Transcriber’s note

Variable spelling and hyphenation have been retained. Minor punctuation
inconsistencies have been silently repaired. The index appears in the
second volume. A list of the changes made can be found at the end of
the book. Formatting and special characters are indicated as follows:

  _italics_
  =bold=




BOOKS AND THEIR MAKERS DURING THE MIDDLE AGES


SUMMARY OF CONTENTS OF VOLUME II.

THE FIRST PRINTER-PUBLISHERS OF FRANCE.--THE LATER ESTIENNES AND
CASAUBON.--CAXTON AND THE INTRODUCTION OF PRINTING INTO ENGLAND.--THE
KOBERGERS OF NUREMBERG.--FROBEN OF BASEL.--ERASMUS AND HIS
BOOKS.--LUTHER AS AN AUTHOR.--PLANTIN OF ANTWERP.--THE ELZEVIRS OF
LEYDEN AND AMSTERDAM.--ITALY: PRIVILEGES AND CENSORSHIP.--GERMANY:
PRIVILEGES, AND BOOK-TRADE REGULATIONS.--FRANCE: PRIVILEGES,
CENSORSHIP, AND LEGISLATION.--ENGLAND: PRIVILEGES, MONOPOLIES,
CENSORSHIP, AND LEGISLATION.--CONCLUSION. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
CONCEPTION OF LITERARY PROPERTY.--INDEX TO THE WORK.




                        BOOKS AND THEIR MAKERS
                        DURING THE MIDDLE AGES

            A STUDY OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PRODUCTION AND
              DISTRIBUTION OF LITERATURE FROM THE FALL OF
                   THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO THE CLOSE OF
                        THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

                                  BY

                        GEO. HAVEN PUTNAM, A.M.

         AUTHOR OF “AUTHORS AND THEIR PUBLIC IN ANCIENT TIMES”
                   “THE QUESTION OF COPYRIGHT,” ETC.


                               VOLUME I.

                               476-1600


                          G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
                         NEW YORK      LONDON
      27 WEST TWENTY-THIRD STREET      24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND

                        The Knickerbocker Press

                                 1896




                            COPYRIGHT, 1896
                                  BY
                          G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS

                 _Entered at Stationers’ Hall, London_


             The Knickerbocker Press, New Rochelle, N. Y.




TO THE MEMORY OF MY WIFE WHO SERVED ME FOR YEARS BOTH AS EYESIGHT AND
AS WRITING-ARM AND BY WHOSE HAND THE FOLLOWING PAGES WERE IN LARGE PART
TRANSCRIBED THIS WORK IS DEDICATED




[Illustration]

PREFACE.


IN a previous volume I undertook to describe, or rather to indicate,
the methods of the production and distribution of the earlier
literature of the world and to sketch out the relations which existed
between the author and his public during the ages known, rather
vaguely, as classic, that is, in the periods of literary activity in
Greece and ancient Rome. The materials for such a record were at best
but fragmentary, and it was doubtless the case that, in a first attempt
of the kind, I failed to get before me not a few of the references
which are scattered through the works of classic writers, and which
in any fairly complete presentation of the subject ought to have been
utilised.

Imperfect as my study was, I felt, however, that I was justified in
basing upon it certain general conclusions. It seems evident that in
Greece, even during the period of the highest literary development,
there did not exist anything that could be described as a system for
the production and distribution of books. The number of copies of any
work of Greek literature available for the use of the general public
must at any time have been exceedingly limited, and it would probably
be safe to say that, before the development of Alexandria as a centre
of book-production, no such thing as a reading public existed. The few
manuscripts that had been produced, and that possessed any measure
of authenticity, were contained in royal archives or in such a State
collection as that of Athens, or in the studies of the small group of
scholarly teachers whose fame was sometimes in part due to the fact
that they were owners of books.

The contemporary writers, including the authors of works treasured
as masterpieces through all later ages, were not only content to do
their work without any thought of material compensation, but appear
to have been strangely oblivious of what would seem to us to be the
ordinary practical measures for the preservation and circulation of
their productions. The only reward for which they could look was fame
with their own generation, and even for this it would seem that some
effective distribution of their compositions was essential. The thought
of preserving their work for the appreciation of future generations
seems to have weighed with them but little. The ambition or ideal of
the author appears to have been satisfied when his composition received
in his own immediate community the honour of dramatic presentation
or of public recitation. If his fellow citizens had accorded the
approbation of the laurel crown, the approval of the outer world or of
future generations was a matter of trifling importance. The fact that,
notwithstanding this lack of ambition or incentive on the part of the
authors, the non-existence of a reading public, and the consequent
absence of any adequate machinery for the production and distribution
of books, the knowledge of the “laurel-crowned” works, both of the
earlier poets and of contemporary writers, should have been so widely
diffused throughout the Greek community, is evidence that the public
interest in dramatic performances and in the recitations of public
reciters (“rhapsodists”) made, for an active-minded people like the
Greeks, a very effective substitute for the literary enlightenment
given to later generations by means of the written or the printed word.

A systematised method of book-production we find first in Alexandria,
where it had been developed, if not originally instituted, by the
intelligent and all-powerful interest of the Ptolemaic kings, but
there appears to be no evidence that, even in Alexandria, which for
the greater part of two centuries was the great book-producing mart of
the world, was there any practice of compensation for authors. It is
to be borne in mind, however, in this connection, that, with hardly
an exception, the manuscripts produced in Alexandria were copies of
books accepted as classics, the works of writers long since dead. For
the editors of what might be called the Alexandrian editions of Greek
classics, compensation was provided in the form of _honoraria_ from the
treasury of the Museum library or of salaried positions in the Museum
Academy.

In Rome, during the Augustan period, we find record of a well organised
body of publishers utilising connections with Athens, with Asia Minor,
and with Alexandria, for the purpose of importing Greek manuscripts and
of collecting trained Greek scribes, and carrying on an active trade
in the distribution of books not only with the neighbouring cities of
Italy, of Spain, and of Gaul, but with such far off corners of the
empire as the Roman towns in Britain. There are not a few references in
the literature of this period, and particularly in the productions of
society writers like Martial and Horace, to the relations of authors
with their publishers and to the business interests retained by authors
in the sale of their books. This Augustan age presents, in fact, the
first example in the history of publishing, of a body of literature,
produced by contemporary writers, being manifolded and distributed
under an effective publishing and bookselling machinery, so as to
reach an extensive and widely separated reading public. When the Roman
gentleman in his villa near Massilia (in Gaul), Colonia (on the Rhine),
or Eboracum (in far off Britain), is able to order through the imperial
post copies of the latest ode of Horace or satire of Martial, we have
the beginnings of an effective publishing organisation. It is at
this time also that we first find record of the names of noteworthy
publishers, the bookmakers in Athens and in Alexandria having left
their names unrecorded. It is the period of Atticus, of Tryphon, and of
the Sosii. Concerning the matter of the arrangements with the authors,
or the extent of any compensation secured by them, the information is
at best but scanty and often confusing. It seems evident, however,
that, apart from the aid afforded by imperial favour, by the interest
of some provincial ruler of literary tendencies, or by the bounty of a
wealthy private patron like Mæcenas, the rewards of literary producers
were both scanty and precarious.

With the downfall of the Roman Empire, the organised book-trade of
Rome and of the great cities of the Roman provinces came to an end.
This trade had of necessity been dependent upon an effective system of
communication and of transportation, a system which required for its
maintenance the well built and thoroughly guarded roads of the empire;
while it also called for the existence of a wealthy and cultivated
leisure class, a class which during the periods of civil war and of
barbaric invasions rapidly disappeared. Long before the reign of the
last of the Roman emperors, original literary production had in great
part ceased and the trade in the books of an earlier period had been
materially curtailed; and by 476, when Augustulus was driven out by the
triumphant Odovacar, the literary activities of the capital were very
nearly at a close.

In the following study I have taken up the account of the production
of books in Europe from the time of the downfall of the Empire of the
West. I have endeavoured to show by what means, after the disappearance
of the civilisation of the Roman State, were preserved the fragments of
classic literature that have remained for the use of modern readers,
and to what agencies were due the maintenance, throughout the
confusion and social disorganisation of the early Middle Ages, of any
intellectual interest or literary activities.

I find such agencies supplied in the first place by the scribes
of the Roman Church, the organisation of which had replaced as a
central civilising influence the power of the lost Roman Empire. The
_scriptoria_ of the monasteries rendered the service formerly given by
the copyists of the book-shops or of the country houses, while their
_armaria_, or book-chests, had to fill the place of the destroyed or
scattered libraries of the Roman cities or the Roman villas. The work
of the scribes was now directed not by an Augustus, a Mæcenas, or
an Atticus, but by a Cassiodorus, a Benedict, or a Gregory, and the
incentive to literary labour was no longer the laurel crown of the
circus, the favours of a patron, or the _honoraria_ of the publishers,
but the glory of God and the service of the Church. Upon these agencies
depended the existence of literature during the seven long centuries
between the fall of the Western Empire and the beginning of the work of
the universities, and, in fact, for many years after the foundation of
the universities of Bologna and of Paris, the book-production of the
monasteries continued to be of material importance in connection with
the preservation of literature.

In a study of the organisation of the earliest book-trade of Bologna
and Paris and of the method under which the text-books for the
universities were produced and supplied, I have attempted to indicate
the part played by the universities in the history of literary
production. In a later chapter I have presented sketches of one or two
of the more noteworthy of the manuscript dealers, who carried on, for
a couple of centuries prior to the invention of printing, the business
of supplying books to the increasing circles of readers outside of the
universities.

In 1450 comes the invention of printing, which in revolutionising the
methods of distributing intellectual productions, exercised such a
complex and far-reaching influence on the thought and on the history
of mankind. I have described with some detail the careers of certain
of the earlier printer-publishers of Europe, and have been interested
in noting how important and distinctive were the services rendered by
these publishers to scholarship and to literature.

The concluding chapter sketches the growth of the conception of the
idea of property in literature, and the gradual development and
extension throughout the States of Europe of the system of privileges
which formed the precedent and the foundations for the modern system of
the law of literature and of interstate copyright legislation. I have
taken pleasure in pointing out that the responsibility for securing
this preliminary recognition of property in literary productions
and of the property rights of literary producers rested with the
printer-publishers, and that the shaping of the beginnings of a
copyright system for Europe is due to their efforts. It was they also
who bore the chief burden of the contest, which extended over several
centuries, for the freedom of the press from the burdensome censorship
of Church and State, a censorship which in certain communities appeared
likely for a time to throttle literary production altogether. I can
but think that the historians of literature and the students of the
social and political conditions on which literary production is so
largely dependent, have failed to do full justice to men like Aldus,
the Estiennes, Froben, Koberger, and Plantin, who fought so sturdily
against the pretensions of pope, bishop, or monarch to stand between
the printing-press and the people and to decide what should and what
should not be printed.

I have thought it worth while, in giving the business history of these
old-time publishers, to present the lists of their more characteristic
publications,--lists which seem to me to possess pertinence and value
as giving an impression of the nature and the range of the literary
interests of the time and of the particular community in which the
publisher was working, while they are also, of course, indicative
of the personal characteristics of the publisher himself. When we
find Aldus in Venice devoting his presses almost exclusively to
classical literature, and in the classics, so largely to Greek; while
in Basel and Nuremberg the early printers are producing the works
of the Church Fathers, in Paris the first Estienne (in the face of
the fierce opposition of the theologians) is multiplying editions of
the Scriptures, and in London, Caxton and his immediate successors,
disregarding both the literature of the old world and the writings
of the Church, are presenting to the English public a long series of
romances and _fabliaux_,--we may understand that we have to do not with
a series of accidental publishing selections, but with the results of
a definite purpose and policy on the part of capable and observing
men, a policy which gives an indication of the nature and interests
of their several communities, while it characterises also the aims
and the individual ideals of the publishers themselves. Some of these
earlier publishers were willing simply to produce the books for which
the people about them were asking, while others, with a higher ambition
and a larger feeling of responsibility, proposed themselves to educate
a book-reading and a book-buying public, and thus to create the demand
for the higher literature which their presses were prepared to supply.

These earlier printer-publishers took upon themselves, in fact, the
responsibility which had previously rested with the universities,
and, back of the universities, with the monasteries, of selecting the
literature that was to be utilised by the community and through which
the intellectual life of the generation was to be in large part shaped
and directed. They thus took their place in the series of literary
agencies by means of which the world’s literature had been selected,
preserved, and rendered available for mankind, a chain which included
such diverse and widely separated links as the Ptolemies of Alexandria,
the princely patrons of Rome, Cassiodorus, S. Benedict and his
monasteries, the schools of Charlemagne and Alcuin, the universities of
Bologna and Paris, and, finally, the printer-publishers who utilised
the great discovery of Gutenberg.

The fact that, during both the manuscript period and the first two
centuries of printing, the writings of Cicero were reproduced far more
largely than those of any other of the Roman writers, is interesting
as indicating a distinct literary preference on the part of successive
generations both of producers and of readers. The pre-eminence of
Aristotle in the lists of the mediæval issues of the Greek classics
has, I judge, a different significance. Aristotle stood for a school
of philosophy, the teachings of which had in the main been accepted by
the Church, and copies of his writings were required for the use of
students. The continued demand for the works of Cicero depended upon no
such adventitious aid, and can, therefore, fairly be credited to their
perennial value as literature.

My readers will bear in mind that I have not undertaken any such
impossible task as a history of literary production, or even a record
of all the factors which controlled literary production. I have
attempted simply to present a study of certain conditions in the
history of the manifolding and distribution of books by which the
production and effectiveness of literature was very largely influenced
and determined, and under which the conception of such a thing as
literary property gradually developed. The recognition of a just
requirement or of an existing injustice must, of course, always precede
the framing of legislation to meet the requirement or to remedy the
injustice, and the conception of literary property and a recognition
of the inherent rights (and of the existing wrongs) of literary
producers had to be arrived at before copyright legislation could be
secured.

I have specified as the limit of the present treatise the close of the
seventeenth century, although I have found it convenient in certain
chapters to make reference to events of a somewhat later date. It has
been my purpose, however, to present a study of the conditions of
literary production in Europe prior to copyright law, and the copyright
legislation of Europe may be said to begin with the English statute of
1710, known as the Act of Queen Anne.

I trust that in the near future some competent authority may find
himself interested in preparing a history of copyright law, and I shall
be well pleased if the present volumes may be accepted by the historian
of copyright and by the students of the subject as forming a suitable
general introduction to such a history.

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

CONTENTS.


                                                                   PAGE

  PREFACE                                                             v
  BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                     xvii


  PART I.--BOOKS IN MANUSCRIPT.

  INTRODUCTORY                                                         3

  I.--THE MAKING OF BOOKS IN THE MONASTERIES                          16
    Cassiodorus and S. Benedict                                       17
    The Earlier Monkish Scribes                                       30
    The Ecclesiastical Schools and the Clerics as Scribes             36
    Terms Used for Scribe-Work                                        42
    S. Columba, the Apostle to Caledonia                              45
    Nuns as Scribes                                                   51
    Monkish Chroniclers                                               55
    The Work of the Scriptorium                                       61
    The Influence of the Scriptorium                                  81
    The Literary Monks of England                                     90
    The Earlier Monastery Schools                                    106
    The Benedictines of the Continent                                122
    The Libraries of the Monasteries and Their Arrangements for the
    Exchange of Books                                                133

  II.--SOME LIBRARIES OF THE MANUSCRIPT PERIOD                       146
    Public Libraries                                                 161
    Collections by Individuals                                       170

  III.--THE MAKING OF BOOKS IN THE EARLY UNIVERSITIES                178

  IV.--THE BOOK-TRADE IN THE MANUSCRIPT PERIOD                       225
    Italy                                                            225
    Books in Spain                                                   253
    The Manuscript Trade in France                                   255
    Manuscript Dealers in Germany                                    276
    The Manuscript Period in England                                 302

  PART II.--THE EARLIER PRINTED BOOKS.

  I.--THE RENAISSANCE AS THE FORERUNNER OF THE PRINTING-PRESS        317

  II.--THE INVENTION OF PRINTING AND THE WORK OF THE FIRST
  PRINTERS OF HOLLAND AND GERMANY                                    348

  III.--THE PRINTER-PUBLISHERS OF ITALY, 1464-1600                   403
    Aldus Manutius                                                   417
    The Successors of Aldus                                          440
    Milan                                                            445
    Lucca and Foligno                                                455
    Florence                                                         456
    Genoa                                                            458

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

WORKS CITED OR REFERRED TO AS AUTHORITIES.


_Abelard and the Origin and Early History of Universities._ By GABRIEL
COMPAYRÉ. New York, 1893.

_Actes Concernants le Pouvoir_, etc., _de l’Université de Paris_.
Paris, 1698.

ADAMS, G. B. _Civilization during the Middle Ages._ New York, 1894.

ADRIAN, J. V. _Catalogus Codd. MSS. Biblioth. Acad. Gissensis._ 4
vols., 1840.

_Alcuini Opera._ Edited by FROBEN. Basel, 1514.

AL-MAKKARI, AHMED IBN MOHAMMED. _History of the Mohammedan Dynasties in
Spain._ Trans. by PASCUAL DE GAYANGOS. 2 vols., 4to. London, 1843.

AMPÈRE, J. J. _Histoire Littéraire de la France avant Charlemagne._ 2
vols. Paris, 1868.

---- _Histoire Littéraire de la France sous Charlemagne._ 2 vols.
Paris, 1870.

ANSELMUS (S.) _Opuscula._ Edited by HAAS. Tübingen, 1863.

---- _Opera Omnia._ Edited by MIGNE. Paris, 1852.

_Athenæ Oxoniensis._ Compiled by WOOD, with Continuation by BLISS. 4
vols. Oxford, 1813-1820.

d’AUBIGNÉ, J. H. MERLE. See under “D.”

BACON, ROGER. _Opera Inedita._ Edited by BREWER, J. S., in the Rolls
Series. London, 1860.

BARACH, C. S. _Handschriften zu Donaueschingen._ Vienna, 1862.

BARSTCH, ADAM. _Le Peintre Graveur._ 21 vols. 8°. Vienna, 1803, 1821.

BASTARD, AUG. (Cte.). _La Librairie de Jean de France, duc de Berri._
Paris, 1834.

BAYLE, PETER. _Historical and Critical Dictionary_ (English Version). 5
vols. London.

BECKMANN, J. _Beyträge zur Geschichte der Erfindungen._ Leipzig, 1786.

BEDE, (VENERABLE). _Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum._ Edited by
G. H. MOBERLEY. Oxford, 1869.

---- _Ecclesiastical Histy. of England._ Trans. by GILES. Lond., 1847.

BENTHAM, JAMES. _The Cathedral Church of Ely._ Cambridge, 1771.

_Bibliothèque de l’École de Chartres. Cinquième Série._

BLADES, WM. _The Biography and Typography of William Caxton, England’s
First Printer._ London, 1877.

BLUME, FR. ANTON. _Iter Italicum._ Berlin, 1824.

BOSSUET. _Œuvres._ 32 vols. Paris, 1828.

BROWN, HORATIO F. _The Venetian Printing Press. An Historical Study._
London and New York, 1891.

BULÆUS, _Historia Universitatis Parisiensis ab anno 800._ 6 vols.
Paris, 1665-1673.

BURCKHARDT, JACOB. _Die Cultur der Renaissance._ Berlin, 1889.

_Casaubon, Isaac. Life, 1559-1614._ By MARK PATTISON. 2d edition.
Oxford, 1892.

_Cassiodori Opera._ Edited by GARET. 2 vols., fol. Rouen, 1679.

_Cassiodorus, Das Leben von._ FRANZ, J. Berlin, 1877.

_Cassiodorus, Letters of._ Trans., with an Introduction, by THOMAS
HODGKIN. London, 1884.

CASTELLANI, CARLO. _La Stampa in Venezia dalla sua Orig. alla Aldo
Manuzio._ Venice, 1889.

_Catalogue Général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques._ Paris,
1849.

_Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis._ Paris, 1889.

CHASSANT. _Dictionnaire des Abréviations Latines et Françaises Usitées
dans les Manuscrits._ Paris, 1864.

CHEVILLIER, ANDRÉ. _L’Origine de l’Imprimerie de Paris._ Paris, 1694.

CHRISTINE DE PISAN. _Les Écrits Politiques de._ Paris, 1838.

_Chroniken, Die, der Deutschen Städte._ 5 vols. Berlin, 1789-1792.

_Chronique Métrique de Godefroy de Paris._ 8 vols. Paris, 1827.

CLARK, J. W. _Libraries in the Mediæval and Renaissance Periods._
Oxford, 1894.

_Columbæ, S. Vita Adamnani._ Edited from DR. REEVES’S text, with an
Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By J. T. FOWLER. Oxford, 1894.

COMPAYRÉ, GABRIEL. _Abelard and the Origin and Early History of
Universities._ New York, 1893.

COPINGER, W. A. _The Law of Copyright in Works of Literature and Art._
London, 1870.

COXE. _The College of Merton, Oxford._

---- _New College, Oxford._

CRÉVIER, J. B. L. _Histoire de l’Université de Paris._ 8 vols. Paris,
1761.

CURWEN, HENRY. _A History of Booksellers, the Old and the New._ London,
1873.

D’ACHÉRY, LUCAS. _Vetera Analecta_ (cum disquisitionibus J. MABILLON).
Paris, 1723.

---- _Spicilegium, sive Collectio Veterum Scriptorum_, etc. 3 vols.
Paris, 1823.

D’AUBIGNÉ, J. H. MERLE. _Letter to an English Clergyman, Printed in the
Record (newspaper) Dec. 12, 1844, in Reply to Strictures of Maitland._

---- _History of the Reformation in the Sixteenth Century._ 5 vols.
London, 1866.

DE LA CAILLE. _Histoire de l’Imprimerie._ Paris, 1689.

DELALAIN, PAUL. _Étude sur la Librairie Parisienne du XIIIe au XVe
Siècle._ Paris, 1891.

DELALANDE, E. _Étude sur la Propriété Littéraire et Artistique._ Paris,
1879.

DELISLE, L. _Cartulaire de Normandie_ (Mémoire des Antiquaires de
Normandie). Rouen, 1852.

---- _Recherches sur l’Ancienne Bibliothèque de Corbie_ (Mémoire de
l’Institut). 4 vols. Paris, 1854.

DELPRAT, G. H. M. _Verhandlung over de Broederschop van G. Groote._
Amsterdam, 1853.

---- _Die Brüderschaft des gemeinsames Lebens._ Leipzig, 1840.

DENIFLE et CHATELAIN. _Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis._ Vols.
I, II, III. Paris, 1889, 1891.

DENIFLE, PÈRE. _Die Entstehung der Universitäten des Mittelalters bis
1400._ Vol. I. Berlin, 1885.

DENK, V. M. OTTO. _Geschichte des Gallo, Frankischen Unterrichts und
Bildungswesens von den ältesten Zeiten bis auf Karl den Grossen._
Mayence, 1892.

DE RANCÉ. _Traité de la Saincteté et des Devoirs de la Vie Monastique._
Paris, 1682.

DIBDIN, T. F. _Typographical Antiquities; or, The History of Printing
in Great Britain._ 4 vols. London, 1810-1819.

---- _Bibliograph. Antiquas_, and _A Picturesque Tour in France and
Germany_. 3 vols. London, 1829.

---- _The Library Companion; or, The Young Man’s Guide and the Old
Man’s Comfort in the Choice of a Library._ 2d edition. London, 1825.

DIDOT, AMBR. FIRMIN. _Histoire de la Typographie._ Paris, 1882.

---- _Alde Manuce et l’Hellenisme à Venise._ Paris, 1875.

DIGBY, SIR KENELM H. _Mores Catholici; or, Ages of Faith._ 3 vols.
London, 1848.

DRUMMOND, ROBERT B. _Erasmus: His Life and Character._ 2 vols. London,
1873.

DU BREUIL, JACQ. _Le Théâtre des Antiquités de Paris._ 6 vols., 4to.
Paris, 1612.

DUGDALE, SIR WM. _Monasticum Anglicanum._ 8 vols. London, 1849.

DÜMMLER, E. _Anselm der Peripatetiker._ Berlin, 1880.

---- _St. Gall. Denkmäler in den Mittheilungen d. Züricher Antiq.
Gesch._ 12 vols.

DÜMMLER, F. _Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte._ 6 vols.

DURER, A. _Geschichte seines Lebens_, M. Thausing. Nuremberg, 1828.

EBERT, H. _Zur Handschriftenkunde._ Leipzig, 1825.

EKKEHARDUS. _Jun. de Cassib. Mon. St. Galli ap. Gold. Scr. Rer. Alem._
2 vols. St. Gall.

ELLIS, GEORGE (_Editor_). _Specimens of Early English Poetry._ 3 vols.
London, 1790.

ELZEVIER, LES. _Histoire et Annales Typographiques._ Alphonse Willems.
Brussels, 1880.

ENGELHARDT. _Herrad von Landsberg und ihr Werk._ Stuttgart, 1818.

ERASMUS. _Opera._ London, 1703.

ESTIENNE, HENRI. _La Foire de Frankfort, Traduit en Français, avec le
Texte Latin._ Paris, 1875.

EVELYN, JOHN. _Memoirs._ Edited by BRAY. 4 vols. London, 1879.

FOSBROKE, J. D. _British Monachism; Manners and Customs of Monks and
Nuns._ London, 1843.

FOURNIER, MARCEL. _Les Statuts et Priviléges des Universités
Françaises._ Paris, 1891.

FRANKLIN, ALFRED. _La Sorbonne, ses Origines, sa Bibliothèque, etc._ 2d
edition. Paris, 1875.

---- _Les Anciennes Bibliothèques de Paris_. Paris, 1867.

FRIEDRICH, TH. P. _Kirchen-Geschichte Deutschlands._ 2 vols. Halle,
1793.

FROMMANN (_Editor_.) _Aufsätze des Buchhandels im 16ten Jahrhundert._
Jena, 1876.

FROUDE, J. A. _Life and Letters of Erasmus._ American edition. New
York, 1894.

GÉRAUD, H. _Paris sous Philippe-le-Bel._ Paris, 1837.

GERSON, JOHANN. _Christliche Kindererziehung_ (in Schultze’s _Berühmte
Lehrer des Mittelalten_). Gütersloh, 1880.

---- _De Laude Scriptorum (Opera)._ 2 vols. Paris, 1706.

_Geschichte der Offentl. Bibliothek zu Bamberg._ Nuremberg, 1832.

_Geschichte der Präger Univers. Bibliothek._ 8 vols. Prague, 1851.

_Gesta Abb. Fontanell._ (in _Monumenta Germania Historica_).

GIESEBRECHT, W. _De Litterarum Studiis apud Italos primis Medii Ævi
Sæculis._ Berlin, 1845.

GOLDSMIDT, EDMUND. _The Aldine Press at Venice. Privately Printed._
Edinburgh, 1877.

GÖRRES, JOSEPH VON. _Histor. Polit. Blätter._ 6 vols. Munich, 1859.

GOTTLIEB, THEODOR. _Über Mittelalterliche Bibliotheken._ Leipzig, 1890.

GÖTZE, LUDWIG. _Geschichte der Buchdrücker-Kunst in Magdeburg._
Magdeburg, 1879.

_Grammatici Latini._ Edited by KEIL, H. 8 vols. Leipzig, 1855-1880.
(For Cassiodorus.)

GREGORY I. (the Great). _Opera._ (In _Library of the Fathers._) 4 vols.
Oxford, 1854.

GREIN. _Bibliothek der Angel-Sächsischen Poesie._ Edited by WÜLKER.
Cassel, 1883.

GRESWELL, E. _A View of the Early Parisian Greek Press, Including the
Lives of the Stephani, and Notices of Other Contemporary Greek Printers
in Paris._ 2 vols. Oxford, 1833.

GRESWELL, WM. P. _Annals of Parisian Typography. Notices and
Illustrations of the Most Remarkable Productions of the Gothic Press in
Paris._ London, 1818.

GRIMM, JACOB. _Kleine Schriften._ 5 vols. Berlin, 1878-1880.

GUÉRARD. _Cartulaire de l’Église de Nôtre-Dame de Paris._ Paris.

---- _Cartulaire de St. Père-de Chartres._

GUIGNES, DE, G. _La Typographie Orientale et Grecque de l’Imprimerie
Royale._ Paris, 1787.

HAGEN, G. _Anecdota Helvet._ Leipzig, 1810.

---- _Litterär. Grundriss zur Geschichte der Deutschen Poesie._ Berlin,
1812.

HALLAM, HY. _Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth,
Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries._ 4 vols. New York, 1886.

HARDY, SIR THOS. _Descriptive Catalogue of Materials Relating to the
History of Great Britain and Ireland._ Rolls Series. 3 vols. London,
1862, 1871.

HARTSHORNE, C. H. _The Book Rarities of the University of Cambridge._
London, 1829.

HASE, OSCAR. _Die Koberger, Eine Darstellung des Buchhändlerischen
geschäftsbetriebes in der Zeit des überganges vom Mittelalter zür
Neuzeit._ Leipzig, 1885.

HERZOG, J. J. _Das Leben Johann Oekolampads._ Basel, 1843.

_Histoire Littéraire de la France, par des Religieux Bénédictins de la
Congrégation de St. Maur._ 12 vols. Paris, 1733-1763.

---- Continuation. 7 vols. Paris, 1814, 1838.

HODGKIN, THOMAS. _Italy and Her Invaders._ 4 vols. Oxford, 1880-85.

---- _The Letters of Cassiodorus._ Translated, with an Introduction.
London, 1886.

HOFFMANN, P. F. L. _Altdeutsche Handschriften._ Leipzig, 1862.

HROSWITHA OF GANDERSHEIM. _Théâtre de._ 3 vols. Paris, 1857.

HUBER, V. A. _The English Universities._ London, 1840.

HUMPHREYS, H. NOEL. _History of the Art of Printing._ London, 1868.

HÜTTEN, ULRICH VON. _Leben, von Strauss._ Bonn, 1878.

JUSSERAND, J. J. _The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare._ London
and New York, 1890.

---- _English Wayfaring Life in the Middle Ages._ 4th edition. London
and New York, 1892.

---- _A Literary History of the English People._ 3 vols. London, Paris,
and New York, 1895-1896.

KAPP, F. _Geschichte des Deutschen Buchhandels bis in das 17te
Jahrhundert._ Leipzig, 1886.

KELLER, A. VON. _Altdeutsche Handschriften._ Leipzig, 1872.

KIRCHHOFF, ALBRECHT. _Geschichte des Deutschen Buchhandels im 17ten
Jahrhundert._ Berlin, 1849.

---- _Die Handschriftenhändler des Mittelalters._ 2d edition. Leipzig,
1853.

KLOSTERMANN, R. _Das Geistige Eigenthum an Schriften, Kunstwerken und
Erfindungen._ Berlin, 1871.

KNIGHT, CHARLES. _The Old Printer and the Modern Press._ London, 1854.

KOHLER, I. _Das Autorrecht._ Jena, 1880.

KÖPKE, F. C. _Otton. Studien._ 2 vols. Leipzig, 1829.

KOTZEBUE, AUGUST V. _Denkschrift über den Büchernachdruck._ Leipzig,
1814.

LABOULAYE, ÉDOUARD. _Études sur la Propriété Littéraire en France et en
Angleterre._ Paris, 1858.

LACROIX, PAUL. _Science and Literature in the Middle Ages._ London,
1886.

LALANNE, LUDOVIC. _Curiosités Bibliographiques._ 2d edition. Paris,
1852.

LAURIE, S. S. _The Rise and Early Constitution of Universities, with a
Survey of Mediæval Education._ New York, 1887.

LEUTER. _Hist. Wessofont._ 2 vols. Bamberg, 1837.

LINDE, A. VAN DER. _Gutenberg, Geschichte u. Erdichtung nach der
Quellen ausgewiesen._ Stuttgart, 1878.

LORCK, C. B. _Hand-buch der Geschichte der Buchdrücker-Kunst._ Leipzig,
1882.

LOUISY, M. P. _Le Livre, et les Arts qui s’y rattachent, depuis les
origines jusqu’à la fin du XVIIIe Siècle._ Paris, 1886.

LUDEN, H. _Vom freien Geistes-Verkehr._ Leipzig, 1814.

_Luther, Life._ By JULIUS KÖSTLIN. Translated from the German. New
York, 1893.

LYON-CAEN, CH., and DELALAIN, PAUL. _Lois Françaises et Étrangères sur
la Propriété Littéraire et Artistique._ 2 vols. Paris, 1889.

MABILLON, JEAN. _Réflexions sur la Réponse de M. l’Abbé de la Trappe._
2 vols. Paris, 1689.

---- _Acta Sanctorum Ordinis S. Benedicti._ 9 vols. Paris, 1668-1673.

---- _Annales Ordinis S. Benedicti._ 6 vols. Paris, 1703, 1759.

---- _De Re Diplomatica._ 6 vols. Paris, 1681.

Same, with supplement. 2 vols. Naples, 1789.

---- _Iter Burgundicum._ Paris, 1684.

---- _Iter Germanicum._ Paris, 1685.

---- _Iter Italicum._ Paris, 1687-1689.

---- _Traité des Études Monastiques._ 2 vols. Paris, 1753.

---- _Vetera Analecta._ (See D’Achéry.)

MADAN, FALCONER. _The Early Oxford Press. A Bibliography of Printing
and Publishing at Oxford, 1468-1640._ Oxford, 1895.

MADDEN, J. P. A. _Lettres d’un Bibliographe._ 5 vols. Paris, 1878.

MAITLAND, S. R. _The Dark Ages, a Series of Essays intended to
illustrate the state of religion and literature in the ninth, tenth,
eleventh, and twelfth centuries._ London, 1845.

MAITTAIRE, MICHEL. _Annales Typographici ab Artis Inventæ Origine ad
Annum 1557._ 9 vols. Paris, 1719-1741.

---- _Historia Typographorum Aliquot Parisiensium Vitas et Libros
Complectens._ 2 vols. London, 1717.

MARSHAM. Προπύλαιον (in _Monast. Anglican_).

MARTENE, EDMOND. _De Antiquis Ecclesiæ Ritibus._ 4 vols. Antwerp,
1736-1738.

---- _De Antiquis Monachorum Ritibus._ 2 vols. London, 1690.

---- _Thesaurus Novus Anecdotorum._ 5 vols. Paris, 1717.

---- _Voyage Littéraire de Deux Bénédictins de la Congrégation de St.
Maur._ 1st and 2d Series. Paris, 1717, 1724.

MASSMANN. _Die Goth. Urkunden von Neapel und Arezzo._ Vienna, 1838.

MATHESIUS. _Memoirs of the Life and Death of Martin Luther._ 1566.

MALDEN. _On the Origin of the Universities._ London, 1835.

MEINERS. _Geschichte der Entstehung u. Entwickelung der hohen Schulen._
Göttingen, 1802, 1805.

MERLET. _Catalogue des Livres de l’Abbaye de St. Père-de-Chartres au
XIe Siècle._

MICHAUD, ABBÉ. _Guillaume de Champeaux et les Écoles de Paris au XIIe
Siècle._ Paris, 1867.

MILNER, JOSEPH. _History of the Church of Christ._ London, 1875.

MILTON, JOHN. _Areopagitica. A Speech for the Liberty of Unlicensed
Printing._ Edited by T. H. WHITE. London, 1819.

MITTARELLI, J. B. _Annales Camaldulenses Ordinis S. Benedicti._ 9 vols.
Venice, 1755-1773.

MONE, FR. J. _Im Anzeige der deutschen Vorzeit._ 6 vols. Carlsruhe,
1846.

---- _Zeitschrift für Gesch. des Oberrheins._

MONTALEMBERT, THE COUNT DE. _The Monks of the West from St. Benedict to
St. Bernard._ 8 vols. Edinburgh, 1861-1879.

_Monumenta Germaniæ Historica._ Edited by PERTZ. 6 vols. Hanover,
1826-1841.

_Monumenta Germaniæ Historica._ Edited by WILHELM MEYER. 10 vols.
Leipzig, 1888-1894.

MORIER, SIR JAMES. _A Journey through Persia, etc._ 2 vols. London,
1812.

MOSHEIM, J. L. _Institutes of Ecclesiastical History._ Trans. by
MURDOCK and SOAMES. Edited by STUBBS. London, 1863.

MUCCIOLO, J. M. _Catalogus Codd. MSS. Malatest. Cæsan. Bibliotheca._
Cæsanæ, 1780.

MULLINGER, J. BASS. _The Schools of Charles the Great and the
Restoration of Education in the Ninth Century._ London, 1877.

MURATORI. _Antiquitates Italicæ Medii Ævi._ 6 vols. Mediolani.
1738-1742.

NAUDÉ, G. _Additions à l’Histoire de Lowys XI. par Comines._ Édit. par
FRESNOY. 4 vols. Paris.

NEWMAN, CARDINAL. _Historical Sketches._ 3 vols. London, 1889.

O’CURRY, EUGENE. _Lectures on the MSS. Materials of the Ancient History
of Ireland._ Dublin, 1874.

OESTERLY, H. _Wegweiser durch die Literatur der Urkunden-Sammlungen._ 2
vols. Berlin, 1885-1886.

OTLEY, W. Y. _An Enquiry Concerning the Invention of Printing._ London,
1837.

OZANAM. _La Civilisation Chrétienne chez les Francs._ 2 vols. Paris,
1866.

PATTISON, MARK. _Isaac Casaubon, 1559-1614._ Oxford, 1892.

PAULSEN, FRIEDRICH. _The German Universities, their Character and
Historical Development._ Trans. by E. D. PERRY. New York and London,
1895.

PEIGNOT, G. _Manual du Bibliophile._ Paris, 1805.

PERRENS, F. T. _The History of Florence from the Domination of the
Medici to the Fall of the Republic, 1434-1531._ Trans. by H. LYNCH. 2
vols. London, 1892.

PERTZ, GEO. HAN. (_Editor_). _Archiv d. Gesellschaft für ältere
Deutsche Geschichts-Kunde._ Berlin, 1846.

PETIT-RADEL. _Recherches sur les Bibliothèques Anciennes._ Paris, 1819.

PEZ, BERNARDUS. _Thesaurus Anecdotorum Novissimus._ 5 vols. Leipzig,
1721-1729.

---- Same, vol. iv. _Codex Diplomatico-historico-epistolaris._

---- _Thes. Diss. Isagog._ (See vol. ii. of the _Thesaurus
Anecdotorum_.)

_Plantin, Christophe, Imprimeur Anversois._ By MAX ROOSES. Antwerp,
1883.

PLATER, THOM. _Selbst-Biographie._ Basel, 1836.

POGGII, FLORENTINI. _Opera._ Florence, 1513.

_Priviléges de l’Université de Poitiers._ Poitiers, 1726.

PÜTTER, J. S. _Beyträge zum Teutschen Staats u. Fürsten-Rechte._
Göttingen, 1777.

RAHN, H. _Geschichte der Bildenden Künste in der Schweiz._ 2 vols.
Leipzig, 1832.

RASHDALL, HASTINGS. _The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages._ 2
vols. Oxford, 1895.

_Recueil des Priviléges de l’Université de Paris._ Paris, 1822.

REIFFERSCHEID, A. _Westfälische Volkslieder in Wort u. Weise._
Heilbronn, 1879.

RENOUARD, A. C. _Traité des Droits d’Auteurs dans la Littérature, les
Sciences et les Beaux-Arts._ 2 vols. Paris, 1838.

_Rheinisches Museum für Philologie. Neue Folge._ Band 49. Frankfort,
1894.

ROBERTSON, ALEX. _Fra Paolo Sarpi._ London, 1895.

ROBERTSON, WM. _View of Europe during the Middle Ages._ (Introduction
to his _History of Charles V_.)

---- _History of Charles V._ Edited by W. H. PRESCOTT, Boston, 1880.

ROCKINGER, L. VON. _Zum Bairischen Schriftswesen._ 2 vols. Vienna, 1892.

---- _Die Untersuchung der Handschriften des Schwabenspiegels._ Vienna,
1890.

ROMBERG, ÉDOUARD. _Études sur la Propriété Artistique et Littéraire._
Brussels, 1892.

ROOSES, MAX. _Christophe Plantin, Imprimeur Anversois._ Antwerp, 1883.

RUINART. _Iter Litterarium in Alsatiam et Lotharingiam._ Paris, 1697.

SAVIGNY, F. C. _Geschichte des Römischen Rechtes im Mittelalter._ 2
vols. Leipzig, 1877.

SCHMIDT, C. _Geschichte der Ältesten Bibliothek in Strasburg._
Strasburg, 1881.

---- _Geschichte der ersten Buchdrücker zur Strassburg._ Strasburg,
1882.

SCHUCK, J. _Aldus Manutius u. Seine Zeitgenossen in Italien u.
Deutschland._ Berlin, 1862.

SCHÜRMANN, AUG. _Die Rechtsverhältnisse der Autoren und Verleger._
Halle, 1889.

_Schwabenspiegel._ Munich, 1874.

SCOTT, MARY A. _Elizabethan Translations from the Italian._ Baltimore,
1895.

SCRUTTON, T. E. _The Laws of Copyright._ London, 1883.

_Social England. A Record of the Progress of the People._ Edited by H.
D. TRAILL. 6 vols. London and New York, 1894-1896.

STENZEL, TH. _Geschichte der Frankischen Kaiser._ 2 vols. Leipzig, 1885.

SWEET, HENRY. _King Alfred’s Version of Gregory’s Pastoral Care._ Early
English Text Society. London, 1871-1872.

SYMONDS, J. A. _The Renaissance in Italy._ 7 vols. London, 1875-1886.

THOMASSY. _Les Écrits Politiques de Christine de Pisan._ Paris, 1838.

THUROT. _De l’Organisation de l’Enseignement dans l’Université de Paris
au Moyen Age._ Paris, 1850.

TIMPERLEY, C. H. _A Dictionary of Printers and Printing, with the
Progress of Literature Ancient and Modern._ London, 1839.

TIRABOSCHI, GIROLAMO. _Storia della Litteratura Italiana._ 16 vols.
Milan, 1822-1826.

TRITHEMIUS, J. _Annalium Hirsangensium._ 2 vols. St. Gall, 1690.

ULPHILAS. _Vet. et Nov, Test. Fragmenta._ Edited by GABELENTZ and LOBE.
2 vols. Leipzig, 1843-1860.

_Urkundenbuch für die Geschichte des Niederrheins._ 6 vols. Cologne,
1852-1856.

VALÉRY. _Correspondance de Mabillon et de Montfaucon._ Paris.

VALLA, LORENZO. _Opera._ Basel, 1543.

VIGFUSSON and POWELL (_Editors_). _Corpus Poeticum Boreale. The
Poetry of the old Northern Tongue from the Earliest to the Thirteenth
Century._ 2 vols. Oxford, 1883.

VIRIVILLE, VALLET DE. _Histoire de l’Instruction Publique en Europe._
Paris, 1849.

VITALIS, ORDERICUS. _Coenobii Uticensis Monachi, Historiæ
Ecclesiasticæ._ 2 vols. Paris, 1840.

VITET. _De la Presse au Seizième Siècle._

_Voyage Littéraire de deux Religieux Bénédictins_ (E. MARTENE et D.
DURAND). 2 vols. Paris, 1717-1724.

WARTON, THOMAS. _History of English Poetry (1774-1781)._ Edited by
HAZLITT. 4 vols. 1871.

WATTENBACH, W. _Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter._ Leipzig, 1875.

WEIDMANN, FR. _Geschichte der Stifts-Bibliothek._ Vienna, 1841.

---- _Geschichte der Bibliothek von St. Gallen._ St. Gall, 1842.

WEST, A. F. _Alcuin and the Rise of the Christian Schools._ New York,
1892.

WESTWOOD, J. O. _Facsimiles of Miniatures and Ornaments of Anglo-Saxon
and Irish MSS._ London, 1868.

WETTER, J. _Geschichte der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst_. Mayence,
1836.

WILDER, DANIEL W. _The Life of Shakespeare, Compiled from the Best
Sources, without Comment._ Boston, 1893.

WILKEN, R. F. _Geschichte der Heidelberg. Bücher-Sammlungen._
Heidelberg, 1817.

WILLEMS, ALPHONSE. _Les Elzevier, Histoire et Annales Typographiques._
Brussels, 1880.

WINTER, V. A. _Die Cistercianer._ Munich, 1815.

WIRTH, HERM. _Archives für die Geschichte der Stadt Heidelberg._ 4
vols. Heidelberg.

WOOD, A. _Athenæ_, etc. (See _Athenæ._)

WRIGHT, THOMAS. _A Selection of Latin Stories from MSS. of the
Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries._ Percy Society. London, 1842.

ZASIUS. _Epistolæ ad viros ætatis suæ doctissimos._ Ulm, 1774.

_Zeitschrift für Deutsches Alterthum._

_Zeitschrift für Geschichte des Oberrheins._

ZIEGELBAUER, H. _Observationes Literariæ S. Benedicti._ 4 vols.
Leipzig, 1784.




PART I.

BOOKS IN MANUSCRIPT.




[Illustration]

PART I.

BOOKS IN MANUSCRIPT.

INTRODUCTORY.


IN the year 410, Rome was captured and sacked by Alaric the Visigoth.
At this time, S. Jerome, in his cell at Bethlehem, was labouring
at his _Commentaries on Ezekiel_, while it was the downfall of the
imperial city which incited S. Augustine to begin the composition
of his greatest work, _The City of God_: “the greatest city of the
world has fallen in ruin, but the City of God abideth forever.” The
treatise required for its completion twenty-two books. “The influence
of France and of the printing-press,” remarks Hodgkin, “have combined
to make impossible the production of another _De Civitate Dei_. The
multiplicity of authors compels the controversialist who would now
obtain a hearing, to speak promptly and concisely. The examples of
Pascal and of Voltaire teach him that he must speak with point and
vivacity.”[1] S. Augustine was probably the most voluminous writer of
the earlier Christian centuries. He was the author of no less than
232 books, in addition to many tractates or homilies and innumerable
epistles.[2] His literary work was continued even during the siege
of Hippo by the Vandals, and he died in Hippo (in 431), in his
seventy-sixth year, while the siege was still in progress.

In regard to the lack of historical records of the time, I will again
quote Hodgkin, who, in his monumental work on _Italy and Her Invaders_,
has himself done so much to make good the deficiency: “It is perhaps
not surprising that in Italy itself there should have been during the
fifth century an utter absence of the instinct which leads men to
record for the benefit of posterity events which are going on around
them. When history was making itself at such breathless speed and in
such terrible fashion, the leisure, the inclination, the presence of
mind necessary for writing history might well be wanting. He who would
under happier auspices have filled up the interval between the bath and
the tennis court by reclining on the couch in the winter portico of
his villa and there languidly dictating to his slave the true story of
the abdication of Avitus, or the death of Anthemius, was himself now a
slave keeping sheep in the wilderness under a Numidian sun or shrinking
under the blows of one of the rough soldiers of Gaiseric.”

Hodgkin finds it more difficult to understand “why the learned and
leisurely provincial of Greece, whose country for nearly a century and
a half (395-539) escaped the horrors of hostile invasion, and who had
to inspire them the grandest literary traditions in the world, should
have left unwritten the story of the downfall of Rome.”

“The fact seems to be,” he goes on to say, “that at this time all that
was left of literary instinct and historiographic power in the world
had concentrated itself on theological (we cannot call it religious)
controversy, and what tons of worthless material the ecclesiastical
historians and controversialists of the time have left us!... Blind,
most of them, to the meaning of the mighty drama which was being
enacted on the stage of the world ... they have left us scarcely a
hint as to the inner history of the vast revolution which settled
the Teuton in the lands of the Latin.... One man alone gives us that
detailed information concerning the thoughts, characters, persons of
the actors in the great drama which can make the dry bones of the
chronologer live. This is Caius Sollius Apollinaris Sidonius, man of
letters, imperial functionary, country gentleman, and bishop, who,
notwithstanding much manifest weakness of character and a sort of
epigrammatic dulness of style, is still the most interesting literary
figure of the fifth century.”[3]

Sidonius was born at Lyons, A.D. 430. His father, grandfather, and
great-grandfather had all served as Prætorian Prefects in Gaul, in
which province his own long life was passed. In 472, Sidonius became
Bishop of Arverni, and from that time, as he rather naïvely tells us,
he gave up (as unbecoming ecclesiastical responsibilities) the writing
of compositions “based on pagan models.” In 475, the year before the
last of the western emperors, Augustulus, was driven from Rome by
Odovacar,[4] the Herulian, the Visigoth king, Euric, became master
of Auvergne. Sidonius was at first banished, but in 479 was restored
to his diocese, and continued his work there as bishop and as writer
until his death, ten years later. At the time of the death of Sidonius,
Cassiodorus, who was, during the succeeding eighty years, to have part
in so much of the eventful history of Italy, was ten years old. There
are some points of similarity in the careers of the two men. Both were
of noble family and both began their active work as officials, one of
the Empire, the other of the Gothic kingdom of Italy, while both also
became ecclesiastics. Each saw his country taken possession of by a
foreign invader, and for the purpose of serving his countrymen, (with
which purpose may very possibly have been combined some motives of
personal ambition,) each was able and willing to make himself useful
to the new ruler and thus to retain official position and influence;
and finally, both had literary facility and ambition, and, holding in
regard the works of the great classic writers, endeavoured to model
upon these works the style of their own voluminous compositions.
The political work of Cassiodorus was of course, however, much the
more noteworthy and important, as Sidonius could hardly claim to be
considered a statesman.

In their work as authors, the compositions of Sidonius are, as I judge
from the description, to be ranked higher in literary quality than
those of the later writer, and to have been more successful also in
following the style of classic models. The style of Cassiodorus is
described as both verbose and grandiloquent. In his ecclesiastical,
or rather his monastic work, taken up after half a century of active
political life, it was the fortune of Cassiodorus, as will be described
later, to exercise an influence which continued for centuries, and
which was possibly more far-reaching than was exerted by the career of
any abbot or bishop in the later history of the Church.

The careers of both Sidonius and Cassiodorus have a special interest
because the two men held rather an exceptional position between the
life of the old empire which they survived and that of the new Europe
of the Middle Ages, the beginning of which they lived to see.

Of the writings of Sidonius, Hodgkin speaks as follows: “A careful
perusal of the three volumes of the Letters and Poems of Sidonius
(written between the years 455 and 490) reveals to us the fact that
in Gaul the air still teems with intellectual life, that authors were
still writing, amanuenses transcribing, friends complimenting or
criticising, and all the cares and pleasures of literature filling the
minds of large classes of men just as when no empires were sinking
and no strange nationalities suddenly arising around them.... A
long list of forgotten philosophers did exist in that age, and their
works, produced in lavish abundance, seem to have had no lack of eager
students.”

As an example of the literary interests of a country gentleman in Gaul,
Hodgkin quotes a letter of Sidonius, written about 469: “Here too [_i.
e._ in a country house in Gaul] were books in plenty; you might fancy
you were looking at the breast-high book-shelves (_plantei_) of the
grammarians, or the wedge-shaped cases (_cunei_) of the Athenæum, or
the well-filled cupboards (_armaria_) of the booksellers. I observed,
however, that if one found a manuscript beside the chair of one of the
ladies of the house, it was sure to be on a religious subject, while
those which lay by the seats of the fathers of the family were full of
the loftiest strains of Latin eloquence. In making this distinction, I
do not forget that there are some writings of equal literary excellence
in both branches, that Augustine may be paired off against Varro, and
Prudentius against Horace. Among these books, the works of Origen, the
Adamantine, were frequently perused by readers holding our faith. I
cannot understand why some of our arch-divines should stigmatise him as
a dangerous and heterodox author.”[5]

In summing up the work of Sidonius, Hodgkin points out the noteworthy
opportunities for making a literary reputation which were missed by
him. “He might have been the Herodotus of mediæval Europe. He could
have given authentic pictures of the laws and customs of the Goths,
Franks, and Burgundians ... a full portraiture of the great apostle
of the Germanic races, Ulfilas, and the secret causes of his and
their devotion to the Arian form of Christianity; and he could have
recorded the Gothic equivalents of the mythological tales in the
Scandinavian Edda and the story of the old Runes and their relation to
the Mœso-Gothic alphabet. All these details and a hundred more, full
of interest to science, to art, to literature, Sidonius might have
preserved for us had his mind been as open as was that of Herodotus to
the manifold impressions made by picturesque and strange nationalities.”

It was doubtless fortunate for the literary reputation of Sidonius
that his father-in-law, Avitus, came to be emperor. The reign of
Avitus was short, but he had time to give to his brilliant son-in-law
a position as Court poet or poet-laureate, while it was probably due
to the imperial influence that the Senate decreed the erection (during
the lifetime of the poet) of the brass statue of Sidonius, which was
placed between the two libraries of Trajan. These libraries, containing
the one Greek and the other Latin authors, stood between the column of
Trajan and the Basilica Ulpia. Sidonius describes his statue as follows:

    _Cum meis poni statuam perennem_
    _Nerva Trajanus titulis videret,_
    _Inter auctores utriusque fixam Bibliothecæ._

    (Sidonius, _Ex._, ix., 16.)

    _Nil vatum prodest adjectum laudibus illud_
    _Ulpia quod rutilat porticus ære meo._

    (Sidonius, _Carm._, viii., 7, 8.)[6]

(Since Nerva Trajanus decreed the erection of a permanent statue, which
is inscribed with the records of my honours, and is placed between the
authors of the two libraries.

The fact that the entrance to the Ulpian Library is aglow with the
bronze of my statue, can add nothing to the laurels of other poets.)

In the opinion of Hodgkin, the books in these two collections in the
Bibliotheca Ulpia may very well have been of more importance to later
generations than those of the library of Alexandria. The books from
Trajan’s libraries were, according to Vopiscus, transported in all or
in part to the Baths of Diocletian. Hodgkin understands that, between
300 and 450, they were restored to their original home.[7]

In the year 537 A.D., the rule of the Goths in Italy, which had been
established by Theodoric in 493, was practically brought to a close by
the victories of Belisarius, the general of the Eastern Empire, and,
thirty years later, the destruction of the Gothic State was completed
by the invasion of the Lombards. With the Lombards in possession of
Northern Italy, and the Vandals, in a series of campaigns against
the armies from Constantinople, overrunning the southern portions
of the peninsula, the social organisation of the country must have
been almost destroyed, and the civilisation which had survived from
the old Empire, while never entirely disappearing, was doubtless in
large part submerged. A certain continuity of Roman rule and of Roman
intellectual influence was, however, preserved through the growing
power of the Church, which was already claiming the inheritance of the
Empire, and which, as early as 590, under the lead of Pope Gregory the
Great, succeeded in making good its claims to ecclesiastical supremacy
throughout the larger part of Europe. In its control of the consciences
of rulers, the Church frequently, in fact, secured a domination that
was by no means limited to things spiritual.

The history of books in manuscript and of the production and
distribution of literature in Europe from the beginning of the work
of S. Benedict to the time when the printing-press of Gutenberg
revolutionised the methods of book-making, a period covering about nine
centuries, may be divided into three stages. During the first, the
responsibility for the preservation of the old-time literature and for
keeping alive some continuity of intellectual life, rested solely with
the monasteries, and the work of multiplying and of distributing such
books as had survived was carried on by the monks, and by them only.
During the second stage, the older universities, the organisation of
which had gradually been developed from schools (themselves chiefly of
monastic origin), became centres of intellectual activity and shared
with the monasteries the work of producing books. The books emanating
from the university scribes were, however, for the most part restricted
to a few special classes, classes which had, as a rule, not been
produced in the monasteries, and, as will be noted in a later chapter,
the university booksellers (_stationarii_ or _librarii_) were in the
earlier periods not permitted to engage in any general distribution of
books. With the third stage of manuscript literature, book-producing
and bookselling machinery came into existence in the towns, and the
knowledge of reading being no longer confined to the _cleric_ or the
_magister_, books were prepared for the use of the larger circles of
the community, and to meet the requirements of such circles were, to an
extent increasing with each generation, written in the tongue of the
people.

The first period begins with the foundation by S. Benedict, in 529, of
the monastery of Monte Cassino, and by Cassiodorus, in 531, of that of
Vivaria or Viviers, and continues until the last decade of the twelfth
century, when we find the earliest record of an organised book-business
in the universities of Bologna and Paris. The beginning of literary
work in the universities, to which I refer as indicating a second
stage, did not, however, bring to an end, and, in fact, for a time
hardly lessened, the production of books in the monasteries.

The third stage of book-production in Europe may be said to begin
with the first years of the fifteenth century, when the manuscript
trade of Venice and Florence became important, when the book-men
or publishers of Paris, outside of the university, had developed a
business in the collecting, manifolding, and selling of manuscripts,
and when manuscripts first find place in the schedules of the goods
sold at the fairs of Frankfort and Nordlingen. The costliness of the
skilled labour required for the production of manuscripts, and the many
obstacles and difficulties in the way of their distribution, caused the
development of the book-trade to proceed but slowly. It was the case,
nevertheless, and particularly in Germany, that a very considerable
demand for literature of certain classes had been developed among the
people before the close of the manuscript period, a demand which was
being met with texts produced in constantly increasing quantities and
at steadily lessening cost. When the printing-press arrived it found,
therefore, already in existence a wide-spread literary interest and a
popular demand for books, a demand which, with the immediate cheapening
of books, was, of course, enormously increased. The production of
books in manuscript came to a close, not with the invention of the
printing-press in 1450, but with the time when printing had become
generally introduced, about twenty-five years later.

It was in the monasteries that were preserved such fragments of the
classic literature as had escaped the general devastation of Italy; and
it was to the labours of the monks of the West, and particularly to
the labours of the monks of S. Benedict, that was due the preservation
for the Middle Ages and for succeeding generations of the remembrance
and the influence of the literature of classic times. For a period of
more than six centuries, the safety of the literary heritage of Europe,
one may say of the world, depended upon the scribes of a few dozen
scattered monasteries.

The Order of S. Benedict was instituted in 529, and the monastery of
Monte Cassino, near Naples, founded by him in the same year, exercised
for centuries an influence of distinctive importance upon the literary
interests of the Church, of Italy, and of the world. This monastery
(which still exists) is not far from Subiaco, the spot chosen by S.
Benedict for his first retreat. It was in the monastery of Subiaco
(founded many years afterwards) that was done, nearly a thousand
years later, the first printing in Italy. The Rule of S. Benedict,
comprising the regulations for the government of his Order, contained
a specific instruction that a certain number of hours in each day were
to be devoted to labour in the _scriptorium_. The monks who were not
yet competent to work as scribes were to be instructed by the others.
Scribe work was to be accepted in place of an equal number of hours
given to manual labour out-of-doors, while the skilled scribes, whose
work was of special importance as instructors or in the _scriptorium_,
were to be freed from a certain portion of their devotional exercises
or observances. The monasteries of the Benedictines were for centuries
more numerous, more wealthy, and more influential than those of any
other Order, and this provision of a Rule which directed the actions,
controlled the daily lives, and inspired the purposes of thousands
of earnest workers among the monks of successive generations, must
have exercised a most noteworthy influence on the history of literary
production in Europe. It is not too much to say that it was S. Benedict
who provided the “copy” which a thousand years later was to supply the
presses of Gutenberg, Aldus, Froben, and Stephanus.

I have not been able to find in the narratives of the life of S.
Benedict any record showing the origin of his interest in literature,
an interest which was certainly exceptional for an ecclesiastic of
the sixth century. It seems very probable, however, that Benedict’s
association with Cassiodorus had not a little to do with the
literary impetus given to the work of the Benedictines. Cassiodorus,
who, as Chancellor of King Theodoric, had taken an active part in
the government of the Gothic kingdom, passed the last thirty years
of his life first as a monk and later as abbot in the monastery of
Vivaria, or Viviers, in Calabria, which he had himself founded in
531. Cassiodorus is generally classed by the Church chronicles as a
Benedictine, and his monastery is referred to by Montalembert as the
second of the Benedictine foundations. Hodgkin points out, however,
that the Rule adopted by the monks of Viviers, or prescribed for them
by its founder, was not that of S. Benedict, but was drawn from the
writings of Cassian, the founder of western monachism, who had died a
century before.[8] The two Rules were, however, fully in accord with
each other in spirit, while for the idea of using the convent as a
place of literary toil and theological training, Benedict was indebted
to Cassiodorus. “At a very early date in the history of their Order,”
says Hodgkin, “the Benedictines, influenced probably by the example of
the monastery of Vivaria, commenced that long series of services to the
cause of literature which they have never wholly intermitted. Instead
of accepting the ... formula from which some scholars have contended
that Cassiodorus was a Benedictine, we should perhaps be rather
justified in maintaining that Benedict, or at least his immediate
followers, were Cassiodorians.”[9]

It was the fortune of Cassiodorus to serve as a connecting link between
the world of classic Rome and that of the Middle Ages. He saw the
direction and control of the community pass from the monarchs and
the leaders of armies to the Church and to the monasteries, and he
was himself an active agent in helping to bring about such transfer.
Born in 479, only three years after the overthrow of the last of
the Emperors of the West, he grew up under the rule of Odovacar,
the Herulian. While still a youth, he had seen the Herulian kingdom
destroyed by Theodoric, and he had lived to mourn over the ruins of
the realm founded by the Goth, which he had himself helped to govern.
He saw his beloved Italy taken possession of by the armies of Narses
and Belisarius from the east, and a little later overrun by the
undisciplined hordes of the Lombards from the north. The first great
schism between the Eastern and the Western Churches began during his
boyhood and terminated before, as Abbot of Vivaria, it became necessary
for him to take a decided part on the one side or the other. A Greek by
ancestry, a Roman by training, the experience of Cassiodorus included
work and achievements as statesman, orator, scholar, author, and
ecclesiastic. He had witnessed the extinction of the Roman Senate,
of which both his father and himself had been members; the practical
abolition of the Consulate, an honour to which he had also attained;
and the close of the schools of philosophy in Athens, with the
doctrines of which he, almost alone in his generation of Italians, was
familiar. He had done much to maintain in the Court and throughout
the kingdom of Theodoric, such standard of scholarly interests and
of literary appreciation as was practicable with the resources
available; and, in like manner, he brought with him to his monastery
a scholarly enthusiasm for classic literature, of which literature he
may not unnaturally have felt himself to be almost the sole surviving
representative. It is difficult to over-estimate the extent of the
service rendered by Cassiodorus to literature and to later generations
in initiating the training of monks as scribes, and in putting into
their hands for their first work in the _scriptorium_ the masterpieces
of classic literature. He belonged both to the world of ancient Rome,
which he had outlived, and to that of the Middle Ages, the thought and
work of which he helped to shape. With the close of the official career
of Cassiodorus as Secretary of State for the Gothic kingdom of Italy,
the history of ancient Europe may, for the purpose of my narrative,
be considered to end. With the consecration of Cassiodorus, as Abbot
of the monastery of Vivaria, (which took place about 550, when he was
seventy years of age), and the instituting by him of the first European
_scriptorium_, I may begin the record of the production of books during
the Middle Ages.

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

CHAPTER I.

THE MAKING OF BOOKS IN THE MONASTERIES.


I HAVE used for the heading of the chapter the term “the making of
books” rather than “literary work,” because the service rendered by
the earlier monastic scribes (a service of essential importance for
the intellectual life of the world) consisted chiefly, as has been
indicated, not in the production of original literature, but in the
reproduction and preservation of the literature that had been inherited
from earlier writers,--writers whose works had been accepted as
classics. While it was the case that in this literary labour it was the
Benedictines who for centuries rendered the most important service, the
first of the European monasteries in which such labour was carried on
as a part of the prescribed routine or rule of the monastic life was
that of Vivaria or Viviers, founded by Cassiodorus, which was never
formally associated with the Benedictine Order, and which had, in
fact, adopted, in place of the Benedictine Rule, a rule founded on the
teachings of Cassian, who had died early in the fifth century. The work
done, under the instructions of Cassiodorus, by the scribes of Viviers,
served as an incentive and an example for Monte Cassino, the monastery
founded by S. Benedict, while the _scriptorium_ instituted in Monte
Cassino was accepted as a model by the long series of later Benedictine
monasteries which during the succeeding seven centuries became centres
of literary activity.

After the destruction of the Gothic kingdom of Italy, it was with
these monasteries that rested the intellectual future of Europe.
Mankind was, for the time at least, to be directed and influenced,
not so much by royal chancellors or prætorian guards, as by the monks
preaching from their cells and by the monastic scribes distributing the
world’s literature from the _scriptorium_.

=Cassiodorus and S. Benedict.=--In the literary history of Europe, the
part played by Cassiodorus was so important and the service rendered
by him was so distinctive, that it seems pertinent for the purposes
of this story to present in some detail the record of his life and
work. As is indicated by the name by which he is known in history,
Cassiodorus was of Greek lineage, his family belonging to the Greek
city of Scyllacium in Southern Italy. His full name was Magnus Aurelius
Cassiodorus Senator. His ancestors had, for several generations,
held under the successive rulers of Italy positions of trust and
honour, and the family ranked with the patricians. The father of the
author and abbot, usually referred to as Cassiodorus the third, was
finance minister under Odovacar, and when the Herulian King had been
overcome and slain by Theodoric, the minister was skilful enough to
make himself necessary to the Gothic conqueror, from whom he received
various important posts, and by whom he was finally appointed Prætorian
Prefect. The Cassiodorus with whom this study is concerned, known as
Cassiodorus the fourth, was born about 479, or three years after the
Gothic conquest.[10] He began his official career as early as twenty,
and it was while holding, at this age, the position of Consilarius,
that he brought himself to the favourable attention of Theodoric by
means of an eloquent panegyric spoken in praise of that monarch.

Theodoric appointed him Quæstor, an office which made him the
mouth-piece of the sovereign. To the Quæstor belonged the duty of
conducting the official correspondence of the Court, of receiving
ambassadors, and of replying in fitting harangues to their addresses,
so that he was at once foreign secretary and Court orator. He also had
the responsibility of giving a final revision to all the laws which
received the signature of the King, and of seeing that these were
properly worded and did not conflict with previous enactments.[11]
Theodoric, who had received what little education he possessed from
Greek instructors in Constantinople, was said never to have mastered
Latin, and he doubtless found the services of his eloquent and
scholarly minister very convenient.

It was the contention of Theodoric that his kingdom represented the
natural continuation of the Roman Empire, and that he was himself
the legitimate successor of the emperors. He took as his official
designation not _Rex Italiæ_, but _Gothorum et Romanorum Rex_. This
contention was fully upheld by the Quæstor, who felt himself to be the
representative at once of the official authority of the new kingdom and
of the literary prestige of the old Empire, and who did what was in
his power to preserve in Ravenna the classical traditions of old Rome
and to make the Court the centre of literary influence and activity.
Theodoric and his Goths had accepted the creed of the Arians, but the
influence of his minister, who was a Christian of the Athanasian or
Trinitarian faith, was sufficient to preserve a spirit of toleration
throughout the kingdom. It is to Cassiodorus that is due what was
probably the first official utterance of toleration that Europe had
known, an utterance that in later European history was to be so largely
set at nought: _Religionem imperare non possumus, quia nemo cogitur
ut credat invitus_.[12] [We must not enforce (acceptance of) a creed,
since no one can think or can believe against his will.] It is not
one of the least of the services of Cassiodorus that he should at
this early date, when the bitterness of controversy was active in
the Church, have been able to set a standard of wise and Christian
toleration. His action had a good effect later in his own monastery
and in the monasteries whose work was modelled on that of Viviers. It
was only in monastic centres like Viviers and Monte Cassino, where
Christian influence and educational work were held to be of more
importance than theological issues, that literary activity became
possible, and it was only in such monasteries that labour was expended
in preserving the writings of “pagan” (that is, of classic) authors.

In 514, Cassiodorus became Consul, a title which, while no longer
standing for any authority, was still held to be one of the highest
honours, and in 515 he received the title of patrician. In 519, he
published, under the title of _Chronicon_, an abstract of history from
the deluge to the year 519. Hodgkin points out that in his record
of events of the fifth century, a very large measure of favourable,
or rather of partial attention is given to the annals of the Goths.
Shortly after the publication of the _Chronicon_, Cassiodorus began
work on his _History of the Goths_, which was finally completed in
twelve books, and the chief purpose of which was to vindicate the
claims of the Goths to rank among the historic nations of antiquity,
by bringing them into connection with Greece and Rome, and by making
the origin of Gothic history Roman. This history of Cassiodorus
is known only by tradition, not a single copy of it having been
preserved. The system of scribe-work in the monasteries, to which we
owe nearly all of the old-world literature that has come down to us,
did not prove adequate to preserve the greatest work of its founder. A
treatise on the origin of the Goths by a later writer named Jordæus,
concerning whom little is known, is avowedly based upon the history of
Cassiodorus, and is the principal source of information concerning the
character of this history.

At the time of the death of Theodoric, Cassiodorus was holding the
important place of Master of the Offices, a post which combined many
of the duties that would to-day be discharged by a Home Secretary,
a Secretary of War, and a Postmaster-General. Under the regency of
Queen Amalasuentha, Cassiodorus received his final official honour in
his appointment as Prætorian Prefect. In the collection of letters
published under the title of _Variæ_, Cassiodorus gives accounts of
the work done by him in these various official stations, and these
letters present vivid and interesting pictures of the methods of the
administration of the kingdom, and also throw light upon many of its
relations with foreign powers.

Cassiodorus continued to do service as minister for the successors
of Amalasuentha, Athalaric, Theodadad, and Witigis, and retired from
official responsibility only a few months before the capture of Ravenna
by Belisarius, in 540, brought the Ostrogothic monarchy to an end. At
the time of the entry of the Greek army, Cassiodorus, now a veteran of
sixty years, was in retirement in his monastery in Bruttii (the modern
Calabria). It was doubtless because of the absence of Cassiodorus
from the capital, that no mention is made of him in the narrative of
the campaign written by Procopius the historian, who, as secretary
to Belisarius, entered Rome with the latter after the victories over
Witigis.

Cassiodorus must have possessed very exceptional adaptability of
character, not to say elasticity of conscience, to be able, during
a period extending over nearly half a century, to retain the favour
of so many of the successive rulers of Italy and apparently to make
his services necessary to each one of them. It is certain, however,
that Italy benefited largely by the fact that through the various
contests and changes of monarchs, it had been possible to preserve a
certain continuity of executive policy and of administrative methods.
The further fact that the “perpetual” or at least the continuing
minister was at once a Greek and a Roman, and not only a statesman but
a scholar, and that he had succeeded in preserving through all the
devastations of civil wars and of foreign invasions a great collection
of classic books and a persistent (even though restricted) interest in
classic literature, exercised an enormous influence upon the culture
of Europe for centuries to come. The career of Cassiodorus had, as we
have seen, been varied and honourable. It was, however, his exceptional
fortune to be able to render the most important and the most
distinctive service of his life after his life’s work had apparently
been completed.

Shortly after his withdrawal to Bruttii, and when, as said, he was
already more than sixty years old, he retired to his monastery,
Vivaria, and during the thirty-six years of activity that remained for
him, he not only completed a number of important literary productions
of his own, but he organised the literary work of the monastery
_scriptorium_, which served as a model for that of Monte Cassino, and,
through Monte Cassino, for the long series of Benedictine monasteries
that came into existence throughout Europe. It was the hand of
Cassiodorus which gave the literary impetus to the Benedictine Order,
and it was from his magnificent collection of manuscripts, rescued from
the ruins of the libraries of Italy, that was supplied material for the
pens of thousands of monastic scribes.

After his retirement to Bruttii, Cassiodorus founded a second
monastery, known as Mons Castellius, the work of which was planned
for a more austere class of hermits than those who had associated
themselves together at Vivaria. Of both monasteries he retained the
practical control, and, according to Trithemius (whose opinion is
accepted by Montalembert) of Vivaria he became abbot.[13] Hodgkin,
while himself citing the extract from Trithemius, thinks it possible
that Cassiodorus never formally became abbot, but says that the
direction and supervision of the work of the two monasteries rested in
any case in his hands.[14]

His treatise on the Nature of the Soul (_De Anima_) was probably
completed just before he began his monastic life, and was itself an
evidence of the change in the direction of his thoughts and of his
ideals. Cassiodorus had now done with politics. As Hodgkin points out,
the dream of his life had been to build up an independent Italian
State, strong with the strength of the Goths, and wise with the wisdom
of the Romans. It is evident that he also felt himself charged with
a special responsibility in preserving for later generations the
literature and the learning of the classic world. With the destruction
of the Gothic kingdom, that dream had been scattered to the winds. The
only institutions which retained a continuity of organisation were
those belonging to the Church, and it was through the Church that must
be preserved for later generations the thought and the scholarship
of antiquity. It was with a full understanding of this change in the
nature of his responsibilities, that Cassiodorus decided to consecrate
his old age to religious labours and to a work even more important than
any of his political achievements: the preservation, by the pens of
monastic copyists, of the Christian Scriptures, of the writings of the
early Fathers, and of the great works of classical antiquity.

Some years before his retirement from Ravenna, Cassiodorus had
endeavoured to induce Pope Agapetus (535-536) to found a school of
theology and Christian literature at Rome, modelled on the plan of the
schools of Alexandria and Nisibis. The confusion consequent on the
invasion of Italy by Belisarius had prevented the fulfilment of this
scheme. The aged statesman was now, however, planning to accomplish, by
means of his two monasteries, a similar educational work.

Hodgkin summarises the aims of earlier monasticism, (aims which were
most fully carried out in the monasteries of the East and of Africa,)
as follows: In the earlier days of monasticism, men like the hermits
of the Thebaïd had thought of little else but mortifying the flesh
by vigils and fastings, and withdrew from all human voices in order
to enjoy an ecstatic communion with their Maker. The life in common
of monks like those of Nitria and Lerinum had chastened some of the
extravagances of these lonely enthusiasts, while still keeping in
view their main purpose. S. Jerome, in his cell at Bethlehem, had
shown what great results might be obtained for the Church of all ages
from the patient literary toil of one religious recluse. And finally,
S. Benedict, in that Rule of his, which was for centuries to be the
code of monastic Christendom, had sanctified work as one of the most
effectual preservatives of the bodily and spiritual health of the
ascetic.

“It was the glory of Cassiodorus,” says Hodgkin,[15] “that he first
and pre-eminently insisted on the expediency of including intellectual
labour in the sphere of monastic duties.... This thought [may we not
say this divinely suggested thought?] in the mind of Cassiodorus was
one of infinite importance to the human race. Here, on the one hand,
were the vast armies of monks, whom both the unsettled state of the
times and the religious ideas of the age were driving irresistibly
into the cloister; and who, when immured there with only theology
to occupy their minds, became, as the great cities of the East knew
only too well, preachers of discord and mad fanaticism. Here, on
the other hand, were the accumulated stores of two thousand years
of literature, sacred and profane, the writings of Hebrew prophets,
Greek philosophers, Latin rhetoricians, perishing for want of men
with leisure to transcribe them. The luxurious Roman noble with his
slave amanuenses multiplying copies of his favourite authors for his
own and his friends’ libraries, was an almost extinct existence. With
every movement of barbarian troops over Italy, whether those barbarians
called themselves the men of Witigis or of Justinian, some towns were
being sacked, some precious manuscripts were perishing from the world.
Cassiodorus perceived that the boundless, the often wearisome leisure
of the convent might be profitably spent in arresting this work of
denudation, in preserving for future ages the intellectual treasure
which must otherwise inevitably have perished. That this was one of the
great services rendered by the monasteries to the human race, the most
superficial student has learned, but not all who have learned it know
that the monks’ first decided impulse in this direction was derived
from Cassiodorus.”

The German biographer of Cassiodorus, Franz, uses similar language:

_Das Verdienst, zuerst die Pflege der Wissenschaften in den Bereich der
Aufgaben des Klosterlichen Lebens aufgenommen zu haben, kann man mit
vollem Rechte für Cassiodorus in Anspruch nehmen._[16]

In the account given by Cassiodorus of the _scriptorium_ of his
monastery, he describes, with an enthusiasm which ought to have been
contagious, the noble work done there by the _antiquarius_[17]: “He
may fill his mind with the Scriptures while copying the sayings of
the Lord; with his fingers he gives life to men and arms against the
wiles of the devil. As the _antiquarius_ copies the words of Christ,
so many wounds does he inflict upon Satan. What he writes in his cell
will be scattered far and wide over distant provinces. Man multiplies
the words of Heaven, and, if I may dare so to speak, the three fingers
of his right hand are made to express the utterances of the Holy
Trinity. The fast travelling reed writes down the holy words and thus
avenges the malice of the Wicked One, who caused a reed to be used to
smite the head of the Saviour.” The passage here quoted refers only to
the work of the copyists of the Christian Scriptures. There are other
references, however, in the same work to indicate that the activity of
the _scriptorium_ was not confined to these, but was also employed on
secular literature.[18]

The devotion and application of the monks produced in the course
of years a class of scribes whose work in the transcribing and
illuminating of manuscripts far surpassed in perfection and beauty the
productions of the copyists of classic Rome. In the monasteries north
of the Alps the work of the scribes was, for the earlier centuries,
devoted principally to the production of copies of missals and other
books of devotion and of portions of the Scriptures. In Italy, however,
where classical culture never entirely disappeared, attention continued
to be given to the transcription of the Latin texts of which any
manuscripts had been preserved, and it was these transcripts of the
monks of Cassiodorus and S. Benedict that gave the “copy” for the first
editions of Cicero, Virgil, and the other classic writers, produced by
the earliest printers of Germany and Italy.

Cassiodorus took pains to emphasise the importance of binding the
sacred codices in covers worthy of the beauty of their contents,
following the example of the householder in the parable, who provided
wedding garments for all who came to the supper of his son. One
pattern volume had been prepared containing samples of various sorts
of covers, from which the scribe might choose that which pleased
him best. The abbot had also provided, to help the nightly toil of
the _scriptorium_, mechanical lamps of some ingenious construction
which appears to have made them self-trimming and to have insured a
continuously sufficient supply of oil. The labour of the scribes was
regulated on bright days by sun-dials, and on cloudy days and during
the hours of the night by water-clocks.

In order to set an example of literary diligence to his monks, and to
be able to sympathise with the difficulties of scribe work, Cassiodorus
himself transcribed (probably from the translation of Jerome) the
Psalter, the Prophets, and the Epistles. In addition to his labours as
a transcriber, Cassiodorus did a large amount of work as an original
author and as a compiler. According to the judgment of Migne, Franz,
and Hodgkin, the importance of his original writings varied very
considerably, and is by no means to be estimated in proportion to their
bulk. One of the most considerable of these was his great commentary on
the Psalms, in the text of which he was able to discover refutations
of all the heresies that had thus far racked the Church, together with
the rudiments of all the sciences which had become known to the world.
This was followed by a commentary on the Epistles and by a history of
the Church, the latter having been undertaken in co-operation with his
friend Epiphanius. This history, known as the _Historia Tripartita_, is
said to have had a larger circulation than any other of the author’s
works. A fourth work, which gives more of the personality of the
writer, was an educational treatise entitled, _Institutiones Divinarum
et Humanarum Lectionum_. In the first part of this treatise, which
bore the title of _De Institutione Divinarum Litterarum_, the author
gives an account of the organisation of his _scriptorium_. In the
second division of the treatise, entitled _De Artibus ac Disciplinis
Liberalium Litterarum_, the author states his view of the relative
importance of the four liberal arts, Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic,
and Mathematics, the last named of which he divides into the four
“disciplines” of Arithmetic, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy. Geometry
and Astronomy occupy together one page, Arithmetic and Music each
two pages, Grammar two pages, Rhetoric six pages, while to Logic are
devoted eighteen pages. The final production of his industrious life
was a treatise called _De Orthographia_, which was completed when its
author was ninety-three years old, and which was planned expressly to
further the work of the monastic scribes in collecting and correcting
the codices of ancient books.

The death of Cassiodorus occurred in 575, in the ninety-sixth year of
his age. An inheritor of the traditions of imperial Rome, Cassiodorus
had been able, in a career extending over nearly a century, to be
of signal service to his country under a series of foreign rulers.
He had succeeded, through his personal influence with these rulers,
in maintaining for Italy an organisation based on Roman precedents,
and in preserving for the society of the capital an interest in the
preservation and cultivation of classic literature. When the political
institutions of Italy had been shattered and the very existence of
civilisation was imperilled, he had transferred his services to the
Church, recognising, with the adaptability which was the special
characteristic of the man, that with the Church now rested the hopes
of any continuity of organised society, of intellectual interest,
of civilisation itself. He brought to the Church the advantage of
exceptional executive ability and of long official experience, and he
also brought a large measure of scholarship and an earnest zeal for
literary and educational interests. It is not too much to say that the
continuity of the thought and civilisation of the ancient world with
that of the Middle Ages was due, more than to any other one man, to the
life and labours of Cassiodorus.

=S. Benedict.=--The _Life of S. Benedict_, written by Pope Gregory I.
(who was born in 543, the year of the death of the saint), was for
centuries one of the most popular books circulated in Europe. The
full title is: _Vita et Miracula Venerabilis Benedicti conditoris,
vel Abbatis Monasterii; quod appellatur arcis Provinciæ Campaniæ_.
“The Life and Miracles of the Venerable Benedict, Founder and Abbot
of the Monastery which is called (of) the Citadel of the Province of
Campania.” This biography was, later, translated by Pope Zacharias from
the original Latin into Greek.

The great achievement of Benedict was the one literary product of his
life, the _Regula_. It comprises seventy-three short chapters, probably
not designed by the author for use beyond the bounds of the communities
under his own immediate supervision. It proved to be the thing for
which the world of religious and thoughtful men was then longing, a
complete code of monastic duty. By a strange parallelism, almost in
the very year in which the great Emperor Justinian was codifying the
results of seven centuries of Roman secular legislation for the benefit
of the judges and the statesmen of the new Europe, Benedict, on his
lonely mountain top, was composing his code for the regulation of the
daily life of the great civilisers of Europe for seven centuries to
come.

_The Rule of S. Benedict, Chap. 48. Concerning Daily Manual
Labour._--“Idleness is the enemy of the soul: hence brethren ought at
certain seasons to occupy themselves with manual labour, and again
at certain hours with holy reading. Between Easter and the calends
of October let them apply themselves to reading from the fourth hour
until the sixth hour.... From the calends of October to the beginning
of Lent, let them apply themselves to reading until the second hour.
During Lent, let them apply themselves to reading from morning until
the end of the third hour, and in these days of Lent, let them receive
a book apiece from the library and read it straight through. These
books are to be given out at the beginning of Lent.”[19]

This simple regulation, uttered by one the power and extent of whose
far-reaching influence have rarely been equalled among men, gave an
impulse to study that grew with the growth of the Order, and that
secured a continuity of intellectual light and life through the dark
ages, the results of which have endured to modern times. “Wherever a
Benedictine house arose, or a monastery of any one of the Orders, which
were but offshoots from the Benedictine tree, books were multiplied and
a library came into existence, small indeed at first, but increasing
year by year, till the wealthier houses had gathered together
collections of books that would do credit to a modern university.”[20]

It was, of course, the case that the injunction to read, an injunction
given at a time when books were very few and monks were becoming many,
carried with it an instruction for writing until copies of the books
prescribed should have been produced in sufficient numbers to meet
the requirements of the readers. The _armaria_ could be filled only
through steady and persistent work in the _scriptoria_, and, as we
shall see later, such scribe-work was accepted not only as a part of
the “manual labour” prescribed in the Rule, but not infrequently (in
the case of the skilled scribes) in lieu of some portion of the routine
of religious observance. Benedict would not have his monks limit
themselves to spiritual labour, to the action of the soul upon itself.
He made external labour, manual or literary, a strict obligation
of his Rule. The routine of the monastic day was to include seven
hours for manual labour, two hours for reading.[21] In later years,
the Benedictine monasteries became centres of instruction, supplying
the place, as far as was practicable, of the educational system of
the departed empire. As Order after Order was founded, there came to
be a steady development of interest in books and an ever increasing
care for their safe-keeping. S. Benedict had contented himself with
general directions for study; the Cluniacs prescribed the selection of
a special officer to take charge of the books, with an annual audit of
them and the assignment to each brother of a single volume.

“The followers of the Saint continued in their patient labour, praying,
digging, and transcribing. The _scriptoria_ of the Benedictine
monastery will multiply copies not only of missals and theological
treatises, but of the poems and histories of antiquity. Whatever may
have been the religious value or the religious dangers of the monastic
life, the historian at least is bound to express his gratitude to these
men, without whose life-long toil the great deeds and thoughts of
Greece and Rome might have been as completely lost to us as the wars
of the buried Lake-dwellers or the thoughts of the Palæolithic man. To
take an illustration from S. Benedict’s own beloved Subiaco, the work
of his disciples has been like one of the great aqueducts of the valley
of the Arno--sometimes carried underground for centuries through the
obscurity of unremembered existence, sometimes emerging to the daylight
and borne high upon the arcade of noble lives, but equally through all
its course, bearing the precious stream of ancient thought from the
far off hills of time into the humming and crowded cities of modern
civilisation.”[22]

=The Earlier Monkish Scribes.=--The literary work begun under the
direction of Cassiodorus in the _scriptorium_ of Viviers, and enjoined
by S. Benedict upon his monks at Monte Cassino, was, as said, carried
on by successive generations of monastic scribes during a number of
centuries. In fact, until the organisation of the older universities,
in the latter part of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth
century, the production and the reproduction of literature was
practically confined to the monasteries. “The monasteries,” says
Maitland, in his erudite and vivacious work, _The Dark Ages_, “were,
in those days of misrule and turbulence, beyond all price not only as
places where (it may be imperfectly, but better than elsewhere) God
was worshipped, ... but as central points whence agriculture was to
spread over bleak hills and barren downs and marshy plains, and deal
its bread to millions perishing with hunger and its pestilential train;
as repositories of the learning which then was, and as well-springs
for the learning which was to be; as nurseries of art and science,
giving to invention the stimulus, the means, and the reward; and
attracting to themselves every head that could devise and every hand
that could execute; as the nucleus of the city which in after days of
pride should crown its palaces and bulwarks with the towering cross
of its cathedral.”[23] It was fortunate for the literary future of
Europe that the Benedictine Order, which had charged itself with
literary responsibilities, should have secured almost from the outset
so considerable a development and should for centuries have remained
the greatest and most influential of all the monastic orders. At the
beginning of the ninth century, Charlemagne ordered an inquiry to
be made (as into a matter requiring careful research) as to whether
there were any monks who professed any other rule than the Rule of S.
Benedict; from which it would appear that such monks were considered as
rare and noteworthy exceptions.

While the two monasteries of Cassiodorus in Calabria and the
Benedictine foundation of Monte Cassino near Naples, were entitled to
first reference on the ground of the exceptional influence exercised by
them upon the literary development of the monks, they were by no means
the earliest of the western monastic foundations. This honour belongs,
according to Denk,[24] to the monastery of Ligugé, near Poitiers
(Monasterium Locociagense), founded in 360 A.D. by Bishop Martin of
Tours. The second in point of date, that of Marmoutier, near Tours, was
instituted by the same bishop a year or two later. Gaul proved to be
favourable ground for the spread of monastic tenets and influence, and
by the year 400 its foundations included over two thousand monks.

In 405, S. Honoratus, later Bishop of Arles, founded a monastery on
the island of Lerin, on the south coast of France, which became a most
important centre of learning and the mother of many monasteries.[25] In
the educational work carried on at Lerin, full consideration was given
to classic authors, such as Cicero, Virgil, and Xenophon, as well as to
the writings of the Fathers, and the scribes were kept busied in the
production of copies.

