions two editions of this Grammar of Alexander x>e Villa Dei, unknown to Mr. Maittaire and others. One, and that in his own library, without time, place, or printer, beginning with the work itfelf, Scribere clericulis paro dodrinale novellis, was publifhed in quarto in the Roman character, and that cut, as appears from the inequality of the type, and contains twenty-eight lines in a page ; which may be reckoned, by all the marks, among the firft editions printed in Italy, about 1470, or even earlier. The other, which was fhewn to Mr. Meerman by Mr. Jacob Bryant, the celebrated writer on the Mytho- logy of the Ancients, is in folio, in the Roman character, and cut too, with fome elegance, thirty lines long, and has- the following remarkable infcription at the end : " Alexandri de Villa Dei Doctrinale (Deo laudes) feli- (l citer explicit. Impreffum fat incommode. Cum aliqua- " rum rerum, quae ad hanc artem pertinent imprevTori *< copia fieri non potuerit in hujus artis inicio : pefte Ge- " nuse, Aft, alibique militante. Emendavit autem hoc " ipfum opus Venturinus Prior, Grammaticus eximius, ita " diligenter, ut cum antea Do&rinale parum emendatum in *' plerifque locis librariorum vitio effe videretur, nunc illius 7 " cura OF PRINTING. It will be brought to light, by a companion with the valuable fpecimens of early printing, which Mr. Meerman's plates exhibit. Nor can any thing ma- terial be oppofed to Junius's relation, except the filence of John Schoeffer of thofe works, in his narration preferved by Trithemius. The reafon is, he pafles over the whole hiftory of moveable wooden types, as not worth his notice j and relates only the particulars of metal types, firft: thofe which had their The circum (lance of there being two brothers of the name of John Geinsfleich will lead us to the meaning of the Poet, in thefe verfes, fubjoined to the firft editions of Justinian's Infiitutes, printed by Peter Schoeffer in 1468 : " Hos dedit eximios fculpendi in arte magiflros, Cui placet en mactos arte fagire viros, Quos genuit ambos urbs Moguntina Johannes, Librorum infignes protocharagmaticos, Cum quibus optatum Petrus venit ad Polyandrttm 9 Curforpofterior, introeundo prior; Quippe quibus prseftat fculpendi lege, fagitus A folo dante lumen et ingenium." By " ambos Johannes," all have hitherto thought to be meant Faustus and Gutenberg, not fuffi- ciently attending to the firft two lines, which fome have left out as needlefs. That Faustus, a man of wealth, practifed Printing with his own hands, or call: the types, no one ever dreamt ; nor do even thofe moderns fay he did, who think he is here meant. It will be difficult, therefore, to perfuade us, that Schoeffer, in whofe praife, and with whofe con- land, as it is certain Jo. of 'Westphalia did. See Mait- taire, Annal. Typogr. torn. I. p. 334, ed. 2. And lince Matthaeus van der Goes appears a printer at Ant- werp 1472, who in that year printed bet boeck van Tondalus vifioen in quarto, TheodoriC confequently returned about that period, from Germany and Fiance, into his own country, See Meerman, vol, 1. p. 98. B. & N. M 2 lent. t# T H E O R I G I N fent, theie verfes were made, would fuffer Faust us, his father-in-law, to be complimented for his Ikill in an art to which he had no pretence, The truth is, the two Johns are no other than Gejnsfleich fenior and Gutenberg, who were the firft inventors of metal types. And yet Mr. Meerman thinks Fust is not wholly unmentioned ; fufpefting he is hinted at by the word Polyandrum, to whom both the Geins- fleiches and Peter Schoeffer applied as to the common patron of all printers, whom he afiifted with his bounty and counfel. He had certainly the furname given him of <2>ufmail> or Goodman, as Jo. Car ion informs us in his Chronicle, which name feems to be alluded to by a new fignification of the word Tolyander, the SUler^ttttW, or one who had many men under his direction. Polyandrum has been alfo ex- plained by many writers to mean the penetralia artis ; from a fuppofition of its alluding to Christ's fepuU chre, which Peter firft entered, though he came to it after John. Schelhornius, however, Amcenit. Liter, torn. IV. p. 301, fufpected fome unknown per/on was here intended [N]. Which of the two brothers invented the metal types, hiftory does not inform us, Geinsfleich fenior had printed in 1442 ihcGrammar of Alexander deVilla Dei, and the Logicalia of Peter of Spain, on wooden types; bur, finding them not fufficiently durable, foon law the expediency of ufing metal. In 1443 ne hi rec * the houfe .Zurmjtmgcn, and was aflifted with money by Fust, who in return had a fhare of the bufinefs 5 [N] Sec Meerman, vol.1, p, 176, 177. an4 OFPRINTING. 85 and about the fame time John Meidenbachius was admitted a partner, as were fome others, whofe names are not tranfmitted to our times; and in 1444 they were joined by Gutenberg, who for that purpofe quitted Strafburg. It feems likely, therefore, that Geinsfleich fenior firft thought of ufing metal types-, but, his eyes failing him, he inftructed Gutenberg in his art, which reached no farther than calling the Jhanks of the letters, or little fquare blocks of metal, which (Polydore Vergil tells us) was firft thought-of in 1442, the very year in which Geinsfleich publifhed his firft eflays on wooden types, which did not anfwer his expec- tations. But, fince the brothers are both called proto- cbaragmatici, it is fafeft, with Wimphelingius, to look upon both as the inventors of this improvement. Whilft the metal types were preparing, which muft have been a work of time, feveral works were printed, both on wooden feparate types and wooden blocks ; which were well adapted to fmall books of fre- quent ufe, fuch as the Tabula Alphabetica, the Ca- tholicon, Donati Grammatica, and the ConfeJJionalia. Thefe were certainly printed by this partnerfhip, as were alfo fome wooden piclures. From the abovementioned printers in conjunction, after many fmaller efiays, the Bible was publifhed in 1450, with large cut metal types [OJ. And it is no wonder, [Oj Manv writers have fuppofed that this was the edition oF which fome copies were Ibid in France, by Fust, as-ma- uufcripts, for the great price of five or fix hundred crowns, which 86 THE ORIGIN wonder, confidering the immenfe labour this work coft, that it fhould be feven or eight years in com- pleting. In this fame year the partnerfhip was dif- folved *, and a new one entered into, in Auguft, be- tween Fust and Gutenberg ; the former fupplying money, the latter (kill, for their common benefit. Various difficulties arifing occafioned a law-fuit for the money which Fust had advanced ; which was de- termined againft Gutenberg. A diftblution of this partnerfhip enfued in 1455 and in 1457 a magni- ficent edition' of the ~P falter was publilhed by Fust and Schoeffer, with a remarkable. commendation, in which they afTumed to themfelves the merit of a new invention (viz. of metal types), " adinventionem arti- " ficiofam imprimendi ac charaterizandi." This book was uncommonly elegant, and in fome meafure the work of Gutenberg-, as it was four years in the prefs, and came out but eighteen months after the partnerfhip was diflblved between him and Fust. The latter continued in pofieffion of the printing- office: and Gutenberg, by the pecuniary affiftance of Conrad Humerv fyndic of Mentz [P], and others, which he afterwards lowered to fixty, arrd at laft to lefs than forty. But it was the fecond and more expenfive edition of 1462, that was thus difpofed of, when Fust went to Paris in 1466, and which had coft 4000 florins before the third quaternion (or quire of four fheets) was printed. See Meerman, vol.1, p. 6. 151,152. N. [P] At the death of Gutenberg, Conrad Humery took poircfTxOn of all his printing materials : and en- ae;ed OF PRINTING. 