making the deliveries and of collecting the payments. It is further
to be borne in mind that the adverse influence of the divines of the
Sorbonne must have hampered materially the demand from university and
ecclesiastical centres for the editions of the Scriptures and for
all the works possessing any theological character, while it was the
case that of the Bibles at least, the sale was absolutely blocked
for several long periods. Notwithstanding all the difficulties and
obstacles, Estienne must have succeeded in building up throughout
Europe a remunerative demand for his publications, for at the time of
his migration from France he was reputed to be a man of means, and even
after all the losses and expenses attending the sudden closing of his
concern in Paris and its re-establishment in Geneva, he was able, a few
years later, to leave to his son a business on an assured foundation,
and resources for carrying it on. An important part of these resources
consisted in a great collection of texts, both printed and in
manuscript, and in a comprehensive and valuable library. The career of
Robert Estienne was assuredly both distinctive and honourable, and the
services rendered by him to the cause of scholarly literature fairly
entitle him to the name of the Aldus of France.

Some years after Robert’s death, the charge was made by some of his
old-time opponents that he had wrongfully carried away to Geneva
certain of the matrices of the Greek type which belonged to the
_Imprimerie Royale_ of Paris, and of which he had the use as Printer
to the King. According to Le Clerc, Robert took with him not the
matrices, but the punches (_les poinçons des matrices_) of certain of
the Greek fonts which had been made for the _Imprimerie Royale_, but
this theory does not accord with the final history. It seems certainly
to have been the case that the type used by Robert’s son Henry for
Greek books issued by him in Geneva after the death of his father,
was identical with that of the royal Greek characters which had been
made for King Francis under Robert’s supervision. Greswell is of
opinion that the charge was well founded, but he points out certain
considerations which probably influenced Robert’s action, and which
seemed to him (as they seemed to Maittaire) to constitute, in some
measure at least, a justification for such action. Robert left Paris
hurriedly, and it could in any case have been no easy task to arrange
for the transportation of the material of his printing-office and
publishing concern without attracting the attention of his enemies in
the Sorbonne.

1. If information had been given to King Henry concerning the
preparations of the printer, the removal would doubtless have been
forbidden. If Robert had taken pains to deposit the matrices in
the chamber of accounts (where the punches of the three fonts were
preserved in boxes lined with velvet),[21] he would at once have
betrayed his plans for removal.

2. The removal of this set of matrices does not appear to have excited
any sensation whatsoever, either at the time of Robert’s departure or
at any later period; nor do we hear of any impediment being caused
through the want of them to the business of the future _Impressores
Regii_.

3. At the time of Robert’s departure, the royal treasury was greatly
in arrears to Robert, not merely for the King’s promised remuneration
of his losses, which the malevolence of the divines had intercepted,
but also for the stipend due to him as _regius typographus_. He may,
therefore, have believed himself to be warranted in retaining the set
of matrices either as an offset or as a pledge.[22]

4. Chevillier, and others of the authorities of the time, writing from
the Catholic point of view, while very indignant with Robert for having
induced two monarchs to give to him, “an outrageous Calvinist heretic,”
the post of royal printer, make no mention of this accusation, while
they would certainly have been very ready, if they had before them any
evidence of such a theft, to include it among the sins of the heretical
printer.

M. de Guignes finds evidence that under the reign of Louis XIII.
certain of the divines of the Sorbonne, who had in preparation a new
edition of the Greek Fathers, presented a petition to that prince
requesting that the Greek matrices might be repurchased from Geneva,
and that, in consequence of this petition, the King, in May, 1619,
directed the sum of three thousand livres to be paid for them to Paul
Estienne, the grandson of Robert, and that the matrices were brought
back to the royal printing-house.

In the same essay, M. de Guignes mentions that in the year 1700,
the University of Cambridge requested the Government (that of Louis
XIV.) to favour it with a cast or font of the Greek characters of
Francis I., then known by the name of “the King’s Greek.” The matter
was referred to the French Academy, which expressed its willingness
to send the font, under the condition that in all works in which the
characters were used, there should be placed at the bottom of the
title-page, after the usual subscription _Typis Academicis_, the
words _Characteribus Græcis e Typographeo regio Parisiensi_. To this
stipulation, however, the curators of the Cambridge University

Press were not willing to consent, and the negotiation therefore fell
through. The incident indicates that after the lapse of a century and a
half, the Greek type planned by Estienne was still considered to excel
fonts of later workmanship.

CHAPTER V.

THE LATER ESTIENNES AND CASAUBON.

1537-1659.

IT is not necessary for the purpose of this study to give the record
in detail of the careers and publishing undertakings of all the
printers of the great family of the Estiennes. I have been interested
in presenting with some fulness the account of the life and work of
Robert, because he stands out as the most distinctive and forcible
member of a famous literary family, and because his experience
illustrates very fairly the characteristic features and the chief
difficulties of the business of publishing books in France in the first
half of the sixteenth century. The business careers of the brothers and
of the descendants of Robert should be mentioned, however, if only to
indicate the exceptional position occupied by this noteworthy family in
the history of printing and publishing, and the extent of the influence
exercised by it through successive generations upon the production of
scholarly literature.

Robert’s elder brother, Francis, was a _libraire juré_ of the
University of Paris. His publications were comprised within the ten
years from 1537 to 1547. He used as a mark a tripos which stands upon a
closed book and from which issues a vine shoot. The motto is _Plus olei
quam vini_. This is sometimes followed by the adage, which seems rather
a truism than a truth, πάντων δυσχερέστατον τὸ πᾶσιν ἀρέσκειν, “Of
all things, the most difficult is to please everybody.”[23] With the
exception of one _Psalterium_ and a _Horæ Virginis_ in Greek, his few
impressions were all in Latin, and were chiefly issues of the classics.
He appears never to have come into conflict with the divines whose
censorship gave so much trouble to his brother Robert.

Charles Estienne, who was the youngest of the three brothers, was
known as a printer and publisher in Paris between the years 1550
and 1560. He had originally adopted the profession of medicine and
attained high reputation as a physician and naturalist, and as a
classical and antiquarian scholar. While travelling in Italy, he became
intimate with Paul Manutius, the son of Aldus. He was a voluminous
author, and the first productions of his Press were the work of his
own pen, and comprised a treatise on Dissection, a series of volumes
on Horticulture, issued under the title of _Prædium Rusticum_, a work
on Birds, and one on Fishes. He also wrote a history of the Dukes
of Milan, a description of the Rivers of France, and a number of
narratives of travel. Finally, he produced a number of critical works,
such as a _Dictionarium Latino-Gallicum_.

This was published in 1552, and again in 1561, and remained for many
years a scholarly authority on its subject, and was honoured by being
largely “appropriated.” Cooper’s _Thesaurus Linguæ Romanæ_, published
in London in 1565, was said by Dr. White Kennett to be a _verbatim_
transcript of Stephen’s Dictionary.[24] It seems evident from the above
brief summary that Charles Estienne secured an honourable position as a
scholar and as an author.

In order to indicate the direction of his publishing interests, I
select a few of the more important of the titles from his catalogue.

    1554. “Compendium Michlol, authore Rodolpho Bayno Cantabrigiense,
    et sanctæ linguæ professore Regio Lutetiæ Parisior.” 4to.
    The author was an Englishman from York, who had accepted a
    professorship at Paris.

    “Institutiones Linguæ Syriacæ, Assyriacæ atque Thalmudicæ una cum
    Æthiopicæ atque Arabicæ collatione, Angelo Caninio Anglarensi,
    authore.” 4to.

    1555. “Ciceronis Opera omnia.” 4 vols. Folio.

    1558. “Petri Bunelli familiares aliquot epistolæ in
    adolescentulorum, Ciceronis studiosorum gratiam.”

    Petrus Bunellus was a native of Toulouse, who had studied in
    Italy, where he had for four years lived with Paul Manutius. He
    had evidently shared the interest of his friend and host in the
    writings of Cicero.

    1559. “Plutarque de la honte vicieuse, par Fr. le Grand.” 8vo.

    “Histoire du siège de Metz en 1552, par Barthélemy de Salignac.”

    “Traicté de la guerre de Malte, par de Villegagnon.” 4to.

    “Missives de B. de Salignac, contenant le voyage du Roy Henry II.
    aux Pays-Bas.” 4to.

    “De Latinis et Græcis nominibus arborum fruticum, herbarum, piscium
    et avium liber; ex Aristotele, Theophrasto, Galeno,” etc. This is
    described as an original and learned work.

The famous scholar Scaliger charges Charles Estienne with vanity and
irritability of temper, but a publisher may be angry occasionally
without any permanent imputation upon his morals or character. Scaliger
had, by a breach of promise and by ill usage, given to Estienne
just cause of offence. He had promised to place with Estienne the
publication for France of all his works, while he afterwards committed
to Vascosan and others such of them as seemed most likely to prove
profitable undertakings. To Charles Estienne he offered those which
on account of their special character promised neither popularity nor
advantage. Under these circumstances, Estienne returned Scaliger’s
manuscripts with an expression of indignation.[25]

Robert Estienne the second was the eldest son of Robert Estienne the
first, and had been brought up in the business of his more famous
father. He did not accompany the latter on his removal to Geneva,
having refused to abandon the Catholic faith. His remaining in Paris
brought to him certain business advantages, as he was put in charge
of the royal printing-office. As a further mark of confidence, and
possibly as special consideration for his fidelity to the Catholic
faith after the rest of his family had gone over to the heretics,
Charles IX. further honoured him with a royal commission to travel
in Italy in search of manuscripts and rare books for use in the
publishing undertakings of the Royal Press, and appointed a provision
for his family during his absence. In 1563, Robert received the formal
appointment as _Typographus Regius_, and by that date he appears to
have fully reconstituted his father’s establishment in Paris. He
numbered among his friends and clients some of the principal scholars
of the age, including Joseph Scaliger, George Buchanan, Sir Thomas
Smith, and others, and appears to have fully maintained the family
reputation for scholarly attainments and for devotion to higher
literature.

Among his more important publications may be cited:

    1565. “Josephi Scaligeri conjectanea in Varronem de Lingua Latina.”

    1566. “Georgii Buchanani Scoti Psalmorum Davidis Paraphrasis
    poetica.”

    “Psalmi Aliquot a Theodoro Beza versi.”

    1568. “De recta et emendata linguæ Græcæ pronounciatione Thomæ
    Smith. Angli, tunc in Acad. Cantabr. publici prælectoris, ad
    Vintoniensem episcopum Epistola.” 4to.

    “De recta et emendata linguæ Anglicæ scriptione Dialogus, Thoma
    Smitho equestris ordinis Anglo authore.” 4to.

Scaliger, while an Italian by race and a Frenchman by birth, is more
usually associated with Holland, where he passed the greater part of
his working years. As professor of belles-lettres in Leyden, he had
among his pupils the celebrated Grotius. He was himself possibly the
most noted of the group of Protestant scholars whose learning and
attainments secured for the Reformers of the time an intellectual
superiority over their Catholic opponents, a superiority which had as
one result a decided revival of letters within the Church of Rome. The
original editions of his books were issued in Leyden, but he was able,
as noted above, to arrange for the publication in Paris of authorised
editions from which he derived a profit, and of certain of these works
editions appeared also in Basel.

George Buchanan, poet and historian, is best known in connection with
his service as tutor for Mary Queen of Scots, and later, as preceptor
for her son James. The latter was possibly largely indebted to Buchanan
for his interest and proficiency in classical studies. Sir Thomas
Smith was the English Ambassador at Paris. The interest of scholarly
foreigners such as those named, in securing for their books the imprint
of Estienne, indicates that the repute of the firm had already extended
beyond the limits of France.

Henry Estienne the second, second son of Robert, carried on in Geneva,
after the death of his father, what may be called the Protestant branch
of the publishing concern, for a few years, when he returned to Paris
and established there a second Estienne Press. He was apparently the
most finished scholar of his scholarly family, and from an early age,
before he had entered upon business responsibilities, we find him
engaged in work as editor and translator. His father had taken special
pains with his education, and as a part of his general training had
caused him to travel as a young man in Italy, England, and the Low
Countries.

Henry had secured a familiarity with Latin in his home circle, where,
as before stated, Latin was practically the language of the household.
He took his first instruction in Greek from Petrus Danesius, one of the
Greek scholars who had been brought to the royal college of Francis I.
He spent nearly four years in travel and in sojourn in Italy, busying
himself while there in collecting and collating manuscripts for his
father’s Press. Maittaire states that he collated for this purpose no
fewer than fifteen manuscripts of Æschylus. Certain annotations made by
him in his transcript of _Athenæus_ were subsequently utilised by his
son-in-law, the famous scholar Casaubon, in the edition printed forty
years later.

In Venice he became acquainted with the Greek scholar Muretus, who, in
addition to his work in the University of Padua, had for a number of
years given editorial assistance in the Greek division of the Aldine
Press. In Henry’s diary of his journey, he speaks of being present at
a gathering in Rome of _literati_ and poets, who ignorantly condemned
Hebrew _ut linguam asperam et horridam_. The young publisher who was
well versed in Hebrew, successfully defended the sacred language and
resolutely vindicated the cause both of David and his interpreters.