There must have been a certain amount of literary activity also in
the monasteries of the East and of Africa some time before any of the
monastic foundations in Europe had come into existence. The numerous
writings of the Fathers secured a wide circulation among the faithful,
a circulation which could have been possible only through the existence
of efficient staffs of skilled scribes and in connection with some
system of distribution between widely separated churches. Teachers like
Origen in Cæsarea, in the third century, and S. Jerome in Bethlehem and
S. Augustine in Hippo, in the fifth century, put forth long series of
writings, religious, philosophical, and polemical, with apparently an
assured confidence that these would reach wide circles of contemporary
readers, and that they would be preserved also for generations to
come. The sacking of Rome by Alaric (in 410) is used by S. Augustine
as a text or occasion for the publication of his beautiful conception
of “The City of God” in much the same manner as a preacher of later
times might have based a homily on the burning of Moscow or the fall
of Paris. The preacher of Hippo speaks as if he were addressing, not
the small circle of his African diocese, but mankind at large. And he
was, of course, justified in his faith, for the _De Civitate Dei_ was
the book which, next to the Scriptures, was most surely to be found in
every monastery in Europe, while when the work of the _scriptorium_ was
replaced by the printing-press, it became one of the most frequently
printed books in Europe. It appears from a reference by S. Augustine,
that nuns as well as monks were included among the African scribes.
In speaking of a nun named Melania, who, early in the fifth century,
founded a convent at Tagaste, near Carthage, he says that she had
“gained her living by transcribing manuscripts,” and mentions that she
wrote swiftly, beautifully, and correctly,--_scribebat et celeriter et
pulchre, citra errorem_.[26]

The scribe-work in the monasteries of Africa and of the East was,
therefore, sufficiently effective to preserve large portions of the
writings of the Fathers and of other early Christian teachers, and it
is, in fact, to the libraries of these Eastern monasteries that is
chiefly due the preservation of the long series of Greek texts which
found their way into Europe after the Renaissance. I have, however,
been able to find no record of the system pursued in the _scriptoria_
and _armaria_ of the Greek monasteries, and the narrative in the
present chapter is, therefore, confined to a sketch of the literary
undertakings of the monks of the West.

The earliest known example of the work of a European monk dates from
the year 517. The manuscript is in the Capitular library in Verona, and
has been reproduced in fac-simile by Ottley. The script is that known
as half uncial.[27] At the time this manuscript was being written,
Theodoric the Goth was ruling in Italy, with Cassiodorus as his
minister, and the monastery at Viviers was still to be founded.

S. Gregory the Great, who became Pope in 590, exercised an important
influence over the intellectual interests of his age. Gregory had been
charged with having destroyed the ancient monuments of Rome, with
having burned the Palatine library, including the writings of Cicero
and Livy, with having expelled the mathematicians from Rome, and with
having reprimanded Bishop Didier of Vienna (in Gaul) for teaching
grammar to children. Montalembert contends that these charges are all
slanders and that the Pope was not only an unequalled scholar, but that
he fully appreciated the importance for the intellectual development
of the Church, of a knowledge of the classics. Gregory is quoted
as saying, in substance: “The devils know well that the knowledge
of profane literature helps us to understand sacred literature. In
dissuading us from this study, they act as the Philistines did when
they interdicted the Israelites from making swords and lances, and
obliged that nation to come to them for the sharpening of their
axes and plough-shares.”[28] Gregory was himself the author of a
considerable series of writings, and, while his Latin was not that
of Cicero, he contributed (according to Ozanam) as much as did S.
Augustine to form the new Latin, what might be called the Christian
Latin, which was destined to become the language of the pulpit and the
school, and which forms the more immediate foundation of an important
group of the languages of modern Europe.

His works include the _Sacramentary_, which determined the language and
the form of the Liturgy, a series of _Dialogues_, and a _Pastoral_, in
which were collected a series of discourses planned to regulate the
vocation, life, and doctrines of the pastors. Of this book, Ozanam says
that it gave form and life to the entire hierarchical body. Then came
a series of commentaries on the Scriptures, followed by no less than
thirty-five books called _Moralia_, which were commentaries on the
Book of Job. His last important production was a series of _Epistles_,
comprised in thirteen volumes. He may possibly have been the most
voluminous author since classic times, and his books had the special
advantage of reaching circles of readers who were waiting for them,
and of being distributed through the already extended machinery of the
Church.

Another important ecclesiastical author of the same generation was
Isidore, Bishop of Seville. The Spanish Liturgy compiled by him and
known as the Mozarabic, survived the ruin of the Visigothic Church and
was thought by the great Cardinal Ximenes worthy of resuscitation.
Isidore also wrote a history of the Goths and a translation of the
philosophy of Aristotle. He may be considered as the first scholar
to introduce to Europe of the Middle Ages the teachings of Greek
philosophy. His greatest undertaking was, however, in the form of an
encyclopædia, treating, under the heading of the Seven Liberal Arts,
of all the learning that was within his reach. It was entitled _Twenty
Books of Etymologies_, or _The Origin of Things_, and included in its
volumes a number of classical fragments which, without the care of its
editor, would probably have perished forever.

Isidore is the first Christian who arranged and edited for Christians
the literature of antiquity. He died in 636, but the incentive that
he had given to learning and to literature survived him in a numerous
group of disciples.[29] Among Isidore’s pupils was King Sisebut, whose
interest in scholarship caused him to endow liberally a number of the
Spanish monasteries.

=The Ecclesiastical Schools and the Clerics as Scribes.=--The so-called
secular clergy were, during the earlier Middle Ages, employed very
largely in connection with the business of the government, being in
fact in many regions the only class of the population possessing
the education necessary for the preparation of documents and the
preservation of records. In Italy, towards the close of the thirteenth
century, there came into existence the class of _notaries_ who took
charge of a good many business details which in Germany and France
were cared for by the clergy. Under the Merovingian kings, there were
government officials and judiciary officials who were laymen. During
the rule of the Carlovingians, however, the writing work of the chapel
and of the government offices was consolidated, falling into the
hands of the clerics, or secular clergy. For a number of centuries,
outside of Italy, it was very exceptional for any documents or for any
correspondence to be written by other than the clergy. Every citizen
of importance was obliged to have his special _clericus_, _clerc_,
or _pfaff_, who took care of his correspondence and accounts. A post
of this kind was in fact the surest means for an ambitious priest
to secure in the first place, a footing in the world, and later,
ecclesiastical positions and income. The secretary or chancellor of
the king, was almost always, as a matter of routine, sooner or later
rewarded with a bishopric.

Charlemagne took from among the poor boys in the court school, one, who
was described as _optimus dictator et scriptor_, and having trained him
as chaplain and secretary, provided for him later a bishopric.[30]

The use of the word _dictator_ is to be noted as indicating the
mediæval employment of the term in connection with writing. _Dictare_
seems, from an early date, to have been used in the first place to
indicate instruction in the art of writing, while later it is employed
constantly to specify the direct work of the writer or composer, in
the sense in which one would say to-day that he had indited a letter.
With the same general sense, the term _dictamen_ is used for the thing
indited or for a composition. Hroswitha, the nun of Gandersheim (whose
poems later had the honour of forming the material for one of the first
books printed in South Germany), used the term _dictare_ continually
for activity in authorship. Wattenbach quotes from the _Legenda Aurea_
of S. Ambrose the words _libros quos dictabat propria manu scribebat_
(he wrote out with his own hand the books that he composed).

As long as any portions of the Roman Empire held together and the
classic culture still preserved its influence, a considerable class
of men secured their support through work as scribes. In Italy this
class seems never entirely to have disappeared. Some small circles of
the people retained, even after the land had been many times overrun
by invaders, some interest in the classics, and were prepared to pay
for more or less trustworthy manuscript copies of these. In Italy also
there appears to have been a much larger use of writing in connection
with trade and commerce than obtained throughout the rest of Europe
until a much later time. While in Germany and France such scholarship
as remained was restricted almost entirely to the ecclesiastics and
to the monastery centres, in Italy the Church, during the earlier
period, took a smaller interest in scholarship. There came into
existence, however, a group of literary laymen, who were in a measure a
continuation of or a succession to the old Latin grammarians, and who
maintained some of their interest in classic culture and preserved,
however imperfectly, some remnants of classic knowledge.

Wattenbach quotes the words of Gerbert,[31] _Nosti Quot Scriptores
in Urbibus aut in Agris Italiæ Passim Habeantur_ (you know how many
writers there are here and there throughout the cities and fields of
Italy).

The schools established under the rule of the Lombards helped to
preserve the art of writing and to widen the range of its experts.
By the time, therefore, of the establishment of the earlier Italian
universities, an organised class of scribes was already in existence
whose skill could be utilised for university work, and, as will be
shown more specifically in a later chapter, the universities took these
scribes under their jurisdiction and extended over them the protection
of university privilege.[32]

In France, after the time of Charlemagne, it was the case, as we have
seen, that those who had any educational or literary ambitions were
almost necessarily obliged to become ecclesiastics, as it was only in
monasteries and in the training schools attached to the monasteries,
that the necessary education could be secured. As one result of this,
the number of ecclesiastics increased much more rapidly than the number
of places in which they could be occupied or of foundations upon which
they could be supported. Priests for whom no priestly work was found
became, therefore, what might be called lay-clerics, and were employed
in connection with the work of the courts, or of magistrates, or as
scribes and secretaries.

In this manner there came into the hands of these lay-clerics, not only
the management of correspondence, personal, official, and diplomatic,
but a very large proportion of the direction of the affairs with which
such correspondence had to do. As far, therefore, as the clerical
personality represented ecclesiastical purposes and aims, the influence
of ecclesiasticism must have been very much greater during the age
in which the art of writing was confined to the Church than at any
earlier or any later period of the world’s history. Such influence was,
however, probably less in fact than in appearance, as it seems to have
been the case that a very large proportion of such clerics were priests
in name only, and that their interests, purposes, and ambitions were
outside of the Church, and were not necessarily even in sympathy with
the development of the control of the Church over the affairs of the
world.

Wattenbach is of opinion that the scribes of this period secured a
larger return for their work than came to any other class of labourers
or officials. Among many other examples, he gives a quotation from
Dümmler concerning a Lombard cleric of Rotland, named Anselm, who, in
1050, prided himself upon the number of books he had written, and said:
_Multos oportet libros scriberes, ut inde precium sumeres, quo a tuis
lenonibus te redimeres_.[33] (You ought to write many books in order to
obtain money with which to buy yourself off from those having claims
upon you.)

Notker wrote in 1020 to the Bishop of Sitten, who wanted to obtain some
books: _Si vultis ea, sumtibus enim indigent, mittite plures pergamenas
et scribentibus præmia et suscipietis eorum exempla_.[34] (If you want
these books, you must send more parchment and also moneys for the
scribes. You will then receive your copies.)

In the twelfth century, the monks of Tegernsee, under the Abbot Rupert,
were working on the production of the books for the library of some
noble lady.[35] The Brother Liaupold, in Mallerstorf, spoke of having
“earned much money through his pen.” This happened in the last quarter
of the twelfth century. The lines quoted by Wattenbach were found upon
a manuscript bearing Liaupold’s name.[36]

For the libraries of their own monasteries, the monks worked without
direct pay, and it was only later, as the ambition of the librarians
increased or as the business of distributing copies of manuscripts
became more important, that the monasteries found it worth while to
employ, either in place of or in addition to their own monks, scribes
from outside. In Salzburg, Pastor Peter Grillinger paid, in 1435, to
the scribes of the neighbouring monasteries three hundred gulden for
the production of a Bible (probably an illuminated copy), and presented
this to the library of the Cathedral.[37]

In the accounts of the monastery at Aldersbach, Rockinger finds
entries, in 1304, of payments for _scriptores librorum_.

The well-known manuscript of Henri Bohic was written in 1374 by a monk
of Corbie, who, according to the cash record of his monastery, received
for his work, in addition to the parchment and other materials, the sum
of thirty-six solidos. For the monastery at St. Gall, Mathias Burer,
of Lindau, who was chaplain in Meminger, and who died in 1485, wrote
twenty-four volumes.

In 1470, the same Burer gave to the monastery, in exchange for a
benefice, his entire library. The record does not specify how many
volumes the library comprised. In 1350, a certain Constantine was
arrested in Erfurt as a heretic. Special efforts were made to save him
from death or banishment on the ground that he was a skilled scribe.
The record does not appear to show whether or not this plea was
successful.

Conrad de Mure speaks of women working as scribes during the
latter part of the thirteenth century. It is probable that these
women were nuns, but it is not so specified. In the _Histoire de
l’Imprimerie_[38] reference is made to a woman who appears to have
acted as an independent scribe--that is to say, not to have been
attached to the university or to the guild of booksellers.

On the tax list of Paris, in 1292, are recorded twenty-four
_escrivains_.[39] It is probable that the actual number was much
greater, as the scribes who were ecclesiastics were exempt from
taxation, and their names, therefore, would not have appeared upon the
list.

In 1460, a certain Ducret, _clerc à Dijon_, received from the Duke for
his work as scribe, a groschen for each sheet, which is referred to as
the _prix accoustumé_.[40]

In 1401, Peter of Bacharach, described as a citizen of Mainz, wrote out
for the Court at Eltville (Elfeld) a _Schwabenspiegel_. This is to be
noted because it is an example of scribe work being done by one who was
not a cleric. Burkard Zink tells us that in 1420, being in Augsburg, he
took unto himself a wife. She had nothing and he had nothing, but she
earned money with her spinning-wheel and he with his pen. In the first
week he wrote _vier sextern des grossen papiers, karta regal_, and the
ecclesiastics for whom the work was being done were so well pleased
with it that they gave him for two sexterns four groschen. His week’s
work brought him sixteen groschen, or forty cents.[41] Clara Hatzlern,
a citizen of Augsburg, is recorded as having written for money between
the years 1452 and 1476. A copy of a _Schwabenspiegel_ transcribed by
her was contained in the collection at Lambach.[42]

The examples named indicate what was, in any case, probably the only
class of scribe work done outside of the monasteries and outside of
the universities or before the university period, by the few laymen
who were able to write. Their labour was devoted exclusively to the
production of books in the tongue of the people; if work in Latin were
required, it was still necessary (at least until the institution in the
thirteenth century of university scribes) to apply to the monasteries.
With the development of literature in Italy, during the following
century, there came many complaints concerning the lack of educated
scribes competent to manifold the works. These complaints, as well as
to the lack of writers as concerning the ignorance and carelessness
shown in their work, continued as late as the time of the Humanists,
and are repeated by Petrarch and Boccaccio.

=Terms Used for Scribe-Work.=--With the Greeks, the term γραμματεύς
denoted frequently a “magistrate.” The term ταχυγράφοι corresponded as
nearly as might be with our “stenographer.” For this the Romans used
the form _notarius_. The scribes whose work was devoted to books were
called, under the later empire, _bibliographoi_ or καλλιγράφοι. The
name καλλιγράφος was applied to the Emperor, Theodosius II. Montfaucon
gives a list of the names of the Greek scribes who were known to
him.[43] The oldest dates from 759, and the next in order from 890 A.D.
The oldest Plato manuscript in the Bodleian library was written in 896
for the Diaconus Arethas of Patras. Arethas was, later, Archbishop of
Cæsarea, and had also had written for him a Euclid, and in 914 a group
of theological works. His scribes were the _calligraph_ John, a cleric
named Stephen, and a _notarius_ whose name is not given.[44]

The terms _librarius_, _scriptor_, and _antiquarius_ were also used for
scribes making copies of books, while _notarius_ was more likely to
denote a clerk whose work was limited to the preparation of documents.
Alcuin speaks of employing _notarii_.

In the inscription in a manuscript by Engelberg of the twelfth
century, we find the lines: _Hic Augustini liber est atque Frowini;
alter dictavit, alter scribendo notavit_.[45] This indicates that
Augustine was the author, while Frowin served as scribe. A manuscript
of the sixth century, contained in the Chapter-House library in Verona,
bears the signature _Antiquarius Eulalius_. A manuscript of Orosius,
written in the seventh century, is inscribed: _Confectus codex in
statione Viliaric Antiquarii_. (A codex completed in the writing-stall
of Viliaric the scribe.) This scribe was probably a Goth, as among the
signatures in a Ravenna document, containing the list of the clerics
of the Gothic Church, occurs the name _Viljaric bokareis_.[46] Otto
von Freising says of his _notarius_, Ragewin: _Qui hanc historiam
ex ore nostro subnotavit_ (who wrote down this story from my lips);
and Gunther, in 1212, complains of a headache which he had brought
upon himself _ut verba inventa notario vix possim exprimere_, that
is in the attempt to shape the words that he was dictating to his
clerks. It was in Italy that the _notarii_ first became of sufficient
importance to organise themselves into a profession and to undertake
the training, for other work, of young scribes, and it was from Italy
that the scribes were gradually distributed throughout Europe. Their
most important employment for some time in Italy was in connection
with the work of the Church, and particularly in the preparation and
manifolding of the documents sent out from Rome. The special script
that was adopted for the work of the Papal office was known as _scripta
notaria_.[47]

According to Wattenbach, the use of papyrus for the documents of the
Church, and even for the Papal Bulls, extended as late as the tenth
century. Sickel speaks of a Bull of Benedict VIII., of 1022, as the
latest known to him which is written on papyrus.

The term _chartularii_, or _cartularii_, was applied to clerics
originally trained for the work of the Church, but who occasionally
devoted themselves also to the manifolding of books. In the memoir of
Arnest, who was the first Archbishop of Prague, it was related that he
always kept three _cartularii_ at work in the transcribing of books.
In the twelfth century, Ordericus speaks of the monks who write books
both as _antiquarii_ and as _librarii_.[48] Richard de Bury uses the
term in describing the renewal of old manuscripts, and restricts it to
scribes who possessed scholarly and critical knowledge. Petrarch makes
a similar application.[49] The term _dictare_ was, during the Middle
Ages, usually employed to describe the author’s work in composing, or
in composing and writing with his own hand, and bears but seldom the
meaning of “dictate.” The proper rendering would be more nearly our
word “indite.”

The term used during the earlier Middle Ages to denote the Scriptures
was not _Biblia_, but _Bibliotheca_. According to Maitland, the latter
term has its origin with S. Jerome, who, in offering to lend books to
his correspondent Florentius, writes: _... et quoniam largiente Domino,
multis sacræ bibliothecæ codicibus abundamus_, etc.[50] (And since
by the grace of God, we possess a great many codices of the sacred
writings.)

In nearly every instance in which reference is made to the complete
collection of the Scriptures, the term used is _Bibliotheca integra_,
or _Bibliotheca tota_. It was evidently the case that for centuries
after the acceptance of the Canon, the several divisions or books of
which the Bible consists were still frequently considered in the light
of separate and independent works, and were transcribed and circulated
separately.

=S. Columba, the Apostle to Caledonia.=--One of the earliest of the
monks of the North of Europe whose life was associated with scholarship
and intellectual influence, was S. Columba, the Apostle to Caledonia,
whose life covered the term between the years 521 and 597. Columba
belongs to the list of Irish saints, although the larger portion of
his life’s work was done in Scotland. Before he had reached the age
of twenty-five, he had presided over the foundation of no less than
twenty-seven monasteries in Ireland, the oldest of which were Darrow
and Derry; the latter, having long been the seat of a great Catholic
bishopric, became, under its modern name of Londonderry, the bulwark of
the Protestant contest against the efforts of the last of the Stuart
kings.

The texts have been preserved of a number of songs ascribed to Columba,
and, whether or not these verses were really the work of the monk,
the tradition that he was the first of the Irish poets doubtless has
foundation. In the time of Columba, the Irish monasteries already
possessed texts in greater quantity than could be found in the
monasteries of Scotland or England, but even in Ireland manuscripts
were rare and costly, and were preserved with jealous care in the
monastic libraries. Not only was very great value put upon these
volumes, but they were even supposed to possess the emotions and
the passions of living beings. Columba was himself a collector of
manuscripts, and his biography by O’Donnell attributes to him the
laborious feat of having transcribed with his own hand three hundred
copies of the Psalter. According to one of the stories, Columba
journeyed to Ossory in the south-west to visit a holy and very learned
recluse, a doctor of laws and philosophy, named Longarad. Columba asked
leave to examine the doctor’s books, and when the old man refused, the
monk burst out in an imprecation: “May thy books no longer do thee any
good, neither to them who come after thee, since thou takest occasion
by them to show thine inhospitality.” The curse was heard, and after
Longarad died, his books became unintelligible. An author of the ninth
century says that the books still existed, but that no man could read
them.[51]

Another story speaks of Columba’s undertaking, while visiting his
ancient master Finnian, to make a clandestine and hurried copy of the
abbot’s Psalter. He shut himself up at night in the church where the
Psalter was deposited, and the light needed for his nocturnal work
radiated from his left hand while he wrote with the right. A curious
wanderer, passing the church, was attracted by the singular light, and
looked in through the keyhole, and while his face was pressed against
the door his eye was suddenly torn out by a crane which was roosting in
the church. The wanderer went with his story to the abbot, and Finnian,
indignant at what he considered to be a theft, claimed from Columba
the copy which the monk had prepared, contending that a copy made
without permission ought to belong to the owner of the original, on
the ground that the transcript is the offspring of the original work.
As far as I have been able to ascertain, this is the first instance
which occurs in the history of European literature of a contention for
copyright. Columba refused to give up his manuscript, and the question
was referred to King Diarmid, or Dermott, in the palace at Tara. The
King’s judgment was given in a rustic phrase which has passed into a
proverb in Ireland: “To every cow her calf [_le gach boin a boinin_],
and consequently to every book its copy.”[52]

Columba protested loudly, and threatened the King with vengeance.
He retired to his own province chanting the song of trust, the text
of which has been preserved and which is sacred as one of the most
authentic relics of the ancient Irish tongue. He succeeded in arousing
against the King the great and powerful clans of his relatives and
friends, and after a fierce struggle the King was overcome and was
obliged to take refuge at Tara.

The manuscript which had been the object of this strange conflict of
copyright, a conflict which developed into a civil war, was afterwards
venerated as a kind of national military and religious palladium. Under
the name of _Cathac_, or “the fighter,” the Latin Psalter said to have
been transcribed by Columba was enshrined in the base of a portable
altar as the national relic of the O’Donnell clan. It was preserved for
1300 years in the O’Donnell family, and as late as 1867, belonged to a
baronet of that name, who placed it on exhibition in the Museum of the
Royal Irish Academy. O’Curry prints a fac-simile of a fragment of the
manuscript, which he believes to be in the hand-writing of S. Columba,
and O’Curry and Reeves are in accord in the opinion that the famous
copy of the Gospels known as the “Book of Kells” is also the work of
the poet monk.[53]

After the successful issue of his contest with Finnian, S. Columba
journeyed through the land, making a kind of expiatory pilgrimage for
the purpose of atoning for the bloodshed of which he had been the
cause. He went for counsel to his soul-friend or confessor, S. Laisren.
The saint bade him as a penance leave Ireland and go and win souls
for Christ, as many as the lives that had been lost in the battle of
Culdreimhne, and never again look upon his native land. He finally took
up his abode in the desolate little island of Iona, on the coast of
Scotland. Other refugees were attracted to the island by the fame of
the saint, and there finally came into existence on the barren rocks a
great monastery which for centuries exercised throughout Britain and
North Europe a wide-spread influence in behalf of higher Christianity
and of intellectual life.

From Iona and its associated monasteries of Ireland and Scotland came
scholarly teachers to France and Germany whose influence was important
in giving a new direction to the work of later generations of monks.
Among the Continental monasteries in which was developed through such
influence a higher range of scholarly activity, were Luxeuil (in the
Vosges Mountains), Corbie (on the Somme), Bobbio (in Lombardy), and
St. Gall (in Switzerland). Wattenbach says that, notwithstanding their
scholarly knowledge, these Scotch monks were wild and careless in their
orthography. As an example of the barbarity of style and of form, he
quotes a manuscript of the date of 750 (written during the rule of
Pepin).

A number of years later, when, through the monks of Iona and under
the general direction of S. Columba, a number of monasteries had been
founded throughout Scotland, Columba had occasion to plead before the
Parliament of Drumceitt in behalf of the Bards, who might be called the
authors of their time, and with whom the poet monk had a keen personal
sympathy. The Bards of Ireland and Britain were at once the poets, the
genealogists, the historians, and the musicians of their countries, and
their position and their influence constituted a very characteristic
feature of Celtic life in the centuries between 500 and 800.

The Irish nation, always enamoured of its traditions, its fabulous
antiquity, and its local glories, regarded with ardent sympathy the men
who could clothe in a poetic dress all the law and the superstitions of
the past, and who could give literary form and force to the passions
and the interests of the present. The Bards were divided into three
orders: The _Fileas_, who sang of religion and war; the _Brehons_,
whose name is associated with the ancient laws of the country which
they versified and recited; and the _Seanachies_, who enshrined
in verse the national history and antiquities, and, above all, the
genealogies and the prerogatives of the ancient families who were
regarded as especially representative of the national and warlike
passions of the Irish people.[54]

The great influence and power enjoyed by the Bards had naturally
produced not a few abuses, and at the time of the Parliament of
Drumceitt their popularity had suffered and a violent opposition had
been raised against them. They were charged with insolence and with
greed, and they were particularly censured for having made a traffic
and a trade of their poetry, a charge which recalls some of the
criticisms of classic times.

The enmities raised against them had gathered so much force that King
Aedh found himself compelled to propose to the Assembly of Drumceitt
the abolition of the Order and the abandonment, or, as one authority
suggests, the massacre of the Bards. It would appear as if Ireland
had been suffering from an excess of poetic utterances and felt that
some revolutionary methods were required in order to restore to the
land quiet and peace. Montalembert is of opinion that the clergy did
not take any part in the prosecution of a class which they might, not
unnaturally, have regarded as their rivals. The Bards had, however, for
the most part kept in friendly relations with the bishops, monks, and
saints, and each monastery, like each prince and lord, possessed a Bard
(who in later years became an annalist) whose chief office it was to
sing the glory and record the history of the community.

Nevertheless, the Bards were certainly, as a body, a residuum of the
paganism that had been so recently supplanted, and it is probable
that the Church, if not joining in the onslaught upon their body, was
not prepared to take any active part in their defence. It seems as
if the decision of the Assembly, under the influence of King Aedh,
would certainly have been adverse to the poets. It was Columba, the
poet monk, who saved them. He, who was born a poet and who, to the
last day of his life, remained a poet, interceded for the Bards with
such eloquence and earnestness that his plea had to be listened to.
He claimed that the general exile of the poets would be the death of
a venerated antiquity and of a literature which was a part of the
country’s life. “The bright corn must not be burned,” he said, “because
of the weeds that mingled with it.”[55] Influenced by his impassioned
plea, the Assembly yielded at length, under the condition that the
number of Bards should be henceforth limited and that the Order should
be placed under certain rules to be framed by Columba himself. Thus
poetry was to continue to exist, but it was not to be allowed to
oppress the community with its redundance.

It is doubtless the case that one reason for the exceptional fame
of Columba and the large amount of legendary detail that has been
preserved of his achievements, was this great service that he had
rendered to the poets of his time. They showed their gratitude by
exalting his glory in numberless songs and recitals, and it is chiefly
from these that has been made up the narrative of the saint’s life.
Another result of this intervention on the part of the monk for the
protection of the poets was a still closer association between the
Church and the literary spirit of the age. All antagonism between the
religious ideal and the influence of the poetry of the Bards seems from
this time to have disappeared. The songs of the Bards were no longer
in any measure devoted to the cause of paganism, but music and poetry
became closely identified with the ideals of the Church and with the
work of the monasteries. The Church had preserved the poets, and poetry
became the faithful handmaid of the Church.

=Nuns as Scribes.=--One of the oldest rules relating to convents, that
of S. Cæsarius of Arles, instituted in the fifth century and brought a
hundred years later to Poitiers by S. Radegonde, required that all the
sisters should be able to read and that they should devote two hours a
day to study--_Omnes bonæ litteras discant_, etc.[56]

While the educational work in the convent schools was for the most part
not carried on beyond what might be called elementary classes, there
were not a few examples of abbesses whose scholastic attainments would
rival those of the abbots. Montalembert speaks of convents founded,
under the auspices of S. Jerome, by S. Paula and her daughter, and
is not prepared to admit that in any essential detail the history of
S. Paula is legendary. He reminds us that Hebrew and Greek were the
daily study of these two admirable women, who advised S. Jerome in
all his difficulties and cheered him under all discouragements.[57]
Montalembert is probably on firmer ground when he speaks of the
scholarly attainments of S. Aura, the friend of S. Eloi, and of the
nun Bertile, whose learned lectures on Holy Scripture drew to Chelles
in the sixth century a large concourse of auditors of both sexes. S.
Radegonde, known by her profound studies of the three Fathers, S.
Gregory, S. Basle, and S. Athanasius, is commemorated by Fortunatus, as
is also Gertrude, Abbess of Nivelle, who sent messengers to Rome and to
Ireland to buy books.[58] I do not find a record of the date of these
book-buying expeditions of the abbess.

In Germany, the list of the learned nuns includes S. Lioba, who was
said to be so eager for knowledge that she never left her books except
for divine service. She was a pupil of S. Boniface, and to her was
due the framing of the system of instruction instituted after the
mission of S. Boniface in North Germany. Hroswitha, the illustrious
nun of Gandersheim (who died in 997), has been referred to more than
once. Hroswitha’s dramatic poetry has been preserved for nearly eight
centuries, and has had the honour of being reprinted as late as 1857.
Her writings included a history in verse of Otho the Great, and the
lives of several saints. Her most important works, however, were sacred
dramas composed by her to be acted by the nuns of the convent. M. Magin
points out that these dramas show an intimate acquaintance with the
authors of classic antiquity.[59] Curiously enough, there was, nearly a
century earlier, another Hroswitha in Gandersheim, who was the daughter
of the Duke of Saxony, and who became the fourth abbess of the convent.
She composed a much esteemed treatise on logic.[60]

Cecilia, daughter of William the Conqueror, who was Abbess of Kucaen,
won fame for her school in grammar, philosophy, and in poetry.
Herrad of Landsberg, who governed forty-six noble nuns at Mont St.
Odile in Alsace, composed, under the name of _Hortus Delictarum_,
a sort of cosmology, which is recorded as the first attempt at a
scientific encyclopædia, and which is noted for the breadth of its
ideas on painting, philosophy, mythology, and history. This was
issued shortly after the death of William the Conqueror.[61] To the
Abbess of Eichstadt, who died about 1120, Germany is indebted for the
preservation of the _Heldenbuch_, a treasury of heroic stories.[62]

The principal and most constant occupation of the learned Benedictine
nuns was the transcription of manuscripts. It is difficult to estimate
too highly the extent of the services rendered by these feminine hands
to learning and to history throughout the Middle Ages. They brought to
the work a dexterity, an elegance of attainment, and an assiduity which
the monks themselves could not attain, and some of the most beautiful
specimens of caligraphy which have been preserved from the Middle
Ages are the work of the nuns. The devotion of nuns as scribes began
indeed with the early ages of Christian times. Eusebius speaks of young
maidens whom the learned men of his time employed as copyists.[63] In
the fifth century, S. Melania the younger distinguished herself by the
beauty and exactness of her transcripts.[64] In the sixth century, the
nuns of the convent at Arles, incited by the example of the Abbess of
St. Césaire, acquired a no less brilliant reputation. In the seventh
century, S. Gertrude, who was learned in the Holy Scriptures, sent
to Rome to ask not only for works of the highest Christian poetry,
but also for teachers capable of instructing her nuns to comprehend
certain allegories.[65] In the eighth century, S. Boniface begged the
abbess to write out for him in golden letters the Epistle of S. Peter.
Cæsarius of Arles gave instructions that in the convents which had been
founded by him and the supervision of which rested with his sister,
the “Virgins of Christ” should give their time between their prayers
and psalms to the reading and to the writing of holy works.[66] In
the eighth century the nuns of Maseyk, in Holland, busied themselves
in a similar fashion, not only in writing, but particularly in
illuminating (_etiam scribendo atque pingendo_), in which they became
proficients.[67]

In the ninth century, the Benedictine nuns of Eck on the Meuse,
and especially the two abbesses Harlinde and Renilde, attained
great celebrity by their caligraphic work and by the beauty of the
illuminated designs used in their manuscripts.[68] In the time of S.
Gregory VII., a nun at Wessobrunn, in Bavaria, named Diemude, undertook
to transcribe a series of important works, the mere enumeration of
which would startle modern readers. These works formed, as we read in
the saint’s epitaph, a whole library, which she offered as a tribute to
S. Peter. The production of this library still left time for Diemude
to carry on with Herluca, a nun of the neighbouring convent of Eppach,
a correspondence remarkable as well for its grace of expression as for
its spiritual insight.[69] A list of her transcripts is given in the
section on the _scriptorium_.

Among other convent scribes is recorded the name of the nun Gita, in
Schwarzenthau, who made transcripts, about 1175, of the writings of
her abbot, Irimbert. In Mallesdorf, at about the same time, a nun of
Scottish parents, named Leukardis, who understood Greek, Latin, and
German, was active in the _scriptorium_, and her work excited so much
admiration that the monk Laiupold, himself a famous scribe, instituted
in her memory an _anniversarium_.[70]

Brother Idung sent his dialogues concerning the monks of Clugni
and the Cistercians to the nuns of Niedermünster, near Regensburg,
_ut legibiliter scribatur et diligenter emendetur ab aliquibus
sororibus_.[71] In the same century (the twelfth) the names of
Gertrude, Sibilia, and other nuns appear on the transcript of the
codex written for the _Domini Monasterienses_, which codex came into
the library of Arnstein in exchange for a copy of the _Pastorals_
of Gregory. Johann Gerson, writing in 1423, refers with cordial
approbation to some beautiful copies prepared by the nuns, of the works
of Origen.[72] In St. Gall, where the literary activity of the monks
has already been referred to, the nuns in the convent of S. Catharine
were, in the thirteenth and in the first half of the fourteenth
centuries, also engaged in preparing transcripts of holy books.

=Monkish Chroniclers.=--In addition to the services rendered by the
monks in the preservation of classic literature, and in addition also
to the great amount of work required of them in the routine of their
monastery for the preparation of books of devotion and instruction, a
most valuable task was performed by many of the monastic scribes in
the production of the records or annals of their times. The work of
the literary monks included the functions not only of scribes, but of
librarians, collectors, teachers, and historians. The records that
have come down to us of several centuries of mediæval European history
are due almost exclusively to the labours of the monastic chroniclers.
Even those who did not compose books which can properly be described as
historical, have left in their _cartularies_ documents by the help of
which the archæologists can to-day solve the most important problems
relating to the social, civil, domestic, and agricultural life of their
ancestors. The _cartularies_, says M. C. Giraud, were the most curious
monuments of the history of the time.[73]

Without the monks, says Marsham (a Protestant writer), we should have
been as ignorant of our history as children.[74] England, converted by
her monks, has special reason to be proud of the historians furnished
by her abbeys.[75] One chronicler, Gildas, has painted with fiery
touches the miseries of Great Britain after the departure of the
Romans. To another, the Venerable Bede, author of the ecclesiastical
history of Britain, we owe the detailed account of the Catholic
Renaissance under the Saxons. Bede’s chronicle extends to the year
731. Its author died four years later. Among later monkish chroniclers
may be mentioned Ingulphus, Abbot of Croyland, whose history extends
to 1091; Vitalis, a monk of Shrewsbury, whose chronicle reached to
1141, and many others. The chronicle of Vitalis gives an animated
picture of the struggle between the Saxons and the Normans, and of
the vicissitudes during this period of the Church of England. Later
monastic historians were: William of Malmesbury (_circa_ 1095-1143),
Geoffrey of Monmouth (_circa_ 1090-1154), Henry of Huntingdon (_circa_
1120-1180), Roger of Wendover (_circa_ 1169-1237), Matthew Paris
(_circa_ 1185-1259), and Ralph Higden (_circa_ 1280-1370). Further
reference to the work of these English chroniclers is made in the
chapter on Books in England during the Manuscript Period. This series
of monkish chronicles presents, says Montalembert, an inexhaustible
amount of information as to the manners, laws, and ideas of the times,
and unites with the important information of history the personal
attractiveness of biography.[76]

Among the chroniclers of France are to be noted S. Gregory of Tours;
S. Abbon, of St. Germain des Prés, who wrote the history of the wars
of King Eudes and an account of the sieges of Paris by the Normans;
Frodoard, who died in 968, and who wrote the annals of the tenth
century; Richer, whose history covers the period between 880 and 995;
Helgaud, who wrote the life of King Robert; Aimoin, a monk of Fleury,
who died in 1008, and who wrote a very curious life of S. Abbon and a
record of the miracles at Fleury of S. Bénoît; Chabanais, a monk of
St. Cybar in Angoulême, who died in 1028, and whose record reaches to
1025. It has been republished by Pertz in the fourth volume of the
_Scriptores_. Raoul Glaber, a monk of St. Germain d’Auxerre, wrote a
history of his own time in five books, which covers the period from the
accession of Hugh Capet to 1046. Hugh, Abbot of Flavigny, wrote with
considerable detail the history of the eleventh century. These various
monkish chronicles have served as a basis for the first national and
popular monuments of French history. The famous chronicles of S. Denys,
which were written very early in Latin, were translated into French in
the beginning of the thirteenth century. They contain the essence of
the historic and poetic traditions of old France.

The mediæval history of Italy is in like manner dependent almost
entirely upon the records of the literary monks. The great collection
of Muratori is based upon the monkish chronicles, especially of those
of Volturna, Novalese, Farfa, Casa Aurio, and of Monte Cassino. From
the latter abbey, there sprang a series of distinguished historians:
Johannes Diaconus, the biographer of S. Gregory the Great, who wrote
during the reign of Charlemagne; Paulus Diaconus, the friend of
Charlemagne; Leo, Bishop of Ostia, first author of the famous chronicle
of Monte Cassino, and Peter Diaconus, who continued its chronicle.
Another monk of Monte Cassino recounts the wonderful story of the
conquest gained by the Norman chivalry in the two Sicilies, a story
reproduced and completed by the Sicilian monk Malaterra.

The list of the learned historians in the German monasteries is also
an important one. The German collections of _scriptories_, such as
those of Eckard, Pez, Leibnitz, and others, present an enormous mass
of monastic chronicles. Among the earlier chroniclers were to be noted
Eginard, Theganus, and Rodolphus of Fulda, who preserved the records
of the dynasty of the Carlovingians. One of the earlier historians
of Charlemagne was a monk of St. Gall, while the chronicles of that
abbey, carried on by a long series of its writers, have left a most
valuable and picturesque representation of successive epochs of its
history. Regino, Abbot of Prüm, wrote a history of the ninth century.
Wittikind, a monk of Corvey, wrote the chronicles of the reign of Henry
I., and of Otho the Great. Ditmar, who was at first a monk of Magdeburg
and later Bishop of Mersebourg, has left a detailed chronicle,
extending from 920 to 1018, of the emperors of the House of Saxony.
Among the eleventh-century writers, is Hermannus Contractus, son of the
Count of Woegen, who was brought up at St. Gall but was later attached
to Reichenau. The history of the great struggle between the Church and
the Empire was written by Lambert, a monk of Hersfeld, and continued
by Berthold of Reichenau, Bernold of St. Blaise, and by Ekkhard, Abbot
of Aurach.[77] The first historian of Poland was a French monk named
Martin, while another monk of Polish origin, named Nestor, who died
in 1116, composed the earliest annals of Russia (then newly converted
to Christianity) which were known to Europe. Among the monkish
historians of the eleventh century, the most noteworthy were William of
Malmesbury, Gilbert of Nogent, Abbot Suger, and Odo of Deuil.

The persistent labour given by these monkish chroniclers to works, the
interest and importance of which were largely outside the routine of
their home monasteries and had in many cases no direct connection with
religious observances, indicates that they were looking to a larger
circle of readers than could be secured within the walls of their
own homes. While the evidences concerning the arrangements for the
circulation of these chronicles are at best but scanty, the inference
is fairly to be drawn that through the interchange of books between the
libraries of the monasteries, by means of the services of travelling
monks, and in connection with the educational work of the majority of
the monasteries, there came to be, as early as the ninth century, a
very general circulation of the long series of chronicles among the
scholarly readers of Europe. Even the literary style in which the
majority of the chronicles were written gives evidence that the writers
were addressing themselves, not to one locality or to restricted
circles of readers, but to the world as they knew it, and that they
also had an assured confidence in the preservation of their work for
the service and information of future generations. The historian
Stenzel (himself a Protestant) points out that these monkish historians
wrote under certain exceptional advantages which secured for their work
a larger amount of impartiality and of accuracy of statement than could
safely be depended upon with, for instance, what might be called Court
chronicles, that is to say, histories which were the work of writers
attached to the Courts. The monks, said Stenzel, in daring to speak the
truth of those in power, had neither family nor property to endanger,
and their writings, prepared under the eye of their monastic superiors
and under the sovereign protection of the Church, escaped at once the
coercion or the influence of contemporary rulers and the dangers of
flattery for immediate popular appreciation.[78] In the same strain,
Montalembert contends that the literary monks worked neither for gain
nor for fame, but simply for the glory of God. They wrote amidst the
peace and freedom of the cloister in all the candour and sincerity of
their minds. Their only ambition was to be faithful interpreters of
the teaching which God gives to men in history by reminding them of
the ruin of the proud, the exaltation of the humble, and the terrible
certainty of eternal judgment. He goes on to say that if princes and
nobles never wearied of founding, endowing, and enriching monasteries,
neither did the monks grow weary of chronicling the services and the
exploits of their benefactors, in order to transmit these to posterity.
Thus did they pay to the Catholic chivalry a just debt of gratitude.[79]

This pious opinion of Montalembert is a little naïve in its expression
when taken in connection with his previous conclusion that the records
of the monks could be trusted implicitly for candour, sincerity, and
impartiality. It is difficult to avoid the impression that in recording
the deeds of the noble leaders of their time, the monks would naturally
have given at least a full measure of attention and praise to those
nobles who had been the greatest benefactors to their Order or to
the particular monastery of the writer. The converse may also not
unnaturally be assumed. If a monarch, prince, or noble leader should be
neglectful of the claims of the monastery within his realm, if there
might be ground to suspect the soundness of his faith to the Catholic
Church, or doubt in regard to the adequacy of his liberality to his
ecclesiastical subjects, it is probable that his exploits in war or in
other directions were minimised or unrecorded. It is safe to assume
also that after the Reformation, the Protestant side of the long series
of complicated contests could hardly have been presented by the monkish
chroniclers with perfect impartiality. Bearing in mind, however, how
many personal influences may have operated to impair the accuracy and
the impartiality of these chroniclers, they are certainly entitled to
a full measure of appreciation for the inestimable service rendered by
them in the long ages in which, outside of the monasteries, there were
no historians. It seems also to have been the case that with many of
the monks who devoted the larger portion of their lives to literary
work, their ambition and ideals as authors overshadowed any petty
monkish zeal for their Order or their monastery, and that it was their
aim to present the events of their times simply as faithful historians.

An example of this high standard of work is presented by Ordericus
Vitalis, who, as an English monk in a Norman abbey,[80] was able to
say: “I will describe the revolutions of England and of Normandie
without flattery to any, for I expect my reward neither from the
victors nor the vanquished.”[81]


=The Work of the Scriptorium.=--The words employed at the consecration
of the _scriptorium_ are evidence of the spirit in which the devout
scholars approached their work: _Benedicere digneris, Domine, hoc
scriptorium famulorum tuorum, ut quidquid scriptum fuerit, sensu
capiant, opere perficiant_. (Vouchsafe, O Lord, to bless this work-room
of Thy servants, that they may understand and may put in practice all
they write.)[82]

Louis IX. took the ground that it was better to transcribe books than
to purchase the originals, because in this way the mass of books
available for the community was increased. Louis was, however, speaking
only of religious literature; he could not believe that the world would
be benefited by any distribution of the works of profane writers.
Ziegelbauer is in accord with Montalembert and others in giving to
the Benedictines of Iceland the credit for the collections made of
the Eddas and for the preservation of the principal traditions of the
Scandinavian mythology. He also confirms the conclusion arrived at
by the Catholic historians generally, that the literary monuments of
Greece and Rome which escaped the devastation of the barbarians were
saved by the monks and by them alone. He cites, as a few examples from
the long list of classics that were thus preserved, five books of the
_Annals_ of Tacitus, found at Corbie; the treatise of Lactantius on
the _Death of Persecutors_, preserved at Moissac; the _Auluraria_ of
Plautus, and the _Commentaries_ of Servius on Virgil, preserved in
Fleury; the _Republic_ of Cicero, found in the library of Fleury in the
tenth century, etc.[83]

In confirmation of the statement that the classics were by no
means neglected by the earlier monastery collectors, Montalembert
cites Alcuin, who enumerated among the books in his library at York
the works of Aristotle, Cicero, Pliny, Virgil, Statius, Lucan, and
Trogus Pompeïus. A further reference to this library will be found
in the chapter on the Monastery Schools. In Alcuin’s correspondence
with Charlemagne, he quotes Ovid, Horace, Terence, and Cicero, and
acknowledges that in his youth he had been more moved by the tears
of Dido than by the Psalms of David.[84] Loup de Ferrières speaks
of having borrowed from his friends the treatise _De Oratore_ of
Cicero, a _Commentary on Terence_, the works of Quintilian, Sallust,
and Suetonius. He says further that he was occupying himself in
correcting the text of the oration of Cicero against Verres, and that
of Macrobius.[85] Abbot Didier of Monte Cassino, who later became
Pope, succeeding Gregory VII., had transcripts made by his monks of
the works of Horace and Seneca, of several treatises of Cicero, and
of the _Fasti_ of Ovid.[86] S. Anselm, Abbot of Bec in the time of
Gregory VII., recommends to his pupils the careful study of Virgil and
of other profane writers, “omitting the licentious passages.” _Exceptis
his in quibus aliqua turpitudo sonat._[87] It is not clear what method
the abbot proposed to have pursued in regard to the selection of the
passages to be eliminated. It is hardly probable that at this time
there had been prepared, either for the use of the monks or of any
other readers, anything in the form of expurgated editions. S. Peter
Damian seems to have expressed the true mind of an important group
at least of the churchmen of his time, when he referred to the study
of pagan writers. He says: “To study poets and philosophers for the
purpose of rendering the wit more keen and better fitted to penetrate
the mysteries of the Divine Word, is to spoil the Egyptians of their
treasures in order to build a tabernacle for God.[88]”

Montalembert is of opinion, from his study of monastic history in
France, that, at least during the eleventh and twelfth centuries,
classic writers were probably more generally known and more generally
appreciated than at the present day. He points out that the very fact
of the existence of various ordinances and instructions intended to
repress any intemperate devotion to the pagan writers is sufficient
evidence of the extent of the interest in or passion for pagan
literature. He cites among other rulers of the Church who issued
protests or cautions against pagan literature, S. Basil, S. Jerome,
S. Gregory, S. Radbert, S. Peter Damian, Lanfranc, etc., etc.[89] In
the _Customs of Clugni_, there is a curious passage prescribing the
different signs that were to be used in asking for books during the
hours of silence, which indicates at once the frequency of these pagan
studies, and also the grade of esteem in which they ought to be held
by the faithful monk. The general rule, when asking for any book,
was to extend the hand, making motions similar to those of turning
over the leaves. In order, however, to indicate a pagan work, a monk
was directed to scratch his ear as a dog does, because, says the
regulation, unbelievers may well be compared to that animal.[90]

As before indicated, the work of transcribing manuscripts was held
under the monastic rules to be a full equivalent of manual labour in
the fields. The Rule of S. Ferreol, written in the sixth century, says
that, “He who does not turn up the earth with the plough ought to write
the parchment with his fingers.”[91] It is quite possible that for
men of the Middle Ages, who had little fondness for a sedentary life,
work in the _scriptorium_ may have been a more exacting task than work
that could be carried on out-of-doors. There were no fires in the cells
of the monks, and in many portions of Europe the cold during certain
months of the year must, in the long hours of the day and night, have
been severe. Montalembert quotes a monk of St. Gall who, on a corner of
one of the beautiful manuscripts prepared in that abbey, has left the
words: “He who does not know how to write imagines it to be no labour,
but although these fingers only hold the pen, the whole body grows
weary.” It became, therefore, natural enough to use this kind of labour
as a penitential exercise.[92] Othlo, a monk of Tegernsee, who was born
in 1013, has left an enumeration of the work of his pen which makes
it difficult to understand how years enough had been found for such
labour. The list includes nineteen missals, written and illuminated
with his own hand, the production of which, he tells us, nearly cost
him his eyesight.[93]

Dietrich or Theodoric, the first Abbot of St. Evroul (1050-1057), who
was himself a skilled scribe (_Ipse manu propria scribendo volumina
plura_), and who desired to incite his monks to earnest work as
writers, related to them the story of a worldly and sinful Brother,
who, notwithstanding his frivolities, was a zealous scribe, and who
had, in industrious moments, written out an enormous folio volume
containing religious instruction. When he died, the devil claimed his
soul. The angels, however, brought before the throne of judgment the
great book, and for each letter therein written, pardon was given for
one sin, and behold, when the count was completed, there was one letter
over; and, says Dietrich naïvely, it was a very big book. Thereupon,
judgment was given that the soul of the monk should be permitted
again to enter his body, in order that he might go through a period of
penance on earth.[94]

In the monastery of Wedinghausen, near Arnsberg in Westphalia, there
was a skilled and zealous scribe named Richard, an Englishman, who
spent many years in adding to the library of the institution. Twenty
years after his death, when the rest of his body had crumbled into
dust, the right hand, with which this holy work had been accomplished,
was found intact, and has since been preserved under the altar as a
holy relic.[95]

There has been more or less discussion as to whether in the
_scriptoria_, it was the practice for monks to write at dictation.
Knittel[96] takes the ground that the larger portion of the work was
done so slowly, and probably with such a different degree of rapidity
on the part of the different scribes, that it would have been as
impracticable for it to have been prepared under dictation as it would
be to do copper engraving under dictation. Ebert,[97] confirming
Knittel’s conclusions, points out that when works were needed in haste,
it was probably arranged to divide up the sheets to be copied among
a number of scribes. He finds evidence of this arrangement of the
work in a number of manuscripts, the different portions of which, put
together under one cover, are evidently the work of different hands.
Wattenbach specifies manuscripts in which not only are the different
pages in different script, but the divisions have been written with
varying arrangements of space; in some cases the space, which had
been left for an interpolated chapter having evidently been wrongly
measured, so that the script of such interpolated chapter had to be
crowded together instead of having the same spacing as that of the
body of the work. Sickel presents examples of the letters of Alcuin
which are evidently the work of a number of scribes. Each began his
work with a new letter, and where, at the end of the divisions, leaves
remained free, other letters were later written in. In the later Middle
Ages, however, there is evidence of writing at dictation, and this
practice began to obtain more generally as the results of the work of
the scribes came to have commercial value. When the work of preparing
manuscripts was transferred from the monasteries to the universities,
dictation became the rule, and individual copying the exception. West
finds evidence that as early as the time of Alcuin, the monks trained
by him or in his schools, wrote from dictation. “In the intervals
between the hours of prayer and the observance of the round of cloister
life, come hours for the copying of books under the presiding direction
of Alcuin. The young monks file into the _scriptorium_ and one of them
is given the precious parchment volume containing a work of Bede or
Isidore or Augustine, or else some portion of the Latin Scriptures, or
even a heathen author. He reads slowly and clearly at a measured rate
while all the others, seated at their desks, take down his words; thus
perhaps a score of copies are made at once. Alcuin’s observant eye
watches each in turn and his correcting hand points out the mistakes in
orthography and punctuation. The master of Charles the Great, in that
true humility that is the charm of his whole behaviour, makes himself
the writing-master of his monks, stooping to the drudgery of faithfully
and gently correcting many puerile mistakes, and all for the love of
studies and for the love of Christ. Under such guidance and deeply
impressed by the fact that in the copying of a few books they were
saving learning and knowledge from perishing, and thereby offering a
service most acceptable to God, the copying in the _scriptorium_ went
on in sobriety from day to day. Thus were produced those improved
copies of books which mark the beginning of a new age in the conserving
and transmission of learning. Alcuin’s anxiety in this regard was
not undue, for the few monasteries where books could be accurately
transcribed were as necessary for publication in that time as are the
great publishing houses to-day.”[98]

Among the monasteries which, as early as the time of Charlemagne,
developed special literary activity, was that of S. Wandrille, where
the Abbot Gerwold (786-806) instituted one of the earlier schools of
the empire. A priest named Harduin took charge of this school. He
was said to be _in hac arte non mediocriter doctus_. It was further
stated that, _plurima ecclesiæ nostræ proprio sudore conscripta
reliquit volumina, id est volumen quatuor evangeliorum Romana litera
scriptum_.[99] (He had left for one church many books written by the
sweat of his brow, that is to say, a volume of the four Evangelists
written in the “Roman letter.”) This expression, _litera Romana_,
occurs frequently in the monastery chronicles and appears to indicate
the uncial script. The _scriptorium_ of St. Gall, in which was done
some of the most elaborate or important of the earlier literary work
of the monks, is frequently referred to in the chronicles of the
monasteries. Another important _scriptorium_ was that in the monastery
of Tournai, which, under the rule of the Abbot Odo, won for itself
great fame, so that its manuscripts were sought by the Fathers of the
Church far and wide, for the purpose of correcting by them copies with
less scholarly authority.[100]

The work of the scribes was not always voluntary; there is evidence
that it was not unfrequently imposed as a penance. In a codex from
Lorch[101] occur after the words, _Jacob scripsit_, written in by
another hand, the lines: _Quandam partem hujus libri non spontanea
voluntate, sed coactus, compedibus constrictus sicut oportet vagum
atque fugitivum vincire_.[102] (Jacob wrote ... a certain portion of
this book not of his own free will but under compulsion, bound by
fetters, just as a runaway and fugitive has to be bound.)

The aid of the students in the monastery schools was not
unfrequently called in. Fromund of Tegernsee wrote under a codex:
_Cœpi hunc libellum, sed pueri nostri quos docui, meo juvamine
perscripserunt_.[103] (I began this book, but the students whom I
taught, finished transcribing it with my help.)

The monk who was placed in charge of the _armarium_ was called
the _armarius_, and upon him fell the responsibility of providing
the writing materials, of dividing the work, and probably also of
preserving silence while the work was going on, and of reprimanding
the writers of careless or inaccurate script. In some monasteries the
_armarius_ must also have been the librarian, and, in fact, as much of
the work done in the writing-room was for the filling up of the gaps in
the library, it would be natural enough for the librarian to have the
planning of it. It was also the librarian, who, being in correspondence
with the custodians of the libraries of other monasteries, was best
able to judge what work would prove of service in securing new books
in exchange for duplicates of those in his own monastery. Upon the
_librarius_ or _armarius_, or both, fell the responsibility of securing
the loans of the codices of which copies were to be made. On such loans
it was usually necessary to give security in the shape of pledges
either of other manuscripts or of property apart from manuscripts.

The scribes were absolved from certain of the routine of the monastery
work. They were called into the fields or gardens only at the time of
harvest, or in case of special need. They had also the privilege of
visiting the kitchen, in order to polish their writing tablets, to melt
their wax, and to dry their parchment.[104]

The custom of reading at meals, while a part of the usual monastic
routine, was by no means confined to the monasteries. References to the
use of books at the tables of the more scholarly noblemen are found as
early as the time of Charlemagne. Eginhart records that Charlemagne
himself while at supper was accustomed to listen to histories and the
deeds of ancient kings. He delighted also in the books of S. Augustine
and especially in the _Civitate Dei_.[105]

In England, after the Norman conquest, there was for a time a cessation
of literary work in the Saxon monasteries. The Norman ecclesiastics,
however, in taking possession of certain of the older monasteries
and instituting also new monasteries of their own, carried on the
production of manuscripts with no less zeal. One of the most important
centres of literary activity in England was the monastery of St.
Albans, where the Abbot Paul secured, about the year 1100, funds
for instituting a _scriptorium_, and induced some wealthy friends
to present some valuable codices for the first work of the scribes.
As the monks at that time in St. Albans were not themselves skilled
in writing, Paul brought scribes from a distance, and, through the
liberality of his friends, secured funds by which they were paid daily
wages, and were able to work undisturbed. It would appear from this
description that some at least among these scribes were not themselves
monks.

In the thirteenth century, Matthew Paris compiled his chronicles,
the writing in which appears to have been, for the greater part at
least, done by his own hand, but at this time, in a large proportion
of the literary work carried on in the English monasteries, the
transcribing was done by paid scribes. This, however, was much less
the case in the Continental monasteries. In Corbie, towards the latter
half of the century, there is a record of zealous writing on the part
of a certain Brother Nevelo. Nevelo tells us that he had a penance to
work off for a grave sin, and that he was allowed to do this by work
in the _scriptorium_.[106] During this century, the monasteries of
the Carthusians were particularly active in their literary work, but
this work was limited almost entirely to theological and religious
undertakings. An exception is presented in the chronicles of the
Frisian monk Emo. While Emo was still a school-boy, he gave the hours
which his companions employed in play, to mastering penmanship and the
art of illuminating. Later, he was, with his brother Addo, a student in
the schools in Paris, Orleans, and Oxford, and while in these schools,
in addition to their work as students, they gave long hours of labour,
extending sometimes through the entire night, to the transcribing of
chronicles and to the preparation of copies of the so-called heathen
literature.

Emo was the first abbot of the monastery in Wittewierum (1204-1237),
and it is recorded that the abbot, while his brothers were sleeping,
devoted his nights to the writing and illuminating of the choir books.
In this monastery, Emo succeeded in bringing together in the _armarium
librorum_ an important collection of manuscripts, and he took pains
himself to give instructions to the monks in their work as scribes.

The quaint monastic record entitled the _Customs of Clugni_ was written
by Ulrich, a monk of Clugni, some time between the years 1077 and 1093
at the request or under the instructions of William, Abbot of Hirschau.
This was the Abbot William extolled by Trithemius as having restored
the Order of S. Benedict, which had almost fallen into ruin in
Germany. Trithemius speaks of his having founded eight monasteries and
restored more than one hundred, and says that next to the reformation
wrought by the foundation and influence of Clugni, the work done by
Abbot William was the most important recorded in the annals of his
Order.

William trained twelve of his monks to be excellent writers, and to
these was committed the office of transcribing the Holy Scriptures
and the treatises of the Fathers. Besides these, there were in the
_scriptorium_ of Hirschau a large number of lesser scribes, who wrought
with equal diligence in the transcription of other books. In charge
of the _scriptorium_ was placed a monk “well versed in all kinds of
knowledge,” whose business it was to assign the task for each scribe
and to correct the mistakes of those who wrote negligently. William
was Abbot of Hirschau for twenty-two years, and during this time his
monks wrote a great many volumes, a large proportion of which were
distributed to supply the wants of other and more needy monasteries.

There was often difficulty, particularly in the less wealthy
monasteries, in securing the parchment required for their work. It is
evident from such account-books as have been preserved, that throughout
the whole of Europe, but particularly in the north of the Continent
and in England, parchment continued to be a very costly commodity
until quite late in the thirteenth century. It was not unnatural that,
as a result of this difficulty, the monastic scribes should, when
pressed for material, have occasionally utilised some old manuscript by
cleaning off the surface, for the purpose of making a transcript of the
Scriptures, of some saintly legend, or of any other religious work the
writing of which came within the range of their daily duty.

There has been much mourning on the part of the scholars over the
supposed value of precious classics which may thus have been
destroyed, or of which but scanty fragments have been preserved in
the lower stratum of the palimpsest. Robertson is particularly severe
upon the ignorant clumsiness of the monks in thus destroying, for the
sake of futile legends, so much of the great literature of the world.
Among other authors, Robertson quotes in this connection Montfaucon as
saying that the greater part of the manuscripts on parchment which he
had seen (those of an ancient date excepted), are written on parchment
from which some former treatise had been erased. Maitland, who is of
opinion that the destruction of ancient literature brought about by
the monks has been much overestimated, points out that Robertson has
not quoted Montfaucon correctly, the statement of the latter being
expressly limited to manuscripts written since the “twelfth century.”
It is Maitland’s belief that a large proportion of the palimpsests
or doubly written manuscripts which bear date during the twelfth,
thirteenth, or fourteenth centuries, represent, as far as they are
monastic at all, not monastery writings placed upon classic texts, but
monastery work replacing earlier works of the monastery _scriptoria_.
Partial confirmation of this view is the fact that so large an interest
was taken by monks in all parts of Europe in the preservation and
transcribing of such classical works as came into their hands. In fact,
as previously pointed out, the preservation of any fragments whatsoever
of classical literature is due to the intelligent care of the monks. To
the world outside of the monastery, the old-time manuscripts were, with
hardly an exception, little more than dirty parchments.

It seems probable that a great part of such scraping of old manuscripts
as was done was not due to the requirements of the legends or missals,
but was perpetrated in order to carry on the worldly business of
secular men. An indication of the considerable use of parchment for
business purposes, and of instances of what we should to-day call
its abuse, is the fact that, as late as the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries, notaries were forbidden to practise until they had taken an
oath to use none but new parchment.[107]

The belief that the transcribing of good books was in itself a
protection against the wiles of the evil one, naturally added to the
feeling of regard in which the writer held his work, a feeling under
the influence of which it became not unusual to add at the close of the
manuscript an anathema against any person who should destroy or deface
it. A manuscript of St. Gall contains the following:

  Auferat hunc librum nullus hinc omne per ævum
  Cum Gallo partem quisquis habere cupit.[108]

[Let no one through all ages who wishes to have any part with Gallus
(the Saint or the Abbey) remove (or purloin) this book.]

In a Sacramentary of the ninth century given to St. Bénoît-sur-Loire,
the donor, having sent the volume as a present from across seas,
devotes to destruction like to that which came upon Judas, Ananias, and
Caiaphas any person who should remove the book from the monastery.[109]
In a manuscript of S. Augustine, now in the Bodleian Library is
written: “This book belongs to S. Mary of Robert’s Bridge; whosoever
shall steal it or sell it, or in any way alienate it from this house,
or mutilate it, let him be anathema maranatha. Amen.” A later owner
had found himself sufficiently troubled by this imprecation to write
beneath: “I, John, Bishop of Exeter, know not where the aforesaid house
is, nor did I steal this book, but acquired it in a lawful way.”[110]

In an exhortation to his monks, delivered in 1486, by John of
Trittenheim (or Trithemius), Abbot of Sponheim, the abbot, after
rebuking the monks for their sloth and negligence, goes on to say: “I
have diminished your labours out of the monastery, lest by working
badly you should only add to your sins; and have enjoined on you the
manual labour of writing and binding books.... There is, in my opinion,
no labour more becoming a monk than the writing of ecclesiastical
books, and preparing what is needful for others who write them, for
this holy labour will generally admit of being interrupted by prayer
and of watching for the food of the soul no less than of the body.
Need also urges us to labour diligently in writing books if we desire
to have at hand the means of usefully employing ourselves in spiritual
studies. For you will recall that all the library of this monastery,
which formerly was so fine and complete, had been dissipated, sold, and
made away with by the disorderly monks before us, so that when I came
here, I found but fourteen volumes. It is true that the industry of the
printing art, lately, in our own day, discovered at Mentz, produces
many volumes every day; but depressed as we are by poverty, it is
impossible for us to buy them all.”[111]

It was certainly the case that, after the invention of printing, there
was a time during which manuscripts came to be undervalued, neglected,
and even destroyed by wholesale, but Maitland is of opinion that this
time had been prepared for by a long period of gradually increasing
laxity of discipline and morals in many monastic institutions. This
view is borne out by the history of the Reformation, the popular
feeling in regard to which was undoubtedly very much furthered by the
demoralisation of the monasteries, a demoralisation which naturally
carried with it a breaking down of literary interests and pursuits.
There had, for some time, been less multiplication, less care, and less
use of books, and many a fine collection had mouldered away. According
to Martene and Mabillon, the destruction due to the heedlessness of
the monks themselves was largely a matter of the later times, that is,
of the fifteenth century and the last half of the fourteenth century.

Maitland is of the opinion that in the later portions of the Middle
Ages the work of the monastic scribes was more frequently carried on
not in a general writing-room, but in separate apartments or cells,
which were not usually large enough to contain more than one person.
Owing to the fact that writing was the chief and almost only in-doors
business of a monk not engaged in religious service, and because of
the great quantity of work that was done and the number of cells
devoted to it, these small rooms came to be generally referred to as
_scriptoria_, even when not actually used or particularly intended for
the purpose of writing. Thus we are told that Arnold, Abbot of Villers
in Brabant, from 1240 to 1250, when he resigned his office, occupied a
_scriptorium_ (he called it a _scriptoriolum_ or little writing cell),
where he lived as a private person in his own apartment.[112] These
separate cells were usually colder and in other ways less comfortable
than the common _scriptorium_. Lewis, a monk of Wessobrunn in Bavaria,
in an inscription addressed to the reader, in a copy he had prepared of
Jerome’s _Commentary on Daniel_, says: _Dum scripsit friguit, et quod
cum lumine solis scribere non potuit, perfecit lumine noctis_.[113]
(He was stiff with cold, while he wrote, and what he could not write
by the light of the sun, he completed by the light of night.) There
is evidence, however, in some of the better equipped monasteries, of
the warming of the cells by hot air from the stove in the calefactory.
Martene mentions that when S. Bernard, owing to the illness produced by
his early austerities, was compelled by the Bishop of Chalons to retire
to a cell, he could not be persuaded to relax the severity of his
asceticism so far as to permit the introduction of any fireplace or
other means of warming it. His friends, however, contrived, with pious
fraud, to heat his cell without his knowledge, by introducing hot air
through the stone floor under the bed.[114]

The _scriptorium_ of earlier times was, however, as previously
described, an apartment specially set aside as a general workroom and
capable of containing many workers, and in which many persons did, in
fact, work together, usually under the direction of a _librarius_ or
chief scribe, in a very business-like manner, in the transcription
of books. Maitland quotes from a document, which is, he states, one
of the very few existing specimens of French Visigothic manuscripts
in the uncial character, and which dates from the eighth century,
the following form of consecration or benediction, entitled (in
monastic Latin) _Orationem in scriptorio_: “Vouchsafe, O Lord, to
bless this _scriptorium_ of Thy servants and all that work therein:
that whatsoever sacred writings shall be here read or written by them,
they may receive with understanding and may bring the same to good
effect.”[115] (see also page 61).

In the more carefully constructed monasteries, the _scriptorium_ was
placed to adjoin the calefactory, which simplified the problem of the
introduction of hot air.

A further evidence, if such were needed, that the larger literary
undertakings were carried on in a _scriptorium_ common room and not
in separate cells, is given by the regulation of the general Chapter
of the Cistercian Order in 1134, which directs that the same silence
should be maintained in the _scriptorium_ as in the cloister: _In
omnibus scriptoriis ubicunque ex consuetudine monachi scribunt,
silentium teneatur sicut in claustro_.[116]

Odo, who in 1093 became Abbot of S. Martin at Tournai, writes that he
confided the management of the outside work of the monastery to Ralph,
the prior. This left the abbot free to devote himself to reading and to
supervising the work in his _scriptorium_. Odo exulted in the number
of writers whom the Lord had given to him. “If you had gone into the
cloister during the working hours, you would have seen a dozen scribes
writing, in perfect silence, at tables constructed for the purpose.”
Odo caused to be transcribed all of Jerome’s _Commentaries on the
Prophets_, all the works of S. Gregory, and all the works that he could
find of S. Augustine, S. Ambrose, Bishop Isidore, the Venerable Bede,
and Anselm, then Abbot of Bec and afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury.
Odo’s successor, Heriman, who gives this account, says with pride that
such a library as Odo brought together in S. Martin could hardly be
paralleled in any monastery in the country, and that other monasteries
were begging for texts from S. Martin’s with which to collate and
correct their own copies.[117]

Maitland mentions that certain of the manuscripts written in Odo’s
_scriptorium_, including the fourth volume of the _Gregorialis_ of
Alulfus, were (in 1845) in the library of Dr. Todd, of Trinity College,
Dublin.[118]

In estimating the extent of book production of the manuscript period,
we may very easily place too large a comparative weight on the
productive power of the Press. Maitland points out that although the
power of multiplication of literary productions was, of course, during
the Dark Ages infinitely below that which now exists, and while the
entire book production of the two periods may not be compared, yet
as regards those books which were considered as the standard works
in sacred literature and in the approved secular literature, the
difference was not so extreme as may easily be supposed. He enquires,
to emphasise his point, what proportion the copies of Augustine’s
_City of God_ and of Gregory’s _Morals_, _printed_ between the years
1700 and 1800, bear to those _written_ between the years 1100 and
1200.[119]

I think, with Maitland, that, according to the evidence on record,
for books such as those given above as typical examples, the written
production during the century selected would probably have exceeded the
number of copies of the same books turned out by the printing-presses
during the eighteenth century. We must recall to ourselves that for a
term of six or seven centuries, writing was a business, and was also
a religious duty; an occupation taken up by choice and pursued with a
degree of zeal, persistence, and enthusiasm for which in the present
day there is no parallel.

Mabillon speaks of a volume by Othlonus, a monk of S. Emmeram’s at
Ratisbon, who was born about the year 1013. In this book, which is
entitled _De ipsius tentationibus, varia fortuna, et scriptis_, the
monk gives an account of his literary labours and of the circumstances
which led to his writing the various works bearing his name.

“For the same reason, I think proper to add an account of the great
knowledge and capacity for writing which was given me by the Lord in
my childhood. When as yet a little child, I was sent to school and
quickly learned my letters, and I began, long before the usual time
of learning and without any order from the master, to learn the art
of writing. Undertaking this in a furtive and unusual manner, and
without any teacher, I got a habit of holding my pen wrongly, nor were
any of my teachers afterwards able to correct me on that point; for
I had become too much accustomed to it to be able to change. Those
who saw my earlier work unanimously decided that I should never write
well. After a short time the facility came to me, and while I was in
the monastery of Tegernsee (in Bavaria) I wrote many books.... Being
sent to Franconia while I was yet a boy, I worked so hard at writing
that before I returned I had nearly lost my sight.... After I became a
monk in the monastery of S. Emmeram, I was appointed the schoolmaster.
The duties of this office so fully occupied my time, that I was able
to do the transcribing in which I was interested only by night and on
holidays.... I was, however, able, in addition to writing the books
which I had myself composed, and the copies of which I gave away for
the edification of those who asked for them, to prepare nineteen
missals (ten for the abbots and monks in our own monastery, four for
the brethren at Fulda, and five for those in other places), three books
of the Gospels, and two with the Epistles and Gospels, which are called
_Lectionaries_; besides which, I wrote four service-books for matins.
I wrote in addition a good many books for the brethren at Fulda, for
the monks at Hirschfeld and at Amerbach, for the Abbot of Lorsch, for
certain friends at Passau, and for other friends in Bohemia, for the
monastery of Tegernsee, for the monastery of Pryel, for the monastery
of Obermünster and for that of Niedermünster, and for my sister’s son.
Moreover, to many others I gave or sent, at different times, sermons,
proverbs, and edifying writings.... Afterwards, old age’s infirmity of
various kinds hindered me.”[120]

If there were many hundred scribes of the diligence of Othlonus, the
mass of literature produced in the _scriptorium_ may very easily have
rivalled the later output of the printing-presses. The labours of
Othlonus were, if the records are to be trusted, eclipsed by those
of the nun Diemude or Diemudis of the monastery of Wessobrunn. An
anonymous monk of this monastery, writing in the year 1513, says:

“Diemudis was formerly a most devout nun of this our monastery of
Wessobrunn. [Pez states that Diemudis lived in the time of Gregory
VII., who became Pope in 1073. She was, therefore, though probably
somewhat younger, a contemporary of the monk Othlonus of Ratisbon.] For
our monastery was formerly double or divided into two parts; that is
to say, of monks and nuns. The place of the monks was where it now is;
but that of the nuns, where the parish church now stands. This virgin
was most skilful in the art of writing: for though she is not known to
have composed any work, yet she wrote with her own hand many volumes in
a most beautiful and legible character, both for divine service and for
the public library of the monastery. Of these books she has left a list
in a certain _plenarius_.[121] The titles are as follows:

A _Missal, with the Gradual and Sequences._ Another _Missal, with
the Gradual and Sequences_, given to the Bishop of Trèves. Another
_Missal, with the Epistles, Gospels, Graduals, and Sequences_. Another
_Missal, with the Epistles and Gospels for the year, the Gradual
and Sequences, and the entire service for baptism_. A _Missal, with
Epistles and Gospels_. A _Book of Offices_. Another _Book of Offices,
with the baptismal service_ (given to the Bishop of Augsburg). A
_Book, with the Gospels and Lessons_. A _Book, with the Gospels_. A
_Book, with the Epistles_. A _Bible_, in two volumes, given for the
estate in Pisinberch. A _Bible_, in three volumes. S. Gregory _ad
regaredum_. _S. Gregory on Ezekiel. Sermons and Homilies of certain
ancient Doctors_, three volumes. _Origen on the Old Testament. Origen
on the Canticles. Augustine on the Psalms_, three volumes. _Augustine
on the Gospels and on the First Epistle of S. John_, two volumes.
Augustine, _Epistles_, to the number of lxxv. Augustine, _Treatises_.
_S. Jerome’s Epistles_, to the number of clxiv. _The Tripartite History
of Cassiodorus. The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius._ S. Augustine,
_Fifty Sermons. The Life of S. Silvester. Jerome against Vigilantius._
Jerome, _De Consolatione Mortuorum. The Life of S. Blasius. The Life
of John the Almoner, Patriarch of Alexandria early in the seventh
century. Paschasius on the Body and Blood of Christ. The Conflict of
Lanfranc with Berengarius. The Martyrdom of S. Dionysius. The Life
of S. Adrian._ S. Jerome, _De Hebraicis Quæstionibus_. S. Augustine,
_Confessions. Canons. Glossa per A. B. C. Composita_ (_i. e._, a Gloss
alphabetically arranged).

These are the volumes written with her own hand by the aforesaid
handmaid of God, Diemudis, to the praise of God and of the holy
Apostles Peter and Paul, the patrons of the monastery.”[122]

The same writer says that Diemudis (whom he calls _exaratrix
diligentissima_) carried on a correspondence by very sweet letters
(_epistolæ suaves valde_) with Herluca, who was for thirty-six years a
nun at Eppach, and that the letters were in his time (1513), that is
four and a half centuries later, extant in the monastery of Bernried.


=The Influence of the Scriptorium.=--Hildebrand, who, under the name
Gregory VII., became Pope in 1073, appears to have made large use of
the literary facilities of the monasteries to bring effectively before
the public the doctrinal teachings which seemed to him essential for
the wholesome development of the strength of the Church in its great
contest with the imperial power and for the proper rule of the world.
The histories of the time speak of monks travelling throughout the
Empire circulating writings in favour of the Church, by means of which
writings schism could be withstood and the zeal of good Catholics
aroused.[123]

Certain of the monasteries, in connection with their literary activity
in behalf of the Pope, came into special disfavour with the Emperor.
Among them was Hirschau, the importance of whose literary work has
been previously referred to. This monastery fell under the displeasure
of the Emperor Frederick IV., but the monks, says their own annalist,
sustained by their prayers, braved the sword of the tyrant and despised
the menaces of offended princes.[124] Abbot William of Hirschau had for
twenty-two years been the soul of monastic regeneration in Germany. He
was one of the great scholars of his time and had done not a little to
further the literary pre-eminence of his monastery, and he became one
of the most valiant defenders of the popes during this contest. Among
other ecclesiastical writers whose pens were active in the defence of
the papal decrees and in assailing the utterances of the schismatics,
and whose work, by means of the distributing machinery which had
already been organised between the monasteries, secured for the time
a large circulation, were Bernard, at one time master of the schools
of Constance, but later a monk at Hirschau; Bernold, a monk of St.
Blaise; Adelbert, a monk of Constance; and Gebhard, another monk of
Hirschau.[125]

Gregory was possibly the first pope who made effective and extended
use of the writings of devout authors for the purpose of influencing
public opinion. If we may judge by the results of his long series of
contests with the imperial power in Germany, the selection of these
literary weapons was one proof of his sagacity. In this contest, the
_scriptoria_ of the monasteries proved more powerful than the armies of
the emperors; as, five hundred years later, the printing-presses of the
Protestants proved more effective than the Bulls of the Papacy.

The most important, in connection with its influence and consequences,
of the discoveries made by scholars concerning the fraudulent character
of historic documents, occurred as late as the beginning of the
fifteenth century. It was about 1440 when Laurentius Valla, at that
time acting as secretary for King Alphonso of Naples, wrote his report
upon the famous _Donation_ of Constantine, the document upon which the
Roman Church had for nearly a thousand years based its claims to be the
direct representative in Western Europe of the old imperial authority.
Valla brought down upon his head much ecclesiastical denunciation.
The evidences produced by him of the fact that the document had been
fabricated a century or more after the death of Constantine could
not be gotten rid of, and, although for a number of years the Church
continued to maintain the sacred character of the _Donation_, and
has, in fact, never formally admitted that it was fraudulent, it was
impossible, after the beginning of the sixteenth century, even for the
ecclesiastics themselves to base any further claims for the authority
of the Church upon this discredited parchment.

Of almost equal importance was the discovery of the fabrication of the
pseudo Isidoric _Decretals_. The _Decretals_ had been concocted early
in the ninth century by certain priests in the West Frankish Church,
and had been eagerly accepted by Pope Nicholas I., who retained in the
archives of the Vatican the so-called originals. The conclusion that
the _Decretals_ had been fraudulently imposed upon the Church was not
finally accepted until the beginning of the fourteenth century. It
was with the humanistic movement of the Renaissance that historical
criticism had its birth, and a very important portion of the work of
such criticism consisted in the analysis of the lack of foundation of a
large number of fabulous legends upon which many of the claims of the
Church had been based.

There were evidently waves of literary interest and activity in the
different monasteries, between which waves the art of writing fell
more or less into disuse and the libraries were neglected. In the
monastery at Murbach, for instance, in which, in the beginning of the
century, important work had been done, it is recorded that in 1291
no monks were found who were able to write, and the same was said in
1297 of the more famous monastery of St. Gall.[126] On the other hand,
the newly organised Orders of travelling or mendicant monks took an
active interest in preparing and in distributing manuscript copies
of works of doctrine at about the time when, in the older and richer
Orders, literary earnestness was succumbing to laziness and luxury.
With these mendicant monks, began also to come into circulation a
larger proportion of original writings, transcribed and corrected, and
probably to some extent sold by the authors themselves. Richard de Bury
makes bitter references in his _Philobiblon_ (chapters v. and vi.) to
the general antagonism of the Church towards literature, but speaks
with appreciation of the educational services rendered by the mendicant
monks. Writing was done also by the monks of the Minorite Order, but
their rules and their methods of life called for such close economy
that the manuscripts left by them are distinguished by the meagreness
and inadequacy of the material and the closely crowded script, which,
in order further to save space, contains many abbreviations.

Roger Bacon is said to have come into perplexity because, when he
wished to send his treatises to Pope Clement IV., he could find no
one among the Brothers of his Order who was able to assist him in
transcribing the same, while scribes outside of the Order to whom he
attempted to entrust the work gave him untrustworthy and slovenly
copies.[127]

With the beginning of the fourteenth century, it is possible to note a
scholarly influence exercised upon certain of the monasteries by the
universities. The most enterprising of the monks made opportunities
for themselves to pass some years of their novitiate in one or more
of the universities, or later secured leave of absence from the
monasteries for the purpose of visiting the universities. It also
happened that from the monasteries where literary work had already
been successfully carried on, monks were occasionally called to the
universities in order to further the literary undertakings of the
theological faculties. Finally, the abbots, and other high officials of
the monasteries, were, after the beginning of the fourteenth century,
more frequently appointed from among the ecclesiastics who had had a
university training.

The library in Heidelberg, the university of which dates from 1386,
received from the monastery at Salem a large number of beautiful
manuscripts, and finally, an illuminated breviary was completed in 1494
by the Cistercian Amandus, who, after the destruction of his monastery
in Strasburg, had found refuge in Salem, where in 1529 he became abbot.
There is evidence that, at this time, both in Salem and in other
monasteries in which the business of manifolding and of selling or
exchanging manuscripts became important, a large proportion of the work
of illustrating or illuminating was done by paid artists.

After the reform movement which began with the Council of Basel, there
came into existence, in connection with the renewal of theological
discussions, a fresh literary activity in many of the monasteries.
In the monastery at Camp, in 1440, the library was renewed and very
much extended, and here were written by Guillaume de Reno, _scriptor
egregius nulli illo tempore in arte sua secundus_, the _Catholicon_,
books of the Mass, and other devotional works. Abbot Heinrich von
Calcar provided Guillaume for eighteen years with a yearly supply of
parchment, valued at seventeen florins, and of other writing material.

In Michelsberg, Abbot Ulrich III. (1475-1483) and his successor Andreas
restored the long-time deserted library, and by work by the scribes
of the monastery and through the exchange of works for the productions
of other monasteries, secured an important collection of manuscripts.
In 1492, Andreas, abbot of the monastery of Bergen, near Magdeburg,
renewed the _scriptorium_, which, later, became active in the
production of copies of works connected with this earlier reformation.

Adolph von Hoeck, who died in 1516, Prior of Scheda in Westphalia, was
a skilled scribe as well as a zealous reformer. In Monsee, a certain
Brother, Jacob of Breslau, who died in 1480, was said to have written
so many volumes that six horses could with difficulty bear the burden
of them.[128] In the monastery at Tegernsee, already referred to,
there was, under Abbot Conrad V. (1461-1492), an active business in
the manifolding and distribution of writings. The same was the case
in Blaubeuern, where, as early as 1475, a printing-press was put into
operation, but the preparation of manuscripts continued until the end
of the century. Among the works issued from Blaubeuern in manuscript
form after the beginning of printing, were the _Chronicles of Monte
Cassino_, by Andreas Ysingrin, completed in 1477, and the _Life of the
Holy Wilhelm of Hirschau_, by Brother Silvester, completed in 1492.[129]

This year of 1492 appears to have been one of exceptional intellectual
as well as physical activity. It records not merely the completion of a
number of important works marking the close of the manuscript period of
literary production, but the publication, as will be noted in a later
chapter, of a long series of the more important of the earlier printed
books in Mayence, Basel, Venice, Milan, and Paris.

In Belgium, through the first half of the fifteenth century, while many
of the monasteries had fallen into a condition of luxurious inactivity,
work was still carried on in the Laurentium monastery of Liége by
Johann of Stavelot, and by other zealous scribes, and in several other
of the Benedictine monasteries of the Low Countries the _scriptoria_
were kept busied. Towards the end of the fifteenth century, and for
some years after the beginning of the work of the German printers,
the production of manuscripts in Germany continued actively in the
monastery of S. Peter at Erfurt, and in the monasteries of S. Ulrich
and Afra in Augsburg, the work of which has been recorded with full
precision and detail in the famous catalogue of Wilhelm Wittwer.

In 1472, in this latter monastery, Abbot Melchior founded the first
printing-office at Augsburg in order to give to the monks continued
employment, and in order also to be able to enlarge the library by
producing copies of books for exchange. It was a long time, however,
before the work of the printing-press came to be sufficiently
understood to bring to a stop the labours of the scribes in manifolding
manuscripts for sale and for exchange. The writings of the nun Helena
of Hroswitha, the _Chronicle of Urspergense_, and other works continued
to be prepared in manuscript form after printed editions were in
the market. The same was the case with the great choir books, which
continued during nearly half the century to be very largely prepared
by hand in the _scriptoria_. This persistence of the old methods was
partly due to habit and to the difficulty of communication with the
centres in which the printing-presses were already at work, but was
very largely, of course, the result of the fact that in the monasteries
was always available a large amount of labour, and that the use of this
labour for the preparation of sacred books had come to form part of the
religious routine of the institution.

With the development of the system of common schools, the educational
work which had previously been carried on in the convents was very
largely given up, thus throwing upon the hands of the monks a still
greater proportion of leisure time. In 1492, Johann of Trittenheim,
Abbot of Sponheim, wrote to the Abbot Gerlach of Deutz a letter, _De
Laude Scriptorum_, in which he earnestly invokes the scribes (he was
addressing the scribes of the monasteries) by no means to permit
themselves to be deterred from their holy occupation by the invasion
of the printing-presses. Such admonitions might continue the work of
the monks in certain of the _scriptoria_, but were, of course, futile
in the attempt to preserve for any length of time the business of
circulating manuscript copies in competition with the comparatively
inexpensive, and often beautiful, productions of the printers.

An important part in the work of the preparation and distribution
of manuscripts was taken by the so-called “Brothers of common life”
(_clerici de vita communi_), who later, also occupied themselves with
the new invention of printing. They cannot properly be classed with
the scribes of the monasteries, for they made their work a trade and a
means of revenue. This practice obtained, to be sure, also with certain
of the monasteries, but it must be considered as exceptional with them.
The Brothers differed also from the writers in the university towns and
elsewhere, who prepared manuscripts for renting out to students and
readers, partly because of the special conditions of their Brotherhood,
under which the earnings of individual Brothers all went into a common
treasury, but chiefly because they made their work as scribes a means
of religious and moral instruction. The earnings secured from the sale
of manuscripts were also largely devoted to the missionary work of the
Brotherhood. The chief authority for the history of the Brotherhood is
the work of Delprat, published in Amsterdam in 1856.

The Brotherhood house in Deventer, Holland, founded by Gerhard
Groote in 1383, became an important workshop for the production and
distribution of manuscripts. Delprat states that the receipts from
these sales were for a time the main support of the Brotherhood house.
In 1389, a copy of the Bible which had been written out by Brother
Jan von Enkhuizen was sold for five hundred gulden in gold.[130] In
Liége, the Brothers were known as _Broeders van de Penne_, because they
carried quill pens in their caps. Groote seems himself to have taken
a general supervision of this business of the production of books,
selecting the books to be manifolded, verifying the transcripts, and
arranging for the sale of the copies which were passed as approved.
Florentius Radewijus had the general charge of the manuscripts (filling
the rôle which to-day would be known as that of stock clerk) and of
preparing the parchment for the scribes and writing in the inscriptions
of the finished manuscripts. Later, with the development of the Order
and the extension of its book business, each Brotherhood house had its
_librarius_, or manager of the manufacturing and publishing department;
its _rubricator_, who added the initial letters or illuminated letters
in the more expensive manuscripts; its _ligator_, who had charge of the
binding, etc.

It was a distinctive feature of the works prepared by the Brothers that
they were very largely written in the language of the land instead
of in Latin, which elsewhere was, as we have seen, the exclusive
language for literature. It was, in fact, one of the charges made by
the ecclesiastics against the Order that they put into common language
doctrinal instruction which ordinary readers, without direct guidance
of the Church, were not competent to understand, and which tended,
therefore, to work mischief. In 1398, the Brothers took counsel on
the point whether it were permissible to distribute among the people
religious writings in Low German, and they appear to have secured the
authorisation required. They laid great stress upon the precision of
their script, and they were, as a rule, opposed to needless expenditure
for ornamentation of text or of covers. Under the influence of Groote,
the work of preparing manuscripts of good books was taken up by the
monks and the nuns of Windesheim, but, according to Busch, the books
produced in Windesheim were but rarely sold. In some cases these seem
to have been distributed gratis, while in others they were given in
exchange for other books required for the library of the monastery or
convent.[131]

Wattenbach says that the Brothers in the Home at Hildesheim were
called upon for an exceptional amount of labour in preparing books
of the Mass and other devotional works in connection with the reform
movement in the monasteries of lower Saxony, which was active in
the middle of the fifteenth century. In the year 1450 (the year in
which Gutenberg perfected his printing-press) it is recorded that
the Hildesheim Brothers earned from the sale of their manuscripts no
less than a thousand gulden.[132] In connection with their interest
in the production and distribution of cheap literature, the Brothers
did not fail to make very prompt and intelligent utilisation of the
new invention of printing, and among the earlier printing-offices
established in Germany and in the Low Countries were those organised by
the Brothers at Deventer, Zwoll, Gouda, Bois-le-duc, Brussels, Louvain,
Marienthal, Rostock, etc.

=The Literary Monks of England.=--In accepting the influence of
literary ideals, the Anglo-Saxon monks were much slower and less
imaginative than the quicker and more idealistic Celts. The quickening
of the intellectual development of the monasteries in England was
finally brought about through the influence of Celtic missionaries
coming directly from Ireland or from the Irish monasteries of the
Scottish region, such as Iona and its associates.

Before the literary work of the English monasteries began, there was
already in existence a considerable body of literature, which was
the expression of the pre-christian conceptions and ideals of the
Anglo-Saxons and their Scandinavian kinsmen. Certain of the most famous
of the literary creations of the Anglo-Saxons were probably produced
subsequent to the time of the acceptance by the people of Christianity,
but these productions continued to represent the imagination and the
methods of thought of the pagan ancestry, and to utilise as their
themes the old-time legends. These Saxon compositions were almost
exclusively in the form of poems, epics, and ballads devoted to
accounts of the achievements of heroes (more or less legendary) in
their wars with each other, and in their adventures with the gods
and with the powers of magic and evil. In these early epics, devoted
chiefly to strife, women bear but a small part, and the element of love
enters hardly at all.