87 others, opened another office in the fame city, whence appeared, in 1460, without the printer's name, the Catholicon Jo. de Janua, with a pompous colophon, in praife of its beauty, and afcribing the honour of the invention to the city of Mentz[QJ. It was gaged to the Archbifhop Adolphus, that he never would fell them to any one but a citizen of Mentz. They were, however, foon difpofed of to Nicholas Bechtermuntze, of Aftavilla, who, in 1469, publifhed Vocabularlum Latino- Teutonicum, which was printed with the fame types which had been ufed in the Catholicon. This very curious and fcarce Vocabulary was fhewn to Mr. Meerman, by Mr. Bryant, in the duke of Marlborough's valuable library at Blenheim. It is in quarto, thirty-five lines long, con- tains many extracts from the Catholicon, and is called Ex quo y from the Preface beginning with thofe words. See Meer- man, vol.11, p. 96. N. [QJ This edition, having been publifhed without a name, has been almoft univerfally afcribed to Fust and Schoeffer. But Mr. Meerman thinks it was not the work of thofe printers ; 1 . becaufe the whole form of their colophons varies from this, and theirs were always printed with red ink, and this with black ; 2. becaufe it has not their names to it, which they never omitted after 1457 ; and, 3. becaufe the fhape of the letter is very different from any that they ufed. As there was no other printing-office at Mentz in 1460 but theirs and Gutenberg's, Mr. Meer- man confidently afcribes it to the latter; and accounts very probably for the omiflion of the printer's name; 1. by the mo- tive of his publication being profit 7 rather than fame ', and, 2. (which $8 THE ORIGIN was a very handfomc book, though inferior W the Pfalter which had been publiftied in 1457 by Fust and Schoeffer. Both the Pfalter and Catholicon were printed on cut metal types [R]. It may not be impro- per to obferve here, that as the Pfalter is the earlieft (which was a llronger reafon) left his claim to the invention fhould be contradicted by Schoeffer, who was then living in the fame city. The lafl motive feems to have had its nfe; for Schoeffer never took any public notice of it, till he publifhed the lnjlitutiones Justiniani in 1468, where he informs his readers, that the two Geinsfleiches, though very fkilful men, had not arrived to fo great per- fection in the art as himfelf. See above, p. 83. This was the firft edition of the Catholicon Jo. de Janua ; that which was printed by Geinsfleich with wooden types (fee above, p. 85) being only zfmall Vocabulary for the ufe of fchools. The Strafburgh edition, by Mentelius, which was publifhed likewife without a name, was not printed till long after, probably not before 1469. See Meerman, vol. II. p. 96. 99. A copy of the Catholicon was purchafed at Dr. Mead's auction for 25 /. 15 s. for the French king ; who had given a commiffion to bid 150/. for it. Mr. West's copy was fold for 35 /. 3 s. 6 d. and is now in the Royal Library. Dr. Askew's, which appeared to be a very beautiful copy, was faid to be not the First Edition, and one of the leaves was written : it fold for 14/. ioj. N. [Rl Gutenberg never ufed any other than either wooden or cut metal types till the year 1462. In 1465 he was ad- mitted inter Aulicos by the Elector Adolphus, with an an- nual penfion ; and died in February 1468. His elder brother Geinsfleich died in 1462. Their epitaphs are printed by Mr. Meerman, vol. II. p. 154. 295. N. book OF PRINTING. 89 book which is known to have a genuine date, it be- came a common practice, after that publication, for printers to claim their own performances, by adding their names to them. The progrefs of the art has been thus traced through its fecond period, the invention of cut metal types. But the honour of completing the difcovery is due to Peter Schoeffer fS~j de Gernjh&m. A very clear account of this final completion of the types is preferved by Trithemius [T] : " Poft " ha^c inventis fucceflerunt fubtiliora, inveneruntque * f modum fundendi formas omnium Latini alphabeti [S] In German, &Cf)O0flfcr 5 in Latin, Opilio; in Englifh, Shepherd. He is fuppofed by Mr. Meerman to have been the firfl Engraver on Copper Plates. The Poet^ whofe verfes we have cited in p. 84, fays of him, " Natio quoeque fuum poterit reperire charagma " Secum ; nempe fbylo praeminet omnigeno." It is not quite certain, however, as Mr. Meerman obferves, whether this is meant for a compliment to his fkill in what is now called Engraving ; it may perhaps mean only that he was able to cut types to repreient all languages. See Meerman, vol. I. p. 253. N. [T] Annales Hirfaugienfcs, torn. II. ad ann. 1450, p. 421. As this book was finifhed in 1514, and Tri- themius tells us, he had the narrative from Schoeffer. liimfelf about thirty years before ; this will bring us back to J484, when Schoeffer nmft have been advanced in years, and Trithemius about twenty-two years old, who died in 15 16. See Voif. Hid. Lat. 1. III. c. 10. Faer. Med. & Inhm. iEtat. 1. IX. B. N literarum, 9 o THE ORIGIN *' literarum' [U], quas ipfi matrices nominabant ; ex *< quibus rurfum genedsfive ftanneos chara&eres funde- " bant, ad omnem prefTuram fufficientes, quos prius c< manibns fculpebanr. Et revera ficuti ante xxx ferme ** annos ex ore Petri Gpilionis de Gernfheim, eivis Mo- " guntini, qui gener erat primi artis inventoris, audivi, *' magnam a primo inventionis fuse hsec ars impreflbria " habuitdifficultatem. PetrusautemmemoratusOpi- " lio, tunc famulus pollea gener, ficut diximus, tnven- " toris primi, Johannis Full, homo ingeniofus et pru- " dens, faciliorem modum fundendi charatteres excogi- <{ tavit, et artem, ut nunc eft, complevit." [U] Mr. Meerman (vol. II. p. 47.) fuppofes there is art error in this paffage, and that it lliould be read, " fundendi " formas omnium Latini alphabeti literarum [ex lis] quas " ipfi matrices nominabant ;" and explains it to mean, " That " they found out a method fundendi formas (that is, of cafiing " the bodies only) of all the letters of the Latin alphabet, from " what they called matrices (on which they cut the face of each " letter) ; and from the fame kind of matrices a method was in "time difcovered of calling r he complete letters (aneas five " flanneos characleres) of fufficient hardnefs for the preffurs " they had to bear, which letters before (that is, when the bo- " dies only were cafl) they were obliged to cut" But this inter- pretation is hfetf chfeure ', and, with fubmiffion, the paffage from Trithemius needs no correction. The limple fenfe is,. That a mode was invented of ' flamping the Jhape of the letters in matrices, from which were cafl the complete types. The firll operation of the Founder at prefent is, to cut the face of the letter on a fleet punch ; this he ilrik.es into a copper matrix ; and from matrices the metal types arc caft, without any further procefs. See Mr. De Missy's remark, on this paffage, at the end of the Appendix. N, Another OF PRINTING. 91 Another ample teltimony in favour of Schoeffer is given by Jo. Frid. Faust us of Afchaffenhurg, from papers preferved in his family: u Reter '-' Schoeffer of Gerniheim, perceiving his mafter u Fust's defign, and being himfelf ardently defirous " to improve the art, found out (by the good pro- " vidence of God) the method of cutting (incidendi) < c the characters in a matrix, that the letters might " each be fingly cajl, inftead of being cut. He pri- *' vately cut matrices for the whole alphabet ; ff and, when he (hewed his mafter the letters caft: " from thefe matrices, Fust was fo pleafed with the " contrivance, that he promifed Peter to give him " his only daughter Christina in marriage ; a pro- " mife which he foon after performed. But there *' were as many difficulties at nrfl with thefe let- " ters, as there had been before with wooden ones ; " the metal being too foft to fupport the force of the " impreflion : but this defect was foon remedied, by " mixing the metal with a fubftance which furH- " ciently hardened it." This account has the more probability in it, as coming from a relation of Fust, yet afcribing the merit to Schoeffer TX], It agrees too with what John Schoeffer tells us [Y], " that " in 1452 Fust completed the art, by the help of [X] See Meerman, vol. I. p. 183. who copied thistefti- mony from Wolfius, Monument. Typography vol. I. p. 468, feq. N. [Y] In a colophon to the Breviarium Trithemii. Ses Meerman, vol. II. p. 144. N N 2 " hi* $ THE ORIGIN " his fervant Peter Schoeffer, whom he adopted " for his fon, and to whom he gave his daughter '* Christina [Z] in marriage, pro dignd laborum " multarumque adinventionum remunerations Fust te and Schoeffer concealed this new improvement, " by adminiftering an oath of fecrecy to all whom *' they intruftcd, till the year 1462 ; when, by the " difperfion of their fervants into different countries, " at the facking of Mentz by the archbimop Adol- * e phus, the invention was publicly divulged." The firft book printed with thefe improved types was Durandi Rationale, in 1459; at wn i cn time, however, they feem to have had only onefize of cafi letters, all the larger characters which occur being cut types, as appears plainly by an inflection of the book [A A]. From this time to 1466, Fust and Schoeffer [Z] It is fomewhat remarkable that John Schoeffer fhould be miftaken in his mother's name ; which, however, Mr. Meerman thinks he was, fince his father (in a con- trad made in 1477, with his kinfman Fust, about twenty copies in vellum, and 180 in paper, of the Decretals of Gregory IX, being the refidue of an impreffion printed in 1473) exprefsly calls his wife Dn0!t, i. e. Dinah ; which Kohlerus, who has printed this contract, fuppofes to be a diminutive of Chbtstina : though Dinah (or Deborah) is a very different name from Christina. MeerivIan, vol. I. p. 184. But fee Mr. De Missy's very ingenious Remarks at the end of our Appendix. N. [AA] Meerman, vol.11, p. 98. When Dr. Askew's fine copy of Durandus was on fale 3 a doubt was ftarted, whether OF PRINTING. 