A little later, he met, in Florence, Petrus Victorius, one of the
most profound Greek scholars at that time in Italy. Henry was able to
present to his host a valuable _Codex_ of Anacreon which the Greek
professor had not before been acquainted with. In 1550, Henry’s travels
extended to England, where he was introduced, as a scholar of note, to
King Edward VI. From England, he went to Flanders and became intimate
with some of the scholars of Louvain. While in Flanders, he devoted
himself to mastering the Spanish language, and he brought back with him
from Antwerp to Paris the texts of certain Spanish classics of which
he printed French versions. In the twenty-sixth year of his age, he
returned to Paris to begin his active business career, for which he had
certainly taken pains thoroughly to equip himself.

He began his publishing undertakings in 1554, with an edition of
_Anacreon_, beautifully printed in quarto. The volume contains, in
addition to the Greek text, Latin versions of the _Odes_ prepared by
the publisher who himself acted as editor. During 1555, he was again
in Italy collecting and collating manuscripts. In 1556, he issued
an edition of the _Psalms_ presented in a Latin version which was
the combined work of George Buchanan a Scotchman, M. A. Flaminius an
Italian, Solomon Macrinus a Frenchman, and Helius Eobanus a German.
He was this year busily engaged, in company with other scholars, in
editorial work on the _Thesaurus Græcus_.

In 1557, he produced editions of _Æschylus, Aristotle, Theophrastus_,
and _Athenagoras_. The notes to _Æschylus_ were the work of the scholar
Petrus Victorius, with whom Henry had a long-time friendship. In this
year was also issued the _Lexicon Ciceronianum Græco-Latinum_, which
had been compiled by himself and in which he had brought together
whatever passages or material Cicero had utilised from philosophers,
historians, poets, or essayists. This work secured for its compiler and
publisher high repute as a scholar of wide attainments.

In 1558, Henry assumed the appellation of a _Typographus illustris
viri Huldrici Fuggeri, Domini in Kirchberg et Weyssenhorn_.[26]
Huldric Fugger was a native of Augsburg, born in 1526, and belonging
to a family conspicuous for its antiquity, its mercantile ability,
and its wealth. Huldric was himself a scholar, and became an eminent
patron of literary men. He expended very great sums in the purchase of
trustworthy manuscripts of ancient authors, and in having produced from
these satisfactory printed editions. Henry Scrimger, a Scotch professor
of considerable erudition, was engaged by him, on terms described as
magnificent, to carry into effect those literary undertakings. Scrimger
was an old friend of Henry Estienne, and it was undoubtedly at his
instance that the baron conceived the plan of appointing Henry as his
typographus. The printer received from Fugger for some years a pension
of fifty gold crowns, but I have been unable to find any specification
of the precise nature of the services which were given in consideration
of this payment.

Expenditure for the promotion of literature was still very exceptional,
and it is perhaps not surprising that the family of Huldric considered
his patronage of letters as evidence of a deranged mind. They
instituted a legal process, and succeeded in inducing the court to take
their view of Huldric’s actions. They secured a decree which caused him
to be declared incapable of the administration of his own property,
and he was for a time placed under guardians. Eventually, however, he
recovered possession of his property, and in fact succeeded also to
the estate of his brother. With increased resources, he resumed his
interest in collecting books, and at his death, in Heidelberg, in 1584,
he bequeathed to the Palatinate a very fine library. It is probable,
however, that his confinement had tended to mitigate his ardour for
expending money in printing books, and his relations with Estienne
were not resumed. The several experiences endured by this would-be
German Mæcenas may have helped to discourage future similar attempts to
further the production of good literature. If the expenditure of money
in the production of books and the collection of libraries were to be
accepted as evidences of mental derangement, it is not surprising that
the printers and publishers of Germany secured during the sixteenth
century very little patronage or compensation from the nobility of the
land.

Huldric Fugger was, however, not the only one of his family who
interested himself in literature. His elder brother, Joannes Jacobus,
had a fine collection of books both printed and in manuscript, and was
proficient in Greek. Other members of the family were in relations with
Paul Manutius in Italy, with Koberger of Nuremberg, and with Froben of
Basel.

The first book printed by Henry Estienne under his new designation
of _Huldrici Fuggeri Typographus_, was an edition of the _Edicts_ of
Justinian, printed in Greek and Latin, which bears date 1558. In 1559,
he issued the _Bibliotheca_ of Diodorus, with annotations of his own,
and in 1561, a very elaborate edition of the complete writings of
_Xenophon_.

After the death, in 1559, of Henry II. and in 1560, of the young King
Francis II., there was for a number of years, during the minority of
Charles IX., a time of trouble and disturbance for France, during
which literary undertakings and business enterprises were of necessity
seriously interfered with. The Calvinists, who had been rapidly
increasing in numbers throughout the kingdom, were making an earnest
fight for consistent toleration, and, later, for official recognition
and for equality with the Catholics before the law, a contention which
was actively opposed by the Guises, and (with occasional pretensions of
concession) by the Queen-Mother, Catharine of Medici. The result was a
series of civil wars, with only occasional brief interludes of truce
and quiet.

In 1562, Estienne completed the publication of certain theological
works which had been left unfinished in Geneva at the time of his
father’s death,--an Exposition of the New Testament and an Exposition
of the Psalms.

The editor, a certain Marloratus, a Huguenot minister at Rouen, was
unfortunately, before the printing was completed, hanged as a heretic,
under the direction of the Duke of Guise, but the books themselves
were not suppressed nor was the publisher interfered with. In fact,
the Faculty of the Sorbonne appears for the time to have suspended its
censorious watchfulness over heretical publications, perhaps because it
found its hands sufficiently full with the active work of suppressing
by fire, gibbet, and sword the heretics themselves.

Henry Estienne had, as stated, established his printing-office
in Paris, where his business may be considered as in a measure a
continuation of the concern of his father Robert, although the post of
printer to the King had, as we have noted, been given to his uncle.
Henry continued, however, to print a certain portion of his books in
Geneva, although it is not clear whether or not he retained the control
of, or even an ownership in, the Press which had been established
there by his father.[27] He appears at this time to have divided his
publishing undertakings, executing at Paris reprints of the classics
and of works in general literature, and reserving for the Geneva Press
theological works which were likely to give offence in a period of
“religious irritation.” This term is, I may mention, Maittaire’s, and
it is perhaps not too strong a description of a period in which a
divine who had taken no part in politics could be hanged simply for
editing a Protestant commentary.

I add some further selections of certain of the more important of the
titles from Henry’s Catalogue.

    1563. “Rudimenta Fidei Christianæ; addita est ecclesiasticarum
    precum formula; Græc. Lat.” 12mo.

    This is Calvin’s Catechism, translated into Greek by Henry himself.

    “De abusu linguæ Græcæ in quibusdem vocibus, quas Latina usurpat
    admonitio.” 8vo. Of this treatise Henry was author as well as
    publisher.

    1564. “Fragmenta Pœtarum Veterum Latinorum, quorum opera non
    extant, Ennii, Accii, Lucilii” etc. This work was undertaken out of
    regard for the memory of his father, by whom the fragments had been
    collected, but who had not been able to complete the preparation of
    them for the press.

    1566. “La confirmation de la discipline ecclésiastique observée
    dans les églises réformées du royaume de France; avec la résponse
    aux objections proposées à l’encontre.” This was printed in Geneva.

In the same year, was issued a Greek _Anthology_ to which the publisher
added certain annotations of his own. By way of exciting the emulation
of young poets, Henry promised an addition of such Greek epigrams
as had been turned into Latin metre by himself and others, and as a
proof of his own facility, he introduced into his annotations to the
_Anthology_ above mentioned more than fifty translations of a single
distich.

The publisher, in thus assuming responsibilities as an author, could,
of course, not escape the criticism of other authors claiming authority
in the same studies. Vavasseur, for instance, says of Henry’s literary
productions: “His verse is more faulty than his prose, his numbers
are harsh and unpolished, his muse is often triflingly diffuse. He is
fluent in writing, but frequently not correct. He is both fastidious
and dictatorial, talking freely of others and much of himself, and
forgetting the modesty which becomes the author.”[28] It is fair
to remember that Father Vavasseur was a Jesuit and was possibly,
therefore, no dispassionate judge of the defects of the scholarly but
heretical publisher.

    1566. “Herodoti Historiæ Libri IX. et de vita Homeri Libellus,
    Latine. Folio.”

    This edition comprises also the _Opuscula_ of Herodotus, Plutarch,
    and Porphyrius, relating to Homer’s life and poesy.

M. de Sallengre relates that Henry Estienne, having printed at a great
expense the histories of Herodotus, his enemies and above all the
monks, who sought every occasion to bring trouble upon him, decried his
history as filled with fables _et de contes à dormir debout_, and that
Henry, to repel the effect of this accusation, undertook to justify
himself by the composition of the following treatise, _Apologia pro
Herodoto, sive Herodoti Historia fabulositatis accusata_.

This _Apologia_ is described by Greswell as a serious performance,
containing nothing that should be particularly offensive to the
monks or to the Roman clergy, unless it be an incidental mention of
_La papesse Jeanne_ and a description of certain superstitions that
Estienne had observed in his visit to the Church of our Lady of Loretto.

The _Apologia_ was, later, prefixed to another issue of a Latin version
of _Herodotus_ and was subsequently printed in French in a separate
volume under the title _L’apologie pour Hérodote_.[29]

The _Apologia_ appears to have been amplified and extended and to have
been made the vehicle of a severe attack upon the Roman Hierarchy and
a means of exposing the ignorance and vices of its ecclesiastics,
the fooleries of their pulpit elocution, the astonishing credulity
of the laity instructed by them, and the laxity of discipline and
deterioration of manners which seemed to be the inevitable result of
a corrupt faith. Greswell is of opinion that the motives which led to
this attack are not to be sought for in any imaginary affront which
Henry had experienced through the monkish accusations against his
_Herodotus_, but that they were rather to be found in the irritation
occasioned by the persecutions from which his family had suffered and
in his rooted antipathy to the principles of the Church of Rome.[30]

Maittaire’s description of Henry’s criticism of the manners and works
of the monks recalls certain portions of the _Encomium Moriæ_ of
Erasmus. The author’s general line of argument is as follows: The
circumstances related by Herodotus in his History ought not to be
pronounced fables on account of their seeming want of verisimilitude,
as in recent times many things have happened which, though in
themselves apparently far less probable than much that Herodotus has
recorded, cannot be called in question. It is contended further that
it is impossible for men ever to have been so stupid and so gross as
Herodotus describes them; but Henry shows by undeniable examples how
excessive in all respects was the grossness of many of those who lived
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, persons who were probably
no less degraded than were the classes whose lives are recorded by
Herodotus. In the account of the wrong-doings and degradation of
later generations, Henry does not spare the monks, who are attacked
without mercy, and he speaks with hardly more reserve of the popes
themselves. It is difficult to understand why divines of the Sorbonne,
whose theological ire had been so bitter against Robert Estienne on
account of Greek annotations to the Testament, should have allowed to
pass, apparently without a protest, so sweeping a denunciation of the
character of the ecclesiastics.

According to De Sallengre, the _Apologia_ was a book which everyone
wished to possess. It was read with avidity, and editions of it were
multiplied. The first three, all printed in Geneva, were issued before
the close of the year 1566. The fourth, fifth, and sixth were printed
at Antwerp in 1567, 1568, and 1569. The seventh, eighth, ninth, and
tenth were printed at Rochelle (the centre of French Protestantism)
between 1572 and 1582, and the eleventh and twelfth at Lyons in 1592
and 1607. These editions were all superseded by that printed at The
Hague in 1735, with notes by M. le Duchat.

An anonymous translation appeared in London in 1607, under the title
of _A World of Wonders, or an Introduction to a treatise touching the
conformitie of ancient and modern wonders; or a Preparative Treatise
to the Apologie for Herodotus, the argument of which is taken from the
Apologie for Herodotus written by Henry Stephen, etc_. I have thought
it worth while to present the specification of the editions of a book
which achieved, if not fame, at least popularity, as an indication of
the activity of the printing-presses even during a period of political
strife and of widely extended wars.

The book appears never to have been put into print in Paris, as it was
doubtless not considered wise to test too severely the censorship of
the University. According to De Sallengre, copies were, however, in
very general circulation in Paris society, which was always ready to be
amused with the recital of clerical enormities and with pictures of the
scandals of private life.

The years 1562 and 1563 were signalised by active operations in the
continued strife between the Protestants and the Catholics, and while,
after 1563, there was a brief cessation of hostilities, the civil war
broke out again in 1567 and continued with brief intervals until the
Massacre of S. Bartholomew in 1572. In each one of these years of
disturbance, however, we find Henry Estienne’s imprint associated with
important publications, principally reissues of the classics, although
it is not easy to understand how it could have proved practicable to
secure any continued sale at this time in France for costly editions,
or how there was in fact any opportunity of interesting the public
or of bringing adequately to the attention of the public, books of
any class. The frequent interference with the communications between
Paris and the cities east of the Rhine must also have rendered it
very difficult to arrange for the distribution of French editions in
Germany, or in the Low Countries, while the latter were themselves in
the throes of the great rebellion against the dominion of Spain.