While it is doubtless the case that the Saxon epics, like the Greek
poems of the Homeric period and the compositions of the Celtic bards,
were preserved for a number of generations in the memories of the
reciters, there are references indicating that the writing of the
texts on the parchment began at a comparatively early date after
the occupation of England. This would imply the existence of some
trained scribes before work was begun in the _scriptoria_ of the
Saxon monasteries. Such lay scribes must, however, have been very few
indeed, and the task of handing down for posterity the old legendary
ballads must have depended chiefly upon the _scops_, which was the
name given to the poets or bards attached to the court of a prince or
chieftain. It is, however, not until the acceptance of Christianity by
the Saxons that there comes to be any abiding interest in letters. As
Jusserand puts it: “These same Anglo-Saxons, whose literature at the
time of their invasion consisted of the songs mentioned by Tacitus,
_carmina antiqua_, which they trusted to memory alone, who compiled
no books, and who for written monuments had Runic inscriptions graven
on utensils or on commemorative stones, now have in their turn monks
who compose chronicles and kings who know Latin. Libraries are formed
in the monasteries; schools are attached to them; manuscripts are thus
copied and illuminated in beautiful caligraphy and in splendid colours.
The volutes and knots with which the worshippers of Woden ornamented
their _fibulæ_, their arms, the prows of their ships, are reproduced in
purple and azure, the initials of the Gospels. The use made of them is
different, the taste remains the same.”

It is undoubtedly the case that the preservation of such fragments of
Anglo-Saxon literature as have come down to us, and probably of most
of the Scandinavian compositions which were transmitted through the
Saxons, was due to the monastery scribes whose copies were in part
transcribed from the earlier parchments and in part were taken down
from the recitals made in the monasteries by the bards or minstrels.
The service was in fact similar to that previously rendered by the
Irish monks to Celtic literature, and by the scribes of Gaul and Italy
to the writings of classic times.

The identity or kinship of much of the heroic poetry of the
Anglo-Saxons with that of the Scandinavians is pointed out by Grein in
his _Anglo-Saxon Library_, and by Vigfusson and York-Powell in their
_Corpus Poeticum Boreale_. The greatest of the old English epics,
_Beowulf_, sometimes called “the Iliad of the Saxons,” was put into
written form some time in the eighth century and, like all similar
epics, was doubtless the result of the weaving together of a series
of ballads of varied dates and origins. The text of the poem has been
preserved almost complete in a manuscript, now placed in the Cottonian
collection in the British Museum, which dates from the latter part of
the tenth century.

It will be understood that, as a matter of convenience in a brief
reference of this kind, I am using the term Saxon and Anglo-Saxon in
no strict ethnological sense, but simply to designate the Teutonic
element of the people of England, an element whose influence is usually
considered to have begun with the landing of Hengist and Horsa in 451.

The first of the Anglo-Saxon monks to be ranked as a poet appears to
have been the cowherd Cædmon, a vassal of the Abbess Hilda and a monk
of Whitby. Caædmon’s songs were sung about 670. He is reported to have
put into verse the whole of Genesis and Exodus, and, later, the life of
Christ and the Acts of the Apostles, but his work was not limited to
the paraphrasing of the Scriptures. A thousand years before the time
of _Paradise Lost_, the Northumbrian monk sang before the Abbess Hilda
the _Revolt of Satan_. Fragments of this poem, discovered by Archbishop
Usher, and printed for the first time in 1655, have been preserved, and
have since that date been frequently published.[133] Cædmon died in
680, and Milton in 1674. The Abbess Hilda, who was herself a princess
of royal family, appears to have had a large interest in furthering the
study of literature, not only in the nunnery founded by her, but in a
neighbouring monastery which came largely under her influence. In both
nunnery and monastery, schools for the children of the district were
instituted, which schools were probably the earliest of their class in
that portion of Britain.

The Northumbrian poet Cynewulf, whose work was done between the
years 760 and 800, may be referred to as a connecting link between
the group of national or popular bards and the literary workers of
the Church. His earlier years were passed as a wandering minstrel,
but later in life he passed through some religious experience and
entered a monastery, devoting himself thereafter to religious poetry.
His conversion was doubtless the means of preserving (through the
_scriptorium_ of his monastery) such of his compositions as have
remained, and thus of making a place for his name among the authors of
England.

Among the earlier Saxon monks whose educational work was important are
to be included S. Wilfred (634-709) and S. Cuthbert (637-687). Wilfred
introduced into England the Rule of the Benedictines, and exercised
a most important influence in instituting Benedictine monasteries
and in bringing these monasteries into relations with the Church of
Rome. His life was a stormy one, but notwithstanding the various
contentions with the several monarchs who at that time divided between
them the territory of England, and in spite of several periods of
banishment, he found time to carry on a great work in furthering the
intellectual life of his Benedictine monks. It was largely due to him
that the Benedictine monasteries accepted almost from the first the
responsibility of conducting the schools of the land. These schools
achieved so great repute that Anglo-Saxons of high rank were eager
to confide their children to Wilfred to be brought up in one of his
monastic establishments. At the close of their school training they
were to choose between the service of God and that of the King. Wilfred
is also to be credited with the establishing within the English
monasteries of a course of musical instruction, the teachers of which
had largely been trained in the great school of Gregorian music at
Canterbury.

Another of the Saxon abbots whose name remains associated with the
intellectual life of the monasteries was Benedict Biscop. Montalembert
speaks of Biscop as representing science and art in the Church, as
Wilfred had stood for the organising of the English Church as a public
body, and Cuthbert for the renewal and development of its life. The
monasteries of Wearmouth and of Yarrow, founded by Biscop, were
endowed with great libraries and became the centres of an active
literary life. Biscop made no less than six journeys to Rome in the
interest of his monastery work, and, in the seventh century, a journey
to Rome from Britain was not an easy experience. His fourth expedition,
begun in the year 671, was undertaken partly in the interests of
literature and for the purpose of securing books for the education of
his monks. He obtained in the Papal capital a rich cargo of books,
some of which he had purchased while others were given to him. In
Vienne, the ancient capital of Gaul, he secured a further collection.
The monastery of Wearmouth, founded in 673, had the benefit of a large
portion of the books brought from Italy by the abbot. It was his
desire that each monastery for which he was responsible should possess
a library, which seemed to him indispensable for the instruction,
discipline, and the good organisation of the community. Biscop’s fifth
journey was made partly for the purpose of securing pictures, coloured
images, and artistic decorations for the chapel of the monastery, but
the sixth pilgrimage, made in 685, was again devoted almost entirely to
the collection of books.

For the details of the work of Biscop in the organisation of his
monasteries and in the supervision of the work in their _scriptoria_,
and concerning his various architectural and artistic undertakings, we
are largely indebted to the historian Beda, or Bede. Bede was a pupil
of Biscop in the monastery of Yarrow, and it was in this monastery that
were written the famous _Chronicles_. It was the time of comparative
peace in the island which preceded the first Danish invasion. The fame
of the scholar who produced these chronicles was destined to eclipse
that of nearly all the Saxon saints and kings, who were in fact known
to posterity principally through the pen of the Venerable Bede. It is
to Biscop, however, that should be credited the literary surroundings
under which Bede was educated, and it is probable that without
the stimulating influence of the books secured by the abbot in his
wearisome journeys to Southern Europe, the monk would hardly have had
the capacity or the incentive to complete his work.

Coelfried, who later became Abbot of Yarrow, and who, after the death
of Biscop, was in charge also of the monastery of Wearmouth, continued
the interest of his predecessor in the libraries and in the work done
by the scribes in the _scriptoria_. Among the books brought from Rome
by Biscop was a curious work on cosmography, which King Alfred was
very anxious to possess. Abbot Coelfried finally consented to let the
King have the book in exchange for land sufficient to support eight
families. Coelfried had had made in the _scriptorium_ of Wearmouth two
complete copies of the Bible according to the version of S. Jerome, the
text of which had been brought from Rome. These copies were placed, one
in the church of Wearmouth and one in that of Yarrow, and were open
for the use not only of the monks, but of any others who might desire
to consult them and who might be able to read the script. Montalembert
refers to this instance as a refutation of “the stupid calumny” which
represents the Church as having in former times interdicted to her
children the knowledge of the sacred Scriptures.[134]

When Aldhelm, who became Bishop of Sherborn in the year 705, went
to Canterbury to be consecrated by his old friend and companion
Berthwold (_pariter literis studuerant, pariterque viam religionis
triverant_--together they had studied literature and together they had
followed the path of religion), the Archbishop kept him there many
days, taking counsel with him about the affairs of his diocese. Hearing
of the arrival during this time of ships at Dover, he went there to
inspect their unloading and to see if they had brought anything in his
way (_si quid forte commodum ecclesiastico usui attulissent nautæ qui
e Gallico sinu in Angliam provecti librorum copiam apportassent_--to
see whether the ships which had arrived from the French coast had
brought, with the books which formed a part of their cargoes, any
volumes of value for the work of the Church). Among many other books
he saw one containing the whole of the Old and New Testaments, which
book he bought, and which, according to William of Malmesbury, who in
the twelfth century wrote the life of Aldhelm, was at that time still
preserved at Sherborn.[135]

The great Bible given by King Offa, in 780, to the church at Worcester
is described in the chronicle of Malmesbury as _Magnam Bibliam_.[136]
As before indicated, however, the common name of this time for a
collection of the Scriptures was not _Biblia_ but _Bibliotheca_. In
a return of their property which the monks of St. Riquier at Centule
made in the year 831, by order of Louis the Débonnaire, we find, among
a considerable quantity of books: _Bibliotheca integra ubi continentur
libri lxxii., in uno volumine_ (a complete Bible, in which seventy-two
books are comprised in one volume), and also _Bibliotheca dispersa in
voluminibus xiv._[137] (a Bible divided into fourteen volumes).

Fleury says of Olbert, Abbot of Gembloux: _Étant abbé, il amassa à
Gembloux plus de cent volumes d’auteurs ecclésiastiques, et cinquante
d’auteurs profanes, ce qui passoit pour une grande Bibliothèque_.[138]
Warton, using Fleury for his authority, speaks of the “incredible
labour and immense expense” which Olbert had given to the formation
of this library. There is, however, no authority in the quotation
from Fleury for such a description of the exceptional nature of the
labour and of the outlay. On the contrary, Fleury goes on to say that
Olbert, who had been sent to reform and restore the monastery, which
was in a state of great poverty and disorder, had put the monks to
work at writing, in order to keep them from being idle. He himself set
an example of industry as a scribe by writing out, with his own hand,
the whole of the Old and the New Testament, a work which was completed
in the year 1040.[139] Maitland calculates that a scribe must be both
expert and industrious to perform in less than ten months the task
of transcribing all the books of the Old and the New Testament. He
estimates, further, that at the rate at which the law stationers of
London paid their writers in his time (1845), such a transcript would
cost, for the writing only, between sixty and seventy pounds.[140]

The sterling service rendered by King Alfred to the literary interests
of England was important in more ways than one, and while his work does
not strictly belong to the record of the English monasteries, it may
properly enough be associated with the literary history of the English
Church; for the King had been adopted as a spiritual son by Pope Leo
IV., and in organising and supervising the work of the Church, he took
upon himself a large measure of the responsibilities which later were
discharged by the Primate. Alfred ruled over the West Saxons from 871
to 901. His reign was a stormy one, and during a number of years it
seemed doubtful whether the existence of the little Saxon Kingdom could
be maintained against the assaults of the Danes. There came finally,
however, a period of peace when Alfred, with Winchester as his capital,
was able to give attention to the organisation of education in his
kingdom.

During the long years of invasion and of civil war, the literary
interests and culture that had come to the Saxons through the Romans
had been in great part swept away. The collections of books had been
burned and could not be replaced because the clerics had forgotten
their Latin. Alfred complained that at the time of his accession in
Winchester he could not find south of the Thames a single Englishman
able to translate a letter from Latin into English. “When I considered
all this, I remembered also how I saw, before it had all been ravaged
and burned, how the churches throughout the whole of England stood
filled with treasures and books, and there was also a great multitude
of God’s servants, but they had very little knowledge of the books;
they could not understand any of them because they were not written
in their own language.” Alfred can find but one explanation for the
omission of the “good and wise men who were formerly all over England”
to leave translations of these books. “They did not think that men
could ever be so careless and that learning could so soon decay.”
The King recalls, however, that there are still left many who “can
read English writing.” “I began therefore among the many and manifold
troubles of this Kingdom, to translate into English the book which
is called in Latin _Pastoralis_ and in English _Shepherd’s Book_
(_Hirdeboc_), sometimes word for word and sometimes according to the
sense, as I had learned it from Plegmund, my Archbishop, and Asser, my
Bishop, and Grimbold my Mass-priest, and John my Mass-priest.”[141] It
will be noted in these references of King Alfred, that the collections
of books, the loss of which he laments, had been contained in the
churches. It was also to the ecclesiastics that he was turning for help
in the work of rendering into English the instruction for his people to
be found in the few Latin volumes that had been preserved.

Jusserand says that Asser was to Alfred what Alcuin had been to
Charlemagne, and that he helped the King, by means of the production
of translations and by founding schools, to preserve and to spread
learning. King Alfred was, however, not content with using his royal
authority and influence for the instituting of schools, but himself
gave to work as a translator personal time and labour which must
have been spared with difficulty from his duties as a ruler and as a
military commander. He chooses for his translations books likely to
fill up the greatest gaps in the minds of his countrymen, “some books
that are most needful for all men to know”: the _Book of Orosius_,
which is to serve as a hand-book of universal history; the _Chronicles
of Bede_, that will instruct them concerning the history of their own
ancestors; the _Pastoral Rule of S. Gregory_, which will make clear
to churchmen their ecclesiastical duties; and the _Consolation of
Philosophy of Boëthius_, recommended as a guide for the lives of both
ecclesiastics and laymen. These royal translations are at once placed
in the _scriptoria_ of the monasteries and in the writing-rooms of the
monastery schools for manifolding, and secure through these channels an
immediate and important educational influence.

It is also under the instructions of Alfred that the old national
chronicles, written in the Anglo-Saxon tongue, are copied, corrected,
and continued. Of these chronicles, seven, more or less complete and
differing from each other to some extent, have been preserved. The
history of the world presents possibly no other instance of a monarch
who devoted himself so steadfastly, with his own personal labour, to
the educational and spiritual development of his people.

In the latter portion of the tenth century, S. Dunstan, Archbishop
of Canterbury under King Edgar, takes up the task of instructing the
clergy and people. Under his influence, new monasteries are endowed,
a further series of monastery schools is instituted, and special
attention is given in the _scriptoria_ and in the writing-rooms of the
schools to the production of copies of translations of pious works.
The special literary feature of the work done in Dunstan’s school was
the attention given to the production of collections of sermons in the
vulgar tongue. A number of these collections has been preserved, an
example of which, known as the _Blickling Homilies_ (from Blickling
Hall, Norfolk, where the MS. was found) was compiled before 971. The
series also included homilies by Ælfric, who was Abbot of Eynsham in
1005, and sermons of Wulfstan, who was Bishop of York in 1002.

The canons of Ælfric were written between the years 950 and 1000. The
authorities do not appear to be clear whether these canons were the
work of the Archbishop or of a grammarian of the same name, while,
according to one theory, the Archbishop and the grammarian were the
same person. The canons were addressed to Wulfin, Bishop of Sherborn,
and they were written in such a form that the Bishop might communicate
them to his clergy as a kind of episcopal charge. The twenty-first
canon orders: “Every priest also, before he is ordained, must have
the arms belonging to his spiritual work; that is, the holy books,
namely, the _Psalter_, the _Book of Epistles_, the _Book of Gospels_,
the _Missal_, the _Book of Hymns_, the _Manual_, the _Calendar_
(_Computus_), the _Passional_, the _Penitential_, the _Lectionary_.
These books a priest requires and cannot do without, if he would
properly fulfil his office and desires to teach the law to the people
belonging to him. And let him carefully see that they are well
written.”[142]

The library of the English monastery or priory was under the care of
the chantor, who could neither sell, pawn, nor lend books without an
equivalent pledge; he might, however, with respect to neighbouring
churches or to persons of consideration, relax somewhat the strictness
of this rule. In the case of a new foundation, the King sometimes sent
letters-patent to the different abbeys requesting them to give copies
of theological and religious books in their own collections. In certain
instances, the King himself provided such transcripts for the new
foundation. In the catalogue of the abbatial libraries of England,
prepared by Leland, record is found of only the following classics:
Cicero and Aristotle (these two appear in nearly all the catalogues),
Terence, Euclid, Quintus Curtius, Sidonius Apollinaris, Julius
Frontinus, Apuleius, and Seneca.[143] It is difficult from such a list
to arrive at the basis or standard of selection.

Thomas Duffus Hardy gives some interesting information concerning
the later literary and historical work done in the monasteries of
Britain,[144] and for a portion of the following notes concerning
this work I am chiefly indebted to him. The Abbey of St. Albans was
founded towards the close of the eighth century, but it was not until
the latter part of the eleventh century, or nearly three hundred years
later, that the _scriptorium_ was instituted. The organisation of the
_scriptorium_ was due to Paul, the fourteenth abbot, who presided
over the monastery from 1077 to 1093, and who had the assistance in
this work of the Bishop Lanfranc. Paul was by birth a Norman, and was
esteemed a man of learning as well as of piety. After the _scriptorium_
had been opened, the abbot placed in it eight _Psalters_, a _Book of
Collects_, a _Book of Epistles_, a book containing the Gospels for the
year, two _Gospels_ bound in gold and silver and ornamented with gems,
and twenty-eight other notable volumes. In addition to these, there was
a number of ordinals, costumals, missals, troparies, collectories, and
other books for the use of the monks in their devotions. This summary
of the first contents of the library is taken by Hardy from the _Gesta
Abbatum_, a chronicle of St. Albans.

The literary interests of Paul were, it appears, continued by a
large proportion at least of his successors, and many of these made
important contributions to the library. Geoffrey, the sixteenth abbot,
gave to the _scriptorium_ a missal bound in gold, and another missal in
two volumes, both incomparably illuminated in gold and written in an
open and legible script. He also gave a precious illuminated psalter, a
book containing the benediction and sacraments, a book of exorcism, and
a collectory. (The description is taken from the _Gesta_.)

Ralph, the seventeenth abbot, was said to have become a lover of books
after having heard Wodo of Italy expound the Scriptures. He collected
with diligence a large number of valuable manuscripts. Robert de
Gorham, who was called the reformer of the liberty of the Church of St.
Albans, after becoming prior, gave many books to the _scriptorium_,
more than could be mentioned by the author of the _Gesta_. Simon,
who became abbot in 1166, caused to be created the office of
historiographer. Simon had been educated in the abbey, and did not a
little to add to its fame as a centre of literature. He repaired and
enlarged the _scriptorium_, and he kept two or three scribes constantly
employed in it. The previous literary abbots had for the most part
brought from without the books added to the collection, but it was
under Simon that the abbey became a place of literary production as
well as of literary reproduction. He had an ordinance enacted to the
effect that every abbot must support out of his personal funds one
adequate scribe. Simon presented to the abbey a considerable group
of books that he had himself been collecting before his appointment
as abbot, together with a very beautiful copy of the Old and New
Testaments.

The next literary abbot was John de Cell, who had been educated in the
schools of Paris, and who was profoundly learned in grammar, poetry,
and physics. On being elected abbot, he gave over the management of
the temporal affairs of the abbey to his prior, Reymond, and devoted
himself to religious duties and to study. Reymond himself was a
zealous collector, and it was through him that was secured for the
library, among many other books, a copy of the _Historica Scholastica
cum Allegoriis_, of Peter Comester. The exertions of these scholarly
abbots and priors won for St. Albans a special distinction among
the monasteries of Britain, and naturally led to the compilation of
the historic annals which gave to the abbey a continued literary
fame. Hardy is of opinion that these historic annals date from the
administration of Simon, between the years 1166 and 1183.

Richard of Wendover, who succeeded Walter as historiographer, compiled,
between the years 1230 and 1236, the _Flores Historiarum_, one of the
most important of the earlier chronicles of England. Hardy points out
that it could have been possible to complete so great a work within
the term of six years, only on the assumption that Richard found
available much material collected by Walter, and it is also probable
that other compilations were utilised by Richard for the work bearing
his name. It is to be borne in mind that the monastic chronicles were
but seldom the production of a single hand, as was the case with the
chronicles of Malmesbury and of Beda. The greater number of such
chronicles grew up from period to period, fresh material being added in
succeeding generations, while in every monastic house in which there
were transcribers, fresh local information was interpolated until the
tributary streams had grown more important than the original current.
In this manner, the monastic annals were at one time a transcript, at
another time an abridgment, and at another an original work. “With the
chronicler, plagiarism was no crime and no degradation. He epitomised
or curtailed or adapted the words of his predecessors in the same
path with or without alteration (and usually without acknowledgment),
whichever best suited his purpose or that of his monastery. He did not
work for himself but at the command of others, and thus it was that a
monastery chronicle grew, like a monastery house, at different times,
and by the labour of different hands.”

Of the heads that planned such chronicles or of the hands that executed
them, or of the exact proportion contributed by the several writers, no
satisfactory record has been preserved. The individual is lost in the
community.

In the earlier divisions of Wendover’s chronicle, covering the
centuries from 231 down to about 1000, Wendover certainly relied,
says Hardy, upon some previous compilation. About the year 1014, that
narrative, down to the death of Stephen, showed a marked change in
style, giving evidence that after this period some other authority had
been adopted, while there was also a larger introduction of legendary
matter. From the accession of Henry II., in 1235, when the _Flores
Historiarum_ ends, Wendover may be said to assume the character of an
original author. On the death of Richard, the work of historiographer
was taken up by Matthew Paris. His _Lives of the Two Offas_ and his
famous _Chronicles_ were produced between the years 1236 and 1259.

In certain of the more literary of the English monasteries, the divine
offices were moderated in order to allow time for study, and, under the
regulations of some foundations, “lettered” persons were entitled to
special exemption from the performance of certain daily services, and
from church duty.[145]

At a visitation of the treasury of St. Pauls, made in the year 1295,
by Ralph de Baudoke, the Dean (afterwards Bishop of London), there
were found twelve copies of the Gospels adorned, some with silver,
and others with pearls and gems, and a thirteenth, the case (_capsa_)
containing which was decorated not merely with gilding but with
relics.[146] The treasury also contained a number of other divisions
of the Scriptures, together with a _Commentary_ of Thomas Aquinas.
Maitland says that the use of relics as a decoration was an unusual
feature. He goes on to point out that the practice of using for
manuscripts a decorated case, caused the case, not infrequently, to be
more valuable than the manuscript itself, so that it would be mentioned
among the treasures of the church, when the book contained in it was
not sufficiently important to be even specified.

The binding of the books which were in general use in the English
monasteries for reference was usually in parchment or in plain leather.
The use of jewels, gold, or silver for the covers, or for the _capsæ_,
was, with rare exceptions, limited to the special copies retained in
the church treasury. William of Malmesbury in the account which he
gives of the chapel made at Glastonbury by King Ina, mentions that
twenty pounds and sixty marks of gold were used in the preparation of
the _Coöpertoria Librorum Evangelii_.[147]

=The Earlier Monastery Schools.=--At the time when neither local nor
national governments had assumed any responsibilities in connection
with elementary education, and when the municipalities were too
ignorant, and in many cases too poor, to make provision for the
education of the children, the monks took up the task as a part of the
regular routine of their duty. The Rule of S. Benedict had in fact made
express provision for the education of pupils.

An exception to the general statement concerning the neglect of the
rulers to make provision for education should, however, be made in the
case of Charlemagne, whose reign covered the period 790 to 830. It was
the aim of Charlemagne to correct or at least to lessen the provincial
differences and local barbarities of style, expression, pression,
orthography, etc., in the rendering of Latin, and it was with this end
in view that he planned out his great scheme of an imperial series of
schools, through which should be established an imperial or academic
standard of style and expression. This appears to have been the first
attempt since the time of the Academy of Alexandria to secure a
scholarly uniformity of the standard throughout the civilised world,
and the school at Tours may be considered as a precursor of the French
Academy of modern times. For such a scheme the Emperor was dependent
upon the monks, as it was only in the monasteries that could be found
the scholarship that was required for the work. He entrusted to Alcuin,
a scholarly English Benedictine, the task of organising the imperial
schools. The first schools instituted by Alcuin in Aachen and Tours,
and later in Milan, were placed in charge of Benedictine monks, and
formed the models for a long series of monastic schools during the
succeeding centuries. Alcuin had been trained in the cathedral schools
founded in York by Egbert, and Egbert had been brought up by Benedict
Biscop in the monastery of Yarrow, where he had for friend and fellow
pupil the chronicler Bede. The results of the toilsome journeys taken
by Biscop to collect books for his beloved monasteries of Wearmouth
and Yarrow[148] were far-reaching. The training secured by Alcuin as
a scribe and as a student of the Scriptures, the classics, and the
“seven liberal arts” was more immediately due to his master Ælbert, who
afterward succeeded Egbert as archbishop.

The script which was accepted as the standard for the imperial schools,
and which, transmitted through successive Benedictine _scriptoria_,
served seven centuries later as a model for the first type-founders of
Italy and France, can be traced directly to the school at York.

Alcuin commemorated his school and its master in a descriptive poem
_On the Saints of the Church at York_, which is quoted in full by
West.[149] In 780, Alcuin succeeded Ælbert as master of the school, and
later, was placed in charge of the cathedral library, which was at the
time one of the most important collections in Christendom. In one of
his poems he gives a kind of metrical summary of the chief contents of
this library. The lines are worth quoting because of the information
presented as to the authors at that time to be looked for in a really
great monastic library. The list includes a distinctive though very
restricted group of Latin writers, but, as West points out, the works
“by glorious Greece transferred to Rome” form but a meagre group.
The catalogue omits Isidore, although previous references make clear
that the writings of the great Spanish bishop were important works of
reference in York as in all the British schools. It is West’s opinion
that the _Aristotle_ and other Greek authors referred to were probably
present only in Latin versions. These manuscripts in the York library
were undoubtedly for the most part transcripts of the parchments
collected for Wearmouth and Yarrow by Biscop.


_The Library of York Cathedral._

  There shalt thou find the volumes that contain
  All of the ancient Fathers who remain;
  There all the Latin writers make their home
  With those that glorious Greece transferred to Rome,
  The Hebrews draw from their celestial stream,
  And Africa is bright with learning’s beam.

  Here shines what Jerome, Ambrose, Hilary thought,
  Or Athanasius and Augustine wrought.
  Orosius, Leo, Gregory the Great,
  Near Basil and Fulgentius coruscate.

  Grave Cassiodorus and John Chrysostom
  Next Master Bede and learned Aldhelm come,
  While Victorinus and Boëthius stand
  With Pliny and Pompeius close at hand.

  Wise Aristotle looks on Tully near,
  Sedulius and Juvencus next appear.
  Then come Albinus, Clement, Prosper too,
  Paulinus and Arator. Next we view
  Lactantius, Fortunatus. Ranged in line
  Virgilius Maro, Statius, Lucan, shine.

  Donatus, Priscian, Phobus, Phocas, start
  The roll of masters in grammatic art.
  Entychius, Servius, Pompey, each extend
  The list. Comminian brings it to an end.

  There shalt thou find, O reader, many more
  Famed for their style, the masters of old lore,
  Whose many volumes singly to rehearse
  Were far too tedious for our present verse.[150]

Alcuin’s work on the Continent began in 782, when, resigning his
place as master of the cathedral school in York, he took charge of
the imperial or palace school at Tours. His work in the palace school
included not only the organisation of classes for the younger students,
but the personal charge of a class which comprised the Emperor
himself, his wife Luitgard, and other members of the royal or imperial
family. Whether for the younger or for the older students, however,
the instruction given had to be of a very elementary character. The
distinctive value of the work was, it is to be borne in mind, not in
the extent of the instruction given to the immediate pupils, but in
making clear to the Emperor and to his sons who were to succeed him,
the importance of securing a certain uniformity of script and of
educational work throughout the Empire.

It is very probable that not a few of the earlier copyists who
completed in the _scriptoria_ the tasks set for them by the instructors
trained in Tours and in Aachen, transcribed texts the purport of which
they had not mastered. It was through their work, however, that the
texts themselves were preserved and were made available for later
scribes and students who were competent to comprehend the spirit as
well as the letter of their contents.

Mabillon is in accord with later authorities such as Compayré and West,
as to the deplorable condition of learning at this time throughout
the Empire ruled by Charles. Says West: “The plight of learning in
Frankland at this time was deplorable. Whatever traditions had found
their way from the early Gallic schools into the education of the
Franks had long since been scattered and obliterated in the wild
disorders which characterised the times of the Merovingian kings....
The copying of books had almost ceased, and all that can be found that
pretends to the name of literature in this time is the dull chronicle
or ignorantly conceived legend.”[151]

A description such as this emphasises the importance of the work
initiated by Alcuin, work the value of which the ruler of Europe was
fortunately able to appreciate and ready to support. In his relation to
scholarly interests in Europe and to the preservation of the literature
of the past, Alcuin may fairly be considered as the successor of
Cassiodorus. He was able in the eighth century to render a service
hardly less distinctive than that credited to Cassiodorus three hundred
years earlier. There is the further parallel that, like Cassiodorus,
he possessed a very keen and intelligent interest in the form given to
literary expression, and in all the details of the work given to the
copyists. The instructions given in Alcuin’s treatise on orthography
for the work of the scribes, follow very closely in principle, and
differ, in fact, but slightly in detail from, the instructions given by
Cassiodorus in his own treatise on the same subject. A couplet which
stands at the head of the first page reads as follows: “Let him who
would publish the sayings of the ancients read me, for he who follows
me not will speak without regard to law.”[152] Alcuin’s care in regard
to the consistency of punctuation and orthography and his intelligent
selection of a clearer and neater form of script than had heretofore
been employed, have impressed a special character on the series of
manuscripts dating from the early portion of the ninth century and
written in what is termed the Caroline minuscule. In a letter written
to Charles from Tours in 799, Alcuin mentions that he has copied out on
some blank parchment which the King had sent him a short treatise on
correct diction, with illustrations from Bede. He goes on to speak of
the special value to literature of the distinctions and subdistinctions
of punctuation, the knowledge of which has, he complains, almost
disappeared: “But even as the glory of all learning and the ornaments
of wholesome erudition begin to be seen again by reason of your noble
exertions, so also it seems most fitting that the use of punctuation
should also be resumed by scribes.... Let your authority so instruct
the youths at the palace that they may be able to utter with perfect
elegance whatsoever the clear eloquence of your thought may dictate,
so that whatsoever may go to the parchment bearing the royal name it
may display the excellence of the royal learning.”[153] A very delicate
hint, remarks West, for Charles to mind his commas and his colons.

Up to the time of Charlemagne there appears to have been so little
facility in writing and so few scribes were available, that government
records were not kept even at the Courts. The schools established
by Alcuin at Tours, under the direction of Charlemagne, were in fact
the first schools for writers which had existed in Western Europe
for centuries. One of the earlier applications made of the knowledge
gained in the imperial schools was for the critical analysis of certain
historical documents which had heretofore been accepted as final
authorities. In the earlier centuries of the Middle Ages, anything that
was in writing appears to have been accepted as necessarily trustworthy
and valuable, very much as in the earlier times of printing the fact
that a statement was in print caused it to be accepted as something
not to be contradicted. The critical faculty, combined with the
scholarly knowledge necessary and properly applied, was, however, of
slow growth, and centuries must still have passed before, in this work
of differentiating the value of documents, the authority of scholars
secured its full recognition.

After this work of Alcuin began, that is to say, after the beginning
of the ninth century, it became the rule of each properly organised
monastery to include, in addition to the _scriptorium_, an _armarium_,
or writing-chamber, which was utilised as a class-room for instruction
in writing and in Latin. In a letter of Canonicus Geoffrey, of
St.-Barbe-en-Auge, dated 1170, occurs the expression, _Claustrum sine
armario est quasi castrum sine armamentario_,[154] (a monastery without
a writing-chamber is like a camp without a storehouse of munitions or
an armory.)

The Capitular of Charlemagne, issued in the year 789, addressed itself
to the correction of the ignorance and carelessness of the monks, and
to the necessity of preserving a standard of correctness for the work
of transcribing holy writings. It contains the phrase:

_Et pueros vestros non sinite eos vel legendo vel scribendo corrumpere.
Et si opus est evangelium, psalterium et missale scribere, perfectæ
ætatis homines scribant cum omni diligentia._

(Do not permit your pupils, either in reading or writing, to garble the
text;--and when you are preparing copies of the gospel, the psalter,
or the missal, see that the work is confided to men of mature age, who
will write with due care.)

The following lines were written by Alcuin as an injunction to pious
scribes:

AD MUSÆUM LIBROS SCRIBENTIUM.

  _Hic sedeant sacræ scribentes famina legis,
  Nec non sanctorum dicta sacrata patrum.
  His interserere caveant sua frivola verbis,
  Frivola ne propter erret et ipsa manus,
  Correctosque sibi quærant studiose libellos,
  Tramite quo recto penna volantis eat.
  Per cola distinguant proprios et commata sensus.
  Et punctos ponant ordine quosque suo,
  Ne vel falsa legat taceat vel forte repente,
  Ante pios fratres lector in ecclesia._

         *       *       *       *       *

  (Quoted from the Vienna Codex, 743. Denis, i., 313.)

Wattenbach is of opinion that these lines stood over the door of the
_scriptorium_ of S. Martin’s Monastery.

West says that the lines were written as an injunction to the scribes
of the school at Tours. He gives the following version, which takes in
certain further lines of the original than those cited by Wattenbach:

“Here let the scribes sit who copy out the words of the Divine Law, and
likewise the hallowed sayings of the holy Fathers. Let them beware of
interspersing their own frivolities in the words they copy, nor let a
trifler’s hand make mistakes through haste. Let them earnestly seek out
for themselves correctly written books to transcribe, that the flying
pen may speed along the right path. Let them distinguish the proper
sense by colons and commas, and let them set the points each one in
its due place, and let not him who reads the words to them either read
falsely or pause suddenly. It is a noble work to write out holy books,
nor shall the scribe fail of his due reward. Writing books is better
than planting vines, for he who plants a vine serves his belly, but he
who writes a book serves his soul.”[155]

In a manuscript which was written in S. Jacob’s Monastery in Liége,
occurred the following lines:

  _Jacob Rebeccæ dilexit simplicitatem,
  Altus mens Jacobi scribendi sedulitatem.
  Ille pecus pascens se divitiis cumulavit,
  Iste libros scribens meritum sibi multiplicavit.
  Ille Rachel typicam præ cunctis duxit amatam,
  Hic habeat vitam justis super astra paratam._[156]

  [(The Hebrew) Jacob loved the simplicity of Rebecca,
  The lofty soul of (the monk) Jacob (loved) the work of the scribe.
  The former accumulated riches in pasturing his flocks,
  The latter increased his fame through the writing of books.
  The former won his Rachel, loved beyond all others.
  May the scribe have the eternal life which is prepared above the
    stars for the just.]

The most important of the works of Alcuin that can be called original
were his educational writings, comprising treatises _On Grammar_,
_On Orthography_, _On Rhetoric and the Virtues_, _On Dialectics_, _A
Disputation with Pepin_, and a study of astronomy entitled _De Cursu et
Saltu Lunæ ac Bissexto_. West mentions three other treatises which have
been ascribed to him: _On the Seven Arts_, _A Disputation for Boys_,
and the _Propositions of Alcuin_.[157] Alcuin was more fortunate than
his great predecessor Cassiodorus in respect to the preservation of
his writings. Manuscripts of all of these remained in existence until
the time came when the complete set of works could be issued in printed
form, and the work of the old instructor could be appreciated by a
generation living a thousand years after his life had closed. He died
at Tours in 804, in his seventieth year. Mabillon speaks of Alcuin as
“the most learned man of his age.” Laurie is disposed to lay stress
upon the monastic limitations of his intellect, and thinks that his
principal ability was that of an administrator; West emphasises the
“pure unselfishness of his character,” and adds, with discriminating
appreciation: “We must also credit him with a certain largeness of
view, in spite of his circumscribed horizon. He had some notion of the
continuity of the intellectual life of man, of the perils that beset
the transmission of learning from age to age, and of the disgrace which
attached to those who would allow those noble arts to perish which the
wisest of men among the ancients had discovered.... Perceiving that
the precious treasure of knowledge was then hidden in a few books,
he made it his care to transmit to future ages copies undisfigured
by slips of the pen or mistakes of the understanding. Thus in every
way that lay within his power, he endeavoured to put the fortunes
of learning for the times that should succeed him in a position of
advantage, safeguarded by an abundance of truthfully transcribed
books, interpreted by teachers of his own training, sheltered within
the Church and defended by the civil power.”[158] Professor West’s
appreciative summary does full justice to the work and the ideals
of Charlemagne’s great schoolmaster. I should only add that in the
special service he was in a position to render in the preservation,
transmission, and publication of the world’s literature, Alcuin must
be accorded a very high place in the series of literary workers which,
beginning with Cassiodorus, includes such names as Columba, Biscop,
Aurispa, Gutenberg, Aldus, Estienne, and Froben.

The most noteworthy of the successors of Alcuin in the palace school
at Tours was John Scotus Erigena, who in 845 was appointed master by
Charles the Bold. The influence of the Irish monk widened the range of
study and gave to it an active-minded and speculative tendency that
brought about a wide departure from the settled conservatism which had
always characterised the teaching of Alcuin. The list of books given to
the scribe for copying was increased, and now included, for instance,
works of such doubtful orthodoxy as the _Satyricon_ of Martianus
Capella, a voluminous compilation constituting a kind of cyclopædia of
the seven liberal arts. Its composition dates from about 500.[159]

In a treatise, _De Instituto Clericorum_, written in 819 (that is,
during the reign of Louis I.), by Rabanus Maurus, who was Abbot
of Fulda and later, Archbishop of Mayence, is cited the following
regulation: “The canons and the decrees of Pope Zosimus have decided
that a clerk proceeding to holy orders shall continue five years
among the readers ... and after that shall for four years serve as an
acolyte or sub-deacon.” (The Zosimus referred to was Pope for but one
year, 417-418.) Rabanus had just before remarked, “_Lectores_ are so
called _a legendo_.” He goes on to say that “he who would rightly and
properly perform the duty of a reader must be imbued with learning and
conversant with books, and must further be instructed in the meaning
of words and in the knowledge of the words themselves,” etc.[160]
Rabanus follows this with a series of very practical instructions and
suggestions for effective education on the part of the readers. These
were based upon the treatise on elocution written nearly two hundred
years earlier by the learned Bishop Isidore of Seville, and they were
again copied three years after the time of Rabanus by Ibo, Bishop of
Chartres, in the treatise _De Rebus Ecclesiasticis_. Maitland, to whom
I am indebted for this citation, finds cause for indignant criticism of
the historian Robertson for the superficial and misleading references
made by the historian to the dense ignorance of the Church in the
Middle Ages. Maitland suggests that if Robertson had applied for
holy orders to the Archbishop of Seville in the seventh century, the
Archbishop of Mayence in the ninth, or the Bishop of Chartres in the
eleventh, he would have found the examination rather more of a task
than he expected. West speaks of Rabanus as “Alcuin’s greatest pupil,”
and as intellectually “a greater man than his master.”[161] He wrote a
long series of theological and educational treatises.

From the _Constitutions_ of Reculfus, who became Bishop of Soissons in
879, it is evident that he expected the clergy to be able both to read
and to write. The Bishop says: “We admonish that each one of you should
be careful to have a Missal, a Lectionary, a Book of the Gospels,
a Martyrology, an Antiphonary, a Psalter, and a copy of the Forty
Homilies of S. Gregory, corrected and pointed by our copies which we
use in the holy mother Church; and also fail not to have as many sacred
and ecclesiastical books as you can get, for from these you shall
receive food and condiment for your souls.... If, however, any one of
you is not able to obtain all the books of the Old Testament, at least
let him diligently take pains to transcribe for himself correctly the
first book of the whole sacred history, that is, _Genesis_, by reading
which he may come to understand the creation of the world.”[162] The
counsel was good, even although a perfectly clear understanding of the
creation might after all not have been secured.

By the close of the ninth century, a large proportion of the
monasteries of the Continent and of England carried on schools which
were open to the children of as large a district as could be reached.
In many cases, the elementary classes were succeeded by classes in
advanced instruction, while from these were selected favourites or
exceptionally capable pupils, who enjoyed in still higher studies the
advantage of the guidance and service of the best scholars in the
monastery. West, in summing up the later influence of Alcuin, speaks
of the stream of learning as having flowed from York to Tours and
from Tours (through Rabanus) to Fulda, thence to Auxerre, Ferrières,
Corbies (old and new), Reichenau, St. Gall, and Rheims, one branch of
it finally reaching Paris.[163] Mabillon speaks of the abbey schools of
Fleury as containing during the tenth and eleventh centuries as many as
five thousand scholars.

In Italy, the most important schools were those instituted at Monte
Cassino, Pomposa, and Classe. Giesebrecht is, however, of opinion that
the educational work of the Italian monasteries was less important than
that carried on by the monasteries in Germany, France, or England. In
Germany, the monasteries which have already been mentioned as centres
of intellectual activity were also those which had instituted the most
important and effective of the schools, the list including St. Gall,
Fulda, Reichenau, Hirschau, Wissembourg, Hersfeld, and many others.

In France and Belgium, the names of the conspicuous abbey schools
include those of Marmoutier, Fontenelle, Fleury, Corbie, Ferrières,
Bec, Clugni. In England, the most noteworthy of the abbey schools
were St. Albans, Glastonbury, Malmesbury, Croyland, and S. Peter’s
of Canterbury. From the epoch of Charlemagne to that of S. Louis,
the great abbeys of Christian Europe served in fact not only as its
schools but as its universities. The more intelligent of the nobility
and the kings themselves were interested in securing for their children
the educational advantages of the monastery schools. Among the French
kings who were brought up in this way are to be named Pepin the Little,
Robert the Pious, and Louis the Fat. In Spain, Sancho the Great, King
of Navarre and of Castile, was a graduate of the monastery of Leyre.

In England, we have the noteworthy example of Alfred, who was not
ashamed, after having reached mature years, to repair his imperfect
education by attending the school established in Oxford by the
Benedictines, where he is said to have studied grammar, philosophy,
rhetoric, history, music, and versification.[164]

A large number of the convents, following the example of the abbeys,
contained schools in which were trained not only the future novices,
but also numbers of young girls destined for the life of the Courts or
of the world.

Mabillon finds occasion to correct the impression on the part of
some writers of the sixteenth century, that the monasteries had been
established solely for the purpose of carrying on educational work.
He writes: _C’est une illusion de certains gens qui ont écrit dans le
siècle précédent que les monastères n’avaient esté d’abord établis que
pour servir d’écoles faisantes profession d’enseigner les sciences
humaines_.

De Rancé, who wrote a _Traité de la saincteté et du devoir de la
vie monastique_, took the ground that the pursuit of literature was
inconsistent with the monastic profession, and that the reading of
the monks ought to be confined to the Scriptures and a few books
of devotion. The treatise was understood to be an attack upon the
Benedictine monks of St. Maur, for that they were learned was a matter
of general knowledge, and the monks of La Trappe, the Order with
which De Rancé had associated himself, had an old-time antagonism to
their scholarly neighbours. It may be considered as a good service for
literature and for monastic history that the treatise of De Rancé,
narrow and unimportant in itself as it was, should have been published.
Nine years later, in the year 1691, was issued the reply of the
Benedictines, the learned and valuable _Traité des Études Monastiques_
of Dom Mabillon, which will be referred to more particularly in the
following chapter.

The historians of these monastic schools have laid stress upon the
limited conceptions possessed by their founders and by the instructors,
of the purpose and possibilities of education, conceptions which of
necessity affected not only the work done in the school-room, but the
character of the literature produced in the _scriptoria_. Laurie, for
instance, writes as follows: “The Christian conception of education
was, unfortunately (like that of old Cato), narrow. It tended steadily
to concentrate and to contract men’s intellectual interests. The
Christian did not think of the culture of the whole man. He could not
consistently do so. His whole purpose was the salvation of the soul....
Salvation was to be obtained through abnegation of the world and
through faith.... Christianity, accordingly, found itself necessarily
placed in mortal antagonism to ‘Humanitas’ and to Hellenism, and had
to go through the troublous experiences of nearly 1400 years before
the possibility of the union of reason with authority, of religion
with Hellenism, could be conserved.... As was indeed inevitable,
theological discussion more and more occupied the active intellect of
the time, to the subordination, if not total neglect of humane letters
and philosophy. The Latin and Greek classics were ultimately denounced.
As the offspring of the pagan world, if not indeed inspired by demons,
they were dangerous to the faith.”[165]

From the _Apostolic Constitutions_, ascribed to the middle of the
fourth century, Mr. Bass Mullinger quotes the injunction: “Refrain from
all the writings of the heathen: for what hast thou to do with strange
discourses, laws, or false prophets, which, in truth, turn aside from
the faith those who are weak in the understanding ... wherefore abstain
scrupulously from all strange and devilish books.”[166]

It was S. Augustine who said _Indocti cœlum rapiunt_--“It is the
ignorant who take the kingdom of heaven,”--and Gregory the Great who
asserted that he would blush to have Holy Scripture subjected to the
rules of grammar.[167] West speaks of the conceptions of grammar and of
rhetoric taught by Alcuin as “crude” and “puerile,” and of his theories
of language as “childish.”

It is, of course, a truism to point out that the educational work done
by Alcuin and the other great instructors of the monastic schools
is not to be judged by the standard of later ages. The students for
whose training they were responsible, whether children or adults,
princes or peasants, must have been, with hardly an exception, in a
very elementary condition of mental development, and it was necessary
for the instruction to be in like manner elementary. In this study, I
am, however, not undertaking to consider the history of education in
early Europe, a subject which has been so ably presented in the works
of Mullinger, Laurie, Compayré, and West. I am concerned with the
work of these early schoolmasters simply because to their persistent
efforts was due the preservation of literature in Europe. If Alcuin and
his successors had done nothing else than to secure a substantially
uniform system of writing throughout the great schools in which were
trained abbots and scribes for hundreds of monasteries, they would
have conferred an inestimable service upon Europe. But their work did
go much further. Notwithstanding the various injunctions and warnings
of ecclesiastical leaders against “pagan” literature, it proved
impracticable to prevent this literature from being preserved and
manifolded in numberless _scriptoria_. The record of the opposition
has been preserved in a series of edicts and injunctions. But the fact
that the interest in the writings of the ancients proved strong enough
to withstand all the fulminations and censures is evidenced by the
long series of manuscripts of the classics produced in the monasteries
during the tenth and eleventh centuries. The writers of these
manuscripts were the product of the schools instituted by Charlemagne
and Alcuin.

=The Benedictines of the Continent.=--The two writers who have given
the largest attention to the record of the literary and scholarly
work of the Benedictines during the seven centuries between 500 and
1200 A.D., are Mabillon and Ziegelbauer. Dom Mabillon was himself a
Benedictine monk and had a full inheritance of the literary spirit and
scholarly devotion which characterised the Order. He was born in Rheims
in 1632, and his treatise on monastic studies, _Traité des Études
Monastiques_, which has remained the chief authority on its subject,
was published in Paris in 1691. Ziegelbauer’s _Observationes Literariæ
S. Benedicti_ appeared a century later.[168]

Mabillon’s work forms a magnificent monument not only to the learning,
diligence, and literary skill of its writer, but to the enormous value
of the services rendered, during a number of centuries, by the monks
of his Order, in the preservation of literature from the ravages of
barbarism and in the development of scholarship. Mabillon also makes
clear the lasting importance of the original initiative given to the
literary labour of the Benedictines by the Rule of their founder.
An important portion of the material upon which Mabillon’s treatise
was based, was collected during a series of journeys made by him in
company with his brother under the instructions first of the great
minister Colbert, and later, of Le Tellier, Archbishop of Rheims, for
the purpose of examining or of searching for documents relating to the
royal family and of procuring books for the royal library. The first
of these journeys, undertaken in the year 1682, was completed entirely
within French territory and was entitled _Iter Burgundicum_. The second
covered a considerable portion of South Germany and Switzerland, and
is known as the _Iter Germanicum_. The third was devoted to Italy,
and is described under the title of _Iter Italicum_; while the fourth
investigation was made in Alsace and Lorraine, and the record is
entitled _Iter Literarium in Alsatiam et Lotharingiam_.

The plan of the journeys involved a thorough ransacking of as many
libraries as they could secure admission to, the libraries being, with
but few exceptions, contained in the monasteries. The immediate result
of these journeys was the addition to the royal library of some three
thousand volumes, chiefly collected in Italy, and the later result,
the publication of the records above specified, which form a most
valuable presentation of the condition of the monastic collections
in the seventeenth century, and which give in their lists the titles
of a considerable number of valuable works which have since entirely
disappeared.

A century later than S. Benedict, an unknown hermit called “the
Master” prepared a Rule under which monks were required to study until
they reached the age of fifty.[169] The Rule of S. Aurelian and S.
Ferreol rendered this regulation universal, and that of Grimlaïcus
identified the character of the hermit with that of “doctor.”[170] In
all countries where the Benedictine Orders flourished, literature and
scholarship exercised an abiding influence. It is impossible, contends
Montalembert, to name an abbey famed for the number and holiness of
its monks which is not also noted for learning and for its school of
literature. The Benedictine monks during the four or five centuries
after the foundation of the Order certainly appear to have held
themselves faithful to the precept of S. Jerome, “A book always in
your hand or under your eyes.” (_Nunquam de manu necque oculis recedat
liber._[171]) They also accepted very generally the example of Bede,
who said that it had been for him always delightful either to learn, to
teach, or to write.[172] Warton is authority for the statement that in
the year 790 Charlemagne granted to the abbot and monks of Sithiu an
unlimited right of hunting, in order that they might procure from the
skins of the deer killed, gloves, girdles, and covers for their books.
He goes on to say: “We may imagine that these religious were more fond
of hunting than of reading. It is certain that they were obliged to
hunt before they could read, and it seems probable that under these
circumstances they did not manufacture many volumes.”[173] Maitland, in
referring to the original text of the concession, finds, however, that
this has been misread by Warton. The permission to hunt, for the useful
purpose specified, was given not for the monks but for the servants of
the monastery.

With all the great Benedictine monasteries, it was the routine to
institute first a library, then a _scriptorium_ for the manifolding
of books, and finally schools, open, not only to students who were
preparing for the Church, but to all in the neighbourhood who had need
of or desire for instruction. The copies prepared in the _scriptorium_
of the texts from the library were utilised in the first place for the
duplicates needed of the works in most frequent reference, but more
particularly for securing by exchange copies of texts not already in
the library, and, in many instances, also for adding either to the
direct wealth of the monastery (by exchange for lands or cattle) or to
its income by making sale of the works through travelling monks or by
correspondence with other monasteries.

The list of monasteries which became in this manner literary and
publishing centres would include nearly all the great Benedictine
foundations of both Britain and the Continent. There was probably,
however, a greater activity during the period between 600 and 1200,
in the matter at least of collecting and circulating books, in the
monasteries of France than in those of Italy, Germany, or Britain; but
more important even than Clugni, Marmoutier, or Corbie, in France, was
the great Swiss abbey of St. Gall, an abbey the realm of which reached
almost to the proportions of a small municipality. In the shade of
its walls, there dwelt a whole nation, divided into two branches, the
_familia intus_, which comprised the labourers, shepherds, and workmen
of all trades, and the _familia foris_, composed of serfs, who were
bound to do three days’ work in each week.

Within the monastery itself, there were, in the latter half of the
tenth century, no less than five hundred monks, together with a great
group of students. In Germany, the most noted of what might be called
the literary monasteries during the ninth and tenth centuries were
those of Fulda, Reichenau, Lorsch, Hirschau, and Gandersheim. It was
in the latter that the nun Hroswitha composed her famous dramas. In
France, in addition to those already specified, should be mentioned
Fleury, St. Remy, St. Denis, Luxeuil, S. Vincent at Toul, and Aurillac.
In Belgium, S. Peter’s at Ghent was, during the tenth century, the most
important of the scholarly monasteries. In England, in addition to the
earlier foundations, already referred to, of Wearmouth and Yarrow, St.
Albans and Glastonbury became the most famous. Before the eleventh
century, the literature that came into existence from contemporary
writers or reproductions of the works of classic writers outside of
the monasteries must have been very trifling indeed. One of the most
noteworthy publications which emanated from St. Gall was the great
dictionary or _Vocabulary_ bearing the name of Solomon (Abbot of St.
Gall and later, Bishop of Constance), a work which was in fact a kind
of literary and scientific encyclopædia. This manuscript, comprising in
all 1070 pages, was put into print in the latter part of the fifteenth
century.[174] The records of the famous library of the monastery have
been brought together by later scholars, and it is their testimony
that the manuscripts contained in it were among the most beautiful and
accurate specimens of caligraphy known. These St. Gall manuscripts
were also noted for their exquisite miniatures and illuminations.
The parchment used for them was prepared by the hands of the monks,
and they also did their own binding.[175] The fame of Sintram, one
of the most noteworthy of the copyists, was known throughout all the
countries north of the Alps; _Omnis orbis cisalpinus Sintramni digitos
miratur_.[176]

In the two schools attached to St. Gall, lectures were given, in the
latter half of the tenth century, on Cicero, Quintilian, Horace,
Terence, Juvenal, Persius, Ovid, and Sophocles.[177] There was even
said to be among the monks of St. Gall a society established for the
study of Greek, called the Hellenic Brothers.[178] The Duchess Hedwig
of Suabia herself taught Greek to Abbot Burckhart II. when he was a
child, and rewarded him by the gift of a “Horace” for his readiness
in verse-making. The Abbot later described in verse the embarrassment
caused to him by a kiss with which the learned Duchess had favoured
him.[179] The Duchess had, when a young woman, learned Latin from
the Ekkehart who, later, became Dean of St. Gall (Ekkehart I.), in
partnership with whom she wrote a commentary on Virgil. A very
charming account of the tuition of this fascinating young Duchess is
given in Scheffel’s famous romance called _Der Treue Ekkehart_. Arx
states that Ekkehart III. and IV. and Notker Labeo were familiar with
Homer, Plato, and Aristotle, and made from them Greek verses.[180]

There is every evidence to indicate that there was during the tenth
century a knowledge of Greek in certain monastery centres of South
Europe, which knowledge, two centuries later, had disappeared almost
entirely, so that the re-introduction into Italy of the writings
of Greek poets and philosophers in the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries came as a fresh revelation. Mabillon contended that while
the monks made Holy Scripture the basis for their theological studies,
it is certain that they acquired apart from these studies, a mass of
other knowledge, and notably all that they could gather with regard
to physical science. Thence it arose that in mediæval works the term
_scripturæ_, or even _scripturæ sacræ_, does not always mean the Holy
Scriptures, but stands for all books which treat of Christian or
ecclesiastical truths or which are useful aids in understanding the
Word of God.[181] Montalembert, commenting on this passage, goes on to
say that to the monk of the tenth century no knowledge was unfamiliar.
Philosophy in its scholastic form, grammar and versification,
music, botany, mechanics, astronomy, geometry in its most practical
application, all of these were the objects of their research and of
their writings. The curious poem addressed by the monk Alfano to
Theodoric, son of the Count Marses and at the time a novice at Monte
Cassino, is cited in support of this view. The poem presents a detailed
account of the daily occupations in the great monastery, in which
occupations literary work holds a very large place. It also gives a
summary of the scholastic pursuits carried on in the monastery.[182]

A service possibly even greater than that of the preservation of
literature and of the keeping alive of an intellectual spirit, was
rendered by the monks in the great educational work carried on by them.
In the Monasterium Resbacense, in Brieggan, founded by Bishop Andœnus
in 634, whose first abbot, S. Ægilius, was a pupil of S. Columban’s,
the list of books in the _scriptorium_ included Cicero, Virgil, Horace,
Terence, Donatus, Priscian, and Boëthius. Of later authors, the works
of Beda, Isidore, Aldhelm, the _Gesta Francorum_, etc.[183] By the
time of Charles Martel and the battle of Poitiers, there had been
much plundering and devastation of the monasteries and convents, the
effects of which remained even after the Arabs were driven back. During
the tumultuous reigns of the Pepins, many clerics returned to or took
up the profession of arms, and devotion and literature were alike
neglected.[184] The biographer of S. Eligius, writing in 760 (under
Pepin) says:[185]

“What do we want with the so-called philosophies of Pythagoras,
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, or with the rubbish and nonsense of
such shameless poets as Homer, Virgil, and Menander? What service can
be rendered to the servants of God by the writings of the heathen
Sallust, Herodotus, Livy, Demosthenes, or Cicero?” Fredegar, called
_Scholasticus_, wrote his chronicle in a Burgundian monastery, about
600. He complains that “the world is in its decrepitude. Intellectual
activity is dead, and the ancient writers have no successors.”

The man to whom the revival of the literary interests of the northern
monasteries was largely due was the Archbishop Chrodegang of Metz,
742-766, Chancellor of Charles Martel, a Benedictine. He framed rules
for the monasteries which restored discipline and infused new life.
His code was adopted throughout France, Italy, and Germany, and even in
England. A certain uniformity of instruction was thus secured in the
monastery schools in singing, language, and script, which persisted
almost until the time of Alcuin, and the influence of which extended
even beyond the monasteries.

Mabillon tells a story of Odo, Abbot of Clugni (who died about 942),
who was so seduced by the love of knowledge that he was led to employ
himself with the vanities of the poets, and resolved to read the works
of Virgil regularly through. On the following night, however, he saw in
a dream a large vase of marvellous beauty, but filled with innumerable
serpents, which, springing forth, twined about him, but without doing
him any injury. The holy man, waking and prudently considering the
vision, took the serpents to stand for the figments of the poets, and
the vase to represent Virgil’s book, which was painted outwardly with
worldly eloquence, but was internally defiled with the vanity of impure
meaning. From thenceforward, renouncing Virgil and his pomps, and
keeping the poets out of his chamber, he sought his mental nourishment
solely from the sacred writings.[186]

Honorius, the reputed author of the _Gemma Animæ_, writes in 1120: “It
grieves me when I consider in my mind the number of persons who, having
lost their senses, are not ashamed to give their utmost labour to the
investigation of the abominable figments of the poets, and the captious
arguments of the philosophers, which are wont inextricably to bind
the mind that is drawn away from God in the bonds of vices and to be
ignorant of the Christian profession whereby the soul may come to reign
everlastingly with God; as it is the height of madness to be anxious to
learn the laws of an usurper and to be ignorant of the edicts of the
lawful sovereign. Moreover, how is the soul profited by the strife of
Hector, or the argumentation of Plato, or the poems of Virgil, or the
elegies of Ovid, who now, with their like, are gnashing their teeth
in the prison of the infernal Babylon, under the cruel tyranny of
Pluto.”[187]

Peter the Venerable, who was Abbot of Clugni in the middle of the
twelfth century, is referred to by the historian Milner as a flagrant
example of the ignorance of the monastic authorities of his time.
Maitland finds cause for no little indignation with the hasty and
ill-founded statements of Milner, and devotes several chapters to an
account of the monastery of Clugni under the rule of Peter, presenting
very ample evidence of the literary activity and scholarly interests
of the abbot and of his close relations with the intellectual leaders
of his time, leaders who were, with hardly an exception, monks and
ecclesiastics. “Who will venture to say,” writes Maitland, “that Peter
would have been pilloried as an ignorant and trifling writer if Milner
had happened to have any personal knowledge of his history and his
works and if he had read in one of the long series of Peter’s Epistles
the words, _Libri et maxime Augustiniani, ut nosti, apud nos auro
preciosiores sunt_.”[188] (Books, and especially those of S. Augustine,
are esteemed by us as more precious than gold.)

The literary journeys of Mabillon were followed by similar journeys on
the part of Father Montfaucon and Edouard Martene, who were both, like
Mabillon, members of the learned Benedictines of St. Maur. Mabillon’s
journeys covered the period of the long wars following the revocation
of the Edict of Nantes (in 1685), including the campaigns between
France and England in the Low Countries. It was probably due to these
campaigns that his researches did not include any of the monasteries
of the lower Rhine, of Flanders, or of Brabant. Martene’s journeys
continued during a term of six years, in which time he examined
manuscripts in more than one hundred cathedrals and at least eight
hundred abbeys. The materials collected were utilised first in the new
edition of the _Gallia Christiana_, and later, in five folio volumes,
comprising only matter previously unpublished, issued under the title
_Thesaurus Novum Anecdotorum_. The account of the journey was printed
under the title _Voyage Littéraire de Deux Religieux Benedictins_.

In 1718, Martene and Montfaucon were again sent on their literary
travels, and the later collections were issued in 1724 in nine
folio volumes, under the title _Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum
Historicorum, Dogmaticorum, Moralium, Amplissima Collectio_. I specify
these works of the literary Benedictines because, although by their
date they do not properly belong to my narrative, they form a very
important authority for what is known of the literary history of the
monasteries. In some of the monasteries which had in earlier times
been famous as centres of literary activity, the libraries were found
by Mabillon and Martene in a grievous condition of destitution and
dilapidation. At Clugni, for instance, they describe the catalogue
(itself six hundred years old), written on parchment-covered boards
three feet and a half long and eighteen inches wide (_grandes tablettes
qu’on ferme comme un livre_), containing some thousands of titles, but
of the books there remained scarcely one hundred. Martene was told that
the Huguenots had carried them off to Geneva. At Novantula, of all its
former riches Mabillon found but two manuscripts; and at Beaupré, of
the great collection of manuscripts there remained but two or three;
while many other famous libraries were in similar condition. The
destruction of so large a portion of the collection of manuscripts and
of the earlier printed books was due to a variety of causes. During the
ninth century, the ravages of the Danes and Normans brought desolation
upon a long list of the monasteries throughout Europe which could most
easily be reached from the coast. In the index to the third volume of
Mabillon’s annals, is given a long list of the Benedictine monasteries
pillaged or destroyed by the Normans. The record begins _Normanni,
monasteria et eis incensa, eversa, direpta_. In many of these
visitations the loss of books must have been considerable. When, for
instance, the abbey of Peterborough in Northamptonshire was burned by
the Danes in the year 870, Ingulph records the destruction of a large
collection of books, _sanctorum librorum ingens bibliotheca_.[189]
Maitland points out that this expression probably stood for really a
great library, as when Ingulph speaks of the destruction in 1091 of the
collection of 700 volumes belonging to his own monastery, he does not
so describe it.[190]

Serious ravages were also made in Central Europe in the tenth century
by the Hungarians. Martene says that after the battle on the river
Brenta, the pagans advanced to Novantula, killed many of the monks,
and burned the monastery with a number of books, _codices multos
concremavere_.[191] The monasteries in Italy suffered primarily from
the Saracens, and those in Spain from the Moors. The losses caused by
the religious wars of the later centuries were, however, according to
Mabillon, much more serious than those brought about by the pagans.
The Calvinists are held responsible for the destruction, among others,
of St. Theodore, near Vienna, of St. Jean, Grimberg, Dilighen, of
Jouaire, and, most important of all, of Fleury.[192] The ravages
caused by fire were possibly greater than those produced by war, many
of the collections having been kept in wooden buildings. Among the
noted monasteries which suffered in this way were Gembloux, Liége,
Lucelle, Loroy, St. Gall, Fulda, Lorsch, Croyland, and Teano near
Monte Cassino. In the burning of the latter perished, as Mabillon was
informed, the original manuscript of the famous Rule of S. Benedict.
Martene speaks of the Church of Romans in Dauphiny as having been
ruined six times: by the Moors, by the Archbishop Sebon, twice by
fire, by Guigne Dauphin in the twelfth century, and finally by the
Calvinists. The library at the time of his visit still contained a few
manuscripts.

In view of these various classes of perils, it may well be a matter of
wonder, not that the monastic collections have so largely perished, but
that so considerable a number of manuscripts has been preserved. The
fact that so many mediæval manuscripts have escaped destruction by fire
and flood, and have been saved from the ravages of invading pagans or
of contending Christians, seems indeed to be good presumptive evidence
of the enormous activity of literary production in the monastery
scriptoria during the centuries between 529 and 1450, the date of the
founding of Monte Cassino, and that of the invention of printing.

=The Libraries of the Monasteries and Their Arrangements for the
Exchange of Books.=--Geoffrey, sub-prior of S. Barbe, in Normandy,
is the author of a phrase which has since been frequently quoted. In
a letter written in 1170 to Peter Mangot, a monk of Baugercy, in the
diocese of Tours, he says: “A monastery (_claustrum_) without a library
(_sine armario_) is like a castle (_castrum_) without an armory (_sine
armamentario_). Our library is our armory. Thence it is that we bring
forth the sentences of the Divine Law like sharp arrows to attack
the enemy. Thence we take the armour of righteousness, the helmet of
salvation, the shield of faith, and the sword of the spirit, which is
the Word of God.”[193]

Among the monasteries whose collections of books were noteworthy and
whose literary exchanges were not infrequently sufficiently important
to be described as a publishing or bookselling trade, may be mentioned
the following: Wearmouth and Yarrow, already referred to, the book
production in which was active as early as the seventh century; St.
Josse-sur-Mer, where, in the ninth century, the Abbot Loup of Ferrières
is reported to have kept a depot of books, from which he carried on
an active trade with England[194]; Bobbio in Lombardy, the literary
treasures in which have been largely preserved in the Ambrosian
library; the monastery of Pomposa near Ravenna, whose library,
collected by Abbot Jerome in 1093, was said to be finer than any other
of the time in Italy; La Chiusa, whose collection rivalled that of
Pomposa; Novalese, whose library, at the time of the destruction of
the abbey by the Saracens in 905, is reported to have contained no
less than 6500 volumes[195]; and Monte Cassino, which under the Abbot
Didia, a friend of Gregory VII., possessed a very rich collection. This
collection was the result of the researches in Italy of the African
Constantine, who, after having passed forty years in the East studying
the scientific treatises of Egypt, Persia, Chaldea, and India, had
been driven from Carthage by envious rivals. He came to the tomb of
S. Benedict, where he assumed the monastic habit, and he endowed his
new dwelling with the rich treasures collected in his wanderings.[196]
There are also to be mentioned Fulda, whose library at one time
surpassed all others in Germany, excepting perhaps that of St. Gall;
Croyland, whose library in the eleventh century numbered 3000 volumes;
and many others.

The work of Ziegelbauer gives in detail the old catalogue of the
library of Fulda and those of a number of other abbeys. The estimates
of the relative importance of these collections are in the main
based upon Ziegelbauer’s statistics. There seems to be no question
that these monastery libraries carried on with each other an active
correspondence and exchange of books, and that this exchange business
developed in not a few cases, as in that of St. Josse-sur-Mer, into
what was practically a book-trade. It is the conclusion of Mabillon,
as of Montalembert, that during the time in which Christian Europe
was covered with active monasteries and convents in which thousands
of monks and nuns were engaged in constant transcription, books could
hardly have been really rare, at least as compared with the extent of
the circle of scholars and readers who required them.

Cahier points out that in addition to these great monastery
collections, there were libraries of greater or less importance in
nearly all the cathedrals, in many of the collegiate churches, and
in not a few of the castles. Mabillon is of opinion that the prices
of books during the Middle Ages have been very much overestimated,
and that the impression as to such prices has been largely based upon
isolated and misunderstood instances.[197] Robertson speaks of the
collection of Homilies bought in 1056 by Grecia, Countess of Arizon,
for two hundred sheep, a measure of wheat, one of millet, one of rye,
several marten skins, and four pounds of silver, but Robertson omits
to mention that the volumes so purchased were exceptionally beautiful
specimens of caligraphy, of painting, and of carving. Maitland points
out that it would be as reasonable to quote as examples of prices in
the nineteenth century the exorbitant sums paid at special sales by
the bibliomaniacs of to-day. “May not some literary historian of the
future,” he goes on to say, “at a time when the march of intellect
has got past the age of cumbersome and expansive penny magazines and
is revelling in farthing cyclopædias, record as an evidence of the
scarcity and costliness of books in the nineteenth century, that in
the year 1812 an English nobleman gave £2260 and another £1060 for
a single volume, and that the next year a Johnson’s Dictionary was
sold by public auction for £200. A few such facts would quite set up
some future Robertson, whose readers would never dream that we could
get better reading, and plenty of it, very much cheaper at that very
time.”[198]

It is, of course, the case that there has been such a thing as
bibliomania since there have been books in the world, no less in
the manuscript period than after the age of printing. “The art of
printing,” says Morier, “is unknown in Persia, and beautiful writing
is, therefore, considered a high accomplishment. It is carefully taught
in the schools, and those who excel in it are almost classed with
literary men. They are employed to copy books, and some have attained
to such eminence in this art, that a few lines written by one of
these celebrated penmen are often sold for a considerable sum. I have
known seven pounds given for four lines written by Dervish Musjeed, a
celebrated penman, who has been dead for some time, and whose beautiful
specimens of writing are now scarce.”[199]

Robertson quotes in support of his general contention a statement
of Naudé to the following effect: “In 1471, when Louis XI. borrowed
from the Faculty of Medicine in Paris the works of Rasis, the Arabian
physician, he not only deposited as a pledge a considerable quantity of
plate, but was obliged to procure a nobleman to join with him as surety
in a deed, binding himself, under a great forfeiture, to restore the
volumes.”[200] In the eighteenth century, however, when Selden wished
to borrow a manuscript from the Bodleian Library, he was required to
give a bond for a thousand pounds. It does not, therefore, follow that
the reign of George II. was a dark age in English literature.[201]

Maitland points out one very important detail, which served to
give to some individual manuscript a value that might, when later
referred to, appear disproportionate to the expense of the hand
labour in its preparation. Under the process of the multiplication
of books by printing, each copy of a given edition must of course
be a fac-simile of all the other copies, sharing their measure of
correctness, and equally sharing their blunders. In the manuscript
period, however, every copy of a work was of necessity unique, and the
correctness of a particular manuscript was no pledge for the quality
even of those which had been copied directly from it. “In fact, the
correctness of every single copy could be ascertained only by minute
and laborious collation, and by the same minuteness of method which
is now requisite from an editor who revises the text of an ancient
writer.... If a manuscript had received such a collation at the hands
of trustworthy scholars, and if it had been shown to present a text of
such completeness and accuracy as might safely be trusted as copy for
future transcripts, such a manuscript would undoubtedly be valued at an
exceptional price.”[202]

Muratori speaks of books when presented to churches being offered
at the altar, _pro remedio animæ suæ_,[203] and on this quotation
Robertson bases a further argument concerning the high value of books.
It was, however, the ordinary routine that when a person made a present
of anything to a church, it was offered at the altar, and it was
understood, if not always specifically expressed, that such offering
was made either for his own spiritual benefit or for that of some other
person. It was doubtless the case that gifts of books to a church were
rare as compared with the gifts of other things, for the simple reason
that nearly all the books that came into existence were produced in
the churches or in the attendant monasteries.

Delisle says that the loan of books from monastery libraries was
considered one of the most meritorious of all acts of mercy. Against
this view there are many examples of the formal prohibition of
the lending of any books outside of the walls of the monastery.
Some communities placed the books of their libraries under an
anathema,--that is to say, they forbade under pain of excommunication
either borrowing or lending. This selfish policy was, however, formally
condemned in 1212 by the Council of Paris, the Fathers of which urged
more charitable sentiments on these bibliophiles: “We forbid monks to
bind themselves by any oath not to lend books to the poor, seeing that
such a loan is one of the chief works of mercy. We desire that the
books of a community should be divided into two classes, one to remain
in the house for the use of the Brothers, the other to be lent out to
the poor according to the judgment of the abbot.”[204]

In support of his contention concerning the general disappearance of
literature during the Middle Ages, Robertson quotes the authority of
Muratori to the effect that, “even monasteries of considerable note
had only one missal.”[205] Maitland has no difficulty in showing
that the passage cited has been wrongly understood, and that the
generalisation based upon it is absurd. Muratori was referring to a
letter of a certain Bonus, who was for thirty years (1018-1048) Abbot
of the monastery of S. Michael, in Pisa. In this letter, Bonus gives an
account of the founding of the monastery, and says that when he came
to Pisa he found there, not a monastery, but simply a chapel, which
was in a most deplorable and destitute condition, wanting vessels,
vestments, bells, and nearly all the requisites for the performance
of divine service, and having no service-books but a missal (_nisi
unum missale_). The statement so worded is of course no evidence that
there may not have been several copies of the missal. It simply shows
that there were no other books (such as texts of the Epistles or
Gospels) for use in the service. Bonus goes on to say, with commendable
pride, that in fifteen years’ time “the little hut,” as he calls
it, had expanded into a monastery, with suitable offices and with a
considerable estate in land, the single tin cup had been exchanged
for gold and silver chalices, and in place of one “missal,” the monks
rejoiced in the possession of a library of thirty-four volumes. It is
difficult to understand how Robertson could have justified himself in
basing, on a careless version of a statement concerning a missal in
a single half-ruined chapel, a broad and misleading generalisation
concerning the general absence of books from monasteries. The list of
the library later secured by the abbot includes copies of the Gospels,
the Psalms, and the Epistles, the Rule of S. Benedict, the Book of
Job, the Book of Ezekiel, five Diurnals, eight _Antiphonarii_, three
Nocturnals, a tractate by S. Augustine on Genesis, a book of Dialogues,
a Glossary, a Pastoral, a book of Canons, a book entitled _Summum
Bonum_, five Missals, a book entitled _Passionarum unum novum ubi sunt
omnes passiones ecclesiasticæ_ (I give the wording from the catalogue),
and the _Liber Bibliotheca_. “Bibliotheca” is the term very generally
applied at this period to the Bible, and often used for a collection
comprising but a few books of the Bible. The catalogue shows that the
good Abbot had made a very fair beginning towards a monastic library.

The letters of Gerbert, Abbot of Bobbio (who, in 998, became Pope
under the name of Sylvester II.), throw some light upon the literary
interests of that famous monastery and of the time. He writes (about
984) to a monk named Rainald (letter 130 of the collection): “You know
with what zeal I seek for copies of books from all quarters, and you
know how many scribes there are everywhere in Italy, both in the cities
and in the rural districts, I entreat you then ... that you will have
transcripts made for me of M. Manilius’ _De Astrologia_, Victorinus’
_De Rhetorica_, and of the _Ophthalmicus_ of Demosthenes.... Whatever
you lay out I will repay you to the full, according to your accounts.”
In letter 123, Gerbert writes to Thietmar of Mayence for a portion
of one of the works of Boëthius, his copy being defective. In letter
9, written to Abbot Giselbert, he asks for assistance in making good
certain deficiencies in his manuscript of the oration of Cicero, _Pro
Rege Deiotaro_. In letter 8, to the Archbishop of Rheims, he requests
that prelate to borrow for him from Abbot Azo a copy of Cæsar’s
_Commentaries_. In return he offers the loan of eight volumes of
Boëthius. In letter 7, he requests his friend Airard to attend to the
correction of the manuscript of Pliny, and to preparing transcripts
of two other manuscripts. In letter 44, to Egbert, Abbot of Tours, he
states that he has been much occupied in collecting a library, and that
he had for a long time been paying transcribers in Rome, in other parts
of Italy, in Germany, and in Belgium, and in buying at great expense
texts of important authors. He asks the Abbot to aid in doing similar
work in France, and he gives a list (unfortunately lost) of the works
for transcripts of which he is looking. He is ready to supply the
parchment and to defray all the expenses of the work. In other letters
he makes reference to his own writings on rhetoric, arithmetic, and
spherical geometry.

These letters, for the reference to which I am indebted to
Maitland,[206] assuredly give the impression that even in the dark
period of the tenth century, there was no little activity in certain
ecclesiastical circles and monastic centres in the transcribing,
collecting, and exchanging of books, and not merely of missals,
breviaries, or monkish legends, but of literature recognised as classic.

Another letter, written a century and a half later, makes reference
to the practice of exchanging books or of using them as pledges. A
prior writes to an abbot in 1150: “To his Lord, the Venerable Abbot
of---- wishes health and happiness. Although you desire to have the
books of Tully, I know that you are a Christian and not a Ciceronian.
But you go over to the camp of the enemy not as a deserter, but as
a spy. I should, therefore, have sent you the books of Tully which
we have, _De Re Agraria_, the Philippics, and the Epistles, but that
it is not our custom that any books should be lent to any person
without good pledges. Send us, therefore, the _Noctes Atticæ_ of Aulus
Gellius and Origen on the Canticles. The books which we have just
brought from France, if you wish for any of them, I will send you.”
The Abbot replies at the end of a long letter: “I have sent you as
pledges for your books, Origen on the Canticles, and instead of Aulus
Gellius (which I could not have at this time), a book which is called
_Strategematon_, which is military.”[207]

The custom of securing books by chains, which prevailed with the
libraries of all the earlier religious institutions, did not originate
with these. Eusebius mentions that the Roman Senate in the time of
Claudius ordered the treatise of Philo Judæus on the Impiety of
Caligula to be chained in the library as a famous monument. There
appears to have been an early appreciation on the part of certain of
the monastery scholars of the importance of indexes. Fosbroke quotes
among others the example of John Brome, Prior of Gorlestone, who, in
the fifteenth century, put indexes to almost all the books in his
library. From an examination of the catalogues of various of the
ecclesiastical libraries, Fosbroke arrives at the calculation that the
proportion of the works contained under the several main sub-headings
was approximately as follows: Divinity, 175; scholastic literature,
89; epistles and controversial literature, 65; history, 54; biography,
32; arts, mathematics, and astrology, 31; philosophy, 13; law, 6.[208]
This classification does not give any separate heading for allegory,
although this was a subject in which not a few of the earlier monkish
writers largely interested themselves.

As an example of monkish allegorical literature, Fosbroke mentions a
work written in 1435, under the instructions of a cloth shearer in
France, whose name he does not give. The cloth cutter, being a great
lover of tennis, had written a ballad upon that game. When he was
old, he wished to atone for his early sins and frivolities, and he
secured the services of a Dominican monk, who wrote, at his instance
and expense, an allegory on the game of tennis. The wall of the tennis
court stood for faith, which should always rest on a solid foundation,
while in the other conditions of the game the Dominican finds the
cardinal virtues, the evangelists, active and contemplative life, the
old and the new law, etc.

In the thirteenth century, Omons, who might be described as the
Lucretius of his day, wrote a work entitled _The Picture of the World_,
from which one could gather an impression of the character of the
philosophy of the early Middle Ages. In the department of metaphysics,
Omons (using largely material borrowed from Thales, Anaxagoras,
Epicurus, and Plato) described God as comparatively an idle being, and
speaks of Him as having at the time of creating Matter also created
Nature. Nature executed the will of God as an axe executes the will of
the carpenter; it sometimes, however, through want or excess of matter,
produces deformities.

The Liberal Arts, Omons divides under the usual septenary
arrangement, which is adopted as early as the fifth century by Capella.
Omons makes mathematics, however, not a mere science of numbers, but
the knowledge of everything that is produced in any regular order
whatever, while rhetoric includes judicial verdicts, decretals, laws,
etc. The term “liberal” he applied only to an art which explicitly
appertained to the mind; and therefore, medicine, painting, sculpture,
navigation, the military art, architecture, etc., although in their
theories as intellectual as are mathematics and astronomy, were,
because applicable to bodily purposes, denominated trades. The term
“philosopher” means only men versed in the occult sciences of nature,
and among the later philosophers Omons held no one so eminent as
Virgil. This was not the Bard of Mantua, but an ugly little Italian
conjurer, who, during the tenth century, had performed various feats of
legerdemain.

When Peter of Celle had borrowed two volumes of S. Bernard’s works,
he wrote to him: “Make haste and quickly copy these and send them to
me; and according to my bargain, cause a copy to be made for me, and
both those which I have sent to you, and the copies, as I have said,
send to me, and take care that I do not lose a single tittle.” Writing
to the Dean of Troyes, he says: “Send me the Epistles of the Bishop
of Le Mans, for I want to copy them”; and, indeed, he seems to have a
constant eye to the acquisition and multiplication of books.[209]

As to this _commercium librorum_, it would be easy, says Maitland, to
multiply examples. In a letter of the Abbot Peter to Guigo, Prior of
Chartreuse, he mentions that he had sent him the Lives of S. Nazianzen
and S. Chrysostom, and the argument of S. Ambrose against Symmachus.
That he had not sent the work of Hilary on the Psalms because his copy
contained the same defect as the Prior’s. That he did not possess
_Prosper against Cassius_, but that he had sent to Aquitaine for a
copy. He begs the Prior to send the greater volume of S. Augustine,
containing the letters which passed between him and S. Jerome, because
a great part of their copy, while lying in one of the cells, had been
eaten by a bear (_casu comedit ursus_),[210] a novel difficulty in the
way of preserving literature.

Peter of Clugni, known as Peter the Venerable, became abbot of the
monastery in 1122. Clugni, the _Caput Ordinis_, was at that time the
most considerable of the Benedictine foundations, and might, in fact,
be termed the most important monastery of its age. The correspondence
of Peter and of his secretary Nicholas, who was for a time also
secretary of Bernard of Clairvaux, forms an important contribution to
the monastic history of the country and contains not a few references
throwing light on the literary conditions of the time. Nicholas had,
in addition to his business as the Abbot’s amanuensis, what Mabillon
calls a _librorum commercium_ with various persons. It appears from his
letters that he used to lend books on condition that a copy should be
returned with the volume lent. Nicholas, while a diligent scribe and an
active-minded scholar, was discovered later, to be a very untrustworthy
person. He left Clairvaux with books, money, and gold service that did
not belong to him, and also (which Abbot Bernard mentions as a special
grievance) with three seals, his own, the prior’s, and the abbot’s.
His further career was a checkered one, but does not belong to this
narrative.

Abbot Peter of Clugni, writing to Master Peter of Poitiers in 1170,
lays some emphasis on the inadvisability of devoting too much time
to the study of the ancients. “See, now, without the study of Plato,
without the disputations of the Academy, without the subtleties of
Aristotle, without the teaching of philosophers, the place and the way
of happiness are discovered.... You run from school to school, and why
are you labouring to teach and to be taught? Why is it that you are
seeking through thousands of words and multiplied labours, what you
might, if you pleased, obtain in plain language and with little labour?
Why, vainly studious, are you reciting with the comedians, lamenting
with the tragedians, trifling with the metricians, deceiving with the
poets and deceived with the philosophers? Why is it that you are now
taking so much trouble about what is not in fact philosophy but should
rather (if I may say it without offence) be called foolishness.”

Counsels of this kind give some indication at least of the tendency
in Poitiers, and doubtless also in Clugni, to devote to the old-time
poetry and philosophy some of the hours which, under a stricter
observance, should be reserved for the Scriptures or the Fathers.
The venerable Abbot must himself have had some fairly comprehensive
knowledge of the literature he was criticising, and the gentle satire
of the phrase “deceived with the philosophers” does not give one the
impression of coming from a clumsy-minded and ignorant monk such as
Robertson describes Peter the Venerable to have been.

A further evidence not only of comprehensive knowledge but of a
liberal spirit, is afforded by the fact that Peter gave to the West
a translation (possibly the first) of the Alkoran. This is the form
used by Peter himself for the Mohammedan scriptures. In a letter to
S. Bernard, he speaks of having had this translation prepared of a
work which had so greatly influenced the thought of the world that it
ought to be known to Europe. He says further that the defenders of
the true faith should familiarise themselves with the contentions of
the Mohammedan heretics, in order to be able to refute these when the
necessity arose.[211]




[Illustration]

CHAPTER II.

SOME LIBRARIES OF THE MANUSCRIPT PERIOD.


THE following are some of the more important collections referred to in
the records of the Middle Ages. In Constantinople the Patriarch had a
library in Thomaïtes which was said to be of considerable importance,
and the works in it are referred to very often in the transactions
of the Synods. This collection was destroyed by fire in 780, but
was speedily replaced. Many of the monasteries of the Greek Church
possessed libraries, and in some of these libraries were preserved the
oldest manuscripts known to the world. Among the most important of
these collections was that contained in the monastery of Mt. Athos,
some of the treasures of which have been preserved to the present day.
During the time of Basilius Macedo (867-886), much work was said to
have been done by the scribes of this monastery.[212]

In Egypt it is claimed that until the conquest by the Arab, there was a
good deal of literary activity in the monasteries, and in the monastery
of S. Catherine of the Sinai range were preserved some specimens of the
earlier manuscripts, of which the Testament discovered by Tischendorf
is the most important example.

The Library of S. Giovanni in Naples, from which many valuable Greek
manuscripts were secured for the Royal Library in Vienna, was not an
old monastery collection, but had its origin, according to Blume, with
Janus Parrhasius.[213] The Augustin monks presented the collection
in 1729 to the Emperor Charles VI., in order that they might not be
disturbed in their seclusion by the visits of zealous scholars.[214]

The earliest of ecclesiastical libraries was probably that collected
by Bishop Alexander, in Jerusalem, at the beginning of the third
century. Fifty years later a library was founded at Cesarea by Origen,
which is described as extensive and important.[215] Collections were
also made at an early date at Hippo, at Cirta, at Constantinople, and
at S. Peter’s and the Lateran in Rome. All these earlier libraries
were apparently connected with the churches, and in most cases places
had been found for them within the church walls. Clark quotes from a
narrative of the persecution of 303-304 a paragraph saying that the
officers “went to the church where the Christians used to assemble, and
spoiled it of chalices, lamps, etc., but when they came to the library
(_bibliothecam_), the presses (_armaria_) were found empty.”[216] From
this reference we may conclude that the several vessels and the books
were in different parts of the same building.

The library of S. Augustine was bequeathed to the church of Hippo, and
the collection was preserved within the church building.

The regulations of the libraries in all the Benedictine monasteries
were based upon the Rule of S. Benedict (see _ante_, p. 28). As Order
after Order was founded, there came to be a steady development of
feeling in regard to books, and an ever increasing care for their
safe-keeping. S. Benedict had contented himself with general directions
for study; the Cluniacs prescribe the selection of a special officer
to take charge of the books, with an annual audit of the collection,
and the assignment to each Brother of a single volume for his year’s
study. The Cistercians and Carthusians provide for the loan of books to
outsiders under certain conditions, and the practice was later adopted
by the Benedictines. The Augustinians prescribe the kind of press
(_armarium_) in which the books are to be kept, and both they and the
Premonstratensians permit their books to be lent on receipt of pledges
of sufficient value. Even the Mendicant Friars, who, under the original
Rule of their Order, had restrained themselves from holding possessions
of any kind, found before long that books were indispensable, so that
their libraries came to excel those of most other Orders. Richard de
Bury, in his _Philobiblon_, says of the Mendicants: “These men are as
ants, ever preparing their meat in the summer, or as ingenious bees
continually fabricating cells of honey ... although they lately at the
eleventh hour have entered the Lord’s vineyard, they have added more
in this brief hour to the stock of sacred books than all the other
vine-dressers.”

Clark points out that the word _Library_ was used by the Benedictines
long before any special room was assigned in the Benedictine House as a
storage place for the books. He is of opinion that until the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries the books were for the most part kept in the
cloisters, the only portions of the monastery buildings, except the
refectory and occasionally the _califactorium_ (warming-house), in
which the monks were allowed to congregate. The books so stored in the
cloisters were shut up in presses, which secured for them a certain
amount of protection. The term applied to these presses, _armaria_, was
that used by the Romans for their book-cases. The monk charged with
the care of the books took his name not from the books themselves, as
in later times, but from the presses which contained them, and was
generally styled _armarius_.