93 Schoeffer continued to print a confiderable number of books ; particularly the two famous editions of Tully's Offices, of which we have already given an account, p. 59. In their earliefl books, they printed more copies on vellum than on paper, which was the cafe both of their Bibles and Tully's Offices. This, however, was foon inverted ; and paper introduced for the greateft part of their impreflions : a few only being printed on vellum, for curiofities, and for the purpofe of being illuminated [BB]. How long Fust lived, is uncertain-, but in 1471 we find Schoeffer was in partnerfhip with Conrad Henlif and a kinf- man of his matter Fust[CC]. He publifhed many books after the death of his father-in-law [DD] ; the laft of which that can be difcovered is a third edition of the P falter in 1490, in which the old cut types of the firft edition were ufed [EE]. whether it was compleat, as it did not begin exactly in the manner defcribed by M. De Bure. It fold, however, for 61 /. How far it correfponded with M. De Bure's account, I cannot pretend to fay, having had no opportunity of examining that particular ; but, on a clofe infpection into the book on a former occafion, I have every reafon to think Mr. Meerman's account of it to be perfectly exact. Dr. Askew's copy was on vellum, and bound in two vo- lumes. N. [BB] Ibid. vol. I. p. 8. [CC] Ibid. p. 7. [DD] Sciiwarzius, Pr'imar. Do cum. cle Orig. Typogr. par. II. p. 4. has enumerated forty-eight books (omnes gran- di or i forma) printed by Schoekfer before 1492. And Mr. Meerm an adds ftill more to that number, vol. I. p. 253. N. [EE] Meerman, vol.11, p. 55, This 94 THE ORIGIN This DhTertation fhall be clofed with a fhort ac- count of the claim of Strajburgh. It has been already mentioned, that Gutenberg was engaged in that city in different employments , and, among others, in endeavouring to attain the art of Printing [FF]. ^hat thefe endeavours were unfuccefsful, is plain from an authentic judicial decree of the fenate of Strafburg'n, in 1439, a ^ r tne death of Andrew J)rizehen [GG]. But there are many other proofs that Gutenberg and his partners were never able to bring the art to perfection. [FF] See above, p. 76, note [I]. [GG] Their firft attempts were made about 1436, with %uooden typef. Mr. Meerman is of opinion that Geins- fleich junior (who was of an enterprising genius, and had already engaged in a variety of projects) gained fome little infight into the bufinefs by vifiting his brother, who was employed byLAURENTius at Harleim, but not fufficient to enable him to praftife it. It is certain, that, at the time of the law-fuit in 1439, much money had been expended, without any profit having arifen ; and the unfortunate Drizehen, in 1438, on his death-bed, lamented to his con- feffor, that he had been at great expence, without having been reimburfed a {ingle obolus. Nor did Gutenberg (who perfifted in his fruitlefs endeavours) reap any advan- tage from them ; for, when he quitted Strafburg, he was overwhelmed in debt, and under a neceffity of felling every thing he was in poffefrion of. See Meerman, vol. I. p. 198 202. All the depofitions in the law-fuit above- mentioned (with the judicial decree) are printed by Mr. Meerman, vol.11, p. 5888. N. I. WlM- OF PRINT I IN G. 95 T. Wimphelingius [HH], the oldeft writer in favour of Strafburg, tells us, that Gutenberg was the inventor of n a new art of writing," ars impreforia, which might almoft be called a divine benefit, and which he happily completed at Mentz; but does not mention one book of his printing : though he adds, that Mentelius printed many volumes correctlyand beautifully, and acquired great wealth : whence we may conclude that he perfected what Gutenberg had in vain efifayed. 2. Wimphelingius, in another book [II}, tells us, the art of Printing was found out by Guten- berg incomplete; which implies, not that he prac- tifed the art in an imperfect manner (as Laurentius had done at Harleim), but rather that he had not been able to accomplifh what he aimed at. 3. Gutenberg, when he left Strafburg in 1444 or the following year, and entered into partnerfhip with Geinsfleich fenior and others, had occafion for his brother's affiftance, to enable him to complete the art; which {hews that his former attempts at Strafburg had been unfuccefsful [KK]. 4. Thefe particulars are remarkably confirmed by TRiTHEMius,whotellsus,intwodirFerentplaces[LL3, [HH] Epitome rerum Germaniearum, ed. Argent. 1505. Meerman, vol. I. p. 262. vol. II. p. 139. [II] CataL Epifa/frgentin, 156S. MEERMAN, utfupra. [KK] Meerman, ut fupra. LL] Annal. Hirfaug. ut fupra, & Chron. Sportheim. See Meerman, vol.- IL p. 103. 127. that 96 THE ORIGIN that Gutenberg fpent all his fubftance in queft of this art; and met with fuch infuperable difficulties, that, in defpair, he had nearly given up all hopes of attaining it, till he was aflifted by the liberality of Fust, and by his brother's fkill, in the city of Mentz. 5. Ulric Zell fays [MM], the art was completed at Mentz ; but that fome books had been publifhed in Holland earlier than in that city. Is it likely that Zell, who was a German, would have omitted to mention Strafburgh, if it had preceded Mentz in Printing ? There is little doubt therefore that all Guten- berg's labours at Strafburgh amounted to no more than a fruitlefs attempt, which he was at laft under a neceflity of relinquishing : and there is no certain proof of a fingle book having been printed in that city till after the difperfion of the printers in 1462 [NN], when [MM] Chronicon Colonia, 1499. Zell attributes the invention to Gutenberg at Mentz ; whence, he fays, the art was firft communicated to Cologn, next to Strafburgh, and then to Venice. See Meerman, vol. II. p. 105. [NN] From this period, Printing made a rapid progrefs in molt of the principal towns of Europe, as will appear by an infpe&ion of our Appendix, NIV*'. In 1490, it reached Conftantinople ; and, according to Mr. Palmer, p. 281, &c. it was extended, by the middle of the next century, to Africa and America. It was introduced into Ruilia about 1560; but, from motives either of policy or fuperftition, it was fpeedily iupprefled by the ruling powers; and, even * This number of the Appendix appears now for die firft time. 7 under OF PRINTING. 97 "when Mentelius and Eggestenius fuccefsfully pur- sued the bufinefs. The former indeed is iuppofed by fome writers to have begun printing about the year 1447* but nofuffkient authority appears forfuch an afTertion. Having mentioned Mentelius, let us examine for a moment how he comes to be confidered as the inven- tor of Printing. The origin of the art was known to very few. The advocates for Mentz were divided in their fentiments between Gutenberg and Fust. The city of Strafburgh put in its own claim to the invention ; and Gutenberg's failure of fuccefs there, cutting off all pretence to the honour of itj opened a way for Men- telius, who certainly was the firft publifher of books in that city. John Schottus, a fon of Mentelius's daughter, fettled there in 15 10, after having refided at Friburg in Bafil, and took an opportunity of cultivat- under the prefent enlightened Emprefs, has fcarcely emerged from its obfcurity. 'That it was early prafiifed in the in- hofpitable regions of Iceland, we have the refpe&able autho- rity of Mr. Bryant : "Arngrim Jonas was born amidft " the mows of Iceland; yet as much prejudiced in favour of his " country as thofe who are natives'of an happier climate. This " is vifible in his Crymogaa ; but more particularly in his " Anatome Blefkiniana. I have in my poffefiion this curious " little treatife, written in Latin by him in his own' country, " and printed Typis Holenfibus in Ijlandia Bore all, anno 16 12. " Hola is placed in fome maps within the Arftic'Q\xc\t y and is u certainly not far removed from it. I believe, it is the " fartheft North of any place, where Arts and Sciences have * l ever refided." Obfervations and Inquiries relating to various parts of Ancient HiJIory, 1 767, p. 277. B. & N, O ins 98 THE ORIGIN ing a report which was likely to prove fo advantageous to him among his countrymen. He was more par- ticularly excited to this, by John Schoeffer, of Mentz ; who boafted in his colophons, though not quite confiftently with truth, that John Fust, his grandfather by the mother's fide, was the firft in- ventor [OO], As Strafburgh rivaled Mentz in its claim, why mould Schottus give place to Schoef- fer, or why Mentelius to Fust? If Schoeffer ufed artifice on one fide, Schottus (hewed more on [OO] John Schoeffer was the firft who attributed the invention to Fust; not, as other writers do, by faying that he affifted the firft printers with money and advice ; but imputing it to his own ingenuity. He did not, how- ever, venture to afTert fo much at once, but artfully pro- ceeded to it by degrees. In his firft colophon, 1503*, he afcribes it majoribus fuis, without naming them. In a de- dication to the Emperor Maximilian, in 15O5, he inge- nuoufly calls Gutenberg the inventor, and Fust and Schoeffer the improvers. In 1509, he calls his grand- father inventor em auttoremque\ and in 1515, in the colophon to Trithemius, which is above cited, he afferts that Fust completed the art with the afiiftance of Peter Schoeffer. By a continual repetition of colophons to this purpofc, many were perfuaded that the affertion was true, and among others, it feems, the Emperor Maximilian (fee above, p. 14) ; to whom, however, in 1505, John Schoeffer had given a very different account. See Meerman, vol. II. p. 144. N. * The colophon to ' Hcrmctis Pimander," 1503, is, " JmpreiTum " for 5/. 