In 1568, Henry printed _Henrici Stephani annotationes in Sophoclem
et Euripidem_, etc., which is evidence that such little matters as
the battles of St. Denis and Jarnac were not permitted to interfere
with his classical studies any more than with the work of his
printing-office. In the next year, he issued another work from his
own pen: _Comicorum Græcorum sententiæ, id est Gnomæ, Græce Latinis
versibus ab H. Stephano redditæ, et annotationibus illustratæ_. He also
completed the publication of a collection of Latin historians. The
list of the year includes a number of other titles of which the most
important (with reference at least to the personality of Henry) were
the two following:

_Artis Typographicæ querimonia et Epitaphia typographorum quorundam,
per H. Stephanum_. 4to; and

_Henrici Stephani epistola de suæ typographiæ statu; Index librorum
qui ex ejusdem officina hætenus prodierunt._ 8vo.

The former is a lament concerning the degradation of the noble art of
typography. An art which had, as he complains, fallen into the hands of
the most illiterate of persons, _quibus nihil cum musis commune est_.
“What,” he exclaims, “would Aldus Manutius say if, returning to life,
he could behold the present miserable condition of the art to which his
life was devoted!” He then proceeds to adduce various instances of the
gross ignorance and corresponding obstinacy of some of the printers and
editors of his time, exemplified by their adulteration of particular
passages of classic authors. These quotations are followed by a number
of _Latin Elegiacs_ and certain _Epitaphia_, partly in Greek and partly
in Latin, which appear to have been included in the volume as evidence
that one printer at least, was both a classical scholar and a man of
literary capacity. It is doubtful whether the condition of printing
throughout Europe at this time afforded any substantial justification
for this sweeping complaint of Henry’s. The presses of Plantin were,
during these very years, active in Antwerp, although Plantin, like
Estienne himself, was contending against manifold difficulties in
the task of carrying on an international publishing business in
the midst of civil war and political disintegration; and the books
produced by Plantin will, not only for the beauty of their typography,
but especially for the perfection of the magnificent copper-plate
illustrations utilised for many of them, stand favourable comparison
with the productions of earlier or later generations. The books issued
in Nuremberg during the same decade, by the second of the Kobergers,
who had built up the greatest publishing concern that Germany had ever
known, can also be specified as excellent examples as well of scholarly
editing as of tasteful and accurate typography. It was doubtless the
case that in Paris as elsewhere, there were, during the last half of
the sixteenth century, examples of scholarly and ignorant editing and
of careless and inaccurate typography, but the same may be said of
every century since the time of Gutenberg. Henry Estienne’s essay may,
I think, be considered partly as an affectation and partly as a piece
of self-conceit.

The second of these monographs presents a description of the status of
his Press, together with an _Index librorum_ or classified catalogue
of his publications. It forms in fact the chief authority for the
history of his business. A considerable portion of the _Epistola_ is
devoted to a description of the purpose and character of the great
_Thesaurus Linguae Graecae_, then in course of production. Henry
takes pains to explain that the plan and inception of the _Thesaurus_
were due to his father Robert, who had in fact, before his death,
collected a large amount of material for the great etymological and
lexicographical undertaking, which may be considered, therefore, as the
work of two generations of scholarly publishers. Greswell is in accord
with Maittaire in describing the work as an “admirable and unrivalled
monument of ardent zeal for the advancement of learning, and as an
example of unwearied diligence and of colossal erudition.”[31]

The remainder of the _Epistola_ is devoted to a recital of the injuries
done to the authors of classical antiquity by ignorant and careless
editors and by credulous printers, ready to accept on the authority
of such editors new readings and unfounded “emendations” in the text.
Henry announces that he has in preparation a treatise to be entitled
_De Origine Mendorum in authoribus Graecis et Latinis_, but Greswell
can find no evidence that this was ever published.

The _Epistola_ closes with a humorous complaint of the trivial and
harassing interruptions to which a scholarly publisher is exposed
at the Frankfort Fair and elsewhere, on the part of applicants for
information concerning his publishing undertakings and plans. The
complaint is printed in Latin iambics. I quote some of the lines as
Englished by Greswell. It will be noted that the _Index librorum_ or
catalogue of Estienne had been printed for the purpose of answering
such inquiries in print. Aldus had, it may be remembered, been driven
to a similar course in 1498, but catalogues were still the exception
rather than the rule.

    I’m harassed by the crowd of those
    At Frankfort who their wares expose;
    And ever ask “What are you doing
    In prospect of the Fair ensuing?
    New works you’ll shew, impressions splendid,
    Where learning stands by Art commended?”
    If I say “No,” “’Tis strange, what, none?
    At least then promise--next but one.”
    Still say I “No,” expostulation
    Assumes the tone of indignation
    That Frankfort’s mart’s so strongly slighted,
    And faith is broken--never plighted.
    Again, these quidnuncs set aside,
    With letters, ceaseless, I’m annoyed,
    Italian, English, German, French,
    All on my studious hours entrench;
    “What last has been achieved and ended?
    What are the impressions next intended?”
    Nor to such modest queries stinted,
    Of books in print or to be printed
    A thousand others they propound
    Which e’en a prophet would confound.

    Of what advantage all these letters?
    Not stimulants are they, but fetters,
    As though you’d spur a steed that’s idle
    Yet check his progress with the bridle.
    My press resists the condescension
    That to such foppery gives attention;
    Stands still and bids them longer stay for
    All they suggest, or even pay for.
    For this annoyance then--be sure
    Not small intent to find a cure.
    Of books to former fairs I’ve given,
    Or now project by leave of heaven,
    These pages few, as best may suit you,
    In form of catalogue salute you;
    Which you’ll my Rescript please to call,
    Addrest to none and yet to all.

Henry’s complaints concerning futile and troublesome correspondence
might, of course, be repeated in many a publishing office to-day, but
the modern publisher is helped out of the difficulty to some extent
by his stenographers and typewriters. It remains a marvel how it was
possible, without any time-saving appliances, for the publishers of
the fifteenth century to conduct a complicated business, to give
personal labour to preparing for the press works calling for original
scholarship and detailed labour, and to carry on, in autographic
letters, literary and theological correspondence.

The _Epistola_ gives the titles or descriptions of a number of
important works which the ambitious publisher had in plan, a list, in
fact, too long to be completed within the lifetime or to be feasible
for the resources of any one publisher, and only a portion of which
were ever brought to completion. In 1571, Henry issued, among other
works, an edition of the works of Plutarch, which gives both the Greek
and the Latin text, in thirteen volumes octavo. In 1572, he completed
the great _Thesaurus_, the most important production of his busy life.
The full title is as follows:

_Thesaurus Græcæ Linguæ, ab Henrico Stephano constructus, in quo
præter alia plurima quæ primus præstitit (paternæ diligentiæ æmulus)
vocabula in certas classes distribuit, multiplici derivatorum serie
ad primigenia, tanquam ad radices unde pullulant, revocata. Thesaurus
Lectori._

    _Nunc alii intrepide vestigia nostra sequantur;
    Me duce, plana via est quæ salebrosa fuit._

_Anno MDLXXII. excudebat Henr. Stephanus, cum privilegio Caes.
Majestatis et Christianiss. Galliarum Regis._ 4 vols. Folio, with two
supplementary volumes containing an appendix and an index.

A seventh volume, issued a year later, adds two glossaries, and a
treatise on the dialects of Attica. This _Thesaurus Græcus_ was
completed by Henry at about the same age as that at which his father,
Robert, had published his Latin _Thesaurus_. The two works would
have been for any generation of publishers creditable examples of
scholarly and public-spirited enterprise, but when we remember that the
publishers were the compilers, and were also the authors of the notes,
commentaries, and separate treatises which make up a large portion of
the bulk of the volumes, and that their work as editors and authors
was done amidst the engrossing cares of the management in stormy times
of a complex and absorbing business, the _Thesauri_ remain magnificent
monuments to the scholarship, the capacity, and the persistent energy
of the two Estiennes.

The _Thesaurus Græcus_ was inscribed by Henry to the Emperor
Maximilian, Charles IX. of France, Elizabeth of England, and John
George, Marquis of Brandenburg. He secured for it, in addition to
the privilege of the French King, which bears date 1561, that of
the Emperor, issued in 1570. In one of the several prefatory words
Henry tells his readers that the only way in which he had found it
practicable to complete his task, was to bind himself to produce
each twenty-four hours, in readiness for the compositors who had
been detailed for the work, a stated quantity of written matter. The
interruptions were often, he says, so frequent that he was obliged to
lay aside the pen ten times in an hour; but there were few days on
which the “copy” that he had pledged himself to complete was not in
readiness at the hour fixed.

Henry makes a special appeal to scholars and to the public generally
to protect his great work against any piratical appropriations, or any
attempts on the part of epitomisers or abridgers. The appeal proved,
however, ineffective, and the _Thesaurus Græcus_ was utilised as a
convenient quarry by a number of later lexicographers. Greswell makes
special mention of Joannes Scapula as the first of the plagiarists
who took advantage of the labours of Henry. He states that Scapula
had been employed as one of Henry’s correctors, a position which gave
him convenient facilities for an early appropriation of the sheets of
Henry’s lexicon. The _Lexicon Græco-Latinum_, which bears the name of
Scapula, was printed in Basel in 1579. In his introduction, he speaks
of having had the plan of the undertaking long in mind, and of having,
in fact, made considerable progress in his work before Henry’s volumes
were printed. He does not admit the appropriation, or even the use of
any of Henry’s material, although, as Maittaire points out, whole pages
of the Basel lexicon are substantially identical with those of the
Paris work.

The lexicon of Scapula being in smaller and less costly form, was found
of convenience to students generally, but the scholars of Henry’s
generation did not hesitate to censure severely the conduct of Scapula
and to make strong condemnations of his literary dishonesty. Maittaire
quotes Malinkrot to this effect, and records also that the celebrated
Dr. Busby, of Westminster School, actually forbade his pupils, on the
ground of indignation at literary larceny, to use what he called “the
surreptitious lexicon” of Scapula. The instance is worth commemorating,
because it marks a distinct advance in the development of popular, or
at least of scholarly, opinion in regard to the rights of literary
producers. There had been not a few examples in previous generations
of indignation on the part of authors or editors concerning the
appropriation of their own works, indignation which was, to be sure,
chiefly concerned not with the diminution of the author’s proceeds,
but with the risk or certainty that the surreptitious editions would
be garbled and inaccurate, and would thus cause injustice to the
reputation of the author. I do not, however, find previous record of
instances in which scholars or readers not personally associated with
the author, had taken pains, simply on the ground of literary ethics,
to discountenance or discourage surreptitious or piratical editions.

It remains to add concerning the _Thesaurus_, that, in common with
not a few other public-spirited publishing undertakings, it brought
to its author-publisher loss instead of profits. Henry complains that
the publication involved him in serious pecuniary difficulties. La
Caille is authority for the statement that these difficulties and the
honour brought upon France by Henry’s publications were made the ground
of a donation, in 1578, by King Henry III. of three thousand livres.
Maittaire is, however, clear in his mind that while the King had
talked about such a compensation, and may even have promised it, the
money was never paid. The instance appears in several respects to be
parallel with that of the big Bible of Plantin, in connection with the
publication of which Plantin received from Philip II. promises many,
but no cash. A second edition was printed in 1572, the sale of which
may have helped to lessen the publisher’s loss. This was, however, the
year of the massacre of S. Bartholomew and of the battles of Brissac
and Moncontour, and it is probable that the business of selling books
could hardly have been in a satisfactory condition.

In 1574, Estienne printed an edition of _Apollonius Rhodius_, and, in
1575, a work of his own composition entitled _Pseudo-Cicero Dialogus
H. Stephani_, and, in the year following, a curious treatise compiled
by himself, entitled _H. Stephani Schediasmatum Variorum_. This year
also witnessed the completion of a magnificent impression of the works
of _Plato_, the editorial work on which was done largely by himself.
According to Maittaire and Fischer, hardly a single typographical error
is to be found in the three volumes. The first volume is dedicated to
Elizabeth, Queen of England, the second to James VI. of Scotland, and
the third to the Republic of Berne.

King Henry III. showed an intelligent interest in the work of the
Estienne Press, and appears to have extended to the printer not a
few marks of royal favour, although, as Maittaire points out, it was
the case in many instances that the gifts of money proffered by the
King did not get beyond the stage of promises. In 1578, the King sent
Henry into Switzerland in search of manuscripts and rare books, and in
1579, he conferred on him a general privilege, “_Tant pour tous les
Historiens Grecs et Latins que pour la Dictionnaire et Cours Civile._”

It is evident, from the various headings of the printer’s letters, that
he was continually shifting his residence. He writes most frequently,
to be sure, from Paris, but very often from Geneva, and again from
Berne, Orleans, Lyons, and Frankfort. He appears to have given his
personal attention, during many years, to the business of his House
at the Frankfort Fair. It is sufficiently surprising that, with this
migratory life, he was able to bring to a successful conclusion so many
important editorial and publishing undertakings, especially as the work
of the printing-office was so often interrupted by war or rumours of
war.