In some of the monasteries where literary studies were pursued with
special ardour, the more persistent readers and scribes were provided
with small wooden compartments or studies called _carrells_. In the
book called the _Rites of Durham_ is given the following description
of these carrells: “In the north syde of the cloister, from the corner
over againste the church dour to the corner over againste the Dorter
dour, was all fynely glased from the hight to the sole within a little
of the ground into the Cloister garth, and in every window _iij_
Pewes or Carrells, where every one of the old monks had his carrell,
several by himselfs, that, when they had dyned, they dyd resort to that
place of Cloister, and there studyed upon these books, every one in
his carrell, all the after nonne, unto evensong tyme. This was there
exercise every daie.... In every carrell was a deske to lye there books
upon, and the carrell was no greater than from one stanchell of the
wyndowe to another, and over againste the carrells againste the church
wall, did stande certain great almeries (or cupbords) of waynscott all
full of bookes (with great store of ancient manuscripts to help them in
their study) wherein did lye as well the old anncyent written Doctors
of the Church as other prophane authors, with dyverse other holie
men’s wourks, so that every one did studye what Doctor pleased them
best, havinge the Librarie at all tymes to goe studye in besydes there
carrells.”[217]

In the _Customs_ of the Augustinian priory of Barnwell, written towards
the end of the thirteenth century, the following passage occurs: “The
press in which the books are kept ought to be lined inside with wood,
that the damp of the walls may not moisten or stain the books. This
press should be divided vertically as well as horizontally by sundry
partitions, on which the books may be ranged so as to be separated from
one another: for fear they be packed so close as to injure each other,
or to delay those who want them.”

The catalogue of the House of the White Canons at Titchfield in
Hampshire, dated 1400, shows that the books were kept in a small room,
on shelves called _columpnæ_, and set against the walls. A closet
of this kind was evidently not a working place, but simply a place
of storage. By the beginning of the fifteenth century, the larger
monasteries had accumulated many hundred volumes, and it began to be
customary to provide for the collections separate quarters, rooms
constructed for the purpose. The presses in the cloisters were still
utilised for books in daily reference.

In Christ Church, Canterbury, where as early as the fourteenth century,
the collection comprised as many as 698 books, a library at Durham was
built about 1425 by Archbishop Chichele: the library at Durham was
built about the same time by Prior Wessyngton. That at Citeaux, which
was placed over the _scriptorium_, dates from 1480, and that of St.
Germain des Prés from 1513. The collection of the latter foundation
was one of the earliest in France, and as early as the beginning of
the thirteenth century, there is record of its being consulted by
strangers. At the time of the French Revolution, it contained 7000
manuscripts and 4900 printed books.[218]

The Queen of Sicily, who in 1517 visited Clairvaux, one of the two
great Cistercian foundations in France, describes the library as
follows: “On the same side of the cloister are fourteen studies, where
the monks do their reading and writing, and over these studies, one
mounts by a broad spiral staircase to the new library. This library
is 189 feet long by 17 feet wide. It contains 48 seats (_bancs_) and
in each banc four shelves (_poulpitres_) furnished with books on all
subjects, but chiefly theology; the greater number of the said books
are of vellum and are written by hand, richly storied and illuminated.”

The phrase “written by hand,” indicates that the Queen was already
acquainted with books produced from type, some of which had in fact
been produced in Italy as early as 1464.

Another description, written in 1723 by the author of the _Voyage
Littéraire_, speaks of “the fifteen little cells, all in a row, where
the Brethren formerly used to write books, for which reason they are
still called the writing rooms. Over these cells is the library, the
building for which is large, vaulted, well lighted, and stocked with a
large number of manuscripts, fastened by chains to desks; but there are
not many printed books.”

The provisions of the statutes affecting the library imposed upon the
colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, were evidently borrowed directly from
the customs of the monasteries. The statutes of Oriel College, Oxford,
dated 1329, present an example: “The common books (_libri communes_)
of the House are to be brought out and inspected once a year, on the
feast of the Commemoration of Souls (November 2d) in the presence of
the Provost or his deputy, and of the scholars (Fellows). Each one
of the scholars, in the order of seniority, may select a single book
which either treats of the science to which he is devoting himself, or
which he requires for his use. This he may keep until the same festival
in the succeeding year, when a similar selection of books is to take
place, and so on, from year to year. If there should happen to be more
books than persons, those that remain are to be selected in the same
manner.”

A statute of Archbishop Lanfranc, for the English Benedictines, dated
1070, and based, as he tells us, on the general monastic practice of
his time, gives the following regulation: “On the Monday after the
first Sunday in Lent, before Brethren come into the Chapter House, the
librarian [here called not _armarius_ but _custos librorum_] shall
have a carpet laid down and all the books got together upon it, except
those which the year previous had been assigned for reading. These the
Brethren are to bring with them, when they come into the Chapter House,
each his book in his hand. Then the librarian shall read a statement as
to the manner in which Brethren have had books during the past year.
As each Brother hears his name pronounced, he is to give back the book
which had been entrusted to him for reading; and he whose conscience
accuses him of not having read through the book which he had received,
is to fall on his face, confess his fault, and entreat forgiveness.
The librarian shall then make a fresh distribution of books, namely a
different volume to each Brother for his reading.”

It would appear from this reference as if Lanfranc’s monks were under
obligations to read through but one book each year, which was certainly
a very moderate allowance. It is also to be noted that the books appear
not to have been distributed according to the preferences of the
readers, but to have been assigned at the will of the librarian. There
must certainly have been no little difference in the character and
extent of the duty imposed of reading through one book (even with so
long an allowance of time) according to the particular volume which the
_custos_ saw fit to assign. The worthy Archbishop writes, however, as
if a book were a book and one as good for edification or as fitting for
penance as another.

It is evident that there were two classes of volumes, one utilised for
distribution for separate reading, and the other reserved for reference
and placed in a separate room (first called _armarium_ and later
_bibliotheca_) where they were fastened with irons chains to lecterns
or reading-desks.

In the various details concerning the distribution of books, the
arrangement of the lecterns for the chained books, etc., the
practice in the early colleges was evidently modelled on that of the
monasteries. The system of chaining, as adopted in England, would allow
of the books being readily taken down from the shelves and placed
on the lectern for reading. One end of the chain was attached to the
middle of the upper edge of the right-hand board or cover; the other to
a ring which played on a bar which set in front of the shelf on which
the book stood. The fore-edge of the books, not the back, was turned
to the front. A swivel, usually in the middle of the chain, prevented
tangling. The chains varied in length according to the distance of the
shelf from the desk.[219]

In a copy of Locke’s _Treatise on the Epistles_, printed in 1711,
Maitland found inscribed the following “advertisement”: “Since, to
the great reproach of the nations and a much greater one of our Holy
Religion, the thievish disposition of some that enter into libraries
to learn there no good, hath made it necessary to secure the innocent
books, and even the sacred volumes themselves, with chains (which are
better deserved by those ill persons who have too much learning to be
hanged and too little to be honest), care should be taken hereafter
that as additions shall be made to this library (of which there is a
hopeful expectation), the chains should neither be longer nor more
clumsy than the use of them requires, and that the loops whereby they
are fastened to the books may be rivetted on such a part of the cover
and so smoothly as not to gall or raze the books while these are
removed from or to their respective places.”[220]

Isidore, Bishop of Seville (_c._ 560-636), possessed probably the
largest collection of books at that time in Europe. It was contained
in fourteen presses or _armaria_, each of which was ornamented with a
bust and inscribed with verses. The series of verses concludes with
the following notice addressed _ad interventorem_, a term which may be
interpreted _a talkative intruder_:

  _Non patitur quemquam coram se scriba loquentem;
  Non est hic quod agas, garrule, perge foras._

(The scribe allows no one to speak in his presence; there is nothing
for you to do here, chatterbox; you had better go outside)--a motto
which would serve very well for a reading-room of to-day.

In Rome the Church had, from an early date, preserved a collection of
manuscripts which related more particularly to church matters, but
which included also some specimens of the Roman Classics. In 855,
Lupus, of Ferrières, writes to Pope Benedict III., begging for the
loan of certain texts from which to make transcripts. He specifies the
Commentary of S. Jerome on Jeremiah, Cicero _de Oratore_, Quintilian,
and Terence.[221]

In the centuries following, however, as the Roman Church sank into a
condition of ignorance and strife, and Italy was continuously upset
by invasions, the library in Rome and the collections which had been
instituted in certain churches outside of Rome were either seriously
lessened or entirely destroyed. As late, however, as 1276, a few
valuable manuscripts were still to be found in the church collections.
Wattenbach speaks of the collection in Verona, in the library of the
Town Hall, as one of the most important of those in Italy in which old
manuscripts have been preserved to the present time. Next in importance
among the older collections, he mentions that of Hexham in England,
which had been originally collected by Bishop Acca in the year 700, and
which is referred to by Bede.[222]

With this is to be mentioned the library of York, which is first
described by Alcuin.[223]

Among the earlier important library collections was that of the
monastery of Vivaria, which had been founded by Cassiodorus; the
writings were classified according to their contents, and were arranged
in a series of _armaria_.

After the beginning of the seventh century, the most noteworthy
collection was that of Bobbio, a portion of which remained as late as
1618, and was taken by Paul V. for the Vatican Library. Another portion
found its way to Turin.

The literary activity of the monastery of Corbie has already been
mentioned, and the library there continued in existence during the
entire lifetime of the monastery. After 1350 the monks appear to have
themselves given up the work of writing. Étienne de Conty is recorded
as one of the special benefactors of the library. He collected books
for it, and he employed special scribes to add to the collection.[224]

In Germany, the monastery of Reichenau was noted as early as 821 for
its excellent collection of manuscripts. The librarian Reginbert
prepared in 821 an exhaustive catalogue of the collection. Not a few of
the manuscripts were, as appeared by the notes in the catalogue, the
work of his own hands. Of these manuscripts, which he had prepared with
so great zeal and labour, there have remained but five sheets of one
book, with a portion of the catalogue.

Of nearly as early a date is the first catalogue of the library of
St. Gall, previously referred to; in the catalogue of this there are
beneath the titles various critical notes. There is record of the loan
of books to the Emperor Charles III., to Frau Rickert, and to Liutward,
Bishop of Vercelli.[225]

In the monastery of Pomposa, in Lombardy, Abbot Jerome brought together
in the eleventh century (in spite of certain grumblings on the part
of the monks, the ground for which is not clearly explained) a great
collection of manuscripts.[226] A certain Henricus Clericus, writing
 in 1093, describing this collection to a friend, says that in no
church, not even in Rome, could so wonderful a group of books be found.
Henricus prepared a catalogue of the library, and at the close of
the catalogue he finds it necessary, as a matter of consistency, to
apologise for the abbot who had ventured to include in the collection
heathen books. The presence of such books, known at the time as _libri
scholastici_, was, however, by no means exceptional in monastery
collections, and in many of these were to be found copies of Virgil,
Ovid, and particularly Cicero. While this was more frequently the case
in Italy, it occurred also in Germany. An inventory made in 1233 of the
monastery of Neumünster, near Wurzburg, includes in a special list the
titles of a number of the Classics.

A similar separate catalogue of _libri scholastici_ was made in 1297
for the collection in the cathedral library of Lübeck.

While the principal increase in the monastery libraries had been
secured through the work of scribes and through exchanges, and
occasionally through purchases, a considerable proportion of the books
came to them through gifts or bequests. The gift that it was customary
for a novice to make on entering a monastery very frequently took the
form of books.

In 1055, the priest Richlof, in placing his son with the Benedictines,
gave as an accompanying present a farm and some books, and his mother
gave a copy of a treatise of S. Ambrose.[227]

Léon Maitre says that in Fleury, each new scholar was expected to
present at least two codices. Towards the end of the eleventh century,
a noble cleric, who entered as a monk the monastery at Tegernsee,
brought with him so many books that, according to the account, when
placed by the principal altar they covered this from top to bottom.[228]

In what was known as the Scottish Monastery, near Vienna, there
was kept in the thirteenth century a record of gifts, which record
includes a long list of presents of books. In the latter part of the
century, the monastery appears to have degenerated, the library fell
into disuse, and the presents of books ceased. In 1418 the so-called
Scottish monks were driven out, and the foundation was taken possession
of by Germans. From this date the record of gifts of books again began.

In 1453, the monastery received as a bequest from Dr. Johannes
Polzmacher his entire library. The library came to include a
considerable list of works on jurisprudence together with a series of
classics, including several copies of Ovid. The latter appears to have
been a special favourite in the monastic collections. The books on
jurisprudence were utilised for the profit of the monastery by being
loaned out to the jurisprudence Faculty of the university. They were,
it appears, also occasionally loaned to the students for transcribing.
In the chance of the manuscripts suffering damage while out on hire,
the borrower was compelled to deposit an adequate pledge in the shape
either of money or other valuable property.[229]

The monastery in Bobbio received books from wandering Irishmen, as is
indicated by the following inscription:

  _Sancte Columba, tibi Scotto tuus incola Dungal,
  Tradidit hunc librum, quo fratrum corda beentur.
  Qui legis ergo, Deus pretium sit muneris ora._[230]

(Holy Columba of Scotland, thy votary Dungal has bestowed upon thee
this book, whereby the hearts of the brothers may be gladdened. Do thou
who readest it pray that God may be the reward of thy labour.)

In the monastery of St. Père-de-Chartres the Abbot Alveus, who died in
955, presented to S. Peter a book _Pro Vita Æterna_.[231]

Dietrich Schreiber, a citizen of Halle, who, notwithstanding his name,
is said not to have been a scribe, gave, in 1239, for the good of his
soul, to the preaching Brothers of Leipzig, a canonistic manuscript,
with the condition that either of his sons should have the privilege of
redeeming the same for the sum of five marks, in case he might require
it in connection with his study of the law.[232] Robert of Lille, who
died in 1339, left in his will to his daughters a certain illuminated
calendar, with the condition attached that after their death the
calendar was to be given to the nuns of Chikessaund.[233]

It is also the case that bequests securing an annual income were
occasionally given with the specific purpose of founding or endowing
monastery _scriptoria_ and libraries. The Abbot of St. Père-de-Chartres
ordered, in 1145, that the tenants or others recognising the authority
of the monastery must take up each year for the support of the library
the sum of eighty-six solidos.[234]

His successor, Fulbert, instituted a new room for the collection
and kept the monks themselves at work, so that in 1367 a catalogue,
inscribed in four rolls, gives the titles of 201 volumes.[235]

Also in Evesham, in Worcestershire, England, a statute enacted in
1215 provides that certain tenths coming into the priory should be
reserved for the purpose of buying parchment and for the increase of
the library. During the following year the amount available for this
purpose was five solidos, eighteen deniers.[236]

The account books of the monks of Ely showed that in the year 1300
they purchased five dozen sheets of parchment, four pounds of ink,
eight calf-skins, four sheep-skins, five dozen sheets of vellum, and
six pairs of book clasps. In the same year they paid six shillings
for a _Decretal_ and two shillings for a _Speculum Gregor._ In 1329,
the Precentor received six shillings and seven pence with which he
was instructed to go to Balsham to purchase books. In the same year,
four shillings were paid for twelve iron chains (used, of course, for
fastening the books safely to the reading-desks). Between 1350 and
1356, the purchases appear to have included no less than seventy dozen
sheets of parchment and thirty dozen sheets of vellum.[237]

Prince Borwin, of Rostock, in 1240 presented the monastery of Dargun
with a hide of land, the proceeds of which were to be used for the
repairing and preservation of the books in the library.[238] Adam,
treasurer of the Chapter of Rennes, in 1231, presented his library to
the abbey of Penfont, with the condition that the books were never
to be diverted from the abbey, and that copies were to be lent only
against adequate pledges.

In 1345, a library was founded in the House of the German Brothers
of Beuggen, near Rheinfelden, through the exertions of Wulfram of
Nellenberg. He directed that all books left by deceased Brothers
throughout Elsass were to be brought to this library, and the living
Brothers were also earnestly urged to present their own books to the
same collection.[239]

The great library of the monastery of Admunt was catalogued in 1380
by Brother Peter of Arbonne. The Chapter of S. Pancras, in Leyden,
received in 1380, through a bequest of Philip of Leyden, a collection
of eighty manuscripts, the catalogue of which has been preserved.[240]

As before indicated, the Monastery Reform, which was instituted with
the beginning of the fifteenth century, exercised a very decided
influence upon the interest in books and upon the development of
libraries. In Tegernsee, where the once noted library had fallen into
ruins, the Abbot Casper (1426-1461) reorganised it, restored such of
the old manuscripts as were still in existence, bought new codices,
and put to work a number of hired scribes. His successor, Conrad V.,
carried on the work actively and purchased for the sum of eleven
hundred pounds heller no less than 450 volumes, in addition to which he
secured a number of gifts or devout presents.[241]

In Salzburg, the Archbishop Johann II. (1429-1441) caused a new
library building to be erected, and collected for it many beautiful
manuscripts. In the monastery of Bergen, near Magdeburg, the Abbot
Bursfelder (1450-1478) organised a library, and utilised for his
books an old chapel. In 1477, the Prior Martin instituted a library
in Bordesholm, and Brother Liborius, who was a professor in Rostock,
gave over, in 1405, to this library, for the good of his soul, his
works on jurisprudence, with the provision that they were to be placed
in chains and to remain forever in the reading-room. A catalogue of
this collection, which was prepared in 1498, and which contains more
than five hundred titles, has been preserved.[242] The library of
the Benedictine monastery of St. Ulrich, near Augsburg, retained its
early importance until the invention of printing, and in 1472, as
before mentioned, a printing office was instituted in connection with
the monastery, by the Abbot and the Chapter, in which active work was
carried on. Abbot Trithemius presented to the monastery of Sponheim,
in 1480, the sum of fifteen hundred ducats for the enlargement of its
library.

As before stated, the Brothers of Common Life planned their collections
of books expressly with reference to the service of the students
in their schools, and these libraries contained, therefore, a much
larger proportion of books in the vernacular than were to be found in
other monasteries. In some of the Brotherhood Homes, the library was
divided into the collection for the Brothers and the collection for
the students. It was ordered that at least once a year all books that
were not out on loan should be called in and should be inspected in the
presence of the Brothers.

=Public Libraries.=--Of the libraries of antiquity, only a single
one, and that the latest in foundation, the Imperial Library of
Constantinople, continued in existence as late as the Middle Ages.
This library, founded in 354 by the Emperor Constantius, was largely
added to by Julian the Philosopher. Under the Emperor Basiliscus, the
original library, which at that time was said to have contained no
less than 120,000 volumes, was destroyed by fire. It was afterwards
reinstituted by the Emperor Zeno, the prefect of the city, Julian,
having given to the work his personal supervision. References are made
to this library in 1276, and again early in the fourteenth century,
when John Palæologus was able to present from it certain manuscripts
(probably duplicates) to the well known manuscript dealer Aurispa of
Venice. It is probable that the manuscripts of the imperial collection
had been to some extent scattered before the fall of the city in 1453.
Such manuscripts as had escaped destruction during the confusion of
the siege of the city were hidden away by the scholars interested, in
various monasteries and in out-of-the-way corners, from which they were
brought out by degrees during the following two or three centuries.

Large quantities of these manuscripts found their way, however, very
promptly to Italy, chiefly through Venice, and, as is described in
another chapter, not a few of the Greek scholars who were driven from
the Byzantine territories, or who refused to live under the rule of the
Turk, brought with them into Italy, as their sole valuable possessions,
collections of manuscripts, more or less important, which they used
either as texts for their lectures or for transcribing for sale.

The collections in the monasteries of the West, brought together in the
first place simply for the requirements of the monks and restricted
(at least in theory) to devotional or doctrinal books, were, in large
measure at least, placed at the disposal of scholars and readers
outside of the monasteries, as the interest in literature came to
extend beyond the class of ecclesiastics. With this extension of the
use of the libraries, there came a natural development in the range of
the books collected.

Long after the monks or ecclesiastics had ceased to exercise any
control over the books or to be themselves the only readers interested
in their preservation and use, the most convenient space for the
collection was to be found in the church buildings. Many of the
collections came, in fact, to be known as cathedral libraries.

In certain cases, books or money for the purchase of books was
bequeathed in trust to ecclesiastical authorities with the direct
purpose of providing a library for the use of the general public. The
cathedral Prior of Vercelli (in Piedmont), Jacob Carnarius, who died in
1234, left his books to the Dominicans of S. Paul. He made it, however,
a condition of the bequest that under proper security of deposit or
pledge, the books should be placed at the disposal of any scholars
desiring their use, and particularly of instructors in the Theological
Faculty of the University of Vercelli.

Petrarch’s library was bequeathed in 1362 to the Church of S. Mark
in Venice, with the condition that the collection was to be for the
use of the general public. The books were neglected, and for some time
disappeared altogether, and it was only in 1635 that a portion of them
were recovered. The famous library of S. Mark dates from 1468, when
Cardinal Bessarion presented to the city eight hundred manuscripts,
assigning as his reason for the gift the generous hospitality extended
by Venice to the refugees from Constantinople. These books were to be
for the use of any qualified citizens of the city, a pledge of double
the value being deposited for any manuscript borrowed. The library
of Boccaccio, who died in 1375, was bequeathed to the monks of the
Holy Ghost in Florence. This library was afterwards added to by the
collection of the famous theologian, Luigi Marsigli, and that of
Niccolo Niccoli.[243]

To Florence, which stood at the front of the intellectual development
of Italy, belongs the credit of instituting the largest and most
important of the earlier public libraries of Italy. Niccolo Niccoli,
one of the most energetic of the scholarly book collectors, specified
in his will, made in 1430, that his manuscripts should be placed in
the Camal-dulensian monastery of S. Maria, where his friend Traversari
was prior, and that these manuscripts were to be available for public
use. In 1437, however, the day before his death, he added a codicil
to his will, under which the decision as to the abiding-place for his
manuscripts was left to sixteen trustees.

He died in debt, however, and the books would have been seized by his
creditors if they had not been redeemed by Cosimo de’ Medici. Cosimo
placed them in the Dominican monastery of S. Mark, the collection in
which, in 1444, comprised four hundred Latin and Greek manuscripts.
Cosimo gave much care to the further development of this collection. As
has already been mentioned, he used for the purpose the services of
the great manuscript dealer, Vespasiano. After the earthquake of 1453,
he caused the library building to be restored with greater magnificence
than before. The care of the library was continued, after the death
of Cosimo, by his son Pietro, and the collection finally became the
foundation of the famous Laurentian library, which is in existence
to-day.

Pietro took pains to send the Greek grammarian, Laskaris, twice to the
Orient to collect further manuscripts. From his first journey, Laskaris
brought back no less than two hundred works, of which eighty had not
heretofore been known in Italy. On his second journey, Laskaris died.

The library suffered much during the invasion of Charles VIII., but a
large proportion of the books were redeemed from the French invaders by
the Dominican monks, who paid for them three thousand gulden.

Cardinal Giovanni de’ Medici (later Pope Leo X.) took the collection
from the monastery with him to Rome, but it was afterwards returned to
Florence by Pope Clemens VII.

Clemens gave to Michel Angelo the commission to build a hall for
the library, but both Pope and architect died before the work was
completed, and the building took shape only finally in 1571, the plan
of Michel Angelo having been carried out in substance.

The library of the Vatican passed through various vicissitudes
according to the interest or the lack of interest of the successive
popes, but under Pope Nicholas V. (1447-1455) it became one of the
most important collections in the world for the use of scholars. In
1471, Sixtus IV. completed the library building and the rooms for the
archives and added many works, and it was under this Pope that the use
of the books was thrown open (under certain conditions) to the general
public.

Frederick, Duke of Urbino, is reported to have spent as much as
40,000 ducats on the ducal collection in Urbino, and Vespasiano
rendered important services in the selection and development of this
library. The books were, in 1657, under the papacy of Alexander VII.,
transferred to the Vatican.

During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, there was very
considerable interest in literary work in Hungary and some noteworthy
collections of manuscripts were there brought together. The collectors
in Italy found in fact some of their richest treasures, particularly
in manuscripts in Greek, in the monasteries of Hungary and of
Transylvania. The cause of literature was much furthered by King
Matthias Corvinus, who brought together a very valuable collection
in Ofen. He kept four scribes in Florence preparing works for the
Ofen library, and thirty were continually at work in Ofen itself. His
wife, Beatrix, who was a daughter of King Ferdinand of Naples, and
a grand-daughter of Alfonso the Good, is said to have exercised no
little influence upon the literary culture of the Hungarian Court. At
her instance, many Italian scholars were brought to Hungary, and their
aid utilised in completing the library. The _codices Budences_ came to
be well known in the scholarly world, and secured fame both for the
beauty of their script and the richness of their adornment. Wattenbach
says of these, however, that their text is very largely inaccurate,
giving the impression that the transcripts had been prepared hurriedly
and to order. After the death of King Matthias, a number of his books
came into the possession of Emperor Maximilian, who used them for the
foundation of the Court Library of Vienna. This was the only portion
of the original Hungarian collection which escaped destruction at the
hands of the Turks.

Among the public libraries in France is to be noted that of Louis
IX., which was open for the use of scholars, but which, being limited
almost entirely to devotional books, could not have been of any great
scholarly service. In the middle of the thirteenth century, Richard de
Furnival, chancellor of the Cathedral of Amiens, instituted a public
library, and himself wrote, as a guide for the same, a work entitled
_Biblionomia_.

The libraries of S. Ulrich and Afra in Augsburg have already been
referred to.[244]

According to Savigny, there were before the time of printing no
university libraries in Italy. The _stationarii_ provided both
instructors and students with such books as were prescribed in the
courses, and the demand for others appears not to have been great. In
Paris, on the other hand, a collection of books for the use of the
students was instituted as early as 1270, the first benefactor being
Stephen, Archdeacon of Canterbury. Stephen gave his books to the church
of Notre Dame to be loaned to poor students of theology. In 1297, Peter
of Joigny, in continuation of the same work, gave a collection of books
in trust to the university directly for the use of these poor students
of theology. The famous College of the Sorbonne probably dates from
1253. The _librarium_ of the college was instituted in 1289, and it was
specified that the books were for the common use of the instructors and
students. The catalogue of this collection, prepared in the following
year, is still in existence and contains 1017 titles.[245]

Each _socius_ of the college had a key to the library rooms and was
permitted to take guests in with him. The books were all fastened
to the wall or to the reading-desks by chains, so that the risk of
abstraction was not a serious one. The statutes of 1321 prescribed that
of every work issued, one copy in the best form must be preserved for
the Sorbonne collection. This is probably the first statute of the kind
having in view the preservation, in a public collection, of copies of
all works produced. It is to be borne in mind, however, in the first
place, that it could have had reference only to books produced under
the direct supervision of the college, and secondly, that there was
here no question of original literary production, but merely of copies
of the older works accepted as possessing doctrinal authority. The
books in this library (and probably in other similar libraries) which
were not protected by chains were called _libri vagantes_, and these
could, under certain restrictions, be loaned out. Wattenbach is of
opinion, however, that no books other than duplicates were placed in
this class.

Another library of importance was contained in the College of Narbonne,
which had been founded in 1316, and which was itself a continuation of
an earlier foundation instituted in 1238 by the Archbishop Peter, at
the time he was about to take part in the Crusade. The books were to be
open for the use of students as well in Paris as of Narbonne.[246]

In the College of Plessis, the statutes of 1455 described that all
books, with the exception of the Missals, must be chained, and that no
unchaining should be permitted except with the authorisation of the
master of all the bursars. In the College of the Scots, the loaning of
books outside of the building was absolutely forbidden.

To the College of the Sorbonne belongs the credit of taking the
initiative step in inviting the first printers to Paris. In 1469, the
prior and the librarian made themselves responsible for finding work
and support for two printers, called to Paris from Mayence. The fact
that the Prior Johann Heynlin was himself a German was doubtless of
influence in bringing to the college early information concerning the
importance of the new art.[247] The first book which was printed in
Paris was the letters of Gasparin of Bergamo, which appeared in 1470
(twenty years after the perfecting of the Gutenberg press), and bore
the imprint _in ædibus Sorbonnæ_.

In England, the foundation of the Franciscans in Oxford took,
early in the thirteenth century, active part in furthering library
facilities for the clerics and the students. They appear to have had
two collections, one called _libraria conventus_, doubtless restricted
to theological and religious books, and one described as _libraria
scholarium_ or _studentium_, which contained a number of examples of
the classics. It was to the Franciscans that Bishop Grosseteste, who
died in 1253, bequeathed all his books.

The interest in literature of Richard de Bury, the friend of Petrarch,
has already been referred to. He was the instructor of King Edward
III., and exercised later, important official responsibilities. He
served as a foreign representative more than once, and was for a
time chancellor of the kingdom. At the time of his death in 1345, he
was Bishop of Durham. He had a passion for the collecting of books,
and with the exceptional advantages of wealth, official station, and
knowledge of distant countries, he had advantages in this pursuit
possessed by no other Englishman of the time. It is said that the other
rooms in his house having already been crowded with books, these were
massed in his bedroom also in such quantities that he could get to his
bed only by stepping upon them. His library was bequeathed to Durham
College in Oxford, which had been founded by himself. The college was
discontinued by Henry VIII., and the books were scattered, not even
the catalogue, which Bury had himself prepared, having been preserved.
In confiding his books to Oxford for the use of the students, Richard
gives various earnest injunctions as to the proper respect in which
they should be held and the care with which they should be handled. A
reader who should handle the books with dirty hands or while eating
or drinking, could, in Bury’s opinion, be fitly punished with nothing
less than banishment. The collection of Durham College was to be open
not only to the use of the members of the college itself, but of all
masters and students in Oxford, but no books of which there were no
duplicates were to be taken out of the building.

The earliest university library of Germany was that of the College
Carolinum in Prague, instituted by Charles IV. The next in date appears
to have been that of Heidelberg, where as early as 1386 the Faculty of
Arts had a library for itself in addition to the general collection
belonging to the university. As before stated, there was also a
collection in the Castle which was open for the use of all readers,
students, citizens, or strangers. The university library in Vienna
dates from 1415, and that in Erfurt from 1433. The town library in
Leipzig had for its origin a collection possessed by the Augustinian
monks in the monastery of S. Thomas, which collection was thrown open
for the use of the public in 1445. Additions to the library were to
be made only under the inspection and supervision of the monastery
authorities.

The most noteworthy library which had no connection with any university
was instituted at Alzei (in Hesse Cassel) in 1409. Its founders were
Johannes of Kirchdorf, Prebendary of the Cathedral of Worms and
chaplain of King Rupert.

The books were given in order that the clerics and other scholarly
people who belonged to the city of Alzei “could use the same for
entertainment and instruction, and could spread among the community at
large the learning contained therein.”[248]

In Hamburg there was, as early as 1469, a collection comprising
forty volumes of medical books, for the use more particularly of the
city physician and his assistant, and also for general reference. In
1480 the burgermeister Neuermeister left a considerable legacy for
the foundation of a city library. In Frankfort, the library of the
Carmelite monastery was taken over in 1477 for the use of the city, in
order that the “books could be made of service for the enlightenment of
the community to the greater glory of God and of the Mother of God.”

=Collections by Individuals.=--Among the laity (outside, at least, of
Italy) it was particularly the kings who from time to time interested
themselves in collecting books. Pepin received from Pope Paul I., at
his own urgent request, a collection of books which included certain
Greek manuscripts. The latter could, however, hardly have been of
any particular service either to the King or to any members of his
Court.[249]

The collection formed by Charlemagne has already been referred to,
and also the provision of his will, under which, after his death, the
books were to be sold and the proceeds given to the poor. Charles
the Bald, with whose name it is not easy to associate intellectual
activity, appears to have been a great collector of books. After his
death his library was, under his directions, divided between St. Denis,
Compiègne, and his son.[250] It is recorded of William the Great of
Aquitaine, who died in 1030, and who was the father of the Empress
Agnes, that “he had many books and read zealously therein.”[251] Count
Baldwin of Guines, who died in 1205, brought together a collection of
books which he had translated into the Romance tongue. Louis IX. of
France was interested in the idea of bringing together a collection of
devout books, and, although he did not live to carry out his plan, the
manuscripts which were left by him served for the scholar Vincennes of
Beauvais in the preparation of his great encyclopedia.

Louis heard, during his crusade, of some sultan who had caused to
be prepared transcripts of all the noted works of philosophy. This
example incited the zeal of Louis, who gave directions that all the
“authentic, useful, and devout books” which were to be found within his
realm were to be transcribed, and the transcripts placed in the Royal
Library. The collection was, however, not allowed to remain complete,
as in his will Louis directed that the books should be divided between
the preacher monks and the Minorites of Paris, the Abbey Royaumont, and
the Dominican monks of Compiègne.[252]

John, Duke of Berry, son of the Good King John, and brother of King
Charles V., found opportunity, even during the troublous times which
culminated with the battle of Poitiers and the imprisonment of his
father, to bring together a noteworthy collection of books. It was
this collection that made the beginning of the library of the Louvre,
instituted by Charles V., a library for which Gilles Mallet prepared in
1373 a very complete catalogue. Barrois published in 1830, in Paris, a
work devoted entirely to a description of the books collected by Prince
John and his brother Charles.

David Aubert, whose translation of the _History of the Emperors_
was published[253] in 1457, makes, in the preface to this history,
special mention of the literary tastes of Philip, Duke of Burgundy.
He says that Philip made a daily practice of having read to him
ancient histories and that he kept employed a great number of skilled
translators, learned historians, and capable scribes who were busied in
adding to his great library. This collection of Philip appears later to
have been scattered as there is no record of its preservation.

The Duke of Bedford found time, between his frequent campaigns,
to interest himself in the collection of manuscripts, and more
particularly of works which were beautifully illuminated. He purchased,
for 1200 francs, a portion of the library of Charles V., which had been
captured, and, these books being taken to Oxford, finally found place
in the Bodleian collection.

Philip of Cleves, who died in 1528 and who was connected with the
Burgundy House, shared the passion of his relatives for magnificent
manuscripts.

An inventory of Margaret, Duchess of Brittany, contains the descriptive
titles of eleven books of devotion and four romances, “all bound in
satin.”[254]

The name of Anne of Brittany, the wife of King Charles VIII., and later
of Louis XII., has long been famous in connection with her fondness for
books of devotion and with the great collection which she succeeded in
making of these. An inventory of 1498 gives the titles of 1140 books as
belonging to Anne’s collection.[255]

In Italy, it was not until the time of Petrarch that there came to
be any general interest in the collection of books. This interest
was naturally associated with the great Humanistic movement of which
it may be considered as partly the cause and partly the effect. The
development of literary interests in Italy during the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries will be considered in the chapter on the
Renaissance.

In Germany, the collections outside of the monasteries appear to have
been less important than in Burgundy and in France, the difference
being probably in part due to the narrower cultivation of the German
noblemen, and probably also in part to their smaller resources. In
fact, the more important collections do not appear to have been in the
possession of the nobility at all, but to have come into existence
through the public spirit of citizens of lower degree. The library of
two hundred volumes brought together as early as 1260 by Hugo Trimberg,
a schoolmaster of St. Gangolf, has already been referred to.

Duke Ludwig of Brieg is described as having had as early as 1360 a
considerable collection of books, and as having had written, in 1353,
by some scribe whose name has not been preserved, the Hedwig legends.

The Electors of the Palatinate interested themselves in the formation
of libraries, having possibly been influenced to some extent by their
relations with their neighbours on the other side of the Rhine. Authors
such as Matthias of Kemnat and Michel Behaim worked at the instance of
the Electors and under pay from them. The books of Kemnat and Behaim
were either originally written in German, or were promptly translated
into German for the use of the Electors and of their wives. A number of
books in this series are also ornamented with pictures, but, according
to the descriptions, the art work in these illustrations was much
inferior to that done at the same time in Burgundy.

The most important group of the Heidelberg manuscripts was collected
by Ludwig III., who died in 1437.[256] His daughter Mechthild, whose
first husband was the Count Ludwig of Wurtemberg, and whose second, the
Archduke Albrich, retained in her widowhood in her castle at Rotenburg
a collection of ninety-four volumes of the mediæval poets, whose works
were written in the vernacular.[257] Ulbrich of Rappoldstein kept two
scribes engaged for five years in transcribing the _Parsival_, and the
cost of the work amounted to £200.

It is apparent from the preceding sketch that the development of
literature and the circulation of books during the Middle Ages were
considerable, notwithstanding the serious difficulties there were to
contend with during the ten centuries between the fall of the Roman
Empire of the West and the time of the invention of printing.

Under the “Peace of the World” secured by the imperial rule, there had
come to be an active literary production and a development of literary
interests throughout the community which called for a wide distribution
and a general use of books. There was available for the use of
publishers a great list of accepted classics, Greek and Latin, and
there were also various epochs during which there came into existence
works by contemporary writers of distinctive importance, many of which
have been preserved as classics for future generations.

The publishers of this period had a convenient and inexpensive material
to use for the making of books, and they had available for book
production the labour of skilled and inexpensive scribes,--chiefly
slaves. The well established means of communication throughout the
Empire enabled the publishers of Rome and Massilia and other literary
centres to keep open connections with cities in the farthest districts
of the realm, and there is adequate evidence of a well organised trade
in the distribution of books over almost the entire civilised world,
a trade which continued active until the latter part of the fourth
century.

With the fall of the Empire of the West and with the destruction of
so much of the civilised organisation and machinery which had been
dependent upon Roman rule, the book trade, or, at least, the trade
outside of Italy, practically disappeared. There remained, however,
with certain classes a knowledge of the classics and an interest in
their preservation, and there remained also in the monasteries the
knowledge and practice of writing and the collections of the works of
the early Church Fathers, the multiplication of which, for the use of
the increasing number of priests, called for continued labour on the
part of the clerical scribes.

When the work of writing came to be instituted, particularly in the
Benedictine Order, as a part of the regular routine of the life of
a properly ordered monastery, and when such work came to be accepted
as a part of the daily or weekly services rendered by the monks,
the preservation of the art of writing and the preservation of the
manuscripts, the existence of which depended upon this continued
knowledge, were assured.

For centuries after 476, such literary vitality as there was depended
practically upon these Benedictine monasteries. After the tenth
century, we find a wider literary interest throughout the community,
and in certain Courts and circles of nobility, literature began to be
accepted as fashionable, and an interest in literature to be accepted
as part of the proper outfit of a gentleman.

The second stage, therefore, in the development of the interest in
books which secured the multiplication of enough copies of many of the
older books to prevent them from passing out of existence, was in the
formation of the collections by princes and nobles, collections which
were, as we have noted, usually under the charge of clerical scribes.

The third and more important stage of development came with the
recognition, on the part of the newly founded universities of Bologna,
Paris, Prague, Heidelberg, and Oxford, of the fact that the work of
higher education required the use of collections of books for the
reference of instructors and for the direct use of the students.
With the instituting in the universities of a class of scribes
(_stationarii_, _librarii_) recognised as university officials, a
recognition which carried with it certain privileges and protection,
and which went far to offset the hampering restrictions of university
and ecclesiastical supervision, the book production of Europe took a
more assured form.

The fourth step in the extension of literary interests was taken by the
towns-people, partly at the instance of priests who were themselves
sprung from the people, and partly under the influence of students
returning from university work to their native towns; and collections
of books were made for the use of the towns-people, while libraries,
originally planned only for the work of the monasteries and for the use
of clerics, were thrown open to students generally. There appear to
have been in the manuscript period and in the earlier ages of printing
a larger number of such town libraries and a larger extent of literary
interest among the citizen class in Germany than in either France or
England.

In Italy, the development of literary interests and of literary
production worked from an early date much more outside of church
organisations than was the case either in Germany or in France.

In such centres of literary activity as Florence, Milan, Padua, Rome,
and later, Venice, the production of the classics and the multiplying
of the books of the Italian writers themselves was carried on at
the instance and to a large extent with the money of the wealthier
citizens, citizens who in many cases held no official positions
whatever. The intellectual life of Italy was, however, from an early
date, very largely influenced by the thought and the learning that
came to it from the Greeks of Constantinople, an influence which was
increasing in importance for a quarter of a century before the fall
of the Greek Empire, and which, after 1453, was naturally still more
extended and emphasised by the large immigration of Greek scholars
flying from Turkish rule and bringing with them the literary treasures
of the East. It was this invasion of Greek thought and the restoration
of the knowledge of the poetry and philosophy of classic Greece, which
gave the immediate impetus to the great intellectual movement known as
the Renaissance.

As the Renaissance movement took hold of the imagination of Italian
scholars, it found ready for its use the new invention of printing, and
through the presses of Aldus and his associates, the thought of the
Old World, reshaped with the knowledge of the fifteenth century, gave a
fresh inspiration to the intellectual life of Europe.

In Germany, where the Renaissance movement also influenced the
intellectual life of the time, a more important impetus to the
intellectual activity came with the work of the Reformation. The
printing-press made the teachings of Luther and his associates
available for the widest popular distribution, and the towns-people
and villagers who bought from the book peddlers the tracts containing
the vigorous statements of the Reformers, and who bought also the
answering arguments of the defenders of the Roman Church, were not
merely wrestling with a religious or theological issue, but were
furthering the general education of the community and were helping to
lay the foundation of the book trade of the future. From the earliest
date of the printing-press, it was the case that there was in Germany
a larger distribution of books, printed in the vernacular, among what
one may call (for purposes of classification) the lower orders of the
community, than was the case in either Italy, France, or Germany. The
development of the relation between literature and the community, which
came after the establishment of the new art of printing, belongs,
however, to a later chapter.

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

CHAPTER III.

THE MAKING OF BOOKS IN THE EARLY UNIVERSITIES.


THE first revival of the long slumbering trade in manuscripts took
place in Italy, the cradle of the universities. Although after the
breaking down of the old civilisation of the Western Empire, Italy had
suffered more through invasions and devastations than any other country
of Europe, it had nevertheless succeeded in preserving a certain
continuity of cultivation and some remnants of learning or germs of
intellectual life, from which germs there came again into growth an
intellectual development for Europe. For the purposes of this study,
I am concerned with the history of the early universities of Europe
only in connection with their relations to the production of books. I
propose, therefore, to give a brief description of the organisation
and the character of the book-trade that came into existence in one or
two of the representative university towns, with some reference to the
general influence of the first universities upon the development and
the distribution of literature.

As has been indicated in the introductory chapter, it is my
understanding that, with the beginning of the thirteenth century,
the responsibility for the preservation and the development of the
intellectual life of Europe, for the mental training of the increasing
proportion of the community which was conscious of intellectual
existence, and for the transmission to the existing generations of
what had been preserved of the thought and learning of the past, was
transferred from the monasteries and the ecclesiastical schools to the
newly organised universities.

This change meant among other things that the control and direction
of education no longer rested with the ecclesiastics, that the class
of scholars was no longer limited to the clerics, and that there were
other directions in which scholarly achievement was to be sought
than those heretofore marked out by the Church. I do not mean to say
that after the beginning of the thirteenth century, when the schools
of Bologna and Paris had developed into universities, the Church
consciously abandoned the control of education, a control which had
rested in its hands for eight centuries. The representatives of the
Church authority themselves took an important part in bringing into
existence not a few of the universities, and in connection with the
organisation of the theological Faculties and in other ways, the popes
and the bishops retained for a long series of years an important
and abiding influence over much of the university work. Heretical
doctrines, or what Rome believed to be heretical doctrines, were taught
not infrequently in university lecture-rooms, but the authority on the
part of the Church to interfere with such teaching, and to secure the
withdrawal of the license from the lecturer, was continually claimed
and was frequently enforced. The fact remained, however, that the
general direction and control of the work of higher education rested no
longer with ecclesiastics but with laymen. Of the four great divisions
of university instruction, Theology, Philosophy (or Art), Law, and
Medicine, the first remained of necessity under the direction of the
Church, while in the supervision of the second the Church undertook to
exercise an influence which of necessity varied greatly from time to
time according to the institution and according also to the character
of the particular popes and bishops. The third and fourth Faculties
were, however, entirely independent of ecclesiastical influence, and
the mere fact of the existence outside of the Church of an important
division of learning and of a great body of scholars must have had a
powerful effect on the imagination of communities which had for so many
generations been accustomed to look to the Church as the source or as
the interpreter of all knowledge.

The principal authorities on the rise and the general history of the
earlier universities are Denifle, Laurie, Mullinger, and Compayré. The
titles of their several works, on which have in the main been based
such statements or conclusions as are expressed in the following pages,
are given in full in the bibliography. The details concerning the
work of the university scribes and the manuscript dealers are chiefly
derived from the works of Wattenbach and Kirchhoff.[258]

It is to be noted that several centuries before the institution in
Christian Europe of the first of the universities, and at a time when,
outside of a few monastic _scriptoria_, the interest in literature in
Christian states was almost non-existent, in the countries which had
accepted the faith of Mahomet a system of higher education had been
effectively organised, and in connection with the intellectual activity
of the universities and libraries of Bagdad, Alexandria, Cairo, and
Cordova, there had been a very considerable production of literature
in the departments of jurisprudence, philosophy, and science. In
fact, the first knowledge that came to the Europe of the Middle Ages
concerning Greek thought and Greek literature was brought to it through
Arabian scholars, and it was by means of the lecturers of Cordova that
the doctrines of Aristotle were made known to the philosophers of
Paris. The list of the scholarly writers who were associated during
the eleventh and twelfth centuries with the great Arabian schools is a
long one, and the books produced by them included not a few works which
had an abiding influence on the thought of Europe. I have, however,
no information concerning the methods employed for the manifolding
and distribution of the books, and a consideration of them does not
properly find place in this study. The names of Avicenna (d. 1027)
and Averrhoes (d. 1198) will be recognised as representative of the
class of authors referred to, the men who, by their translations of
Hippocrates, Galen, Aristotle, and other Greek classics, recalled what
Laurie calls the university life of the Greeks.[259]

In explaining how the universities are to be distinguished from
the cathedral schools or the Benedictine schools out of which they
were developed, Laurie gives the following definition of the first
universities: “They were _specialised_ schools, as opposed to the
schools of Arts, and they were _open to all_, without restriction, as
_studia publica_ or _generalia_, as opposed to the more restricted
ecclesiastical schools, which were under a Rule.”[260]

For the older institutions, it is not practicable to fix with any
precision the date of their beginning, and no year can be named in
which they first exercised the functions of a university. The first
university that was formally founded was that of Prague, which dates
from April, 1348. Bologna, Paris, Padua, Oxford, and Cambridge were
not founded but grew, that is, were developed under special influences
out of pre-existing schools. The first European school which, while
never developing into a university, did do specialised university
work, was that of Salerno, which may be said to have initiated for
Europe systematised and scientific instruction in medicine. _Fons
Medicinæ_ was the name given to it by Petrarch. The school of Salerno
has one special claim to commemoration in any general sketch of the
intellectual life of Europe. Its foundation and early development
were due to the famous Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino, the
monastery which had been established by S. Benedict (in 529), and the
_scriptorium_ in which was the creation of Cassiodorus. Salerno, which
was later affiliated with the University of Naples, fills, therefore,
the place of a connecting link between the educational work of the
old-time Benedictine _scriptorium_ and the scientific activities and
intellectual life of the new university system of Europe. Indeed,
through that wonderful old man, Cassiodorus, at once Greek, Roman, and
Goth, statesman, author, and monk, the chain of continuity is borne
directly back to the classic world of imperial Rome.

The study of letters in Monte Cassino had come to include medicine,
and the writings of Galen and Hippocrates were transcribed in the
_scriptorium_, and were later made the first text-books in the medical
school established by the monks at Salerno. Charlemagne is said to
have interested himself in the school and in 802 to have ordered
certain Greek medical treatises to be translated for its use from
the Arabic into Latin.[261] The man who finally developed the monks’
medical school (then known as the _civitas Hippocratica_) into a
great and specialised _studium publicum_ was, however, Constantine, a
Carthaginian Christian. His work was done between the years of 1065
and 1087, under the special favour and patronage of Robert Guiscard,
who was at that time ruler of Apulia. In the time of Robert the school
contained some women students, probably the earliest in Europe.
There are references also at this period to several female writers
on medical subjects. Salerno dates as a privileged school from 1100.
The University of Naples, with which the medical college of Salerno
was later affiliated, was instituted by Frederick II. (the “Wonder of
the World”) in 1224. Notwithstanding the brilliancy of the Court of
Frederick and the feverish energy of the monarch himself, the literary
work done in his university was not of abiding importance, and it is
Bologna which serves as the type of the earlier universities of Europe,
and which divides with the University of Paris the honour of having
served as a general model for later foundations.

The University of Bologna lays claim to be the oldest in Europe.
According to one tradition it was founded by Charlemagne about 800,
but the celebration in 1890 of its thousandth anniversary indicates
that its modern historians have contented themselves with a somewhat
later date. The jurist Irnerius, who gave instruction in civil law
in Bologna between 1100 and 1135, was able to do for the school of
law a very similar work to that done by Constantine a century earlier
for the school of medicine at Salerno, and under his direction the
school became a _studium publicum_ or _generale_. Bologna dates as a
privileged _studium_ from 1158, when the _Universitas_ secured a formal
recognition from Frederick I. Tiraboschi speaks of the university
as having been in a flourishing condition as early as the twelfth
century, and in 1224, when the Emperor Frederick II., in his zeal on
behalf of his newly founded university at Naples, undertook to suppress
that of Bologna, the latter is reported to have had no less than
10,000 students. Its great jurist of that time was Azo or Azolinus.
The edict was revoked in 1227, and the schools of the university
were, in fact, never closed. The University of Padua dates from about
1215, and that of Vercelli (in Piedmont) from 1228. In 1248, Innocent
IV. established the University of Piacenza, with privileges similar
to those enjoyed by Paris and Bologna. Pisa dates from about 1340,
Florence from 1321, and Pavia from 1362. Galeazzo Visconti secured
for Pavia from Charles IV. a charter with the privileges of Paris,
Bologna, and Oxford. Notwithstanding the competition of so many rival
institutions, and the special favour shown from time to time to certain
of these by one prince or another (as in the case of the Emperor
Frederick to Naples), Bologna not only retained its pre-eminence among
the universities of Italy, but secured for itself a great reputation
throughout Europe, attracting students of every nationality. In
Bologna, Padua, and Pavia special attention was given to jurisprudence,
while the school of Florence was noted for the liberal remuneration
granted to its instructors in rhetoric and in belles-lettres. In this
respect, however, Florence stood almost alone. The instructors in
literature, classed as Humanists, were obliged for the most part to
seek appreciation and remuneration not in the universities, but at
the Courts of the cultivated princes and in the palaces of the more
intellectual of the noblemen, and, fortunately for the literary life of
Italy, literature had, during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
a popularity and acceptance among princes and nobles to an extent not
known elsewhere in Europe.

While the university life of Italy dates from the close of the twelfth
century, it is not until the beginning of the thirteenth century
that we find any trace of regulations concerning the production and
distribution of manuscripts. It appears that for a term of perhaps a
quarter of a century there had been in Bologna and in the other older
university towns a certain amount of interest in the production,
hiring, and selling of manuscripts, a trade which had been carried on
without any supervision or restriction on the part of the university
authorities, and the same was the case with the work of the earlier
manuscript dealers in Paris.

The term _stationarii_, which first appears in Bologna in 1259 and in
Paris some years later, indicates at once a change in the method of
work of these university scribes as compared with previous writers
who had been ready to do work in one place or another as opportunity
offered. For a number of years there was, in connection with this
university work, practically no selling of books. The special
responsibility of the _stationarii_ was to keep in stock a sufficient
number of authorised and verified transcripts or copies of the books
ordered or recommended in the educational courses of the university,
and to rent these to the students or to the instructors at rates which
were prescribed by university regulations. The _stationarii_ also
took over the books of the students who died while in the university,
or of departing students, as in most of the universities it was a
misdemeanour to carry any books at all out of the university town.

In Bologna, Padua, and probably other Italian universities, the Jews
were forbidden to carry on any trade in books. If, therefore, Jews
coming into a town had manuscripts which they wished to dispose of,
it was necessary for them to place these manuscripts in the hands of
the _stationarii_, and they would make sale of them on commission. As
before specified, however, the buyers of books in a university town
could purchase only the use of the books during their sojourn in such
town. On leaving the town, it was necessary that the books should be
placed again with the _stationarii_ for sale to others connected with
the university. It is probable, however, that this regulation applied
only to the special list of text-books or reference books authorised
and prescribed by the university. A certain Heinrichs of Kirchberg
relates that on leaving Padua in 1256, he had managed to bring away
with him a considerable package of books. He had accomplished this
by hiding the books in a load of hay which he took with him through
the town gates without being discovered.[262] In 1334, the university
regulation was modified so that after having secured the special
permission of the authorities, a student could take with him from the
university books which he had purchased.

Until the time when the manuscript traders were replaced by the dealers
in printed books, the most important function of the university dealers
was not in the sale, but in the hiring out of manuscripts, and the
term _stationarius_ came from a very early date to be limited to the
functionary who, under the regulations of the university, provided,
for hire, the students, and in some cases the instructors, with the
material required for their work.

In order to facilitate the manifolding and prompt distribution of the
texts needed, and in order also to lessen for the students the cost
of securing these texts, the practice obtained from the beginning
of dividing the manuscripts into portions, to which portions were
given the name _peciæ_ or _petiæ_--or in the Italian form, _pezze_.
At first, the extent of these divisions must have been more or less
arbitrary, but later, the number of pages or sheets to be contained in
them was made a matter of specific university regulation. According
to the regulation, the _pecia_ was to contain sixteen columns, each
with sixty-two lines, and each line with thirty-two letters, and the
material was to be written on sheets comprising together a form,
_quaterne_.

The _pecia_ served as the unit of the calculation for the charge for
the rental. The older manuscripts had been written in a much larger
_format_ than that found convenient for university work, and the above
specified form was now arrived at as, on the whole, best meeting the
requirements of the students and the convenience of the scribes.

For some years after the formal recognition by the university statutes
of the _stationarii_, the number of these was naturally limited, a
limitation which had a service for the university authorities in
facilitating the supervision considered important, and which was, of
course, of business value for the _stationarii_ themselves. A certain
amount not only of scholarly knowledge but also of capital must have
been requisite on the part of the _stationarii_ in order to bring
together for manifolding authentic codices or texts, and also to keep
themselves supplied with writing materials, which during the thirteenth
century continued to be costly. There is evidence that in certain
cases, particularly in Padua, a salary was paid from the university
chest to the _stationarii_, which was an admission on the part of the
university authorities that the prices prescribed for the rent of the
_peciæ_ were not in themselves adequate to secure a living income for
the scribes.

The _stationarii_ were occasionally known in the Italian universities
by the name of _bedelli_, or _bidelli_. The _bedelli_ were originally
university officials, whose functions probably covered some such
disciplinary work as that which is to-day in the hands of the Oxford
proctors. The name suggests also the English term _beadle_, applied to
the English parish official who was charged with the duty of keeping
the peace, and I find that the lexicographers derive the word _beadle_
directly from the earlier term _bedel_, the name given to the English
university functionary who had to do with matters of discipline and
particularly with the direction of public functions, processions,
etc. The name is derived from _pedum_, a stick, the allusion being
probably to the baton or staff of office. The use in Italy of the term
_bidellus_ for the scribes hiring out manuscripts, was evidently due
to the fact that the privileges of this business were in certain cases
given to the university officials, in addition, probably, to their
other duties.

The name of _peciarii_ was sometimes applied to the officials whose
duty it was to supervise the work of the _stationarii_. In 1300, there
is reference to six _peciarii_ in Bologna.

The earliest Italian reference to university scribes dates from
1228, and concerns not the University of Bologna, but the smaller
institution of Vercelli in Piedmont. The Vercelli regulations order
the employment of two _exemplatores_, who were to be charged with the
duty of providing the texts required for the use of the instructors and
students in the Faculties of jurisprudence and theology. The prices to
be paid for these manuscripts were to be fixed by the rector of the
university. As this is the earliest regulation of which there is record
concerning bookselling in the universities, I think it worth while to
cite the text itself:

_Item habebit Commune Vercellarum duos exemplatores, quibus taliter
providebit, quod eos scholares habere possint, qui habeant exemplantia
in utroque jure et in Theologia competentia et correcta tam in textu
quam in glossa; ita quod solutio fiat a scholaribus pro exemplis
secundum quod convenit, ad taxationem Rectoris._[263]

[The University of Vercelli shall also employ two _exemplatores_, for
whom suitable provision shall be made, so that they may be at the
service of the scholars who require manuscripts authoritative and
correct both as to the text and in the commentaries, either in the
department of law or in that of theology, and in return for the copies
(or for the use of the copies) received from the _exemplatores_, the
students shall pay a fitting price (or rental) to be fixed by the
Rector of the university.]

In similar fashion, the statutes of the University of Padua of the year
1283 provide that two _stationarii_ or _bidelli_ should be employed,
one of whom should be at the service of the Faculty of jurisprudence,
and the other should serve those of arts and of medicine. The
theological Faculty was not instituted in Padua until much later. The
two _bidelli_ drew salaries, the first of eight ducats per year, and
the second of two ducats, forty sols. They were charged with the duty
of keeping a supply of _peciæ_ of the texts prescribed in the lists and
of placing these supplies at the disposal of the students and scholars
calling for the same. In the year 1420, the statutes of the High School
of Modena prescribed that the _stationarius_ (there appears to have
been question of but one official for the entire institution) must
keep a supply of the texts of the Roman and Canonical law, the _summa
notaria_, the _speculum_, the Lectures of Cinus and of Innocentius.

The _stationarius_ was to charge for the rent of a _pecia_ of the
prescribed texts four denarii, of the _glossarii_ five denarii, and
of other texts six denarii. I do not find in the regulations any
specification of the term covered by this rental. The city was to
assure the _stationarius_ of freedom from military service, and was to
give him “the yearly compensation of ten lire.”[264]

A reference by the Italian scholar Filelfo indicates that from this
university arrangement the term _bidellus_ came to be applied to
scribes outside of university towns. Filelfo speaks of a _librarius
publicus_, “who, in the ordinary speech, is called _bidellus_.”

With the increase in the larger universities, such as Bologna and
Padua, of the number of students and instructors requiring literary
material, the practice gradually took shape of purchasing instead
of hiring the texts required, and the _stationarii_ developed into
_librarii_. In its original signification, the term _librarius_ stood
for librarian; and as late as the fourteenth century the French word
_librairie_ was used for a library or a collection of books. It seems
to have been only after the introduction of printing that the use of
the term _librairie_ finally came to be restricted in France to a
collection of books held for sale, that is to say, to a book-shop.

The book-dealers, who in the earlier years of the manuscript period
devoted themselves to keeping collections of manuscripts, filled, in
fact, rather the rôle of librarians than of booksellers. They were
ready to rent out their manuscripts for a consideration, or to permit
customers to consult the texts without taking them from the shop. The
practice of making from their original stock of texts authenticated
copies for general sale, was a matter of comparatively slow development.

Bologna had become the most important school in Europe for the study of
Roman and Canonical law, and it was in Bologna that the undertakings of
the university bookseller first became important. The booksellers were
not only subject to the supervision of the university, but were also
brought under the regulations of the town, and the town authorities
undertook to prescribe prices as well for the renting as for the
selling of the manuscripts, and also to prescribe penalties for the
renting or selling of incorrect or incomplete texts.

The university regulations specified that there must be on the part of
the booksellers no modification of the text under which new readings or
glosses should be inserted to replace those accepted as authoritative,
and a penalty was attached to the selling or renting of the texts
in any other form than that in which they were prescribed by the
instructors of the Faculty to which the study belonged. In 1289, the
penalty for the contravention of this regulation, previously fixed at
ten lire, was raised to one hundred lire.[265]

A few years later, a university regulation specified that the
_stationarii peciarum_ who undertook to rent out the authoritative
texts, must keep in stock sufficient supplies of 117 specified
works. In the year 1300, there were in the university six official
_stationarii_, of whom three were Italians and three, foreigners. They
had to be appointed each year, but it seems probable that when their
work proved satisfactory they were re-appointed from year to year.

The responsibility for the general supervision of the texts and
for their correctness and completeness rested with the _bidellus
generalis_. Any reader who should discover blemishes or omissions in
the _peciæ_ was under obligation to report the same to the _bidellus
generalis_, and the _stationarius_ who was responsible for the
preparation of the defective text was fined five solidos, one half of
the fine going to the university chest, one quarter to the _bidellus_,
and one quarter to the informant.

The _stationarii_ were ordered to post up in a conspicuous place in
their shops all the regulations having to do with their trade, in
order that all buyers could know what they were entitled to receive.
They were not at liberty to decline to rent to university members any
_peciæ_ on the official list. On the other hand, if they rented out
_peciæ_ to students who had been expelled or who were under suspension,
they were themselves liable to fine. The usual rental at this time,
that is to say, the beginning of the thirteenth century, was four
_denarii_ for a _quaterne_ (four sheets) and two _denarii_ for a
_pecia_. The _denarius_ was the equivalent of about ten cents.

The rental for works not on the official list was somewhat higher, as
these would not be called for so continuously and as the preparation
of supplies of the same must, therefore, be more of a speculation. In
renting manuscripts outside of Bologna (which could be done only under
special permission of the university authorities and which occurred
as a rule only with members of other universities) an additional two
_denarii_ for a _quaterne_ could be demanded. Students renting the
_peciæ_ were obliged to deposit a pledge of sufficient value to secure
the _stationarii_ against loss. Between the regulations applying
to the _stationarii peciarum_, and those controlling the general
_stationarii_, who had authority to sell as well as to rent and whose
business lay outside of the university, there were various differences.
The general _stationarius_ appeared to have undertaken from time
to time the sale of books on commission, which to the university
_stationarius_ was forbidden.

One of the earlier university regulations prohibited students from
purchasing manuscripts with a view of selling them again for a profit,
but this, according to Savigny, fell into disuse in the course of
the fourteenth century. As late as 1334, the regulations of Bologna
strictly prohibited students from taking with them, on leaving the
universities, any books whatsoever, without a special authorisation
on the part of the heads of their respective Faculties. Regulations
of this kind naturally interfered with the normal development of the
book trade in a city so largely dependent upon its university as was
Bologna, and formed one cause for the greater activity of the general
book trade in cities like Venice, where the regulations of the commune
were not supplemented by those of university authorities.

The city statutes of Bologna of 1259, prohibited the _stationarii
librarii_ from taking a higher commission on the sale of manuscripts
than two and a half per cent. It was also specified that no sale of a
work left on commission should be made without the direct knowledge
of the owner. The _stationarius peciarum_ belonged at the outset to
the membership of the university, and, in accepting the authority
of its supervision and its regulations, enjoyed also the university
privileges, which included freedom from certain municipal obligations.
Many of the university _stationarii_ belonged, as mentioned, to the
class of _bidelli_.

It was forbidden for any member of the university to promise or to
engage, either directly or indirectly, to pay to the _stationarius_
a higher commission or compensation than that prescribed in the
regulations. The penalty for an infraction of this rule, a penalty
imposed upon both the parties concerned, was a fine of five livres.
The student was also under obligations to denounce to the rector
any attempt on the part of the dealer to secure an additional
compensation.[266] The very severity of these prohibitions gives
indication of difficulty in securing enforcement of the system.

The statutes of Padua and of the other Italian universities of the
manuscript trade, were similar to, and were probably in the main based
upon, those of Bologna. In Padua, the earliest regulations which have
been preserved bear date as late as 1465, which is one year later than
the introduction into Italy of the printing-press. The regulations of
1465 prescribed the size of the _peciæ_ and confirmed the rental prices
to the schedule of those of Bologna. The renting of manuscripts could,
however, have continued but for a short period after the issue of these
regulations. In Padua, as in Bologna, the _stationarii peciarum_ had to
make a deposit, in entering upon their business, of four hundred lire.
They had also to go through with an examination at the hands of the
university authorities, and they then had to take an oath of loyalty to
the university. This entitled them to their formal appointment, which
needed, however, as stated, to be confirmed from year to year.

In Padua, as in Bologna, there were fixed commissions for the sale
of manuscripts, and these commissions, in themselves quite moderate,
were to be paid half by the buyer and half by the seller. It appears,
however, that the prices were probably not fully controlled by these
regulations, as there are examples of so-called “presents” being
given by buyers to the sellers after the sale of manuscripts on the
commission basis specified in the regulations had been duly recorded.

In Padua, as in Bologna, it was strictly forbidden for Jews to take
any part in the buying and selling of manuscripts. The only way in
which a Jew could secure a manuscript desired by him was through the
intervention of the university authorities, who might make purchase
of the same on his behalf. The _bidellus_ was the official usually
employed for the purpose. It may be assumed that some additional
commission was here required, and that the Jews had to pay more dearly
for their university texts than the Christians.

There does not appear to be record of the loaning of manuscripts to
students for their own transcribing, although in Paris this evidently
formed an important portion of the manuscript business. In Bologna, as
in Padua, the trade in bookbinding was directly associated with that of
manuscript selling, and the _ligatori librorum_ carried on their work
in the shops of the _librarii_. In Bologna, the manuscripts were in the
main devoted to the subjects of the law and scholastic theology, while
in Padua the more important division was medicine.

The literary requirements, however, for doctors of law as for doctors
of medicine, must have been at best but moderate. Savigny states that
in the thirteenth century the collection of books belonging to a
doctor of the law in Bologna rarely comprised more than from four to
six volumes, and the medical collections were hardly as large. It is
with the beginning of the fifteenth century that there comes to be a
larger understanding of the relations of literature to education and a
material increase in the demand in the university towns for supplies of
books outside of the texts actually in use in the lecture room.

Compayré gives the following list of the books required in the ordinary
and in the extraordinary courses of law in Bologna, a list which was,
he says, practically the same at Montpellier: The several works of the
_Corpus Juris_ of Justinian, comprising the _Codex_ (which dates from
529), the _Digestum Vetus_, the _Infortiatum_, the _Digestum Novum_.
These were identical with the three parts which the pupils of Irnerius
distinguished as the _Pandects_ or _Digest_, the _Institutes_, the
_Authenticum_. To these sources of the Roman law were later added the
_Constitutiones_ of Frederick I. and Frederick II., and in Montpellier
the _Usus Feudorum_, a collection of feudal laws.

The statutes of the universities fixed the time within which the
reading of the prescribed books must be completed. Professors were
obliged, in entering upon their duties, to take the following oath:
“I swear to read and to finish reading within the time fixed by the
statutes, the books or parts of books which have been assigned for
my lectures.” Severe penalties were inflicted on those whose courses
had not been completed within the required time.[267] There ought, as
a rule, to have been no difficulty in completing the task assigned,
for each Faculty had, as a rule, only a single work or at most a
single author assigned for its consideration. The Faculty of Arts had
Aristotle, that of Civil Law the _Corpus Juris_ of Justinian, that
of Common Law the _Decretals_ of Gratian. Compayré suggests that,
according to the maxim of Seneca, _timeo hominem unius libri_, the
Faculties of the Middle Ages might well have been awe-inspiring.

The list of the texts of the medical Faculties was, however, somewhat
more considerable. The course in Montpellier, where medicine became
still more important than law, followed in the main that of Salerno.
The first place was given to Hippocrates and Galen. It is somewhat
surprising that as late as 1250 the teachings of these old-time
practitioners (whose work was done respectively in the fourth century
B.C. and the second century A.D.) should still have remained the
chief authorities in medical science. Compayré refers to them as the
Aristotles of Medicine. In the program of the Faculty of Paris of 1270,
however, the names of Hippocrates and Galen do not appear.

With the two Greeks were associated the original works of Constantine
and his translations from Rhazes Hali-Abbas, Ysaac, Avicenna,
Johannicus, and other Arabic and Persian writers, and finally the
treatise of John of St. Amand, and of Nicholas of Salerno. The
_Antidotarium_, or _Book of Antidotes_, known also as the _Book of
Medicaments_, was for some centuries a work of standard reference
and of popular sale. The influence of the Arabs in the instructional
literature of medicine seems to have been almost as controlling as that
of the Greeks in philosophy and of the Romans in law.

Rabelais, who studied medicine in Montpellier between 1520 and 1530, is
said to have been the first among the students who was able to read his
Greek authors in the original instead of in Latin translations.[268]
Rabelais found time while in college not only for Greek and medicine,
but for literature. The first part of the _Pantagruel_ was written
before he had secured his final diploma.

By the middle of the thirteenth century, the number of the books
required for use in the university courses had increased to such an
extent that four catalogues were issued, one for each of the four
Faculties--Law, Medicine, Theology, and Arts. The lectures and the
instruction were given entirely in Latin, which was the only language
that could have been understood by all of the various nationalities
represented, or even by the representatives of the different Italian
dialects.

In Spain, the earliest university was that of Palencia, which was
founded in 1212. Salamanca, founded a few years later, soon exceeded
Palencia in importance, and, particularly in connection with the work
of its medical Faculty, secured for itself, before the close of the
thirteenth century, a repute throughout Europe. Compayré is of opinion
that the instruction given in Salamanca, not only in medicine but in
science generally and in philosophy, was very largely influenced by
the presence in the peninsula of Moorish scholars. “The philosophy of
Averrhoes and the medicine of Avicenna exerted a manifest influence
on the development of studies at Salamanca.”[269] It seems probable,
if this belief is well founded, that the Arabian literature, produced
and manifolded in Cordova, found its way to Salamanca, and through
Salamanca to Salerno, Bologna, and Paris.

The formal constitution of the University of Paris dates from 1202.
Certain of its historians, however, claim for its first work as an
educational institution a much earlier date. Crévier, for instance,
says: “The University of Paris as a school goes back to Alcuin ...
Charlemagne was its founder.”[270] Charlemagne’s practical interest
in education has caused his name to be associated with the schools of
Tours, Aachen, Milan, Salerno, Bologna, and Paris. The most recent
writer on the subject, Compayré, is of opinion that this is an
exaggerated statement. He finds evidence of an unbroken succession of
Benedictine schools, such as those of Rheims, Tours, Angers, Laon,
Bec, and others, which had preserved a continuity of educational work
from the time of Charlemagne to that of Louis VIII., and which, under
such leaders as Lanfranc (1005-1089), and S. Anselm (1033-1109), had
developed and maintained a high degree of intellectual activity. He
considers these to have constituted the direct succession to the
schools of the palace of Charlemagne, but he fails to find in them the
prototype of the university system. For Compayré, the actual founder
of the University of Paris was Abelard, who died sixty years before
the university secured its organisation. It is his contention that it
was Abelard who, by his learning, his independence of thought, his
eloquence, and his mastery over the minds of men, is to be credited
with the initiation of the great movement from which was to proceed
not only the University of Paris, but the long series of universities
for which Paris served as an incentive and the type. It was Abelard,
says Compayré, who, if not first, at least with the most direct and
far-reaching influence, introduced dialectics into theology and reason
into authority, breaking away from the mere passive transmission of
the beliefs and timid dialectics accepted by the schools of theology,
and thus making possible the development of a true university spirit.
“The method of Abelard is the soul of scholastic philosophy,”[271]
the philosophy which, until the Renaissance, reigned supreme in the
University of Paris. Abelard’s method, says Père Denifle, is presented
in the book which during several centuries served as the text for
theological instruction, the _Sentences_ of Peter Lombard, and its
influence is also to be noted in that other noteworthy work which
became the authority for the schools of common law, the _Decretals_ of
Gratian.

Abelard may be called the first professor of superior instruction. His
work was certainly begun with _éclat_, for his classes are said to have
numbered at times no less than five thousand pupils. “First of the
French philosophers ... he may justly be considered as the precursor
of Ramus and Descartes, in other words, of the Renaissance and of the
modern spirit.”[272] Apart from this more far-reaching influence, he
was able to do for the school of Paris what the jurist Irnerius was,
during nearly the same years, accomplishing for the school of Bologna,
making possible, namely, its development into the university. It was
through the work done by Abelard that “the theological school of Paris
became the seminary of Christian Europe.”[273] This influence continued
through the succeeding centuries in which Paris still remained the
centre of theological instruction, a result which necessarily had later
an important effect in shaping the character of the earlier issues of
the Paris Press.

The term _University_ is not a synonym of the university of science,
but simply of the university of teachers and students who composed a
group and who instituted association of studies. “In the language
of the Civil Law,” says Malden, “all corporations were called
_Universitates_, as forming one whole out of many individuals.”[274]

The organisation of the University of Paris, while differing in certain
important details from that of Bologna, was substantially identical
with the Italian institutions in respect to the privileges conceded to
instructors and students. In successive enactments or crown edicts,
the members of the universities of Paris, Montpellier, and Poitiers
were exempted, not only from the regular national taxes and from
the town dues (_octroi_), but also from special war taxes. In 1295,
Philip the Fair decreed that under no pretext could the goods of the
members of the universities be taken or their revenues attached.[275]
The following statute of the University of Padua represented fairly
enough the status of students in all the universities of France and of
Italy: “Students must be considered as citizens in what concerns the
advantages, but not in that which constitutes the burdens of citizens.”
Under this same principle, members of the universities were also exempt
from military service.

The authorities of the University of Paris exercised a very direct
control from the outset over all the details of the business of making,
renting, and selling books. This authority became in Paris a matter of
much more immediate importance and abiding influence than in Bologna.
In the latter, as we have seen, the business of the book-dealers
was very closely limited to the production of the texts immediately
required for the work of the class-room. In Paris, however, in the
manuscript period, two and a half centuries before the introduction
of the printing-press, the book-trade of the university had become
in great measure the book-trade of the city. During a large part of
this time, moreover, Paris shared with Florence the position of the
centre of the intellectual activities of Europe. The scribes and
their masters who were manifolding manuscripts in the Latin quarter,
were not only supplying text-books to the students of the university,
but were preparing literature for the scholarly readers of Paris, of
France, and of Europe. The book-dealers of Paris constituted, however,
for several centuries, with a few exceptions, a guild organised within
the university. The members of this guild, the _libraires jurés_, were
members of the university, and the operations of the guild were under
the direct control of the university authorities. This arrangement
gave to the book-dealers material advantages in the possession of
university privileges and in the control of a practical monopoly
of the business of producing books. It involved, however, certain
corresponding disadvantages. University control meant supervision,
censorship, restriction, regulation of prices, interference with
trade facilities, and various hampering conditions which delayed very
seriously, both before and after the introduction of printing, the
development of the business of making and of circulating books, and, as
a result of this, placed not a few obstacles in the way of the literary
and the intellectual development of the community. Chevillier says:
“The book-trade of Paris owes its origin to the university, by which,
under the approval of the king, it was organised into an association of
masters. This association was, from the outset, controlled directly by
the university, from the authorities of which it received its statutes
and regulations, and by which the master _libraires_ were licensed,
_jurés_.”[276]

“The reproduction of a work of scholarship (to which class belonged of
necessity the text-books prescribed for the work of the university,)”
remarks Delalain, “called for on the part of the scribe a considerable
measure of scholarly knowledge and also for a detailed and careful
supervision. It was held, therefore, by the university authorities
that the responsibility properly belonged to them to supervise the
series of operations by means of which these university texts were
prepared and were circulated. It was essential that the completeness
and the correctness of each copy should be verified, and that these
copies should be confided to trustworthy persons for their sale or
their hire, in order that there should be no risk of inaccuracies in
the texts themselves or of any unnecessary enhancement of the cost to
instructors or to students of their purchase or their hire. On this
ground, the university of Paris asserted from the beginning of its
history the right to control the book-trade of the city, a contention
which was confirmed and maintained by all the kings of France after
Philip Augustus.”[277]

The “book-trade” was held to include all the dealers and artisans who
were concerned with the production and distribution of manuscripts;
that is, the copyists and their employers, the binders, the
illuminators, the sellers of parchment, and, later, the manufacturers
of paper. While the control of the university was exercised over the
entire book-trade, the interest of the authorities was naturally much
keener in regard to the divisions having to do with the production
of books than in the work of the booksellers. The matter of chief
importance, in fact, according to the accepted theory, the sole purpose
for the existence of the book-trade, was to secure for the members of
the university a sufficient supply, at a fixed and moderate charge, of
correct and complete texts of the prescribed works; while it was also
essential to protect those members from the contamination of heretical
writings or of heretical comments on books of accepted orthodoxy.

A regulation of December, 1316, prescribes that no _stationarius_ shall
employ a copyist until such employee shall have been duly sworn before
the university, or before the Rector and four _procureurs_, to execute
his functions faithfully, and, having been accepted as a trustworthy
scribe, shall have had his name inscribed on the official register.

As a partial offset to the series of restrictions and limitations under
which was carried on the work of these early publishers, it is in order
to specify certain privileges and exemptions enjoyed by them as members
of the university. These included exemption from taxes; exemption
from service on the watch or on the city guard; and the privilege
of jurisdiction, commonly known as _committimus_. Under this last,
they were empowered in suits or cases, civil or personal, and whether
engaged as plaintiffs or defendants, to bring witnesses or other
principals before the _Juges Conservateurs_, functionaries charged with
the maintenance or protection of privileges.[278]

Issues concerning personal rights arising between the members of
the university were decided before the tribunal or court of the
Rector. Cases affecting realty, and all cases between the members
and outsiders, were tried before the _Conservateurs des Priviléges_,
an authority of necessity favourably disposed to the members of the
university. The ground assigned for this privilege was that instructors
and pupils, and those engaged in aiding their work (_i. e._ the makers
of books), should not be exposed to loss of valuable time by being
called away from their work to distant parts.[279] An edict of Philip
Augustus, in 1200, confirmed by S. Louis in 1229, and by Philip the
Fair in 1302, directed that the cases of university members be brought
before the Bishop of Paris. The university found disadvantages in being
under the jurisdiction of the Bishop (whose censorship later proved
particularly troublesome for the publishers), and applications were
made to replace the authority of the ecclesiastical courts with that of
the royal courts. In 1334, letters-patent of Philip of Valois directed
the provost of Paris, who was at that time _conservateur_ of the royal
privileges, to take the university under his special protection, and in
1341 the members of the university were forbidden to enter proceedings
before any other authority. In 1361, under an edict of King John, the
members of the university were again declared exempt from taxes and
assessments of all kinds (_portes, gabelles, impositions, aides, et
subsides_). The repetition from reign to reign of certain edicts and
regulations such as the above does not imply that the earlier ones had
been recalled, but that they had to some extent fallen into desuetude,
or that attempts had been made to override them.

By letters-patent issued in 1369, Charles V. declared that all dealers
in books and makers of books required for the use of “our scholars”
should be exempt from all taxes, etc. The exemption included binders,
illuminators, parchment-makers, etc. It appears that some abuses had
crept in under this exemption, as in 1384 it was ordered that no
book-dealers should be freed from taxes if they carried on for gain any
other occupation.[280]

The policy of favouring the production and sale of books by freeing the
publishers and dealers from taxes and other burdens was continued and
even developed after the introduction of printing. The kings, impressed
with the possibilities of this great discovery, recognised that it was
for the interest of the realm to free books, printed or written, not
only from _octroi_ or city duties, but from customs or importation
charges. Letters-patent of Henry II., dated 1553, read as follows:
_Avons ordonné et ordonnons lesdits livres, escrits ou imprimez, reliez
ou non reliez, estre et demeurer exempts desdits droits de traicte
foraine, Domaine forain et haut passage_.[281] This was a more liberal
policy than at that time prevailed in Italy or in England, or, in
fact, than has as yet been accepted in the nineteenth century by the
United States. In order to obtain the advantage of such exemption, the
publishers had to secure from the Rector of the university a passport
or certificate for their packages.

One of the earlier regulations of the university affecting the
book-trade was that under which the supervision of the sale of
parchment was left in the hands of the Rector. This sale was usually
authorised only at the annual Lendit fair. The dealers, bringing their
parchment, exposed this for inspection. Before any other purchases
were permitted, the Rector selected the quantity needed for the
university, for which payment was made at a price fixed in advance.
He then received from the parchment-dealers, for the treasury of the
university, or for the special fund of the book guild, a gratuity which
amounted to from two thousand to three thousand francs.

In Paris, as in Bologna, during the whole of the thirteenth century
and the first portion of the fourteenth, the principal work of the
university book-dealers was not the selling but the renting of books.
The regulations concerning the division of manuscripts into chapters or
_peciæ_ were, however, not carried out with the same precision in Paris
as in the Italian universities, nor was it practicable to exercise in
the larger city, or even within the confines of the Latin Quarter, as
close a supervision as in Bologna or Padua over the rates for renting
and over the stock of copies kept by the _stationarii_. The general
purpose of the regulations was, however, the same, and the routine of
renting prices and the general rate of commission on the books sold
were, as said, matters of university regulation. With a community of
students ranging in number from ten thousand to (in the most prosperous
days of the university) as high as thirty thousand, the monopoly of
supplying text-books, whether through sale or through renting, must
have constituted an important business. It was not until some time
after the introduction of printing that the importance and prospect of
profit of publishing done outside of the university limits, and freed
from a portion of the university restrictions, came to be sufficient
to make it worth while for certain of the more enterprising of the
printers to give up the trade in text-books and their privileges as
_libraires jurés_ and to establish themselves as independent dealers.

In the University of Paris we find in use in the twelfth century, in
addition to the terms _librarii_, _stationarii_, and _petiarii_, the
term _mangones_. The word _mango_ originally designated a merchant or
dealer, but appears to have carried an implication of untrustworthiness
or slipperiness. It is satisfactory, therefore, to understand that
_mangones_ very speedily went out of use as a name for dealers in
books.[282] The _petiarii_ are not mentioned in the statutes of the
university, where they appear to be replaced by the _parcheminii_.[283]

Guérard interprets the term _stationarius_ as standing first for a
scribe with a fixed location (_un écrivain sédentaire_), as opposed
to a copyist who was prepared to accept work in any place where it
could be secured. Later, the term was understood to designate a master
scribe who directed the work of a bureau of copyists; and still later,
the _stationarius_, sometimes then called _stationarius librorum_,
possessed a complete book-making establishment, where were employed,
in addition to the copyists, the illuminators, binders, and other
artisans. At this stage of his development, the _stationarius_ has
become the equivalent of the printer-publisher of a later generation.
Guérard is inclined to limit the earlier use in Paris of the term
_librarius_ to the keeper of a shop in which books were kept for sale,
but in which no book-production was carried on.[284] It is evident,
however, that in France, as in Italy, there was no very definite or
consistent use of the several terms, and that before the introduction
of printing, _librarius_ and _stationarius_ were applied almost
indifferently to dealers having to do either with the production or
with the sale of books. Chassant is authority for the statement that
at the time of the introduction of printing into France there were in
the two cities of Paris and Orleans more than ten thousand individual
scribes or copyists who gained their living with their pens.[285] It is
not surprising that the first printers, whose diabolical invention took
the bread away from these workers, had their lives threatened and their
work interrupted.

The letters-patent of Charles V., dated November 5, 1368, specify
fourteen _libraires_ and eleven _écrivains_ (employing _stationarii_)
as at that time registered in Paris. No one was admitted to the
profession of _librarius_ or _stationarius_ who was not a man of
approved standing and character, and who had not also given evidence
of an adequate and scholarly knowledge of manuscript interpretation
and of the subject to which he proposed to give attention. The
examination was made before the four chief publishers (_les quatre
grands libraires_). Having secured the approval of the board of
publishers, the applicant was obliged to secure also acceptance from
the representatives of the Rector, and to submit certain guarantees for
the satisfactory performance of his responsibilities. He was called
upon to submit, for himself and heirs, all his property as well as
his person to the control of the court of Paris as a pledge for the
execution of his trust. As late as 1618, in the reign of Charles IX.,
the master printers (_i. e._, printer-publishers) were obliged to hold
certificates from the Rector and the university, to the effect that
they were skilled in the art of printing, and that they possessed full
knowledge of Latin and of Greek.

The _libraires jurés_ comprised two classes, the _libraires grands_
(_officium magni librariatus_), and the _libraires petits_ (_officium
parvi librariatus_).[286] The immediate responsibility for the
government of the body rested with the four chief _libraires_ (_les
quatre grands libraires_). It was they who fixed the prices for the
sale or hire of manuscripts, and who supervised the examination of
manuscripts with reference, first, as to their admission into the
official list of the university texts, and, secondly, as to the
completeness and accuracy of the particular parchment submitted. They
also inspected the book-shops and the workrooms of the copyists, and
verified from time to time the accuracy and the quality of the copies
prepared from these accepted texts; they passed upon the qualifications
of applicants for the position of _libraire juré_; and, finally,
they exercised a general supervision over the enforcement of all the
university regulations affecting the book-trade, and gave special
attention to those prohibiting any interference with this trade by an
outside dealer, one who was not a _libraire juré_. These four chief
_libraires_ were each under a bond or “caution” for the amount of 200
livres. In addition to the exemption from general taxes and guard duty
conceded to all the _libraires jurés_, these four enjoyed from time
to time certain special privileges. In October, 1418, by a regulation
of Charles VI., the four chief _libraires_ are exempted by name from
certain special duties on wine, etc., which had been imposed for the
purpose of securing funds _pour la recouvrance de nos Villes et Chastel
de Monstreau ou Faut-Yonne_.[287] It was also necessary for him to find
two responsible bondsmen for an amount of not less than 100 livres
each.[288][289] In Bologna in 1400 the bond was also fixed at 200
livres, the equivalent of 5065 francs.[290]

The special obligations imposed upon and accepted by the _librarii_ and
_stationarii_, as specified in documents between the years 1250 and
1350, can be summarised as follows:

I. To accept faithfully and loyally all the regulations of the
university concerning the production and the sale of books.

II. Not to make within the term of one month any agreement, real or
nominal, transferring to themselves the ownership of books which had
been placed in their hands for sale.

III. Not to permit the loss or disappearance of any book so consigned
for the purpose later of acquiring ownership of the same.

IV. To declare conscientiously and exactly the just and proper price of
each book offered for sale, and to specify such price, together with
the name of the owner, in some conspicuous place in the work itself.

V. To make no disposition of a consigned book without having in the
first place informed the owner or his representative of the price to be
secured for the same, and to make immediate report and accounting of
such price when received.

VI. To charge as commission for the service of selling such book not
more than four deniers to a member of the university and not more than
six deniers to an outsider. This commission was to be paid by the
purchaser, who seems to have been considered the obliged party in the
transaction.[291]

VII. To place conspicuously in the windows of their shops a price list
of all works kept on sale.

The _stationarii_ on their part were also held:

I. To employ no scribes for the production of manuscripts other than
those who had been accepted and certified before the Rector.

II. To offer for sale or for hire no manuscripts that had not been
passed upon and “taxed” by the appointed authority.

III. To refuse to no applicant who was a member of the university the
loan for hire of a manuscript, even though the applicant should require
the same for the purpose of producing copies.

It is evident that a regulation of this character would, in the case of
an original work by a contemporary author, have operated as a denial of
any author’s rights. Such original work constituted, however, at this
time the very rare exception, and their authors were evidently obliged
to content themselves with the prestige of securing circulation. The
case of a manuscript representing outlay and skilled labour on the
part of the dealer, who might have had to make a toilsome journey
to secure it, and who had later paid for the service of one or more
editors for its collation and revision, was, of course, of much more
frequent occurrence. It is difficult to understand why this class of
effort and enterprise should not have been encouraged by the university
authorities instead of being so largely nullified by regulations which
made of such a manuscript common property. This regulation is, however,
identical with that of Bologna. The penalty there for refusing to place
a manuscript at the service of a member of the university was five
livres.[292]

IV. To offer for rent no texts that were not complete and correct.

V. In the event of a work being brought to Paris by a stranger, to give
immediate information to the authorities in order that before such
work could be copied for hire or for sale it should be passed upon by
the authorities as orthodox and as suitable for the use of the members
of the university, and as being complete and correct in its own text.

Any _libraire_ who, having been duly sworn, should be convicted of
violation of these regulations, forfeited his office, and all the
rights and privileges thereto appertaining; and all members of the
university, instructors or students, were strictly prohibited (under
penalty of forfeiture of their own membership) from having further
dealings with such a delinquent.[293]

These various regulations, while possibly required in connection with
the general interests of the university, were certainly exacting and
must have interfered not a little with any natural development of
the book-trade. It is nevertheless the case that the makers of books
and the book-dealers in Paris occupied a more independent and a more
dignified position than had been accorded to their brethren in Bologna.
The latter appear to have risen hardly above the grade of clerks or
lower-class functionaries, while these earlier Parisian publishers
secured from the outset recognition as belonging to the higher
educational work of the university, work in the shaping of which they
themselves took an important part.

In 1316 (the year of the accession of Philip V.) the association of
_libraires jurés_ (authorised or certified book-dealers) comprised
but thirteen members.[294] A year earlier there had been twenty-two,
and I can only assume that the war troubles had had their natural
influence in depressing and breaking up the book business. In 1323,
the list comprises twenty-nine names, including the widow of De
Peronne. In 1368, the number had again fallen to twenty-five. In 1488,
the university list gives the names of twenty-four _libraires_, in
addition to whom were registered two illuminators, two binders, and two
_écrivains_.[295] The _écrivains_ specified were undoubtedly master
scribes, the register here quoted apparently not including the names of
the copyists employed. At this date, however, the work of the printers
had been going on in Paris for fourteen years, and the business of
those concerned with the production of books in manuscript form
must have been very largely reduced. The work of the master scribes
continued, however, in the sixteenth century, but by the close of the
fifteenth had become limited to the production, for collectors, of
manuscripts as works of art.