10 j. Is. 7 In APPENDIX. i$$ In 1493, a fine edition of Isocrates [k] was printed at Milan, in folio, by Henry German and Sebastian ex Pantremulo. All the above works are prior in time to thofe of Aldus, who has been erronecufly fuppofed to be the firfi Greek Printer t the beauty, however, correci- nefs, and number, of his editions place him in a much higher rank than his predeccLTors [/], and his charac- ters in general were more elegant than any before ufed. He was born in 1445, and died in 1515^]. \_f\ See Palmer, p. 158. An illuminated copy of this work was purchafed for the The British Museum, at Dr. A skew's fale, for ten guineas and a half. N. [/] It would be endlefs to enumerate the various works of this diftinguilhed Printer. It may be proper, however, to mention his very curious edition of the Pfa'ter, which is without date, but is clearly fixed by Mr. Maittaire either to the year 14.95 or 1496. Mr. De Missy had a line copy of it, which was fold to Mr. Mason' for feven pounds. N. \jn~\ Aldus was inventor of the Italic character which is now in ufe, called, from his name, Aldine, or Curfivus. This fort of letter he contrived, to prevent the great num- ber of abbreviations that were then in ufe; a lingular fpeci- men of which is faithfully exhibited by Chevillier** u Sic hie e fat sm qd ad fimptr a e f pducibile a Deo " g a e & sir hie a 5 e g a h e fpducibile a Do." i. e. " Sicut hie eft fallacia fecund uin quid ad fimpliciter* " A eft producibile a Deo: l*2rgo A eft. Et fimiliter hie. " A non eft : Ergo Anon eft producibile a Deo." Contrac- tions of a fimilar nature abounded in all the works of that age, and more particularly in the books of law. N. * From '' La Logique ] See hereafter, p. 128. 153 162. And fee an account of the early Greek and Latin editions both of the Old and New Teftament in Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra. Mr. Ma itt aire, however, Annal. Typogr. t. I. p. 41, mentions a Latin Bible, of Paris, unnoticed by Le Long, which is without a date ; but is fixed by [Mr. Barricave] a learned friend of Mr. Maittaire's to the year 1464, the third year of the reign of Louis the Eleventh, from the three following veries printed in a colophon at the end of it : " Jam femi Undecimus luftrum Francos Lodoicus " Rexerat, Ulricus, Martinus, itemque Michael " Orti Teutonia hanc mihi compofuerc figuram." Mr. Palmer, Hiftory of Printing, p. 100, after citing the above conjecture, adds, " I am perfuaded that Mr. Mait- " taire's friend was miftaken in the firft verfe. As Che- ** villier gives us the fame colophon at the end of the firft " Paris Bible by the fame three partners, with this variation " however from the former, that inftead o- femi !njlrum y it " has tribus lufris t that is, inftead of the thirds it imports the " thirteenth year of that King's reign : we may eafily fuppofe, " that it was the firft Paris Bible of 1475 ; and this Gentle- of two fentences, one of which the tranferiber negligently overlooked. 16. -tm . . . 17. -m . . . 18. nn . . . raw . . i9-t3NO . .. . 2o.Dptfl in . . 5I.D^1 . . . yr\tih Dip/t: . pa dhk wi'irq Dnxq * For HO the LXX read TQ3. The text is evidently wrong j and ought to iland as in 1 Kings. f22 6-ima 7. th 8.in 9. O without tD{^ 10. tDipM 1m wanting:. APPENDIX. ii$ i Kings viii. 2 Chron. vu Various Readings. own . nnna 24. nn ** nn ate* 26. nto *]H^1 wrong. 27. wanting. own . 28. Dvn nnno . DP ITiT < 30- ronn , DlpD 7^ own to 32. own 33. *pra 12. wanting. 13. flown* 14- onton wanting, wanting. i* Tin 16. Til mvn ^ntorrn 1 wanting. TW right. 18. onan n 19. wanting* 20. yyy mmnfi n^Vi cdoi ai.^nn OipDD DWip 23. camp ytW? :wn7 24. t\w DM 3 * Verfe 1 3 th is a parcnthefis (not extant in Kings) with part or- Verfe 12th repeated. U6 A P P E N D I X. t Kings viii. 2 Chron. vi. Various Readlng. 33- ybx f 24. wanting, . Y7* . yxb . 34 . own 25. own p cnn^ni Dnu^m Dnuannru orrnnN^Dn^nnn: 55. dw . , 26. DWH Drwtonsn OfiKprtD 36.Tnnntt 27. Tifiri ? 37- ppn 28. ppTl right. !3K . . V*tf wrong. rftnata . rftno 731 right. 38. nwi . *9-nw , Itov by? . , . py byy\ pyr . . . in . raw - intOSfl 1W3 39- own . .- 30. own p nwi . . . wanting. nn:i , . . nnnii *p^ nyn , nyT iw ':n^D . - , *J2 without 73 no-iwr 3i-1^^ wanting, . YDvnroy? 42.*]nvnx\wm , > *d . 32. wanting. ITflNI , yr\ Ijnri . imn *oi \m V?Dnm r f . lVaorirn 43-nriK 33- nn^i own .: own p COD D13BB pn 1VT rmV? , hK^bi 44- u^ 8 . . s?'VW *44 A p P E ] W D I X. l Kings vui 2 Chron. vi Various Readings. y 4 +. nip*Stt f 34- T7K wanting. . nKtn roa WIS 45 D'ot^n . . 35- own o 4^- Drvn^ . 36.Dnmty msn . wanting. > 47- on 1 ? *7K j . . 37- Din 1 ? Sk Dn*n^ . oncy wni . iriVH right. U3?bh U Wll right. *s. cnn^ . 38. on 4 ? crvn'K f pot? yix . wanting. yvn , . wn nom rvnVi nun w:n right. 49- D's^n . 39- own p rao . pDDO cn:nn Drvronn 117 N. B. This Collation, made from Walton's Polyglot}, proceeds no farther, becaufe the remainder of Solomon's Prayer is very different in Kings, from what it is in Chronicles ; for which difference if the Learned could clearly account, it would be of great fervice to this important branch of Literature. In 2i8 APPENDIX. In Mr. Clarke's Connexion of the Roman, Saxon, and Englijh Coins, among many other interefting par- ticulars, is a curious DifTertation on the Jewijh Money ; in which the Shekel, as determined by Grsepsius *, is proved (againft the united authority of Villal- pandus and Greaves) to have been fynonymous to the Didrachma* or forty-eighth part of a pound : and confequently a fourth part of an ounce ; not half an ounce, as has been commonly fuppofed. * " It is now almoft two centuries lince Stanislaus Grsepsius, a learned Polander, publifhed a treatife, De multiplici ficlo, et talento Hebraico. This book met with a very lingular fate. It was at firft much neglected ; and then, about a century afterwards, publifhed in Germany, as a very choice Mf. found in one of their libraries. One Henricus Goutier Thulemarius re-printed it word for word, without taking the leaft notice of its author; and this Literary Pirate was in time regarded as the true Pro- prietor. See Baudelot, Utilite des Voyages, vol. II. p. 247. and Fabricius, Bibl. Ant. p. 27." Mr. Clarke, p. 242. This learned work of Grsepsius would be nq temptation to a Literary Pirate of thefe days ! B, N III. APPENDIX. N III. On the firft-printed Polyglotts. THE firft Polyglott work was printed at Genoa in 15 1 6, by Peter Paul Porrus [#], who under- took to print the Pcntaglott Pfalter of Augustin Justinian, bifhop of Nebo. It was in Hebrew, Arabic [], Chaldaic, and Greek, with the Latin Verfions, [a] " By Porrus it was printed at Genoa, in adibus " Nicolai Justiniani Pauli ; whither he feems to have been < invited for that purpofe : after which I conceive that he * returned to his ufual place of abode at Turin ; as by him- " felf, at the end of the book, he is called Petrus Porrus " Mediolanenfis Taurini degens." C. D. M. Mr. Dk Missy had three copies of this Pfalter, of which the fineft was fold to Mr. Cracherode for one guinea. [b~\ The Arabic verfion is of no authority, as it was tranflated, not from the Hebrew, but from the Septuagint ; where the veriion of the Prophets (particularly Jeremiah) is lefs faithful than that of the other books of the Old Tefta- ment, and was probably made by a Jew who was very ignorant of Hebrew. But this is far from being the cafe of the Pentateuch. See Michaelis, Syntagma Comment ationum t 1763, Comm.III. p. 58. and Pride aux, vol. IT. folio, p. 36. The Illyrian, Gothic, Arabic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Syriac verfions were all made from the Septuagint ; though there is ftill in being an older verfion of the Syriac, tranflated immediatedly from the Hebrew original. Prideaux, p. 37. " The Arabic is the latejl of all the antient verfions of " the Old Teftament. In the year 942 died R. Saadias, 7 " called 120 APPENDIX. Verfions, Gloffes, and Scholia, which laft made the eighth column, in folio. The Arabic was the firft that ever was printed ; and this the firft piece of the Bible that ever appeared in fo many languages \b\ iC Called Gaon (i. e. the illuflrious), who prefided over the * Babylonian fchools. The chief merit of this learned and " laborious Rabbi is, that he tranflated all the Old Tefta- " ment from the Hebrew into