The years 1578-1583 chronicled the production of a number of important
books, chiefly editions of the classics. An edition of _Herodotus_,
issued in 1581, the publisher dedicated to Sir Philip Sidney, with a
prefatory address in which he reminds Sidney of their former literary
intercourse, first in Germany and later in Austria. During 1584,
Henry’s Press appears to have been idle, but the five following years
show a renewed activity. The assassination of his royal patron,
Henry III., in 1588, did not fail to call forth the lamentations of
Estienne’s muse, but his _Epitaphia_ on the monarch are said to evince
more loyalty than poetic excellence.

The last work bearing Henry’s imprint was an edition of the _Poemata
Varia_ of Beza, which bears the date of 1579. Henry’s death came in
1598, in a hospital at Lyons. The seventy years of his active and
eventful life had brought, as an offset to the well merited prestige
and honours that had been accorded to him for his distinctive services,
a full measure of vicissitudes and reverses. His life was full of sharp
contrasts. He had intimate relations with many of the rich and great,
and he found himself associated not infrequently with the splendours
of courts and enjoyed the favour of more than one monarch; yet poverty
was his prevailing lot, and his work was carried on under a constant
struggle with difficulties and obstacles of the most serious character.

When we recall the limited extent of the circles of students and
readers in France and throughout Europe who were interested in higher
literature, the constant absorption of the rulers and nobles and of the
active-minded citizens generally in war and in political strife to the
necessary exclusion of any adequate attention to the arts of peace;
and when, further, we remember the constant succession of wars, civil
and foreign, in which, during the lifetime of our publisher, France
was engaged, wars which must have rendered all traffic difficult and
have constituted a most serious hindrance to the business of producing
and of distributing books, we can but be surprised at the number and
the magnitude of his literary and his business achievements, and are
prepared to accord full appreciation to his courage, his patient
persistence, his enormous industry, and his omnivorous scholarship.
It has been possible in this article merely to touch upon some of
the more noteworthy of his own productions. The mere transcription
of the titles of the literary labours achieved or projected by Henry
would be a considerable task; and we gather the impression that in
his strength and capacity for continuous work he must have as far
exceeded the average literary worker of to-day, as the heroes of old
were said to have exceeded in their physical powers the men of later
times. In comparing the character of Henry with that of his father
Robert, Maittaire says that they evinced equal skill and zeal in their
profession, but speaks of Robert as less ostentatious of his own
merits, more ingenuous, and more ready to acknowledge the co-operation
of others. Greswell finds evidence of an arrogance and moroseness of
temper in Henry, which increased with age, and which frequently led him
into violent altercations.

Florence, the eldest daughter of Henry Estienne, had married (in 1586)
the famous scholar Isaac Casaubon, a son-in-law of whom a father like
Henry Estienne might well have been proud. Mark Pattison, in his
biography of Casaubon, suggests that the latter had probably fallen
in love with the manuscript collections of the father before he began
to pay his court to the daughter. It was fortunate for Casaubon that
his wife proved satisfactory in herself, as the jealousy of her
father prevented him from securing any benefit from the manuscript
collections. After a good deal of friction, Casaubon appears to have
given up the attempt to carry on scholarly work with Estienne, and,
according to Pattison, he never saw the inside of Estienne’s library,
notwithstanding the absence of the latter for months and even for years
at a time, excepting on one memorable occasion when he and Florence
summoned courage to break it open.[32]

According to Casaubon, Estienne was in fact a perfect dragon in the
close keeping of his books and manuscripts. Speaking of a new book of
Camerarius, Casaubon writes to Bongars, “Read it I have not; seen it
I have, but it was in the hands of Henry Estienne who would not so
much as allow me to touch, much less to read it, while he is every day
using or abusing my books as if they were his own.”[33] Pattison goes
on to point out, however, that Casaubon exaggerates the facts, when
he complains that Estienne would lend him no books, as both with the
_Strabo_ and with the _Athenæus_, he derived material assistance from
collations which Henry Estienne had made in Italy.

Casaubon contributed also to certain of the editions issued by his
father-in-law, such as the _Thucydides_ of 1588, the Latin _Dionysius_
of the same year, the _Plinius_ of 1591, and the _Diogenes Laertius_ of
1593. According to his own account, he was, however, jealously excluded
from all share in the text and the translation, or from any control of
the contents of the volumes, and his contributions appear to have been
limited to notes and commentaries.

Casaubon appears never to have secured from Estienne the payment of a
certain dower, that belonged to or had been promised to his wife, while
the portion of the property that finally came to Florence after the
settlement of her father’s very meagre estate was but trifling and was,
later, more than offset by a claim for which the estate was adjudged to
be liable for the re-payment of certain moneys that had been advanced,
on the security of the matrices of the famous royal font of Greek type,
which had been brought by Robert Estienne from Paris.

The business of the House of Estienne was carried on after Henry’s
death by his son Paul and his nephews. The publications of these
Estiennes of the fourth generation were chiefly, as heretofore, in the
division of Greek and Roman classics, and were of a character fairly
to maintain the high scholarly standard which had been established.
Robert was himself a classicist and a poet, and Maittaire speaks of his
literary productions as having secured a good repute.

Antoine, the son of Paul, succeeded his father in 1620, and in 1623 was
appointed _Imprimeur du Roy_. His son Henry succeeded in 1649 to the
latter title. Henry’s work closed about 1659. He left no children, and
was the last of the family who devoted himself to the work of printing
and publishing, and with his death, therefore, the history of the House
comes to an end.

During a term of more than a century and a half the Estiennes or
Stephani had, as printers, as publishers, and as scholars filled a
large place in the literary history of France and of Europe, and I find
record of no other family which has contributed to the profession of
publishing so many distinctive and distinguished men.

=Isaac Casaubon.=--As a supplement to this sketch of the history of the
Estienne family, I will add a brief reference to the literary work and
the publishing relations of Isaac Casaubon, the famous scholar, who, as
above mentioned, entered into the family circle as the son-in-law of
the second Henry.

In 1589, the city of Geneva was being besieged by the Duke of Savoy.
The siege continued, in form at least, during the ensuing nine years,
and although it was, of course, not practicable during the whole of
that period to maintain a close investment, the city suffered all the
privations and many of the horrors of continued war.

Geneva contained in 1589, at the time of the beginning of the siege, a
population of about 12,000. It was able to muster for its defence 2186
men capable of bearing arms. Against this little force the Duke brought
up an army of 18,000 regular troops, with the determination to destroy
the nest of heretics once for all. The importance of destroying the
city was fully understood by the Catholic party, and was especially
urged by S. Francis de Sales. The schools and the printing-presses were
particularly pointed out by the Saint as instruments of mischief. The
struggle against these odds was a gallant one, but the little Republic
succeeded in preserving its existence and its independence, although
when, by the peace of Vervins in 1598, it was released from its state
of siege, it had lost out of its little levy nearly three fourths.

Isaac Casaubon, who, later, took rank as one of the most learned
scholars of his time, was born in Geneva in 1559. He was the son of
Arnold Casaubon, a Protestant pastor of Dauphiné. He held the Chair of
Greek and of History in the Academy of Geneva from 1581 to 1596, (a
term which included the period of the great siege) when he migrated
to Montpellier. Isaac’s salary as professor in Geneva was two hundred
and eighty florins, to which he was able to add ninety florins from
boarding students. On this meagre income he ventured (in 1584) to marry
a wife and managed also to bring together a considerable collection of
books.

This first wife, who was a native of Geneva, died in two years, leaving
a daughter. In 1586, Casaubon took for his second wife Florence, the
daughter of Henry Estienne.

One of the manuscript-dealers with whom Casaubon, as an impecunious
collector, came into relations, was Darmarius, described as one of the
last of the caligraphs, a class which in Italy and in the university
towns of Germany survived for nearly half a century the invention of
printing. Darmarius had access to the libraries of Venice and Florence
and travelled about Europe to sell his copies. His manuscripts, says
Pattison, were not works of art like the productions of the pen of a
Vergecio or a Rhosus, made to adorn the collections of princes and
cardinals. The books sold by Darmarius were hasty transcripts, written
on poor paper, chiefly of certain unpublished works that he had found
in the library of Cardinal Bessarion.[34] They did not make up for
their want of beauty by the accuracy of their text, for the transcriber
does not seem to have known even the grammar of classic Greek, but for
these wretched copies he was able to secure from scholars hungry for
books, great prices. For a _Polyæmus_, Casaubon paid, in 1578, “a great
sum,” _magno ære_, and for a _Julius Africanus_ three hundred crowns,
almost its weight in silver, but neither of these authors was as yet in
print.

The admission of Casaubon into the family of the great publisher, so
far from adding to his opportunities for getting his writings before
the public, did not even secure for him any additional facilities for
their preparation. Reference has already been made in the sketch of
Henry Estienne to the jealous selfishness with which, particularly
in the later years of his life, he retained in his own hands his
collections of books and of manuscripts. But few friends appear to have
ever secured from him permission to utilise his literary stores, while
of his learned son-in-law he was particularly jealous. Casaubon was
one of the few scholars in Europe who was competent to edit, from the
original, a Greek text, and although in certain respects Estienne’s
scholarly ideals were high, he seems to have laid more stress upon his
individual prestige than upon the advance of learning.

Impecunious as Casaubon was during by far the greater portion of
his life, he appears to have been always ready to give orders or
commissions for the purchase of books or manuscripts. In some cases
he was able to arrange to pay for these by services in one direction
or another; in 1592, for instance, Henricus Petri of Basel sends
him two copies of his second edition of _Homer_, one for the King
of France and one for himself, the gift being accompanied with the
request that Casaubon would secure for the book a (copyright) privilege
for France.[35] In 1608, Biondi of Venice has a standing commission
to send books to Casaubon.[36] Many presents of manuscripts were
made to Casaubon, and in other instances manuscripts and books were
loaned to him which were never returned. Pattison speaks of this part
of Casaubon’s collection as becoming his by “process of adhesion.”
In 1595, Casaubon writes to Commelin, a publisher of Heidelberg, as
follows:

“If I ask you to send me direct all that issues from your press, it
is not, believe me, dearest Commelin, because I am unwilling to buy
these, but because I am unable. Our booksellers here in Geneva are a
blind sort, who are unwilling to bring back from Frankfort any books
that may not pay. I except Favre, who is not so stupid as the rest. You
will have to write to De Tournes [a printer of Geneva] directing him
to deliver to me the _Chrysostom_, as he refuses to do so without your
express commands.” Casaubon’s complaint about the lack of enterprise on
the part of the booksellers of Geneva has, of course, been frequently
enough repeated by scholars of later date, who are not always able to
understand that the bookseller who takes unwise risks in accumulating
stock that may not sell, will very soon cease to be a bookseller at
all. His annoyance at De Tournes for declining to hand over property of
Commelin’s without authority from the owner is equally naïve.

Casaubon tells us that Geneva in his day had a public library, but that
the collection, although valuable, was very small. The _Commentaries_
published by Casaubon in 1592, on Perseus, Theophrastus, Suetonius,
and Diogenes Laertius, were based upon the lectures given by him in
the Geneva Academy. The volumes were printed in Geneva, but I can
find no record of the arrangement made by him of their publication.
The references that he makes to the several sources of his very small
income include no mention of receipts from the sale of his books, and
it seems probable that these brought to their author no returns other
than the occasional expression of recognition or honorarium on the
part of scholarly patrons. If Henry Estienne had been willing to give
to these _Commentaries_ the service of the imprint of his Paris House,
the commercial results would probably have been much more satisfactory,
but, whatever the difficulty, it was the case that no writings of
Casaubon were issued by his father-in-law.

Casaubon tells us that the ministers of Geneva exercised a strict
surveillance over the teaching both of the scholar and of the Academy,
and that a professor in the latter could not even publish without first
submitting his book to the censorship of divines. It seems probable
that the Calvinistic scrutiny in Geneva may easily have been in its
narrowness and in its persistency a more serious obstacle during the
last ten years of the sixteenth century, in the way of publishing and
literary undertakings, than the censorship of the Catholic theologians
of Paris.

It is the conclusion of Pattison (which is not in harmony with the
earlier descriptions of the intellectual activities of Geneva) that
during the term of Casaubon’s work there existed in the town nothing
that could properly be called a literary interest. There was a poor
and starved seminary for pious instruction; an academic printing-press
devoted to the production of sermons and text-books; a theology
not formal or nominal, but interfused throughout the life and the
thought of each day. An armed enemy crouched at the gates of the
city, watching his opportunity for the death spring; while each week
brought news of some fresh outrage on believers with whom Geneva was in
sympathy in the countries where the Catholic reaction was in its full
tide.

On this ungenial soil, Casaubon developed out of his own instincts
the true ideal of classical learning. Not a scheme of philology, as
we now conceive it, but the idea of a complete mastery, by exhaustive
reading, of the thought of the ancient world, a reconstruction of Greek
and Roman antiquity out of the extant remains of the literature.[37]
Casaubon’s first literary work of importance, the _Animadversiones_
on Athenæus, was printed at Lyons in the year 1600. He was at the
time occupying a Chair in the Protestant University of Montpellier,
but there was no press in Montpellier with facilities for printing
Greek text. In fact, the printing of books in the city appears to have
begun only in 1597. Seventy years earlier, Rabelais had been obliged
to have printed at Lyons his edition of the _Hypocratic Aphorisms_.
Casaubon endeavoured to induce a Geneva printer to establish in
Montpellier a Press with a Greek font and a skilled corrector, but the
business connected with the little University did not offer sufficient
encouragement for the undertaking. It may be remembered that Oxford did
not possess any Greek type until 1586, and that Greek was first printed
in Cambridge some years later. Pattison is of opinion that there was
probably at the time a Greek Press at Toulouse, but no heretic could
print or even sojourn in this city of fanatical Romanism, a city in
which even the edict of toleration could never be put in force.