While the majority of _libraires jurés_ were naturally Frenchmen,
there was no regulation to prevent the holding of such a post by a
foreigner, and the list always, as a matter of fact, included several
foreign names. The presence in the university of large groups of
foreign students made it quite in order, and probably necessary, that
they should find among the book-dealers some who could speak their home
language and who could make clear to them the requirements concerning
the university texts. The presence of these foreign book-dealers
also facilitated the arrangements for the exchange of manuscripts
between Paris and foreign universities. These foreign book-dealers,
while obliged in ordinary routine to take an oath of fealty to the
university, were not called upon to become citizens of France.

The list includes from time to time the names of women _libraires_,
these women being usually widows of _libraires_ who had duly qualified
themselves. The women must themselves, however, in order to secure
such appointments, have been able to pass the examination in Latin, in
palæography, and in the technicalities of manuscript book-making. In
respect as well to the admission of foreigners as to that of women, the
Paris guild of the university book-dealers practised a more liberal
policy than that followed by the university authorities of Bologna
or the Stationers’ Hall of London. Later, this liberal policy was
restricted, and in 1686 it was ordered that no foreigners should be
admitted to the lists of the master _libraires_ of the university.

The purchase of a manuscript during the fourteenth century was
attended with almost as many formalities and precautions as are to-day
considered necessary for the transfer of a piece of real estate. The
dealer making the sale was obliged to give to the purchaser guarantees
to the effect, first, that he was himself the owner or the duly
authorised representative of the owner of the work; and, secondly, that
the text of this was complete and correct, and as security for these
guarantees he pledged his goods, and sometimes even his person. As a
single example of a transaction illustrating this practice, I quote a
contract cited by Du Breuil. This bears date November, 1332, and sets
forth that a certain Geoffrey de Saint Léger, a duly qualified _clerc
libraire_, acknowledges and confesses that he has sold, ceded, and
transferred to the noble gentleman Messire Gérard de Montagu, _Avocat
du Roi au Parlement_ (counsellor at the royal court), all right, title,
and interest in a work entitled _Speculum Historiale in consuetudines
Parisienses_, contained in four volumes bound in red leather. The
consideration named is forty livres Parisian, the equivalent, according
to the tables of de Wailly, of 1013 francs. The vendor pledges as
security for the obligation under the contract all his worldly goods,
together with his own person (_tous et chacun de ses biens, et
guarantie de son corps même_), and the contract is attested before two
notaries.[296]

While the university assumed the strictest kind of control and
supervision over the work of the book-dealers, it conceded, as an
offset, to the association of these dealers a very substantial
monopoly of the trade of making and selling books. It was prohibited,
under severe penalties, for a person not a _libraire juré_ to do
business in a book-shop or at any fixed stand; that is to say, he
could not sell as a _stationnaire_, but had to carry on his trade as a
pedlar or chap-man, from a pack or a cart. The value of the manuscript
that such pedlar was permitted to offer for sale was restricted to
ten _sous_, the equivalent of half a franc. At the price at which
manuscripts were held during the fourteenth century, this limitation
restricted the trade of the peripatetic vendors to single sheets, or
broadsides, containing usually a _Pater_, an _Ave_, or a _Credo_, or
a brief calendar or astrological table. Successive edicts were issued
from reign to reign, renewing the prohibition upon the selling of
books, whether in French or Latin (excepting only of such maximum
value), by any drapers, grocers, pedlars, or dealers of any kind.[297]

In all the official references of the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries to the book-dealers, the ground is taken that they formed a
class apart from mechanics or from traders in ordinary merchandise.
They were considered to be engaged in an intellectual pursuit, and were
treated as members of a profession upon whose service the work of the
university and that of the Church were largely dependent. Thus in 1649
the _Recueil_ makes use of these words:

_Les Marchands-Libraires, Imprimeurs et Relieurs seront toujours
censés du corps de nostre bien aymée fille aisnée l’Université; du
tout séparés des arts méchaniques, et autres Corps de Mestiers ou
marchandises; et come tels, conservés en la jouissance de tous les
droicts; priviléges, franchises, libertez, préséances et prérogatives
attribuées à ladite université et à eux par les Royes nos prédécesseux
et par nous._[298]

It was, therefore, not permitted to the _libraire_ to bring discredit
upon his profession by also engaging in any “sordid pursuits” (_viles
occupations_), and in so doing he rendered himself liable to being
deposed from his high post (_declaré déchu de son noble office_). He
could, however, unite with his work as _libraire_ that of a notary, or
that of a royal counsellor or practitioner in the higher court (_avocat
du roi au Parlement_).

Notwithstanding the personal prestige and the substantial advantages
which were thus enjoyed by the book-dealers of the university, there
were from time to time instances of protest, amounting occasionally to
insubordination, on the part of the _libraires_, who, as their business
aims and possibilities developed, became restive under the long series
of trammels and restrictions, and particularly in connection with those
imposed by the ecclesiastical division of the university authorities.
The dread, however, of losing any portion of their privileges, and
particularly the risk of any impairment of their monopoly of the
book-trade of the university and of Paris, operated always as a
sufficient consideration to prevent the insubordination from going to
extremes. Throughout the entire period of the Middle Ages the control
of the university continued, therefore, practically absolute over the
book-trade of Paris, the influence of the Church and the (more or less
spasmodic) authority of the Crown being exercised by means of the
university machinery.

This state of affairs continued for some period of years after the
introduction of printing. The university still insisted upon its
responsibility for the correctness and the completeness of the texts
issued from the Paris press, although it gave up of necessity the
routine of examining individual copies of the printed editions. On
the other hand, the censorship control on the part of the theological
Faculty over the moral character and orthodoxy of the works printed
was insisted upon more strenuously than ever as the Church began
to recognise the enormous importance of the influence upon public
opinion of the widely distributed printed volumes. The effect of this
ecclesiastical control upon the business of printing books is set
forth with some detail in the chapter on the early printers of Paris.
It is sufficient to say here that the contention on the part of the
university to control, as a portion of the work of higher education,
the business of the makers and sellers of books, while sharply attacked
and materially undermined after the middle of the seventeenth century,
was not formally abandoned until the beginning of the eighteenth. At
this time the Crown took over to itself all authority to regulate the
press, an authority which disappeared only with the revolution of 1789.

For six centuries the book-trade of Paris and of France, whether it
consisted in the production of manuscripts for the exclusive use of
members of the university, or of printed books for the enlightenment of
the general public, had been obliged to do its work under the hampering
and burdensome regulations and restrictions of a varying series of
authorities. The rectors of the university, the theologians of the
Sorbonne, the lawyers of the Parliament of Paris, the chancellors of
the Crown, the kings themselves, had all taken a hand, sometimes in
turn, not infrequently in conflict with each other, in the task of
“regulating” the trade in books. The burden of the restrictions was,
in pretence at least, offset by various privileges and exemptions,
but they remained burdens notwithstanding. It may well be a cause
of surprise that in the face of such a long series of hampering
difficulties, difficulties more serious than those with which any
publishers in the world, outside of Rome, had to contend, the
manuscript publishers and the later printer-publishers of Paris should
have been able to do so much to make Paris a literary and a publishing
centre. As has been already indicated, it was certainly the case
that during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Paris shared with
Florence the position of being the centre of the manuscript trade of
Europe. It was also the case, as will be set forth in a later chapter,
that the first printer-publishers of Paris did most noteworthy work in
furthering the development of scholarly publishing and the production
of scholarly books. It required, however, the revolution of 1789 to
establish the principle that the business of producing and distributing
books could secure its legitimate development only when freed from
censorship restrictions and regulations, and that it was a business the
control of which belonged properly not to the university, the Courts of
Parliament, or the Crown, but to the people themselves.

Considering the scarcity and the costliness of books in the Middle
Ages, it is somewhat surprising that the work of instruction rested
so directly upon books, that is, depended upon the mastery of a text.
Thurot says: “It is the distinctive character of instruction in the
Middle Ages that the science was not taught directly and in itself, but
by the explanation of books which derived their authority solely from
their writers.”[299] Roger Bacon formulates it: “When one knows the
text, one knows all that concerns the science which is the object of
the text.”[300] Instead of taking a course of logic or of ethics, says
Compayré, the phrase was reading a book on logic or ethics, _legere_ or
_audire librum_. This close adherence to the text secured, of course,
an assured demand in the university towns first for the hired _pecias_
and later for the purchased manuscripts.

The foundation of the College of the Sorbonne dates from 1257. It was
organised by Robert de Sorbon, chaplain to Louis IX. The college was
at once affiliated with the University of Paris, of which it became
the theological Faculty, and in the general direction of which it
exercised at times a controlling influence. The college is connected
with my subject on the ground of its assumption of the theological
censorship of the Paris book-trade and of its frequent attempts to
exercise a general censorship over all the productions of the Paris
printing-press.

As we shall note later in the history of the Paris book-trade, various
complications arose between the publishers and booksellers possessing
a university license (the _libraires jurés_) and certain unlicensed
dealers who undertook to come into competition with them. The locality
occupied by these unlicensed booksellers was on the Island of the Cité,
immediately by the precincts of Notre Dame. In fact it was the case
with the book-trade generally north of the Alps that its business was
very largely carried on in the portals of a church if not under the
immediate shadow of the cathedral.

While in Italy the Church furthered but slightly the early production
of books and, later, did not a little to hamper the undertakings of the
publishers, it was the case in France and quite largely also in South
Germany, that the publishers found themselves very largely dependent
upon the scholarly interests and the scholarly co-operation of the
clerics, and the association of the Church with the book-trade was, for
a large proportion at least of the fifteenth century, an important one.

In Paris, the booksellers licensed by the university were all in the
Latin Quarter, and in the same region were to be found the sellers
of parchment, the illuminators, the scribes, binders, etc., who also
carried university licenses and were under university supervision. It
is probable that the specification in the Tax Roll of 1292 of eight
_librarii_ in Paris refers only to the booksellers licensed by the
university and carrying on their business in the Latin Quarter.

In Bayeux, in 1250, certain clerics were exempted from taxation if
they dealt in parchment or if they were engaged in the copying of
manuscripts, and the book-shops along the walls of the cathedral were
also exempt from taxation. It is not clear to me in looking up this
record, whether the tax mentioned was a town tax or a general tax, or
whether it was one of the ecclesiastical levies.[301]

Roger Bacon’s reference to the scribes of Paris has already been
mentioned. He could not secure from the Brothers of his Order a
transcript of his work which he desired to present to Pope Clement,
because they were too ignorant to write the same out intelligently,
while he was afraid to confide the work to the public scribes of
France lest they might make improper use of the material.[302] It is
Wattenbach’s opinion that the wrongful use of his production dreaded by
Bacon was the sale of unauthorised copies of it by the scribes to whom
the preparation of the authorised copies should be confided.

In 1292, Wenzel, King of Bohemia, presented to the monastery of
Königsaal, 200 marks in silver for the purchase of books, and the
purchases were made from the book-sellers in Paris. Richard de Bury
extols Paris as the great centre of the book-trade. Of the value of
the book collections in Rome and the possibility there of securing
literary treasures, he had already spoken, but the treasures of Paris
appear to have impressed him still more keenly. There he found occasion
to open his purse freely and took in exchange for base gold, books of
inestimable value. Joh. Gerson, in his treatise _De Laude Scriptorum_
expresses the dread lest the persistent carrying away from Florence
of his books by wealthy visitors may not too seriously diminish its
literary treasures.

The Paris publishers appear to have sent out travelling salesmen or
representatives to take orders for their wares. As early as 1480, a
publisher named Guillaume Tousé, of Paris, made complaint to the
chancellor of Brittany to the effect that he had entrusted a commission
to a certain Guillaume de l’Espine to carry books into Lower Brittany
and to make sale of the same during a period of six months. He had
taken with him books to the value of five hundred livres and was to
have a salary of ten crowns for the six months’ work. He had, however,
failed to return or to make report of his commission. Tousé secured a
judgment against his delinquent traveller, but the record does not show
whether he ever succeeded in getting hold of him again.[303]

In the universities of Oxford and of Cambridge, the _stationarii_
began their work some years later than in Paris or Bologna. They had
the advantage, however, of freedom from the greater portion of the
restrictions and special supervision which hampered the work of the
scribes in the Italian and French universities, and as a result their
business developed more promptly and more actively, and in the course
of a few years, they became the booksellers of the university towns.
It was, of course, from this university term _stationarii_ that the
name of stationers came at the outset to be applied to the organised
book-dealers of Great Britain. The Guild of the British book-dealers
completed its organisation in 1403, nearly sixty years before the
introduction into England of the printing-press.[304]

The art work put into the manuscripts produced in the Low Countries,
particularly in Belgium, was more highly developed and was a more
important part of the industry than was the case in any other portion
of the world.

In the earlier German universities, the _stationarii_ also found place
and found work, but this work seems to have been of less importance
and the scribes appear to have secured for themselves a less definite
university recognition than in Italy or in France. The explanation
given by Wattenbach is that the German students, being better informed
and more industrious, did for themselves a larger portion of the
transcribing required and were, therefore, freed from the necessity of
hiring their hefts.

The statutes of the universities of Prague and of Vienna permitted the
masters and the baccalaureates to secure from the university archives,
under certain pledges, the loan of the books authorised as text-books
or of works of reference, for the purpose of making trustworthy copies
of the same. The copyists were enjoined as follows:

_Fideliter et correcte, tractim et distincte, assignando paragraphos,
capitales literas, virgulas et puncta, prout sententia requirit._[305]
The practice also obtained in these universities of having texts
dictated to the students by the _magisters_ or the Bachelors of Arts.
This was described as _librum pronuntiare_, and also as _ad pennam
dare_.

In this phrase, Karoch sent word to Erfurt that _ad pennam dabit_ his
treatise _Arenga_.[306]

The text-books utilised in the German universities in the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries were as limited in range and in number
as those of Bologna and of Padua. The instruction in the medical
departments of Prague and Vienna was based in the main on the works of
Hippocrates and Galen, with some of the later commentaries, principally
from Arabian writers. In philosophy the chief authority was Aristotle,
in mathematics Euclid, and in astronomy Ptolemy. A few works of later
date were utilised, such as the _Summula_ of Petrus Hispanus and the
_De Sphæra Mundi_ of Johannes de Sacro Bosco. Bosco is otherwise known
as John Holywood or Halifax. He held the chair of mathematics in the
University of Paris about the middle of the thirteenth century. The
use of his treatise for classes in Prague is evidence of a certain
interchange between the universities of books in manuscript.

An important reason for the very large membership of the universities
of the Middle Ages as compared with their successors of to-day, is
to be found in the fact that they undertook to supply not only the
higher education which belongs to the present university curriculum,
but also the training now furnished by the _gymnasia_ or High Schools,
which were at that time not in existence. We find, therefore, in their
membership, thousands of students who were little more than boys either
in their years or in their mental development.

The universities also, on the other hand, attracted to their
membership very many students of mature age, who came sometimes for
special purposes, but more frequently because it was only in the
university towns that circles of scholars could be found, that books
were available, and that any large measure of intellectual activity
was to be experienced. As Savigny puts it: “The universities were,
during the Middle Ages, practically the only places where men could
study or could exercise their minds with any degree of freedom.” It
was inevitable therefore, that, with the generations succeeding the
discovery of printing, there should be a decrease in the influence
and in the relative importance for the community of the universities.
With the establishment of secondary schools, the training of the boys
was cared for to better purpose elsewhere; and with the increasing
circulation of printed books, it became possible for men to come into
relations with literature in other places than in the lecture room.
The universities were no longer the sole depositories of learning
or the sole sources of intellectual activity. This lessening of the
influence of the universities represented, or was at least coincident
with, a wider development of intellectual activity and of interest in
literature on the part of the masses of the people. The universities
alone would never have been in a position so to direct the thought
of the community as to render the masses of citizens competent to
arrive at conclusions for themselves and sufficiently assured in such
conclusions to be prepared to make them the basis of action. This was,
of course, partly because, notwithstanding the large membership and the
fact that this membership represented nearly all the classes in the
community, the universities could at best come into direct relations
but with a small proportion of the people. A more important cause
for such lack of intellectual leadership is to be found in the fact
that the standard of thought and of instruction in the universities
concerned itself very little with the intellectual life or issues of
the immediate time. As Biot puts it (speaking, to be sure, of a later
century): “The universities were several centuries in arrears with all
that concerned the sciences and the arts. Peripatetics, when all the
world had renounced with Descartes the philosophy of Aristotle, they
became Cartesians when the rest were Newtonians. That is the way with
learned bodies which do not make discoveries.”

It was the dissemination of literature through the new art of printing
rather than the diffusion of education through the university lecture
rooms, which brought to the masses of the people the consciousness
of mental existence and of individual responsibility for arriving at
sound conclusions. Prior to the printing-press, this responsibility
had been left by the people with their “spiritual advisers,” who were
charged with the duty of doing the thinking for their flocks. It was
this change in the mental status of the people which was the precursor
(although at a considerable space of years) of the Reformation.

With the beginning in Germany of the movement known as Humanism, the
representatives of the new thought of the time were not to be found in
the university circles, and had not received their inspiration from
the lecture rooms. Says Paulsen: “The entire traditional conduct of
the universities, and in particular of the instruction in arts and
theology, was rejected with the utmost scorn by the new culture through
its representatives, the poets and orators, to whom form and substance
alike of this teaching seemed the most outrageous barbarism, which they
never wearied of denouncing.” In the _Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum_,
which were issued about 1516 from the band of youthful poets gathered
about Mutianus at Erfurt, the hatred and detestation felt by the
Humanists for the ancient university system raised to itself a lasting
monument.

Within a few years from the publication of the _Epistolæ_, the
influence of the Humanists had so far extended itself as to have
effected a large modification in the systems of study in all the larger
universities. “The old ecclesiastical Latin was replaced by classical
Latin; Roman authors, particularly the poets, were made the subject of
lectures, and the old translations of Aristotelian texts were driven
out by new translations on principles advocated by the Humanists. Greek
was taken up in the Faculty of arts and courses in the language and
literature were established in all universities.”[307]

An immediate result of these changes and extensions was an active
demand for printed texts. The Humanistic movement, itself in a
measure the result of the printing-press, was a most important fact
in providing business for the German printers during the earlier
years of the sixteenth century. The strifes and contentions of the
Reformation checked the development in the universities of the
studies connected with the intellectual movement of the Renaissance
and lessened the demand for the literature of these studies. The
active-minded were absorbed in theological controversies, and those
who could not understand the questions at issue could still shout
the shibboleths of the leaders. As Erasmus put it, rather bitterly,
_ubi regnat Lutheranismus, ibi interitus litterarum_. The literature
of the Reformation, however, itself did much to make good for the
printing-presses the lessened demand for the classics, while a
few years later, the organisation of the Protestant schools and
universities aroused intellectual activities in new regions, and
created fresh requirements for printed books. Within half a century,
in fact, of the Diet of Worms, the centre of the book-absorbing
population of Germany had been transferred from the Catholic states of
the south to the Protestant territories of the north, and the literary
preponderance of the latter has continued to increase during the
succeeding generations.

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

CHAPTER IV.

THE BOOK-TRADE IN THE MANUSCRIPT PERIOD.


=Italy.=--It seems probable that the book-trade which had been
introduced into Gaul from Rome still existed during the sixth century.
F. J. Mone finds references to such trade in the chronicles of Cæsarius
of Arles.[308] In the code of laws of the Visigoths, it is provided
that copies of the volume containing the laws shall be sold at not more
than six sols.[309]

Wattenbach is of opinion that not only in Rome but in other Italian
centres some fragments of the classic book-trade survived the fall of
the Empire and the later invasions and changes of rulers, and he finds
references to book-dealers in Italy as late as the sixth century.[310]
He takes the ground that, notwithstanding the destruction of buildings,
library collections, and in fact of whole cities, during the various
contests, first with the Barbarian invaders and later between these
invaders themselves, there still remained scholarly people who
retained their interest in Latin literature; and he points out that,
notwithstanding the many changes in the rulers of Italy between the
year 476 and the beginning of the eleventh century, Latin never ceased
to remain the official language and, as he maintains, the language of
literature.

In the _Tetralogus_ of Wipo are the following lines which have a
bearing upon this belief in the continuation of some literary interests
in Italy:

  _Hoc servant Itali post prima crepundia cuncti,
  Et sudare scholis mandatur tota juventus.
  Solis Teutonicis vacuum vel turpe videtur,
  Ut doceant aliquem, nisi clericus accipiatur._[311]

(From their cradle up all Italians pay heed to learning, and their
children are kept at work in the schools. It is only among the Germans
that it is held to be futile and wrong to give instruction to one who
is not to become a cleric.)

Giesebrecht, in his treatise _De Litterarum Studiis apud Italos_,
confirms this view. He refers to a manuscript of Orosius which was
written in the seventh century and which contains an inscription
stating that this copy of the manuscript was prepared by the scribe in
the _Statione Magistri Viliaric Antiquarii_.

This is one of the earlier examples of the use of the term _statio_,
from which is derived the term _stationarii_, indicating scribes whose
work was done in a specific workshop or headquarters, as contrasted
with writers who were called upon to do work at the homes of their
clients. As is specified in the chapter on the universities, this term
came to be used to designate booksellers (that is to say, producers
of books) who had fixed work-shops. In the Acts of the Council of
Constantinople, the scribe who wrote out the record of the fifth
Synod is described as _Theodorus librarius qui habuit stationem ad S.
Johannem Phocam_.[312]

In such work-shops, while the chief undertaking was the production of
books, the scribes were ready to prepare announcements and to write
letters, as is even to-day the practice of similar scribes in not a few
Italian cities and villages.

From the beginning of the seventh century, Rome was for a considerable
period practically the only book market in the world, that is to say,
the only place in which books could be obtained on order and in which
the machinery for their production continued to exist. In 658, S.
Gertrude ordered for the newly founded monastery at Nivelle certain
sacred volumes to be prepared in the city of Rome.[313] Beda reports
that the Abbot Benedict of Wearmouth, in 671, secured from Rome a
number of learned and sacred works, _non paucos vel placito pretio
emtos vel amicorum dono largitos retulit_. (He brought back a number
of books, some of which he had purchased at the prices demanded, while
others he had received as gifts from his friends.) Later, the Abbot
repeated his journeys, and in 678, and again in 685, brought back fresh
collections. The collections secured on his last journey included even
certain examples of the profane writers.[314]

A similar instance is noted in the chronicles of the monastery of St.
Wandrille. The Abbot Wandregisil sent his nephew Godo to Rome in 657,
and Godo brought back with him as a present from the Pope Vitalian,
not only valuable relics, but many volumes of the sacred Scriptures
containing both the New and the Old Testament.[315] During the time
of the Abbot Austrulf (747-753) a chest was thrown up by the sea on
the shore. It contained relics and also a _codicem pulcherrimum_, or
beautiful manuscript, containing the four gospels, _Romana Littera
Optime Scriptum_.

This term _Romana Littera_ has been previously referred to as
indicating a special script which had been adopted in Rome by the
earlier instructors for sacred writings.

Alcuin relates of the Archbishop Ælbert of York (766-780):

  _Non semel externas peregrino tramite terras,
  Jam peragravit ovans, Sophiæ deductus amore,
  Si quid forte novi librorum seu studiorum,_
  _Quod secum ferret, terris reperiret in illis.
  Hic quoque Romuleam venit devotus ad urbem._[316]

(More than once he has travelled joyfully through remote regions and
by strange roads, led on by his zeal for knowledge, and seeking to
discover in foreign lands novelties in books or in studies which he
could take back with him. And this zealous student journeyed to the
city of Romulus.)

During the Italian expeditions of the German Emperors, books were from
time to time brought back to Germany. Certain volumes referred to by
Pez as having been in the Library at Passau, in 1395, contain the
inscription _isti sunt libri quos Roma detulimus_.

Wattenbach finds record of an organised manuscript business in Verona
as early as 1338,[317] and of a more important trade in manuscripts
being carried on in Milan at the same time. In the fourteenth century,
Richard de Bury speaks of buying books for his library from Rome. The
references to this early manuscript business in Italy are, however, so
fragmentary that it is difficult to determine how far the works secured
were the remnants of old libraries or collections, or how far they were
the productions of scribe work-shops engaged in manifolding copies for
sale.

It seems evident, however, that while a scattered trade in manuscripts
was carried on both by the scribes in the towns and between the
monastery _scriptoria_, the facilities for the production and
manifolding of manuscript copies were hardly adequate to meet the
demand or requirements of readers and students. As early as 250,
Origen, writing in Cappadocia, was complaining that he found difficulty
in getting his teachings distributed. A zealous disciple, named
Ambrosius, secured for the purpose a group of scribes whose transcripts
were afterwards submitted to Origen for revision before being sent
out through the churches. It is further related that Origen became so
absorbed in the work of correcting these manuscripts that he could
not be called from his desk either for exercise or for meals.[318] S.
Jerome, a century later, when he was sojourning in Bethlehem, found
similar difficulty. He had among his monks some zealous scribes, but he
complained that their work was untrustworthy.[319]

Abbot Lupus of Ferrières was obliged (in the ninth century) to apply to
monks in York in order to secure the transcribing work that he required.

In connection with this difficulty in securing books, it became
customary, when copies were loaned from libraries, to secure from
the borrower a pledge or security of equal or greater value. The
correspondence of the time gives frequent instances of the difficulty
in getting back books that had been loaned, notwithstanding the risk
of the forfeiture of the pledges. In 1020, Notker writes from St. Gall
to the Bishop of Sitten that certain books belonging to the Bishop,
for which the Bishop was making demand, had been borrowed by the
Abbot Aregia, and that, notwithstanding many applications, he had not
succeeded in getting even a promise of their return.[320] In Vercelli,
a beautiful mass book which had been loaned by the Abbot Erkenbald of
Fulda (997-1011) to the Bishop Henry of Wurzburg, was to have been
retained for the term of the Bishop’s life. After the death of the
Bishop, reclamation was made from Fulda for the return of the volume,
but without success. During the years 1461-1463, the Legate Marinus de
Fregeno travelled through Sweden and Norway and collected there certain
manuscripts which he claimed were those that had been taken away from
Rome at the time of its plunder by the Goths. He evidently took the
ground that where books were concerned, a term of one thousand years
was not sufficient to constitute a “statute of limitations.”

Louis IX. of France is quoted as having taken the ground that books
should be transcribed rather than borrowed, because in that way the
number would be increased and the community would be benefited. In
many cases, however, there could, of course, be no choice. The King,
for instance, desired to possess the great encyclopedia of Vincenzo
of Beauvais. He sent gold to Vincenzo, in consideration of which a
transcript of the encyclopedia was prepared. The exact cost is not
stated.[321]

In 1375, a sum equivalent to 825 francs of to-day was paid for
transcribing the commentary of Heinrich Bohic on the Decretals of 1375.
In the cost of such work was usually included a price for the loan or
use of the manuscript. A fee or rental was, in fact, always charged
by the manuscript-dealers. Up to the close of the fourteenth century,
the larger proportion of transcripts were prepared for individual
buyers and under special orders, one of the evidences of this being
the fact that upon the titles of the manuscripts were designed or
illuminated the arms or crests of the purchasers. After the beginning
of the fifteenth century, there is to be found a large number of
manuscripts in which a place has been left blank on the title-pages for
the subsequent insertion of the crest or coat-of-arms, indicating that
in these instances the manuscript had been prepared for general use
instead of under special order.[322]

As already mentioned, Charlemagne interested himself, not only in
the training of scribes, but in the collection of books, but he does
not appear to have considered it important that the works secured by
him should be retained for the use of his descendants, as he gave
instructions in his will that after his death the books should be sold.

One of the oldest illuminated Irish manuscripts is that of S. Ceaddæ.
This was purchased, at what date is not specified, by some holy man
in exchange for his best steed, and was then presented by him to the
church at Llandaff. The manuscript finally made its way to Madrid
and thence to Stockholm; according to the record, it had, before
the purchase above mentioned, been saved out of the hands of Norman
pirates.[323] It is certain that very many of the monasteries which
were within reach of the incursions of the Normans were bereft by them
of such books as had been collected, although it is not probable that,
as a rule, the pirates had any personal interest in, or commercial
appreciation for, the manuscripts that fell into their hands.

Gerbert, whose literary interests have been previously referred to, and
who is described as the most zealous book collector of his time, tells
us that he made purchases for his library in Italy, in South Germany,
and in the Low Countries, but he does not mention whether he was
purchasing from dealers or individuals. He was a native of Auvergne,
and in 999 became Pope (under the name of Gregory V.). Abbot Albert of
Gembloux, who died in 1048, states that he brought together, at great
cost, as many as one hundred and fifty manuscripts.[324]

A certain Deopert records that he purchased for the monastery of St.
Emmeran, from Vichelm, the chaplain of Count Regimpert, for a large sum
of money (the price is not specified), the writings of Alcuin.[325]

Notwithstanding the very strict regulations to the contrary, it not
unfrequently happened that monasteries and churches, when in special
stress for money, pledged or sold their books to Jews. As the greater
proportion at least of the sacred writings of the monasteries would
have had no personal interest for their Hebrew purchasers, it is
fair to assume that these were taken for re-sale, and that, in fact,
there came to be a certain trade in books on the part of financiers
acting in the capacity of pawn-brokers. In 1320, the monastery of S.
Ulrich was in need of funds, and the Abbot Marquard, of Hagel, pawned
to the mendicant monks a great collection of valuable books, among
which were certain volumes that had been prepared as early as 1175
under the directions of the Abbot Heinrich. The successor of Marquard,
Conrad Winkler, in 1344, succeeded in getting back a portion of the
books, by the payment of 27 pounds heller, and 15 pfennigs.[326]
Instances like these give evidence that a certain trade in manuscript
books, in Northern Europe at least, preceded by a number of years the
organisation of any systematised book-trade.

Kirchhoff speaks of usurers, dealers in old clothes, and pedlars,
carrying on the trade in the buying and selling of books during the
first half of the fifteenth century. In Milan, a dealer in perfumery,
Paolino Suordo, included in his stock (in 1470) manuscripts for sale,
and later announced himself as a dealer in printed books. Both in
England and France at this time manuscripts were dealt in by grocers
and by the mercers. The monastery of Neuzelle, in 1409, pawned several
hundred manuscripts for 130 gulden, and the monastery at Dobrilugk, in
1420, sold to the Prebendary of Brandenburg 1441 volumes.

In 1455, the Faculty of Arts of the University of Heidelberg bought
valuable books from the estate of the Prior of Worms. In 1402, the
cathedral at Breslau rented a number of books from Burgermeister Johann
Kyner, for which the Chapter was to pay during the lifetime of said
Kyner a yearly rental of eight marks, ten groschens.[327]

The Bishop of Speier rented to the precentor of the cathedral in 1447
some separately written divisions of the Bible, which were to be held
by the precentor during his lifetime only, and were then to be returned
to the Bishop’s heirs. The rental is not mentioned. The Chapter of the
Cathedral of Basel arranged to take over certain books from the owner
or donor, whose name is not given, and to pay as consideration for the
use of the same, each year on the anniversary of the gift, 16 sols.[328]

Richard de Bury makes a reference to the book-trade of Europe, as it
existed in the fourteenth century, as follows:

_Stationariorum ac librariorum notitiam non solum intra natalis soli
provinciam, sed per regnum Franciæ, Teutoniæ et Italiæ comparavimus
dispersorum faciliter pecunia prævolante, nec eos ullatenus impedivit
distantia neque furor maris absterruit, nec eis æs pro expensa defecit,
quin ad nos optatos libros transmitterent vel afferrent._[329]

(By means of advance payments, we have easily come into relations with
the _stationarii_ and _librarii_ who are scattered through our native
province, and also with those who are to be found in the kingdoms
of France, Germany, and Italy; and neither the great distances, nor
the fury of the sea, nor lack of money for their expenses has been
permitted to prevent them from bringing or sending to us the books that
we desired.)

In the same work, De Bury uses the term _bibliator_, which he
afterwards explained as being identical with _bibliopole_,--a seller of
books.

The record of the production of books that was carried on in the
earlier universities, such as Bologna and Padua, is presented in the
chapter on the universities.

In connection with the very special requirements of the earlier Italian
universities, and with the close control exercised by them over the
scribes, it is evident that a book-trade in the larger sense of
the term could not easily come into existence. The first records of
producers and dealers of books of a general character were to be found,
not in the university towns, but in Milan, Florence, and particularly
in Venice. In 1444, a copy of Macrobius was stolen from the scholar
Filelfi, or Philelphus, which copy he recovered, as he tells us, in the
shop of a public scribe in Vincenza.

Blume mentions that in Venice the _Camaldulensers_ of S. Michael in
Murano carried on during the earlier part of the fifteenth century an
important trade in manuscripts, including with the older texts verified
copies which had been prepared under their own direction.[330] The
headquarters, not only for Italy but for Europe, of the trade of Greek
manuscripts, was for a number of years in Venice, the close relations
of Venice with Constantinople and with the East having given it an
early interest in this particular class of Eastern productions.

Joh. Arretinus was busied in Florence between the years 1375 and 1417
in the sale of manuscripts, but he appears to have secured these mainly
not by production in Florence, but by sending scribes to the libraries
in the monasteries and elsewhere to produce the copies required.

A reference in a letter of Leonardo Bruni, written in 1416, gives
indication of an organised book-trade in Florence at that time:

_Priscianum quem postulas omnes tabernas librarias perscrutatus
reperire nondum potui._[331] (I have hunted through all the book-shops,
but have not been able to find the Priscian for which you asked.)

Bruni writes again concerning a certain Italian translation of the
Bible that he had been trying to get hold of:

_Jam Bibliothecas omnes et bibliopolas requisivi ut si qua veniant ad
manus eligam quæque optima mihi significent._ (I have already searched
all the libraries and book-shops in order to select from the material
at hand the manuscripts which are for me the most important.)

Ambrogio Traversari wrote in 1418 in Florence:

_Oro ut convenias bibliopolas civitatis et inquiri facias diligenter,
an inveniamus decretales in parvo volumine._[332] (I beg you to make
search among the booksellers of the city and ascertain whether it is
possible to secure in a small volume a copy of the Decretals.)

The use for book-dealers of the old classic term _bibliopola_ in place
of the more usual _stationarius_ is to be noted.

From these references, we have a right to conclude that there were
during the first quarter of the fifteenth century in Florence a number
of dealers in books who handled various classes of literature.

The great publisher of the fifteenth century, Philippi Vespasianus,
or Vespasiano, who was not only a producer and dealer in manuscripts,
but a man possessed of a wide range of scholarship, called himself
_librarius florentinus_. He held the post for a time of _bidellus_ of
the University of Florence. His work will be referred to more fully in
a later division of this chapter.

Kirchhoff points out that the dealers of this time, among others
Vespasiano himself, were sometimes termed _chartularii_, a term
indicating that dealers in books were interested also in the sale
of paper and probably of other writing materials. The Italian word
_cartolajo_ specifies a paper-dealer or perhaps more nearly a stationer
in the modern signification of the term.

The influx of Greek scholars into Italy began some years before the
fall of Constantinople. Some of these scholars came from towns in Asia
Minor, which had fallen under the rule of the Turks before the capture
of Constantinople. When the Turkish armies crossed the Bosphorus, a
number of the Greeks seem to have lost hope at a comparatively early
date of being able to defend the Byzantine territory, and had betaken
themselves with such property as they could save to various places of
refuge in the south of Europe, and particularly in Italy. As described
in other chapters, many of these exiles brought with them Greek
manuscripts, and in some cases these codices were not only important
as being the first copies of the texts brought to the knowledge of
European scholars, but were of distinctive interest and value as being
the oldest examples of such texts in existence.

The larger number of the exiles who selected Italy as their place of
refuge found homes and in many cases scholarly occupation, not in the
university towns so much as in the great commercial centres, such as
Venice and Florence. Many of these Greeks were accepted as instructors
in the families of nobles or of wealthy merchants, while others made
use of their manuscripts either through direct sale, through making
transcripts for sale, or through the loan of the originals to the
manuscript-dealers.

A little later these manuscripts served as material and as “copy” for
the editions of the Greek classics issued by Aldus and his associates,
the first thoroughly edited and carefully printed Greek books that
the world had known. It was partly as a cause and partly as an effect
of the presence of so many scholarly Greeks, that the study of Greek
language, literature, and philosophy became fashionable among the
so-called higher circles of Italian society during the last half of the
fifteenth century.

The interest in Greek literature had, however, as pointed out, begun
nearly twenty-five years earlier. As there came to be some knowledge
of the extent of the literary treasures of classic Greece which
had been preserved in the Byzantine cities, not a few of the more
enterprising dealers in manuscripts, and many also of the wealthier and
more enterprising of the scholarly noblemen and merchants, themselves
sent emissaries to search the monasteries and cities of the East for
further manuscripts which could be purchased.

One reason, apparently, for the preference given by the Greeks to
Venice and Florence over Bologna and Padua was the fact that the two
great universities were devoted, as we have seen, more particularly
to the subjects of law, theology, and medicine, subjects in which the
learning of the Greeks could be of little direct service.[333] The
philosophy and the poetry which formed the texts of the lectures given
by the Greek scholars attracted many zealous and earnest students,
but these students came, as stated, largely outside of the university
circles. The doctors of law and the doctors of theology were among the
last of the Italian scholars to be interested in Homeric poetry or in
the theories of the Greek metaphysicians.

Towards the middle of the fifteenth century and a few years before the
introduction of printing, a new term came to be used for dealers in
manuscripts. The scribes had in many cases naturally associated their
business interests with those of the makers of paper,--_cartolaji_, and
the latter name came to be applied not only to the paper manufacturers,
but to the purchasers of the paper upon which books were inscribed. In
some cases the paper-makers, or _cartolaji_, appear themselves to have
organised staffs of scribes through whose labour their own raw material
could be utilised, while the name of paper-maker,--_cartolajo_, came to
be used to describe the entire concern.

After the introduction into Italy of printing, the association of the
paper-makers with books became still more important, and not a few of
the original printer-publishers were formerly paper manufacturers,
and continued this branch of trade while adding to it the work of
manufacturing books. Among such paper-making publishers is to be noted
Francesco Cartolajo, who was in business in Florence in 1507, and whose
surname was, of course, derived from the trade in which his family had
for some generations been engaged. Bonaccorsi turned his paper-making
establishment in Florence into a printing-office and book manufactory
as early as 1472, and Montali, in Parma, took the same course in 1482;
Di Sasso who, in 1481, came into association with the Brothers Brushi,
united his printing-office with their paper factory.

Fillippo Giunta, one of the earlier publishers in Florence, calls
himself _librarius et cartolajus_. It is possible that he reversed the
business routine above referred to, and united a paper factory with his
printing-office.

One result of the influx of Greek scholars, many of whom were
themselves skilled scribes while others brought with them scribes,
was the multiplying of the number of writers available for work and a
corresponding reduction in the cost of such work.

The effect of this change in the business conditions was to lessen
the practice of hiring manuscripts for a term of days or weeks, or of
dividing manuscripts into _pecias_, and to increase the actual sale of
works in manuscripts.

The university regulations, however, controlling the loaning of
manuscripts and of the _pecias_ appear to have been continued and
renewed through the latter half of the fifteenth century, that is to
say, not only after the trade in manuscripts, at popular prices, had
largely developed in cities like Florence, Venice, and Milan, but
even after the introduction of printing. It would almost seem as if
in regard to books in manuscript, the system which had been put into
shape by the university authorities had had the effect of delaying for
a quarter of a century or so the introduction into Bologna and Padua
of the methods of book production and book distribution which were
already in vogue in other cities of Italy. I do not overlook the fact
that there was in Florence also a university, but it is evident that
the book-trade in that city had never been under the control of the
university authorities, and that the methods of the dealers took shape
rather from the general, common-sense commercial routine of the great
centre of Italian trade than from the narrow scholastic theories of the
professors of law or of theology.

During the twenty-five years before the art of printing, introduced
into Italy in 1464, had become generally diffused, the years in which
the trade in manuscripts was at its highest development, Florence
succeeded Venice as the centre of this trade, both for Italy and for
Europe.

The activity of the intellectual life of the city, and the fact that
its citizens were cultivated and that its scholars were so largely
themselves men of wealth, the convenient location of the city for trade
communications with the other cities of Italy and with the great marts
in the East, in the West, and in the North, and the accumulation in
such libraries as those of the Medici of collections, nowhere else
to be rivalled, of manuscripts, both ancient and modern, united in
securing for Florence the pre-eminence for literary production and for
literary interests.

Scholars, not only from the other Italian cities, but from France,
Germany, and Hungary, came to Florence to consult manuscripts which in
many cases could be found only in Florence, or to purchase transcripts
of these manuscripts, which could be produced with greater correctness,
greater beauty, and smaller expense by the _librarii_ of Florence than
by producers of books in any other city. After the Greek refugees began
their lecture courses, there was an additional attraction for scholars
from the outer world to visit the Tuscan capital.

The wealthy scholars and merchant princes of Florence, whose
collections of manuscripts were given to the city during their
lifetime, or who left such collections after their death to the
Florentine libraries, made it, as a rule, a condition of such gifts and
such bequests that the books should be placed freely at the disposal
of visitors desiring to make transcripts of the same. Such a condition
appears in the will of Bonaccorsi,[334] while a similar condition was
quoted by Poggio[335] in his funeral oration upon Niccolo d’ Niccoli,
as having been the intention of Niccolo for the books bequeathed by him
to his Florentine fellow-citizens.

Foreign collectors who did not find it convenient themselves to
visit Florence, such as the Duke of Burgundy, and Matthias Corvinus
of Hungary, kept employed in the city for a number of years scribes
engaged in the work of preparing copies of these Florentine literary
treasures for the libraries of Nancy and of Buda-Pesth.

Matthias was, it seems, not content with ordering the transcripts of
the works desired by him, but employed a scholarly editor, resident in
Florence, to supervise the work and to collate the transcripts with the
originals, and who certified to the correctness of the copies forwarded
to Buda.[336] At the death of Matthias, there appear to have been left
in Florence a number of codices ordered by him which had not yet been
paid for, and these were taken over by the Medici.[337]

In a parchment manuscript of the Philippian orations is inscribed a
note by a previous owner, a certain Dominicus Venetus, to the effect
that he had bought the same in Rome from a Florentine bookseller for
five ducats in gold in 1460.[338] Dominicus goes on to say that he had
used this manuscript in connection with the lectures of the learned
Brother Patrus Thomasius.

During the thirteenth century, there was a considerable development
in the art of preparing and of illuminating and illustrating
manuscripts. One author is quoted by Tiraboschi as saying that the
work on a manuscript now required the services not of a scribe, but
of an artist. For the transcribing of a missal and illuminating the
same with original designs, a monk in Bologna is quoted as having
received in 1260 two hundred florins gold, the equivalent of about one
hundred dollars. For copying the text of the Bible, without designs,
another scribe received in the same year eighty lire, about sixteen
dollars.[339]

The work of the manuscript-dealers in Florence was carried on not only
for the citizens and sojourners in the city itself, but for the benefit
of other Italian cities in which there was no adequate machinery for
the manifolding of manuscripts. Bartholomæus Facius, writing from
Naples in 1448, speaks of the serious inadequacy of the scribes in that
city. There were but few men engaged in the business, and these were
poorly educated and badly equipped.[340] Facius was, therefore, asking
a correspondent in Florence to have certain work done for him which
could not be completed in Naples. Poggio writes from Rome about the
same date to Niccolo in Florence to somewhat similar effect. He speaks
with envy of the larger literary facilities possessed by his Florentine
friends.[341]

Next to Florence, the most important centre for the manuscript trade
of North Italy was Milan. As early as the middle of the fourteenth
century, there is record of no less than forty professional scribes
being at work in the city. Such literary work as was required by Genoa
and other Italian towns within reach of the Lombardy capital came to
Milan. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, when the population
of the city was about 200,000, there had been in the city but two
registered copyists. More important, however, than that of either
Florence or Milan, was the manuscript trade of Venice, the position of
which city gave it exceptional advantages as well for the collection of
codices from the East as for securing the services of skilled scribes
from Athens or from Constantinople. One of the more noteworthy of the
Venetian importers of manuscripts was Johannes Galeotti, a Genoese by
birth, who made various journeys to Constantinople, and whose special
trade is referred to in an inscription on a manuscript dating from 1450
and containing the speeches of Demosthenes.[342]

Reference has already been made to Aurispa, who appears to have been
the most important manuscript-dealer of his time, not only in Venice,
but possibly in the world. Aurispa sent various agents to Greece and to
the farther East to collect manuscripts and kept scribes busied in his
work-shop in Venice in preparing authentic copies of these texts. One
of his travellers was Plantinerus, who was sent to the Peloponnesus in
1415, and who succeeded in securing there some valuable codices.[343]
Plantinerus found, in executing his commissions, that he had to come
into competition with a traveller sent out by Cosimo de’ Medici on a
similar errand.

Venice possessed an advantage over the other Italian cities, not only
in the collection of texts, and in its facilities for manifolding
these, but in its position for securing wide sales for the same in
the cities outside of Italy, with which it was, in connection with
its active commerce, in regular relations. The lines of the Oxford
printers, Theo. Rood and Thomas Hunt, printed in their edition of the
_Letters of Phalaris_, give an indication of the relations of the
English university in the early part of the fifteenth century with the
literary marts of Southern Europe.

  _Celatos, Veneti, nobis transmittere libros
  Cedite, nos aliis vendimus, O Veneti_--[344]

(If you Venetians will send over to us the books which have been hidden
(_i. e._ difficult or rare books, or possibly books unearthed from far
off Eastern regions) we will find sale for the same.)

There is evidence in fact of a very active book-trade between Venice
and England for many years before the introduction into Italy of the
printing-press. The work of Aldus and of those who were associated
with him in carrying on printing and publishing undertakings in Venice
naturally very largely extended these relations with the English
scholars, but the channels for the same had already been opened. The
manuscript-dealers in Venice fixed their place of business in the most
frequented parts of the city--the Bridge of the Rialto, and the Plaza
of S. Mark.

The trade of the Italian dealers in manuscripts was not brought to an
immediate close by the introduction of printing. The older scholars
still preferred the manuscript form for their books, and found it
difficult to divest themselves of the impression that the less costly
printed volumes were suited only for the requirements of the vulgar
herd. There are even, as Kirchhoff points out,[345] instances of
scribes preparing their manuscripts from printed “copy,” and there are
examples of these manuscript copies of printed books being made with
such literalness as to include the imprint of the printer.

The work of Aldus (continued with scholarly enterprise later by such
men as Froben of Basel and Estienne of Paris) in the printing of Greek
texts, although begun as early as 1495, and although exercising a
very wide influence upon the distribution of Greek literature, was
insufficient to supply the eager demand of the scholars, while not
many other printers were, in the early years of the exercise of the
art, prepared to incur the very considerable risk and expense required
for the production of Greek fonts of type. The risk was, of course, by
no means limited to the cost of the type; the printers of the earlier
Greek books had themselves but slight familiarity with the literature
of Greece, and they were obliged in many cases to confide the selection
and the editing of their texts to editors to whom this literature was
very largely still a novelty. The printers hardly knew what books
to select and they had no adequate data upon which to base business
calculations as to the extent of the demand that could be looked for
for any particular book. The feeling that they were working in the dark
was, therefore, a very natural one.

It was on this ground that, while printing-presses were, during the
century after 1450, multiplying rapidly through Europe, the printing
of Greek books continued to be for a large portion of the period an
exceptional class of undertakings, and work was still found for scribes
who could be trusted to make accurate transcripts of Greek codices.

Kirchhoff gives the names of the following Italian manuscript-dealers
and scribes whose scholarly activity during the latter half of the
fifteenth century was especially important: Antonius Dazilas, Cæsar
Strategus, Constantius Librarius, Andreas Vergetius, and Antonius
Eparchus. The latter made various journeys to the East in search of
manuscripts. The fact that the dealers in manuscripts very rarely
placed their own names on the copies of the texts sent out from their
work-shops has, in a large number of cases, prevented these names from
being preserved for future record. The names that have come into record
are in the main such as have been referred to in the correspondence of
their scholarly friends and clients. I quote a few of these references
from the lists given by Kirchhoff:

In Bologna the oldest _librarius_ whose work is referred to is
Viliaric, who was called an _antiquarius_, and whose shop was open in
the beginning of the thirteenth century. In a manuscript, previously
referred to, containing a treatise of Paul Orosius, originally written
in the seventh century, and from which this copy was transcribed early
in the thirteenth, there is at the end an inscription, as follows:

  _Confectus codex in statione magistri Viliaric antiquarii,
  Ora pro me scriptore, sic dominum habeas protectorem._[346]

(This codex was completed in the stall of Master Viliaric, bookseller;
pray for (the soul of) me, the scribe, and you shall have the Lord for
your protector.)

This codex seems to have been prepared, according to the usual
university practice, for hire, as on the sixteenth page there is noted
the memorandum, “this quaternio has five sheets.”

In 1247, Nicolaus is recorded as being the _stationarius
universitatis_, and in the same year a certain Johannes Cambii is
recorded as a _stationarius librorum_; and Minghinus as a _stationarius
peciarum_. Here we have in one year record of three classes of scribes
being at work. They were all noted as being doctors of the law, and
they all appear on the list of persons exempt from military service.

Later in the same century, a certain Cervotti, who had inherited from
a deceased brother a collection of books, undertook to use these
for profit by offering them for hire. The list of the books, drawn
up by the notary Noscimpax, has been preserved, and includes twenty
different works. Certain of these are collections of the university
lectures in the Faculty of law, and the others have also, in the main,
to do with the subject of jurisprudence. The first book on the list
is _Diversitates Dominorum_, and the last _Margarita Gallacerti_,
which latter does not appear properly to belong to the subject of
jurisprudence.

In the year 1400, there is reference to a scribe named Moses and
specified as a Jew, which, in view of the university regulations
previously referred to prohibiting the sale of books by Jews or to
Jews, is noteworthy.

The entry appears at the close of a manuscript of Bartholomæus
Brixiensis:

_Emi hunc librum anno domini MCCCC die XXI. Mensis novembris a Moysi
Judeo pro viii. florenes._

Kirchhoff is of opinion that Moses must have been a travelling pedlar,
as it is difficult to believe that a Jew could have at that time
secured the post of a licensed university scribe.[347]

In Verona, there is reference to a certain Bonaventura, who is recorded
as a _scriptor_, and who seems to have occasionally utilised for his
manuscript work the hand of a woman. An inscription on one of the
manuscripts by Bonaventura, quoted by Endlicher, reads as follows:

  _Dextra scriptoris careat gravitate doloris.
  Detur pro penna scriptori pulchra puella._[348]

In Florence, the earliest _librarius_ of note was probably Johannes
Aretinus, whose work continued during the years between 1375-1417.
Ambrosius Camaldulensis, who had so much to do with books and with
literature, takes pains, in a letter written in 1391, to send a cordial
greeting to the _librarius_ Aretinus.[349] Bandini prints a letter
of Petrarch’s in which the latter refers to Aretinus as a friend for
whom he has a high regard and as a man of exceptional knowledge and
clearness of insight, and specifies, as works that he valued highly,
nine manuscripts which had been written by the hand of Aretinus.
These included Aristotle’s treatise on Ethics, several Essays of
Cicero, the Histories of Livy, Cicero’s Orations, Barbari on Marriage,
etc.

Kirchhoff gives a list of fourteen other Florentine _librarii_, whose
work extended over the years between 1410 and 1480. The latter date is
sixteen years later than the introduction of the printing-press into
Italy.

The most noteworthy by far of these manuscript-dealers of Florence
was Philippi Vespasiano, who has been previously referred to, and
who is to be ranked not only as the most important publisher of the
manuscript period, but as one of the great scholars of his time, and
as a man whose friendship was cherished by not a few of the leaders of
thought during the earlier period of the Renaissance. In one of the
Florentine collections has been preserved a number of letters written
to Vespasiano by his scholarly friends between the years 1446 and
1463, and these letters show how honoured a position he held in the
generation of his time. He was, in fact, in character and in ambition,
as well as in the nature of his work, a worthy predecessor of Aldus,
and he lived long enough himself to have seen some of the productions
of the Aldine Press.

In his earlier years, Vespasiano was for a time secretary to Cardinal
Branda in Rome, and it is during this time that he devoted himself
earnestly to classic studies. It was while he was in Rome that he
began work upon a literary undertaking of his own, which comprised a
series of Memoirs of the noteworthy men of his time with whom he had
come into relations. The Medici, Duke Borso of Ferrara, and other of
the scholarly nobles made large use of Vespasiano’s collections of
manuscripts and facilities for producing authentic transcripts.

He was one of the Italian dealers whose agents were actively at work
in Greece and in Asia Minor in the collecting of manuscripts, and the
clients to whom he supplied such manuscripts included correspondents
in Paris, Basel, Vienna, and Oxford.

In the Bodleian Library in Oxford is a codex containing certain works
of Cyprian, on the first sheet of which is inscribed:

_Vespasianus librarius Florentinus hunc librum Florentiæ transcribendum
curavit._ (Vespasian, a Florentine _librarius_, had this book
transcribed at Florence.)

Another manuscript in the same collection, containing a commentary on
some comedies of Terence, is inscribed as follows:

_Vespasianus librarius Florentinus fecit scribi Florentiæ._ (Vespasian,
a Florentine _librarius_, had this book written in Florence.)

Both codices are beautiful examples of the best manuscript work of the
period.[350]

There are various references of the time showing that manuscripts
which bore the stamp of Vespasiano were not only beautiful in their
form, but possessed probably a higher authority than the work of any
other manuscript-dealer of the age for completeness and for accuracy.
He took contracts for the production of great libraries, and it is
recorded that, in preparing for Cosimo de’ Medici a collection of two
hundred works, he employed forty-five scribes for a term of twenty-two
months.[351] Vespasiano died in 1496, one year later than the
establishment in Venice of the Aldine Press.

Agnolo da Sandro is described as a _bidellus_, a manuscript-dealer,
in Florence as late as 1498, at which time the trade in manuscripts
must already have begun very seriously to diminish. Niccolo di Giunta,
who was active in the manuscript trade in Florence towards the end of
the fifteenth century, is famous as having been the founder of the
family of Giunta or Junta, which later took such an important part in
printing and publishing undertakings in Italy.

In Perugia, the first record of a manuscript-publisher bears date as
late as 1430. The name is Bontempo, and his inscription appears on a
parchment copy of an _Infortiatum_.

While there are various references to manuscript-dealers in Milan of an
early date, the first inscription bears date as late as 1452. The name
is Melchoir, who is described as a “dealer of note.” Filelfo speaks of
Melchoir as having copies of Cicero’s _Letters_ for sale at ten ducats
each.[352]

Paolo Soardo, who was in business between 1470 and 1480, is described
as an apothecary and also as a dealer in _delicatessen_, but he seems
to have added to his employment that of a manifolder and seller of
manuscripts.

Jacobus Antiquarius speaks of having purchased from Paolo in 1480 a
Roman history for the sum of one _aureus_. In Padua, Jacob, a Jew,
succeeded, notwithstanding the university regulations against dealing
in manuscripts by Jews, in carrying on between 1455 and 1460 a business
in the sale of manuscripts. His inscription appears on a number of
classical codices of the time, and in a manuscript of Horace, dating
from the twelfth century, the owner makes reference that he purchased
the same in 1458 from Jacob, the Hebrew _librarius_.[353]

The records of Ferrara give the names of Carnerio, _bibliopola_, and of
several others as doing business in manuscripts between 1440 and 1490.

In Rome the records of 1454 speak of Giovanni and Francisco as
_cartolaji_ and _librarii_, that is to say, dealers in paper and also
in manuscripts. In that year these dealers had for sale among their
things, _Letters of Cicero_ (without which work no well regulated
manuscript-dealer’s collection appears to have been complete) and the
works of Celsus. A copy of the latter was bought for Vespasiano for
the sum of twenty ducats. There is record during the same year of a
certain Spannocchia who also had Cicero’s _Letters_ for sale.

In Genoa there were at this time one or two manuscript-dealers, but, as
before stated, the readers and scholars of Genoa appear for the most
part to have supplied themselves from Florence.

The most important trade in manuscripts during the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, as was the case during the fifteenth century with
the trade in printed books, was carried on in Venice and Florence. As
early as 1390 the inscription of Gabriel Ravenna, _librarius_, appears
in a copy of Seneca’s _Tragedies_.[354] Kirchhoff is of opinion that
Gabriel conducted, during the last fifteen years of the fourteenth
century, an important work-shop for the production of manuscripts.

A year or two later, occurs the name of Michael, a German _librarius_,
but it is possible that Michael’s work was more nearly that of a
secretary than of a manuscript-dealer. As Kirchhoff points out,
it is not always easy at this stage of the trade in manuscripts,
to distinguish between the inscriptions of the manuscript-dealers
certifying to the correctness of the copy sent out from their shops,
and the inscriptions of the scribes or secretaries who, having
completed for this or that employer specific copies of the works
required, added their names as a record on the final sheet.

Reference has already been made to Johannes Aurispa, by far the most
important of the manuscript-dealers of his time and possibly of the
entire Middle Ages. Aurispa was born in 1369 in Sicily. The earlier
years of his life were passed in Constantinople, where he appears to
have held a position of some importance in connection with the Court.
While in Constantinople, he began to make collections of manuscripts,
and he organised there a staff of skilled scribes. In 1423, at the
invitation of his friends, Ambrosius Camaldulensis and Niccolo
de’ Niccoli, he came to Florence, bringing with him an invaluable
collection of 238 manuscripts.

To this store he afterwards added, while in Florence, a further lot of
codices which he had had sent from Constantinople to Messina. At this
time, his interest in the collection of manuscripts appears to have
been a matter of scholarship merely and of sympathy with the efforts
of certain Florentine scholars whom he came to know, to secure the
material for their classical studies.

Later, however, in connection, doubtless, with the many applications
that came to him for transcripts of his codices, he decided to organise
a business as a bookseller and publisher. Before taking this course, he
had, it appears, sought a position as instructor, first in Florence and
afterwards in Bologna and in Ferrara, but had not succeeded in finding
the kind of a post that suited him.

Part of the evidence of his change of mind comes to us through letters
from Filelfo, whose keen scholarly interest brought him into close
relations with men having to do with literary production. Filelfo
writes to Aurispa, in 1440:

_Totus es in librorum mercatura, sed in lectura mallem. Quid enim
prodest libros quotidie, nunc emere, nunc vendere, legere vere
nunquam!_ (You are completely absorbed in the occupation of trading
books, but I should choose that of reading them. For what does it
profit you to buy and sell books every day if you never have time for
their perusal.)

And again in 1441:

_Sed ex tua ista taberna libraria nullus unquam prodit codex, nisi cum
quæstu._[355] (No book ever leaves your book-shop, except at a profit
to you.)

The publishing undertakings of Aurispa were devoted almost entirely to
works of classical literature. Among the authors whose names appear
either in the lists of books offered by him or in the correspondence of
his friends and clients, are as follows:

Philo Judæus, Strabo, Theophrastus, Demosthenes, Xenophon, Proculus,
Homer, Aristarchus, Athenæus, Sophocles, Æschylus, Pindar, Oppian,
Proclus, Eusebius, Gregory, Aristotle, Plutarch, Plotinus, Lucian, Dio
Cassio, Diodorus, and other Greek authors. The Latin writers included
Cicero (of necessity), Virgil, Pliny, Quintilian, Macrobius, Apicius,
and Antonius.

Aurispa seems to have enjoyed the confidence and friendship of all
the noted Italian scholars of his time, and the letters of his
correspondents speak with very cordial appreciation as well of the
importance of his services to literature, as of the extent of the
accuracy of his own scholarship. The only correspondent with whom
he appears to have had any trouble was Filelfi, but if Filelfi had
not managed to have friction with Aurispa, the bookseller would have
been an exception among the contemporaries of this irritable and
self-sufficient scholar.

In 1450, being then well advanced in years, Aurispa gave up his
business undertakings, took priestly orders, and lived thereafter as a
_scriba apostolicus_, dividing his time between Ferrara and Rome. He
declined tempting offers, made through his friend Panormita, to join
the literary circle of King Alphonso which had been brought together
about the Court in Naples.

After Aurispa’s death, Filelfo gave to his son-in-law, Sabbatinus, a
very cordial word of appreciation of the services and of the character
of the publisher. A portion of the manuscripts belonging to Aurispa’s
collection was purchased in 1461 by Duke Borso of Ferrara for two
hundred ducats.

A large collection of manuscripts was, however, in Aurispa’s
possession at the time of his death, and these were taken charge of by
Bartholomæus Facius, and, after various vicissitudes, many of them have
since found place in existing collections of Florence, Venice, Vienna,
Paris, and London. A selection of the letters between Aurispa and his
near friend Camaldulensis has also been preserved.

=Books in Spain.=--At the time when the great manuscript-dealers
of Venice and Florence were carrying on business with the literary
centres of France, Germany, and England, they had some dealings
also with Spain; but their correspondence was practically limited
to the University of Salamanca, which had been founded about 1220.
The literary activities of Spain during the fifteenth century were
certainly much less important than those of either Italy or France.
They were of necessity seriously hampered by the long series of wars
with the Moors, while the final overthrow in 1492 of the Moorish
kingdom of Granada doubtless had, as one of many results, a decidedly
unfavourable influence upon the intellectual development and the
literary possibilities of the Peninsula. For two centuries or more
the scholars of the Moorish kingdom had busied themselves in making
collections of Arabic literature, while of not a few of the more
noteworthy works they caused to be prepared versions in Latin, by means
of which the books were made available for the use of instructors and
students in Salerno, Bologna, Padua, and Paris. It was the case also
that the first knowledge of certain Greek authors came to the scholars
of Europe through the Latin translations which were produced in Cordova
from the Arabic versions. The Moorish scholars thus became a connecting
link for the transmission to the Western world of the philosophy and
learning of the East. Until its conquest and practical destruction by
the Spaniards in 1236, Cordova had been not only the political capital
but the centre of the intellectual life of the Moorish kingdom, so that
it was spoken of as the Athens of the West. At the close of the tenth
century it is said to have contained nearly one million inhabitants. In
connection with the work of its university and of the great library,
a large body of skilled scribes were busied with the manifolding of
manuscripts, and there appears to have been a regular exchange of
manuscripts between Cordova and Baghdad.

In the year 995, Thafar Al-baghdádé, the chief of the scribes of his
time, came from Baghdad and settled in Cordova. The Khalif Al-hakem
took him into his service and employed him in transcribing books.
The Khalif surpassed every one of his predecessors in the love of
literature and of the sciences, which he himself cultivated with
success and fostered in his dominions. Through his influence, Andalusia
became a great market to which the literary productions of every clime
were immediately brought for sale. He employed merchants and agents to
collect books for him in distant countries, remitting for the purpose
large sums of money from the treasury, until, says the chronicler, “the
number of books in Andalusia exceeded all calculation.” The Khalif
sent presents of money to celebrated authors in the East with a view
to encourage the publication of works or to secure the first copies of
these. Hearing, for instance, that Abú-l-faraj of Ispahán had written
a book entitled _Kitábu-l-aghani_ (_The Book of Songs_), he sent him
a thousand dinars of pure gold, in consideration of which he received
a copy of the work before it had been published in Persia. He did the
same thing with Abú Bekr Al-abhari, who had published a commentary on
the _Mokhtassar_.

Al-hakem also collected and employed in his own palace the most skilful
men of his time in the arts of transcribing, binding and illuminating
books. The great library that he brought together remained in the
palace of Cordova, until, during a siege of the city by the Berbers,
Hájib Wadheh, a freedman of Al-mansúr, ordered portions of the books
to be sold, the remainder being shortly afterwards plundered and
destroyed on the taking of the city. The extent of the collection
is indicated by the description of the catalogue. In the Tekmílah,
Ibun-l-abbáns is quoted by Al-Makkari as saying that the catalogue
comprised forty-four volumes, each volume containing twenty sheets.
Makkari estimates that the library contained no less that four hundred
thousand volumes. It is possible that this number was over-estimated,
at least, if we are to believe the statement of Ibun-l-abbar that the
Khalif Al-hakem had himself read every book in the collection, writing
on the fly-leaf the dates of his perusal and details concerning the
author.

Makkari gives a long list of famous authors who flourished in Andalusia
during the reign of Al-hakem, their productions including works in
law, medicine, history, topography, language, and poetry. One of the
historians, Al-tári-khí, was a paper merchant, and was accordingly
known by the name of Al-Warrak. I do not find record of the names of
any dealers in books or any account of the means employed for their
distribution.[356]

=The Manuscript Trade in France.=--While, in Italy, the more important
part of the trade in manuscripts was carried on outside of the
university circles, in France the university retained in the hands
of its own authorities the control and supervision of the work of
the manuscript-dealers; and the book-trade of the country, not only
during the manuscript period, but for many years after the introduction
of printing, was very directly associated with the university
organisation. The record of the production and of the trade in books
carried on by the _stationarii_, _librarii_, and the printer-publishers
of the university is presented in the chapter on the Making of Books
in the Universities.

During its earlier years, the trade in manuscripts was limited
practically to the city of Paris. The work of the official university
scribes in Paris was very similar to that which has already been
referred to for Bologna. It appears, however, that, in accordance with
the Parisian methods, there was less insistence upon the practice of
hiring manuscripts, either complete or in divisions, and there was an
earlier development of the practice of making an absolute sale of the
texts required.

Kirchhoff traces the beginning of the manuscript-trade back to the
second half of the eleventh century. He says that it is not clear
whether the earlier dealers were able to devote themselves exclusively
to the business of selling books, or whether, as he thinks it more
probable, they associated this business with some other occupation.
Jean de Garland, who compiled a kind of technological directory or list
of industries carried on in Paris in 1060, says: _Paravisus est locus
ubi libri scholarium vendentur_.[357] He is apparently referring to
the Place near the Cathedral Church, which later became the centre of
the Parisian book-trade. Peter of Blois, writing, in the middle of the
twelfth century, to an instructor in jurisprudence in Paris, makes a
more definite reference to the Parisian manuscript-dealers. He speaks
of the great collections of valuable books which the Parisian dealers
have for sale, and laments the narrowness of his purse which prevents
him from purchasing many things which have tempted him.[358]

Bulæus, in his _History of the University of Paris_, published in 1665,
maintains that as early as 1174, the manuscript-dealers of Paris formed
a part of the organisation of the university, and that their work had
been brought fully under the regulation of the university authorities.
The university statistics, before the thirteenth century, do not,
however, appear fully to bear out this contention. The first statutes
which give detailed regulations concerning the book-trade bear date
as late as 1275. These statutes specify what texts and what number of
copies of each text the licensed booksellers should keep in stock, and
give a schedule, as was done in Bologna and Padua, of the prices at
which the loans and sales should be made.

Kirchhoff is of opinion that, prior to the middle of the thirteenth
century, the book-trade connected with the university, while it
had already assumed considerable proportions, had not been brought
thoroughly under university control. With this control came also as an
effect, the privileges which attached to the dealers as members of the
university body, and there is no evidence that the booksellers enjoyed
these privileges before 1250. Depping takes the ground, that during
the fifteenth century the sale of books in Paris was not sufficient to
constitute a business in itself, and that all dealers in books had some
other occupation or means of support, and interested themselves in the
sale of manuscripts only as an additional occupation.[359]

It appears hardly likely, however, that manuscript-dealers should be
able to secure immunity from the general tax, which fell upon nearly
all other classes of dealers, on the ground of the importance of
their trade for education, unless they were able to show that they
were actively engaged in such trade. The regulation quoted by Depping
specifies among the free citizens of the city of Paris who were not
liable to the King’s tax,--_libraires parcheminiers_, _enlumineurs_,
_escriipveins_. It was evidently the intention of the framers of the
law to include under the exemption all dealers upon whose trade the
preparation and sale of manuscripts was directly dependent. Under this
heading were included, of necessity, the scribes, the illuminators (who
added to the text of the scribes the artistic decorations and initial
letters), and (most important of the three) the dealers in parchment.

The fact that the booksellers are named in this schedule separately
from the scribes is an indication of the existence of a bookselling
trade of sufficient importance to call for the work of capitalists
employing in the preparation of their manuscripts the services of
the scribes and of the other workmen required. Work of this kind can
properly be classified as publishing.

The dealer was himself prohibited from making purchase of a manuscript
left in his hands until this had been offered for sale during the term
of not less than one month. Record was to be kept of the name of the
purchaser and of the price received.

The requirement that the price obtained for a manuscript should be
recorded, has secured the preservation, on a number of manuscripts of
the time, of a convenient record of their market value.

In a collection of sermons dating from the latter part of the fifteenth
century, for instance, is the record, “This book was sold for 20
Parisian sols.” In a text of _Ovid_ of about the same time is noted
simply the price,--6 sols, Parisian.[360]

Newly prepared transcripts could not be licensed for renting until
they had been examined and passed as correct by the officials, and
until their renting prices had been placed on record. No new work
could be included in the lists of the _stationarii_ until license for
the same had been secured. At this date, the usual term of rental of
a manuscript was one week, and an additional charge could be made if
the manuscript was held in excess of that time. In case a member of
the university had transcribed an incorrect or incomplete manuscript,
the _stationarius_ was liable to him for damages to cover his wasted
labour. According to the general practice, the hirer of a manuscript
was obliged to deposit a pledge for the same, which pledge could be
disposed of by the _stationarius_ after the term of one year.

In the schedule presented by Chevillier of manuscripts licensed in
the early part of the thirteenth century, the prices specified cover
only the rates for renting. Chevillier points out that there is in
this schedule no indication of the division of the manuscripts into
_pecias_, the practice which was, as we have seen, the usual routine in
the Italian universities.[361]

An appraisal of the books contained in the library of the Sorbonne in
the year 1292 gives a value of 3812 livres, 10 sous, 8 deniers.[362]

The regulations concerning the sale of works on commission were
renewed in 1300, with provisions which must have rendered this class
of business not only unremunerative but peculiarly troublesome. Such
a sale could be made only in the presence of two witnesses. No other
bookseller was at liberty to purchase the book, excepting with the
permission and in the presence of the original owner. Before a sale was
made to a bookseller, the manuscript must be allowed to remain exposed
for sale not less than four days in the library of the Dominican
monastery.

Exceptions to the above regulations were permitted under the express
authority of the Rector of the university in case the original
possessor of the manuscript might be in immediate need of money, a
condition which probably obtained in a large number of cases.

The general purpose of these regulations appears to have been the
prevention of any undue increase in the market price or selling value
of manuscripts, or the “cornering of the market” on the part of the
manuscript-dealers in connection with texts which might be in demand.
Existing regulations of this kind tended, however, naturally to fall
into desuetude.

In 1411, an ordinance of Charles VI. made fresh reference to the
necessity of such supervision, mainly on the ground of the convenience
of tracing stolen manuscripts or unlicensed manuscripts.

In 1342, the _librarii_ were permitted to increase their selling
commission from four deniers to six deniers in the case of manuscripts
sold by them for clients who were not themselves members of the
university. Kirchhoff points out, however, that this commission could
by no means have represented the actual charges made. The University
of Paris claimed the authority to license its _librarii_, and to carry
on business not only in Paris but throughout France. _Librarii_ from
without were, however, strictly prohibited from carrying on business in
Paris.

There were in Paris, in addition to the _stationarii_ and _librarii_,
a certain number of unlicensed dealers who were not members of the
university, and who might be classed as book pedlars. While these book
pedlars enjoyed no university privileges, their business was subjected
to the supervision of the university authorities. It was the purpose
of the regulations to prevent dealers of this kind from taking part in
any higher grade book business. They were, for instance, forbidden to
sell any volume for a higher price than ten sous, which, of necessity,
limited their trade practically to chap-books, broadsides, etc. They
were also forbidden to trade in any covered shops, their business being
carried on in open booths. In case they were at any time found to be
trenching upon the business of the licensed or certified book-dealers
(_libraires jurés_), they forfeited promptly their permits as book
pedlars.

In 1323, the Paris School was the most important in Europe for
theological studies, as that of Bologna was the authority on
jurisprudence, and that of Padua for medicine; and the trade of the
Paris booksellers was, therefore, largely devoted to theological
writings. It is partly on this ground that the records of the
monasteries in which there was scholarly and literary activity make
more frequent reference during this century to Paris as a book centre
than to any one of the Italian cities. When, for instance, King Wenzell
II. of Bohemia, at the time of the founding of the Cistercian abbey of
Königsaal, presented two hundred marks of silver for the organisation
of its library, the Abbot Conrad had, he reports, no other course to
take than to travel to Paris in order to purchase the books. This was
in the year 1327.[363] Johann Gerson, writing in 1395 to Petrus de
Alliaco, speaks of the wealth of the literary stores available at this
time in Paris. The list that he gives as an example of these treasures
is devoted exclusively to theological works.

While it is difficult to understand from the evidence available
what machinery may have been in existence during the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries for the distribution of the books, there are
various references to indicate that such distribution took place
promptly over a very considerable territory. The anonymous author of
a polemical tract, written in order to point out the errors of some
heretical production, says:

_Is autem erroneus liber positus fuit publice ad exemplandum Parisius
anno domini 1254. Unde certum est, quod jam publice predicaretur, nisi
boni prelati et predicatores impedirent._[364]

(In Paris in the year of our Lord 1254, this heretical book was openly
given to the scribes to be copied. Whence it is evident what manner of
doctrine would now be set forth to the public had not good priests and
preachers interfered.)

Kirchhoff is of the opinion that there began to be at this time
in connection with the work of the contemporary authors a kind of
publishing arrangement under which the author handed over to the
_stationarii_ or to the _librarii_ his literary production for
multiplication and for publication, either through renting, through
sale, or in both methods. He finds in the manuscript of a tract by
Gerson, which was given to the public in the year 1417, a notice to the
effect that this was published in Paris under the instructions of the
author and under the license of Magister Johannus, Cancellarius.[365]

The work of the manuscript-dealers was carried on in booths or shops in
various open places, but as a rule in the immediate neighbourhood of
the churches. Certain booths were to be found, however, on the bridges
and by the courts of justice; and a neighbourhood particularly resorted
to by the booksellers was the Rue Neuve Notre Dame, where, in the year
1292, out of eight licensed book-sellers, no less than three had their
work-shops. On the bridge Neuf Notre Dame, there were at the time
of its falling, in 1499, a number of booksellers, three of whom are
recorded as having lost their stock through the accident. The places
selected by the earlier dealers in manuscripts became later the centre
of the Parisian trade in printed books.

As a result of their membership in the university, the dealers in
manuscripts shared in the exemption from the taxation enjoyed by the
university body. The royal tax collectors persisted, however, from
time to time in ignoring this right of exemption, and it was therefore
necessary at different periods to secure fresh enactments from the
royal ordinances in order to confirm the privilege. An example of
such an ordinance is that issued by Philip the Fair, in 1307. In the
cases in which the university placed an impost upon its members for
any special purpose, the manuscript dealers were, of course, obliged
to assume their share of such impost. At the time of their acceptance
as official or licensed dealers, they had to pay a fee, in the first
place of four sous, but after 1467 of eight sous. For the privilege
of keeping an open shop, the fee was twenty-four sous. A further fee
of eight sous was payable for each apprentice, and a weekly payment
of twelve deniers payable for each workman. These fees went into the
treasury of the booksellers’ corporation.

After 1456, under the enactment of the congregation of the university,
each manuscript dealer and paper dealer was called upon to pay to the
Rector of the university at the time of his acceptance and license a
_scutum_ of gold.

The four _taxatores_, the officials charged with the supervision of
the fees for the booksellers’ guild (usually the four senior or most
important members of the guild), were also charged with the selection
or approval of new members and with the supervision of the proper
carrying out of the various regulations controlling the organisations
of the guild. In the earlier period of the work, such censorship as
was found necessary concerning the books to be published was exercised
through these four taxators. They were also the official representative
body of the university guild.

In case any member of the guild suffered injury from unauthorised
competition, the guild had the power to suspend the business operation
with the person charged with committing the injury, until the complaint
could be passed upon. In case the rules of the corporation had been
broken, the corporation appears to have had the power, at least up
to the beginning of the fifteenth century, of withdrawing the trade
privilege or license.

The taxators or _principales jurati_, as they were sometimes called,
had power to proceed not only to supervise the business undertaking of
the members of the guild, but were also authorised to take measures
against the outside or unlicensed booksellers and to proceed, if
necessary, even to the point of seizure and confiscation of their
goods. In carrying out such measures, they were empowered to call upon
the university bedels for co-operation.

These unlicensed dealers or book pedlars, as they increased in numbers,
naturally attempted to withdraw themselves from the jurisdiction and
supervision of the university authorities. An ordinance of Charles VI.,
dated June 20, 1411, confirms specifically the right of control over
the entire book-trade, and prohibits pedlars, dealers, hucksters, etc.,
from taking part in the selling of manuscripts, “of which business
they could have no understanding.” The edict went on to specify that
the carrying on of the book business by ignorant and irresponsible
dealers not only caused injury to the licensed book-dealers, but was
a wrong upon the public, in that it furthered the circulation of
incorrect, incomplete, and fraudulent manuscripts. This ordinance was
doubtless issued at the instance of the book-dealers’ guild, but it
is evident that it was not strictly carried out, as from year to year
there are renewed complaints of the competition of these ignorant and
irresponsible book pedlars.

It was considered important, in order to insure the proper control by
the university over the book-trade and the interests of the scholars
who depended upon the book-dealers for their text-books, that the
trade in the materials used in the manifolding of books should also be
strictly supervised. The special purpose of the university authorities
was to prevent any “cornering of the market” in parchment, and to
insure that the supply of this should be regular and uniform in price.

Under the ordinance of 1291, the dealers in parchment were forbidden
to keep any secret stores of the same, but were obliged to keep on file
with the managers of the book guild the record of the stock carried by
them from month to month. The parchment-dealers licensed to do business
in Paris were forbidden to sell parchment to dealers from outside of
Paris. On the first day of the Trade Fair, when foreign dealers brought
parchment to Paris for sale, the Parisian dealers were forbidden
themselves to make purchases, this day being reserved for such
purchases as the university officials might desire to make. In case,
after the first day of the Fair, a foreign dealer in parchment had
before him more applications for his stock than could be supplied, and
among the applicants there should be one representing the university,
the latter was to be served first. Outside of the time of the official
Fair, the Paris dealers in parchment were allowed to make purchases of
their material only in the monastery of S. Mathurin.

In case between the times of the Fair a foreign dealer or manufacturer
of parchment came to Paris, he was obliged to place his stock in
this same monastery and to give information concerning this deposit
to the Rector of the university. The Rector sent a representative to
examine and to schedule the parchment, and the stock was priced by
four of the licensed parchment-dealers associated with the university.
The university authorities had then for twenty-four hours the first
privilege of purchase. This regulation was applied also to the
parchment-trade carried on at the Fair of St. Germain.

It is evident from the many renewed edicts and ordinances referring
to this trade that it was not easy to carry out such regulations
effectively, and that much friction and dissatisfaction was produced by
them. It seems probable also that, with the trade in parchment as in
other trades, the attempt to secure uniformity of price, irrespective
of the conditions of manufacture or of the market, had the effect not
infrequently of lessening the supply and of causing sales to be made
surreptitiously at increased prices.

After the use of parchment had in large part been replaced by paper
made of linen, the supplies of Paris came principally from Lombardy.
Later, however, paper-mills were erected in France, the first being
at Troyes and Esson. These earlier paper manufacturers were, like the
book-dealers in Paris, made free from tax. This exemption was contested
from time to time by the farmers of the taxes and had to be renewed
by successive ordinances. Later, the university associated with its
body, in the same manner as had been done with the parchment-dealers,
the manufacturers and dealers in paper, and confirmed them in the
possession of the privileges previously enjoyed by the _librarii_ and
_stationarii_. The privileges of the paper manufacturers extended,
however, outside of Paris, which was, of course, not the case with the
_librarii_.

While, in connection with the requirements of the university and
the special privileges secured through university membership, the
book-trade of Paris and the trades associated with it secured a larger
measure of importance as compared with the trade of the provinces than
was the case in either Italy or Germany, there came into existence as
early as the middle of the fourteenth century a considerable trade in
manuscripts in various provincial centres.

In Montpellier, the university was, as in Paris, a centre for
publishing undertakings, but in Angers, Rouen, Orleans, and Toulouse,
in which there are various references to book-dealers as early as
the beginning of the fourteenth century, the trade must have been
supported by a public largely outside of the university organisation.
The statutes of Orleans and of Toulouse, dating from 1341, regulate the
supervision of the trade in manuscripts.

In Montpellier, there appears to have been, during the beginning of
the fourteenth century, a business in the loaning of the manuscripts
and of manuscript _hefts_--_pecias_, similar to that already described
in Bologna. The university authorities, usually the bedels, supervised
the correctness of the _pecias_ and prescribed the prices at which they
should be rented. The _stationarii_ who carried on this business and
also the _venditores librorum_ were members of the university body.
The sale of books on commission was also supervised under regulations
similar to those obtaining in Bologna.

No _stationarius_ was at liberty to dispose of a work placed in his
hands for sale (unless it belonged to a foreigner) until it had been
exposed in his shop for at least six days, and had at least been three
times offered for sale publicly in the auditorium. This offering for
sale was cared for by the _banquerii_, who were the assistants or
tenants of the rectors. These _banquerii_ were also authorised to carry
on the business of the loaning of _pecias_ under the same conditions
as those that controlled the _stationarii_. They were also at liberty,
after the close of the term lectures, to sell their own supplies of
manuscripts (usually of course the copies of the official texts) at
public auction in the auditorium.

It is difficult to understand how, with a trade, of necessity, limited
in extent, and the possible profits of which were so closely restricted
by regulations, there could have been a living profit sufficient to
tempt educated dealers to take up the work of the _stationarii_ or
_librarii_.

It is probably the case, as Kirchhoff, Savigny, and others point
out, that the actual results of the trade cannot be ascertained with
certainty from the texts of the regulations, and that there were
various ways in which, in spite of these regulations, larger returns
could be secured for the work of the scholarly and enterprising
_librarii_.

An ordinance issued in 1411 makes reference to booksellers buying
and selling books both in French or in Latin and gives privilege
to licensed booksellers to do such buying and selling at their
pleasure. This seems to have been an attempt to widen the range of the
book-trade, while reference to books in the vernacular indicates an
increasing demand for literature outside of the circles of instructors
and students.

In the beginning of the fifteenth century, there was, among a number of
the nobles of families in France, a certain increase in the interest of
literature and in the taste for collecting elaborate, ornamented, and
costly manuscripts.

The princely Houses of Burgundy and of Orleans are to be noted in this
connection, and particularly in Burgundy, the influence of the ducal
family was of wide importance in furthering the development of the
trade in manuscripts and the production of literature.

A large number of the manuscripts placed in these ducal family
libraries were evidently originally prepared by scribes having
knowledge only of plain script, and the addition of the initial
letters and of the illuminated head and tail pieces was made later
by illuminators and designers attached to the ducal families. It
was to these latter that fell the responsibility of placing upon
the manuscripts the arms of the owners of the libraries. In case
manuscripts which had been inscribed with family arms came to change
hands, it became necessary to replace these arms with those of the
later purchaser, and many of the illuminated manuscripts of the period
give evidence of such changing of the decorations, decorations which
took the place of the book-plate of to-day.

The taste for these elaborate illuminated manuscripts, each one of
which, through the insertion of individual designs and of the family
arms, became identified with the personality and taste of its owner,
could not easily be set aside, after the middle of the fifteenth
century, by the new art of printing. As a matter of fact, therefore, it
not infrequently happened, towards the latter part of the fifteenth
century, that these noble collectors caused elaborate transcripts to
be made, by hand, of works which were already in print, rather than
to place in their own collection books in the form in which ordinary
buyers could secure them.

By the year 1448, the number of certified _librarii_ in Paris had
increased to twenty-four.[366] Kirchhoff is of opinion that a certain
portion at least of these _librarii_ carried on also other trades, but
it is evident that there had come to be in these years, immediately
preceding the introduction of the printing-press, a very considerable
development in the demand for literature and in the book-trade of the
capital.

In 1489, the list of book-dealers and of those connected with the
manufacture of books who were exempt from taxation included twenty-four
_librarii_, four dealers in parchment, four dealers in paper, seven
paper manufacturers (having mills outside of Paris), two illuminators,
two binders, and two licensed scribes.

In the following year, the list of _librarii_ free from taxation was
reduced to seventeen. It is probable that those _librarii_ whose
names had been taken off the exemption list undertook a general book
business carried on outside of the university regulations, and were
probably able to secure returns more than sufficient to offset the loss
caused by the curtailing of their freedom from taxation and of their
university privileges.

This reduction in the number of manuscript-dealers who remained members
of the corporation was, however, very promptly made up by including in
the corporation the newly introduced printers. As early as 1476, one of
the four officials of the guild was the printer Pasquier Bonhomme.

The cessation of the work of the scribes and the transfer of the
book-trade from their hands to those of the printers took place
gradually after the year 1470, the printers being, as said, promptly
included in the organisation of the guild. There must, however, have
been, during the earlier years at least, not a little rivalry and
bitterness between the two groups of dealers.

An instance of this rivalry is given in 1474, in which year a
_librarius juratus_, named Herman von Stathoen (by birth a German),
died. According to the university regulation, his estate, valued at
800 crowns of gold, (there being no heirs in the country) should have
fallen to the university treasury. In addition to this property in
Paris, Stathoen was part owner of a book establishment in Mayence,
carried on by Schöffer & Henckis, and was unpopular with the Paris
dealers generally on the ground of his foreign trade connections.

Contention was made on behalf of the Crown that the property in Paris
should be confiscated to the royal treasury, and as Schöffer & Henckis
were subjects of the Duke of Burgundy, whose relations with Louis XI.
might be called strained, the influence of the Court was decidedly in
favour of the appropriation of any business interest that they might
have in their partner’s property in Paris. In the contention between
the university and the Crown, the latter proved the stronger, and the
bookseller’s 800 crowns were confiscated for the royal treasury, and at
least got so far towards the treasury as the hands of the chancellor.

As a further result of the issue which had been raised, it was ordered
on the part of the Crown that thereafter no foreigner should have a
post as an official of the university or should be in a position to lay
claim to the exemption and the privileges attaching to such post.

While in Paris the manuscript-dealers had been promptly driven from
the field through the competition of the printers, in Rouen they held
their own for a considerable term of years. The space which had been
assigned to the _librarii_ for their shops at the chief doorway of the
cathedral, continued to be reserved for them as late as 1483, and the
booksellers keeping on sale the printed books, were forbidden to have
any shops at this end of the cathedral, but were permitted to put up,
at their own cost, stalls at the north doorway.

The oldest Paris bookseller whose name has been placed on record is
described as Herneis le Romanceur. He had his shop at the entrance
to Notre Dame. His inscription appeared in a beautiful manuscript
presenting a French translation of the Code of Justinian, a manuscript
dating from the early part of the thirteenth century. It is possible
that Guillaume Herneis, whose name appeared in the tax list of 1292
with a rate of ten livres, was the scribe and the publisher of the
above manuscript, but if this were the case he must have been at the
time of this tax rating well advanced in years.[367] In 1274, the name
of Hugichio le Lombard appears recorded on several manuscripts which
have been preserved in existing collections. In the taxes of 1292,
appears the name of Agnien, _Libraire_, in the Rue de la Boucherie,
assessed for thirty-six sous. The tax is too large to make it probable
that Agnien was a mere pedlar or did business from an open stall, and
it is Géraud’s opinion that he was charged probably as a university
bookseller to whom the tax collector had refused the exemption
belonging to university members.[368]

In the year 1303, the stock of books of a certain Antoine Zeno,
_libraire juré_, was scheduled for taxation. Among the titles included
in this schedule are the commentaries or lectures of Bruno on S.
Matthew (57 pages, price one sol), the same on Mark, Luke, and John,
the commentaries of Alexander on Matthew, the _Opera Fratris Richardi_,
the _Legenda Sanctorum_, various texts of the Decretals, commentaries
of S. Bernard on the Decretals, a treatise of a certain Thomas on
metaphysics, on physics, on the heavens and the earth, and on the soul,
and a series of lectures on ethics, and on politics. The scheduled
price ranged from one sol to eight sols, the latter being the price of
a manuscript of 136 pages. The books were probably confined exclusively
to texts used in the university work.[369]

In 1313, appears in the tax list, assessed for twelve sous, the name of
Nicholas L’Anglois, bookseller and tavern-keeper in Rue St. Jacques.