Arabic; expreffing the Ara- *\ l bic in Hebrew characters. But though the whole Hebrew " Bible was thus tranflated by him ; yet the Pentateuch " only has been, as yet, publifhed from his verfion. The '* other books, now in Arabic, in the Paris and London " Polyglotts, were tranflated at different times, by different " authors; partly from the Greek, and partly from the " Syriac verfions : and but few parts, if any, (excepting " the Pentateuch) were tranflated from the Hebrew." Dr. Kennicott, on the State of the printed Hebrew Text, Diff. II. p. 452454. See a particular enumeration of the Arabic verfions, both Mf. and printed, in Le Long, p. 214, &c. N. [] Justinian, prefuming this work would procure him great gain, as well as reputation, caufed 2O00 copies to be printed of it, and promifed in his Preface to proceed with the other parts of the Bible. But he was miferably difap- pointed : every one applauded the work ; but few proceeded farther ; and fcarce a fourth part of his number was fold^. Befides the 2000 copies, he had alfo printed fifty upon vel- lum, which he preiented to every crowned head, whether Chriftian or Infidel. The whole New Teftament was prepared for the prefs by Justinian, who had alfo made great progrefs in the Old. See Le Long, Bibliotheca Sacra, p. 2. Maittaire, Annal. Typ. torn. II. Par. I. p. 121. Palmer, Hill, of Printing, p. 263. N. In APPENDIX. 121 In 1518, John Potken published the Pfalter, in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and ^Ethiopic, [or Chaldaic, as he, with fome others, called it,] at Cologn ; but the name of the Printer is no where to be found through- out the book [>]. It has no Preface properly fo called : [r] The Printer 's name is no where mentioned, that we know of, except in the following obfervations of the late Mr. De Missy, to whom this article had been commu- nicated : * I would almoft venture to affirm, that you have * named him when you named Potken. For if he does not 1 fay exprefsly that be was the Printer, he feems at leaft to ' give us a broad hint of it, when he fays : Statui jam i fenex lingua s extern as aliquas difcere : & per artem imprejfo- c riam, quam adolefcens didici, edere : ut modico are libri in ' diver/is Unguis, fortnis ceneis excufi emi pojfint. Thefe words 1 might have been minded, but were omitted, by Le Long 4 in the abftra&s he made of Potken's addrefs to his 1 readers at the end of the book. Towards the end of the * fame Addrefs he fays imprimi curavi : but fuch a phrafe { may very well be underftood of one who faw-his work 1 printed at home with his own types. And, befides, he ' might have chofen that phlfcfe as the moft convenient, oa * account of his having been abfcnt for fome time while ' the impreffion was carried on by his kinfman and learned ' afhftant Soier, alias Heyh Confer with the above Addrefs ' what he fays, p. 7. (col. 2 fub /inert) of his Introducliun- c cula, &c. a fmall work of no more than four leaves, * which was certainly intended to go along with the Pfalter, * though it is not always, and is perhaps very feldom, to be 4 found with it. In the abovementioned Addrefs he pre- ' tends to be the firft who had imported into Europe what he * calls the Chaldee [now more properly called the JEth:cpic~\ i>. ' Tongue* 122 APPENDIX. Called : but From an Addrefs of Potken to the llti- dious Readers, which is printed on the laft page of the Pfalter, ' Tongue. And nothing hitherto has appeared to the con- * trary. Some quibblers indeed might object, that it rather 1 was imported by the ./Ethiopian Fryars who had helped him ' to learn it. But he certainly feems to have been the firft 4 who prefented the European Republic of Letters with a * printed Introdutliuncula to the Reading of that language : * nor could any body, that I know of, have faid in 1518, that ' in 1513 he had published or printed an ./Ethiopic book in * Europe, as Potken does in his Addrefs of 15 18, where he ' acquaints us, that, nearly five years before, he had given at * Rome an edition of the JEthiopic Pfalter printed by itfelf : * for it is evidently of fuch a Pfalter that he fays : Pfalter ium ' arte imprefjoria quinquennia vix exaflo, 6 Roma edidi : which book is noticed by Le Long, in thefe * words : Pfalmi iff Canticum Canticorum /Etbiopice Jludio ' Joannis Potken cum ejus prafatione Latina, in 4. Romar ' 15 1 3. That Latin Preface, could I get a fight of it, would ' perhaps enable me to be more particular and more pofitive. 1 The book is marked by Le Long himfelf as being in the ' Royal Library at Paris ; and an account of the laid Preface, ' no-doubt, might ealily be obtained, if afking for it fhould ' become a matter of any importance to the curious. Thus * much, however, I thought, might be propofed provifionally, ' concerning the name of the Printer to whom the world was ' indebted for Potken's Polyglott Pfalter. But fince I have ' dwelt 10 long upon that fubjeft, 1 cannot well difmifs it ' without adding a word about the rank which Le Long gives ' to this work among the firft-printed Polyglott Pialters ; * immediately after that of Jujlimani, printed by Porrus in * 15 16; and before another, by him fuppofed to be printed, APPENDIX. 123 Pfalter, we are informed, that, while his earned zeal for Chriftianity, and for the Roman See, made him extremely * as well as Potken's, two years later. Pfalterium Hehraice> * Grace, & Latine, cura &f Jludit Defid. Era/mi. V. S. Hiero- * nymi Opera, in foL Bafilea, typis Amerbachii 15 1 8. Such ' was Le Long's indication of the book in the firft edition of * his Bibliotheca Sacra. In the laft Paris edition (1723) it ' runs thus : " Pfalterium Hebraic^, & Latine, tam ex Ver- " lione S. Hieronymi fecundum Hebraicam veritatem quam " ex Vulgata Latina, cura & ftudio Defid. Erafmi & Conr. " Pellicani. V. S. Hieronymi Opera, in fol. Bafileas, typis " Amerbachii 1518," and is followed by thefe fcraps Ex ' prafatione Brunonis Amerbachii. ** Veteri probataeque " Theologiae plurimum lucis acceffurum ex hac caftiffima c a>u9>j(j"fwf, [zx aviv 0jjg-j,J quod aiunt, nos confecifle, (i fed adjutus \adjutoi\ opera doclifiimi parirer &c humaniflimi " Patris Conradi \_Chonrad\~\ Pellicani Rubcaqueniis, ex " familia D. [divi] P'rancifci cujus aufpicio potiffimum hsec " res pera&a eft.'' What fhall we fay to all this? I have * certainly ftrong reafons to queftion whether Le Long ever R 1 faw 124 APPENDIX, extremely defirous of learning foreign languages, efpepially what he calls the Chaldee, for which he was * faw an edition of what is commonly called Erafmufs St. c Jerotn, bearing the date of 1518 : except fome copy or * copies of the firft edition fhould be fuppofcd to have been ' fold with a new title bearing fuch a date. But even this * I have ftrong reafons to difbelicve. The moil, in fhort, 1 I can grant is, that considering the more general ufe, and 1 of courfe the more general demand, of the eighth Va- cs ' o * lume, or even of the very feparable part of it which con- ' tains the Polyglott Pfalter ; fome copies of either may * have been fold fingly with any frefher title and date, in * order to pleafe that very common fort of buyers who will ' by all means be ferved with the neweft edition. A copy * of the iritire eighth volume I can fhew, the date of which, in the title-page, is fo late as 1527. But then, on the very c back, of that title page, is printed a fhort Preface by * Bruno Amerbachius, the original date of which is thus pre- ' ferved : Idibusjamiar lis. Anno M.D.XVI : and in which lie c declares that a peculiar Preface fhall be given to the Poly- * glott Pfalter. Now this peculiar Preface is certainly the * fame from which the above abftra&s have been taken by * Le Long ; and, being likewife printed on the back of the * Pfalter's title-page, preferves alio the original date of 'the faid year 1516: from which circumftances, without ' defcending to more minute particulars, it is plain, I think, r that this Pfalter, being two years more antient than Pot- * ken's, ought to have been placed before it. Nay, I would * fain afk, if it might not difpute the precedency even with * Porrus's ? And this at leaft I can affirm, that Porrus's < date is Menfe Vlfflbri, and Amerbach's VIII Calmd. Sep- c f tembreh* APPENDIX. 