What Casaubon would, of course, have preferred and what ought, through
his father-in-law, to have been secured for him, was the advantage of
the Greek Press of Paris, which, during the previous half-century, had
secured for itself a well-earned pre-eminence. For the impecunious
professor a journey to Paris was, however, at this time, out of the
question, and he was obliged to content himself with a provincial
publisher. Of the book-trade of the French provinces, Lyons was at
that time the centre. In facilities for reaching the book markets of
Switzerland and Germany, it had advantages over Paris itself. Its
connections with Italy were, of course, very much more direct than
those possessed by the publishers of Paris, and it utilised these
connections not only for the prompt importation of the publications
of France, of Florence, and of Rome, but for the reproduction, often
in pretty close fac-simile, of the more noteworthy books issued from
the Italian presses. With the smaller outlay requisite in reprinting
works upon which the expense of editing and preparing for the press had
already been covered, the publishers of Lyons were able to undersell
Aldus and his successors and to secure for the Aldine texts a large
part of the returns from the markets of southern Europe. They did
not even limit their “appropriations” to the productions of foreign
publishers, such as Aldus of Venice, Froben of Basel, and Koberger of
Nuremberg. We find continual record of complaints on the part of the
publishers of Paris that their “privileges” were not respected and
that their more marketable books were reproduced by their piratical
competitors in Lyons. The “enterprise” of the publishers in Lyons seems
not even to have been restricted by their relations with the Catholic
Church, for they built up a trade in the production of Calvinistic
hymn-books for the use of the congregations of Switzerland.

The printers of Geneva, who were naturally of the opinion that
Calvinism was their legitimate stock in trade and should be for them
an exclusive possession, equally unmindful of their denominational
obligations, retorted by manufacturing cheap editions of missals,
books of hours, and even of Jesuit publications. The Lyonese printers
availed themselves of the brand of heretic to secure the confiscation
at the frontier of a good many shipments of the books from Geneva even
when these books belonged to “orthodox” Jesuit literature. The Genevese
could not easily meet this weapon, as there was at that time in force
in the Republic no _index expurgatorius_, and there was, therefore,
no means of securing an examination of books on the frontier. They
continued, however, their invasion of the French market after peace
had been restored between France and the Republic, and they managed
to evade the prohibition or the restriction upon the importation
of books printed in the Protestant city of Geneva, by placing upon
their title-pages the name of some other publishing centre, such as
Cologne or Antwerp. Occasionally even, the name of a French city was
substituted for the obnoxious Geneva. For instance, the edition of
_Aristotle_, printed in 1590 by Le Maire of Geneva, had upon it the
title _Lugdunæ_ (Lyons).

Henry Estienne died at Lyons in January, 1598, and Casaubon, on his way
to Geneva, to look after the settlement of his wife’s interest in the
estate, stopped at Lyons. He found there, in the person of a certain
Meric de Vic, a patron who was willing to co-operate with him in the
publication of the _Animadversiones_, and who, afterwards, gave him
the means of making his visit to Paris. In later years, De Vic was
known as a friend and patron of Grotius. I have been able to find no
exact record of the arrangement with the Lyons publisher. The work was
printed for the account of the author, by Antoine de Harsy, the cost
being in large part provided by De Vic.

Pattison speaks of De Harsy as “one of those cormorants who about this
time began to sit hard by the tree of knowledge,”[38] but he does
not give us the evidence for this unfavourable estimate. He goes on
to say, as if in mitigation of his harsh description of Casaubon’s
first publisher, that up to this time the publisher had usually been
the friend of the author, and often his collaborator, even when not an
author in his own name.

In arriving at Geneva, after the death of Estienne, Casaubon entered,
only for the second time in his life, his father-in-law’s library.
“Such a wreck of vast projects! A memorial of stupendous labour!” he
exclaimed, on seeing it. We learn from his diary that it was due to
his influence that the co-heirs permitted the manuscripts to pass to
Paul Estienne, to whom the Greek Press had been bequeathed. The printed
books were sold for the benefit of the creditors. Such a termination
of the scholarly labours and enormous energy of Estienne was hardly to
have been looked for.

In the year 1600, at the instance of his friend De Vic, Casaubon
journeyed to Paris, where he was hoping to receive from the King some
kind of appointment that would secure him an income. He was received
for a time as the guest of his wife’s cousin, Henry Estienne. The
publishing business of the old House of Estienne was then being carried
on in Paris by the Patissons, who had connected themselves with the
family by marriage.

The position which Casaubon understood from De Vic had been promised
by the King was not secured without discouraging delay. He had hoped
to be associated in some way with the instruction of Greek in the
University, but his Protestant faith proved an insuperable obstacle to
any University appointment. In 1601, after he had been kept waiting
nearly a year, a royal patent was given to him as keeper of the Royal
Library, where he succeeded the mathematician Gosselin. The salary was
1,200 livres, and the duties of the post left to the incumbent a large
measure of leisure time.

The Paris of that day contained about 400,000 people. Coryat, writing
in 1608, says that the Rue S. Jacques was “very full of booksellers
that have faire shoppes most plentifully furnished with bookes.” The
library in which the scholar from Geneva now found himself installed
contained about nine hundred works, a large proportion of which were in
manuscript. The collection of Greek manuscripts was said to be second
only to that of the Vatican.[39]

The new librarian found himself in favour with the King, who visited
the library from time to time and made gracious inquiries of the keeper
concerning the contents of the books. It was said by Scaliger of Henry
IV. that he could not keep his countenance and could not read a book.
Moderate as was the salary of the keeper of the King’s books, it was,
by not a few of those in authority in a Court where literature was
held in such low esteem, considered to be a wasteful and excessive
expenditure. “You cost the King too much, Sir,” said Sully to Casaubon;
“your pay exceeds that of two good captains, and you are of no use to
the country.”[40]

Casaubon’s position in Paris proved, after a few years, to be an
impossible one. It had, it seems, been the expectation of the King that
his librarian would, for the sake of remaining in Paris, follow the
royal example and accept (in form at least) the faith of Rome. This
course the student from Geneva had, however, no idea of taking. The
opposition of the theologians of the University and of the politicians
of the Court (including the great minister Sully) proved in the end
sufficient to withdraw from the librarian the King’s favour, and
Casaubon foresaw that he could not be assured of the continuance of
the royal protection. At the invitation of some scholarly English
friends--Spottswood, later, Archbishop of Glasgow, and Lamb, afterwards
Bishop of Galway,--Casaubon went to London, ostensibly for a visit.
He was presented to King James, whose ambition to be recognised as a
member of the fraternity of European scholars induced him to offer to
Casaubon a pension of three hundred pounds if he would make his home in
England. The offer was accepted, and the remaining years of Casaubon’s
life were spent in London, with an occasional sojourn in Ely, where his
good friend, Bishop Andrews, was always ready to tender appreciative
hospitality.

One of the famous controversial publications of the latter half of the
sixteenth century was the series entitled the _Magdeburg Centuries_.
The purpose of the Lutheran writers of this work was to present a true
history of the Church of Christ. According to this Protestant view, the
Church had been instituted in the Apostolic age in perfect purity, but
had been perverted by a process of slow canker, until it had become the
Church, not of Christ but of Anti-Christ, an instrument not for saving
men, but for destroying them. The _Centuries_ were completed, in 1574,
in no less than thirteen folio volumes. It was evident that, for a
work of this compass, no wide circulation could be looked for with the
impecunious public of Protestant Germany, but the historical thesis of
which these folios were the laborious evidence made a deep impression
upon the thought of the time.[41]

A young priest named Baronius was selected by the authorities in Rome,
or rather by S. Philip Neri, to prepare a reply to the _Centuries_,
and he devoted his life to the task. The result was the production
of the _Annales Ecclesiastici_, the most comprehensive work which
the controversies of the Protestant revolt had as yet produced. The
_Annales_ were completed, as far as the work of Baronius was concerned,
in thirteen folio volumes, in 1600, but the series was continued by
various writers until, in the edition issued at Lucca in 1738-1786, it
had grown to thirty-eight folio volumes, a work of which purchase was
difficult and perusal impossible.

Of the original work, the circulation, considering the bulk and the
costliness of the volumes, was unprecedented. The printing was done at
the Papal Press, the same press which had originally been organised
by Paul Manutius. The cost was borne by the papal treasury and the
full weight of the authority of the influence of the Church was given
to securing the widest possible distribution. As a result, edition
after edition was taken off by the demands from the libraries of the
monasteries, the cathedral chapters, and the Jesuit colleges and also
by individual prelates and princes, who had remained in the orthodox
fold.[42] The amount of the original labour put into the book by
Baronius must have been enormous, as his texts, his notes, and even
his extracts were all made with his own hand. According to his own
statement, the continuous labour could never have been supported, had
it not been in the first place for the stimulating authority of S.
Philip Neri, and secondly for the special aid given by the Virgin, the
saints, and the apostles Peter and Paul. Pattison sums up the purpose
and the result of the work as follows: “Baronius exhibited the visible
unity and impeccable purity of the Church founded upon Peter and
handed down inviolate; such at this day as it had ever been ... the
_Annales_ transferred to the Catholic party the preponderance in the
field of learning, which ever since Erasmus had been on the side of the
innovators.”

It was the turn of the Protestants to feel the need of an antidote
to Baronius and an attempt to supply this need was made in the
_Exercitationes_ of Casaubon. Casaubon’s work, however, never
passed beyond the status of a fragment, although this fragment was
sufficiently ponderous to form eight hundred folio pages. According
to the Protestant authorities, Casaubon had no difficulty in showing
the great lack of accurate scholarship on the part of Baronius and in
pointing out in the earlier portions of the _Annales_ (it was only
the first two volumes that were considered in his _Exercitationes_) an
enormous number of errors and misstatements. It was in fact difficult
to understand how the task of writing the early history of the Church
could have been undertaken (even with the aid of S. Peter and S.
Paul) by an author who was ignorant both of Greek and of Hebrew. The
volume of _Exercitationes_ did not, however, secure any such general
circulation or wide-spread influence with Protestant readers as had
been gained among the Catholics by the great series of _Annales_. There
was no ecclesiastical authority to induce the purchase as an act of
piety and no ecclesiastical machinery available to further circulation.

These three works seemed to me to call for some special reference,
because they present noteworthy and characteristic examples of the
theological controversies of the century and of the employment of
scholarly labour to secure or to affirm the foundations of religious
faith. The very great advantages possessed by the Roman writer in
securing immediate channels of distribution and an assured reading
public are also to be noted in connection with the serious obstacles
existing at the time in the way of any general distribution of books by
means of such machinery as was available for the publishers.

The _Exercitationes_ was printed for Casaubon by the King’s printer in
London and was issued by a publisher named Bell. I can find no record
of the publishing arrangement, but the cost of the undertaking appears
to have been provided for in part by the royal treasury and in part by
the aid of Bishop Andrews, who was an old friend of the author.

Casaubon’s sojourn in England was more favourable for his literary
labour than had been his position as royal librarian in Paris, but
while he was the most industrious of students, and, according to
his biographies, practically killed himself by close application to
his desk, the number of his completed works is but inconsiderable.
Pattison gives the titles or descriptions of not less than twenty-four
books, which had been planned out and many of which had been in
part written, but which remained at the death of the scholar either
fragments or simply titles.

Of the twenty-five works that were finished during the lifetime of
the scholar, a portion were afterwards characterised by himself as
_juvenilia_ which he was unwilling even to acknowledge. The edition
of _Theophrastus_, published in 1592, is the first work with which in
later years Casaubon expressed himself as satisfied. No one of the
books appears to have retained for itself a literary life, that is to
say, to have become a part of the world’s literature or even to have
remained in demand with the scholars. It was the case with Casaubon,
as with Scaliger, that his reputation has remained greater than that
of his productions. The scholar was more important than his books. It
seems evident, as far as can be gathered from the scanty references to
business details in Casaubon’s correspondence, that he never earned
anything, at least directly, through the labours of his pen. His books
must all have produced deficiencies instead of profits, and the sum
required for their publication had to be obtained from the few wealthy
friends who were able to appreciate the value to the world of a life
devoted to scholarship.

Casaubon died in London in 1614, in his 55th year.

CHAPTER VI.

WILLIAM CAXTON, AND THE INTRODUCTION OF PRINTING INTO ENGLAND,
1422-1492.

A SKETCH of the early printer-publishers of Europe would of course be
incomplete without some reference to the career of the man whose work
will always be associated with the history of printing in England.
The publishing undertakings of Caxton were, however, of much less
considerable importance than those of his continental contemporaries
to whom chapters have been devoted, while it is also the case that the
events of his life have been so fully set forth in various English
histories that they are already familiar to readers interested in the
record of printing and publishing. It would, therefore, be superfluous
for me to attempt to present, in a general sketch like the present,
any extended or detailed information concerning Caxton’s career.
For my present purpose, it will be sufficient to indicate briefly
the influences from which Caxton derived his interest in literary
undertakings, and the sources from which he secured his training as
a printer, with some reference to the character of his publishing
undertakings as compared with those of the printers whose work had
already been begun in Germany, France, and Italy.