It is to be noted that the booksellers, and for that matter the traders
generally of the time, are frequently distinguished by the names of
their native countries. It is probable that Nicholas failed to escape
taxation as a bookseller because he was also carrying on business (and
doubtless a more profitable business) in his tavern. The list of 1313
includes in fact but three booksellers, and each of these is described
as having an additional trade.[370]

A document of the year 1332 describes a sale made by a certain Geoffroy
de Saint Léger, a _clerc libraire_, to Gérard de Montagu, _avocat
du roy au parlement_. Geoffroy acknowledges to have sold, ceded,
assigned, and delivered to the said Gérard a book entitled _Speculum
Historiale in Consuetudines Parisienses_, comprised in four volumes,
and bound in red leather. He guarantees the validity of this sale with
his own body, _de son corps mesme_. Gérard pays for the book the sum
of forty Parisian livres, with which sum Geoffroy declares himself
to be content, and paid in full.[371] It appears that the sale of a
book in the fourteenth century was a solemn transaction, calling for
documentary evidence as specific as in the case of the transfer of real
estate.

In the year 1376, Jean de Beauvais, a _librarius juratus_, is recorded
as having sold various works, including the Decretals of Gregory
IX., illustrated with miniatures, a copy of _Summa Hostiensis_, 423
parchment leaves, illustrated with miniatures, and a codex of Magister
Thomas de Maalaa.[372]

In the year 1337, Guidomarus de Senis, master of arts and _librarius
juratus_, renews his oath as a taxator. He seems to have put into his
business as bookseller a certain amount of literary gaiety, if one may
judge from the lines added at the end of a parchment codex sold by him,
which codex contains the poems of Guillaume de Marchaut.

The lines are as follows:

  _Explicit au mois d’avril,
  Qui est gai, cointe et gentil,
  L’an mil trois cent soixante et onze.
  D’Avril la semaine seconde,
  Acheva à un vendredi,
  Guiot de Sens c’est livre si,
  Et le comansa de sa main,
  Et ne fina ne soir ne matin,
  Tant qu’il eut l’euvre accomplie,
  Louée soit la vierge Marie._[373]

Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, was one of the more important book
collectors of his time. In 1386, the Duke paid to Martin L’Huillier,
dealer in manuscripts and bookbinder, sixteen francs for binding
eight books, six of which were bound in grain leather.[374] The Duke
of Orleans also appears as a buyer of books, and in 1394, he paid to
Jehan de Marsan, master of arts and dealer in manuscripts, twenty
francs in gold for the _Letters of S. Pol_, bound in figured silk, and
illuminated with the arms of the Duke.

Four years later, the Duke makes another purchase, paying to Jehan one
hundred _livres tournois_ for a Concordance to the Bible in Latin, an
illuminated manuscript bound in red leather, stamped.

The same Duke, in 1394, paid forty gold crowns to Olivier, one of the
four principal _librarii_, for a Latin text of the Bible, bound in
red leather, and in 1396, this persistent ducal collector pays sixty
livres to a certain Jacques Jehan, who is recorded as a grocer, but who
apparently included books in his stock, for the _Book of the Treasury_,
a book of Julius Cæsar, a book of the King, _The Secret of Secrets_,
and a book of Estrille Fauveau, bound in one volume, illuminated, and
bearing the arms of the Duke of Lancaster. Another volume included
in this purchase was the _Romance of the Rose_, and the _Livres des
Eschez_, “moralised,” and bound together in one volume, illuminated in
gold and azure.[375]

In 1399, appears on the records the name of Dyne, or Digne Rapond,
a Lombard. Kirchhoff speaks of Rapond’s book business as being with
him a side issue. Like Atticus, the publisher of Cicero, Rapond’s
principal business interest was that of banking, in which the Lombards
were at that time pre-eminent throughout Europe. In connection with
his banking, however, he accepted orders from noble clients and
particularly from the Duke of Burgundy, for all classes of articles of
luxury, among which were included books.

In 1399, Rapond delivered to Philip of Burgundy, for the price of five
hundred livres, a _Livy_ illuminated with letters of gold and with
images, and for six thousand francs a work entitled _La Propriété de
Choses_. A document, bearing date 1397, states that Charles, King of
France, is bound to Dyne Rapond, merchant of Paris, for the sum of 190
francs of gold, for certain pieces of tapestry, for certain shirts,
and for four great volumes containing the chronicles of France. He is
further bound in the sum of ninety-two francs for some more shirts,
for a manuscript of Seneca, for the Chronicles of Charlemagne, for
the Chronicles of Pepin, for the Chronicles of Godefroy de Bouillon,
the latter for his dear elder son Charles, Dauphin. The King further
purchases certain hats, handkerchiefs, and some more books, for which
he instructs his treasurer in Paris to pay over to said Rapond the
sum of ninety francs in full settlement of his account; the document
is signed on behalf of the King by his secretary at his château of
Vincennes.[376]

Jacques Rapond, merchant and citizen of Paris, probably a brother of
Dyne, also seems to have done a profitable business with Philip of
Burgundy, as he received from Philip, for a Bible in French, 9000
francs, and in the same year (1400), for a copy of _The Golden Legend_,
7500 francs.

Nicholas Flamel, scribe and _librarius juratus_, flourished at the
beginning of the thirteenth century. He was shrewd enough, having made
some little money at work as a bookseller and as a school manager, to
carry on some successful speculations in house building, from which
speculations he made money so rapidly that he was accused of dealings
with the Evil One. One of the houses built by him in Rue Montmorency
was still standing in 1853, an evidence of what a clever publisher
might accomplish even in the infancy of the book business.

The list of booksellers between the years 1486-1490 includes the name
of Jean Bonhomme, the name which has for many years been accepted
as typical of the French bourgeois. This particular Bonhomme seems,
however, to have been rather a distinctive man of his class. He calls
himself “bookseller to the university,” and was a dealer both in
manuscripts and in printed books. On a codex of a French translation
of _The City of God_, by S. Augustine, is inscribed the record
of the sale of the manuscript by Jean Bonhomme, bookseller to the
University of Paris, who acknowledges having sold to the honoured
and wise citizen, Jehan Cueillette, treasurer of M. de Beaujeu, this
book containing _The City of God_, in two volumes, and Bonhomme
guarantees to Cueillette the possession of said work against all. His
imprint as a bookseller appears upon various printed books, including
the _Constitutiones Clementinæ_, the _Decreta Basiliensia_, and the
_Manuale Confessorum_ of Joh. Nider.

Among the cities of France outside of Paris in which there is record
of early manuscript-dealers, are Tours, Angers, Lille, Troyes, Rouen,
Toulouse, and Montpellier. In Lille, in 1435, the principal bookseller
was Jaquemart Puls, who was also a goldsmith, the latter being probably
his principal business. In Toulouse, a bookseller of the name of
S. Julien was in business as early as 1340. In Troyes, in the year
1500, Macé Panthoul was carrying on business as a bookseller and as a
manufacturer of paper. In connection with his paper-trade, he came into
relations with the book-dealers of Paris.

=Manuscript Dealers in Germany.=--The information concerning the
early book-dealers in Germany is more scanty, and on the whole
less interesting, than that which is available for the history of
bookselling in Italy or in France. There was less wealth among the
German nobles during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and fewer
among the nobles who had means were interested in literary luxuries
than was the case in either France, Burgundy, or Italy.

As has been noted in the preceding division of this chapter, the
references to the more noteworthy of the manuscript-dealers in France
occur almost entirely in connection with sales made by them to the
members of the Royal Family, to the Dukes of Burgundy, or to other of
the great nobles. The beautifully illuminated manuscript which carried
the coat-of-arms or the crest of the noble for whom it was made,
included also, as a rule, the inscription of the manuscript-dealer by
whom the work of its preparation had been carried on or supervised,
and through whom it had been sold to the noble purchaser. Of the
manuscripts of this class, the record in Germany is very much smaller.
Germany also did not share the advantages possessed by Italy, of close
relations with the literature and the manuscript stores of the East,
relations which proved such an important and continued source of
inspiration for the intellectual life of the Italian scholars.

The influence of the revival of the knowledge of Greek literature
came to Germany slowly through its relations with Italy, but in the
knowledge of Greek learning and literature the German scholars were
many years behind their Italian contemporaries, while the possession of
Greek manuscripts in Germany was, before the middle of the fifteenth
century, very exceptional indeed. The scholarship of the earlier German
universities appears also to have been narrower in its range and more
restricted in its cultivation than that which had been developed in
Paris, in Bologna, or in Padua. The membership of the Universities of
Prague and of Vienna, the two oldest in the German list, was evidently
restricted almost entirely to Germans, Bohemians, Hungarians, etc.,
that is to say, to the races immediately controlled by the German
Empire.

If a scholar of England were seeking, during the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, special instruction or special literary and
scholarly advantages, his steps were naturally directed towards Paris
for theology, Bologna for jurisprudence, and Padua for medicine, and
but few of these travelling English scholars appear to have taken
themselves to Prague, Vienna, or Heidelberg.

In like manner, if English book collectors were seeking manuscripts,
they betook themselves to the dealers in Paris, in Florence, or in
Venice, and it was not until after the manuscript-trade had been
replaced by the trade in the productions of the printing-press that the
German cities can be said to have become centres for the distribution
of literature.

Such literary interests as obtained in Germany during the fourteenth
century, outside of those of the monasteries already referred to,
centred nevertheless about the universities. The oldest of these
universities was that of Prague, which was founded in 1347, more
than a century later than the foundations of Paris and Bologna. The
regulations of the University recognised the existence of scribes,
illuminators, correctors, binders, dealers in parchment, etc., all of
which trades were placed under the direct control of the university
authorities.

Hauslik speaks of the book-trade in the fourteenth century as being
associated with the work of the library of the university, and refers
to licensed scribes and illuminators, who were authorised to make
transcripts, for the use of the members of the university, of the texts
contained in the library.[377]

If we may understand from this reference that the university
authorities had had prepared for the library authenticated copies of
the texts of the works required in the university courses, and that the
transcribing of these texts was carried on under the direct supervision
of the librarians, Prague appears to have possessed a better system for
the preparation of its official texts than we have record of in either
Bologna or Paris. Hauslik goes on to say that the entire book-trade of
the city was placed under the supervision of the library authorities,
which authorities undertook to guarantee the completeness and the
correctness of all transcripts made from the texts in the library.
Kirchhoff presents in support of this theory examples of one or two
manuscripts, which contain, in addition to the inscription of the name
of the scribe or dealer by whom it had been prepared, the record of the
corrector appointed by the library to certify to the correctness of the
text.[378]

The second German university in point of date was that of Vienna,
founded in 1365, and, in connection with the work of this university
the manuscript-trade in Germany took its most important development.
There is record in Vienna of the existence of _stationarii_ who carried
on, under the usual university supervision, the trade of hiring out
_pecias_, but this was evidently a much less important function than in
Bologna.

The buying and selling of books in Vienna was kept under very close
university supervision, and without the authority of the rector or of
the bedels appointed by him for the purpose, no book could be purchased
from either a _magister_ or a student, or could be accepted on pledge.

The books which had been left by deceased members of the university
were considered to be the property of the university authorities, and
could be sold only under their express directions. The commission
allowed by the authorities for the sale of books was limited to 2½ per
cent., and before any books could be transferred at private sale, they
must be offered at public sale in the auditorium. The purpose of this
regulation was apparently here as in Paris not only to insure securing
for the books sold the highest market prices, but also to give some
protection against the possibility of books being sold by those to whom
they did not belong.

The regulation of the details of the book business appears to have
fallen gradually into the hands of the bedels of the Faculty, and
the details of the supervision exercised approach more nearly to the
Italian than to the Parisian model.

The third German university was that of Heidelberg, founded in 1386.
Here the regulations concerning the book-trade were substantially
modelled upon those of Paris. The scribes and the dealers in
manuscripts belonged to the privileged members of the university.
The provisions in the foundation or charter of the university, which
provided for the manuscript-trade, make express reference to the
precedents of the University of Paris.

By the middle of the fifteenth century, there appears to have been a
considerable trade in manuscripts in Heidelberg and in places dependent
upon Heidelberg. In the library of the University of Erlangen, there
exists to-day a considerable collection of manuscripts formerly
belonging to the monastery of Heilsbronn, which manuscripts were
prepared in Heidelberg between 1450 and 1460. The series includes
a long list of classics, indicating a larger classical interest in
Heidelberg than was to be noted at the time in either Prague or
Vienna.[379]

The University of Cologne, founded a few years later, became the centre
of theological scholarship in Germany, and the German manuscripts
of the early part of the fifteenth century which have remained in
existence and which have to do with theological subjects were very
largely produced in Cologne. A number of examples of these have been
preserved in the library of Erfurt.

One reason for the smaller importance in Germany of the _stationarius_
was the practice that obtained on the part of the instructors of
lecturing or of reading from texts for dictation, the transcripts being
made by the students themselves. The authority or permission to read
for dictation was made a matter of special university regulation. The
regulation provided what works could be so utilised, and the guarantee
as to the correctness of the texts to be used could either be given
by a member of the faculty of the university itself or was accepted
with the certified signature of an instructor of a well known foreign
university, such as Paris, Bologna, or Oxford.

By means of this system of dictation, the production of manuscripts
was made much less costly than through the work of the _stationarii_,
and the dictation system was probably an important reason why the
manuscript-trade in the German university cities never became so
important as in Paris or London.

It is contended by the German writers that, notwithstanding the
inconsiderable trade in manuscripts, there was a general knowledge of
the subject-matter of the literature pursued in the university, no
less well founded or extended among the German cities than among those
of France or Italy. This familiarity with the university literature
is explained by the fact that the students had, through writing at
dictation, so largely possessed themselves of the substance of the
university lectures.

In the Faculty of Arts at Ingolstadt, it was ordered, in 1420, that
there should be not less than one text-book (that is to say, one copy
of the text-book) for every three scholars in baccalaureate. This
regulation is an indication of the scarcity of text-books.

The fact that the industry in loaning manuscripts to students was
not well developed in the German universities delayed somewhat the
organisation of the book-trade in the university towns. Nevertheless,
Richard de Bury names Germany among the countries where books could be
purchased, and Gerhard Groote speaks of purchasing books in Frankfort.
This city became, in fact, important in the trade of manuscripts for
nearly a century before the beginning of German printing.[380]

Æneas Silvius says in the preface of his _Europa_, written in 1458,
that a _librarius teutonicus_ had written to him shortly before, asking
him to prepare a continuation of the book “_Augustalis_.”[381] This
publishing suggestion was made eight years after the perfection of
Gutenberg’s printing-press, but probably without any knowledge on the
part of the _librarius_ of the new method for the production of books.

In Germany there was, during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries,
outside of the ecclesiastics, very little demand for reading matter.
The women had their psalters, which had, as a rule, been written out
in the monasteries. As there came to be a wider demand for books
of worship, this was provided for, at least in the regions of the
lower Rhine, by the scribes among the Brothers of Common Life. The
Brothers took care also of the production of a large proportion of the
school-books required.

During the fourteenth century and the first half of the fifteenth,
the Brothers took an active part in the production and distribution
of manuscripts. Their work was distinct in various respects from
that which was carried on in monastery or in university towns, but
particularly in this that their books were, for the most part, produced
in the tongue of the common folk, and their service as instructors
and booksellers was probably one of the most important influences in
helping to educate the lower classes of North Germany to read and to
think for themselves. They thus prepared the way for the work of Luther
and Melanchthon.

As has been noted in another chapter, the activity of the Brothers in
the distribution of literature did not cease when books in manuscripts
were replaced by the productions of the printing-press. They made
immediate use of the invention of Gutenberg, and in many parts of
Germany, the first printed books that were brought before the people
came from the printing-presses of the Brothers.

Some general system of public schools seems to have taken shape in
the larger cities at least of North Germany as early as the first half
of the thirteenth century. The teachers in these schools themselves
added to their work and to their earnings by transcribing text-books
and sometimes works of worship. Later, there came to be some extended
interest in certain classes of literature among a few of the princes
and noblemen, but this appears to have been much less the case in
Germany than in Italy or even than in France. In the castles or palaces
where there was a chaplain, the chaplain took upon himself the work of
a scribe, caring not only for the correspondence of his patron, but
occasionally also preparing manuscripts for the library, so called, of
the castle. There is also record of certain _stadtschreiber_, or public
scribes, licensed as such in the cities of North Germany, and in some
cases the post was held by the instructors of the schools.

Ulrich Friese, a citizen of Augsburg, writing in the latter half of
the fourteenth century, speaks of attending the Nordlingen Fair with
parchment and books. Nordlingen Church was, it appears, used for the
purpose of this fair, and in Lübeck, in the Church of S. Mary, booths
were opened in which, together with devotional books, school-books and
writing materials were offered for sale.

In Hamburg also, the courts in the immediate neighbourhood of the
churches were the places selected by the earlier booksellers and
manuscript-dealers for their trade. In Metz, a book-shop stood
immediately in front of the cathedral, and in Vienna, the first
book-shop was placed in the court adjoining the cathedral of S.
Stephen. Nicolaus, who was possibly the earliest bookseller in Erfurt,
had his shop, in 1460, in the court of the Church of the Blessed Virgin.

From a school regulation of Bautzen, written in 1418, it appears
that the children were instructed to purchase their school-books
from the master at the prices fixed in the official schedule.[382]
A certain schoolmaster in Hagenau, whose work was carried on between
1443 and 1450, has placed his signature upon a considerable series of
manuscripts, which he claims to have prepared with his own hands, and
which were described in Wilken’s History of the library in Heidelberg.
His name was Diebold Läber, or, as he sometimes wrote it, Lauber,
and he describes himself as a writer, _schreiber_, in the town of
Hagenau. This inscription appears in so many manuscripts that have been
preserved, that some doubt has been raised as to whether they could
be all the work of one hand, or whether Lauber’s name (imprint, so to
speak) may not have been utilised by other scribes possibly working in
association with him.[383]

Lauber speaks of having received from Duke Ruprecht an order for
seven books, and as having arranged to have the manuscripts painted
(decorated or illuminated) by some other hand. Lauber is recorded as
having been first a school-teacher and an instructor in writing, later
a scribe, producing for sale copies of standard texts, and finally a
publisher, employing scribes, simply certifying with his own signature
to the correctness of the work of his subordinates. There is every
indication that he had actually succeeded in organising in Hagenau, as
early as 1443, an active business in the production and distribution of
manuscripts. The books produced by him were addressed more generally
to the popular taste than was the case with the productions of the
monastery scribes.

In part, possibly, as a result of this early activity in the production
of books, one of the first printing-presses in Germany, outside of
that of Gutenberg in Mayence, was instituted in Hagenau, and its work
appears to have been in direct succession to that of the public writer
Lauber.

The relations between Hagenau and Heidelberg were intimate, and the
scholarly service of the members of the university was utilised by the
Hagenau publishers. The book-trade of Hagenau also appears to have been
increased in connection with the development of intellectual activity
given by the Councils of Constance and Basel. In regard to the latter
Council, Kirchhoff quotes Denis as having said:

_Quod concilium, qui scholam librariorum dixerit haud errabit._[384]

Either as a cause or as an effect of the activity of the book
production in Hagenau, the Hagenau schools for scribes during the
first half of the fifteenth century became famous.[385] The work of
producing manuscripts appears to have been divided, according to the
manufacturing system; one scribe prepared the text, a second collated
the same with the original, a third painted in the rubricated initials,
and a fourth designed the painted head-pieces to the pages, while
a fifth prepared the ornamented covers. It occasionally happened,
however, that one scribe was himself able to carry on each division of
the work of the production of an illuminated manuscript.

Hagen quotes some lines of a Hagenau manuscript, as follows:

  _Dis buch vollenbracht vas,
  In der zit, also man schreip vnd las,
  Tusent vnd vyer hundert jar.
  Nach Christus gebort daz ist war,
  Dar nach jn dem eyn vnd siebentzigsten jar,
  Vff sant Pauly bekarung, daz ist ware,
  Von Hans Dirmsteyn, wist vor war,
  Der hait es geschreben vnd gemacht,
  Gemalt, gebunden, vnd gantz follenbracht._[386]

Hagenau was one of the few places of book production (excepting
the workshops of the Brothers of Common Life) in which, during the
manuscript period, books were prepared to meet the requirements of the
common folk. The literature proceeding from Hagenau included not only
“good Latin books,” that is to say, copies of the accepted classics as
used in Heidelberg and elsewhere, but also copies of the famous Epics
of the Middle Ages, the Sagas, Folk Songs, Chap-Books, copies of the
Golden Bull, Bible stories, books of worship, books of popular music,
books of prophecy, and books for the telling of fortunes, etc.[387]

Throughout both Germany and the Low Countries, it was the case that,
during the manuscript period, the work of the school teachers was
closely connected with the work of the producers and sellers of
manuscripts, and the teachers not infrequently themselves built up
a manuscript business. The school ordinance of the town of Bautzen,
dating from the year 1418, prescribed, for example, the prices which
the scholars were to pay to the _locatus_ (who was the fifth teacher in
rank in the institution) for the school-books, the responsibility for
preparing which rested upon him.

A history of the Printers’ Society of Dresden, printed in 1740, gives
examples of some of these prices:

  For one _A. B. C._ and a paternoster, each one groschen.
  For a _Corde Benedicite_, one groschen.
  For a good _Donat_, ten groschens.
  For a _Regulam Moralem et Catonem_, eight groschens.
  For a complete _Doctrinal_, a half mark.
  For a _Primam Partem_, eight groschens.

In case no books are purchased from the _locatus_, there shall be paid
to him by each scholar, if the scholar be rich, two groschens, if he be
in moderate circumstances, one groschen, and if the scholar be poor, he
shall be exempt from payment.[388]

A certain Hugo from Trimberg, who died about 1309, is referred to by
Jaeck as having been a teacher for forty years, at the end of which
term he gave up the work of teaching with the expectation of being
able to make a living out of his collection of books. The collection
comprised two hundred volumes, of which twelve are specified as being
original works, presumably the production of Trimberg himself. Jaeck
does not tell us whether or not the good schoolmaster was able to earn
enough from the manifolding or from the sale of his books to secure a
living in his last years.[389]

Kirchhoff refers to the importance of the fairs and annual markets
for the manuscript trade. It is evident that, in the absence of any
bookselling machinery, it was of first importance for the producers
of copies of such texts as might be within their reach, to come into
relations with each other in order to bring about the exchange of their
surplus copies.

There is record of the sale and exchange of manuscripts, during the
first half of the fifteenth century, at the Fairs of Salzburg, Ulm,
Nordlingen, and Frankfort. It was in fact from its trade in manuscripts
that Frankfort, by natural development, became and for many years
remained the centre of the trade in printed books.[390] Ruland speaks
of one of the most important items of the manuscript-trade at the
Frankfort Fair between 1445 and 1450, being that of fortune-telling
books and illustrated chap-books.

It appears also from the Fair records that in Germany, as in Italy,
the dealers in parchment and paper were among the first to associate
with their goods the sale of manuscripts. In 1470, occurs the earliest
record of sales being made at the fair in Nordlingen of printed
books.[391] The earliest date at which the sale of printed books at
the fair at Frankfort was chronicled was 1480. In 1485, the printer
Peter Schöffer was admitted as a citizen in Frankfort.

While Kirchhoff maintains that the distribution of books in manuscript
was more extensive in Germany than in either France or Italy, and
emphasises particularly the fact that there was among circles
throughout Germany a keener interest in literature than obtained
with either the French or the Italians, he admits that the record of
noteworthy booksellers in Germany, during the manuscript period, is,
as compared with that of France and Italy, inconsiderable. In Cologne,
he finds, as early as 1389, through an inscription in a manuscript
that has been preserved, the name of Horstan de Ledderdam, who called
himself not a _librarius_, but a _libemarius_. The manuscript that
bears this record is a treatise by Porphyry on Aristotle.

In Nordlingen, the tax list of 1407 gives the name of Joh. Minner,
recorded as a _scriptor_. There is an entry of a sale made by Minner to
the Burgermeister Protzen of a German translation of the _Decretals_.
The tax list of 1415 gives the name of Conrad Horn, described as a
_stadtschreiber_. Horn seems to have carried on an extensive business
in the production and the exchange of manuscripts. Kirchhoff quotes a
contract entered into by him in 1427 with a certain Prochsil of Eystet
for the purchase of a _buch_, the title of which is not given, for the
sum of forty-three Rhenish gulden.

The name of Diebold Lauber has already been mentioned. His inscription
appears on a number of manuscripts that have been preserved principally
through the Heidelberg University. On the first sheet of a _Legend
of the Three Holy Kings_ from this library, is written the following
notice, which can be considered as a general advertisement:

    _Item welche hande bücher man gerne hat, gross oder clein,
    geistlich oder weltlich, hübsch gemolt, die findet man alle by
    Diepold Lauber, schreiber in der burge zu hagenow._

Freely translated, this notice would read: “Any books that are desired,
whether great or small, religious or profane, beautifully painted
(adorned), all of these will one find by Diepold Lauber, scribe in
the town of Hagenau.” Among the manuscripts of Lauber, which have
been preserved, is a beautiful copy of _Gesta Romanorum, mit den
viguren gemolt_, a Bible in rhyme (_eine gerymete bibel, ein salter
Latin und Tüstch_). Also a number of _gemolte losbücher_ (illustrated
fortune-telling books), etc.

In Heidelberg, the name of Wolff von Prunow, _bibliopola_, is recorded
early in the fifteenth century, as associated with the university. In
Bruges, in 1425, the list of manuscript-dealers is a more important
one. It begins with Joorquin de Vüc, who is described as a cleric. He
was bookseller to Duke Philip, and is spoken of by Labord as having
had an extensive manuscript factory.[392] Colart Mansion has already
been referred to. He is recorded in 1450 as an _escripvain_, but a
few years later appears in the list of printers and is known as the
friend and associate of Caxton. The books of Duke Philip of Burgundy
include also the name of the bookseller Hocberque, in 1427, and that of
Neste in 1423. In 1456, Morisses de Haat is recorded as an _escripvain
de livres_, who rented out books. In order to do this, he must, as
Kirchhoff points out, have carried some general stock. A certain Herr
van Gruthuyse, a rich collector, of Bruges, bought a number of finely
illuminated manuscripts from Jean Paradis, who was in 1470 made a
member of the _librariers gild_.

Kirchhoff quotes a document dated 1346, the wording of which is in the
form of a contract between Wouters Vos and Jan Standard, described
as manuscript-dealers, “parties of the first part,” and a group of
citizens, “parties of the second part.” The contract has to do with
the transfer of certain books as security for a loan. The list of the
books includes copies of the Codex of Justinian, some essays on taxes,
polities, and rhetoric, a work by Albertus, a treatise by Ægidius, the
Physics of Aristotle, a commentary of Averrhoes, etc. These two dealers
of Bruges seem to have had an important collection of literature for so
early a period.

The manuscript-trade in the Netherlands was more important both in
character and in extent than that carried on in Germany, and it had
also a larger influence upon the general education of the people than
the book-trade of the time in either France or Italy. In France and
in Italy, the earlier book-trade was, as we have noted, connected
principally with the work of the universities. In the Low Countries,
on the other hand, particularly in such centres as Ghent, Antwerp,
and Bruges, there came into existence, during the first half of the
fifteenth century, an active and intelligently conducted business in
the production of books both of a scholarly and of a popular character,
the sale of which was made very largely among the citizens, outside
of the university circles. One reason why the trade in books found a
larger development in Belgium than in Germany, was the greater wealth
of the trading class in the Low Countries. With the wealth, came
cultivation and a taste for luxuries, and among luxuries soon came to
be included art and literature.

As early as 1424, there was instituted a guild of publishers,
_librariers gild_, in Ghent, and a year or two later one in Brussels.
These guilds came into relations in 1450 with the St. Lucas Guild in
Antwerp.

According to Kapp, the first evidences of an organised German trade
in manuscripts are to be found at the beginning of the fifteenth
century. He is, however, convinced that a very considerable exchange
of literary material in manuscripts must have found place at a much
earlier date. There came to be in the German towns and among the
citizen class an earlier interest in literature than there is evidence
of at this time in the same class of any other country of Europe. This
demand for reading matter on the part of the citizen class brought into
existence in Germany (at a time when in Italy, France, and England
there were practically no books in other than the Latin language) a
considerable mass of popular literature written in the vernacular,
and copied out on cheap material in such way as to make possible a
general circulation. This popular circulation of books written for the
common folk was very much facilitated by the introduction into Germany,
as early as the fourteenth century, of paper, which for the cheaper
manuscripts took the place of the old-time parchment.

The Order of Brothers of Common Life carried on their literary work,
so to speak, between the monasteries and the writers of the general
lay community. They had for their first purpose the dissemination of
sound doctrine, but as they were trying to give instruction direct
to the common folk, they put their teachings into the dialect of the
place, and they wrote out in their own monasteries the chap-books and
instruction books which, at times distributed freely from the monastery
centres, came to be very largely sold.

Their work lay between that of the monastery monks and that of the
city scribes in another respect. As before indicated, the work of
the scribes in the _scriptorium_ was performed for no individual
remuneration. If the manuscripts were sold or were exchanged for
property of one kind or another, the benefit of the sale or exchange
accrued to the monastery. On the other hand, the scribes of the cities,
as they came to organise themselves into an accepted trade, arrived at
a system of fixed charges for their work. The Brothers of Common Life,
while living together in monkish centres, did not withdraw themselves
from the life of the world, but made it their first duty, using their
monastery homes simply as a starting-place or place of consultation
or as centres of education, to go out into the highways and by-ways,
teaching what they had to teach direct to the people whom they met; and
as an important means of this instruction they used their facilities
as scribes for manifolding the tracts and the scriptural classics
with which they provided themselves. It was their recognition of the
enormous service that could be secured in influencing a community
through the distribution of books, that made them so prompt in their
appreciation of the value of the printing-press and that caused them to
take place among the first printers of Germany.

The term commonly given to the earlier German scribes was _clericus_,
or _pfaffe_, and nearly every well-to-do nobleman or citizen had a
_clericus_, or _pfaffe_, to take charge of his correspondence and his
accounts.

While the general use of this term indicates the ecclesiastical origin
of the scribes and confirms the previous records to the effect that
the first scribes undoubtedly were monks trained in the monasteries,
it is of course by no means to be accepted as evidence that the art of
writing continued, at least after the fourteenth century, to be limited
to ecclesiastics. As has before been indicated, the monastery schools
accepted very many pupils who had no intention of entering the Church,
but who secured from their monkish teachers a knowledge of reading and
writing.

As early as 1403, mention is made of a certain Heilmannus, formerly
a cleric of the diocese of Trier, licensed as a public scribe (_eyn
offenbar schreiber_). At about the same time, Dr. Conrad Humery, of
Mayence, is referred to in the chronicles as _pfaffe_, _jurist_,
and _chancellor_ of the city. Ulrich Zell, who later became the
first printer in Cologne, was accustomed to add to the imprint of
his works the designation _clericus_ from Hanau in the diocese of
Mayence. Notwithstanding the term _clericus_ and the reference to his
diocese, Ulrich had never been an ecclesiastic.[393] The ecclesiastical
divisions, parishes or dioceses, were utilised in those times, as
political divisions are to-day, as the territorial designations that
would be most readily understood.

The trade in books in manuscript was developed from two great sources.
For a certain special and restricted class of work, the trade came into
existence and continued, as we have seen, for some centuries, in the
Italian universities, in the University of Paris, and in two or three
of the older German universities. Some little time later, the scribes
found place among the hand-workers and dealers of the larger cities.
Their work was at first carried on most actively in connection with
cathedrals and churches, and, later, associated itself with the annual
markets and fairs.

In the trade centres, where the goldsmiths, designers, and illuminators
found profitable occupation, the skilled writers (that is to say, those
who were competent to prepare the elaborately ornamented manuscripts)
soon found occupation, while the writers of common text came to be
employed particularly, as mentioned, in the markets and fairs in
connection with the records and correspondence required for business
transactions.

Throughout the first half of the fifteenth century the production of
manuscripts, which, from the beauty of their script and the artistic
finish of their illustrations and ornamentations, could be classed as
works of art, became an important industry, an industry of which the
centres in Germany and the Low Countries were Bruges, Ghent, Antwerp,
Aix-la-Chapelle, Cologne, Strasburg, Augsburg, Ulm, and Vienna.

As before indicated, the manuscripts produced in the Netherlands and
in Burgundy far surpassed those of Germany and, for that matter, those
of the rest of the world, in beauty and in the elaboration of their
artistic finish and ornamentation. The Dukes of Burgundy took a large
personal interest in this special industry of their dominions, and
their patronage did much to make the art fashionable and to further its
development.

When, after the introduction of printing, the printers and book-makers
instituted their trade-unions or guilds in Ghent and in Bruges, they
absorbed into their organisations the existing associations of fine
writers, scribes, illuminators, etc.

In the library of S. Mark’s, in Venice, there is a beautiful breviary
known as that of Grimani, which was produced in 1478 by certain artists
of Bruges, among whom is mentioned John Memmling, and which was
purchased in 1489, for five hundred ducats, by the Cardinal Grimani.
About the same time, that is to say, between 1468 and 1469, was
produced the copy of Froissart’s Chronicles which had been prepared in
Bruges for the son of Duke Philip of Burgundy, and which is at present
in the possession of the library of the University of Breslau.

The labour of the scribes of the fifteenth century was, however, by no
means exclusively devoted to works of magnificence (_prachtwerke_).
From the shops of the ordinary writers, were produced considerable
masses of text-books, books of worship, cookery books, astrological
treatises, almanacs, and even political tracts. Before the middle
of the century, there are records of licensed scribes carrying on
a general business for the public in Cologne, Frankfort, Augsburg,
Vienna, and even in smaller towns, such as Nordlingen.

The scribes of the universities, who were included among the
university officials, and who, in securing certain university
privileges, subjected themselves also to a rather elaborate series
of restrictions, were naturally not in a position to leave their
university towns to do work in other centres. In fact, it was for
a long time not permitted for them to take up any work outside of
providing the copies required of the authorised university texts.
The scribes who were not associated with any official bodies were,
however, free to carry their work from place to place according as the
varying demand of the seasons of the year, a demand dependent upon the
markets, the fairs, and other special business conditions, might give
opportunity for a profitable use of their labours. The shops of these
town scribes were, as a rule, in the open places, more particularly in
the market, in the neighbourhood of the town hall, or under the shadow
of the cathedral or principal church. Frequently, where the business
was not quite important enough to warrant a shop, it was carried on
under the steps or in the porches of the church or the cathedral, and
sometimes even within the church building, in one of the chapels.

It seems probable that the old-time ecclesiastical associations of
the art (which was still known as “clerical”) may have caused the
authorities having charge of the church buildings to look with special
favour upon these later scribes, so that they were able to secure for
their trade facilities and accommodations which would not have been
afforded to workers or dealers in other occupations.

There is a reference, in 1408, in one of the Strasburg chronicles to
a scribe named Peter von Haselo, who sells books on the steps of the
cathedral of Our Lady.[394] In Cologne the manuscript-dealers took
possession of various corners or angles of the cathedral for their
shops or booths. In Münster the space immediately in front of the
cathedral was allotted to them. In a number of the larger cities the
scribes dealt not only in the productions of their own pens, but in
such ancient manuscripts as they had been able to collect, these
coming for the most part from Italy. It was from this branch of their
business that the booksellers came to be known quite frequently as
_antiquarii_.

While there gradually grew up throughout Germany an active trade in
manuscripts, the record shows an earlier development of this trade in
Italy and France, and even in England. Reference has already been made
to the activity as a book collector of Richard de Bury, who in the
first half of the fourteenth century secured through travelling dealers
manuscripts which had been brought from France and from Italy. De Bury
speaks of these dealers as taking commissions for the delivery of the
manuscripts at such interval of months as would be required for the
long journeys from Oxford to Paris and back, or from Oxford to Florence
or Venice.

It appears, however, that towards the middle of the fifteenth century,
when the work of town scribes in Germany had once begun and the
character of their productions came to be known to the common people,
the circulation of books among the people was more extensive in amount
and more wide-reaching in the territory and the classes of buyers
concerned than was the case in any other state of Europe.

In 1439, some dealers from the Siebengebirge brought from Basel to
Hermannstadt certain political controversies and tracts. Some of
the latter treated of the work of the Council of Basel, and came,
therefore, under the censorship of the Church, and their circulation in
Hermannstadt was forbidden.[395]

Between 1440 and 1450, the records of the annual fairs of Nordlingen
include repeated references to dealings in manuscripts.

After 1460, it is not always easy to determine whether the
specifications of the prices paid for books refer to manuscripts or
to printed copies. On the 27th of March, 1485, Rudolph Agricola, the
librarian of the Elector of the Palatinate, writes to his friend Adolph
Rusch, a bookseller from Strasburg who was at that time in Frankfort,
ordering for his library copies of the following books: Columella, _De
Re Rustica_; Celsus, _De Medicina_; _Macrobii Saturnalia_, _Statii_,
_Opera_, and Silius Italicus. It is certain, says Kirchhoff, that these
books had not yet been printed in Germany, and he is, therefore, of
opinion that Agricola was expecting to secure manuscripts. Kapp points
out, however, that certain of them had already been printed in Italy;
_Columella_, for instance, had been published in a volume with _Cato_
and _Varro_, in Venice in 1472, and in Reggio in 1482.

_Celsus_ appeared in Florence in 1478, and in Milan in 1481;
_Macrobius_, in Venice in 1472 and 1483; _Statius_ in Rome in 1476,
in Milan in 1483; _Silius_ in Rome, in 1471, in Milan in 1480, and in
Parma in 1481.

It seems probable that, in connection with the correspondence between
the scholars of Italy and the instructors in the University of
Heidelberg, news might very easily have come to the librarian of the
Elector of these important classical undertakings, and that he had
naturally desired to secure copies of the books for the Elector’s
library. As far as I can understand from the reference made by
Kapp, there is no record of the result of this order or inquiry,
or of the prices at which Agricola secured or hoped to secure the
books in question. It was undoubtedly the case that, as the work
of the printers, both German and Italian, came to be known to the
book collectors, there was a steady decrease in the prices paid for
manuscripts, until the business of the manuscript-dealers came to be
limited to the sale as curiosities of old codices, and the work of the
scribes in the reproduction of copies ceased altogether.

Reference has already been made to the prices paid during the Middle
Ages for more or less famous manuscripts. The difficulty with the
prices of which we have record is that they vary so considerably for
goods of apparently about the same description, a variation doubtless
depending upon the special conditions of the sale, the wealth or
eagerness of the purchaser, etc. In 1054, for instance, a _Book of the
Mass_ was sold by the monk named Ulrich (the sale being made with the
consent of the Abbot) in exchange for a great vineyard covering the
slope of a large hill, the exact dimensions of which are not given.
In 1057, a nun named Diemude, of the convent of Wessobrunn, exchanged
a Bible, which she had written with her own hand, for a farm on
Peissenburg. Without, however, the exact description of any particular
manuscript, a description which should specify the nature of the work
put into it, the illuminations, the designs, the covers, etc., it is,
of course, very difficult to compare one transaction with another.

Kapp speaks of a good copy of the _Corpus Juris_ as being valued in
1350 at 1000 gold gulden.[396] He quotes a purchase made by a certain
Prahel, in 1427, of a copy of _Livy_ for 120 gold gulden, and the
sale of a _Plutarch_ in 1470 (twenty years after Gutenberg’s press
began to work) for no less than 800 gold gulden. Jan Van Enkhuisen,
of Zwolle, received in 1460 for an illuminated Bible 500 gold gulden,
and for a Bible with a plain text (_einfach geschrieben_) 100 crowns.
In 1345, Etienne de Conty paid for a handsomely adorned copy of the
_Commentaries_ of Henry Bohic, 62 livres and 11 sous, a sum which Kapp
calculates to be the equivalent of 825 francs in the money of the
present day. For the production of this work, there were paid to the
scribes 31 livres and 5 sous, for the parchment 18 livres and 18 sous,
for six initials in gold, 1 livre and 10 sous, for other illuminations
3 livres and 6 sous, for the hire of the manuscript (paid to the
university _bidellus_), 4 livres, and for binding the volume, 1 livre
12 sous.

The Countess of Anjou paid, in 1460, for a copy of the _Homilies_ of
Haimon, Bishop of Halberstadt, two hundred sheep, five measures of
wheat, and five measures of barley.

In 1474, Louis XI. of France, pledged as security for the safe return
of a manuscript containing a treatise by the Arabic physician Rhases,
which he had borrowed from the medical Faculty of the University of
Paris, his silver plate, while a nobleman also stood security for the
King in the transaction. In 1392, the Countess of Blois, wife of the
Baron of Castellane, left in her will, as a bequest to her daughter, a
manuscript on parchment of the _Corpus Juris_. It was made a condition
of the bequest that the daughter should marry a jurist, in order that
this valuable treasure could come into the right hands.

The National Library in Paris contains two manuscripts of the Bible
in Latin and French text, written on parchment, which Firmin Didot
appraised as having cost to produce not less than the equivalent of
82,000 francs. He excludes from this calculation of cost the price
of the parchment, the hire of the scribes, and the cost of the
binding. The principal item of the outlay for the more valuable of
these manuscripts was incurred in the production of the 5,000 designs
illuminated in gold and colour, the cost of preparing which Didot
estimated at over 12,000 francs.

As before pointed out, the exceptional outlay incurred in the
production of these illuminated manuscripts cannot be taken as in any
way a guide for the average market price of manuscripts prepared for
general circulation and sale. The text-books, chap-books, etc., which,
during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, were prepared for the
common folk, sold at prices that seem very low when one bears in mind
the large amount of manual labour required for their production. The
school ordinance of the town of Bautzen (in Saxony) of 1418 fixed
the price of an _A B C_ book, containing also a _Paternoster_, at
one groschen; of a _Doctrinal_, a half mark; and of a _Donatus_, ten
groschens.

At this time, however, the market price in the same region for a hen
was one pfennig, for a pound of beef two pfennigs, for a loaf of
bread, containing rations for three men for one day, three pfennigs,
for a pound of cheese one pfennig, for a measure of the best wine one
kreutzer.

From this date on, however, there came to be, with the increase in
the production of manuscript books in the common text, a very steady
decrease in the selling price of such books.

At the end of the fourteenth century the average price in Italy for a
well written copy of the _Corpus Juris_ was 480 marks. In 1451, such a
copy was sold in Florence for 14½ ducats, the equivalent of 90 marks.

In 1400, a manuscript containing writings of Justinian, Sallust, and
Suetonius, written on 115 folio sheets of parchment, was sold in
Florence for 16 ducats, the equivalent of 100 marks. In 1467, a copy of
the comedies of Terence, written on 198 folio sheets (paper, however,
instead of parchment), was bought in Heidelberg for three gulden. By
this date, sixteen years, namely, after the printing of Gutenberg’s
first volume, the competition or the expectation of the competition of
the printing-press, had already begun to affect the market prices of
manuscripts. In 1499, there is record of the sale in Heidelberg for
the price of two gulden, of a manuscript comprising 134 quarto sheets,
containing the _Hecuba_ of Euripides, and the _Idyls_ of Theocritus.

In not a few of the monasteries, even of those which had an old-time
repute for literary activity, the literary efforts came and went in
waves, and sometimes for long periods, extending over a generation or
more, there was an actual decrease in the extent of the attention given
to the production of manuscripts and to the securing of additions to
the library. In other instances the development of the libraries went
on but slowly.

C. Schmidt refers to the record of the library of the Strasburg
Cathedral, which in 1260 possessed a collection of fifty codices that
had been for the most part presented by Bishop Wernher as far back
as 1027. In the year 1372, the catalogue of the library shows that
the number had increased to ninety-one, a gain of only forty-one
manuscripts in a space of more than one century.

The renewed interest that came to the scholars of Italy in the works of
classic writers with the revival of classical studies induced by the
Renaissance caused manuscripts of these works to be searched for, not
only in Italy and in the countries of the East that could most easily
be reached by Italy, but throughout the monasteries of Europe. In 1517,
there is record of instruction being given by Pope Leo X. to a certain
cleric named Heytmer to visit the libraries of the Palatinate and of
the adjoining districts and to search for classical manuscripts for
purchase for the Papal collection. Heytmer was enjoined to make special
inquiry for the missing books of Livy.

Another agent of Leo was fortunate enough to discover in the monastery
of Corvey on the Weser the first five books of Tacitus. Being unable
to induce the monastery to make sale of the manuscript, he succeeded
in some way in appropriating it, and in getting it safely over the
Alps. It was this manuscript that was used for the _editio princeps_
of Tacitus, printed in Rome in 1515. The Pope sent to the library of
the Corvey monastery a copy of this printed edition of the Tacitus as
a restitution for the appropriated manuscript. The manuscript itself,
in 1522, was taken (one does not know how) from Rome to Florence, where
it is to-day chained in the Laurentian Library. I understand that
this Corvey text constituted the only copy of the first five books of
Tacitus which had been found when this author was first put into print.

=The Manuscript Period in England.=--During the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, in England as in ancient Greece, and as also
in mediæval Italy, Southern France and Germany, the people who were
prepared to interest themselves in literary productions, received
their literature, or at least their poetical literature, very largely
by means of reciters or minstrels. In the prologue to his _Troilus
and Cressida_, Chaucer tells us it was intended to be read _or elles
sung_. George Ellis points out that this must relate to the chanting
recitation of the minstrels. Ellis goes on to say: “A considerable
part of our old poetry is simply addressed to an audience, without any
mention of readers. That our English minstrels at any time united all
the talents of the profession, and were at once poets and reciters and
musicians, is extremely doubtful; but that they excited and directed
the efforts of their contemporary poets to a particular species of
composition, is as evident as that a body of actors must influence the
exertions of theatrical writers. They were, at a time when reading
and writing were rare accomplishments, the principal medium of
communication between authors and the public; and their memory in some
measure supplied the deficiency of manuscripts, and probably preserved
much of our early literature until the invention of printing.”[397]

Says Jusserand: “At a time when books were rare, and when the theatre,
properly so-called, did not exist, poetry and music travelled with the
minstrels and gleemen (_jongleurs_) along the highway, and such guests
were always welcome.”[398]

The connection of minstrelsy with the circulation of literature is
referred to by Charles Knight as follows: “A popular literature was
kept alive and preserved, however imperfectly, before the press came to
make those who had learnt to read self-dependent in their intellectual
gratifications; and what has come down to us of the old minstrelsy,
with all its inaccuracy and occasional feebleness, shows us that the
people of England, four or five centuries ago, had a common fund of
high thought upon which a great literature might in time be reared. The
very existence of a poet like Chaucer is the best proof of the vigour,
and to a certain extent of the cultivation, of the national mind, even
in an age when books were rarities.”[399]

As early as the twelfth century, during such reigns as those of Henry
I. (Beauclerc) and Henry II., there was in England a very considerable
production of literature, under such various headings as chronicles,
satires, sermons, works of science and of medicine, treatises on style,
prose romances, and epics in verse. Jusserand points out that a large
proportion of these compositions were written in Latin.[400] This
would indicate a wider general understanding of Latin than prevailed
three centuries later when Caxton’s printing-press began its work;
for, as will be noted in the chapter on Caxton, the proportion of
Latin books issued by Caxton was very much smaller than was the case
with the contemporary publishers in France and in Germany. Such an
active and varied literary production as that described by Jusserand
would also, of course, imply the existence of a considerable body of
trained scribes in addition to those who were at work in the monastic
_scriptoria_ on the chronicles and books of devotion.

The very large measure of attention given to the production of legends
and romances, and the great popularity of these among almost all
classes of the people, was the distinctive feature of the literature
of England during the three centuries preceding the introduction of
printing. The scenes of many of these romances are laid in classic
times, and their characters bear classic names; but the stories are
hardly constructed on classic lines, and very little attempt is made
to preserve what the dramatic critic in _Nicholas Nickleby_ calls “the
oneness of the drama.” Antiquity is presented in the garb of the Middle
Ages. As Jusserand remarks: “Everything in these poems was really
translated; not only the language of the ancients but their raiment,
their civilisation, their ideas. Venus becomes a princess: the heroes
are knights, and their costumes, pictured in the illuminations, are so
much in the fashion of the day that they serve us to date the poems.”

In addition to these classic romances, in which old-time heroes
masquerade in mediæval garb and speak in mediæval language, there is
a long series of tales which appear to have been of English origin.
English readers and English writers of the time seem to have possessed
a special penchant for story-telling. “Prose tales were written in
astonishing quantities in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries by pious
authors who under pretext of edifying and amusing their readers at
the same time, began by amusing and frequently forgot to edify.”[401]
The Welshman, Walter Map, became famous at the Court of Henry II. for
his satires and humorous stories. His work was done in Latin. His _De
Nugis Curiatum_ secured the most abiding repute. He might perhaps
be considered as a twelfth-century Martial. That famous body of
stories, the _Gesta Romanorum_, heretofore believed to be the result
of German reshaping of legends originating with the monks of Italy,
is now claimed to have been first compiled in England towards the
end of the thirteenth century.[402] The _Gesta_ was one of the most
widely circulated books in Europe (outside of the accepted devotional
classics) both in the manuscript period, and during the first century
of printing.

The stories of the time are of very varied origin and in many cases
had evidently, in the rewriting, undergone material modifications
or transformations. Whether the language used be Latin, French, or
English, it is evident from the character of the tales that the writers
were addressing themselves not to any limited group of scholars and
clerics, but to what would to-day be described as a popular circle of
readers and of hearers. Thomas Wright points out that even those tales
which are presented in Latin give evidence from local references and
from English quotations of having been written for Englishmen.[403]

The Canterbury Tales of Geoffrey Chaucer, chief among the story-tellers
of England, if not of Europe, were written about 1390. After the
long series of translations and adaptations, these tales of Chaucer
mark a distinct epoch in the production of native romance, in which
characters, incidents, and surroundings were alike English, although
there are many evidences of continental influences. The circulation of
the _Tales_ in manuscript form was very extended, and Caxton showed
his usual excellent judgment by including them in the first group of
publications issued from his Westminster Press. This earliest printed
edition was probably published in 1478. A second edition was issued by
Caxton in 1484.

It seems probable, as well from the history of the _Canterbury Tales_
as from that of the long series of romances which had preceded them,
a history giving evidence of a wide-spread influence and repute, that
there must have been, during the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth
centuries, a considerable book-production outside of the monastery
_scriptoria_, and that there must also have been a fairly effective
machinery for the sale and distribution of the manuscript texts. The
latter were doubtless supplied in great part by the travelling pedlars,
who sold with their novelties in ribbons and trinkets the latest new
tale, or the latest version of some very old tale.

Books in manuscript were included in the goods sold at certain of
the great fairs, such as that of Stourbridge (near Cambridge), St.
Giles (near Oxford), and St. Bartholomew, in London.[404] After the
introduction of printing, such fairs did considerable business in
the sale not only of the chap-books and almanacs, which were carried
about in the pedlars’ packs, but also of substantial and costly works.
Professor Thorold Rogers explains that the rapid diffusion of books
and pamphlets at a time when newspapers and advertisements were still
unknown, can only be accounted for by the understanding that the
book-dealers made large use of these fairs. He goes on to say that he
finds entries of purchases for the libraries of the Oxford colleges,
with the statement that the books were bought at St. Giles’s Fair.[405]
It will be remembered how two centuries or more after the period
referred to by Thorold Rogers, Michael Johnson, the father of Samuel,
made a practice of going on market days to Uttoxeter, taking there from
his book-shop in Litchfield books to be offered for sale on a stall
in the market-place. The market days had, in 1725, replaced in great
measure the old-time fairs. In the chapter on Germany, I have referred
to the early use made of the Fair at Nordlingen by the dealers in
manuscripts, a practice which was later continued by the printers.

It does not appear that the manuscript-dealers were permitted to
carry on their trade in the chapels or within the enclosures of the
cathedrals, as was so largely done by their contemporaries in Germany
and in France. The extensive multiplication of books by copyists is
less easy to account for. I have not been able thus far to find record
of any considerable production, in London or other commercial centres,
of books in manuscript, and I can only infer such production from the
wide-spread circulation and influence of the books themselves.

The literary activities of England during these centuries of the
manuscript period were by no means limited to the production of
fiction. The long series of contributions to local and national history
made by the monkish chroniclers have been referred to in a previous
chapter. In the twelfth century, Orderic Vital or Vitalis writes his
_Angligenæ Historiæ Ecclesiasticæ_, Henry of Huntingdon, his _Historia
Anglorum_ (from A.C. 55 to A.D. 1154), and William of Malmesbury,
his _Gesta Regum Anglorum_. The _Historia Anglorum_ was printed in
1586, at the expense of Sir Henry Savile. William of Malmesbury was,
like Richard de Bury, noted as a collector of books. His history was
issued between 1112 and 1124. A few years later, in 1139, appears the
great _Historia Regum Britanniæ_, of Geoffrey of Monmouth. Geoffrey
begins his British history with the earliest times, and, thanks, as he
explains, to certain special discoveries, or to a special revelation,
he is able to write with as much certainty about the reign of King
Arthur as concerning events of his own time. This chronicle must have
been largely multiplied and widely distributed, as an exceptionally
large number of copies have been preserved to the present time, the
British Museum alone possessing no less than thirty-four.

In the thirteenth century the work of the historians is carried on
by such writers as Roger of Wendover, and Matthew Paris, chief among
English chroniclers. In the fourteenth century, the most noteworthy
among a long series of historical writers is Ralph Higden, author
of the _Polychronicon_, or “Universal History,” which remained for
centuries an accepted authority.

In the thirteenth century, Bartholomew or Glanville compiles one of the
oldest of the general cyclopædias. Of this, many manuscripts have been
preserved, eighteen of which are in the National Library in Paris.[406]
John of Gaddesden, court physician under Edward II. (1310-1312), writes
a medical cyclopædia, or compendium of prescriptions, which not only
secures a European reputation at the time, but retains its prestige for
nearly three centuries, and is issued in print in Augsburg, in 1595,
in two quarto volumes. As early as the reign of Henry II. (1154-1189)
an important group of law books had appeared, and the law treatises
of Henry of Bracton, issued early in the thirteenth century, retained
their value sufficiently to appear two centuries later in a printed
edition, abridged from the original text. These few typical writers are
referred to simply as presenting some indication of the variety and of
the extent of the literary activities of England during the centuries
preceding the beginning of printing. The popular interest in the works
of such writers, and the great influence exerted by them upon the
opinions of their own and of succeeding generations, is evidence of a
considerable multiplication of copies and of an extended circulation,
and this evidence is corroborated by the fact that of many of the books
of the period so large a number of copies have been preserved to the
present time through the perils and vicissitudes of the intervening
centuries.

The most noteworthy example of the literary interests of Britain
during the manuscript period is afforded by Richard Aungerville,
better known as Richard de Bury, Bishop Palatine of Durham, whose
famous _Philobiblon_ was given to the world in 1345. In his various
travels, and through his correspondents in England, France, and Italy,
he was able to get together a great collection of books, which were
later bequeathed to the University of Oxford. His eloquent tribute
to his beloved books must, I judge, be taken rather as expressing
the enthusiasm of an exceptionally devoted scholar than as fairly
representing the literary spirit of the time:

“Thanks to books, the dead appear to me as though they still lived....
Everything decays and falls into dust by the force of time: Saturn is
never weary of devouring his children, and the glory of the world would
be buried in oblivion, had not God as a remedy conferred on mortal man
the benefit of books.... Books are the masters that instruct us without
rods or ferules, without reprimands or anger, without the solemnity of
the gown or the expense of lessons. Go to them, you will not find them
asleep: if you err, no scoldings on their part: if you are ignorant, no
mocking laughter.”[407]

In 1344, (the year before his death) Richard writes as follows:

“As it is necessary for a state to provide military arms, and prepare
plentiful stores of provisions for soldiers who are about to fight,
so it is evidently worth the labour of the church militant to fortify
itself against the attacks of pagans and heretics with a multitude of
sound books. But because everything that is serviceable to mortals
suffers the waste of mortality through lapse of time, it is necessary
for volumes corroded by age to be restored by renovated successors,
that perpetuity, repugnant to the nature of the individual, may be
conceded to the species. Hence it is that Ecclesiastes significantly
says, in the 12th chapter. ‘There is no end of making many books.’
For, as the bodies of books suffer continued detriment from a combined
mixture of contraries in their composition, so a remedy is found out
by the prudence of clerks, by which a holy book paying the debt of
nature may obtain an hereditary substitute, and a seed may be raised up
like to the most holy deceased, and that saying of Ecclesiasticus, be
verified, ‘The father is dead and, as it were, not dead, for he hath
left behind him a son like unto himself.’”

One of the earliest authorities concerning book publishing in England
is Bishop Fell, who in his Memoir on the State of Printing in the
University of Oxford, tells us that that university “possessed an
exclusive right of transcribing and multiplying books by means of
writing,” a privilege which implies a species of copyright. The date
referred to is about 1600.

In both Oxford and Cambridge, according to the statutes in force
before the introduction of printing, the _stationarii_ belonged to
the class of _Servientes_, who were appointed by the chancellor
or vice-chancellor of the university. The records of Oxford show
many instances of the pawning of books by the undergraduates and
occasionally by the instructors to the _stationarii_. In one codex,
belonging to Mr. Thomas Paunter, there is an inscription showing that
it was pawned to a _stationarius_ in 1480, for the sum of thirty-eight
shillings.[408] Books which had been so pledged, came frequently
enough, after their forfeiture, into sale. An entry in the accounts
of the library of S. John’s College in Cambridge, dating from 1456,
records a payment made, apparently from the treasury of the college,
for the redemption of an _Avicenna_ from the _stationarius_ to whom
a certain John Marshall had pledged the manuscript. The cost of the
redemption was £1. 6_s._ 4_d._[409]

The Oxford _stationarii_ finally secured privileges as members of
the university, but not before 1458, (as a result apparently of an
arrangement between the university and the city authorities), did this
agreement take the _stationarii_ out of the jurisdiction of the city,
and put them into the same class with the dealers in parchment, the
illuminators, and the scribes, who for many years had been subordinated
to the university. The taxes on the _stationarii_ were fixed by and
collected by the chancellor, and the proportion due to the city
treasury was paid over by him.

The term _stationarius_, which had, as we have seen, been in use for
these university dealers throughout all Europe, secured in Great
Britain a permanent association with the book-trade by its use as an
appellation for the publishers’ and booksellers’ guild, which was
chartered in 1403 as “The Stationers’ Company.” Its headquarters in
London was entitled Stationers’ Hall, and is still so known. The term
in Great Britain, however, was made from a very early date to cover a
larger variety of trade undertakings than that to which it was limited
in the university towns in Italy, France, and Germany. The business of
selling manuscripts on commission, which was, as we have seen, kept
under very close supervision on the part of the university authorities
of Paris and Bologna, appears to have been much less important in
England, and the dealers seem for the most part to have been left free
to make such terms either in buying or selling manuscripts as they saw
fit, and as the necessities of their customers rendered practicable.

As early as the reign of Edward III. (1327-1377), there is record of a
number of _stationarii_ as carrying on business in Oxford. In an Oxford
manuscript dating from this reign, there is an inscription of a certain
Mr. William Reed, of Merton College, who tells us that he purchased
this book from a _stationarius_.[410]

In London, there is record of an active trade in manuscripts being in
existence as early as the middle of the fourteenth century. The trade
in writing materials, such as parchment, paper, and ink, appears not to
have been organised as in Paris, but to have been carried on in large
part by the grocers and mercers. In the housekeeping accounts of King
John of France, covering the period of his imprisonment in England, in
the years 1359 and 1360, occur entries such as the following:

    “To Peter, a grocer of Lincoln, for four quaires of paper, two
    shillings and four pence.”

    “To John Huistasse, grocer, for a main of paper and a skin of
    parchment, 10 pence.”

    “To Bartholomew Mine, grocer, for three quaires of paper, 27
    pennies.”[411]

The manuscript-trade in London concentrated itself in Paternoster Row,
the street which became afterwards the centre of the trade in printed
books.

The earliest English manuscript-dealer whose name is on record is
Richard Lynn, who, in the year 1358, was _stationarius_ in Oxford.[412]
The name of John Browne occurs in several Oxford manuscripts on about
the date of 1400. Nicholas de Frisia, an Oxford _librarius_ of about
1425, was originally an undergraduate. He did energetic work as a book
scribe and, later, appears to have carried on an important business in
manuscripts. His inscription is found first on a manuscript entitled
_Petri Thomæ Quæstiones_, etc., which manuscript has been preserved in
the library of Merton.

There is record, as early as 1359, of a manuscript-dealer in the town
of Lincoln who called himself Johannes _Librarius_, and who sold, in
1360, several books to the French King John. It is a little difficult
to understand how in a quiet country town like Lincoln with no
university connections, there should have been enough business in the
fourteenth century to support a _librarius_.

The earliest name on record in London is that of Thomas Vycey, who was
a _stationarius_ in 1433. A few years later we find on a parchment
manuscript containing the wise sayings of a certain Lombardus, the
inscription of Thomas Masoun, “_librarius of gilde hall_.”

Between the years 1461 and 1475, a certain Piers Bauduyn, dealer in
manuscripts, and also a bookbinder, purchased a number of books for
Edward IV. In the household accounts of Edward appears the following
entry: “Paid to Piers Bauduyn, bookseller, for binding, gilding and
dressing a copy of Titus Livius, 20 shillings; for binding, gilding and
dressing a copy of the Holy Trinity, 16 shillings; for binding, gilding
and dressing a work entitled ‘The Bible’ 16 shillings.”

William Praat, who was a mercer of London, between the years 1470 and
1480 busied himself also with the trade in manuscripts, and purchased,
for William Caxton, various manuscripts from France and from Belgium.

Kirchhoff finds record of manuscript-dealers in Spain as early as the
first decade of the fifteenth century. He prints the name, however, of
but one, a certain Antonius Raymundi, a _librarius_ of Barcelona, whose
inscription, dated 1413, appears in a manuscript of Cassiodorus.

[Illustration]




PART II.

THE EARLIER PRINTED BOOKS.




[Illustration]

PART II.

THE EARLIER PRINTED BOOKS.

CHAPTER I.

THE RENAISSANCE AS THE FORERUNNER OF THE PRINTING-PRESS.


THE fragments of classic literature which had survived the destruction
of the Western Empire, had, as we have seen, owed their preservation
chiefly to the Benedictine monasteries. Upon the monasteries also
rested, for some centuries after the overthrow of the Gothic Kingdom of
Italy, the chief responsibility for maintaining such slender thread of
continuity of intellectual activity, and of interest in literature as
remained. By the beginning of the twelfth century, this responsibility
was shared with, if not entirely transferred to, the older of the great
universities of Europe, such as Bologna and Paris, which from that time
took upon themselves, as has been indicated, the task of directing
and of furthering, in connection with their educational work, the
increasing literary activities of the scholarly world.

With the increase throughout Europe of schools and universities, there
had come a corresponding development in literary interests and in
literary productiveness or reproductiveness. The universities became
publishing centres, and through the multiplication and exchange of
manuscripts, the scholars of Europe began to come into closer relations
with each other, and to constitute a kind of international scholarly
community. The development of such world-wide relations between
scholars was, of course, very much furthered by the fact that Latin
was universally accepted as the language not only of scholarship but
practically of all literature.

In Italy, by the beginning of the fourteenth century, intellectual
interests and literary activities had expanded beyond the scholastic
circles of the universities, and were beginning to influence larger
divisions of society. The year 1300 witnessed the production in
Florence of the _Divine Comedy_ of Dante, and marked an epoch in the
history of Italy and in the literature of the world. During the two
centuries which followed, Florence remained the centre of a keener,
richer, and more varied intellectual life than was known in any other
city in Europe.

With the great intellectual movement known as the Renaissance, I
am concerned, for the purposes of this study, only to indicate the
influence it exerted in preparing Italy and Europe for the utilisation
of the printing-press. The work of the Renaissance included, partly as
a cause, and partly as an effect, the rediscovery for the Europe of the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries of the literature of classic Greece,
as well as the reinterpretation of the literature of classic Rome.

The influence of the literary awakening and of the newly discovered
masterpieces would of necessity have been restricted to a comparatively
limited scholarly circle, if it had not been for the invention of
Gutenberg and for the scholarly enterprise and devotion of such
followers of Gutenberg as Aldus, Estienne, and Froben. It is, of
course, equally true that if the intellectual world had not been
quickened and inspired by the teachers of the Renaissance, the presses
of Aldus would have worked to little purpose, and their productions
would have found few buyers. Aldus may, in fact, himself be considered
as one of the most characteristic and valuable of the products of the
movement.

The Renaissance has been described by various historians, and analysed
by many commentators. The work which has, however, been accepted as
the most comprehensive account of the movement and the best critical
analysis of its nature and influence, and which presents also a vivid
and artistic series of pictures of Italy and the Italians during
the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, is Symonds’
_Renaissance in Italy_. These volumes are so thoroughly imbued with
the spirit of the period, and the author’s characterisations are so
full and so sympathetic, that it is difficult not to think of Symonds
as having been himself a Florentine, rather than a native of the
“barbarian realm of Britain.”

I take the liberty of quoting the description given by Symonds of the
peculiar conditions under which Italy of the fifteenth century, in
abandoning the hope of securing a place among the nations of the world,
absorbed itself in philosophic, literary, and artistic ideals. Freshly
imbued with Greek thought and Greek inspiration, Italy took upon itself
the rôle played centuries earlier by classic Greece, and, without
political power or national influence, it assumed the leadership of the
intellect and of the imagination of Europe.

“In proportion as Italy lost year by year the hope of becoming a united
nation, in proportion as the military instincts died in her, and the
political instincts were extinguished by despotism, in precisely the
same ratio did she evermore acquire a deeper sense of her intellectual
vocation. What was world-embracing in the spirit of the mediæval Church
passed by transmutation into the humanism of the fifteenth century. As
though aware of the hopelessness of being Italians in the same sense
as the natives of Spain were Spaniards, or the natives of France were
Frenchmen, the giants of the Renaissance did their utmost to efface
their nationality, in order that they might the more effectually
restore the cosmopolitan ideal of the human family. To this end both
artists and scholars, the depositories of the real Italian greatness at
this epoch, laboured; the artists by creating an ideal of beauty with
a message and a meaning for all Europe; the scholars by recovering for
Europe the burghership of Greek and Roman civilisation. In spite of
the invasions and convulsions that ruined Italy between the years 1494
and 1527, the painters and the humanists proceeded with their task as
though the fate of Italy concerned them not, as though the destinies
of the modern world depended on their activity. After Venice had been
desolated by the armies of the League of Cambray, Aldus Manutius
presented the peace-gift of Plato to the foes of his adopted city, and
when the Lutherans broke into Parmegiano’s workshop at Rome, even they
were awed by the tranquil majesty of the Virgin on his easel. Stories
like these remind us that Renaissance Italy met her doom of servitude
and degradation in the spirit of ancient Hellas, repeating as they do
the tales told of Archimedes in his study, and of Paulus Emilius face
to face with the Zeus of Phidias.[413]...

It is impossible to exaggerate the benefit conferred upon Europe by
the Italians at this epoch. The culture of the classics had to be
reappropriated before the movement of the modern mind could begin,
before the nations could start upon a new career of progress; the
chasm between the old and the new world had to be bridged over. This
task of reappropriation the Italians undertook alone, and achieved
at the sacrifice of their literary independence and their political
freedom. The history of the Renaissance literature in Italy is the
history of self-development into the channels of scholarship and
antiquarian research. The language created by Dante as a thing of
power, polished by Petrarch as a thing of beauty, trained by Boccaccio
as the instrument of melodious prose, was abandoned even by the Tuscans
in the fifteenth century for revived Latin and newly discovered Greek.
Patient acquisition took the place of proud inventiveness; laborious
imitation of classical authors suppressed originality of style. The
force of mind which in the fourteenth century had produced a _Divine
Comedy_ and a _Decameron_, in the fifteenth century was expended upon
the interpretation of codices, the settlement of texts, the translation
of Greek books into Latin, the study of antiquities, the composition
of commentaries, encyclopædias, dictionaries, ephemerides. While
we regret this change from creative to acquisitive literature, we
must bear in mind that these scholars, who ought to have been poets,
accomplished nothing less than the civilisation, or, to use their own
phrase, the humanisation, of the modern world. At the critical moment
when the Eastern Empire was being shattered by the Turks, and when
the other European nations were as yet unfit for culture, Italy saved
the Arts and Sciences of Greece and Rome, and interpreted the spirit
of the classics. Devoting herself to what appears the slavish work of
compilation and collection, she transmitted an inestimable treasure
to the human race; and though for a time the beautiful Italian tongue
was superseded by a jargon of dead languages, yet the literature
of the Renaissance yielded in the end the poetry of Ariosto, the
political philosophy of Machiavelli, the histories of Guicciardini and
Varchi. Meanwhile the whole of Europe had received the staple of its
intellectual education.”[414]

Symonds finds in the age of the Renaissance, or in what he calls
the Humanistic movement, four principal periods: first, the age of
inspiration and discovery, which is initiated by Petrarch; second,
the period of arrangement and translation. During this period, the
first great libraries came into existence, the study of Greek began
in the principal universities, and the courts of Cosimo de’ Medici in
Florence, Alfonso in Naples, and Nicholas in Rome, became centres of
literary activity; third, the age of academies. This period succeeded
the introduction of printing into Italy. Scholars and men of letters
are now crystallising or organising themselves into cliques or schools,
under the influence of which a more critical and exact standard of
scholarship is arrived at, while there is a marked development in
literary form and taste. Of the academies which came into existence,
the most important were the Platonic in Florence, that of Pontanus in
Naples, that of Pomponius Lætus in Rome, and that of Aldus Manutius in
Venice. This period covered, it is to be noted, the introduction of
printing into Italy (1464) and its rapid development. In the fourth
period it may be said that scholasticism to some extent took the place
of scholarship. It was the age of the purists, of whom Bembo was both
the type and the dictator. There is a tendency to replace learning
with an exaggerated attention to æsthetics and style. It was about the
Court of Leo X. (1513-1522) that these æsthetic _literati_ were chiefly
gathered. “Erudition, properly so-called,” says Symonds, “was now upon
the point of being transplanted beyond the Alps.”

The names of the scholars and writers who, following Dante, gave fame
to Florence and to Italy, are part of the history of the world’s
literature. It is necessary to refer here only to those whose influence
was most important in widening the range of scholarly interests and
in preparing Italy and Europe for the diffusion of literature, a
preparation which, while emphasising the requirement for some means of
multiplying books cheaply, secured for the printing-press, as soon
as its work began, an assured and sufficient support. The fact that a
period of exceptional intellectual activity and literary productiveness
immediately preceded the invention, or at least the introduction of
printing, must have had an enormous influence in furthering the speedy
development and diffusion of the new art. The press of Aldus Manutius
seems, as before said, like a natural and necessary outgrowth of the
Renaissance.

The typical feature of the revival of learning in Italy was, of course,
the rediscovery of the literature of Greece. In the poetic simile of
Symonds, “Florence borrowed her light from Athens, as the moon shines
with rays reflected from the sun. The revival was the silver age of
that old golden age of Greece.”[415] The comparison of Florence with
Athens has repeatedly been made. The golden ages of the two cities were
separated by nearly two thousand years; but history and human nature
repeat themselves, and historians have found in the Tuscan capital of
the fifteenth century a population which, with its keen intellectual
nature, subtle and delicate wit, and restless political spirit, recalls
closely the Athens of Pericles. The leadership which belonged to Italy
in literature, art, scholarship, and philosophy, was, within Italy,
conceded to Florence.

The first name in the list of Florentine scholars whose influence
was important in this revival is that of Petrarch. He never himself
mastered the Greek language, but he arrived at a realisation of the
importance of Greek thought for the world, and he preached to others
the value of the studies which were beyond his own grasp. It was at
Petrarch’s instance that Boccaccio undertook the translation into Latin
of the _Iliad_. Among Latin authors, Petrarch’s devotion was given
particularly to Cicero and Virgil. The fact that during the first
century of printing more editions of Cicero were produced than of any
other classic author must have been largely due to the emphasis given
by the followers of Petrarch to the beauty of Cicero’s latinity and the
permanent value of his writings.

Petrarch was a devoted collector of manuscripts, and spared neither
labour nor expense to secure for his library codices of texts
recommended as authoritative. Notwithstanding his lack of knowledge
of Greek, he purchased for his collection all the Greek manuscripts
which came within his reach and within his means. Fortunately for
these expensive literary tastes, he appears to have possessed what we
should call a satisfactory independence. Some of his manuscripts went
to Boccaccio, while the rest were, at his death, given to the city of
Florence and found place later in the Medicean Library.

Petrarch laid great stress on the importance, for the higher education
of the people, of efficient public libraries, and his influence with
wealthy nobles served largely to increase the resources of several of
the existing libraries. In his scholarly appreciation of the value
of such collections, he was helping to educate the community to
support the booksellers, while in the collecting of manuscripts he was
unwittingly doing valuable service for the coming printer. He died in
1374, ninety years before the first printing-press began its work in
Italy. A century later his beautiful script served as a model for the
italic or cursive type which was first made by Aldus.

Symonds thinks it very doubtful whether the Italians would have
undertaken the labour of recovering the Greek classics if no Petrarch
had preached the attractiveness of liberal studies, and if no school of
disciples had been formed by him in Florence. Of these disciples, by
far the most distinguished was Boccaccio. His actual work in furthering
the study of Greek was more important than that of the friend to whom
(although there was a difference of but nine years in their ages) he
gave the title of “master.” Boccaccio, taking up the study of Greek
(at Petrarch’s instance) in middle life, secured a sufficient mastery
of the language to be able to render into Latin the _Iliad_ and the
_Odyssey_. This work, completed in 1362, was the first translation
of Homer for modern readers. He had for his instructor and assistant
an Italian named Leontius Pilatus, who had sojourned some years at
Byzantium, but whose knowledge of classic Greek was said to have been
very limited. Boccaccio secured for Pilatus an appointment as Greek
professor in the University of Florence, the first professorship of
Greek instituted in Europe.

The work by which Boccaccio is best known, the _Decameron_ or the _Ten
Nights’ Entertainment_, was published in 1353, a few years before the
completion by Chaucer of the _Canterbury Tales_. It is described as
one of the purest specimens of Italian prose and as an inexhaustible
repository of wit, beauty, and eloquence; and notwithstanding the fact
that the stories are representative of the low standard of moral tone
which characterised Italian society of the fourteenth century, the
book is one which the world will not willingly let die. It is probably
to-day in more continued demand than any book of its century, with the
possible exception of the _Divine Comedy_. The earliest printed edition
was that of Valdarfer, issued in Florence in 1471. This was three years
before the beginning of Caxton’s work as a printer in Bruges. The
_Decameron_ has since been published in innumerable editions and in
every language of Europe.

A far larger contribution to Hellenic studies was given some years
later by Manuel Chrysoloras, a Greek scholar of Byzantium, who,
after visiting Italy as an ambassador from the Court of the Emperor
Palæologus, was, in 1396, induced to accept the Chair of Greek in the
University of Florence. “This engagement,” says Symonds, “secured
the future of Greek erudition in Europe.” Symonds continues: “The
scholars who assembled in the lecture-rooms of Chrysoloras felt that
the Greek texts, whereof he alone supplied the key, contained those
elements of spiritual freedom and intellectual culture without which
the civilisation of the modern world would be impossible. Nor were
they mistaken in what was then a guess rather than a certainty. The
study of Greek implied the birth of criticism, comparison, research.
Systems based on ignorance and superstition were destined to give way
before it. The study of Greek opened philosophical horizons far beyond
the dream world of the churchmen and monks; it stimulated the germs
of science, suggested new astronomical hypotheses, and indirectly led
to the discovery of America. The study of Greek resuscitated a sense
of the beautiful in art and literature. It subjected the creeds of
Christianity, the language of the Gospels, the doctrines of St. Paul,
to analysis, and commenced a new era of Biblical inquiry. If it be
true, as a writer no less sober in his philosophy than eloquent in his
language has lately asserted, that except the blind forces of nature,
nothing moves in this world which is not Greek in its origin, we are
justified in regarding the point of contact between the Greek teacher
Chrysoloras and his Florentine pupils as one of the most momentous
crises in the history of civilisation. Indirectly the Italian intellect
had hitherto felt Hellenic influence through Latin literature. It was
now about to receive that influence immediately from actual study of
the masterpieces of the Attic writers. The world was no longer to be
kept in ignorance of those ‘eternal consolations’ of the human race. No
longer could the scribe omit Greek quotations from his Latin text with
the dogged snarl of obtuse self-satisfaction, _Græca sunt, ergo non
legenda_. The motto had rather to be changed into a cry of warning for
ecclesiastical authority upon the verge of dissolution, _Græca sunt,
ergo periculosa_; since the reawakening faith in human reason, the
reawakening belief in the dignity of man, the desire for beauty, the
liberty, audacity, and passion of the Renaissance, received from Greek
studies their strongest and most vital impulse.”

Symonds might have added that the literary revival, which was so
largely due to these Greek studies, made possible, a century later,
the utilisation of the printing-press, the invention of which would
otherwise have fallen upon comparatively barren ground; while the
printing-press alone made possible the diffusion of the new knowledge,
outside of the small circles of aristocratic scholars, to whole
communities of impecunious students.

Florence had, as we have seen, done more than any other city of Italy,
more than any city of Europe, to prepare Italy and Europe for the
appreciation and utilisation of the art of printing, but the direct
part taken by Florence in the earlier printing undertakings was,
curiously enough, much less important than that of Venice, Rome, or
Milan. By the year 1500, that is, thirty-six years after the beginning
of printing in Italy, there had been printed in Florence 300 works, in
Bologna 298, in Milan 629, in Rome 925, and in Venice 2835.

The list of the scholars and men of letters who, during the century
following the work of Petrarch and Boccaccio, associated themselves
with the brilliant society of Florence, and retained for the city its
distinctive pre-eminence in the intellectual life of Europe, is a long
one, and includes such names as those of Tommaso da Sarzana, Palla
degli Strozzi, Giovanni da Ravenna, Niccolo de’ Niccoli, Filelfo,
Marsuppini, Rossi, Bruni, Guicciardini, Poggio, Galileo, Cellini,
Plethon, and Machiavelli. It was to Strozzi that was due the beginning
of Greek teaching in Florence under Manuel Chrysoloras, while he
also devoted large sums of money to the purchase in Greece and in
Constantinople of valuable manuscripts. He kept in his house skilled
copyists, and was employing these in the work of preparing transcripts
for a great public library, when, unfortunately for Florence, he
incurred the enmity of Cosimo de’ Medici, who procured his banishment.
Strozzi went to Padua, where he continued his Greek studies.

Cosimo, having vanquished his rival in politics, himself continued
the work of collecting manuscripts and of furthering the instruction
given by the Greek scholars. The chief service rendered by Cosimo
to learning and literature was in the organisation of great public
libraries. During his exile (1433-1434), he built in Venice the
Library of S. Giorgio Maggiore, and after his return to Florence, he
completed the hall for the Library of S. Marco. He also formed several
large collections of manuscripts. To the Library of S. Marco and to
the Medicean Library were bequeathed later by Niccolo de’ Niccoli
800 manuscripts, valued at 600 gold florins. Cosimo also provided a
valuable collection of manuscripts for the convent of Fiesole. The
oldest portion of the present Laurentian Library is composed of the
collections from these two convents, together with a portion of the
manuscripts preserved from the Medicean Library.

In 1438, Cosimo instituted the famous Platonic Academy of Florence, the
special purpose of which was the interpretation of Greek philosophy.
The gathering in Florence, in 1438, of the Greeks who came to the
great Council, had a large influence in stimulating the interest of
Florentines in Greek culture. Symonds (possibly somewhat biassed in
favour of his beloved Florentines of the Renaissance) contends that the
Byzantine ecclesiastics who came to the Council, and the long series of
Greek travellers or refugees who found their way from Constantinople
to Italy during the years that followed, included comparatively few
real scholars whose classical learning could be trusted. These men
supplied, says Symonds, “the beggarly elements of grammar, caligraphy,
and bibliographical knowledge,” but it was Ficino and Aldus, Strozzi
and Cosimo de’ Medici who opened the literature of Athens to the
comprehension of the modern world.

The elevation to the papacy, in 1447, of Tommaso Parentucelli, who took
the name of Nicholas V., had the effect of carrying to Rome some of
the Florentine interest in literature and learning. Tommaso, who was
a native of Pisa, had won repute in Bologna for his wide and thorough
scholarship. He became, later, a protégé of Cosimo de’ Medici, who
employed him as a librarian of the Marcian Library. To Nicholas V.
was due the foundation of the Vatican Library, for which he secured a
collection of some five thousand works. Symonds says that during his
pontificate, “Rome became a vast workshop of erudition, a factory of
translations from Greek and Latin.” The compensation paid to these
translators from the funds provided by the Pope, was in many cases
very liberal. In fact, as compared with the returns secured at this
period for original work, the rewards paid to these translators of the
Vatican seem decidedly disproportionate, especially when we remember
that a large portion of their work was of poor quality, deficient
both in exact scholarship and in literary form. To Lorenzo Valla was
paid for his translation of Thucydides, 500 scudi, to Guarino for a
version of Strabo, 1500 scudi, to Perotti for Polybius, 500 ducats.
Manetti had a pension of 600 scudi a month to enable him to pursue
his sacred studies. Poggio’s version of the _Cyropædia_ of Xenophon
and Filelfo’s rendering of the poems of Homer, were, from a literary
point of view, more important productions. Some of the work in his
series of translations was confided by the Pope to the resident Greek
scholars. Trapezuntios undertook the _Metaphysics_ of Aristotle and
the _Republic_ of Plato, and Tifernas the _Ethics_ of Aristotle.
Translations were also prepared of Theophrastus and of Ptolemy.

In addition to these paid translators, the Pope attracted to his Court
from all parts of Italy, and particularly from his old home, Florence,
a number of scholars, of whom Poggio Bracciolini (or Fiorentino) and
Cardinal Bessarion were the most important. Bessarion took an active
part in encouraging Greek scholars to make their homes and to do their
work in Italy. The great development of literary productiveness and
literary interests in Rome during the pontificate of Nicholas, is one
of the noteworthy examples of large results accruing to literature and
to literary workers through intelligently administered patronage. It
seems safe to say that before the introduction of printing, it was only
through the liberality of patrons that any satisfactory compensation
could be secured for literary productions.

During the reign of Alfonso of Aragon, who in 1435 added Sicily to
his dominions, and under the direct incentive of the royal patronage,
a good deal of literary activity was developed in Naples. Alfonso
was described by Vespasiano as being, next to Nicholas V., the most
munificent patron of learning in Italy, and he attracted to his Court
scholars like Manetti, Beccadelli, Valla, and others. The King paid to
Bartolommeo Fazio a stipend of 500 ducats a year while he was engaged
in writing his _Chronicles_, and when the work was completed, he added
a further payment of 1500 florins. In 1459, the year of his death,
Alfonso distributed 20,000 ducats among the men of letters gathered
in Naples. It is certain that in no other city of Europe during that
year were the earnings or rewards of literature so great. It does
not appear, however, that this lavish expenditure had the effect of
securing the production by Neapolitans of any works of continued
importance, or even of bringing into existence in the city any lasting
literary interests. The temperament of the people and the general
environment were doubtless unfavourable as compared with the influences
affecting Florence or Rome. It is probable also that the selection of
the recipients of the royal bounty was made without any trustworthy
principle and very much at haphazard.

A production of Beccadelli’s, perhaps the most brilliant of Alfonso’s
literary protégés, is to be noted as having been proscribed by
the Pope, being one of the earliest Italian publications to be so
distinguished. Eugenius IV. forbade, under penalty of excommunication,
the reading of Beccadelli’s _Hermaphroditus_, which was declared to be
_contra bonos mores_. The book was denounced from many pulpits, and
copies were burned, together with portraits of the poet, on the public
squares of Bologna, Milan, and Ferrara.[416] This opposition of the
Church was the more noteworthy, as the book contained nothing heretical
or subversive of ecclesiastical authority, but was simply ribald and
obscene.

Lorenzo Valla, another of the writers who received special favours
and emoluments at the hands of Alfonso, likewise came under the
ecclesiastical ban. But his writings contained more serious offences
than obscenity or ribaldry. He boldly questioned the authenticity of
Constantine’s _Donation_ (a document which was later shown to be a
forgery), and of other documents and literature held by the Church
to be sacred, and the accuracy of his scholarship and the brilliancy
of his polemical style, gave weight and force to his attacks.
Denunciations came upon Valla’s head from many pulpits, and the matter
was taken up by the Inquisition. But Alfonso told the monks that they
must leave his secretary alone, and the proceedings were abandoned.

When Nicholas V. came to the papacy, undeterred by the charge of
heresies, he appointed Valla to the post of Apostolic writer, and
gave him very liberal emoluments for work on the series of Greek
translations before referred to. Valla never retracted any of his
utterances against the Church, but he appears, after accepting the
Pope’s appointment, to have turned his polemical ardour in other
directions. He engaged in some bitter controversies with Poggio, Fazio,
and other contemporaries, controversies which seem to have aroused and
excited the literary circles of the time, but which turned upon matters
of no lasting importance. It is a cause of surprise to later literary
historians that men like Valla, possessed of real learning and of
unquestioned literary skill, should have been willing to devote their
time and their capacity to the futilities which formed the pretexts for
the greater part of the personal controversies of the time. Professor
Adams says of Valla: “He had all the pride and insolence and hardly
disguised pagan feeling and morals of the typical humanist; but in
spirit and methods of work he was a genuine scholar, and his editions
lie at the foundation of all later editorial work in the case of more
than one classic author, and of the critical study of the New Testament
as well.”[417]

During the two centuries preceding the invention of printing, it was
the case that more books (in the form of manuscripts) were available
for the use of students and readers in Italy than in any other country,
but even in Italy manuscripts were scarce and costly. Even the
collections in the so-called “libraries” of the cathedrals and colleges
were very meagre. These manuscripts were nearly entirely the production
of the cloisters, and as parchment continued to be very dear, many of
the works sent out by the monks were in the form of palimpsests, that
is, were transcribed upon scrolls which contained earlier writing.
The fact that the original writing was in many cases but imperfectly
erased, has caused to be preserved fragments of a number of classics
which might otherwise have disappeared entirely. The service rendered
by the monks in this way may be considered as at least a partial
offset to the injury done by them to the cause of literature in the
destruction of so many ancient writings. This matter has been referred
to more fully in the chapter on Monasteries and Manuscripts.

One of the Italian scholars of the fifteenth century who interested
himself particularly in the collection of manuscripts of the classics
was Poggio Bracciolini. In 1414, while he was, in his official capacity
as Apostolic Secretary, in attendance at the Council of Constance,
he ransacked the libraries of St. Gall and of other monasteries of
Switzerland and Suabia, and secured a complete _Quintilian_, copies
of _Lucretius_, _Frontinus_, _Probus_, _Vitruvius_, nine of Cicero’s
_Orations_, and manuscripts of a number of other valuable texts. Many
of the libraries had been sadly neglected, and the greater part of the
manuscripts were in dirty and tattered condition, but literature owes
much to the monks through whom these literary treasures had been kept
in existence at all.