125 was deftitute of any proper matter , fome ^Ethiopian Fryars happened to be at Rome (as he exprefles it), pere- ( tembreis. Neither could it well be urged as a decifive c point in favour of Porrus's, that its date is at the end of ' the work, while Amerbach's is only at the end of a Pre- * face, on the very back of the title-page, which apparently ' was printed the fvrft of all, and that the time required to * print the reft might retard the difpatch of the whole book * beyond the month of November. For, not to mention 1 the Printer's well-known and almoft prodigious diligence, * who, by taking proper meafures before-hand, and fetting * feveral p relies at work for the fame book, might have done * with it before the laft-mentioned month ; it will be fuffi- 4 cient to obferve, in the firft place, That the fuft fheet of * the firft ^iiatcrnio, though ready for the prefs, may have i been purpoi'ely left with a blank page (either worked-off 4 or not), until the blank page could be filled up with a * Preface, in which the Editors, conformably toreafon, might 1 fpeak of their performance as of a work already executed. ' Secondly, Thar, without going a great way for an actual c example of what I iuppofe may have been praUfed in this 4 cafe, a Alining example of it we have at hand in the very ' next ninth and laft volume ; the final date of which fpecify- * ing the month of May 15 16, the Preface neverthelefs is * dated June the 26 (Sexto Kalendas Julias). Thirdly, That, i of ail the dates in the whole let which mark the month, the * oldeft being (T. II. fol. verfo 191) of Auguft 1515, none 4 is To late in 15 16 as that of the Polyglott Pfalter inqueftion. 4 From which reafons it is plain to me that the book might 4 have been ready for lale, if not precifely on the 25th of 4 Auguft (VIII Calend. Septembreis) at fartheft a few days L after; two months, not to fay three, before Porrus had 4 printed iz6 APPENDIX. feregrinationU caufa, to whom he eagerly applied : and that, from his intercourfe with them, he had acquired ' printed his final date of November, without marking the * day ; which, if one of the laft in the month, he had fome e reafon to fupprefs, that it might not look near four full * months remote from the flrft of Auguft ; this being the * date of Juftiniani's dedication to the Pope, and the dedi- * cation having probably been printed when he hoped, and * perhaps promifed, that againfl fuch a time the whole ihould 4 be finifhed. But, be this as it will, I think I have faid * enough to make good what I hinted above, that the Poly- * glott Pfalter of Bafil might difpute the precedency with that * of Genoa. By all this, however, 1 am far from pretend- * ing to make Erafmus the firft Editor of Polyglott Books : * and I firmly believe that when Le Long inlerted thefe * words, Cura & jludio Defid. Erdfmi, he did it without any * other foundation than the common opinion which afcribes * to Erafmus the whole bufinefs of preparing this Edition of f. Jerom's works ; though he fo little meddled with Hebrew, ' that when he had occaiion for it, en pojfant, he would not 4 proceed without requiring the afliftance of the two brothers 1 Bruno and Bafil Amerbach. So that Le Long, initead of * Cura iff Jiudlo Defid. Era/mi, might rather have faid, Cura * fif Jiudlo Brunonis & Bafilii Amerbachiorum (or, as they ufed * to fpell it, Amorbacbiorum). This I infer from their joint 4 Addrefs to the Reader, at the head of Tome the Fifth ; 1 where alfo the Reader is informed of fome particulars * which may ferve as a good, or even neceffary, comment * upon the fifth page of Erafrnus's dedication to Archbifhop * Warham. I. That when Erafmus [who by the bye had * himfelf collected materials towards an edition by him * intended APPENDIX. 127 acquired fuch a knowledge of their language, as to make him believe he might undertake an edition of the * intended of St. Jerom's works] came to Bafil ; he found ' great provifions and preparations already made [for the * fame purpofe], at the expence, and by the care, of their * now deceafed Father, John Amerbacb : who, after procuring 1 St. Ambrofe's and St. Auftin's works, printed fuis typis y ' had reiblved to go on with St. Jerom's. II. That their * father, intending to make them collaborators in that work, * had furnifhed them with ibme knowledge (qualicunque * peritia, as they term it) in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew * languages. III. That Erafmus having taken upon him < the care of the four firft Tomes, the care of the five laft ' became their lot. And accordingly, in all the fubfequent * Addreffes to the Reader, we find them (though under the * fole name of Bruno) fpeaking as Editors ; yet making ho- * nourable mention of the Learned to whofe affiftance they * acknowledged themfelves much indebted. And let me add, ' that they not only never fpeak as Printers, but exprefs 1 themfelves in fuch a manner as to leave all the honours of * the printing-ofnee to John Froben : io that, in Le Long's c account, it was a new miftake to write Typis Amerbachii ; a ' miftake, however, which Maittaire himfelf, in bis account, * has not avoided, his words being, p. 124: Eodem anno quo ( yujlinianus Juum Pfalterium P entaglotton edidit ; Bafdcte ab ' Amorbachlo Pfalterium triglotton . . . excufum e/7. Some- ' thing more might be added in order to rectify, by the prc- * lent account of Erafmus' s Jerom, ibme inaccuracies which * may puzzle or miilcad the reader, in the accounts given * of it by the very beft and lateft writers of Erafmus's Life -. * but I think that this hint alone may be fufficient. The ' only 128 APPENDIX. the iEthiopic Pfalter ; which was actually publithed at Rome nearly five years before the date of his Polyglott performance. At the end of the above- mentioned addrefs, he promifed to perform fome- thing in the Arabic, if he mould meet with fufficient encouragement. The famous Bible of Cardinal Ximenes, com- monly called the Complutenfian, confifts of fix large folio volumes ; having the Hebrew [d], Latin, and Greek, in c only addition in which I fhall indulge myfelf, will be to * prefent the Reader with a kind of Infcription in capitals, ' which is very confpicuous at the end of the laft volume; c and by which we may be made, in fome meafure, to un- derftand, not only how far Froben is to be looked upon c as connected with, or diltinguifhed from, the Amerbachs ; ' but alfo, what that Society was, which I remember is fome- * where fpoken of by Erafmus himielf (if I miftake not), * who relates, that on his refufing with fome obftinacy a ' confiderable fum offered him by Froben, and urging that < he thought fuch a fum too confiderable from a man even * in his circumftances, Froben at laft prevailed by afluring 4 him, that the offer he made was not at his own private * expence, but at the expence of the Society. The faid c Infcription is as follows : " basileae in aedibvs io. " FROBENNII IMPENDIO BRVNONIS, BASILI1 ET BONIFACII " AMORBACHIORVM, AC IOANNIS FROBENNII CHALCO- " GRAPHI ET IACOBI RECKBVRGII CIVIVM B ASILIENSIVM, " MENSE MAIO. AN. M.D XVI." C. D. M. Mr. D.E Missy had two copies of Potken's Pfalter, the beft of which was fold for no more than 18 fhillings. N. \d~\ The Hebrew text in this edition was corrected by ALPHONSUSj APPENDIX. 129 in three diftinfb columns, and the Chaldee paraphrafe, with a Latin interpretation, at the bottom of the page, the margin being rilled with the Hebrew and Chaldee radicals. It was begun in 1502, finifhed in 15 1 7, but not publifhed till 1522. A more par- ticular account of it may be feen in Le Long, in Maittaire, and in De Bure(Y|. In 1546 appeared, at Constantinople, " Penta- " teuchus Hebraso-Chaldceo-Perfico-Arabicus/' in three columns -, the Hebrew text in the middle ; on the right hand the Perfic verfion of R. Jacob fil. Joseph j and on the left the Chaldee paraphrafe of Onkelos : at the top is the Arabic paraphrafe of Saadias, and at the bottom the commentary of Rasi. The whole is printed in Hebrew characters with points, the middle column on a larger fize than the Alphonsus, a phyfician of Complutum, Paulus Coro- nellus, and Alphonsus Zamora, who were all converts from Judaifm to Chriftianity. The manufcripts it was printed from had undergone the Maforetical caftigation. See Dr. Kennicott, Diff. II. p. 475. N. [e~] In the firft edition of this little tracl, we gave our rea- ders reafon to hope for fome further remarks on the Complu- tensian Bible, and on the edition of Plantinus. If the life of our valuable Friend had been prolonged, that hope would not have been difappointcd. With his ufual alacrity and benevolence, he had actually collected many materials, and begun to methodize his thoughts on the iubjedt : what was done, Mrs. De Missy has kindly permitted us to annex to the prefent publication ; and, though in an unfinifhed ft ate, will be deemed an acquifition to polite letters. B. 8c N. S others. I 3 P A P P F. N D I X. others. At the end or Genefis appears, u Abfolutus f* eft liber Genefeos in domo Eliezeris Berajs " Gerson Soncinatis [/]" In 1547, was published, from the fame prefs, " Pen- f c tateuchus, Hebraicus, Hifpanicus, & Barbaro-Gras- f* cus." This edition was alfo printed in three co- lumns ; the Hebrew Text in the middle ; the old Spanilh verfion on the right hand , and on the left, the modem Greek, as ufeq 1 by the Cara'ftes at Con- stantinople, who do not underftand Hebrew. The Spanilh is defigned for the Refugee Spanifh Jews. At the head and bottom of the pages are the Targuni and the Commentary, as in the former editions [g~\. The Royal or Spanifh Polyglott was printed at