Caxton was born in the Weald of Kent, about 1422, and died in London in
1492. His life covered, therefore, the period during which Gutenberg
was perfecting his printing-press, and included also the years in which
Koberger was beginning his publishing work in Nuremberg and Froben was
organising his publishing concern in Basel. The first publication of
Aldus in Venice was issued in the year after the death of Caxton. While
the larger number of the early printers had had training in technical
or mechanical work, which secured for them a certain preparation for
the technical requirements of the new art, and others, as in the case
of Aldus, had had experience as students and as instructors which
gave them advantages for the editorial work of scholarly publishing,
the larger proportion of the active life of Caxton had been devoted
to business as a wool-merchant, in connection with which business he
could, at least in his earlier years, have had but few opportunities
for coming into relations with men interested in literature. His
literary interests came to him comparatively late in life, as a result
of his association with the Court of the Duke of Burgundy, while his
first knowledge of and attraction towards the work of printing were the
result of the acquaintance formed at that Court with Colard Mansion,
the first printer of Bruges.

Caxton’s business work began as an apprentice to Robert Large, who
was an eminent member of the Mercers’ Company of London. It is the
conclusion of Mr. Blades, who has made himself the authority on the
subject of Caxton, that the admission of the young Kentishman to such
a household as that of Large was in itself sufficient evidence, under
the conditions of the time, that Caxton was a man of good family. It is
Mr. Blades’s belief that Caxton was a descendant of the Caunstons, who
owned the manor of Caunston in the Weald.

In 1441, when Caxton was about twenty years old, his first master
died and he was sent to Bruges, where he became a member of the
English _House_ or the English _Nation_, the term applied to the
association of English merchants residing in Bruges, and carrying on
from there business with England and with the other trade centres of
the Continent. His early associations had given him some preparation
for a sojourn in Flanders. A colony of Flemish wool-manufacturers had
been established in the Weald by Edward III., and the Flemings, having
inter-married with the Kentish families, had impressed their language
and their social habits very largely upon that portion of the county.
Of the English _Nation_ in Bruges Caxton became governor, in or about
1462, a position which made him the leading Englishman in the dominions
of Burgundy. His selection for such a position confirms the impression
that he was a man of birth, while it was also evidence that he had been
successful in his business undertakings and that he was recognised as a
man of character and of executive ability.

His position brought him into official relations with the Court of
Burgundy and with the new Duke, Charles the Bold, who, in 1467,
succeeded his father, Philip the Good. Princess Margaret of England,
the sister of King Edward IV., who became the wife of Charles, seems
to have taken a keen, personal interest in Caxton, and, a year or two
after her coming to Bruges, she induced him to give up his mercantile
career and his honourable position as governor of the English merchants
and to attach himself to her personal service. Lord Scales, afterward
Earl Rivers, who had visited Bruges as one of the ambassadors to
conclude the treaty of marriage, was, later, one of the most liberal
patrons of Caxton the printer, and his translation of the _Dictes
and Sayings of the Philosophers_ was the first book with the date of
imprint issued from Caxton’s London Press.[43]

After 1467, while Caxton still held his official responsibilities and
before he had begun to investigate the new art of printing, we find
him interesting himself in literary pursuits. He began in that year
the translation of the _Histories of Troy_ (_Le Recueil des Histoires
de Troye_), which translation was printed in 1474. In 1471, Caxton
was in the service of the Duchess, receiving a yearly salary and other
advantages, and being under instruction to proceed with his literary
undertakings. Margaret seems, in fact, in giving Caxton an income in
order that he might devote himself to literature, to have had in view
a kind of endowment of research. He presented to the Duchess, in 1471,
as a first result of his literary labours, a manuscript copy of his now
completed translation of the _Histoires_, and the favour given by her
to the work appears to have secured for it an immediate reputation, not
only with the English-speaking members of the Court, but with their
friends and correspondents in England, so that demand for Caxton’s
translation soon became more active than could be supplied by the
work of the scribe. In the epilogue to the first printed edition, he
speaks of his hand becoming “wery and not stedfast with much writing”
while his eyes were “dimed with overmuch lokyng on the whit paper.”
Then it was, apparently, that, through the suggestion of his friend
Colard Mansion, he was led to turn his attention to the new art of
printing.[44]

As has been mentioned in an earlier chapter, literary interests
had, for a number of years before the beginning of printing, found
a favourable environment in the dominions of the Duke of Burgundy.
Burgundy and Flanders were, during the last half of the fifteenth
century, among the richest territories in Europe. The arts and the
luxuries of civilisation had at that time attained a higher development
in Bruges than in almost any other capital, and with the other
refinements of life, had come an active interest in literary pursuits
and in the collection of libraries. These literary interests had been
furthered by the example of the ruling family, successive dukes having
set the fashion of collecting rare and costly works and of employing
great staffs of skilled scribes, illuminators, and binders, to put
into the most beautiful possible dress the manuscripts that had been
secured from all parts of Europe. David Aubert, a well-known scribe,
writing in 1457, thus describes the literary interests of Duke Philip
the Good: “This renowned and virtuous prince has been accustomed,
for many years past, to have ancient histories read to him daily.
His library surpasses all others, for from his youth he has had in
his service numerous translators, scholars, historians, and scribes,
working diligently not only in Bruges but in various countries, so that
now there is not in all christendom a prince who has so varied and rich
a collection.”[45]

Barrois, in describing the library of this sovereign, gives (as
a selection only) the titles of nearly three thousand works, the
greater part being magnificent folios, written on vellum, beautifully
illuminated, and bound in velvet, satin, or damask. Many of the volumes
were studded with gems, and were fastened with gold clasps, jewelled or
chased.

The fashion set by the Court was followed by the opulent nobles,
and, later, by the wealthy merchants, who vied with each other
in multiplying libraries. A nobleman whose name became famous in
connection with literature was Louis de Bruges, Seigneur de la
Gruthuyse, who afterwards received from Edward IV. of England the title
of Earl of Winchester. The larger portion of his manuscripts were
the work of Flemish scribes and were decorated by Flemish artists.
His library afterwards came into possession of the kings of France,
being added to the collection of the Chateau of Blois. A number of the
manuscripts are now preserved in the _Bibliothèque Nationale_ of Paris.
The Flemish armorial bearings had been partly obliterated in order to
be replaced with those of the French King, but the obliteration was
not so complete as to prevent the identification of the manuscripts
with the original collection of Louis. It was to Louis de Bruges that
Colard Mansion owed the first assistance he secured in the attempt
(which was finally unsuccessful) to establish a printing concern in
Bruges. It is somewhat surprising, in consideration of the great wealth
of the Flemish capital, the large measure of literary interest shown by
its noblemen and its merchants, the extensive collections of beautiful
and accurate manuscripts available for the use of the printers, and
the exceptional trade facilities and connections possessed by a city
which was at the time the commercial capital of North Europe, that the
art of printing should not at once have secured an assured foothold,
and that some printer should not have built up in the Flemish capital
a successful publishing concern. The first publishers who did secure
an assured business foundation and a wide-spread literary prestige
were obliged to do their work under conditions which appeared to be
much less favourable than those existing in 1470 at Bruges. Bruges was
probably the first city in Europe which possessed, some years before
the beginning of printing, a guild of makers of books, the organisation
of which was entirely on a mercantile basis, that is to say, which had
no connection with any university and was under no other supervision
or control than that of the monarch. The company, which in 1454
received a formal charter, is styled _Der Ghilde van sinte jan Ewagz_,
or the Guild of S. John the Evangelist, who was the patron saint of
scribes. The branches of industry connected with book-making which
were represented in this guild are specified by Van Praet as follows:
scriveners, illuminators, printers (that is to say, those who produced
from blocks impressions of illustrations), parchment and vellum makers,
letter engravers, figure engravers, carvers, cloth shearers, curriers,
bookbinders, painters, vignette designers, print sellers, booksellers.

In Antwerp a similar guild, instituted at about the same time,
was called the Guild of S. Luke; while at Brussels the scriveners
instituted a limited guild of their own, called _Les Frères de la
Plume_. It is to be borne in mind that there was in England no guild
of writers or makers of books until a number of years after the
introduction of printing, the charter of the Stationers’ Company dating
from 1552.

It was the good fortune of Caxton to be for thirty-three years a
resident of the city which could divide with Paris the distinction of
being the literary capital of North Europe, and for the latter portion
of that time, in his close association with the Court, to have had
access to the ducal libraries and the other great collections of the
city. Mr. Blades is of opinion that, in the course of his mercantile
business, Caxton must often have had occasion to fill commissions,
from correspondents in England who were interested in literature, for
transcripts of Flemish manuscripts. If this be the case, he became a
connecting link between his native country and the literary treasures
of the continent a number of years before he began in London the
work of printing for English readers his own versions of the Flemish
manuscripts.

Of the history of Colard Mansion, the first printer of Bruges, but few
details have been preserved. He is known to have been a skilled scribe,
and one of the earliest references to him occurs in 1450, when there
is record of his receiving from Duke Philip fifty-four livres for the
manuscript of a romance entitled _Romuleon_, which was illuminated and
bound in velvet. This copy is now in the Royal Library at Brussels.[46]
From 1454 to 1473, Mansion’s name is found in the list of subscribers
to the Guild of S. John, and, in or about the year 1471, he removed
from Brussels to Bruges, and devoted himself to the work of printing.
In 1484, he appears to have broken down in resources and in credit. He
left Bruges, and after that time nothing further is known of him. He
was at the time in arrears to the chapter of S. Donatus for the rent of
his printing-office, the work of which he had carried on in two rooms
over the porch of the church, but the value of the printed sheets left
in the rooms appears to have been sufficient to liquidate this debt.
Van Praet speaks of twenty-one works as having been printed by him,
while Blades finds record of twenty-two. Of these, the most important
was probably the edition of Ovid’s _Metamorphoses_, printed in French,
in a large folio, with numerous woodcuts. The practice of adorning
books with illustrations and with ornate initials and tail-pieces
remained a characteristic of the Press of the Low Countries. Other
noteworthy works on the list were French editions of _Boëthius_ and
_Boccaccio_. With the exception of one work, _Dionysii Areopagiticæ
liber_, all of Mansion’s publications were in French. In this respect
he forms a noteworthy exception to the printers of his generation,
whose earlier works were nearly exclusively in Latin. One or two of the
first printers in Lyons also began their work with volumes in French.
Mansion’s undertakings were divided nearly equally between books of
devotion and books of frivolity, such as _Les Advineaux Amoureux_, the
only volume on the list which reached a second edition. The opinion of
Mr. Blades, that the fonts of type used by Mansion were identical with
those later employed in the first books of Caxton, may, I judge, be
considered as established.[47]

It is the contention of the German historians that Caxton secured
his training as a printer not in Bruges but in Cologne, and that the
initiative for the introduction of printing into England is, therefore,
to be credited to Germany. The evidence for and against this theory,
evidence which depends largely upon technical details, such as the
identity of certain fonts of type, the spacing of lines, etc., has
been very thoroughly and skilfully analysed by Mr. Blades, and his
conclusion, that Caxton did no work in the Cologne printing-offices
and that his first printed books did not follow the Cologne models,
can, I judge, be safely accepted. Some reference to the grounds for the
German belief may, however, be made. Printing had been introduced into
Cologne by Ulrich Zell, who was a fugitive from the sack of Mayence.
His first publication, or at least his first book with a date, was
the _Liber Joannis Chrysostomi super Psalmo quinquagesimo_, issued in
1466. His second undertaking was an edition of the _De Officiis_ of
Cicero. He printed in all no less than one hundred and twenty separate
works, and was the leading printer in the city at the time of Caxton’s
visit in 1471. In connection with his business as a wool-merchant
and his official responsibilities for the English _Nation_, Caxton
had had continued relations with Cologne, and must have had a full
acquaintance with the city. Madden speaks of Caxton as being a visitor,
in 1470, at the Weidenbach convent of the Brothers of Common Life
in Cologne, at which time the Brothers had their printing-office in
active operation.[48] Caxton’s diary tells us that the translation of
his _Recueil_, begun in Bruges and continued in Ghent, was completed
at Cologne on the 19th of September, 1471. Kapp concludes that his
first idea for reproducing his translation in printed copies most
probably came to him from an examination of the work of the presses
of Zell or of the Brothers. It is of course possible enough that
Caxton interested himself, while in Cologne in 1471, in inspecting the
printing establishment of Zell, which must, as a novelty, have been one
of the noteworthy sights of the city. It seems evident, however, from
Mr. Blades’s analysis of the fonts of type used by Mansion and, later,
by Caxton, that these were not secured from Cologne, but were cast in
Bruges, while various details of the workmanship of Caxton’s earlier
volumes show methods entirely different from those of the Cologne
printers. As one such detail, Mr. Blades points out that Zell, after
1467, always spaced out the lines of his books to one even length, and
feels convinced that he would have taught any one learning the art from
him to do the same; yet this improvement was not adopted by either
Mansion or Caxton until several years later. “Whoever may have been the
instructor of Mansion and Caxton, and whatever may have been the origin
of their typography, the opinion that either of them, after learning
the art in an advanced school such as that of Cologne, would have
adopted in their first productions, without any necessity for so doing,
primitive customs which they had never been taught, and would have
returned in after years by slow degrees to the rules of their original
tuition, has only to be plainly stated to render it untenable.”[49]

The chief information concerning Caxton’s training as a printer is
derived from his own _Prologues_ and _Epilogues_. The first six books
ascribed to Caxton’s Press are:

  “The Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye.”
  “Le Recueil des Histoires de Troye.”
  “The Game and Playe of Chesse, with Prologue by Caxton.”
  “The Meditacions sur les Sept Pseaulmes Penitenceaux.”
  “Les Fais et Processes du Chevalier Jason.”
  “Les Quatre Dernières Choses Advenir.”