Poggio is to be noted as a free-thinker who managed to keep in good
relations with the Church. So long as free-thinkers confined their
audacity to such matters as form the topic of Poggio’s _Facetiæ_,
Beccadelli’s _Hermaphroditus_, or La Casa’s _Capitolo del Forno_, the
Roman Curia looked on and smiled approvingly. The most obscene books to
be found in any literature escaped the Papal censure, and a man like
Aretino, notorious for his ribaldry, could aspire with fair prospects
of success to the scarlet of a Cardinal.[418]

While there could be no popular distribution, in the modern sense of
the term, for necessarily costly books in manuscript, in a community of
which only a small proportion had any knowledge of reading and writing,
it is evident from the chronicles of the time that there was an active
and prompt exchange of literary novelties between the court circles
and the literary groups of the different cities, and also between the
Faculties of the universities. A controversy between two scholars or
men of letters (and there were, as said, many such controversies, some
of them exceedingly bitter) appears to have excited a larger measure
of interest and attention in cultivated circles throughout the country
than could probably be secured to-day for any purely literary or
scholastic issues. There must, therefore, have been in existence and
in circulation a very considerable mass of literature in manuscript
form, and we know from various sources that Florence particularly
was the centre of an important trade in manuscripts. I have not thus
far, however, been able to find any instances of the writers of this
period receiving any compensation from the publishers, booksellers, or
copyists, or any share in such profits as might be derived from the
sale of the manuscript copies of their writings. It seems probable that
the authors gave to the copyists the privilege (which it was in any
case really impracticable to withhold) of manifolding and distributing
such copies of the books as might be called for by the general public,
while the cost of the complimentary copies (often a considerable
number) given to the large circle of friends, seems as a rule to have
been borne by the author.

As the author had to take his compensation in the shape of fame (except
in the cases of receipts from patrons), the wider the circulation
secured for copies of his productions (provided only they were not
plagiarised), the larger his fund of--satisfaction. For substantial
compensation he could look only to the patron. Fortunately for the
impecunious writers of the day, it became fashionable for not a few of
the princes and nobles of Italy to play the rôle of Mæcenas, and by
many of these the support and encouragement given to literature was
magnificent, if not always judicious.

During the reigns of the last Visconti and of the first Sforza, or
from about 1440 to 1474, literature became fashionable at the Court
of Milan. Filippo Maria Visconti is described as a superstitious and
repulsive tyrant, and he could hardly by his own personality have
attracted to Lombardy men of intellectual tastes. Visconti appears,
however, to have considered that his Court would be incomplete
without scholars, and to have been willing to pay liberally for their
attendance. Piero Candido Decembrio was one of the most industrious of
the writers who were supported by Visconti. According to his epitaph,
he was responsible for no less than 127 books. Symonds speaks of his
memoir of Visconti as a vivid and vigorous study of a tyrant. Gasparino
da Barzizza was the Court letter-writer and rhetorician, and, as the
official orator, filled an important place in what was considered the
intellectual life of the city.

By far the most noteworthy, however, of the scholars who were attracted
to Milan by the Ducal bounty was Francesco Filelfo. He could hardly
be said to belong to Lombardy, as he was born in Ancona and educated
at Padua, and had passed a number of years in Venice, Constantinople,
Florence, Siena, and Bologna. The longest sojourn of his life, however,
was made in Milan, where he arrived in 1440, and where he enjoyed for
some years liberal emoluments from the Court.

Filelfo was evidently a man with great powers of acquisition and with
exceptional versatility. He brought back with him from Constantinople
(where he had remained for some years) a Greek bride from a noble
family, an extensive collection of Greek manuscripts, and a working
knowledge of the Greek language; and at a time when Greek ideas and
Greek literature were attracting the enthusiastic attention not
merely of the scholars but of the courtiers and men of fashion, these
possessions of Filelfo were exceptionally serviceable, and enabled
him to push his fortunes effectively. He seems to have possessed a
self-confidence at least equal to his learning. He speaks of himself
as having surpassed Virgil because he was an orator, and Cicero
because he was a poet. Symonds says, however, that, notwithstanding his
arrogance, he is entitled to the rank of the most universal scholar
of his age, and his self-assertion doubtless aided not a little in
securing prompt recognition for his learning. Venice paid him, in 1427,
a stipend of 500 sequins for a series of lectures on Eloquence. A year
later he accepted the post of lecturer in Bologna on Moral Philosophy
and Eloquence, with a stipend of 450 sequins. Shortly afterwards,
flattering offers tempted him to Florence, where he lectured on the
Greek and Latin classics and on Dante, with a stipend first of 250
sequins, and later of 450 sequins. He found time while there for the
preparation of translations of the _Rhetoric_ of Aristotle, and of a
number of other Greek works.

Filelfo’s arrogance and bad temper, and his fondness for invective
and satire, soon brought him into trouble with the literary circle of
Florence, and finally with the Medici, and he was compelled to withdraw
to Siena, where he remained four years with a stipend of 350 florins.
From there, after a brief visit to Bologna, he removed to Milan, where
his emoluments were much larger than any heretofore received, and
where, in the absence of any other scholars of equal attainments or
assumptions, he had the satisfaction of being the accepted literary
leader of the capital. In addition to his professional salary,
he received large sums and presents for addresses, orations, and
commemorative poems, which he was always ready to prepare. Such a
combination of rhetoric and literature was peculiarly characteristic of
the Italy of the time, and may be said to constitute a distinct phase
in the history of compensation for intellectual productions. Filelfo
published, in two ponderous volumes, his Satires, Odes, and other
fugitive pieces, under the title of _Convivia Mediolanensia_.

Notwithstanding the considerable sums which Filelfo earned through
his lectures and through his various rhetorical productions, he seems
always to have been in need of money. His tastes were expensive, while
his three wives had borne him no less than twenty-four children. In
his later years he gained the reputation of being very greedy of gold
and of making impudent demands which bore very much the character of
blackmail. Gregorio Lollio, writing (in 1452) to the Cardinal of Pavia,
describes Filelfo in the following words: “He is calumnious, envious,
vain, and so greedy of gold that he metes out praise or blame according
to the gifts he gets, both despicable as proceeding from a tainted
source.”[419]

From Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, he received a liberal stipend.
Pope Nicholas V., after reading some of his Satires (which Symonds
characterises as “infamous”) presented him with 500 ducats. Travelling
from Rome to Naples, Filelfo received more presents from Alfonso, who
dubbed him a knight. Continuing his journey, he secured honours and
rewards in Ferrara from Duke Borso, in Mantua from Marchese Gonzaga,
and in Rimini from Gismondo Malatesta. After the death of Sforza, he
accepted, in 1475, from Pope Sixtus IV., a professional Chair in Rome,
with a salary of 600 florins. He soon, however, quarrelled with the
Pope, and withdrew to Florence, where Lorenzo de’ Medici provided a
post for him as Professor of Greek Literature.

Filelfo died in Florence in his eighty-third year. He had probably
received larger emoluments for his work as an instructor, as a
rhetorician, and as a man of letters, than any man of his generation,
but he died without any means, and was buried by the charity of
the Florentines. His career, in its activities, vicissitudes,
controversies, successes, and bitternesses, was very typical of the
lives of the Italian scholars of the period.

At the time of Filelfo’s death, while in many other cities the
influence of the Renaissance was bringing together collections of books
and circles of scholars, and literary productiveness was increasing
throughout Italy, Florence still remained the capital of learning and
of refined culture. Lorenzo de’ Medici had, in 1469, succeeded to
Pietro, and of all the Medici it was Lorenzo whose influence was the
most important in furthering the intellectual and artistic movements
of the time. Symonds speaks of him as “a man of marvellous variety and
range of mental power, in whom ... the versatility of the Renaissance
found its fullest incarnation.”

Lorenzo attracted to his villa the greatest scholars and most brilliant
men of the time, a circle which included Poliziano, Landino, Ficino,
Pico della Mirandola, Alberti, Pulci, and Michael Angelo. The interests
of this circle, as of all similar Italian circles of the time, were
largely absorbed in the philosophy and literature of Greece, and
special attention was devoted to the teachings of Plato. Plato’s
writings were translated into Latin by Ficino, and the translation
was printed in 1482, at the cost of Filippo Valvio. Ficino was too
poor himself to undertake the publication of his works, and this was
the case with not a few of the distinguished authors of the age. The
presentation of books to the public required at this time what might be
called the endowment of literature, an endowment which was supplied by
the liberality of wealthy patrons possessed of literary appreciation
or public-spirited ambition, or of both. As Symonds expresses it,
“Great literary undertakings involved in that century the substantial
assistance of wealthy men, whose liberality was rewarded by a notice
in the colophon or in the title-page.” The formal dedication was an
invention of a somewhat later date.

The Ficino edition of _Plotinus_, printed at the expense of Lorenzo
de’ Medici, and published a few weeks after his death, bears the
inscription, _Magnifici sumptu Laurentii patriæ servatoris_. The
edition of _Homer_ of Lorenzo Alopa, issued in 1488, was printed at the
expense of either Bernardo Nerli or Giovanni Acciajuoli. These examples
of printed publications belong, however, to a later chapter. Ficino
followed up his translation of Plato’s work with a _Life of Plato_, and
an essay on the _Platonic Doctrine of Immortality_.

In 1484, appeared in the Florentine circle the beautiful and brilliant
Pico della Mirandola, a man who through his exceptional gifts, his
varied learning, and the charm of his personality, exercised a very
wide influence over his generation, and who may possibly be accepted
as at once the type and the flower of the Renaissance. Pico studied
at Bologna, and later at Paris. He printed, in 1489, in defence of
his philosophical theories, certain theses which were condemned as
heretical by Innocent VIII. In 1493, the ban of heterodoxy was renewed
by a brief of Alexander VI. Pico’s enquiring mind and scholarly ardour
covered a wide range of research, including the philosophy of the
Platonists, the mysteries of the Cabbala, and the system and theories
of Aquinas, Scotus, Albertus Magnus, and Averrhoes, and he proposed to
devote his learning and his life to the task of reconciling classical
traditions with the Christian creeds. Didot quotes the following
characteristic sentence from a letter written by Pico, February 11,
1491, to Aldus Manutius: “_Philosophia veritatem quærit, theologia
invenit, religio possidet_.” (Philosophy seeks truth, theology
discovers it, religion possesses it.)

Pico died at the age of thirty-one, before the book had been written in
which he proposed to demonstrate these positions. He was able, however,
to render a great service to Italy and to Europe in securing for his
friend Aldus the aid required for the establishment of the Aldine Press
in Venice. The details of the relations of the two men are given in the
chapter on Aldus.

Other noteworthy members of the literary circle which surrounded
Lorenzo de’ Medici, were Christoforo Landino, Leo Battista Alberti, and
Angelo Poliziano. Landino edited _Horace_ and _Virgil_ and translated
Pliny’s _Natural History_, and in 1481 published an edition of _Dante_,
and Battista Alberti, (whose comedy of _Philodoxius_, which passed for
an antique, was published by the Aldi, in 1588, as the work of Lepidus
Comicus), wrote three treatises on painting, and several volumes on
architecture. Alberti was more distinguished as an artist, architect,
and musician, than as an author. It was characteristic, however, of the
men of this group to be universal in their genius.

Symonds speaks of Poliziano as emphatically the representative of
the highest achievements of the age in scholarship, and as the first
Italian to combine perfect mastery over Latin and a correct sense of
Greek, with splendid genius for his native literature. His published
works included annotated editions of _Ovid_, _Suetonius_, _Statius_,
_Pliny_, and _Quintilian_, translations of _Epictetus_, _Galen_,
and _Hippocrates_, a series of _Miscellanea_, and most important of
all, the edition, printed from the famous Amalfi manuscript, of the
_Pandects_ of Justinian.

Among the smaller cities in which the Humanistic movement influenced
literature and furthered the development of learning, may be mentioned
Carpi, afterwards the home of Musurus and Aldus; Mirandola, the
birthplace of the brilliant Pico; Pesaro, where Alessandro and
Constanzo Sforza brought together a library rivalling that of the
Medici; Rimini, where Sigismondo Malatesta gathered about his fortress
a circle of scholars; and Urbino, where the good Duke Frederick brought
together one of the finest collections of manuscripts which Europe
had known, a collection valued at over 30,000 ducats. Vespasiano, who
served for some time as librarian, says that for fourteen years the
Duke kept from thirty to forty copyists employed in transcribing Greek
and Latin Manuscripts. The work of these copyists went on for some
years after the introduction of printing into Italy, for Frederick, in
common with not a few other of the scholarly nobles who were collectors
of manuscripts, distrusted and looked down upon the new art, and had no
interest in books which were merely mechanical reproductions.

Vespasiano da Bisticci, whose aid Frederick had secured in the
preparation of his library, was noted as an author, as a scribe, and as
a bookseller. Symonds speaks of the “rare merit” of the biographical
work in Vespasiano’s _Lives of Illustrious Men_, the memoirs of which
Symonds utilised largely in the preparation of his _Renaissance_.
Vespasiano’s literary work must have been done “in the intervals of
business,” for his business undertakings were important. He was the
largest dealer in manuscripts of his time. His purchasing agents and
correspondents were armed with instructions to secure authenticated
codices wherever these were obtainable, and the monasteries not only
of Italy but of Switzerland, South Germany, Hungary, Transylvania, and
the East were carefully searched for possible literary treasures. He
employed a large force of skilled copyists in the production of copies
of famous works, which copies were distributed through correspondents
and customers in the different scholarly centres of Europe. Possessing
himself a wide and exact scholarship, he gave his personal attention
to the selection of his texts, the training of his copyists and the
supervision of their work, so that a manuscript coming from Vespasiano
carried with it the prestige of accuracy and completeness.

Vespasiano’s scholarly knowledge and his special experience in
palæography were utilised by such clients as Nicholas V., Cosimo de’
Medici, Frederick of Urbino, and other lovers of literature, in the
formation of and development of their libraries. Vespasiano united,
therefore, the functions of a scholarly editor and commentator, a
collector, a book-manufacturer, a publisher and a bookseller, a
series of responsibilities which called for a wide range of learning,
accomplishments, and executive ability. It is evident from his career
and from the testimony of his friends and clients (terms in this case
practically identical) that he was devoted to literature for its own
sake. He accepted the rewards secured by his skill and enterprise,
and promptly expended these in fresh efforts for the development
and extension of liberal scholarship. Vespasiano may be called the
last, as he was probably the greatest of the book-dealers of the
manuscript period. Born in 1421 and living until 1498, he witnessed
the introduction of printing into Italy, and may easily have had
opportunities of handling the earlier productions of the Venetian
printing-press. Vespasiano was a fitting successor of Atticus and a
worthy precursor of Aldus, whose work in the distribution of scholarly
literature was, in fact, a direct continuation of his own.

As before mentioned, the trade in the production of manuscript copies
went on for a number of years after the introduction of printing. The
noblemen and wealthy scholars who had inherited, or who had themselves
brought together, collections of famous works in manuscript, were for
some time, not unnaturally, unwilling to believe that ordinary people
could, by means of the new invention, with a comparatively trifling
expenditure secure perfect and beautiful copies of the same works.
Before the death of Vespasiano, in 1498, however, the work of the
printing-press had come to be understood and cordially appreciated by
book-buyers and students of all classes, and the trade of the copyists
and of the manuscript-dealers had, excepting for newly discovered
texts, practically come to an end. The career of Vespasiano belongs
strictly to the chapter on the publishers of manuscripts, of whom he
was the most important. The man himself, however, through his character
and services, belongs essentially to the movement of the Renaissance,
of which movement he was at once a product and a leader.

During the reigns of Pope Innocent VIII., 1484-1492, and of Alexander
VI. (Borgia), 1492-1503, little or nothing was done in Rome to
further the development of literature. To the latter was in fact
due the initiating of the system of the subjection of the press to
ecclesiastical censorship, a system which for centuries to come was to
exercise the most baneful influence over literature and intellectual
activities and to interfere enormously with the establishment of any
assured foundation for property in literature. Some account of the long
contests carried on by the publishers of Venice against this claim for
ecclesiastical control of the productions of their presses, is given in
a later chapter.

Venice stood almost alone among the cities of Italy in resisting the
censorship of the Church, and even in Venice, the Church in the end
succeeded in the more important of its contentions. In Spain, the
ecclesiastical control was hardly questioned. In France, it was, after
a century of contest, practically merged in the censorship exercised
by the Crown, a control which was in itself fully as much as the
publishing trade could bear and continue to exist. In Austria and South
Germany, after the crushing out of the various reformation movements,
the Church and State worked in practical accord in keeping a close
supervision of the printing-presses. In North Germany, on the other
hand, ecclesiastical censorship never became important. The evils
produced by it were, however, serious and long enduring throughout a
large portion of the territory of Europe, and the papal Borgia, though
by no means a considerable personage, is responsible for bringing
into existence an evil which assumed enormous proportions in the
intellectual history of Europe.

Towards the close of the fifteenth century begins in Italy the age of
academies, associations of scholars and littérateurs for the furthering
of scholarly pursuits and of literary undertakings. One of the earlier
of these Academies was instituted in Rome, in 1468, by Julius Pomponius
Lætus (a pupil of Valla), for the special purpose of promoting the
study of Latin literature and Latin antiquities. Comedies of Plautus
and of other Latin dramatists were revived, and the attempt was made to
make Latin, at least for the scholarly circle, again a living language.
The Academy was suspected by Pope Paul II. to have some political
purpose, and it was for a time suppressed, but resumed its activities
some years later under the papacy of Alexander VI.

The Academy of Naples was instituted in 1470, under the leadership of
Beccadelli and Juvianus Pontanus, and with a membership comprising a
number of the brilliant scholars whom Alphonso the Magnanimous had
attracted to his Court. This society also devoted itself particularly
to the revival of an interest in Latin literature, and not a few of the
members became better known under the Latinised names there adopted by
them than by their Italian cognomens. Pomponius had written little and
hoped to be remembered through his pupils. Pontanus on the other hand,
wrote on many subjects, using for the purpose Latin, of which he was
a master. Symonds says that he chiefly deserves to be remembered for
his ethical treatises, but he seems himself to have attached special
importance to his amatory elegiacs and to a series of astronomical
hexameters entitled _Urania_.

In Florence, the Platonic Academy continued to flourish under the
auspices of the Rucellai family. It was suppressed in 1522, at the
time of the conspiracy against Giulio de’ Medici, but again revived
in 1540. In 1572, was organised in Florence the famous academy called
_Della Crusca_, which secured for itself a European reputation. In
Bologna, in 1504, the society of the _Viridario_ was instituted,
with the purpose of studying printed texts and of furthering the art
of printing. Bologna had a considerable number of other literary
societies, for the study of jurisprudence, chivalry, and other
subjects. Throughout Italy at this period academies multiplied, but the
greater number exercised no continued influence.

It is probable, however, that they all proved of service in preparing
the way for the printed literature which the Italian presses were,
after 1490, beginning to distribute, and that in widening the range of
popular interest in scholarship and in books generally, they did not
a little to render possible the work of Aldus and other early Italian
publishers. The academy founded by Aldus in Venice, for the prosecution
of Greek studies, will be referred to in the chapter on Aldus.

“The fifteenth century rediscovered antiquity; the sixteenth was
absorbed in slowly deciphering it. In the fifteenth century ‘educated
Europe’ is but a synonym for Italy. What literature there was north
of the Alps was in great part derived from, or was largely dependent
upon, the Italian movement. The fact that the movement originated
in the Latin peninsula, was decisive of the character of the first
age of classical learning (1400-1550). It was a revival of Latin as
opposed to Greek literature. It is now well understood that the fall
of Constantinople, though an influential incident of the movement,
ranks for little among the causes of the Renaissance. What was revived
in Italy in the fifteenth century was the interest of the Schools
of the early Empire--of the second and third century.... But in one
decisive feature, the literary sentiment of the fifteenth century was a
reproduction of that of the Empire. It was rhetorical, not scientific.
Latin literature as a whole is rhetorical.... The divorce of the
literature of knowledge and the literature of form which characterised
the epoch of decay under the early empire, characterised equally
the epoch of revival in the Italy of the Popes.... The knowledge and
wisdom buried in the Greek writers presented a striking contrast to the
barren sophistic which formed the curriculum of the Latin schools. It
became the task of the scholars of the second period of the classical
revival to disinter this knowledge.... Philology had meant composition
and verbal emendation; it now meant the apprehension of the ideas
and usages of the ancient world. Scholars had exerted themselves to
write, they now bent all their effort to know.... There came now into
existence what has ever since been known as ‘learning,’ in the special
sense of the term. The first period of humanism in which the words of
the ancient authors had been studied, was thus the preparatory school
for the humanism of the second period, in which the matter was the
object of attention.

As Italy had been the home of classical taste in the first period,
France became the home of classical learning in the second. Single
names can be mentioned, such as Victorius or Sigonius in Italy,
Mursius or Vulcanius in the Low Countries, who were distinguished
representatives of ‘learning,’ but in Bulæus, Turnebus, Lambrinus,
Scaliger, Casaubon, and Saumaise, France produced a constellation of
humanists whose fame justly eclipsed that of all their contemporaries.

If we ask why Italy did not continue to be the centre of the humanist
movement, which she had so brilliantly inaugurated, the answer is that
the intelligence was crushed by the reviviscence of ecclesiastical
ideas. Learning is the result of research, and research must be free
and cannot coexist with the claim of the Catholic clergy to be superior
to enquiry. The French school, it will be observed, is wholly in fact
or in intention Protestant. As soon as it was decided (as it was before
1600) that France was to be a Catholic country, and the University of
Paris a Catholic university, learning was extinguished in France.
France saw without regret and without repentance the expatriation
of her unrivalled scholars. With Scaliger and Saumaise, the seat of
learning was transferred from France to Holland. The third period of
classical learning thus coincides with the Dutch school. From 1593, the
date of Scaliger’s removal to Leyden, the supremacy in the republic of
learning was possessed by the Dutch. In the course of the eighteenth
century, the Dutch school was gradually supplanted by the North German,
which from that time forward has taken, and still possesses, the lead
in philological science.”[420]

[Illustration]




[Illustration]

CHAPTER II.

THE INVENTION OF PRINTING AND THE WORK OF THE FIRST PRINTERS OF HOLLAND
AND GERMANY.

1440-1528.


“FOUR men, Gutenberg, Columbus, Luther, and Copernicus, stand at
the dividing line of the Middle Ages, and serve as boundary stones
marking the entrance of mankind into a higher and finer epoch of its
development.”[421]

It would be difficult to say which one of the four has made the
largest contribution to this development or has done the most to
lift up the spirit of mankind and to open for men the doors to the
new realms that were in readiness. The Genoese seaman and discoverer
opens new realms to our knowledge and imagination, leads Europe from
the narrow restrictions of the Middle Ages out into the vast space of
Western oceans, and in adding to the material realms controlled by
civilisation, widens still more largely the range of its thought and
fancy. The Reformer of Wittenberg, in breaking the bonds which had
chained the spirits of his fellow-men and in securing for them again
their rights as individual Christians, conquers for them a spiritual
realm and brings them into renewed relations with their Creator. The
great astronomer shatters, through his discoveries, the fixed and petty
conceptions of the universe which had ruled the minds of mankind, and
in bringing to them fresh light on the nature and extent of created
things, widens at the same time their whole understanding of themselves
and of duty. The citizen of Mayence may claim to have unchained
intelligence and given to it wings. He utilised lead no longer as a
death-bringing ball, but in the form of life-quickening letters which
were to bring before thousands of minds the teachings of the world’s
thinkers. Each one of the four had his part in bringing to the world
light, knowledge, and development.

At the time when the art of printing finally took shape in the mind
of Gutenberg, the direction of literary and intellectual interests
of Germany rested, as we have seen, largely with Italy. The fact,
however, that the new art had its birthplace, not in Florence, which
was at that time the centre of the literary activities of Europe, but
in Mayence, heretofore a town which had hardly been connected at all
with literature, and the further fact that the printing-presses were
carrying on their work in Germany for nearly fifteen years before
two printers, themselves Germans, set up the first press in Italy,
exercised, of necessity, an important influence in inciting literary
activities throughout Germany and in the relations borne by Germany to
the scholarship of the world.

The details of the life and early work of Gutenberg are at best
but fragmentary, and have been a subject of much discussion. It is
not necessary, for the purpose of this treatise, to give detailed
consideration to the long series of controversies as to the respective
claims of Gutenberg of Mayence, of Koster of Haarlem, or of other
competitors, as to the measure of credit to be assigned to each in
the original discovery or of the practical development of the the
printing-press. It seems in any case evident that whatever minds
elsewhere were at that time puzzling over the same problem, it was the
good fortune of Gutenberg to make the first practical application of
the printing-press to the production of impressions from movable type,
while it was certainly from Mayence that the art spread throughout the
cities, first of Germany, and later of Italy and France.

It is to be borne in mind (and I speak here for the non-technical
reader) that, as indicated in the above reference, the distinction and
important part of the invention of Gutenberg was, not the production of
a press for the multiplication of impressions, but the use of movable
type and the preparation of the form from which the impressions were
struck off. The art of printing from blocks, since classified as
xylographic printing, had been practised in certain quarters of Europe
for fifty years or more before the time of Gutenberg, and if Europe had
had communication with China, xylography might have been introduced
four or five centuries earlier.

With the block-books, the essential thing was the illustrations, and
what text or letterpress accompanied these was usually limited to a
few explanatory or descriptive words engraved on the block, above,
beneath or around the picture. Occasionally, however, as in the _Ars
Moriendi_, there were entire pages of text engraved, like the designs,
on the solid block. The earlier engraving was done on hard wood, but,
later, copper was also employed. It is probable that the block-books
originated in the Netherlands, and it is certain that in such towns
as Bruges, Antwerp, and Amsterdam, the art was developed more rapidly
than elsewhere, so that during the first half of the fifteenth century,
the production of wood engravings and of books made up of engravings
(printed only on one side, and accompanied by a few words of text),
began to form an important article of trade. The subjects of these
designs were for the most part Biblical, or at least religious. One
of the earlier of the block-book publications and probably the most
characteristic specimen of the class, is the volume known as the
_Biblia Pauperum_. This was a close imitation of a manuscript book
that had for five or six centuries been popular as a work of religious
instruction. It had been composed about 850, by S. Ausgarius, a monk
of Corbie, who afterwards became Bishop of Hamburg. The _scriptorium_
established by him at Corbie was said to have been the means of
preserving from destruction a number of classics, including the
_Annals_ of Tacitus.[422] The use, five centuries later, as one of the
first productions of the printing-press, of the monk’s own composition,
may be considered as a fitting acknowledgement of the service thus
rendered by him to the world’s literature. Examples of manuscript
copies of the _Biblia Pauperum_ are in existence in the _Bibliothèque
Nationale_ in Paris, in Munich, in the British Museum, and elsewhere,
and there is no difficulty in comparing these with the printed copies
produced in the Netherlands, which are also represented in these
collections.

It is probable that Laurence Koster of Haarlem, whose name is, later,
associated with printing from movable type, was himself an engraver of
block-books. Humphreys is, in fact, inclined to believe that the first
block-book edition of the _Biblia Pauperum_ was actually Koster’s work,
basing this opinion on the similarity of the compositions and of their
arrangement to those of the _Speculum Humanæ Salvationis_, which was
the first work printed from movable type, and the production of which
is now generally credited to Koster.[423] The _Biblia Pauperum_ was
printed from blocks in Germany as late as 1475, but before that date an
edition had been printed from movable type by Pfister in Bamberg.

As has been pointed out by many of the writers on the subject, the
so-called invention of printing was not so much the result of an
individual inspiration, as the almost inevitable consequence of a long
series of experiments and of partial processes which had been conducted
in various places where the community was interesting itself in the
multiplication of literature.

If, as is probably the case, the first book printed from movable type
is to be credited to Koster, it remains none the less the case that
Gutenberg’s process must have been worked out for itself, and that the
German possessed, what the Hollander appears to have lacked, not merely
the persistence and the practical understanding required to produce
a single book, but the power to overcome obstacles and to instruct
others, and was thus able to establish the new art on a lasting
foundation.

The claims of the Hollanders under which Koster is to be regarded as
the first printer, or at least (bearing in mind the Chinese precedents
in the tenth century) the first European printer, from movable type,
claims which Humphreys accepts as well founded, are in substance as
follows: Laurence Koster was born, somewhere in Holland, about 1370,
and died in Haarlem about 1440. He is believed to have made his first
experiments with movable wooden types about 1426, and to have worked
with metal types about ten years later. The principal of the earlier
authorities concerning Koster’s career is a certain Hadrian Junius, who
completed, in 1569, a history of Holland, which was published in 1588.
He speaks of Koster as being a man of an honourable family, in which
the office of Sacristan (custos, Coster or Koster) was hereditary,
and he describes in detail the development of the invention of type,
from the cutting of pieces of beech-bark into the form of letters, to
the final production of the metal fonts. Junius goes on to relate the
method under which Koster’s first book (from type), _Speculum Humanæ
Salvationis_, was printed, in 1430. This book, the origin of which is
not known, had for many years been popular among the Benedictines,
and few of their monasteries were without a copy. As a result of
this popularity, many examples of the manuscript copies have been
preserved, some of which are in the Arundel collection in the British
Museum. Zani says that the _Speculum_ was compiled for the assistance
of poor preachers, and in support of this view he quotes certain lines,
which may serve also as an example of Latinity and of the general style:

  _Predictum prohemium hujus libri de contentis compilavi
  Et propter pauperes predicatores hoc opponere curavi._[424]

Koster appears to have produced, about 1428, an edition of a portion
of the _Speculum_ in which the entire pages (presenting on the upper
half two designs, and on the lower two columns of text) are printed
from solid wooden blocks. Humphreys gives examples of these pages. The
cutting of the text, all the letters of which had, of course, to be cut
in reverse, is a wonderful piece of work. About 1430, was completed the
first issue printed from movable types. The arrangement of the pages
is the same, the upper half is occupied with two designs (printed in
brown ink, from wooden blocks), and the lower half is given to the
text, printed in black ink, from the metal type. The first typographic
edition contains a number of xylographic pages. In the type-pages, the
block-illustration was printed first, and the sheet was then imposed
again for the printing of the text. Both the designs and the text were
modelled to follow very closely the character of the manuscripts of
the period. The volume is undoubtedly the earliest European example of
printing from type, and the evidence that it was the work of Koster,
and that it was produced not later than 1430, or about twenty years
earlier than the Bible of Gutenberg, is, I understand, now accepted by
the best authorities as practically conclusive. Three editions of the
book were printed by Koster before his death in 1440, the third being
printed in Dutch (instead of Latin), and being entirely typographic.
This is the edition seen and described (128 years later) by Junius.
After specifying the method employed by Koster (according to his own
views concerning movable type), Junius goes on to say, “It was by this
method that he produced impressions of engraved plates, to which he
added ‘separate’ letters. I have seen a book of this kind, the first
rude effort of his invention, printed by him on one side only; this
book was entitled the _Mirror of Our Salvation_.” While this evidence
of Junius comes first into record one hundred and twenty-eight years
after the time assigned to the printing of Koster’s first book, it is
the conclusion of Humphreys, Blades, and other historians that, in
consideration of the circumstances under which Junius wrote, and the
nature of the information which was evidently at that time available
for him, his testimony may safely be accepted as conclusive. Junius
goes on to say that Koster, having perfected his system, and finding
a rapidly increasing demand for his printed books, was unable to
manage the work with the aid of the members of his own family. He
took foreign workmen into his employ, which eventually led to the
abstraction of his secret and caused the credit of his invention to
be given to others.[425] Junius gives further details concerning the
channels through which he secured the record of the work of Koster. He
refers to a certain Nicholas Galius who had been his first preceptor,
and who remembered having heard the facts connected with Koster’s
discovery from a certain Cornelius when the latter was over eighty
years of age. Cornelius testified that he had himself been a binder
in the establishment of Koster, and the Dutch historian, Meerman, has
discovered in the records of the church of Haarlem a memorandum dated
1474, which is evidence that there was at that date a binder in the
town called Cornelius.[426]

In claiming for Holland the prestige of inventing the several
distinctive processes connected with the printing of books, Humphreys
sums up as follows: It is beyond dispute that the Dutch were the first
to produce block-books, and thus were virtually the first printers
of books. It is also a matter of record that it was the printers of
Holland who first devised the art of stereotyping, a process which
was applied by John Miller of Amsterdam towards the close of the
seventeenth century. There is, therefore, apart from the details
above specified and from the evidence of tradition, a strong natural
presumption in favour of the development in Holland of the intervening
step of substituting movable types for carved pages of letters.
Humphreys points out that there are other references to the production
in the Netherlands of books from movable metal types, before the date
at which Gutenberg’s first volume was completed in Mayence. In a
record of accounts of Jean Robert, Abbé of Cambrai, the manuscript of
which has been preserved in the archives of the city of Lille, appears
the entry: “Item, for a printed (_getté en molle_) _Doctrinal_ that
I sent for to Bruges by Macquart, who is a writer at Valenciennes,
in the month of January, 1445, for Jacquet, twenty sous, Tournois.
Little Alexander had one the same, that the church paid for.” It is
stated later in the record that one of these books proved to be so
“full of faults” that it had to be replaced by a written copy.[427]
The purport of the term _getté en molle_ (which might possibly have
been written _jetté_ or _guetté_) was first elucidated by M. Besuard,
who pointed out that it evidently stood for “cast in a mould,” the
reference being to the metallic types, which were so cast. In the
letters of naturalisation accorded, in 1474, to the first printers with
movable types established in Paris, the term used is _escritoire en
molle_, or writing by means of moulds or moulded letters. Humphreys is
inclined to give credit to the theory, which is presented by many of
the advocates of Koster, that the first suggestion of the new art was
brought to Gutenberg in Strasburg by a workman who had been employed
by Koster in Haarlem, but he admits that this theory is supported by
practically nothing that can be called evidence, and depends for its
authority simply upon the sequence of events, and upon the surmises
and probabilities suggested by Junius. It remains the case that after
the death of Koster, which occurred either in 1440 or in 1439, the
production of books from type came to an end in Holland, and that for
instruction in the new art Europe was indebted not to Haarlem but to
Mayence. We may accept as conclusive the evidence which gives to Koster
the credit of producing the first book printed (outside of China) from
movable type, without lessening the value of the service rendered by
Gutenberg. The shores of our Western Continent were undoubtedly visited
by Eric and his Northmen, but it was Columbus who gave to Europe the
New World.

The production of printed books, which changed the whole condition of
literary production and of literary ownership, is to be traced directly
to the operations of Gutenberg and Fust. Kapp mentions that if it were
not for the records of certain court processes of Strasburg and of
Mayence, we should have hardly any trustworthy references whatsoever to
the work or the relations of Gutenberg prior to 1450.

By means of these court records, however, it has proved possible to
secure some data concerning various undertakings in which Gutenberg was
engaged before he devoted himself to his printing-office. He belonged
to a noble family of Mayence, the family name of which was originally
Gensfleisch, a name Latinised by some writers of the time as Ansicarus.
For more than a century, the Gensfleische stood at the head of the
nobility of the city in the long series of contests carried on with
the guilds and citizens.

Until the sacking of the city, after the outbreak of October,
1462, Mayence was the most important of the free cities and of the
commercial centres of the middle Rhine district, and was an important
competitor for the general trade of central Europe with Strasburg on
the upper river and with Cologne in the region below. The citizens
felt themselves strong enough, with the beginning of the fifteenth
century, to make a sturdy fight against the old-time control claimed by
the nobility, and as early as 1420, they had overcome the patricians
in a contest which turned upon the reception of the newly chosen
Elector, Conrad III. As one result of this struggle, a number of the
Gensfleische found themselves among the exiles.

Gutenberg’s father, whose name was Frilo, had held the office of Tax
Receiver or General Accountant in the city, and was among those who
were banished in 1420. Gutenberg himself was born either in 1397
or 1398. He appears to have passed a portion of his youth at the
little village of Eltville, and from there went to Strasburg. In the
year 1433, an entry in the tax record of Mayence speaks of Henne
Gensfleisch, called Gutenberg, who was an uncle of the printer. About
the year 1440, Gutenberg was engaged in Strasburg in the manufacture
of looking-glasses, and is already referred to as a man of scientific
attainments and learned in inventions.

One of the court records above referred to gives the details of a suit
brought by the brothers Dritzehn against Gutenberg, in connection with
this first manufacturing business. Another Dritzehn, a brother or a
cousin of the above, had as early as 1437 applied to Gutenberg to
be instructed (in consideration of the payment of an honorarium) in
a “certain art” (_in etlicher kunst_). Shortly thereafter Gutenberg
entered into an arrangement with a certain Hans Riffe of Lichtenau,
and instructed him in the trade of manufacturing mirrors, Riffe making
an investment in the business and sharing the profits.

Dritzehn made in all, three contracts with Gutenberg; under the first,
he was instructed in the art of stone-polishing, and took some interest
in this branch of Gutenberg’s business; under the second, he interested
himself in the manufacturing of mirrors; while the third contract
refers to certain arts and undertakings (_kunste und afentur_) in which
Dritzehn also received instruction, and to the carrying on of which he
also contributed an investment.

It is the opinion of some of the students on the subject that the
researches of Gutenberg, which resulted in 1450 in the production of a
working printing-press, had begun at least ten years back, and that, in
connection with these researches, he had been obliged to borrow money
or to accept investments from Dritzehn and from other associates. The
vague terms used in referring to the undertakings which were associated
with or which followed the mirror manufacturing business (“a certain
art”) indicate that these associates had been cautioned to give no
information as to the precise nature of the work in which Gutenberg
was experimenting. Humphreys is of opinion that the term “manufacture
of looking-glasses” was used partly as a blind and partly as a joke,
and that Gutenberg was actually engaged in the production (with
the aid of one of Koster’s assistants) of copies of the _Speculum_
(Mirror). Against this view is the fact that Gutenberg did not print
the _Speculum_ at all. If Gutenberg were already working over the
printing-press invention at the time of his association with Dritzehn
and with Riffe, there may be some justice in the claim of Strasburg to
be the birthplace of the printing-press. The completed press, however,
was not produced until Gutenberg had returned to the old home city of
the family--Mayence.

After the close of the suit brought by Dritzehn against Gutenberg,
that is to say, after 1440, there are no further references to
Gutenberg’s undertakings in Strasburg. It is not even known whether
or not he continued business operations there, but it appears that he
was dwelling there as late as 1444. In 1448, he is recorded as again a
citizen of Mayence, and it was in Mayence that, in 1450, the completed
invention became known to the world.

Gutenberg’s name stands on no title-page and is connected with no
colophon. The fact, however, that the full responsibility for the
invention belongs to him is borne witness to by his contemporaries,
Peter Schöffer, Ulrich Zell, the Abbot Trithemius, Jacob Wimpheling,
and others. In a chronicle of the archbishop of Mayence, continued to
the year 1555 and compiled by Count Wilhelm von Zimmern, it is recorded
that the noble art of book-printing was discovered in Mayence by a
worthy citizen named Gutenberg, who devoted to the invention all his
time and resources until he had brought it to a successful completion.

In 1470, a letter was written by the scholar, Wilhelm Fichet, of Paris,
to the historian, Robert Gaguin, which letter was later printed on
the last sheet of a volume published in Paris and in Basel, entitled:
_Gasparini Pergamensis Orthographiæ Liber_. This letter contains an
enthusiastic description of the new art of book-printing discovered in
Germany by Gutenberg. The writer says: “There has been discovered in
Germany a wonderful new method for the production of books, and those
who have mastered this method are taking their invention from Mayence
out into the world somewhat as the old Grecian warriors took their
weapons from the belly of the Trojan horse. The light of this wonderful
discovery will spread from Germany to all parts of the earth. I have
been told by three foreigners--Kranz, Freiburger, and Gering--that
Gutenberg has succeeded in producing books by means of metal letters in
place of using the handiwork of the scribes.”

Fichet goes on to speak of Gutenberg as “bringing more blessings
upon the world than were given by the goddess Ceres, for Ceres could
bestow only material food, while through Gutenberg the productions of
the thinkers could be brought within the reach of all people.” This
letter was written only two years after the death of Gutenberg, and
as it came from Basel, one of the first cities to which the new art
had been carried from Mayence, it constitutes very good contemporary
evidence as to the immediate credit that was given to Gutenberg for the
invention.[428]

The historical date now given for the completion of the invention is
August 22, 1450. On this date Gutenberg entered into a contract with
Johann Fust, a wealthy citizen and goldsmith of Mayence, under which
contract Fust loaned to Gutenberg, with interest at 6 per cent. (a
low rate for that period), the sum of 800 gulden in gold. This sum
Gutenberg agreed to utilise in developing his invention, while the
material of the workshop to be instituted was pledged to Fust as
security for the repayment of the loan. The sum proved insufficient
for establishing the necessary plant, and two years later Fust added a
further sum of 800 gulden.

Gutenberg pledged himself, as afterwards stated in the lawsuit which
arose between Fust and himself, to use this money for the printing of
books,--“_das werk der bücher_.” At the time Gutenberg secured this
loan, it seemed evident that, in experimenting with and in developing
his invention, he had exhausted his own entire resources.

Gutenberg could, of course, lay no claim to being in any literal sense
of the term the first printer. Printing in one form or another had been
carried on in Germany and elsewhere for a number of years, and printing
from movable blocks had, in fact, been done in China 400 years or more
before the beginning of Gutenberg’s work. As early as the twelfth
century, says Kapp, there are numerous references to cloth printers,
stampers of letters, and printers of maps. The oldest wood-cut known to
have been produced in Europe, is a representation of S. Christopher,
and bears date 1423. At about this time, and probably, in fact, some
years earlier, was begun in Holland, as previously stated, the work
of printing from wooden blocks, the designs being principally devoted
to holy subjects. In connection with such designs, there had been
printing also from letterings cut out of solid wooden blocks, and these
letterings had even in some cases been cut upon blocks sufficient to
occupy an entire page.

The practical contribution made by Gutenberg, which developed from the
easy processes of stamping designs and brief lines of lettering, a
method by means of which whole books could be produced, was first, in
the use of movable metal type, produced by casting, and second, in an
improvement made in the mechanism of the hand presses by which larger
sheets could be worked.

The first work produced with this movable metal type was a Latin
version of the Bible. The description of this volume is first given in
a chronicle of Cologne, dating from the year 1499, the statements in
which rest upon the authority of Ulrich Zell, who was the first printer
in Cologne.

Concerning the further operations of Gutenberg, we are mainly dependent
upon the references in the records of the suit brought by Fust, in
1445, for the repayment of his loan, and upon a document of 1468
in which a certain Dr. Humery entered into an undertaking with the
Archbishop of Mayence that the printing-office plant left by the
deceased Johann Gutenberg shall not be permitted to be taken out of
the city of Mayence. This later reference had to do with a second
printing-press established by Gutenberg with the aid of the said Humery.

In the suit brought by Fust, Gutenberg contended that the second
payment of 800 gulden agreed upon had never been given to him in full.
He stated further that Fust had agreed to advance 300 gulden per year
for use in the purchase of materials, paper, parchment, type-metal, and
ink. The matter of the later accountings between Fust and Gutenberg is
evidently a complicated one and need not be considered here in detail.
Gutenberg’s inability to repay the first and more important loan for
the payment of which his first printing-press had been mortgaged,
caused the ownership of this office to come into the control of Fust.

Fortunately, by the time his first venture had thus been closed, as
far at least as he was concerned, he had been able to give sufficient
evidence of the importance and of the commercial value of the
undertaking to be in a position to interest others in his schemes.

His second printing-press was in like manner pledged to the associate
who provided the capital,--Dr. Humery,--and the business of this
office appears to have been continued without break until the time
of Gutenberg’s death in 1468. With these new resources at hand,
Gutenberg was able to cast some new fonts of type, and to make various
improvements in his working methods.

The first issues of the new press, the organisation of which appears to
have been completed about 1457, were volumes containing the writings
of Mätthaus de Cracovia and Thomas Aquinas. The third book was the
famous first edition of the _Catholicon_, a grammatical compilation
of the Dominican monk Balbus from Genoa. The _Catholicon_ was a folio
containing no less than 373 rather closely printed sheets. In the
meantime, Fust had associated with him Schöffer or Schoiffher, who had
been an assistant of Gutenberg, and the two were continuing work in the
original printing-office.

The sacking of Mayence, in 1462, by Adolph of Nassau, put an end, for
the time, to all business in the city, including the work of the new
printing-presses. Gutenberg betook himself to the neighbouring town of
Eltville, which, as early as 1420, had given shelter to his parents,
and there he carried on his printing for a time under the protection of
Archbishop Adolph.

Kapp points out that the printing art had its development, not in a
university centre, but in a commercial town, and was from the outset
carried on, not by scholars, but by workers of the people, and that
this fact doubtless had an important influence in bringing the whole
business of the production of books and the distribution of literature
into closer relations with the mass of the German people than was the
case in France.

In France, as will be noted later, the first printers were directly
associated with the university, succeeding immediately to the official
university scribes, and the production of books through the presses
continued to be under direct control of the university, as had been the
case from the beginning with the production of books in manuscript.
The fact that the control of the first French presses rested with the
university Faculty, undoubtedly exercised an important influence on
the choice of the books to be printed, and the first issues of the
French presses were, therefore, in the main restricted to editions of
the classics or to works of jurisprudence and medicine belonging to
the official lists of the university texts. The earlier issues of the
German press, on the other hand, were books belonging in no way to the
university _curriculum_, but were addressed directly to the interests
of the people at large.

While the modifications introduced by Gutenberg into the methods of
printing, under which the old engraved blocks were replaced by movable
leaden type, seem slight in themselves, they constituted nevertheless a
new art. The actual changes were but inconsiderable, but the practical
result was a revolution in the possibilities of the press.

Gutenberg’s work as a printer was, from a commercial point of view,
never successful. During the eighteen years which elapsed between the
time of his invention and the date of his death, he seems to have been
always under the pressure of debt and money difficulties. He had in
fact no time to make money. He had given up, in his devotion to his
invention, previous business undertakings which were remunerative,
and he had absorbed in the development of the printing-press all the
resources that he could control. His interest, however, was evidently
that of perfecting an art rather than of creating a business; and
in spite of his various difficulties and his several lawsuits with
his associates, it is in evidence as part of the testimony in these
very suits, that he was recognised by all as a man of knowledge and
character, and as a born leader, whose integrity of purpose and whose
nobility of aim were acknowledged by all with whom he had to do.
With all his misfortunes, he seems never for a moment to have lost
confidence in the value to the world of his idea, and to this idea,
with no thought of personal gain or advantage, he was willing to devote
his means and his life.

The difference between the production each year of a few hundred
copies of religious or classical works by the laborious toil of the
monks or the university scribes, works which could at best benefit
only the limited circle of readers who were within reach either of the
monasteries or of the universities, and a world-wide distribution, as
well of the great books of the earlier times which belonged to the
world’s literature as of the current thoughts of the contemporary
generation, was a difference, not of degree, but of kind. It was a
revolution in the history of human thought and in the influence of
thought upon humanity.

If the invention of printing had not taken shape in the brain of
Gutenberg, it would doubtless have come to the world through some
other worker, and, in fact, with no very great delay, for other men
were already busying themselves with the same great need and were on
the track of the same means of supplying the need. As the history
stands, however, the credit for the revolution must be given to the
mirror-maker of Mayence. Other sailors would certainly have found
their way to the Western Continent if the opportunity or the attempt
of Columbus had failed, but it is to Columbus that history gives the
laurel crown.

Gutenberg, and the printers who followed him, naturally selected as the
first models for their newly founded type the script letters with which
they were familiar in the best manuscripts. The first font of type
manufactured by Gutenberg, which was used in his earliest publication,
_The Folio Bible_, was known as the “missal type,” having been copied
from the script adopted by the monks for the books of worship. This
style of type was followed for a long time for Bibles and for religious
works generally. One of the earlier objections against printed books
was that they were so much less beautiful in their appearance than the
work of the best scribes, and it was the finest script that remained
as the ideal to be attained by the type-founders and the clear black
impression of the best oak-gall writing ink that was to be imitated by
the impressions from the presses.

The scholarly lovers of fine books in Germany regarded the new art at
the outset with no little disapproval and criticism. The collectors
who had brought together, with much labour and expenditure, stores
of valuable manuscripts dreaded lest, through the multiplication of
comparatively inexpensive copies of their texts, the value of their
collections should be taken away. When the messengers of Cardinal
Bessarion were shown by the Greek Laskaris (later the author of the
first Greek grammar that came into print), a specimen of one of the
earlier printed books, they spoke sneeringly of this so-called
discovery which had been made by a barbarian from a German city.[429]
The great manuscript-dealer, Vespasiano, writing in 1482 concerning
the magnificent ducal library in Urbino, the volumes in which had
been largely either collected or purchased by himself or under his
own direction, says: “In this library all the volumes are of perfect
beauty, all written, by skilled scribes, on parchment and many of
them adorned with exquisite miniatures. The collection contains no
single printed book. The Duke (Frederick) would be ashamed to have a
printed book in his library.”[430] By collectors like Frederick and
manuscript-dealers like Vespasiano, the new art was considered to be
merely a mechanical method of producing inartistic volumes, with which
none but uncultivated people could be satisfied.

For a number of years, therefore, after the work of the first presses,
there were still produced beautiful specimens of manuscripts, more
particularly of Italian and French books of worship, and for this class
of manuscripts the work of the hand illuminators and miniature painters
continued to be utilised. In Germany there are various examples of
books which had been printed, being again produced in written copy, as
for instance, the _Chronicon Urspergense_, of Hroswitha.[431] It was
also the case that for the production of large choir-books the work of
the scribes continued to be useful.

Trithemius, Abbot of Sponheim, wrote to Gerlach, Abbot of Deutz, a
letter which was printed in 1494 in Mayence, under the title, _De Laude
Scriptorum Manualium_. In this he says:

“A work written on parchment could be preserved for a thousand years,
while it is probable that no volume printed on paper will last for more
than two centuries. Many important works have not been printed, and the
copies required of these must be prepared by scribes. The scribe who
ceases his work because of the invention of the printing-press can be
no true lover of books, in that, regarding only the present, he gives
no due thought to the intellectual cultivation of his successors. The
printer has no care for the beauty and the artistic form of books,
while with the scribe this is a labour of love.”[432]

Notwithstanding such criticism on the part of a few scholarly
churchmen, the influence of Rome and of the Church generally, during
the earlier work of the printers, was very largely favourable and had
not a little to do with the support given to the work which might
easily otherwise have been given up for lack of adequate business
return. The Church of Rome felt itself at this time sufficiently secure
in its control of the minds of men to be prepared to utilise to full
advantage all methods for distributing its doctrinal literature, and
to have no dread as to these same means being used for the scattering
of heretical teachings. The popes of the time, largely influenced by
the spirit of the Renaissance, gave a cordial welcome to the revival
of scholarly interests and to the printing-press as an important
means for furthering the general education and the intellectual
development of the community. Their interest was by no means limited
to the distribution of doctrinal works, but in these earlier years of
publishing they welcomed, and to a considerable extent co-operated in,
the production of editions, for general circulation, of the works of
the pagan classics.

Hegel says, in his _Philosophy of History_, that the renewed interest
in the studying of the writings of the ancients found an important
support in the service of the printing-press. He goes on to point out
that the Church felt no anxiety concerning this renewed interest in
pagan literature, and evidently did not imagine that this literature
was introducing into the minds of men a new element of suggestion and
of inquiry.

It may be considered as one of the fortunate circumstances attending
the introduction of the art of printing that the popes of the time were
largely men of liberal education and of intellectual tastes, while one
or two, such as Nicholas V., Julius II., and Leo X., had a very keen
personal interest in literature and were collectors of books.

The fact that Leo X. was a luxury-loving, free-thinking prince rather
than a devoted Christian leader or teacher, may very probably have been
in the end a service for the enlightenment and development of his own
generation and of the generations that were to come. An earnest and
narrow-minded head of the Church could, during the first years of the
sixteenth century, have retarded not a little the development of the
work of producing books for the community at large.

It was a number of years before the dread of the use of the
printing-press for the spread of heretical doctrines and of a
consequent undermining of the authority of the Church assumed such
proportions in the minds of the popes in Rome and with the bishops
elsewhere, as to cause the influence of the Church to be placed against
the interests of the world of literature. As a result of this early
acceptance by the Church of the printing-press as a useful ally and
servant, the first Italian presses were supported by bishops and
cardinals in the work of producing classics for scholarly readers,
while at the other extremity of the Church organisation, and at a
distance of a thousand miles or more from Rome, the Brothers of
Common Life were using the presses in their Brotherhood homes for the
distribution of cheap books among the people.

Berthold von Henneberg, Elector of Mayence, speaks of “The Divine Art
of Printing.”[433] The Carthusian monk, Werner Rolewinck, writes, in
his _Outline History of the World_ (_Fasciculus Temporum_): “The art
of printing which has been discovered in Mayence is the art of arts,
the science of sciences, by means of which it will be possible to place
in the hands of all men treasures of literature and of knowledge which
have heretofore been out of their reach.”

Joh. Rauchler, the first Rector of the Tübingen High School (later the
University of Tübingen), rejoices that through the new art so many
authors can now be brought within the reach of students in Latin,
Greek, and Hebrew, authors who are witnesses for the Christian faith,
and the service of whose writings to the Church and to the world is so
great, that he can but consider “this art as a gift directly from God
himself.”[434] Felix Fabri, Prior of the Dominican monastery in Ulm,
says, in his _Historia Suevorum_, issued in the year 1459, that “no art
that the world has known can be considered so worthy, so useful, so
much to be esteemed, indeed, so divine as that which has now, through
the Grace of God, been discovered in Mayence.”

The first printing work done by the Brothers of Common Life dates
from 1468. They appear to have promptly utilised their scribes as
compositors and their illuminators as designers for the new form in
which their books were produced. Many of the Benedictine monasteries
which had for so many centuries led the way in the preservation and
the multiplication of literature at once associated presses with their
monasteries and had their monks trained in the art of setting type and
of printing sheets.

Among the monastery printing-presses were those of the Carthusian
monastery in Strasburg, the monastery of S. Ulrich and Afra, in
Augsburg, and the Benedictine monasteries in Nuremberg and Rostock.
As a rule, in places where the work of scribes had been active, the
printing-press found a ready acceptance. It was not long, however,
before so great a development in the methods of the printing business
was brought about that it became difficult for the monasteries to carry
on the work effectively, and by the middle of the sixteenth century the
production of books in monasteries had practically ceased.

The favourable relations between the Church and the printers were
checked by the Humanistic movement, which, a generation or more
before the Reformation, began to bring into question the authority
of the Church and the infallibility of papacy. The influence of the
Humanistic teachers was so largely furthered by the co-operation
of the printers that the jealousy and dread of the ecclesiastical
authorities were promptly aroused, and they began to utter fulminations
against the wicked and ignorant men who were using the art of printing
for misleading the community and for the circulation of error.
The ecclesiastics, who had at first favoured the widest possible
circulation of the Scriptures, now contended that much of the heretical
teaching was due to the misunderstanding of the Scriptures on the part
of readers who were acting without the guidance of their spiritual
advisers.

The authorities of the Church now began to take the ground that the
reading of the Scriptures by individuals was not to be permitted,
and that the Bible was to be given to the community only through
the interpretation of the Church. At the same time, the authority
of the Church was exerted to repress, or at least to restrict, the
operations of the printing-press, and to bring printers and publishers
under a close ecclesiastical supervision and censorship. It was
now, however, too late to stand between the printing-press and the
people. Large portions of the community had become accustomed to a
wide circulation of books and to the selection without restriction of
such reading-matter as might be placed within their reach, and this
privilege they were no longer willing to forego.

It was nevertheless true that in certain countries, particularly in
Italy and in France, the censorship of the Church was strong enough
seriously to hamper and interfere with publishing undertakings and to
check the natural development of literary production. Even in Italy,
however, the critical spirit was found to be too strong to be entirely
crushed out, and from Venice, the most important of the Italian
publishing centres, it proved possible to secure for the productions of
the printing-press a circulation that was practically independent of
the censorship of Rome.

The Humanistic movement was, on other grounds, of immediate service for
the printers and publishers, in that it brought about an active demand
for the works of classical writers, a demand which it required the
fullest resources of the earlier printers to supply.

If the invention of Gutenberg had taken shape during the period when
there happened to be no such active intellectual literary interests,
the first printers might easily have found it difficult to secure
business for their presses and the development of the business of book
production would have been seriously hampered. The long series of
controversies which were brought into being by the Reformation, and
the large mass of controversial literature which was the result of
the Reformation, constituted, a generation later, another favourable
influence in securing an assured foundation for the business of the
printers. If it be the case that the work of the leaders of the
Reformation could hardly have been carried on without the aid of the
printing-press, it is also true that at a time when the business of the
early printers was in a very critical and unremunerative condition,
the impetus given to the production of literature, and the increased
eagerness on the part of the common people for literature, formed an
essential factor in making an assured foundation for the business of
the printers and the publishers.

In 1462, on the 28th of October, Archbishop Adolph of Nassau captured
the city of Mayence and gave it over to his soldiers for plunder. The
typesetters and printers, with all other artisans whose work depended
upon the commerce of the city, were driven to flight, and it appeared
for the moment as if the newly instituted printing business had been
crushed out. The result of the scattering of the printers, however, was
the introduction of the new art into a number of other centres where
the influences were favourable for its development.

The typesetters of Mayence, driven from their printing-offices by the
heavy hand of the Church, journeyed throughout the world, carrying
their new knowledge and training and they were able to give to many
communities the means of education and enlightenment through which the
great revolt against the Church was finally instituted. The work of
the printers, checked for the time in Mayence, took shape promptly in
Strasburg, and from there was taken down the Rhine to Cologne, and in
a few years was also in active operation in Basel, Augsburg, Ulm, and
Nuremberg. In 1464, as elsewhere described, German printers carried
their invention into Italy and erected the first Italian printing-press
in Subiaco. And in 1470, also through Germans, the work of the printers
began in Paris.

The shrewd and enterprising merchant Fust, by means of whose capital
Gutenberg had been able to begin his business operations, would
hardly have pressed his suit against his associate, if he had not had
confidence in the value of the invention. As soon as, through the
decision of 1455, he came into possession of the presses, he at once
put these again into operation. He found a practical superintendent
or co-worker in Peter Schöffer. Schöffer was a German by birth, but
had carried on work in Paris as a scribe or writer of higher class
manuscripts, as illuminator, and as a manuscript-dealer. Returning to
Mayence in 1454, he had entered the employ of Gutenberg as type-setter
and proof-reader. Later, having married the daughter of Fust, he was
taken into partnership by his father-in-law, and was able to make a
satisfactory organisation and a wide development for the business of
the printing-office. The first publication issued by Fust & Schöffer
was a psalter printed (in Latin) on parchment, with the great missal
type.

The second work, undertaken, not at the risk of the printers, but at
the cost of two of the Mayence monasteries, was an edition of a great
choir-book. This psalter, or rather _psalterium_, is the first printed
work in which the name of the printer is given and the date of the
publication. It apparently proved possible to secure for this book even
with the very inadequate distributing machinery that was available, a
remunerative sale, as it was printed again in 1490, in 1502, in 1515,
and in 1516.

Among the earlier publications of Fust & Schöffer are the _Rationale
Divinorum Officiorum_ of the Dominican monk Durandus, which was issued
in 1459, the _Codex Constitutionum_ of Pope Clement, issued in 1460,
and the _Bull_ of Emperor Frederic III. against Diether von Isenburg,
printed in 1461. The most beautiful and most important production of
their press was, however, the great Latin Bible issued in 1462, in two
folio volumes, and which is known as the “48 line Bible.”

The work of the printing-office was, as previously stated, stopped by
the sacking of the city, and the two partners appear to have migrated
for the time to Frankfort. In 1464, they were again in Mayence, and
in that year they published the sixth book of the _Decretals_ of Pope
Boniface VIII., and the _De Officiis_ of Cicero. The latter was the
first of the German editions of the classics, and remained a favourite
book with the German printers, being repeatedly reprinted.

In 1453, Fust made a journey to Paris in order to find sale there
for his big Bible. This was four years before the first Paris
printing-press began its work, and it was in connection with this
big Bible that the gossip arose of Fust being able, through compact
with the Devil, to produce an indefinite number of copies of a book.
It could not be understood how in any other way these copies could
be offered so cheaply. The University of Paris was at that date the
most important in Europe, and the influence of the University upon the
cultivation of the city and its close relations with the old book-trade
in manuscripts, had made Paris the most important European centre for
literary production and the place where scholars were in the habit
of looking for their material. It was in Paris, if anywhere, that it
should prove possible to find sale for the Latin Bible, and Fust’s
efforts appear to have met with a prompt success. The first Bible
bearing a date was completed in 1462, and is known as the Mayence
Bible. At the time it was in readiness (in October) nothing could be
done in getting it into the market, as Mayence was being besieged by
Adolph of Nassau. In 1466, Fust is again in Paris with copies of the
second edition of his _De Officiis_, and with other of his publications.

There is still preserved in the city library of Geneva a copy of this
edition of Cicero, which contains the record that it was bought by
Louis de la Vernada, in Paris, in July, 1466, from Fust.[435]

Fust & Schöffer may claim to have been the first printers who
acted also as publishers and booksellers. Notwithstanding the many
difficulties with which they had had to contend, they were able to
offer their books at prices which, to the old dealers in manuscripts,
seemed astounding and which gave some pretext for the charge of magic.
Madden says that a copy of the “48 line Bible” printed on parchment,
could be bought in Paris, in 1470, for 2000 francs, and that the cost
of the same text a few years earlier in manuscript form would have been
five times as great. Bishop John of Aleria, writing in 1467 to Pope
Paul II., says that it is now possible to purchase in Rome for 20
gulden, gold, works which a few years earlier would have cost not less
than 100 gulden, and that other books now selling as low as 4 gulden
would previously have cost not less than 20 gulden. The first results
of the printing-press appear, therefore, to have been a reduction of
about four fifths in the price of work of a scholarly character.

Fust is entitled to the description, not only of the second printer
and of the first publisher, but of the first pirate in printed
books. In 1465, Mentel printed in Strasburg under the title of _De
Arte Prædicatoria_, the fourth book of S. Augustine’s _De Doctrina
Christiana_. The editor states that he had, for the purpose of this
edition, collected manuscript texts in the libraries of Heidelberg,
Speyer, Worms, and Strasburg, and that he had induced Joh. Mentel,
a “master of the art of printing,” to put the volume into a form
available for the general use of clerics.

Fust reprinted this volume in 1466, following the text with precision,
and simply replacing Mentel’s name with his own. This is the first
instance of literary appropriation of which there is any record, after
the beginning of printing.[436]

After the death of Fust, which occurred early in 1467, Schöffer
continued the business with Fust’s sons, and established branches in
Paris and in Angers. His name appears for the first time alone on the
title-page of the _Thomas Aquinas_, published in a folio of 516 pages
in March, 1467. He prints it in full as Petrus Schoiffher de Gernsheim.
In a receipt for 15 gold crowns, paid by the College of Autun for
a copy of this, Schoiffher styles himself _Impressor Librorum_. He
appears to have made sale in Paris not only of his own publications,
but of the books issued by other German printers.

In a copy of the work of Johannus Scotus, printed by Koberger in 1474,
now contained in the library of the Paris Arsenal, appears the entry,
“I, Peter Schöffer, printer from Mayence, acknowledge that I have
received from the worthy Magistrate, Johannus Henrici, of Pisa, three
_scuta_ as the price of this book.”[437] Schöffer seems to have acted
in some measure also as purchasing agent for the University of Paris,
through an associate, Guimier, who was a licensed member of the Paris
guild. The Paris branch of the business was given up a few years later,
and Schöffer devoted his energies to extending his trade in Germany. In
1479, his name appears in the list of the citizens of Frankfort, and
the removal to Frankfort of his publishing headquarters constituted
the first step towards the selection of that city as the centre of
the publishing and bookselling trade of Germany, a position that it
retained for more than a century. Schöffer continued, however, to do
the work of his printing in Mayence.

Some light is thrown upon the extent of the publishing undertakings
carried on at the time by Schöffer with his associate Hancquis, by the
record of a suit brought by the two partners in 1480 against a certain
Bernhard Inkus, of Frankfort. They charged Inkus with having begun
the publication of a considerable series of books, the property right
in which (_Eigentumsrecht_) vested in themselves and in Conrad Henki
(who was a son of Fust). It does not appear from the record of this
trial on what grounds Schöffer and his associates claimed the right to
control these books, or whether the unauthorised issues of which they
complained had been printed by the defendant Inkus or were simply being
offered for sale by him on behalf of other printers.

The case appears to have been referred or possibly appealed to a court
in Basel, and by this court was issued some preliminary injunction
against the continued sale of the books complained of. The record
giving the final decision of the case is, however, missing. The lack
of full details of the suit is the more to be regretted as it appears
to have been the first case after the invention of printing involving,
if not copyright ownership, at least a certain control by contract.

In the same year we find the Magistracy of the City of Frankfort
applying to the Magistracy of the City of Lübeck for the protection
of Schöffer against some illegitimate infringement of Schöffer’s
business rights on the part of the Lübeck citizen Hans Bitz. Here also
is there no record as to the result of the application. The firm also
had dealings with Ulm, as appears from a claim made, in 1481, for the
collection of the moneys due from certain citizens in Ulm--Harscher,
Ruwinger, and Ofener, for books delivered. They sent to Ulm, with
a protection certificate given by Elector Diether of Mayence, a
representative who was empowered to collect the money. There was at
the outset some delay in connection with an alleged informality in his
authorisation, but the Magistracy of Ulm sent back word that as soon as
the requisite authorisation was secured, the collection of the money
would be enforced in due course.

These cases are evidence of a certain organisation of machinery for
the distribution of books and for the management of a publishing
business, within a comparatively brief period after the beginning of
the work of the printing-presses, and they indicate also that the
second firm which entered into the business of printing had succeeded
in establishing such business on fairly assured foundations, and in
carrying on successfully large undertakings. It is to be noted further
that Fust & Schöffer, and other of the earlier German printers, did
their work without the assistance of any patronage, and without even
the advantage of a university connection. The early printers of Italy
would have found it impracticable to carry on their operations without
the assistance of certain wealthy and enterprising noblemen who were
prepared to interest themselves in the new art either from curiosity
or from philanthropy, and as late even as 1495, that is to say nearly
half a century after the beginning of printing, the organisation of
the business of Aldus was dependent upon the favour and services of
certain of his noble friends. In Paris the first printers were helped,
and in part supported, by the money of patrons or of the Crown, and
by the co-operation and influence of the University. In England also
the influence of Oxford was of material importance in securing for the
first printers some assured foundation and support, while the work
of Caxton and his immediate successors in London was also largely
furthered by, if not actually dependent upon, the work or help of noble
and wealthy friends.

In Germany, however, the printing work began, as we have seen, through
the enterprise and ingenuity of a citizen manufacturer who was
supported by the middle class of the community, and who made his first
connections directly with the townspeople. The help of the universities
appears to have been of comparatively smaller importance. It probably
counted for more in Cologne than in any other of the university cities
in which the earlier printers did their work.

In the course of the thirty-six years of his independent business
activity, that is from the death of Fust in 1466 to the time of his
own death, Schöffer printed in all fifty-nine works which bear date
and which have been identified as his. His firm took rank for this
period as by far the most important printing and publishing concern in
existence.

With hardly an exception, the books issued from his press were folios.
They were printed with fifty to sixty lines on the page, and contained
an average of about 300 pages or 150 sheets.

Among the works included in the list are the _Constitutiones_
of Clement V., the _Institutions_ of Justinian, the _Expositio
Sententiarum_ of Thomas Aquinas, the _Epistolæ_ of S. Jerome, the
sixth book of the _Decretals_ of Boniface VIII., the _Decretals_ of
Gregory IX., the _Codex_ of Justinian, and the _Expositio Psalterii_
of Joh. Torquemada. The last named volume had already been printed in
Subiaco and again in Rome under the direct supervision of the author,
who was supplying the funds for carrying on the first printing-office
established in Italy.

After Schöffer’s death in 1502, his son printed an edition of the
_Mercurius Trimegistus_.

I do not find record of the arrangement entered into by Schöffer for
the editing of the texts of the works printed by him. The collection
of manuscripts for use as “copy” for printers, and the collection of
different manuscripts in order to secure the most complete and accurate
texts, must have called for a considerable measure of scholarly and of
general literary knowledge.

It does not appear that Schöffer had enjoyed opportunities for making
himself a scholarly authority, or that he ever made claim to any
special scholarly attainments. There is no record of editorial work
done by himself in the books issued from his press, as was the case
to so exceptional a degree a few years later with the books printed
by Aldus; nor has Schöffer preserved in connection with his editions
the names of the editors who supervised their publication, as came to
be the practice later with the issues of the Aldine press, of Froben
in Basel, and of Koberger in Nuremberg. As far as I can ascertain,
however, the Schöffer texts compared favourably for accuracy and for
authority with other of the earlier printed books, and it is to be
assumed, therefore, that he had been able to organise an adequate
critical staff or to secure from time to time, as required, the
services of competent scholars.

The business founded by Gutenberg, taken possession of under mortgage
by Fust, and carried on first by Fust & Schöffer, and later by Schöffer
and other associates, lasted nearly one hundred years. The first
publication was, as noted, the big _Psalterium_, printed in 1457,
and the last, an edition of the German version of the books of Livy,
printed by Ivo Schöffer in 1557.

It seems evident that while the credit for the great invention fairly
belongs to Gutenberg, and the original planning and initiative of the
business were his, a large measure of business capacity must have
belonged to his partner Fust, who had also, to be sure, the advantage
of being a capitalist to begin with, a factor as important in the
earliest time of publishing as in the present day.

One of the most definite pieces of testimony in regard to the
connection of Gutenberg with the invention of printing, testimony which
possesses special value as coming from a person possessing first-hand
knowledge of the facts, is contained in an Epilogue written in verse
by John Schöffer (son of Peter), and printed at the end of the _Livy_
published by him in 1505. It is addressed to the Emperor Maximilian,
and reads as follows:

“May your Majesty deign to accept this book which was printed at
Mayence, the town in which the admirable art of typography was
invented, in the year 1450, by John Gutenberg, and afterwards brought
to perfection at the expense, and by the labour, of John Fust and Peter
Schöffer.”

It would not belong to the plan of this historical sketch to give in
detail a record of the successive concerns which carried on throughout
Germany, with increasing rapidity and with undertakings of ever
widening importance, the business of printing and publishing. I propose
merely to present the records of a few of the earlier concerns, and to
make such reference to typical firms of later generations as may give
an impression of the gradual development of the book-trade, and as may
serve also as examples from which to judge of the development of the
idea of the literary property in Germany, and the varying positions
taken under the enactments and other governmental measures in regard to
such property.

The books printed during the first half-century were, as we shall note,
almost exclusively reissues of ecclesiastical or pagan classics, and
apart from such original work as may have been put into introductions
or notes, did not call for the labour of contemporary authors. Among
the earlier of original German publications is to be classed a German
grammar entitled _Die Leyenschul_, printed by Peter Jordan in Mayence
in 1531. This grammar, which remained for a considerable time an
authority on its subject, does not bear the name of the author or
editor.

Another of the earlier original works for the sale of which the author
may have secured some compensation was the _Astronomie_ of Joh.
Stöffler, which was printed in Ottenheim in 1513.

One of the more important of the earlier publishing concerns of Mayence
was that of Franz Behem, who printed in the ten years succeeding 1539
an important series of theological works. With the close of Behem’s
business in 1552, Mayence appears to have lost its relative importance
in connection with the work of printing and publishing.

In Strasburg, which had contested with Mayence the prestige of being
the actual birthplace of the printing-press, important publishing
undertakings were carried on from a very early date, and for a number
of years the city of Basel alone could compete with Strasburg in the
number and importance of the books issued from its presses. The two
publishing concerns whose individual enterprises and whose rivalry
with each other did so much to bring Strasburg into importance as a
factor in the German book-trade, were those of Johann Mentel and of
Heinrich Eggestein. Mentel’s first publications were a Latin Bible in
two folio volumes, which was the first Bible printed in the smaller
Gothic type; an edition of _De Doctrina Christiana_ of S. Augustine; an
edition of the _Summa_ of Thomas Aquinas; an edition of the Bible in
German, which appeared in 1466; the _Speculum Historiale_ of Vincentius
Bellovacensis, etc. Madden finds record of twenty-one publications
which can certainly be identified as Mentel’s, and which comprise in
all forty-one volumes, of which thirty-seven are in large folio. During
the time of his business activity, (1465-1478) he appears to have
published about two volumes a year.[438]

Humphreys points out that Mentel was in advance of the other German
printers of the day in first using, in place of the confused old
Gothic black letter, the clear Roman letter which was in use in Italy.
Mentel’s most important publication, the collection of the _Specula_
of S. Vincent of Beauvais, issued in 1473, in eight volumes folio,
was printed in type of the Roman letter.[439] M. Bernard, in his
_Origines de l’Imprimerie_, is of opinion that it was in printing these
theological works which were in accord with the taste of the reading
public of his day, that Mentel realised a fortune, while many of his
competitors ruined themselves in reproducing the Latin classics, the
taste for which before the close of the fifteenth century was not
sufficiently developed to ensure a remunerative sale. He was also the
first of the German printers to print descriptive catalogues of his
books. At the head of the catalogue was a notice to the following
effect: “Those who wish to possess any of these books have only to
address themselves to the sign of----.” Here a blank was left, in order
that each retail bookseller to whom the catalogue was sent might fill
in his own name and sign. Such a detail (which is, I may mention, quite
in accord with modern publishing methods) indicates that there was as
early as 1470, a well developed bookselling machinery in western and
central Germany.

Mentel’s principal rival in Strasburg was Heinrich Eggestein.
Eggestein appears to have been a man of scholarly training, and had
received from some university the degree “Magister.” To him belongs
the credit of the issue, in 1466, of the first Bible printed in
German. Important as was this work, the printer was not interested in
associating with it his imprint, and the volumes are identified as
the work of his press only by circumstantial evidence.[440] The first
work which was edited and which bears his imprint was an edition of
the _Decretum Gratiani_, printed in a gigantic folio in 1471. Before
this date, he had issued three Bibles in Latin text. The _Decretum_
was again printed by Eggestein in 1472, although the original issue
of 1471 had been promptly pirated by the enterprising Schöffer. It is
evident that it proved possible to secure for the book an immediate and
presumably remunerative sale.

Another of Eggestein’s publications in 1472 was an edition of
_Clementinæ_. In this he gives his imprint and gives notice also that
he has already issued a long series of books treating of “divine and
human law.” The last book bearing a date, issued by Eggestein is the
_Decretals_ of Innocent IV., printed in 1478.

The third Strasburg printer was George Huszner, who was originally a
goldsmith. He married the daughter of another goldsmith, Nikolaus of
Hanau, who later worked with his son-in-law as _aurifaber et pressor
librorum_.[441] The _Speculum Judiciale_ of Bishop Wilhelm Duranti,
printed by Huszner in 1473, is described by Kapp as a master-piece of
typography. This bears the name as editor of Joh. Beckenhub, who calls
himself a cleric. Martin Flach of Strasburg, whose business activity
covered the years 1475 to 1500 published something over seventy works,
which were, with hardly an exception, devoted to theology and dogma.

In 1480, was printed a magnificent edition of the Latin Bible in
four volumes, known as _Biblia Latina cum glossa ordinaria Walafridi
Strabonis et interlineari Anselmi Laudunensis_. This was issued by
Anton Koberger of Nuremberg and it has only recently been discovered
that it was printed for him by Adolph Rusch of Strasburg. While it was
by far the most noteworthy typographical undertaking that had been
completed up to that date, the printer had not thought it important
to associate his name with the volumes. Rusch was a publisher as well
as a printer, and was also a large dealer in paper, supplying this to
printers in Strasburg, Nuremberg, Basel, and elsewhere. He further
carried on a miscellaneous business as a bookseller and in purchasing
from other publishers for his miscellaneous trade supplies of other
publications, and he was accustomed to make payment for the same in
paper. He seems altogether to have been a man of very wide activities,
whose influence must have been of considerable importance in connection
with the early organisation of the German book-trade. He had married
a daughter of the Strasburg printer, Mentel, and through his wife,
inherited an interest in Mentel’s business. Rusch purchased from the
printer Amerbach, in exchange for paper stock, a portion of the edition
of S. Augustine’s _De Civitate Dei_, which appears to have shared with
certain essays of Cicero the honour of being one of the most frequently
printed books in the early lists.

One of the earlier of the Strasburg printers who gave particular
attention to works in German was Johann Reinhart, also known (from his
birthplace) as Johann Grüninger, whose list comprised German editions
of works in theology and religion, and in poetic literature, together
with a series of folk-songs and stories for the people. While his
fellow publishers were at that time, with hardly an exception, limiting
their undertakings to works planned for scholars, such as reprints
of the classics and theological works printed in Latin, Reinhart
addressed himself at once to a popular audience, and while in so doing
he was undoubtedly of service in furthering the education of his
generation, he appears also to have secured for himself satisfactory
business results. He gave particular attention to illustrated books,
securing the service of a number of noteworthy designers and engravers,
and ornamenting his books, not only with full-page illustrations,
but with elaborate initial letters and head- and tail-pieces. He is
chronicled as being the only publisher in Strasburg who, after the
Reformation was in full development, continued to print Catholic
tracts and pamphlets. As an instance of the large distribution that it
was possible to secure at the beginning of the sixteenth century for
certain classes of books, is to be noted the sale made by Reinhart in
1502 to Schönsperger, of 1000 copies of a volume of _The Lives of the
Saints_. Reinhart was one of the printers whose presses were utilised
by the great publisher Koberger of Nuremberg. In 1525, he printed for
Koberger the translation by Pirckheimer of the great Geography of
Ptolemy. In this work the translator appears himself to have retained
an interest.

There have been preserved a number of the letters which passed between
Pirckheimer, Koberger, and Reinhart, while this work was going through
the press. It appears that, notwithstanding Reinhart’s personal
supervision of the undertaking and his interest in securing for the
pages satisfactory ornamentations, Pirckheimer had found frequent
occasion for dissatisfaction and criticisms, and in his letters
there are many expressions which might have been written by authors
of to-day who were not satisfied that the printers were following
“copy” correctly. At one point, Pirckheimer says that if he could have
foreseen all the difficulties that he was to experience in securing a
correct printing for his volume, he would have burned the manuscript
rather than have put it to press.

Reinhart points out, on his part, however, that, in the first
place, the manuscript had not been prepared in such manner that the
compositors could follow it correctly, and that, secondly, he had given
no little of his own personal attention to re-arranging and re-shaping
the “copy” in order that the text might be as correct as possible.

Pirckheimer was also unhappy in connection with certain of the designs
with which the printer had ornamented his text, and expresses the wish
that in place of using Italian designers, the printer had given the
work to good Germans.[442]

From the middle of the eleventh century, Cologne had competed with
Mayence for the distinction of being the most important trade centre of
Germany. Its favourable position made it a natural point of exchange
for business operations between the dealers of the North Sea and those
of the Mediterranean. To Cologne came from the south by way of the
passes of the Alps, the wares, not only of Italy, but those which had
been brought from the East by the vessels of Venice and of Genoa, while
from the great Russian mart of Novgorod and the enterprising Hanseatic
city Lübeck, were brought the goods of Russia and of the far North.
In Cologne were also ware-houses under the charge of trading guilds
of their several nations, whither were brought the goods of England,
France, and the Low Countries.

It was not only in mercantile undertakings, however, that the city had
secured for itself prestige. The University, founded in the early part
of the fourteenth century on the model of that of Paris, was considered
to have surpassed in the importance of its scholarly work the older
institutions of Heidelberg, Prague, and Vienna; and it remained for
many years at the head of the scholarship of Germany and a particular
exponent of the doctrinal theology of the Catholic Church. Cologne
was, therefore, recognised by the early printers as an exceptionally
favourable centre for the prosperous development of their work, and the
printing and publishing undertakings of the city assumed at an early
date very considerable importance.

The existing library of the city contains over 400 works, principally
theological, but including also volumes in jurisprudence and in higher
class instruction, which were produced by Cologne printers before the
close of the fifteenth century. At this time the University contained
no less than 4000 students, and the requirements of these students for
text-books and of their instructors for works of reference, must have
given a very decided impetus to the work of the earlier publishers,
while the trade connections possessed by Cologne with the cities of
the North and East furnished channels through which the publishers
were able to extend the demand for their books. The first introduction
of the printing-press into Cologne was due to the sacking of the
City of Mayence in 1462, when Ulrich Zell, of Hanau, who like Peter
Schöffer, called himself a _clericus moguntinensis_, and who had
been an apprentice of Gutenberg, having been driven from Mayence,
brought to Cologne the invention of his master. While it is possible
that his printing undertakings began earlier, the first dated work
issued from his press was published in 1466, and was an edition of
the _Liber Johannes Chrysostomi super Psalmo Quinquagesimo_. This was
promptly followed by a volume containing the _De Officiis_ of Cicero.
No publishing list of the period appears to have progressed very far
without including one or more of the essays of Cicero. The latest book
published by Zell was a commentary by Girard Hardervicus on the new
Logic of Albertus Magnus. The list of books known to have been produced
by Zell includes no less than 120 titles, but a large number of these
were pamphlets of moderate compass, and only eighteen were in the folio
form which was the standard of the time.

A printer whose work was in part contemporary with that of Zell, was
Johann Koelhoff, who included in his list eighty publications, of which
seven were in the German tongue. These last are spoken of by Kapp as
possessing distinctive interest for theologians, because they included
some of the earliest printed examples of the Low-German dialect.
Bartholomäus Unkel, whose list included in all twenty works, printed,
in 1480, in the Low-German dialect an edition of the _Sachsenspiegel_,
a work which found place during the following century in the lists of
very many of the German publishers.

As before mentioned, the influence of the University was given strongly
to the support of Orthodox doctrines of the Catholic Church, and
doctrinal books which did not conform to the university standard of
orthodoxy were not printed in Cologne. It is probable that in the
beginning of the publishing operations, no direct censorship was
attempted on the part of the theologians of the University, but it
seems evident that they were able notwithstanding, to discourage
publications the opinions of which they might consider pernicious.

The name of Franz Birckmann, whose printing operations began in 1507,
occupies an important place in the list of the publishers of Cologne,
and his business relations with Paris and his connections with the
book-dealers of London have brought his name into reference in much
of the correspondence of his time. Birckmann appears, at the outset
at least, not to have himself been a printer. His first book, the
_Missale Coloniense_, was printed for him in Paris. Kirchhoff speaks
of Birckmann as possessing a fine business capacity and exceptional
enterprise and creative genius, and refers to him as carrying on his
undertakings now in London and Canterbury, then in Bruges, Liége,
or Frankfort; again in Cologne, Antwerp, Tübingen, and Basel. The
list of the places visited by this enterprising publisher of the
time serves to give an indication as to the centres where literary
activities were the most important.[443] Erasmus, writing on the 21st
of December, 1520, from Canterbury, to his friend Andreas Ammonius in
Rotterdam, speaks of Birckmann as being ready himself to undertake
the introduction into England of any books that might be called for.
Birckmann appears finally to have established in London a permanent
business office, for the volume, _Graduale ad Usum Sarum_, which was
printed for him in Paris in 1528, bears as an imprint, Franz Birckmann
of St. Paul’s Church Yard.[444]

This early connection of the publishers of Cologne with London is of
special interest in connection with the record of William Caxton, the
first English printer, who was said to have learned his art in Cologne
and to have brought it thence (by way of Bruges) to London. In the same
series of letters to Ammonius, Erasmus speaks of giving to Birckmann
the manuscript of his _Proverbia_, of his _Plutarch_, and the _Lucian_,
in order that he might arrange to have the books printed in Paris, by
Jodocus Badius. For some reason, not stated, Birckmann decided not to
place these works in the hands of Badius, but took them to Froben, in
Basel, which was the means of bringing Erasmus into connection with
that publisher, with whom he had satisfactory intimate relations for so
large a portion of his life.

As has been stated in another chapter, the theologians of the Faculty
of the Sorbonne had taken a strong stand against the writings of
Erasmus, and it is very possible that Badius was unable to secure a
permit or a privilege for these volumes.

Birckmann seems, at about this time, to have secured some interest, if
not in the general business of Froben, at least in a certain number
of his publishing undertakings. In 1526, Birckmann came into trouble
with the authorities of Antwerp on account of his having sold there
an edition of the translation of S. Chrysostom, which had been made
by Ökolampadius, and which had come under the ban of the Antwerp
censorship. The publisher succeeded in freeing himself from the
penalties imposed by the Antwerp magistracy only after a long contest
and a considerable expenditure of money.[445] It is a little difficult
to understand the precise grounds of the opposition raised by the
Antwerp censors, and I have not been able to get at the details of the
case. It is of interest as one of the earliest examples of censorship
upon the press which occurred in Northern Europe. Kapp is of opinion
that the censorship exercised by the Church authorities in Cologne was
more rigorous than that instituted by the authorities in Bavaria. It
seems certain that the Catholic University of the Rhine was able to
exercise no little influence in shaping the direction of the earlier
literary undertakings of North Germany.

Caxton’s sojourn in Cologne must have been some time between the years
1471 and 1474. Further details concerning his work in Bruges and his
later publishing undertakings in London will be given in the chapter on
printing in England. During the latter part of the fifteenth century
and the earlier years of the sixteenth, Cologne printers secured for
themselves an unenviable reputation as unauthorised reprinters of
works which were the result of the scholarly labours and investment of
publishers elsewhere. They issued editions as nearly in _fac-simile_ as
might be of a number of the classics published in Venice by Aldus, and
they followed these, later, with the imitations of the scholarly texts
published by Plantin in Antwerp and by the Elzevirs in Leyden.

While it was the case that these texts, with rare exceptions, were the
work of authors dead centuries before, and that in the works themselves
the original publishers could rightfully claim no control, it is to
be borne in mind that the production of the earlier editions of such
classics had nevertheless called for a very considerable expenditure
of capital and of labour, as well in the securing of the codices
used as “copy” by the type-setters as in the revision and editing of
these codices by the scholarly commentators employed, and also in the
preparation of notes, introductions, and elucidations for the volumes.
The risk and investment incurred by Aldus in the production of his
edition of _Aristotle_, and the exceptional character of the original
labour invested by the publisher in such a work are grounds for
considering that his contention for the control of the text which came
from his printing-office, at least for a certain term of years, was as
well founded as might be a contention of to-day for a book which was in
its entirety the work of a contemporary writer.

The city whose publishing operations are next to be considered in
the chronological record is Basel. For a number of years after the
invention of printing, Basel remained one of the most important
publishing centres, not only of the German Empire (to which at this
time the city belonged), but of Europe. Its position on a direct line
of communication between Italy and Germany had given it an importance
in connection with the general trade of Europe, and the facilities
which furthered this general trade became of value also in connection
with the production of books. The University of Basel, founded in 1460,
speedily brought to the city men devoted to scholarly pursuits, many of
whom took an early interest in the work of the printing-press, and were
ready to give their co-operation to publishers like Froben, not only in
editing manuscripts for the press, but even in the routine work of the
printing-offices in the proof-reading and correcting. In 1501, at the
time Basel broke away from the imperial control, the city had already
secured for itself a cosmopolitan character, and had become a kind of
meeting place for the exchange of thought as well as for the goods of
representatives of all nations. At this time there were in the city no
less than twenty-six important publishing and printing concerns. The
earliest book bearing a date and an imprint which was issued from a
Basel printing-press was an edition of the _Gregorii Magni Moralia in
Jobum_, which appeared in 1468. But one or two copies exist, of which
the one that is in the best preservation is contained in the National
Library of Paris.

Printing was introduced into Basel by Berthold Ruppel, who, in 1455,
had been an apprentice with Fust. The first work which is identified
as Berthold’s, but which does not bear a date, is the _Repertorium
Vocabulorum Exquisitorum_ of Conrad de Mure. The difficulties which
have attended all organisations of labour appear to have begun at an
early date in Basel, as there is record of a strike of the compositors
occurring as early as 1471. This strike lasted for a number of months
and was finally adjusted by the arbitration of the authorities of the
town, certain concessions being made on the part of both the master
and the employees. The magistrate issued a decision or mandate to the
effect that on a certain date the workmen must return to their shops
and accept the authority of their masters, and this order appears to
have been accepted. It does not appear what course could have been
taken to force the men to their work in case they might still have been
recalcitrant. The fact that a difference between the printers and their
men should have been a matter of such general importance indicates that
already within twenty years of the beginning of printing in Germany,
the business in Basel had assumed large proportions.

In 1474, there was printed in Basel an edition of the _Sachsenspiegel_,
a work of popular character, which can share with the Bible and with
different essays of Cicero, the honour of being the most frequently
published book in Germany during the first quarter century of printing.

Between 1478 and 1514, Johann Amerbach, one of the most scholarly of
the early editors, printers, and publishers of Germany, made Basel his
headquarters. His work was, however, by no means limited to Basel,
as he co-operated with Koberger in Nuremberg and with other of his
contemporaries in editorial and publishing responsibilities in other
cities.