Ant- werp, by Christopher Plantinus, 1569 1572, by authority of Philip II, King of Spain, in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Chaldee, under the direction of Arias Montanus, in eight volumes, folio; con- taining, befides the whole of the Complutenfian edition, a Chaldee paraphrafe on part of the Old Teftamenr, which Cardinal Ximenes had depofited .in the theological library at Complutum, having par- ticular reafons for not publilhing it. The New Teflament had the Syriac verfion, and the Latin tranllation of Santes Pagninus as reformed by Arias Montanus [h\. This work was alfo enriched with [/] Le Long, p. 45. [g'\ Ibid. p. 46. [k~] " We need fay the lefs of this great work ; as it is s not pretended, that the leaft correction was made in this ?' edition of the Hebrew Text, lacked no fuch thing conk! " nofiiblv APPENDIX. i 3 i with various Grammars and Dictionaries of the feveral languages it confifts of. In 1586 a Polyglott Bible was publifhed at Heidel- berg, in two volumes, folio j printed in four columns, Hebrew, Greek, and two Latin verfions, viz. St. Jerom's and that of Pagninus; with the notes of Vatablus j and in the margin are- the idioms, and the radices of all the difficult words. Two other dates have been feen to this edition, viz. 1599 and 1 61 6; but Le Long, after an attentive companion, declares them to be only different copies of the fame impreffion , but that fome them have the Greek Teftament with the addition of the Latin verfion of Arias Montanus [/]. " pciiibly be expected from an Editor who believed the " perfection of the Hebrew Text quanta ir.tcgritate (fays " he) femper confervata fuerint Biblla Hebraa, plerique doc- Cl tijfimi viri cmjlanter ajjeverarunt, he. HodY, p. 516, " 517." Dr. Kennicott, DifT. IL p. 477. This edition (which is particularly mentioned in Le Long, p. 20.) is defcribed by M. De Lure as a work moll beautiful']/- printed; but, on account of the great number of treatifes it contains, it is difficult to arrange the volumes properly. Mr. De Missy, from whom I flattered myfelf I fhould have received an accurate relation of tins edition, had a good copy of it; which happening to be bait in indifferent binding, was (old for no more than leven pound:, to 'Mr. Mac Carthv, who purchased many other articles, and particularly many little French curiofities. N. [j \ li Quae hd) Vatabli norn'me circumferuntur Biblis, < ; ejus non iunt; annotationeioue eidem adferiptae auctorcm " habent Roeertum Stephanum." W.uto.v, Prolcg. i>'. p. 53. Sec Le Long. p. 15. Jn i 3 2 APPENDIX, In 1596, Jacobus Lucius printed an edition, in Greek, Latin, and German, at Hamburgh, in four volumes, folio, " Studio Davidis Wolderi " the Greek from the Venice edition of I5i8[]; the Latin verfions thofe of St. Jerom and Pagninus. In 1599, Eli as Hutterus publilhed one at No- remberg, in fix languages ; four of them, the Hebrew, Chaldee, Greek, and Latin, printed from the Ant- werp edition j the fifth was the German verfion of [] Le Long, p. 26. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graca, fays the fame. But the editor, Wolderus himfelf, in his Preface, fpeaks thus : " De LXX interpretum Graeca, deque " Latina Hieronymi, ut putatur, verfione nihil raoneo : " nili quod fcire tua non parum, opinor, intereft ; in iis, " Plantinianam editionem me effe fequutum : quod cor- " rectior quidem quae evict nulla fefe mihi offerret." As far as can be judged from a collation of fome pafTages, it appears that he followed the edition of Plantinus, but ufed his own judgement in the punctuation and other lefs material particulars. The new Latin verfion, here printed, appears to be, not that of Pagninus (though faid to be his by Wolderus) ; but rather that which Robert Ste- phens publifhed in 1557, corrected from the obfervations of Pagninus and Vatablus. The New Te'ftament is the firft of Beza, which R. Stephens printed in 1556, with the fame types which he ufed in the following year for the abovementioned Latin verfion of the Old Teftament. We are indebted for this note to the Mf. annotations which Mr. De Missy had made many years ago on the margin of his copy of Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, fuch as it is in the Leipfic edition of 1709. Mr. De Missy's copy of Wolderus was fold for half a guinea, and is now in The Roy a l Li b it ar y. N . Luther ; APPENDIX. 133 Luther , and the fixth the Sclavonic verfion of Wit- temberg [/]. This Bible was never completed, and goes no farther than the book of Ruth. The next work of this kind was, " Biblia Sacra " Polyglotta, ftudio Guy Michaelis Le Jay. Pa- " rifiis, apud Antonium Vitray, 1628, & ann. feqq. " ad 1645," in ten volumes, very large folio. This edition, which is extremely magnificent [w], contains all that is in thofe of Ximenes and Plantinus, with the addition of the Syriac and Arabic verfion. This was foon followed by " Biblia Sacra Poly- " glotta, compleclentia textus originales, Hebraic. " Chaldaic. & Grzec. Pentateuchum Samaritanum, " & Verfiones Antiquas, cum apparatu, appendi- [/] Inftead of the Sclavonic, fome copies were printed with the French verfion of Geneva; others, with the Italian of the fame city ; and others again with a Saxon verfion from the German of Luther. Hutterus publifhed the Pfalter and New Teftament in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and German. He alfo publifhed the New Teftament in twelve languages ; viz. Syriac, Hebrew, Greek, Italian, Spanifh, and French, in one page; and Latin, German, Bohemian, Englifli, Danifh, and Polonefe, in another. Calmet, ubi fupra. See Le Long, p. 26. In Mr. De Missy's cata- logue appeared, " Hutteri Biblia Polyglotta, h Nov. Tell. " vol. 2." The two volumes were fold to The British Museum, for half a guinea. N. [w] The Samaritan Pentateuch was firft printed in it, with its verfion, from Mff. brought into Europe between the year 1620 and 1630, under the care of the very learned Morinus. See Br. Kennicott, Dill". H. p. 478. N. 2 " cibus r$4 APPENDIX. " cibuS- & annotationibus , ftudio & opera Brian! "Walton. Londini 1657, & arm. feqq." [n~\ in four [] Nine languages are ufed in this edition ; yet there is no one book in the whole Bible printed in fo many. In the New T Gen. i. 19, by which that 44 text, in contradiction to itfelf ellewhere, fays, " and 44 the morning and the evening were the fourth day." *' And this, as the tranjlation is different, I take to 44 have been an error of the Editor, and not of the 44 copy from which he printed. 44 Nor is this the only error, for in Gen. iii. 2. t^HDH 44 is falfely printed for >njn. So again Gen. iv. 5. 44 But this is nothing, comparatively fpeaking, to 44 what we meet with a little below, at ver. 7. where 44 the fecond yor\ is unluckily omitted in its proper 44 place ; and then inferted after ^1, with a repeti- 44 tion of the word nDQ7, to the utter confufion of 44 the fenfe of the paffage for, literally trandated, it 44 runs thus : Nonne, fi benefeceris, recipies ? fi autem 44 non, ad, port am peccatum cubat> benefeceris ad port am. 44 Thefe are glaring inltances of unpardonable ne- ** g n "g en ce , and the more unpardonable, becaufe 44 they 144 APPENDIX. " they (land at the entrance of a work, which juftly ** required the greateft care, and the utmoft ac- " curacy. '* I (hall only add, what, in obedience to truth, I * am bound to add, that the French Polyglott is en- ** tirely clear of all thefe errors ; and indeed of many " others, which the attentive Reader will find feat- *' tered through the Englifh Polyglott/' In the Preface alfo are the following inaccuracies : P. I . laji paragraph but one, r. xa7axXvuld read m.cccc.lxx ii. I cannot but think this highiy probable; and, in confirmation of it, would rbferve, that this edition of Ptoi.omy has fignatures (though irregularly difpofed, as if not fully acquainted with their ufc), which have not been noticed in any book of earlier date than 1470. See above, p. r8. N. Brrjcia, s Brefcia, APPENDIX. 