Without going into the careful analysis presented by Blades of the
evidence concerning the production of these books, it is sufficient
to give his conclusions. The _Recueil_, with the translation of which
Caxton had begun his literary undertakings, was probably first printed
(in Caxton’s version) in 1474, and the edition of the French original
must have followed shortly afterwards. The remaining four books were
brought before the public between this date and 1476.

It is interesting to note the character of the selections made by
Caxton for the first issues of his Press. With the exception of the
_Meditations on the Psalms_, this group of books belongs entirely
to what to-day would be called light literature. The same general
character obtains with the books printed by Mansion, and, excepting
with one or two Houses in Lyons, it could not be paralleled by the
lists of any other of the printers of this generation, whose first
undertakings were almost exclusively devoted to the service of the
Church or to the revival of the classics. How far the responsibility
for the literary standard of the two printers of Bruges rested with
themselves, and how far it was determined by the preferences and
suggestions of their patroness the Duchess, it is probably not now
practicable to determine.

The German printers, Heynlin and Fichet, who introduced printing into
Paris, and their successors, Krantz, Gering, and others, beginning
their work under the instructions of the University, had printed the
books which were selected for them by the University authorities, and
these earlier issues of the Paris Press were restricted to theology
and jurisprudence. Later, were added the works of certain selected
classic authors. It was a number of years, however, before any volume
was printed in Paris in the French language. The first volume printed
in French in Europe was, in fact, Caxton’s edition of the Burgundian
romance, _Le Recueil_. The first French books printed in France were
issued in Lyons, where the publishers were free from the hampering
supervision of the theologians of the University. The early Lyons lists
of the fifteenth century included indeed a series of quite frivolous
publications, in the vernacular, such as _Le Roman de la Rose_, _La
Farce de Pathelin_, _Les Quinze Joies de Mariage_, _Le Champion des
Dames_, and a French version of the _Facetiæ_ of Poggio. The publishers
of Paris, working under the restrictions of the University censors,
must not infrequently have looked with envy at the publishing
undertakings of their enterprising Lyons competitors, who were, with
the exception of Caxton, the first to address themselves to the
tastes and to the interests of the unscholarly and pleasure-seeking
readers. In the matter of cultivating and supplying a taste for popular
literature, Mansion and Caxton were in accord with the methods of Lyons
rather than those of Paris.

It is the conclusion of Mr. Blades that the books above specified,
while nominally issued by Caxton, were actually printed by Mansion.
However this may be, it is evident that, in connection with the
production of these books, Caxton secured a sufficient knowledge
of the technicalities of the art to be qualified to carry on a
printing-office himself. It is probable that the ready sale found
in England for the printed copies of the _Recueil_ which were sent
over there gave him encouragement concerning the possibilities of the
English market for similar printed books. It is certain that, in 1476,
he gave up his home in Bruges, resigning at the same time the honours
and privileges pertaining to his position at Court, and, retiring to
England, established himself at Westminster. The type, and probably
also the presses, taken over for his Westminster office, were those of
Mansion, which had become the property of Caxton, doubtless through
purchase from Mansion’s creditors. It was during the fifteen years
that remained to him of active work after his varied life experience
as an apprentice, a merchant, a governor of a great mercantile colony,
a magistrate, and a courtier, that he was able to complete the
undertakings with which his name will always be associated, and to
bring to his native country the most important result produced by the
activity of man during the noteworthy fifteenth century.

In the advertisement or announcement of his business, issued by Caxton
about 1480, he professes himself ready to satisfy any man, whether
spiritually or temporally inclined. The wording of the advertisement is
as follows:

“If it plese any man spirituel or temporel to bye ony pyes of two and
thre _comemoracios_ of Salisburi ose emprynted after the forme of
this present lettre whiche ben and truly correct, late hym come to
Westmenester in to the almonesrye at the reed pale and he shall have
them good chepe.”

The phrase “printed in the Abbey of Westminster,” which is affixed to
some of the books, is not to be understood as indicating that the work
of the printing-office was actually carried on within the walls of the
church itself. The tenement occupied by Caxton, called the “red pale,”
was in the almonry, this being a space within the abbey precincts,
where alms were distributed to the poor. In the same enclosure were
other buildings, including the almshouses built by Lady Margaret,
the mother of Henry VII., who was one of Caxton’s patronesses. Some
chroniclers have suggested that the _scriptorium_ of the abbey
would have been a very appropriate place in which to begin the work
of producing printed books for England. One difficulty with this
suggestion is the lack of evidence that the abbey had ever contained a
_scriptorium_. No mention of such a place is made by any historian, nor
does any existing manuscript bear record of having been produced within
the abbey. Caxton’s immediate successor, Wynken de Worde, who had been
his assistant, continued for some years after Caxton’s death to carry
on the work of the printing-office in the same building. He placed on
his books, for the Latin form of imprint, the words, “In domo Caxton in
Westmonasterio.” His English imprint, with sundry variations, was most
frequently “Printed in Caxton’s house at Westmynstere.”

Mr. Blades gives a list of ninety-eight separate works identified
as Caxton’s, in addition to which there are eight or ten others
concerning which the evidence is doubtful. The titles of the first
five, printed in Bruges, in co-operation with Mansion, have already
been cited. I give the titles of the remaining ninety-three:

    1477. “Dictes and Sayings of Philosophers,” translated by Earl
    Rivers. This was probably the first book printed in England.
    The first printed book in Italy was issued in 1464, and was a
    “Donatus.” The first book printed in France bears date 1469, and
    was an edition of the “Letters of Kaspar von Bergamo.” A large
    proportion of the publications identified as Caxton’s were printed
    without imprint or specification of the place or date of issue. Mr.
    Blades is able, however, to give a list of twenty books which bear
    the record of having been printed at Westminster. The imprints and
    colophons show a pleasing variety in form and in spelling.

    1478. Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales.” 1st edition. Folio.

    The “Canterbury Tales” had been written about 1395, and during the
    century which preceded this first printed edition, the work had
    secured an assured prestige and a circulation which for a book in
    manuscript must have been very considerable. As one of the most
    famous productions of English literature, it was a very natural
    selection to be included with Caxton’s earlier publications. This
    first edition was in fact the tenth work produced from the Caxton
    Press. The second edition was printed about six years later (Blades
    says “probably 1484”), and appears to have had the advantage of a
    more correct or more complete text. In a prefatory note printed by
    the publisher in this volume, Caxton gives the following account of
    the way in which this better text came into his hands: “Of which
    book so incorrect was one brought to me six year passed, which I
    supposed had been very true and correct, and according to the same
    I did imprint a certain number of them, which anon were sold to
    many and divers gentlemen: of whom one gentleman came to me, and
    said that this book was not according in many places unto the book
    that Geoffrey Chaucer had made. To whom I answered that I had made
    it according to my copy, and by me was nothing added or diminished.
    Then he said he knew a book which his father had and much loved,
    that was very true, and according unto his own first book by him
    made; and said more, if I would imprint it again, he would get me
    the same book for a copy. How be it, he wist well his father would
    not gladly part from it; to whom I said, in case that he could
    get me such a book true and correct, that I would once endeavour
    me to imprint it again, for to satisfy the author: whereas before
    by ignorance I erred in hurting and defaming his book in divers
    places, in setting in some things that he never said nor made, and
    leaving out many things that he made which are requisite to be
    set in. And thus we fell at accord; and he full gently got me of
    his father the said book, and delivered it to me, by which I have
    corrected my book.”

    1478. “The Moral Proverbs of Cristyne,” translated by Earl Rivers.
    Folio.

    Christine de Pisa wrote these “Proverbs” about 1400. Thomassy
    speaks of her as, with the exception of Joan of Arc, the most
    famous woman of her age.[50] Blades says of her that she was early
    left a widow, with children and parents to support, and urged on
    by necessity, she devoted herself to a literary life, and soon
    became famous, and that for many years her labours were incessant.
    He appears to be of the opinion that she succeeded in securing a
    livelihood by her pen. If this opinion be correct, Christine was
    certainly a marked exception to the other authors of the fourteenth
    century.

    1478. “The Horse, the Sheep, and the Goose.”

    This is not a treatise on the care of domestic animals, but a
    series of dialogues in verse, attributed to Dr. John Lydgate. It
    reached a second edition.

    1478. “The Chorle and the Bird.” 4to. A Fable, probably by Lydgate.
    This reached a second edition.

    1479 (about). “The Book of Courtesy.” 4to.

    1479. “The Temple of Brass or the Parliament of Fowls.”

    “Envoy of Chaucer to Skogan.” 4to.

    1479. “Queen Anelida and False Arcyte.”

    “The Complaint of Chaucer to His Purse.”

    1479. “Boethius de Consolacione Philosophiæ,” translated into
    English by Geoffrey Chaucer. Folio. “I William Caxton have done my
    devoir to emprinte it.”

    With the exception of the anonymous French version printed by
    Mansion in Bruges, in 1471, this was the first edition of this
    perennial work issued in Europe in any version but the original
    Latin. The earliest printed edition of the Latin, that of Koberger,
    had been issued in Nuremberg in 1473. Boëthius had received
    continued attention at the hands of the scribes, and the number
    of manuscript copies available for the earlier printers was
    possibly greater than of any other classic. M. Paris speaks of five
    different translations of the “De Consolacione” into French verse,
    which had been produced in the fifteenth century. Mr. Blades says
    that the version by Chaucer was made not from the French, but from
    the original Latin. One of the three copies of the Caxton edition
    in the British Museum, which was discovered in the library of the
    school attached to the Abbey of St. Albans (an abbey which had had
    an old-time association with literature), was noteworthy because
    in the covers were discovered certain printed sheets of other of
    Caxton’s publications not previously known.[51]

    Chaucer appears to have considered this translation to be one of
    his praiseworthy undertakings. He writes:

    And for to speke of other holynesse
    He hath in prose translated Boëce.[52]

    1479. “Cordyale, or the Four Last Things.” Folio. Translated from
    the French by Earl Rivers.

    1480. “The Chronicles of England.” Folio. “Emprynted by me William
    Caxton in thabbey of Westmynstre.” 1st edition.

    This work is often referred to as “Caxton’s Chronicle.” It
    presents, in substance, the chronicle of Brute, with the narrative
    brought down to the battle of Towton (1461). The old chronicle of
    Brute was so called from the opening chapter, which describes the
    settlement in Britain of Brutus, the descendant of Æneas.[53]

    1481. “Parvus et Magnus Chato.” 3rd edition. Folio.

    This edition contains two woodcuts, which Mr. Blades believes to be
    the earliest specimens of wood-engraving in England. In the matter
    of book-illustrations, the printers of England were, during the
    fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, very much surpassed by those of
    the continent.

    1481. “The Mirrour of the World,” translated from the French by
    Caxton. Folio, with illustrations.

    The French version from which Caxton worked was that of “Maître
    Gossevin,” which was itself based upon the metrical version,
    prepared, in 1245, by the Duke of Berri. The Latin original,
    “Speculum vel Imago Mundi,” was the work of some unknown author
    writing early in the thirteenth century. The number of manuscript
    copies which had been preserved, is evidence of its early
    popularity. Caxton’s judgment in reviving the work in an English
    version and a printed edition proved to be well founded, as it
    passed through various editions. This first edition was, however,
    not the speculation of the printer, the cost of its production
    having been borne by Alderman Hugh Brice.[54]

    1481. “The History of Reynard the Fox.” Folio. A translation
    prepared by Caxton from a Flemish version of the popular legend.

    1481. “Tully on Old Age”; “Tully on Friendship”; “The Declamation
    of Noblesse.” Folio. “Emprynted by me, symple person, William
    Caxton.”

    This translation was made, as is stated in the Prologue, “at the
    ordinance and desire of Sir John Falstoffe.”

    1481. “Cura Sapientiæ,” or the “Court of Sapience.” By John Lydgate.

    This poet, several of whose productions have been preserved by
    Caxton’s Press, died in 1461, about fifteen years before Caxton
    began his printing work. While not quite a contemporary, he was
    one of the few English authors of his own times with whom Caxton’s
    imprint is associated. The poem presents a debate between Mercy,
    Truth, Justice, and Peace, together with a metrical description
    of theology, geography, natural history, horticulture, grammar,
    rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy. I am not
    sure from the description whether it is to be classed with light
    literature, or may properly be considered as one of the publisher’s
    “solid” productions.