147 Henry of Cologn,StatiusGallicus, 1474 Bruges, Colard Manfion, 1476 Br una [C^ Brunfwick~\, Anonymus, I488 Brufels, Anonymus, 1476 BUildy Andrew Hefs, M73 Burgdorf, Anonymus, 1475 Caen, Jacobus Durand, i486 Caragoffa [Saragofa], f Anonymus, I Pablo Hums, 1491 1499 Coll, Bonus Gallus, 1478 Cologn, John Koelhofl^ 1470 Conjlance, Anonymus, 1489 Conftantlnople, Anonymus, 1490 Convent of Regulars at Scbconhoven, > Anonymus, 1500 In agro CaREGIO *, 1489 Cofenza, O&avius Salmonius, 1478 Cracow, Anonymus, 15O0 Cremona, Bernard de Milintis, 1485 Dtventer [in OvervfTe ], J Anonymus, y, [ Richard Patfroit, 1472 a city in Lower Saxon 1477 Delft, Jacob Jaccps, 1477 Dijon, Anonymus, 149 1 Dole, John Hebertus, 1492 Eicbjhdt, Michael Reiler, 14S8 Erfort, Anonymus, 1482 Ergoiu, Elias til. Elise, 1470 Ejlingen [in Suabia], Conrad Fyner, 1475 Ferrara, Andrew Gallus, 147 1 Florence, Bernard and Dominick Cenini, 1472 Fnburg, Kilianus, 1493 Gaicta, Jufto, 1488 Ghent, | Anonymus, 1 Arend de Key fere, 1483 1485 * CL Where fituatcd i U 2 Gebennenjly 148 A P Gebennenfi *, Geneva, Genoa, Gentta [Q^ Ghent], S. Giacomo de Rinoli [a monaftery at Florence] Gouda, P E N D I . X. Anonymus, / Anonymus, I Jacobus Arnollet, ' Mathias Moravus, Anonymus, Dom. de Pifloria. Granada, Hagenau, Harleim, Hajfeleti, Heidelberg, Ingolftadt, Lantriguier, Leipfic, Leiria, Lewis, Leyden, Lignitz [Lignis], Lintz, Lijbon, London, f Anonymus, 1 Gerard Leeu, 148 1 1478 1498 1474 1480 1477 1478 1480 1496 HIS 1496 1484 148 1 1480 1489 1492 1499 1481 1484 1494 1479 1497 1481 1500 149 1 14S1 C4 148 1 148 1 H93 1494 t Juhanus Notaire & J. Barbier, 1498 * In the book whence this AJjtfive was taken, it was probably preceded by a Subflantiiie indicating fome place of the Cevcnnes. C. D. M. f See above, p. 39. Lcvain t Anonymus, f Anonymus, 1 Henry Gran, Jacobus Begaard, A nonymus, f Anonymus, 1 Jacobus Knoblockcr, Anonymus, John Cafney, f Anonymus, I Marcus Brandt, Anonymus, Anonymus, Anonymus, . Anonymus, Peter Ariel in, Anonymus, fAnonymus, Will, de Machlinia, J John Lettou f, J Richard Pynfon, I Nicholas le Conte. A P P E N D I X. 149 Lovain, Jo. de Weflphalia, 1473 Lubeck, Anonymus, H7 1 Lunenbergy John Luce, 1493 Lyons, Bartholomew Buyer, 1477 Madrid, Anonymus, I494 Magdeburg, Anonymus, I483 Mantua, T ho. Septemcaftrenfis & focii, H72 Memmingen, / Anonymus, I Albert Kune, 1483 1490 Ment-z, Fuft and SchoefFer, 1457 Mejfana, f Anonymus, \ Andrew de Brugis, i486 H97 Milan, Anthony Zarot, 1 470 Mirandula, Anonymus, 1496 Afodena, Balthazar de Struciis, H77 Monreale [in Sicily], Dominick. de Nivaldis 6c filii, 148 1 Monte Mov.acborian, John Senfenfchmidt, 148 r Munjier, John Limburgus, i486 Nantes, Stephen Larcher, 1488 Naples, Sixtus RieiTenger, 147 1 Nimeguen, Jo. de Weflphalia, 1479 Noremberg, Anthony Coburger, 1471 Offenbach, Anonymus, 1496 Oppenheitn, Anonymus, 1498 Ortona, Judaei Soncinates, 1496 Oudenarde, John Gefar, 1480 Oxford, f Anonymus [QiCorfellis], J T. R. * (_Theodoric Rood, 1468 1480 1481 Padua, Bartholomew de Valdezochio, 1472 Paler?no, Andrew de Wormacia, H77 Pumpelune, William de Brocario, 1496 Paris, [0^1464? f] jUlric Gering, Martin Crantz, \ and Michael Friburger, } I47C * Sec above, p. 31- f See above, p. 106. Parmi* 150 Parma. APPENDIX. f Anonymus, L Stephen Corallus, Pavia, Jacobus de Sandto Petro, Perpignan, J. Rofembach, Perugia, Stephen Arns, Pefaro, Anonymus, Pefcia, Sigifmund Rodt, Piacenza, Jo. Peter de Ferraris, Pigneroli, Jacobus de Rubeis, f Anonymus, I Gregory de Gente, e Anonymus, in aedibusCano- J nici Eccleiine B. Hilarii, [ John de Marnef, Provim [in Champagne], W illiam Tavernier, Poitiers, Quilambourg, Reggio, Reutlingen, Rimini, Rome, Rojloch, Rouen, Salamanca, Salonichi, Scandiani, Schoonhoven, 1472 H73 H77. 1500 148 1 1494 1488 47S 1475 1482 1485 1479 1500 H97 1480 Anonymus, Profp. Odoardus, Alb. Maguli, 1481 John Averbach, 1 49 Anonymus, i486 f Conrad Sweynheim, "I , 1 Arnold Pannartz, J T 47 f Prefbyteri et Clerici Congre- | , 1 gationis domus viridis horti, ] 47 John le Bourgois, Anonymus, Anonymus, Peregrin Pafqual, f Anonymus, in Conventu \ \ Regularium, J Sciedami, Sedani, Sedan, Anonymus, Seville, Siena, Soncino, Sorten Monajlerium, Paul de Colonia, Sigifmund Rot, f Anonymus, I Abraham fil. Rabbi Hhaiim, Anonymus, 1488 U95 H93 1425 1500 1498 1491 1489 1484 1488 1478 Spire, A P Spire, Stockholm, Strojburgh *, Subia:o- Abbey, Toledo, Toloufe, Treca, Trevifo, Tubmgtn, 'Tunis, Tours, Valentia, Venice, Verona, Vicenza, Vienna, Vienne fin Dauphine], Viterbo, Vim, TJrbino, TJdine, Utrecht, Wejlminjler, Zwoll, P E N D I X. 151 Petrus Drach, 1477 John Fabcr, H95 Henry Eggeftein, 147 1 Anonymus, 1465 J Anonymus, i486 I John Teller, *495 Anonymus, i486 f Anonymus, 1480 1 William le Rouge, 1492 Girard de Lifa de Flandria, 1471 Fred. Meynberger, 1488 John Fabri and Jo. de Petro, 1474 f Anonymus, in domo Gu- 1 , \ lielmi Archiep. Turonenfis, J J Anonymus, 1475 \ Alphonfus de Orta, J 49& Rotdolt f, 1468 Jo. de Spira, *4^9 Jo. & Vindelin. de Spira,"] Nicolaus Jenfon, I 147O ^Chriftopher Baldarfer, Jo. Nicolai filius, 1472 Hermanus Levilapis, *475 Anonymus, 1481 Peter Schenck, 1484 Anonymus, 1480 John Zeiner, J 473 Anonymus, 1484 Anonymus, 1498 f Nicholas Ketzlaer, "I I Gerard de'Lumpt, j 473 Jerard de Lumpt, f William Ca ton, I Winand de Word, Anonymus, 1477 H95 H79 * Mentel and Eggistiin .tioll probably praftifed the profeflion in this city foon after 1462. Sec above, p. 96, 97. -j- See above, p. 23. Addendum t 152 3 Addendum to p. 135. Dr. Edmund Castell, who had been many years a member of Emanuel College in Cambridge, was, in his ad- vanced age, admitted into St. John's in that univerfity. He was chofen Arabic profeflbr in 1666; to which preferment he was intitled by his merit as an Orientalift. He had, fome years before, given very eminent proofs of his abilities, in the laborious work of the Polyglott. Great part of his life was {pent in compiling his " Lexicon Heptaglotton," on which he beftowed incredible pains and expence, even to the breaking of his conftitution, and exhaufting of his fortune, having expended no kfs than twelve thoufand pounds upon that work. At length, when it was printed, the copies remained unfold upon his hands. He died in 1685 ; and lies buried in the church of Higham Gobyon in Bedfordfhire, of which he was rector. It appears from the infcription on his monument, which he erected in his life-time, that he was chaplain to Charles II. He bequeathed all his Oriental manufcripts to the univeriity of Cambridge, on condition that his name fhould be written on every copy in the collection. See more of him, at the end of *' Thomas de Elmham," publifhed by Hearnk, p. 356. 427. and in Leland's "Collectanea," by the fame Editor, vol. VI. p. 80 ; alfo in Dr. Pococke's " Life," fol. p. 50, Notes; and p. 66. Thus far from Granger, vol. II. p. 193. Some further anecdotes of Dr. Castell may be feen in the Life of Lightfoot. NV, APPENDIX. 153 N V. On the Complutensian Polyglot t. An unfinifhed Eflhy [a], TH E fifch volume contains the New Teftament in two columns, one (on the right hand) for the Vulgate, printed in a pretty neat fizeable Gothic letter : and [#] The apology which has been fo handfomely made in the unfinifhed advertifement prefixed to our late worthy Friend's Fables *, which (the advertifement only excepted) had been ready for publication ibme time before his death, will ac- count for the imperfect ftate in which thefe papers appear, and will be the jufteft tribute we can pay to his memory : " II im- " porte peu au Public de favoir les raifons qui en retarderent " alors la publication; qu'il fufhfede dire, qu'apres s'etre remis " acct ouvrage l'Auteur le fufpendit de-nouveau, pour rendre " aun favant et ancien ami (dans un Pais voilin) un fen ice " literal re, qui demandoit quelques recherches affez minu- " tieufes, au milieu defquclles la mort l'arreta, fans qu'on " puiffe dire qu'elle le furprit. Depuis quelques annees il " eto;t dans Fhabitude de confide'rer chaque jour, qui fe " renouvelioit pour lui, comme un jour-de-plus ajoute par la u Bonte divine, a line vie cui avoit deja ateint les bornes " les plus ordinaires de la vie humaine ; et cela fans que " l'egalite de ion humeur, fans que fa gaicte naturelle en " fuffent le moins du monde altereesf. Soutenu dans les * " Paraboles oa Fables et adtres petites narrations d'un citoven de la " Rcpublique Chreticnne du dix-huitieme fiecle : par Cesar De- " Missy. Troifiemc edition; revue et corrigee par l'Autcur, 177b," 8vo ; fold by Seivell and Elmjlej, and ornamented with a remarkable likenefs ot tue Author. f Mr. De. Missy died Aug. 10, 17-5 ; aged 72. vears and 10 weeks. X <' chagrins 154 APPENDIX. and one for the Greek, printed in characters remark' able, not only by their uncommon largenefs, but by their very form, which might be called a ttifFand fome- . what auk ward imitation of mo ft MiT. of the middle age. Le Long obferves that they are without any fpirits or accents, fine ullis fpirituum & accentuum notis : and for this he had as his vouchers the very editors of the book, who fay the fame thing both in their Greek and Latin Prefaces. He might however have added, and not improperly, that the acute accent, which flrikes. the eye in every line except on monofyllables, was not employed as a Greek one, but merely as an Apex (xtpuicc), or little note, in order to guide thofe who want it in the pronunciation or modulation of the words, or as the Latin Preface exprefies it, In prclaticne mcdu- lationeve. Wetstein, p. 118, of his Prolegomena^ obferves that it was done as cuftomary with Latin *' chagrins et les embarras qu'il trouvoit fur fa route, par " une conviction raifonnee des erandes Verites qu'il a *' picchces jufques a la fin, avec un zelc qui naiiloit de cette " conviction, il n'avoit, a proprement parler, d'autre defir, " d'autre objet, dans toutes ies actions, dans fes amufe-