    The author is frank enough in regard to his own deficiencies. He
    writes:

    I am a monk by my profession,
    Of Bury, called John Lydgate by my name,
    And wear a habit of perfection,
    Although my life agree not with the same.

    1481. “The History of Godfrey of Bulloigne, or the Conquest of
    Jerusalem.” Folio. A translation by Caxton from an anonymous French
    chronicle.

    “Polychronicon.” Folio. “Imprinted and set in forme by me William
    Caxton.”

    This volume includes the most considerable and important original
    work undertaken by Caxton. The “Polychronicon” had its origin with
    Roger Monk, of St. Werberg in Chester, early in the fourteenth
    century. It was continued by Higden of the same monastery, and,
    in 1387, Trevisa, chaplain of the Earl of Berkeley, prepared from
    the Latin text an English version. Caxton revised this version of
    Trevisa, and added a continuation of the history, bringing the
    record down to 1460.

    1483. A “Vocabulary” in French and English. Folio.

    1483. Gower’s “Confessio Amantis.” Large folio. “Emprynted at
    Westmestre, by me William Caxton.” Gower had died in 1408, and
    belonged, therefore, to a previous century, but even as late as the
    century succeeding his death, he continued to be the most widely
    read (at least in England) of the English poets. It is probable
    that the literary authorities of Caxton’s time rated Gower higher
    than Chaucer. It is certain that the “Confessio Amantis” was one of
    the most successful of Caxton’s publications. Some lines of Gower’s
    give an impression of the taste of English readers in his time.

    Full oft time it falleth so,
    Mine ear with a good pittance
    Is fed of reading of romance,
    Of Iodyne, and of Amadas,
    That whilom weren in my case,
    And eke of other many a score,
    That loveden long ere I was bore.

    His “Confessio Amantis” had, he states, been written at the command
    of King Richard II., the same monarch to whom Froissart tells us
    he presented a volume of the famous “Chronicles,” “fair illumined
    and written, and covered with crimson velvet, with ten buttons of
    silver and gilt and roses of gold in the midst, with two great
    clasps, gilt, richly wrought.” Richard’s interest in books must,
    therefore, have included literature in two languages.

    1484. “The Book which the Knight of the Tower Made to the
    ‘Enseygnment’ and Teaching of His Daughters.” Folio. “Emprynted at
    Westmynstre the last day of Januer the fyrst yere of the regne of
    Kynge Richard the Thyrd.” This was a translation by Caxton of a
    book by Geoffrey de la Tour, written in 1371.

    1484. “The Golden Legend.” Folio. “Fynysshed at Westmere the twenty
    day of Novembre/ the yere of our Lord M/CCC/LXXXIII/. By me Wyllyam
    Caxton.”

    This work is described as the most laborious and most important
    of Caxton’s literary and publishing undertakings. The collection
    from which the various versions of “The Golden Legend” were derived
    was a compilation entitled “Legenda Aurea,” made in the thirteenth
    century by Jacobus de Voragine, Archbishop of Genoa, in which were
    narrated the lives and miracles of the Saints.[55] Caxton appears
    to have had before him, in preparing his volume for the press, one
    of the many Latin texts, an English version compiled about 1450,
    and the French version of Jean de Vignay. In editing the collection
    for English readers, Caxton omitted a number of the more incredible
    and more objectionable of the stories. Some of the best of these
    stories are identical with those given in the “Gesta Romanorum,”
    the first printed edition of which was issued by Koberger in 1493.
    Caxton’s volume was extensively illustrated, and he speaks of the
    preparation of the designs as having caused him much trouble and
    expense. The undertaking was suggested by the Earl of Arundel, who
    agreed to take “a reasonable number of copies,” and further to pay
    as an annuity “a buck in summer and a doe in winter.”

    1484. “The Fables of Æsop”; of “Avian”; of “Alfonse”; and of “Poge”
    (Poggio), the Florentine. Folio. “Emprynted by me William Caxton at
    Westmynstre.” Illustrated. The text was translated by Caxton from
    the French, and was the first version of “Æsop” in English.

    1485. “Troylus and Creside.” Folio.

    1485. “The Lyf of Our Ladye.” Folio. “Emprynted by Wyllyam Caxton.”

    This poem was the work of John Lydgate, and had been written at
    the “excitation” of Henry V. It belonged to what may be called the
    popular group of Caxton’s publications.

    1485. “The Noble Histories of King Arthur and of certain of his
    Knights.” Folio. “Emprynted in thabbey of Westmestre.”

    This was the work of Sir Thomas Malory, and was generally known as
    the “Morte d’Arthur”; it was completed, as the author states, in
    1470. Caxton states in his Prologue, that Sir Thomas had “reduced”
    the romances “from certain books in French.” I have not been able
    to find record of the date of Malory’s death, but as Caxton makes
    no reference to any relations with him, it is probable that in
    1485 he was no longer living. His “Histories” certainly, however,
    could be classed as contemporary literature, and their selection by
    Caxton for the honour of a printed edition gives the impression of
    a publisher who was not so absorbed in the literature of the past
    as to be unmindful of the literary activities and possibilities in
    his own community.

    Caxton gives in his Prologue his reasons for the selection of
    Malory’s work for publication. He considers Arthur to be a national
    hero and one of the nine great characters of the world’s history,
    his list comprising Hector, Alexander, Arthur, Charlemagne, and
    Godfrey of Bouillon. “In these playsaunt historyes,” says Caxton,
    “may be seen noble chyvalrye, curtosye, humanyte, frendlynesse,
    hardynesse, love, frendship, cowardyse, murdre, hate, vertue and
    synne. Doo after the good and leve the evyl and it shal brynge
    you to good fame and renommee.” A book containing all this was
    certainly deserving of the honour of a printed edition. Caxton’s
    selection of the “Morte d’Arthur” showed admirable publishing
    judgment. The book was not only excellent “copy” for the time, but
    has had a more abiding repute than perhaps any production of its
    age.

    1485. “The Life of the Noble and Christian Prince Charles the
    Great.” Folio. “Explicit per William Caxton.”

    This “Life” was based upon the biography (itself a compilation) by
    Henry Bolomyer, Canon of Lausanne. The work, which is something
    more than a translation, was undertaken by Caxton at the instance
    of Danberry, treasurer of the King’s jewels, and of certain other
    persons of noble estate and degree.

    1485. “The Knight Paris and the Fair Vienne.” Folio. “Explicit per
    Caxton.”

    A translation by Caxton of a famous romance, which had originally
    been written in “Catalane,” but of which versions had appeared in
    a number of languages. It can be described as belonging to the
    popular literature of Europe, for after securing a wide circulation
    in manuscript editions, it was printed in Trevisa as early as 1482,
    in London, as above, in 1485, in Antwerp in 1487, and frequently
    thereafter.

    1487. “The book of Good Manners.” Folio. “Explicit et hic est finis
    per Caxton.”

    This is the work of Jaques Legrand, an Augustinian friar, said to
    have been a native of Toledo. It was written about 1370. Legrand
    was also the author of the “Sophologium.” Caxton states in his
    Prologue that he undertook the translation in response to a
    “death-bed request” of his friend William Pratt, who was a man of
    influence in the Mercers’ Guild, and Caxton refers to him as “a
    singular friend of old Knowledge.”

    1487. “Speculum Vitæ Christi.” Folio. “Emprynted by Wyllyam
    Caxton.” Probably a translation of the French version of the “Vita
    Christi,” written in 1410, by S. Bonaventura.

    1488. “The Royal Book, or Book for a King.” Folio. “Translated out
    of Frensshe into Englysshe by me Wylyam Caxton.”

    This is a translation of “Le Livre des Vices et des Vertus,” said
    to have been written early in the fourteenth century by Friar
    Laurent, confessor of Philip the Bold. The book had come into
    general circulation in France and had been twice translated into
    English before the version of Caxton.

    1489. “The Faytes of Arms and of Chivalry.” Folio. Per Caxton.

    This is a translation by Caxton of the work of Christine de Pisa
    of Venice. It was written in France about 1400. In her preface,
    Christine says: “Because men of arms are not clerks, nor instructed
    in the science of language, I have assembled and gathered together
    diverse books to produce this work, and because that this is a
    thing not accustomed and out of usage to women, which commonly do
    not intermit but to spin on the distaff and to occupy themselves in
    the things of the household; I supplicate humbly ... to have nor to
    take for no evil if I, a woman, charge myself to treat of so high a
    matter.”

    1489. “Statutes of Henry VII.” Folio. The earliest known volume of
    statutes, and noteworthy also because printed in English.

    1489. “The Governal of Health”; “The Medicina Stomachi.”

    The “Governal” was originally written in Latin, but was translated
    into English before Caxton’s time. It is a compilation from the
    writings of certain Greek and Arabian physicians. The “Medicina” is
    attributed to Lydgate, who seems to have been Caxton’s favourite
    author.

    1489. “The Four Sons of Aymon.” Folio.

    A translation by Caxton of a very famous and popular romance, which
    originated probably as early as the twelfth century. Caxton’s
    version was apparently produced from the volume printed in Lyons in
    1480, “Les Quatre Filz Aymon.”

    1490. “Eneydos.” Folio. “Translated by me Wyllyam Caxton.”

    The original was not a version of the “Æneid,” but a romance based
    in part on the “Æneid,” and in part on the “Fall of Princes” of
    Boccaccio. Mr. Blades points out that a good sale was probably
    expected for it, as a large impression was struck off, and the
    existing copies are therefore comparatively numerous. The book
    failed, however, to reach a second edition.

    1490. “A Book of Divers Ghostly Matters.” “Emprynted at
    Westmynstre. Qui legit emendet, pressorem non reprehendat Wyllelmn
    Caxton. Cui, de alta tradat.”

    The volume contains, with various writings, the “Rule of S. Benet.”
    The compilation is credited to Jehan de Sonshavie.

    1491. “The Arte and Craft to Know Well to Die.” Folio. Translated
    by Caxton in 1490.

    The complete work, of which Caxton’s volume is an abridgment, had
    been known during the century, in manuscript form, under the title
    “The Art and Craft to Live Well and to Die Well.” It had been
    printed in Latin in Paris in 1483. Caxton had probably utilised for
    his translation the French version printed in Bruges by Mansion.

    1491. “The Chastening of God’s Children.” Folio. Authorship unknown.

    1491. “Ars Moriendi”: That is to say, “The Craft for to die for the
    Health of Man’s Soul.”

    A translation, by Caxton, of a Latin tract. The only copy known,
    either in MS. or in print, is in the Bodleian Library. This is the
    latest work certainly identified as Caxton’s, and, as he died in
    1491, it is very possibly the last undertaking of his busy life.

I have classed under the dates specified, the works selected as
representative of Caxton’s undertakings. I should explain, however,
that the greater number of them were issued without date, and many
without imprint of any kind. Mr. Blades has, with painstaking skill,
identified the volumes issued from Caxton’s Press during the lifetime
of the master, by a careful analysis and classification of the type
used. He finds that six different fonts were utilised in all, the first
being that secured from the wreck of Mansion’s concern in Bruges and
forming the beginning of Caxton’s plant at Westminster, and the others
having been added from year to year, according to the requirements and
according also to the resources available. Very few of the books had
any title-pages, and when the name of the author is mentioned, it must,
as a rule, be looked for in the publisher’s or translator’s prologue.
In some instances the dates of the printing have been arrived at or
approximated by the references made by Caxton in his Prologue, or in
a concluding paragraph, to the date when the work of the translation
had been completed. In the small number of volumes containing an
imprint, the pleasing variety of the form and spelling of such imprint
is to be noted. The more usual wording is “Emprynted by me Wyllyam
Caxton at Westmynstre,” but from this form there are a number of
modifications. In selecting from the list of Caxton’s publications
certain titles taken as fairly representative of the general character
of his undertakings, I have avoided specifying any re-issues or later
editions. As the entire typesetting had to be repeated, the labour and
expense of producing a second edition was for the manufacturing items
very nearly as great as for the original publication. The illustrations
were, however, in the majority of cases, available for the reissue,
while the work of translating or of the compilation, collation, and
revision of texts needed, of course, to be incurred but once. There
was, therefore, a better prospect of satisfactory returns if a second
edition could be reached, while the record of such editions serves
also as a partial test of the publisher’s judgment in gauging the
taste and the interest of his public. Of the ninety-eight works issued
by Caxton, three reached, during his lifetime, a third edition, the
_Dictes of Philosophers_, the _Parvus Chato_, and the _Horæ_. While of
fifteen, including, of course, the above, second editions were called
for, the other twelve titles being: _The Horse, the Sheep, and the
Goose_, _The Chorle and the Bird_, _The Game of Chesse_, _Indulgence_,
_The Chronicles of England_, _The Canterbury Tales_, _The Golden
Legend_, the _Speculum Christi_, _The Mirrour of the World_, _The Book
of Courtesy_, and the _Liber Festivalis_. A number of Caxton’s books
were issued, after his death, by De Worde in later editions. The more
noteworthy of these were _The Canterbury Pilgrimage_, _The Chronicles
of England_, and _The Golden Legend_.