His most important publication in Basel was a series of the works of
the Church Fathers. In carrying these books through the press, he was
able to secure the co-operation of a number of the well known scholars
of the time, including Beatus Rhenanus, Dodo, Conon, Wyler, Pellikan,
and, above all, his old instructor, Heynlin.

Before beginning business in his own name in Basel, Amerbach had
co-operated with Koberger in the production of the great Bible with the
commentaries of Hugo, and he was also in active relations with Rusch
of Strasburg. The last book which was printed with his own name is an
edition of the _Decretum Gratiani_, which appeared in 1512. His edition
of the works of S. Jerome, left unfinished at the time of his death,
was completed by his pupil and successor, Johann Froben.

Froben, who was like his master, not only a printer but a scholar of
wide attainments, did more, possibly, than any printer of his time,
except Aldus of Venice, to further through his publishing undertakings
the development of scholarship and of literature. He appears to have
had a thorough knowledge, not only of Latin, which was common to all
the scholars of his time, but of Greek and Hebrew, which were rarities
even in university centres. It was the case with Froben, as with Aldus,
that he himself assumed the task of preparing for the press the texts
of a number of works issued by him, a task which included a comparison
of manuscripts, in order to secure the most correct readings, and such
thorough knowledge of the text as would make possible the correction
of errors, not only of typography, but of statement. Froben’s work and
character have been commemorated by the loving words of Erasmus, who
during the last twenty years of Froben’s life held with him the closest
relations of friendship as well as of business.

It was through Froben that the larger publishing undertakings of
Erasmus were carried on, undertakings which were later in part shared
with Aldus of Venice. Froben’s work was done exclusively for scholarly
readers. His imprint appears upon no book printed in German, while
the list of books issued by him during the thirty-six years of his
business activity includes no less than 257 works, nearly all of which
were of large compass and distinctive importance. Erasmus himself,
ranking at that time possibly as the greatest scholar of Europe, was
ready to give to Froben his assistance in supervising texts for the
compositors and in the corrections of the proofs. The details of the
business arrangements entered into by publishers like Froben with
their scholarly assistants have unfortunately not been preserved, but
it would appear as if in many cases these scholars had given their
services as a labour of love, and solely with a view to furthering the
development of scholarship and literature. Erasmus was for a number of
years an inmate of Froben’s house, and it is probable that he received
a certain annual stipend for his editorial services, in addition to
the returns paid to him from the sale of his books. The most important
of the issues from the Froben press in the matter of popular sale
and of business success were, as indicated, the writings of Erasmus.
Erasmus, in fact, was possibly the first author who was able, after
the invention of printing to secure from the sale of his books any
substantial returns. It is evident from the various references made by
Erasmus that those returns were sufficient to make him substantially
independent, notwithstanding the fact that piracy editions of his books
were printed in Paris, in Cologne, and elsewhere.

Further information concerning the publishing undertakings of Erasmus
will be found in the chapter devoted to him.

Pamphilus Gengenbach, described as the first dramatist of the sixteenth
century, and who was also a poet, undertook between the years 1509 and
1522, the business of a printer. We do not learn with what success.
A more noteworthy printer of Basel of the same period, noteworthy at
least from the point of view of commercial success, was Langendorf.
He built up his business by the publication of piracy editions of the
writings of Luther, out of which he is reported to have made large
profits.[446]

The first German printer who appears to have received honours from
royalty was a certain Heinrich Petri, who was carrying on business
between 1520 and 1579, and who in 1556, in recognition of his services
to the community, was knighted by Charles V.

As before indicated, the work of the printers and publishers of
Basel was very much furthered by the presence and by the intelligent
co-operation of the members of its University Faculty. The University
was of service not only in making a certain important market for
editions of scholarly books, but, as a more important consideration,
in giving to the publishers the aid of scholarly advisers, editors,
and proof-correctors. By the close of the fifteenth century, Basel had
secured so great a prestige for the production of accurate editions of
important texts, and for the beauty and costliness of its typography,
that commissions came to its printers from all parts of Europe.

In 1510, Sir Thomas More, desiring, as he writes, to secure a European
circulation for his books, causes the same to be printed in Basel,
while during the years between 1490 and 1520, the popes send to Basel
printing-offices the orders for their commercial printing.

The next city in chronological order to be considered as a publishing
centre is Zurich, in which printing began in 1504.

The first of the Zurich printers whose name has been preserved is
Christ Froschauer, who is known principally through his association
with Zwingli. Froschauer, who devoted himself earnestly to the cause
of the Calvinists, had a religious as well as a business interest
in securing a wide circulation for the works of Zwingli and his
associates, and together with these works, he printed editions of
the Bible, not only in German, but in French, Italian, Flemish,
and English. Froschauer’s editions were the first Bibles printed
on the Continent in the English language. For these Bibles, which
were distributed at what to-day would be called popular prices, very
considerable sales were secured, and the presses of Froschauer were
thus made an important adjunct to the work of the Reformation.

In Augsburg, the printing business of which began to assume importance
in 1468, the interests of the publishers were, on the other hand,
largely associated with the cause of the Roman Church. The first book
with an Augsburg imprint and date was issued by Zainer, and was an
edition of the _Meditationes Vitae Domini Nostri Jesu Christi_. In
1470, was published by Schüssler a Latin edition of _Josephus_, and in
1477, Sorg, who was one of the most active of the Augsburg publishers,
issued the book of the Council of Constance, which contained no less
than 1200 wood-cuts, presenting the 1156 coats-of-arms which were
represented at the Council.

The most famous of the printer-publishers of Augsburg was, according
to Kapp, Ratdolt, whose list comprised principally mathematical works
and books of religious music. His edition of _Euclid_, issued in 1482,
constituted the first European edition of the Syracusan mathematician.
The sales of the orthodox theological books, which constituted a
special interest of the Augsburg publishers, were largely checked by
the Reformation. George Willer, an enterprising Augsburg bookseller,
who sold not only his own publications but those of other German
publishers, is to be credited with the printing of the first classified
catalogue known to Germany.

Among the earlier publications of Ulm, the most important was the
geography of Ptolemy, issued by Holl in 1484, with important maps.

The eminence of the city of Nuremberg in the work of publishing is
principally due to the scholarly enterprise of one family, that of
the Kobergers, whose work began about 1470. Antonius Koberger, the
first of the line, is grouped with Froben of Basel and with Aldus of
Venice for the commercial importance of his undertakings, and above
all for the scholarly ideal of his business operations. His active
business work covered the years 1470-1503. Among his earlier important
publications was an edition of _Thomas Aquinas_, issued in 1474, and
of the _Consolations of Philosophy_ of Boëthius, printed in 1475. The
latter was the first printed edition of a book which had been for
nearly a thousand years famous among books in manuscript, and which
possibly shares with S. Augustine’s _City of God_ the reputation of
being the work most frequently found in the old monastery libraries.
By the year 1500, Koberger was utilising no less than twenty-four
presses, and undoubtedly was sending out annually more books than any
other publisher of his time. He had branches or agencies in Frankfort,
Paris, and Lyons, a business correspondence in the Netherlands,
Italy, Austria, Hungary, Poland, and England, as well as, of course,
throughout Germany. In respect to the bulk of the business done by
him and of the commercial success secured, he was a greater publisher
than either Aldus or Froben, his two most famous contemporaries. The
work of Aldus, which is considered in detail in another chapter, was,
however, distinctive on the ground of the special difficulties to be
overcome and of his enterprise and scholarly ambition in the production
of Greek literature. The interest of the work of Froben centres partly
in his close friendship and long association with Erasmus, and in the
fact that, as the publisher for Erasmus, he secured the first important
copyright returns for a contemporary author which had been known in the
record of publishing.

Koberger gave special attention to the production of Bibles and of
works in orthodox theology. The latter division of his list was largely
interfered with by the increasing influence of the Lutherans.

Koberger took the initiative in the production of books containing
expensive and elaborate illustrations, and his illustrated editions
will compare more favourably with those of Plantin and with the other
publishers of the Low Countries, than is the case with the issues of
any other German publisher. Nuremberg had always been the centre of art
interests, and there appear to have been in the town many designers
whose services could be secured for the production of wood-cuts.

The great German Bible, published by Koberger in 1483, filled with
artistic illustrations engraved on wood, compares not unfavourably with
the illustrated Bible issued by Plantin fifty years later.

The _Schedelsche Chronik_, published in 1493, contained no less than
2000 wood-cuts prepared by the Nuremberg artists, Wohlgemut and
Pleydenwurf. After the work of the Reformers became active, the presses
of Nuremberg were occupied for some years in issuing controversial
tracts and pamphlets upholding the orthodox views of the Church; while,
under an edict of the magistrates issued in 1520, the printers of
Nuremberg were forbidden to print and the dealers were forbidden to
sell the writings of Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and their associates.
Notwithstanding this prohibition, however, there was enough sympathy
with the Reformation among many of the Nuremberg printers to keep
them interested in the surreptitious production (under risk of fine,
confiscation, and imprisonment) of very many of the Protestant tracts
of the times. While the Catholic tracts were, however, catalogued in
due course and openly sold, the Protestant pamphlets had to be smuggled
in and out of the city and disposed of under various covers and
precautions.

In giving chronological consideration to certain of the distinctive
publishing centres and printer-publishers of Germany, it is necessary
at this time to refer to the important undertakings of the Brothers
of Common Life, whose work in the manuscript period has already been
described.

As in the earlier manuscript publishing, the Brothers had interested
themselves particularly in reaching with their books the common people,
and had for this purpose produced their versions in the folk dialects.
When, therefore, they had replaced the _scriptoria_ of their Houses
with well organised printing-offices, they devoted their presses
mainly to the production of devotional books, and of books of general
instruction planned for the service and information of the middle and
lower classes, and printed in the vernacular.

While I have not found record of the business results secured through
these printing-offices established by the Brothers, it seems probable,
in view of the excellent distributing machinery they possessed for
their output, and from the fact that they were almost the first among
printers to prepare publications expressly for the use of the lower
and middle classes, that they secured from the sales of their books
satisfactory business returns, so that the profits produced by their
presses may easily have formed an important part of the resources and
the income of the Order. Their first printing-presses were established
in Marienthal in 1468, in Brussels and in Rostock in 1476, and in
Nuremberg in 1479. In 1490, there were no less than sixty different
printing establishments carried on under the supervision of the
Brothers. I am not sufficiently familiar with the various phases of
the complex history of the Reformation to be able to speak definitely
concerning the influence exercised upon the controversies and the
contest of the time by the publications of the Brothers. It is my
impression that these publications remained on the whole orthodox, but
that they represented the more liberal wing of Catholic Orthodoxy.

The city of Leipzig, which a century after the invention of printing
became the centre of the book-trade of Germany, and the most important
book-producing city in the world, began its printing somewhat later
than the other German cities whose work has already been referred to.

The earliest printing-press set up in Leipzig was that of an anonymous
printer who issued, in 1481, an edition of the essay of the Dominican
Annius von Viterbo, entitled _Glosa Super Apocalipsim_. The second
Leipzig publication, also issued without imprint, was an edition of the
fifteen astrological propositions of Martin Polich. The first Leipzig
publisher whose name is recorded is Markus Brandis, who issued, in
1484, a volume entitled _Regimen Sanitatis_, which was the work of
Archbishop Albicius of Prague, who had died in 1427. It is not easy
to decide on what basis these first three publications of the future
publishing mart were selected, and it is difficult to understand how
a remunerative sale could have been depended upon for any one of the
three.

By the year 1513, the production of Breviaries had become an important
interest with the Leipzig presses. A printer named Lotter secured
a reputation in the earlier years of the sixteenth century for the
excellence of his typography, and was employed by the Archbishop of
Heller in printing the Breviaries and the Missals of the Dioceses
of Brandenburg. In 1492, a certain Gregor Werman printed _Sacrarum
Historiarum Opus_. The name of the author does not appear in connection
with the work. In 1497, Bötticher issued an edition of Virgil’s
_Bucolics_, the first classic which bears a Leipzig imprint.

By the year 1495, the book-trade of Leipzig had assumed very
considerable proportions, not only in connection with printing and
publishing, but in the organisation of machinery for collecting and
distributing the publications of other cities. In this branch of the
book business, Leipzig was already beginning to rival Frankfort. The
booksellers’ association, organised in 1525, is, at the present time,
370 years later, the most effective and intelligently managed trade
organisation that the world has known. Leipzig publishers gave from an
early period special attention to the printing of the controversial
literature of the Reformation, and, as was natural from their close
relations with Wittenberg, the sympathies of the larger proportion of
the printers were in accord with the Lutherans.

Under the trade restrictions established by Duke George of Saxony, who
was a Catholic, and whose reign covered the period between 1524 and
1533, the work of the Protestant printers was very seriously hampered,
and the whole book-trade of Leipzig was affected. The writings of the
Reformers were repressed as far as practicable by rigorous censorship,
while those of the Romanists found few buyers. Lotter, the son of the
first printer of that name, removed his printing-office to Wittenberg,
where he continued, though still under the difficulties of a rigorous
supervision, to distribute the writings of the Reformers. The
magistracy of Leipzig, appreciating the importance of the book-trade,
attempted in the first place to secure for its operations the necessary
protection. Later, however, it was compelled, under pressure from the
Duke, to put into effect the ducal regulations for supervision and
censorship, and two ecclesiastical censors, appointed under the ducal
authority, secured the aid of the city officials in making examination
of the books printed, and in confiscating or cancelling all heretical
works found in the book-shops of either Leipzig or Dresden.

Under the edict issued in 1528, all books printed by Vogel, Goltz, and
Schramm of Wittenberg, were forbidden to be offered for sale in Leipzig
or Dresden, and were forbidden transportation to the Frankfort Fair.
The immediate result of these anti-reform operations of the Church and
of the Duke was the practical destruction for the time being of the
book-trade of Leipzig.

In 1539, a printer of Leipzig, named Michel Wohlrabe, secured for
himself notoriety through the extent of his piracy publications. He
issued editions of the Lutheran Bible and of other writings of the
Reformers, in the face, not only of the claims of these writers to
control their own publications, but of the prohibition of Duke George
against the production of any Lutheran literature whatever. After
the death of George, however, there came a change in regard to the
influence of the ducal government, and at the request of the Elector
John Frederic, an edict was issued forbidding the further printing in
Leipzig of any anti-Lutheran literature. This removed one difficulty in
the way of Wohlrabe’s operations, and Luther and his friends found that
they were helpless, in the conditions which then obtained in the law
and in the book-trade, to prevent the circulation of these unauthorised
editions.

Luther’s complaints, referred to further on, were principally directed,
as it must be remembered, not against the loss of profits to himself,
but to the injury to the community and the grievance to the writers in
having books circulated in an unrevised and incorrect text.




[Illustration]

CHAPTER III.

THE PRINTER-PUBLISHERS OF ITALY, 1464-1600.


THE reproduction and distribution of the works of classical writers
to such an extent as not only to influence the scholarly thought of
the time, but to widen enormously the circles of society reached and
affected by intellectual influences, became possible only through the
new art of printing which had been brought across the Alps by German
workmen; while the prompt utilisation of printing for the service
of scholarship called for the devoted labour of printers who were
themselves scholars and who were prepared to subordinate and even to
sacrifice, in the cause of a literary ideal, their immediate business
advantage. It was to the high scholarly ideals and courageous and
unselfish labours of Aldus Manutius and his immediate successors no
less than to the imagination, ingenuity, and persistency of Gutenberg
and Fust, that the Europe of 1495 was indebted for the great gift of
the poetry and the philosophy of Greece. Mayence and Venice joined
hands to place at the service of the scholarly world the literary
heritage of Athens.

The close of the fifteenth century witnessed a great expansion in
more than one direction of European thought. In the West, Columbus
had opened up a new world, and his discovery, while giving manifold
incentives to the men of action, must also have served as a powerful
stimulus to the imagination of the thinkers of the time, in its
suggestions concerning the possibilities of the future. In the East,
the printers of Venice were making use of scholars from Constantinople
to rediscover for Europe the vast realm of Greek thought, and to
bring Homer, Plato, and Aristotle to the knowledge of the students of
Bologna, Paris, and Oxford. Perhaps in no other epoch of the world’s
history has there been so great an expansion of the possibilities
of thought and of action, so suggestive a widening of range of the
imagination, as in the decade succeeding 1492.

The introduction into Italy of the art of printing was due to Juan
Turrecremata, who was Abbot of the monastery of Subiaco, and who later
became Cardinal. He was a native of Valladolid in Spain, and his family
name was Torquemada, of which name Turrecremata is the Latinised form.
The Cardinal has been confused by Frommann[447] with the Torquemada who
was Inquisitor-General of the Inquisition during the period of its most
pitiless activity. The latter probably belonged to the same family, but
his Christian name was Tomas, and he was not born till 1420, thirty
years later than the Cardinal. Juan Torquemada had, however, been one
of the confessors of Queen Isabella, and was said to have made to her
the first suggestion of the necessity of establishing the Inquisition,
in order to check the rising spirit of heresy. He did not realise what
a Trojan horse, full of heretical possibilities, he was introducing
into Italy in bringing in the Germans and their printing-press.

The monastery of Subiaco was some sixty miles from Rome. Among its
monks were, in 1464, a number of Germans, some of whom had, before
leaving Germany, seen or heard enough of the work done by the printers
in Mayence or Frankfort to be able to give to the Abbot an idea of
its character. The Abbot was keenly interested in the possibilities
presented by the new art, and with the aid of these German monks
he arranged to bring to Subiaco two printers, Conrad Schweinheim,
of Mayence, and Arnold Pannartz, of Prague, who were instructed
to organise a printing-office in the monastery. They began their
operations early in 1464, their first work being given to the printing
in sheet form of the manuals of worship or liturgies used in the
monastery.

In 1465, they published the first volume printed in Italy, an edition
of a Latin syntax for boys, edited by Lactantius. This was followed
in the latter part of the same year by an edition of Cicero’s _De
Oratore_, and in 1467, by the _De Civitate_ of Augustine.

It was only the enthusiasm of the Abbot that rendered it possible,
even for a short period, to overcome the many obstacles in the way
of carrying on a printing-office in an out of the way village like
Subiaco. But the difficulties soon became too great, and in 1467,
the two German printers found their way, under the invitation of the
brothers Massimi, to Rome, where they set up their presses in the
Massimi palace. There they carried on operations for five years,
during which time they produced a stately series of editions of the
Latin classics, including the works of Cicero, Apuleius, Gellius,
Cæsar, Virgil, Livy, Strabo, Lucan, Pliny, Suetonius, Quintilian,
Ovid, together with editions of certain of the Church Fathers, such as
Augustine, Jerome, and Cyprian. They also published a Latin Bible, and
the Bible commentaries of Nicholas de Lyra, in five volumes.

With the production of the last work, the resources which had been
placed at their disposal by their friends the Massimis and by another
patron, Bussi, Bishop of Aleria, were exhausted. The Bishop addressed
an appeal to the Pope on their behalf, setting forth the importance
of their work for the “service of literature and of the Church.”
Sixtus IV., who had just succeeded to the papacy, while apparently not
affected by the dread which influenced future popes concerning the
pernicious influence of the printing-press, evidently did not share in
the enthusiasm of the Bishop as to its present value for the Church. He
was also somewhat avaricious and preferred to use his money to provide
for a large circle of relatives rather than to support a publishing
business. The printers were, therefore, unable to secure any aid from
the papal treasury, and, in 1472, they brought their business to a
close. Schweinheim transferred his activities to the work of engraving
on copper, while concerning the further undertakings of Pannartz there
is no record.

During the seven years of their operations in Subiaco and in Rome,
these two printers, who constituted the first firm of publishers in
Italy, had printed twenty-nine separate works, comprised in thirty-six
volumes. The editions averaged 275 copies of each volume, the total
output aggregating about 12,500 volumes. There is no record of any
attempt being made to secure for this first list of publications the
protection of privileges, and there could in fact have been at the time
no competition to fear.

Shortly after the cessation of Schweinheim’s business, Turrecremata
became a cardinal, and he immediately invited another German printer,
Ulrich Hahn, from Ingolstadt, to settle in Rome. Hahn’s first
publications were the _Meditationes_ of the Cardinal himself, and
these were followed by a number of editions of the Latin classics.
The learned Campanus, Bishop of Teramo, was one of Hahn’s patrons and
gave also valuable service as a press-corrector, working so diligently
that at one time he reserved for himself only three hours’ sleep. The
Bishop writes with great enthusiasm to a friend concerning the art of
printing, “by means of which material which required a year for its
writing could be printed off ready for the reader in one day.”

Other German printers followed Hahn, and before the close of the
century more than twenty had carried on work in Rome with varying
success. The influence of the Church was at this time decidedly
favourable to the new art, and nearly all the Roman printers of the
earlier group were working at the instance of ecclesiastics, and often
with the direct support of ecclesiastical funds. It is to the Church of
Rome, therefore, that belongs the responsibility for the introduction
into Italy of the printing-press, the work of which was later to give
to the Church so much trouble. The little town of Subiaco can, as the
record shows, claim the credit of the first printing, while it was in
Rome that the first publications of importance were produced.

The leading place, however, in the production of books was almost
from the outset taken by the printers of Venice, and as well for the
excellence of their typography as by reason of the scholarly importance
of the publications themselves, the Venetian printers maintained
for many years a pre-eminence not only in Italy but in Europe. The
distinctive prestige secured by Venice came through the printing of
Greek texts, the beginnings of which, under the direction of Aldus
Manutius, will be referred to later.

=Venice.=--The first book printed in Venice was the famous _Decor
Puellarum_, a treatise of instruction for young girls as to the ruling
of their lives. Its date has been claimed by Venetians to be 1461, but
it appears from the judgment of the best authorities that this date
must have been erroneous and that the volume really appeared in 1471.
The printer of the _Decor Puellarum_ was Jenson, a Frenchman, and the
contest for priority in Italian publishing has rested between him and
the two Germans of Subiaco.

Another printer whose first Italian volume, _Epistolæ Familiares_,
appeared in Venice in 1470, was also a German, John of Speyer. A fourth
volume in this earlier group of publications bore the title _Miracoli
della Gloriosa Verzine_. This was the only one of the four which was
printed by an Italian, Lavagna of Milan, while it was also the only
early printed book in the Italian language.

In the year 1493, the earliest official document relating to the
printing-press in Venice was published by the Abbate Jacopo Morelli,
prefect of the Marcian Library. That document is an order of the
_Collegio_ or cabinet of Venice, dated September 18, 1469. The order
was proposed by the Doge’s councillors, and grants to John of Speyer,
for a period of five years, the monopoly of printing in Venice and
in the territory controlled by Venice. John did not long enjoy the
advantages of this monopoly, having died in 1470, but the business was
continued by his brother Windelin, to whom, apparently, was conceded
the continuance of the monopoly.

John of Speyer was one of the few of the earlier printers who left
information concerning the size of their editions. If he had also
thought it important to specify the price at which the books were sold,
we should have had data for calculations concerning the relative profit
from the different works.

Of the _Epistolæ Familiares_, the first edition comprised but one
hundred copies, but the demand must have been greater than had
been calculated for, as four months later the printing of a second
edition of six hundred copies was begun, which was completed (in two
impressions) within the term of three months.

The printer, Nicolas Jenson, was born in the province of Champagne
about 1420, and was brought up in the Paris Mint. He was sent to
Mayence in 1458 by Charles VII. to learn the secrets of the new art of
printing. He returned to France in 1461, shortly after the accession
of Louis XI. It is not clear whether the new king was less interested
than had been his predecessor in the development of French printing, or
whether Jenson was afforded any opportunity for exercising his art in
Paris. In 1465, however, he is heard of in Venice, and he began there,
in 1470, a printing and publishing business which soon became the most
important in Italy.

There were many reasons to influence Jenson in his choice of Venice as
the scene of his operations. In the first place, the tide of printers
was flowing steadily towards Italy. Apprentices who had acquired the
new art in Germany set out to seek their fortunes by the exercise of
their skill. It was natural that they should turn to Italy, where the
nobles were rich, where learning had its home, where there were already
many manuscripts available for the printers, and where there was a
public, both lay and ecclesiastic, ready to pay for the reproductions.
The Venetian Republic offered special attractions in the security
afforded by its government, and in the protection and liberty she
promised to all who settled in her dominions. Venice was, moreover, the
best mart for the distribution of goods, and the trade in paper was
facilitated by the ease and cheapness of sea-carriage.

The first rag paper was made about the year 1300, and the trade of
paper-making soon became an important one in Italy. In 1373, the
Venetian Senate forbade the exportation of rags from the dominions of
the Republic, an act which recalls the edict of Ptolemy Philadelphus in
290 B.C., forbidding the exportation of papyrus from Alexandria.

The position of Venice secured for it exceptional facilities for
becoming a literary and a publishing centre, facilities in some
respects similar to those which eighteen hundred years earlier had
given to Alexandria the control of the book production of its time. The
Venetian Contarini, writing in 1591, speaks of “the wonderful situation
of the city, which possesses so many advantages that one might think
the site had been selected not by men but by the gods themselves. The
city lies in a quiet inlet of the Adriatic Sea. On the side towards the
sea, the waters of the lagoons are spread out like a series of lakes,
while far in the distance the bow-shaped peninsula of the Lido serves
as a protection against the storms from the south. On the side towards
the main land, the city is, in like manner, surrounded and protected by
the waters of its lagoons. Various canals serve as roadways between the
different islands, and in the midst of the lakes and of these watery
ways arise in stately groups the palaces and the towers of the city.”

It was by the thoroughness of the protection secured for Venice through
its watery defences, no less than by its isolated position outside of,
although in immediate connection with, the Italian territory, that
the Republic was enabled to keep free from a large proportion of the
contests petty and great that troubled or devastated Italian territory
during the sixteenth century.

When it was drawn into a conflict, its fighting was done very largely
by means of its fleets, operating at a distance, or with the aid of
foreign troops hired for the purpose, and but rarely were the actual
operations of war brought within touch of Venetian territory. Its
control of the approaches by sea prevented also the connections with
the outer world from being interfered with. The city could neither
be blockaded nor surrounded, and in whatever warlike operations it
might be engaged, its commercial undertakings went on practically
undisturbed. It was under very similar conditions that Alexandria
secured, in literary production and in publishing operations during the
fourth and the third centuries B.C., pre-eminence over Pergamus and
the other Greek cities of Asia Minor. The fact that manuscripts and
printing-presses could be fairly protected against the risks of war,
and that the road to the markets of the world for the productions of
the presses could not easily be blocked, had an important influence
during the century succeeding 1490, in attracting printers to Venice
rather than to Bologna, Milan, or Florence. The Venetian government was
also prompt to recognise the value of the new industry and the service
and the prestige that were being conferred upon the city by the work of
the printer-publishers and their scholarly editors. The Republic gave,
from the outset, more care to the furthering of this work by privileges
and concessions and by honourable recognition of the guild of the
printers than was given in any other Italian state. To these advantages
should be added the valuable relations possessed by Venice with the
scholars of the Greek world, through its old-time connections with
Constantinople and Asia Minor. It was through these connections that
the printers of Venice secured what might be called the first pick of
the manuscripts of a large number of the Greek texts that became known
to Europe during the half-century succeeding 1490.

These texts were brought in part from the monasteries, which had been
spared by the Turkish conquerors in the Byzantine territory and in Asia
Minor, while in other cases, they came to light in various corners of
Italy, where the scholars, flying from Constantinople after the great
disaster of 1453, had found refuge. As it became known that in Venice
there was demand for Greek manuscripts, and that Venetian printers
were offering compensation to scholars for editing Greek texts for the
press, scholars speedily found their way to the City of the Lagoons.
To many of these scholars, who had been driven impoverished from their
homes in the East, the opportunity of securing a livelihood through the
sale and through the editing of their manuscripts must have opened up
new and important possibilities.

In 1479, Jenson sold to Andrea Torresano of Asola, later the
father-in-law of Aldus Manutius, a set of the matrices punched by his
punches. These matrices were probably the beginning of the plant of the
later business of Aldus. In 1479, Pope Sixtus IV. conferred upon Jenson
the honourary title of Count Palatine. He was the first nobleman in
the guild of publishers, and he has had but few successors. He died in
1480.

John of Windelin, John of Speyer, and Nicolas Jenson, the three
earliest Venetian printers, employed three kinds of characters in
their type--Roman, Gothic, and Greek. The Gothic character secured, as
compared with the others, a considerable economy of space, and its use
became, therefore, more general in connection with the increased demand
from the reading public for less expensive editions. Before the Greek
fonts had been made, it was customary to leave blanks in the text where
the Greek passages occurred and to fill these in by hand.

It was the practice of the later printer-publishers to place in
their books the date, place of publication, and their own names, and
considering how much the editing, printing, and publication of a
book involved, it was natural that those who were responsible for it
should be interested in securing the full credit for its production.
It is nevertheless the case that quite a number of books, of no little
importance, were issued by the earlier printers without any imprint
or mark of origin, an omission which, as Brown remarks, is certainly
surprising in view of the high esteem in which printers were held and
of the large claims made by them upon the gratitude of their own age
and of future generations.

The larger proportion of the outlay required for these early books
was not the expense of the manufacturing, heavy as this was, but the
payments required for the purchase of manuscripts, and for their
revision, collation, correction, and preparation for the type-setters.

The printer-publisher needed to possess a fair measure of scholarly
knowledge in order to be able to judge rightly of the nature of the
editorial work that was required before the work of the type-setters
could begin. If, as in the case of Aldus, this scholarly knowledge was
sufficient to enable the printer himself to act as editor, to revise
the manuscripts for the press, and to write the introduction and the
critical annotations, he had of course a very great advantage in the
conduct of his business.

As an example of the cost of printing in Venice at this period, Brown
cites an agreement entered into in 1478 between a certain Leonardus,
printer, and Nicolaus, who took the risk of the undertaking, acting,
therefore, as a publisher. An edition of 930 copies of the complete
Bible was to be printed by Leonardus for the price of 430 ducats,
the paper being furnished by Nicolaus. Twenty of the copies were to
be retained by Leonardus, and the cost to Nicolaus of the 910 copies
received by him would have been, exclusive of the paper, about $2150,
or per copy about $2.50. The cost of the paper would have brought the
amount up to about $3. The selling price of Bibles in 1492 appears to
have varied from 6 ducats to 12 ducats, or from $30 to $60, but it is
probable that these prices covered various styles of bindings.

The years between 1470 and 1515 witnessed a greater increase in the
number of printers at work in Venice, a considerable proportion of
the newcomers being Germans. With the rapid growth in the production
of books, there came a material deterioration in the quality of
the typography. The original models for the type-founders had
been the letters of the manuscripts, and it was the boast of the
earlier founders that their type was so perfect that it could not
be distinguished from script. The copyists realised that their art
was in danger, and, in 1474, they went so far in their opposition in
Genoa as to petition the Senate for the expulsion of the printers. The
application was, however, disregarded; the new art met at once with a
cordial reception, and from the beginning secured the active support of
the government.

The trade of the printers could, however, not rest upon a secure
foundation until the taste for reading had become popularised.
The wealthy classes were not sufficiently numerous to keep the
printing-presses busy, while it was also the case that for a number of
years after the invention of printing, a considerable proportion of the
wealthier collectors of literature continued to give their preference
to manuscripts as being more aristocratic and exclusive. The earlier
books issued from the presses were planned to meet the requirements
of these higher class collectors, whose taste had been formed from
beautiful manuscripts. With the second generation of printers, however,
a new market arose calling for a different class of supplies. The
revival of learning brought into existence a reading public which was
eager for knowledge and which was no longer fastidious as to the beauty
of the form in which its literature was presented. By 1490, a demand
had arisen for cheap books for popular reading, and in changing their
methods to meet this demand, the printers permitted the standard of
excellence of their work to suffer a material decline.

Brown gives an abstract from the day-book of a Venetian bookseller of
1484-1485, the original of which is contained in the Marcian Library.
Even at that early date, we find represented in the stock of the
bookseller, classics, Bibles, missals, breviaries, works on canon law,
school-books, romances, and poetry.

The record shows that the purchases of the bookseller from the
publisher were usually made for cash, and that for the most part he
received cash from his customers. In some cases, however, these latter
made their payment in kind. Thus a chronicle was exchanged for oil;
Cicero’s _Orations_ for wine; and a general assortment of books for
flour; while different binders’ bills were settled, the one with the
_Life and Miracles of the Madonna_, and the other with the series of
the _Hundred Novels_. The proof-reader was paid for certain services
with copies of a Mamotrictus, a Legendary, and a Bible, and an account
from an illuminator was adjusted with an Abacus, (a multiplication
table, or a condensed arithmetic).

The prices of books ruled lower than might have been expected, the
cheapest being volumes of poetry and romance. For instance, Poggio’s
_Facetiæ_ sells for nine soldi, and the _Inamoramento d’Orlando_ for
one lira, while Dante’s _Inferno_ with a commentary, brings one ducat,
and Plutarch’s _Lives_, two ducats. A small volume of Martial brought
fifteen soldi. The editions of certain printers realised higher prices
than those of the same books by other printers whose imprint did not
carry with it so much prestige.

It was during the last ten years of the fifteenth century that the
business of printing and publishing in Venice reached its highest
importance as compared with that done elsewhere. It was this decade
that witnessed the founding of the Greek press by Aldus, Vlastos,
and Caliergi, the first printing in Arabic and in the other Eastern
languages, and the beginning of the publication of romances and
_novelieri_.

The part taken in these new undertakings by Aldus Manutius was of
distinctive importance, not only for Venice and Italy, but for the
civilised world. He was a skilled printer, and an enterprising,
public-spirited publisher, and he was, further, a judicious and
painstaking critic and editor, and a scholar of exceptional
attainments. To him more than to any other one man is due the
introduction into Europe of the literature of Greece, which was
in a measure rediscovered at the time, when, by the use of the
printing-press, it could be placed within the reach of wide circles of
impecunious students to whom the purchase of costly manuscripts would
have been impossible.

In his interest in Greek literature, as well as in his scholarship
and public-spirited liberality, Aldus was a worthy successor to the
Roman publisher of the first century who had earned the appellation of
Atticus on account of the attention given by him to the reproduction
for the reading public of Italy of the great classics of Greece.
Atticus was, however, a man of large means, gained chiefly through his
business as a banker and a farmer of taxes, and it appears to have
been to him a matter of indifference whether or not his publishing
undertakings returned any profits on the moneys invested in them. Aldus
began business without capital and died a poor man. Not many of his
books secured for the publisher profits as well as prestige. He lived
modestly and laboured continuously, but he expended in fresh scholarly
publishing undertakings all the receipts that came to him from such of
his ventures as proved remunerative.

As before pointed out, the payments made by Aldus for the work of
editing his series of classical publications, payments which were
probably the first ever made in Italy for literary work in connection
with printing, were not only of material service to many of the
impecunious Greek scholars, but must have served as precedents for
fixing, for Italy at least, a market value for literary service.
The payments to the Greek refugees included in a number of cases
compensation for the use of the manuscripts they had brought with them,
manuscripts which not infrequently constituted practically everything
in the shape of property that they had been able to save from the grasp
of the Turks. For a number of the more scholarly of these refugees,
places were made in the universities, or as we should now say, Chairs
were endowed, for instruction in the language and literature of Greece.
Aldus himself took the initiative in inducing the Venetian Senate to
institute such a professorship in Padua for his friend Musurus.

For a number of years, a larger proportion of the scholars and the
manuscripts was absorbed by Venice than by any other of the Italian
cities. The production of books progressed more rapidly in Venice
than elsewhere, and the art of bookmaking reached a higher perfection
there during the first decade of the sixteenth century than in any
city in Europe. As before noted, however, Subiaco had preceded Venice
in the printing of books, while the use of Greek type, in which
Venice so rapidly attained pre-eminence, occurred first in Milan. The
introduction of illustrations into book-printing probably originated in
Rome.

=Aldus Manutius.=--It seems to me in order, for the purpose of my
narrative, to present in some detail the record of the life and work
of Aldus. The history of any representative printer-publisher whose
career belonged to the earlier stages of the business of making and
selling books, would have value in throwing light on the extent of
the difficulties and obstacles to be overcome and on the nature of
the methods adopted; the career of Aldus possesses, however, not
merely such typical value but a distinctive and individual interest,
as well because of the personality of the man as on the ground of
the exceptional importance, for his own community and for future
generations, of the service rendered by him.

Aldus Manutius was born at Bassiano in the Romagna, in 1450, the year
in which Gutenberg completed his printing-press. He studied in Rome
and in Ferrara, and after having mastered Latin, he devoted himself,
under the tutorship of Guarini of Verona, to the study of Greek. Later,
he delivered lectures on the Latin and Greek classics. One of his
fellow students in Ferrara was the precocious young scholar Pico della
Mirandola, whose friendship was afterwards of material service. In
1482, when Ferrara was being besieged by the Venetians and scholarly
pursuits were interrupted, Aldus was the guest of Pico at Mirandola,
where he met Emanuel Adramyttenos, one of the many Greek scholars who,
when driven out of Constantinople, had found refuge in the Courts
of Italian princes. Aldus spent two years at Mirandola, and under
the influence and guidance of Adramyttenos, he largely increased his
knowledge of the language and literature of Greece. His friend had
brought from the East a number of manuscripts, many of which found
their way into the library of Pico.

In 1482, Aldus took charge of the education of the sons of the Princess
of Carpi, a sister of Pico, and the zeal and scholarly capacity which
he devoted to his task won for him the life-long friendship of both
mother and sons. It was in Carpi that Aldus developed the scheme of
utilising his scholarly knowledge and connections for the printing of
Latin and Greek classics. The plan was a bold one for a young scholar
without capital. Printing and publishing constituted a practically
untried field of business, not merely for Aldus but for Italy.
Everything had to be created or developed; knowledge of the art of
printing and of all the technicalities of book-manufacturing; fonts of
type, Roman and Greek; a force of type-setters and pressmen and a staff
of skilled revisers and proof-readers; a collection of trustworthy
texts to serve as “copy” for the compositors; and last, but by no means
least, a book-buying public and a book-selling machinery by which such
public could be reached.

It was the aim of Aldus, as he himself expressed it, to rescue from
oblivion the words of the classic writers, the monuments of human
intellect. He writes in 1490: “I have resolved to devote my life
to the cause of scholarship. I have chosen in place of a life of
ease and freedom, an anxious and toilsome career. A man has higher
responsibilities than the seeking of his own enjoyment; he should
devote himself to honourable labour. Living that is a mere existence
can be left to men who are content to be animals. Cato compared human
existence to iron. When nothing is done with it, it rusts; it is only
through constant activity that polish or brilliancy is secured.” The
world has probably never produced a publisher who united with these
high ideals and exceptional scholarly attainments, so much practical
business ability and persistent pluck.

The funds required for the undertaking were furnished by the Princess
of Carpi and her sons, probably with some co-operation from Pico, and
in 1494, Aldus organised his printing-office in Venice. His first
publication, issued in 1495, was the Greek and Latin Grammar of
Laskaris, a suitable forerunner for his great classical series. The
second issue from his Press was an edition of the Works of Aristotle,
the first volume of which was also completed in 1495. This was followed
in 1496 by the Greek Grammar of Gaza, and in 1497 by a Greek-Latin
Dictionary compiled by Aldus himself.

The business cares of these first years of his printing business were
not allowed to prevent him from going on with his personal studies.
In 1502, he published, in a handsome quarto volume, a comprehensive
grammar under the title of _Rudimenta Grammatices Linguæ Latinæ, etc.
cum Introductione ad Hebraicam Linguam_, to the preparation of which he
had devoted years of arduous labour. Piratical editions were promptly
issued in Florence, Lyons, and Paris. He also wrote the _Grammaticæ
Institutiones Græcæ_ (a labour of some years), which was not published
until 1515, after the death of the author.

It will be noted that nearly all the undertakings to which he gave,
both as editor and as publisher, his earliest attention, were the
necessary first steps in the great scheme of the reproduction of the
complete series of the Greek classics. Before editors or proof-readers
could go on with the work of preparing the Greek texts for the press,
dictionaries and grammars had to be created. Laskaris, whose Grammar
initiated the series, was a refugee from the East, and at the time of
the publication of his work, was an instructor in Messina. No record
has been preserved of the arrangement made with him by his Venetian
publisher, a deficiency that is the more to be regretted as his Grammar
was probably the very first work by a living author, printed in Italy.
Gaza was a native of Greece, and was for a time associated with the
Aldine Press as a Greek editor.

In 1500, Aldus married the daughter of the printer Andrea Torresano of
Asola, previously referred to as the successor of the Frenchman Jenson
and the purchaser of Jenson’s matrices. In 1507, the two printing
concerns were united, and the savings of Torresano were utilised to
strengthen the resources of Aldus, which had become impaired, probably
through his too great optimism and publishing enterprise.

During the disastrous years of 1509-1511, in which Venice was harassed
by the wars resulting from the League of Cambray, the business came
to a stand-still, partly because the channels of distribution for
the books were practically blocked, but partly also on account of
the exhaustion of the available funds. Friends again brought to the
publisher the aid to which, on the ground of his public-spirited
undertakings, he was so well entitled, and he was enabled, after the
peace of 1511, to proceed with the completion of his Greek classics.
Before his death in 1515, Aldus had issued in this series the works of
Aristotle, Plato, Homer, Pindar, Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes,
Demosthenes, Lysias, Æschines, Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon,
Plutarch, and others, in addition to a companion series of the works of
the chief Latin writers. The list of publications included in all some
100 different works, comprised (in their several editions) in about
250 volumes. Considering the special difficulties of the times and the
exceptional character of the original and creative labour that was
required to secure the texts, to prepare them for the press, to print
them correctly, and to bring them to the attention of possible buyers,
this list of undertakings is, in my judgment, by far the greatest and
the most honourable in the whole history of publishing.

It was a disadvantage for carrying on scholarly publishing undertakings
in Venice, that the city possessed no university, a disadvantage that
was only partly offset by the proximity of Padua, which early in the
fifteenth century had come under Venetian rule. A university would of
course have been of service to a publisher like Aldus, not only in
supplying a home market for his books, but in placing at his disposal
scholarly assistants whose services could be utilised in editing the
texts and in supervising their type-setting. The correspondence of
members of a university with the scholars of other centres of learning,
could be made valuable also in securing information as to available
manuscripts and concerning scholarly undertakings generally. In the
absence of a university circle, Aldus was obliged to depend upon his
personal efforts to bring him into relations, through correspondence,
with men of learning throughout Europe, and to gather about the Aldine
Press a group of scholarly associates and collaborators.

The chief corrector or proof-reader for Greek work of the Press was
John Gregoropoulos, of Candia. Some editorial service was rendered by
Theodore Gaza, of Athens, who took part, for instance, in the work
on the set of _Aristotle_. The most important, however, of the Greek
associates of Aldus was Marcus Musurus, of Crete, whose name appears
as the editor of the _Aristophanes_, _Athenæus_, _Plato_, and a number
of other of the Greek authors in the Aldine series, and also of the
important collection of _Epistolæ Græcarum_.

Musurus was an early friend of Pico, and later of his nephew, Alberto
Pio, and it was at Carpi that he had first met Aldus, with whom he
ever afterwards maintained a close intimacy. In 1502, probably at the
instance of Aldus, Musurus was called by the Venetian Senate to occupy
the Chair of belles-lettres at Padua, and he appears to have given his
lectures not only in the University, but also in Venice. Aldus writes:
“Scholars hasten to Venice, the Athens of our day, to listen to the
teachings of Musurus, the greatest scholar of the age.”

In 1503, the Senate charged Musurus with the task of exercising a
censorship over all Greek books printed in Venice, with reference
particularly to the suppression of anything inimical to the Roman
Church. This seems to have been the earliest attempt in Italy to
supervise the work of the printing-press. It is natural enough that the
ecclesiastics should have dreaded the influence of the introduction
of the doctrines of the Greek Church, while it is certainly probable
that many of the refugees from Constantinople brought with them no
very cordial feeling towards Rome. The belief was very general that
if the Papacy had not felt a greater enmity against the Greek Church
than against the Turk, the Catholic states of Europe would have saved
Constantinople. The sacking of Constantinople by the Christian armies
of the Fourth Crusade was still remembered by the Christians of the
East as a crime of the Western Church. There were, therefore, reasons
enough why the authorities of Rome should think it necessary to keep
a close watch over the new literature coming in from the East, and
should do what was practicable to exclude all doctrinal writings, and
the censorship instituted in 1502 was the beginning of a long series
of rigorous enactments which proved, however, much less practicable to
carry out in Venice than elsewhere in Italy.

Other literary advisers and associates of Aldus were Hieronymus
Alexander (later Cardinal), Pietro Bembo, Scipio Carteromachus,
Demetrius Doucas, Johann Reuchlin, and, above all, Erasmus of
Rotterdam, whose learning rivalled that of Musurus, and who, outside of
Italy, was far more widely known than the Greek scholar.

It was in the year 1500 that the scheme took shape in the mind of Aldus
of an academy which should take the place in Venice that in Florence
was occupied by the academy instituted by the Medici. The special aim
of the Aldine Academy, to which Aldus gave the name _Ne-accademia
Nostra_, was the furthering of the interest in, and knowledge of, the
literature of classic Greece. Aldus himself was the first president
of the Academy, and while the majority of the members were residents
either of Venice or of Padua, the original list included scholars of
Rome, of Bologna, and of Lucca, Greeks of Candia, Erasmus of Rotterdam,
and others from distant places.

Aldus applied to the Emperor Maximilian for a diploma giving imperial
sanction to the organisation of his Academy, but the Emperor, although,
as is shown in other correspondence, friendly in his disposition to the
printer, was from some cause unwilling to give an official recognition
to the Academy. The constitution of the Academy was printed in Greek,
and certain days were fixed on which the members gave their personal
consideration to the examination of Greek texts, the publication of
which was judged likely to be of service to scholarship.

With the editorial aid of certain members of the Academy, Aldus
arranged to print each month, in an edition of one thousand copies,
some work selected by the Council. This Council, therefore, took
upon itself in the matter of the selection of Greek classics for
presentation, a function similar to that exercised 300 B.C. by
the scholars appointed for the purpose in the Academy of Ptolemy
Philadelphus, while some of its functions might be paralleled by those
exercised to-day by the Delegates of the Clarendon Press of Oxford. It
was the hope of Aldus that this Venetian Academy would take upon itself
larger responsibilities in connection not only with Greek literature
but with arts and sciences generally. When, however, with the death
of its president, the Academy lost the service of his energetic
initiative, its work soon came to a close.

For the sale of his publications, Aldus was in the main dependent
upon direct correspondence with scholars. In Italy prior to 1550,
bookselling hardly existed as an organised trade, and while in Germany
there was a larger number of dealers in books, and the book-trade had
by 1510 already organised its Fair at Frankfort, the communications
between Italy and Germany were still too difficult to enable a
publisher in Venice to keep in regular relations with the dealers
north of the Alps. Paris was probably easier to reach than Frankfort,
but the sales in Paris were not a little interfered with by the Lyons
piracy editions before referred to, and even by piracies of the Paris
publishers themselves. Aldus succeeded, however, before his death
in securing agents who were prepared to take orders for the Aldine
classics, not only in Paris, but in Vienna, Basel, Augsburg, and
Nuremberg. With Frankfort he appears to have had no direct dealings, as
his name does not appear in the list of contributors to the recently
instituted Book-Fair.

As an example of a business letter of the time, the following lines
from a bookseller in Treviso, who wanted to buy books on credit, are
worth quoting:

  _Alde, libros quos venales bene credere possis
  Hic pollet multa bibliopola fide.
  Fortunis pollet quantum illa negotia possunt;
  Hoc me, Manuti, credere teste potes!
  Ignoras qui sim, nec adhuc sine pignore credis;
  Te meus erga ingens sit tibi pignus amor._

(You have books for sale, Aldus, which you are able to entrust to me,
if as a dealer, you have sufficient faith. This confidence would secure
for you as much business advantage as is possible in such transactions.
You can accept in this matter my personal word. You do not know who I
am, and do not make a practice of giving credit. My great regard for
you should, however, serve as a sufficient pledge.)[448]

The business of the time was done very largely by personal
correspondence, and as the knowledge of his editions of the Greek
classics came to be spread abroad, Aldus found himself overburdened
with enquiries calling for personal replies. In order to save time
in replying to such enquiries, Aldus printed on a folio sheet the
descriptive titles of his publications with the prices at which they
were offered. This sheet, printed in 1498, was the first priced
catalogue ever issued by a publisher.

The orders that came to Aldus for his books differed in one important
respect from those received by a publisher or bookseller to-day. The
buyers did not write as a matter of ordinary business routine, or as if
they were conferring any favour upon the publisher in taking his goods,
but with a very cordial sense of the personal obligation that the
publisher was, through his undertakings, conferring upon them and upon
all scholarly persons. As an example of many such letters, I will quote
from one written in 1505, from a Cistercian monastery in the Thuringian
Forest, by a scholarly monk named Urbanus:

“May the blessing of the Lord rest upon thee, thou illustrious man. The
high reward in which you are held by our Brotherhood will be realised
by you when you learn that we have ordered (through the house of Függer
in Augsburg) a group of your valuable publications, and that it is our
chief desire to be able to purchase all the others. We pray to God
each day that He will in His mercy, long preserve you for the cause of
good learning. Our neighbour, Mutianus Rufus, the learned Canonicus
of Gotha, calls you ‘the light of our age,’ and is never weary of
relating your great services to scholarship. He sends you a cordial
greeting, as does also Magister Spalatinus, a man of great learning. We
are sending you with this four gold ducats, and will ask you to send
us (through Függer) an _Etymologicum Magnum_ and a _Julius Pollux_,
and also (if there be money sufficient) the writings of Bessarion, of
Xenophon, and of Hierocles, and the Letters of Merula.”[449]

Troublesome as Aldus found his correspondence, letters of this kind
must have been peculiarly gratifying as evidence that his labours were
not in vain.

He had similar correspondence with the well-known scholar, Reuchlin,
an appreciative friend and a grateful customer, who in 1501, at the
time of the first letters, was resident in Heidelberg, and also with
Longinus and the poet Conrad Celtes in Vienna. The latter was later of
service to Aldus in securing for his Press valuable manuscripts from
Bohemia, and from certain monasteries in Transylvania. The name of
Celtes is further of note in the literary history of Germany because to
him was issued the earliest German privilege of which there is record.
It bears date 1501, and protected the publication of an edition by
Celtes of the writings of the Benedictine nun Hroswitha (Helena von
Rossow), who had been dead for 600 years.

The most famous of the transalpine scholars with whom Aldus came into
relations was, however, Desiderius Erasmus, of Rotterdam, or to speak
with more precision, of Europe. Erasmus has many titles to fame,
but for the purposes of this treatise his career is noteworthy more
particularly because he was one of the first authors who was able to
secure his living, or the more important portion of this, from the
proceeds of his writings. The career of Erasmus belongs properly to
the chapter on Germany, as it was in Basel, at that time a city of
the Empire, that he made his longest sojourn, in close association
with his life-long friend Froben, the scholarly publisher whom Erasmus
called the “Aldus of Germany.”

In 1506, Erasmus, who had been in England for a second visit, came to
Italy, where he lectured in the Universities of Bologna and Padua,
and from Padua he was induced by Aldus to transfer himself to Venice.
There he remained during the year 1508, making his home with the
publisher, and rendering important service as a literary adviser and in
editorial work. There is no record of any formal or continued business
arrangement between the scholar and the publisher, and it is very
possible that no such arrangement took shape.

Erasmus took charge of the preparation for the press, among other
works, of the Aldine editions of _Terence_, _Seneca_, Plutarch’s
_Morals_, and _Plautus_. For his work on the _Plautus_ he tells us that
he received twenty pieces of gold (_i. e._, ducats). Later, however,
he denied with some indignation, in writing to Scaliger, that he had
worked as a “corrector” or proof-reader for Aldus. It should be borne
in mind that in connection with the many difficulties in securing from
more or less doubtful manuscripts trustworthy texts, and in educating
compositors to put such texts correctly into type, the work of reviser,
press-corrector, or proof-reader, in the earlier days of printing,
demanded a very high standard of scholarship and a wide range of
knowledge. There was, therefore, no reason why Erasmus should have been
ashamed to admit that he had done work of this kind. Some years later
he gave to his friend Froben, the great publisher of Basel, similar
service and co-operation. The intimate relations of Erasmus with Aldus
and Froben, by far the greatest publishers of the time, had no little
influence in furthering the world-wide circulation secured for his
works.

While in Venice, Erasmus also supervised the printing of a revised
edition of his _Adagia_ (Proverbs) which appeared in 1508. For this
work, Aldus obtained a privilege both in Venice and in Rome, and there
were printed in Venice alone eight editions. When, however, in 1520,
Paul Manutius undertook again to reprint the _Adagia_, he found that he
had to contend with an increasing hostility on the part of the Church
against anything bearing the name of Erasmus. The book was finally
issued anonymously, and it was described in the catalogue as the work
of “_Batavus quidam homo_” (a certain Hollander).

In 1512, Aldus printed, under the instructions of Erasmus, (who was,
however, at that time no longer in Italy) the _Colloquies_ and the
_Praise of Folly_. There is unfortunately no record of the publishing
arrangement arrived at for these, but as Erasmus complained bitterly of
the loss and injury caused to the author through the wide sale of the
piracy issues, it is fair to assume that he had reserved an interest in
the authorised editions. In the introduction to his _Adagia_, Erasmus
writes as follows: “Formerly there was devoted to the correctness of
a literary manuscript as much care and attention as to the writing
of a notarial instrument. Such care and precision were held to be
a sacred duty. Later, the copying of manuscripts was entrusted to
ignorant monks and even to women. But how much more serious is the
evil that can be brought about by a careless printer, and yet to this
matter the law gives no heed. A dealer who sells English stuffs under
the guise of Venetian is punished, but the printer who in place of
correct texts, misleads and abuses the reader with pages the contents
of which are an actual trial and torment, escapes unharmed. It is
for this reason that Germany is plagued with so many books that are
deformed (_i. e._, untrustworthy). The authorities will supervise with
arbitrary regulations the proper methods for the baking of bread, but
concern themselves not at all as to the correctness of the work of
the printers, although the influence of bad typography is far more
injurious than that of bad bread.”

The relations of Aldus with Johann Reuchlin were longer and more
intimate than with Erasmus. It was natural enough that the scholar
who may properly be called the founder of Greek studies in Germany,
should have come into close relations with the publisher who had
undertaken to produce Greek texts for Europe and who had founded a
Greek academy in Venice. In 1498, Aldus printed the Latin oration which
Reuchlin had addressed to Pope Alexander VI., in behalf of the Prince
Palatine Philip, and from that date the two men remained in regular
correspondence with each other. In 1502, Aldus, writing to Reuchlin
(who was at that time in Pforzheim), gives, as to a trusted friend upon
whose sympathy and intelligent interest he could depend, the details of
his publishing undertakings and of his plans and hopes for the future,
and asks for counsel on various points. A few months later, in another
letter, Aldus writes:

“I am hardly able to express my gratification at your friendly words
concerning the importance and the value of my publishing undertakings.
It is no light thing to secure the commendation of one of the greatest
scholars of his time. If my life is spared to me, I hope more fully
to deserve the praise that you give to me for service rendered to the
scholarship and enlightenment of the age.”

Reuchlin was not only a friendly counsellor of the Venetian publisher,
but a valuable customer also for his books. In addition to purchasing
for his own library a full series of the Aldine editions, Reuchlin
appears to have interested himself keenly in commending these to his
scholarly acquaintances, not only, as he states, in order to encourage
a great undertaking, but for the purpose of doing service to German
students. In 1509, Reuchlin was appointed by the Duke of Bavaria,
Professor of Greek and Hebrew in the University of Ingolstadt, the
first professorship of Greek instituted in Germany. Reuchlin said
more than once that the work of his Chair had been made possible only
through the service rendered by Aldus in providing the Greek texts.

The influence of Aldus not only on the publishing standards but on the
scholarly and literary conditions of Germany, was in fact widespread
and important. Kapp, the historian of the German book-trade, speaks
of it as more important than that of all the German publishers of
his generation. This influence was due not only to the publishing
undertakings of the Aldine Press, but to the intimate relations
maintained by its founder with many of the German scholars, relations
which helped to establish a community of interests between the literary
centres of Italy and Germany and to direct German scholarship into new
paths. The separation of political boundaries had no significance for
a man with the humanitarian ideals of Aldus, while the fact that Latin
was the universal language of scholarship and of literature, helped not
a little to bring about that community of feeling among scholars which
was the special aim of the Venetian publisher. In 1502, Aldus writes to
John Taberio, in Brescia:

“I am delighted to learn that so many men of distinction in the great
city of Brescia are, under your guidance, devoting themselves with
ardour to Greek studies. The expectations with which I undertook the
publication of Greek texts are being more than realised. I am, in fact,
not a little astonished to find that even in these sad times of war in
which my undertakings have been begun, so many are found ready to give
the same ardour to scholarly pursuits that they are giving to fighting
against the infidel and to civil strife. Thus it happens that even from
the midst of war arises literature, which has for so many years lain
buried. And it is not only in Italy, but also in Germany, in France, in
Pannonia, in Spain, and in England, and wherever the Latin language
is known, that young and old are devoting themselves to the study of
Greek. The joy that this brings to me causes me to forget my fatigues,
and redoubles my zeal to do what is in my power for the service of
scholarship, and particularly for the students who are growing up in
this time of the renaissance of letters.”

During the first years of the sixteenth century, the difficulties
in the transmission either of merchandise or of money were many.
The packages of books which Aldus had occasion to send to Reuchlin
in Stuttgart, for instance, came forward sometimes by way of
Milan, Vienna, or Basel, and later through Augsburg. The Augsburg
banking-house of Függer, founded about 1450, possessed in 1500 (and
for half a century thereafter) connections which enabled them to take
charge not only of what we should call mercantile bills and banking
credits, but also of the forwarding and delivery of the goods against
which the bills were drawn. They carried on what to-day would be called
an express business, and in a majority of instances the instructions
were evidently to make collections on delivery. During the first half
of the sixteenth century, the Függers, with their branch houses in
Florence, Venice, and Genoa, supplied the most valuable machinery
for the transaction of business between Italy and Germany. These
communications, however, were of necessity very frequently interrupted
by the troubles of the times.

In 1510, Mutianus Rufus writes to Urban that “in connection with the
conflicts between the French and the Venetian soldiers, the passes
of the Alps have been blocked, so that literature from Venice can no
longer find its way into Germany. I had hoped with the next Frankfort
Fair, to be able to place in the hands of my students the beautiful
Aldine editions. But my hopes were in vain. When the Fair was opened,
there was not a single volume from Italy. We shall be able this spring
to do nothing in our classical schools. Oh, the stupidities of war!”

In 1514, the Elector Frederic the Wise of Saxony applied to the several
powers interested for a safe conduct for his librarian, Spalatin, whom
he desired to send to Venice to purchase directly from Aldus the Aldine
classics for the library of Wittenberg. Some difficulties intervened,
however, as Spalatin appears never to have reached Venice. It was
doubtless due to the long-continued wars between the Emperor and the
States of Italy, that Aldus was unable, during his own lifetime, to
establish direct agencies in Germany for his publications. We find
record of such agencies in Frankfort, Basel, Augsburg, and Nuremberg,
first in the time of his son, agencies which were extended by the
grandson.

The active work of Aldus extended over a period of twenty years,
from 1495 to 1515. This time included the wars of 1500, 1506, 1510,
and 1511, in which Venice was directly engaged, wars which had of
necessity much to do with the interference with his business, and with
the difficulties, of which he makes continual complaint, in securing
returns for his sales. “For seven years,” writes Aldus in 1510, “books
have had to contend against arms.” There appears to have been no
single year of the twenty in which he was free from pressing financial
cares, while from time to time the work of the presses and in the
composing room came to an actual standstill for want of funds. During
these twenty years he printed not less than 126 works which previously
existed only in manuscript form, and the manuscript copies of which had
to be secured and carefully edited.

It is probable that Aldus, in his own enthusiasm concerning the value
and importance of the re-discovered classics, had overestimated the
extent of the interest that could be depended upon for these classics
throughout the world. It is evident, however, that there were enough
scholars in Italy, Germany, France, and the Low Countries, to assure
a widespread demand for the Aldine editions, and that the larger part
of the publisher’s difficulties consisted in the lack of convenient
machinery for making known to these scholars the fact that such books
had been prepared, for the delivery of such copies as might be ordered,
and for the collection of the payments due.

Another serious difficulty with which Aldus had to contend was the
competition of the piratical copies of his editions which promptly
appeared in Cologne, Tübingen, Lyons, and even so close at home as
Florence. The most serious interference with his undertakings appears
to have come from the printers of Lyons, who in their enterprising
appropriations from Paris on the one hand and from Nuremberg, Basel,
and Venice on the other, speedily won for their city notoriety as the
centre of piratical publishing. The Lyons printers printed editions of
the Aldine Latin classics, making a very close imitation of the cursive
or italic type, and issued the volumes without imprint, date, or place
of publication.

The privileges secured from the government of Venice had effect, of
course, only in Venetian territory. Privileges were given by the Pope
for a number of the Aldine publications, and these covered, in form,
at least, not only the States of the Church but the territory of
all States recognising the papal authority, while the penalties for
infringing such papal privileges were not infrequently made to include
excommunication. There was, however, no machinery by means of which the
papal authority could be brought to bear upon Catholics infringing or
disregarding the privileges, and as a fact the papal privileges proved
of very little service in protecting the literary property either of
Aldus or of later literary workers. A further word concerning the
privileges issued in Venice and in the other States of Italy will be
given in a later division of this narrative.

Apart from this important work in the scholarly and editorial divisions
of publishing, Aldus made several distinctive contributions to the
art of book-making. He was, as before stated, the first printer who
founded complete and perfect fonts of Greek type, fonts which for many
years served as models for the printers of Europe. He invented the type
which was first called cursive, and which is known to-day as italic,
a type having the advantage of presenting the text in a very compact
form. (The cursive font was said to have been modelled on the script
of Petrarch.) And finally, he was the first publisher who ventured
upon the experiment of replacing the costly and cumbersome folios
and quartos, in which form alone all important works had heretofore
been issued, with convenient crown octavo volumes, the moderate price
of which brought them within the reach of scholars of all classes
and helped to popularise the knowledge and the influence of classic
literature. This constituted a practical revolution in publishing
methods.

Aldus had possibly read the remark of Callimachus, the librarian of the
Alexandrian library in 290 B.C., that “A big book is a big nuisance.”
These Aldine classics, while printed in octavo (_i. e._, upon a sheet
folded in eights), were of a size corresponding more nearly to what
would to-day be known as a sixteenmo, the size of the sheet of paper
being smaller than that used to-day. Aldus had no presses which would
print sheets large enough to fold in sixteen or even in twelve. The
price of these small octavos averaged three _marcelli_ or two francs,
say forty cents. Making allowance for the difference in the purchasing
power of money between the year 1500 and the year 1895, I judge that
this may represent about $2.00 of our currency.

For centuries the Aldine editions served as the authoritative texts
for the authors presented, and even to-day they stand as a wonderful
monument of the imagination, the learning, the courage, and the
persistency of their publisher. Good Italian though he were, Aldus
was by some of his countrymen charged with want of patriotism on the
ground that if he helped to make the study of the classics easy for
the Barbarians of the outer world, they would no longer need to come
for their learning to Italy, heretofore the centre and source of all
scholarly enlightenment. To this effect writes Beatus Rhenanus in his
introduction to the Works of Erasmus:

_Quidam Venetiis olim Aldo Manutio commentarios Græcos in Euripidem et
Sophoclem edere paranti dixit: Cave, cave hoc facias, ne barbari istis
adjuti domi maneant et pauciores in Italiam ventilent._

Kapp is of opinion that the dread was well founded and that the
distribution throughout Germany and France of popular editions of the
classics, did have the result of keeping at home many students who
would otherwise have crossed the Alps. That they were now able to
secure, at moderate cost and in their own homes, learning for which
heretofore they had been obliged to make long and costly journeys, was
due to the unselfish and public-spirited labours of Aldus. It was,
therefore, with good reason that he was held in high regard by the
Humanists of Germany. They sought his friendship and nearly overwhelmed
him with correspondence. In 1498, Conrad Celtes and Vincenzo Longinus
commemorated his service in verse. Aldus thanked them for their
courtesy, and in sending them as an acknowledgment copies of his
_Horace_ and _Virgil_, he asked them to bring him into communication
with any scholarly Germans who were interested in the classics. Aldus
did not, however, consider it wise to print the ode of eulogy that
Celtes had written upon the Emperor Maximilian, because he was afraid
of causing offence to the Bohemians and Hungarians through whose
scholars he had secured not a few rare manuscripts.

Throughout Germany the productions of the Aldine presses were received
with enthusiasm. Mutianus Rufus speaks of himself as weeping with joy
when there came to him from a friend the precious gift of the editions
of _Cicero_, _Lucretius_, and other classics. He and his friends Urban
and Spalatin deprived themselves almost of the necessaries of life,
in order to save moneys with which to bring across the Alps the other
volumes of the series. Pirckheimer and Reuchlin were among the first of
the German buyers of the Aldine classics. Hummelsburger writes in 1512
to Anselm in Tübingen, “I shall buy my Hebrew books in Italy, where
Aldus has printed them in beautiful texts.... Germany no less than
Latium owes a great debt to Aldus.”

The political status of Italy and its division into a number of states
or principalities which carried on independent policies and which
were frequently in active warfare with each other, entailed serious
difficulties upon the new business of publishing, difficulties which,
while troublesome enough for Aldus in Venice, were still more serious
for his competitors in Florence and Milan. A privilege secured for
Venice was not binding even in times of peace outside of Venetian
territory, while in the frequently recurring times of war, any
privileges which a Venetian or a Milanese publisher had been fortunate
enough to secure in the Italian States were abrogated in fact if not in
form. In this respect, the early publishers of Paris, whose privileges
covered (nominally at least) the territory of the kingdom, had a
decided advantage over their rivals in the much divided territory of
Italy or of Germany.

Aldus had the feeling, for which in his case there appears to have been
sufficient ground, that his business undertakings, with which were
connected far-reaching plans for furthering scholarly knowledge, were
absolutely dependent upon his own continued and persistent personal
attention. While he had succeeded in securing the services of scholarly
associates to share with himself the editorial responsibilities of his
work, he does not appear to have been able, with the material at his
command, to train up any assistants competent to take any important
share in the business management. One of his many complaints concerning
the repeated interruptions which interfere with his important daily
labours, might have been uttered by many a publisher of later times. He
writes in 1514 (the year before his death) to his friend Navagerus:

“I am hampered in my work by a thousand interruptions.... Nearly every
hour comes a letter from some scholar, and if I undertook to reply to
them all, I should be obliged to devote day and night to scribbling.
Then, through the day come calls from all kinds of visitors. Some
desire merely to give a word of greeting, others want to know what
there is new, while the greater number come to my office because
they happen to have nothing else to do. ‘Let us look in upon Aldus,’
they say to each other. Then they loaf in and sit and chatter to no
purpose. Even these people with no business are not so bad as those
who have a poem to offer or something in prose (usually very prosy
indeed) which they wish to see printed with the name of Aldus. These
interruptions are now becoming too serious for me, and I must take
steps to lessen them. Many letters I simply leave unanswered, while to
others I send very brief replies; and as I do this not from pride or
from discourtesy, but simply in order to be able to go on with my task
of printing good books, it must not be taken hardly.... As a warning
to the heedless visitors who use up my office hours to no purpose, I
have now put up a big notice on the door of my office to the following
effect: ‘Whoever thou art, thou art earnestly requested by Aldus, to
state thy business briefly and to take thy departure promptly. In this
way thou mayst be of service even as was Hercules to the weary Atlas.
For this is a place of work for all who may enter.’”

Aldus Manutius died January 25, 1515, (Venetian style, corresponding to
February 6, 1515, modern style) aged sixty-five years. Until 1529, the
business was carried on for the heirs by his father-in-law, Torresano,
and in that year was taken over by Paul Manutius, the son of Aldus.
In 1540, Paul took into partnership his son, Aldus the younger, and
the firm took the title of _Aldi Filii_. With the death of Aldus the
grandson, in 1597, the family, in its main line, became extinct, and
the work of the Aldine Press, which had continued for a little more
than a century, came to a close. To his children, Aldus was able to
bequeath little besides his fame and the value of his name. The moneys
that had been earned during his work of twenty-five years from the
successful undertakings had been for the most part absorbed in other
ventures which were either unremunerative, or from which the returns
came but slowly. The carrying out of such great publishing plans
required, in fact, business connections and methods which did not yet
exist, and was dependent also upon the continuance of peace in Europe
for a quarter of a century, an impossible condition for the beginning
of the sixteenth century.

In entering upon business ventures under such difficult circumstances,
Aldus was doubtless, from a business point of view, unwisely
optimistic; but it is difficult not to admire the public spirit and the
pluck with which, in the face of all difficulties, he persisted till
the day of his death in the great schemes he had marked out for himself.

While his work had brought no wealth, his life had been rich in the
accomplishment of great things and in the appreciation given to his
labours. It was also his fortune to gather about him and to come into
relations with many noteworthy men, who as friends and co-workers
shared his enthusiasm, and who gave with him unselfish labour for a
scholarly ideal. Partly because the editors and the publishers were
working for results other than profits, partly because the books
published were (with a few noteworthy exceptions, like the writings of
Erasmus) not original works, but editions of old classics, and partly
because the whole business of publishing was still in its infancy, the
history of the Aldine Press does not present any important precedents
as to the compensation earned by authors for their productions, or as
to the protection of the author’s property rights in these productions.
The relations of Aldus with all the authors, editors, and scholars
with whom he had to do were however more than satisfactory; they were
cordial, resting in a number of cases on a close personal friendship.
The scholars regarded the publisher as one of themselves, and, in fact,
accepted him as a leader.

It is evident that Erasmus, whose writings formed an important
property, was satisfied with the returns secured for him by Aldus.
He speaks with cordial appreciation of the services rendered by his
“authorised publishers,” Aldus of Venice, and Froben of Basel, and
speaks further of the losses caused to himself by the competition of
the piracy reprints of Lyons and Paris. It appears, therefore, that he
retained a continued interest in the sale of his authorised editions,
but unfortunately no details of his publishing arrangements have been
preserved.

The history of the publishing work of Aldus, while not presenting
precedents for royalty or copyright arrangements, constitutes
nevertheless a very important chapter in the history of property in
literature. Aldus was able, by combining skilled editorial labour
with selected classics, to create a great literary property, which
needed only distributing machinery and a peaceable Europe to become
commercially valuable. He set the example also, for Italy at least,
of securing privileges in each of the Italian States possessing any
literary centres, and although he was not always able to prevent
piratical reprinting on the part of his competitors in Florence, or
even always to keep out of other cities in Italy the piracy editions
from Lyons, he accomplished something towards the ideal of a copyright
that should hold good for Italian territory. He even had hopes of
securing, through the authority of the Pope, a system of copyright that
should prove effective in all Catholic States, and it was not until
long after Aldus’s death that the attempts to establish a Catholic
copyright system were given up by publishers as practically futile.

His latest biographer, Didot, himself both a fine scholar and a great
publisher, contends that Aldus accomplished more than the greatest
scholars of his time for the spread of learning and the development
of literature; and the testimony of the three great scholars who were
contemporaries and near personal friends of the Venetian publisher,
Musurus, Reuchlin, and Erasmus, fully bears out M. Didot’s opinion. It
was the exceptional combination of a creative imagination and scholarly
knowledge with practical business ability and unfailing pluck and
persistency, that enabled the young tutor to create the Aldine Press,
the work of which will cause to be held in continued honour, in the
history alike of scholarship and of publishing, the memory of Aldus
Manutius.

=The Successors of Aldus.=--Paul Manutius, the son of Aldus, continued
for some years the business of the Aldine Press, giving special
attention to editions of the writings of Cicero. In 1561, he accepted
an invitation from Pope Pius IV. to come to Rome and to take charge
there of the publication of the writings of the Fathers of the Church,
and of such other works as might be selected. The amount required for
the organisation of an adequate printing-office was to be supplied
from the papal treasury. Paul was to receive an annual stipend of 500
ducats, together with one half of the net profits realised from the
sales of the works published, and the contract was to continue for
twelve years.

An interesting series of letters has been preserved, written by Paul
to his brother Manutius in Asola, and to his son, Aldus the younger,
in Venice. These letters, which are quoted by Renouard, Frommann, and
Didot, contain a number of details and references which throw light
not only upon the personal relations of the writers, but upon the
business conditions of the time. We learn that Paul was a good deal of
an invalid throughout his working years, and we gather the impression
that his feeble health was an important ground for the apparent lack of
ambition which made him willing to give up his work as an independent
publisher in Venice and to accept the position of Pope’s printer in
Rome.

We also learn that his son Aldus, while bright-witted, was lacking in
persistency and in industry. The youngster never, in fact, accomplished
anything of importance. Paul had himself inherited the scholarly tastes
of his father, and had received a good classical education, but he does
not appear to have possessed very good business faculty, and he made no
distinctive mark as a publisher. The Pope had, however, asked for his
aid rather as a scholarly editor than as an experienced man of business.

Pius appears to have been impressed with the belief that the
printing-press, under scholarly management, could be made of service
to the cause of the Church in withstanding the pernicious influence
of the increasing mass of the publications of the German heretics.
These Protestant pamphlets and books were not merely undermining the
authority of the Church in Germany, Switzerland, and France, but were
even making their way into Italy itself. The first issues of the Aldine
Press in Rome were the _Decrees_ of the Council of Trent, in a variety
of editions, the writings of Cyprian, and the letters of S. Jerome.

Pius V., who in 1565 succeeded Pius IV., was equally favourable to the
undertakings of the printing-office, and gave to Paul the necessary
support. The work was carried on in a building which was the property
of the municipality, and some issues arose with the magistrates
concerning its continued use as a printing-office. From a letter dated
September 27, 1567, it appears that the magistrates had required that
Paul should pay taxes or license-fees on his printing business, which
they classed as a trade. He took the ground that printing was not a
trade but an art, and that it was so defined in the invitation given
to him to come to Rome, and in the agreement executed with him by the
Pope. He contended, further, that, as the Pope’s printer, whose work
was devoted to the Church, he was in any case entitled to exemption
from the municipal taxes imposed on traders. The Pope does not
appear to have fully backed up his printer in this contention, and a
compromise was finally arrived at under which a portion of the proceeds
of the business was paid to the magistracy. The precise terms of the
arrangement are not clearly stated, but it seems probable that the
half share of the profits previously payable to the papal treasury was
divided into two portions, one of which went to the municipality.

The profitable part of the business was in the printing of the official
editions of the Catechisms and Breviaries. Paul complains, in fact,
that the presses are so occupied with the work of the Breviaries,
that he is not able to make progress with the printing of his own
_Commentaries on the Letters of Cicero_. In June, 1568, Paul writes
to his son Aldus, who was now of age, expressing his regret that the
young man was not interested in devoting himself to carrying on the
printing-office in Venice. Aldus had, it seems, expressed a preference
for the study of law. The business in Venice was finally turned over
to Basa, who paid, for a term of five years, twenty _scudi_ gold a
month for the use of the existing material and for the good-will.

In July, 1569, difficulties began to accumulate about the
printing-office in Rome. The Pope was less interested and the
magistrates were troubling the office with what Paul calls
unintelligent interference. There were, in fact, too many parties
interested in the management of the business to enable its control to
be easily or consistently exercised. Paul’s health was also failing
seriously and he was longing for rest and for leisure to carry on his
scholarly undertakings. In 1570, the ownership of the receipts of the
printing-office was somewhat simplified, the change being probably due,
in part at least, to the representations of Paul that the many-headed
control was unworkable.

In May, 1570, Paul writes rather pathetically to Aldus: “In my case,
scholarship and industry have never brought rest or fortune.... I pray
God that you may be better favoured.... I must beseech you, however, to
put away childish things. It is full time that you recalled to yourself
the honourable traditions of our family.... My own active work must be
nearly over.”

In June, of the same year, he again counsels Aldus, who had for some
time been betrothed, to make a speedy marriage, and then to concentrate
himself upon the work of the printing-office in Venice. He advises
against a a plan that the young man had in view, of opening a retail
book-shop. He emphasises, however, that there is no chance of success
for a printer-publisher without the most persistent and arduous labour.

In 1571, Paul’s failing strength compelled him to leave Rome, resigning
(as he hoped, for a time only) the income of the papal printing-office.
He devoted the winter months to the completion of his _Commentaries on
the Orations of Cicero_. The work was published in 1578-9 (after the
author’s death) by his son Aldus in Venice, and, under arrangement, by
Plantin in Antwerp. The negotiations with Plantin had been completed by
Paul. He had specified the form and style of the Antwerp edition, and
had arranged to take his share of the profits in the shape of a royalty
on the sales.

In 1572, Paul being yet in Milan, one of his hopes was fulfilled in
the marriage of his son Aldus. “Now,” he wrote, “I can pass my days in
peace. I feel hopeful for your future and rejoice that our line is to
be continued.” Later in the year, with no little difficulty (partly
on the ground of his feeble health, and partly because of the floods
and wretched roads) he made his way to Venice for a brief visit. He
wanted to see his son’s wife, and he desired also to give personal
instructions for the printing of his _Commentaries_. “I feel very
hopeful,” he writes, “concerning the sale of my _Cicero_, and hopeful
also that it will not be reprinted (in piracy editions) during my
lifetime.”

Paul was obliged to leave Venice before the printing of his work was
begun, and the letter written after the receipt of the first sheets
expresses his bitter disappointment at the manner in which this
all-important commission had been attended to. “If you had had in your
hands some utterly contemptible scribble,” he writes, “you could hardly
have printed it in a more tasteless and slovenly style ... and you
knew I had this undertaking so much at heart!... I have instructed
Basa to burn all the sheets that have been printed, and to print these
signatures again, with a proper selection of type and on decent paper.”

Aldus the younger seems never to have had his heart fairly in his
business, and under his management (or lack of management), the
prestige of the Aldine Press in Venice fell off sadly. He appears to
have been extravagant, or at least uncalculating, in his expenditures,
and was also spending moneys which he could ill afford, not like his
grandfather for manuscripts and type, but for clothes and artistic
curiosities.

Paul had accepted the pressing invitation of the new Pope, Gregory
XII.; to resume his place as manager of the printing-office in Rome,
but with less exacting duties, and with a fixed salary. A plan was even
talked over between the Pope and Paul for the establishment of another
printing-office, which should be devoted entirely to the publication
of classical works and of “expurgated” editions of works, portions of
which had been condemned in the Index. Paul was to act as editor and
supervisor of the series, because his name was already recognised as
that of a scholarly authority. The scheme never, however, took shape.
Paul’s strength failed rapidly, and he died in the spring of 1574.

While he had devoted many years to his business as a printer-publisher,
and had maintained the reputation of his name for a high standard as
well of typography as of scholarly writing, his own preference had been
for a scholarly rather than a business career. He went on with the work
of his Press very largely because he felt that it was a duty he owed to
his father’s name and memory. His own memory is, however, chiefly to be
honoured for his scholarly edition of _Cicero_, with its comprehensive
and analytical commentaries, an edition which long remained the
accepted authority for Europe.

A few years after the death of Paul, his son Aldus gave up the attempt
to carry on the Press in Venice, a work for which he had never been
really fitted, and accepted a position in the University of Bologna, as
professor of archæology. The printing business was sold, and the Aldine
Press, after a century of work, came to an end.

=Milan.=--During the fifteenth century, Italy presents a curiously
complex and varied series of pictures and conditions. We find,
together with constantly recurring civil strife, successive wars of
invasion from the North and from the East, and in the train of the
frequent armies, those inevitable camp followers, pestilence, famine,
and misery. To the contests against the French and German invaders and
the strifes between states and cities, were added schism and discord
in the Church itself, and there were long periods during which pope
was contending against anti-pope for the right to rule the world
as the infallible head of an infallible church. Yet these years,
when the land was troubled by schism and devastated by strife and
pestilence, were years during which the cities of Italy were becoming
rich with an active and prosperous trade; while it was also at this
time that the art of Italy brought forth its greatest production and
that the development of its literature made most important advances.
The vitality of the people was so exuberant, its productive force so
enormous, that notwithstanding the frightful waste caused by war and
pestilence, its energies were still sufficient for some of the greatest
of artistic creations, for active and scholarly work in the new
learning and literature, and for a sharp competition for the leadership
of the world’s commerce and industries. A typical example of the life
and strife of the time is afforded by Milan, the capital of Lombardy.
Its position as the northernmost of the great cities and in the centre
of the open territory of the plains, exposed it to the first attacks
of invaders from across the Alps, while the ambition of the rulers and
of the people kept it in frequent strife with its Italian rivals. Its
trade seems to have continued active, however, (except when armies were
actually at its gates) and while in art more important work was done
in Florence, the first steps in the new literature, that is, in the
literature connected with printing, were taken in Lombardy.

The first printing in Milan was done in 1469 by Philip of Lavagna,
who was followed in 1470 by Antonio Zarotus. In the printing of books
Milan holds precedence, therefore, over all the towns of Italy except
Subiaco and Rome, antedating Venice by about a year. The publishing
undertakings of the Lombardy capital never, however, rivalled in
importance those of Venice. In 1476, Paravisinus, printed an edition of
the Greek Grammar of Laskaris, the first volume printed in Europe in
Greek characters. In the previous volumes containing Greek text, this
had been printed in Latin characters. The editor of the Grammar was
Demetrius, a refugee from Crete. He was also the editor of the first
edition in Greek of _Homer_. The first Missal was printed by Zarotus in
1475.

While in Rome the work of printing was begun by a German and in Venice
by a Frenchman, the first printers in Milan were native Italians. Among
the earlier of the Lombard printer-publishers, we find the name of
Alexander Minutianus, a learned professor, who devoted himself to the
editing of a valuable series of Latin classics, and whose publishing
activities extended over a term of twenty years. Minutianus published
in 1498-99, in four folio volumes, the first complete edition of
_Cicero_. The relations of Milan with the cities north of the Alps
were more intimate at this time than those of any other Italian city,
and it was natural, therefore, that as the printing business in
Lombardy increased in importance, German printers should begin to seek
employment there. The first whose name is recorded was Waldorfer (or
Valdarfer) from Regensburg, whose work began in 1474, and who brought
with him fonts of Gothic type. Waldorfer printed an edition of _Pliny’s
Letters_ and a selection of the _Orations of Cicero_. These were
followed by the _Commentary_ of Servius on _Virgil_, and by the first
issue in print of the famous _Decameron_ of Boccaccio. The _Decameron_
had been written in 1353, and had, therefore, waited 120 years for a
publisher. In 1493, Henricus Germanus and Sebastian Pontremulo printed
the first Greek edition of _Isocrates_. In Milan, however, work in law,
science, and medicine constituted a more important proportion of the
earlier publications than in Venice or in Rome. The De Honate Brothers
were printing as early as 1472, works in jurisprudence, and Frommann is
of opinion that before 1480 several firms were devoting their presses
exclusively to the departments of law and science. In 1472, a company
was formed for the printing and publishing of books, probably the first
publishing association in existence. There were at first five members
or associates, as follows:

Antonio Zarotus, a printer from Parma; Gabriel degli Orsoni, a priest;
Colla Montana, an instructor in the High School (he was concerned
some years later in the murder of the Duke Galeazzo Maria); Pavero
de’ Fontana, a professor of Latin, afterwards editor of _Horace_; and
Pedro Antonio de’ Burgo, of Castiglione, a lawyer. Subsequently a sixth
associate was added, Nicolao, a physician and a brother of the last
named.

The Association was organised for a term of three years and its purpose
was stated to be the instituting of a printing-office, with not less
than four presses, and the carrying on of a book-manufacturing and
publishing business. The capital was to be contributed in equal shares
by four of the associates, the printer, Zarotus, investing no money,
but contributing his knowledge of the business and undertaking its
general management. The printer was to receive one third of the net
proceeds, and the remaining two thirds were to be divided equally
among his four associates. From the printer’s share were to be repaid
the first expenditures contributed by the other four. The subsequent
expenditures were to be met by the sales of the books. The person
acting as corrector for the press, usually one of the scholarly
associates, secured as his compensation one or two copies of the work
corrected.

The selection of the books to be printed was to be made by the
unanimous decision of the whole board, and the selling price was also
to be fixed by the board. The organisation was to remain secret, and
all employees were to take an oath of secrecy and obedience. Each
member bound himself to give no council or aid to any other publishing
concern and to print no work with another printer except under the
permission of his associates. At the termination of the agreement, the
printer was to have a right to purchase at a valuation the presses and
the manuscripts.

The capitalist of the concern was the lawyer Antonio de’ Burgo, and
he found the funds (100 ducats) with which the first operations were
initiated. Under a supplementary agreement, the lawyer Burgo and his
brother the physician assumed for their individual account one half of
the rent of the premises and purchased three additional presses. These
presses were kept at work exclusively in the production of a series of
works in the departments of law and medicine. The printer Zarotus took
charge of the manufacture of these books for the brothers Burgo, in
addition to those printed for the Association. The editorial work in
selecting the material and in preparing them for the press was cared
for by the Burgos, who also appear to have attended to the publishing
details.

The brothers paid over to the treasury of the Association twenty-five
ducats for the use of the plant (type, etc.) outside of the presses,
and were to pay also one fourth of the proceeds of the sales of their
series. Each associate was also to receive a copy of each book printed.

The brothers agreed to print no books excepting in the departments of
canon and civil law and of medicine, and the Association was to include
in its list no works in these departments. The penalty for infringing
this provision was fixed at 200 ducats.

The brothers were not at liberty to dispose of their portion of the
printing-office to any other parties. At the end of three years, the
presses and publications belonging to the two Burgos were transferred,
on an appraisal, to Zarotus.

No records have been preserved of the results of their undertakings,
or of those of the Association as a whole. The fact, however, that as
early as 1472, only eight years after the introduction of printing into
Italy, there should have been sufficient business, or even expectation
of business, to warrant the organisation of such a publishing company,
is certainly noteworthy, if only as evidence of the intellectual
activity and business enterprise of the Italy of the fifteenth century.
It is curious also that special provision should have been made for
legal and medical publications, as the literary interests of the period
of the Renaissance, which had so much influence in furthering the
activities of the earlier Italian printers, were so largely classical.

It was necessary for the first publishers to be both printers
and scholars, and this necessary condition of early publishing
undertakings, the association of adequate scholarship with technical
knowledge required for the making of books, was fully provided for
in the Milan company, which included, as we have seen, two classical
professors, one theologian, one jurist, and one physician.

More than a century later, in 1589, was organised the Guild of the
Printers, Publishers, and Booksellers of Milan. During the hundred
years that had passed since the printing-press began its work in
Lombardy, the city had known various rulers, and had, for a brief term,
enjoyed independence. By far the larger portion of the century had
been for Lombardy periods of turmoil, and the years of uninterrupted
peace had been few. It was, therefore, not surprising that the
business of the production of books had developed more rapidly and
more prosperously in Venice, Rome, and Bologna, which were from their
position better protected against the mischances of war.

In 1589, Lombardy was a portion of the great Spanish Empire, and (as it
contained few heretics) it was enjoying under the rule of Philip II.,
a period of peace and of comparative prosperity. The charter of the
Guild or Corporation of the Printers and Publishers was confirmed by
King Philip himself. The Stationers’ Company of England had received
its charter from Queen Mary in 1556, or thirty-three years earlier.
The Guild of the Venetian Printers dated from 1548, and was the
earliest association of the kind in Europe. The affairs of the Guild
of Milan were managed by a board of directors, comprising a Prior, a
Bursar, and two Councillors. The Board had charge of the property of
the corporation, and was responsible also for the protection of its
privileges under the charter, and for the defence of any of its members
whose rights might be assailed. It rested also with the Board to see
that the regulations of the Corporation were properly carried out, and
in the event of any assessment being laid upon the organised Printers
and Publishers, it was the duty of the Bursar to apportion the payments
equitably among the members of the Guild.

To the Board was also given authority to adjudicate disputes not only
between members of the Guild, but between the members and outsiders,
and its jurisdiction extended over the entire duchy. From the decisions
of the Board there was, as a rule, no appeal. In case, however, the
issue involved any complicated questions of law, so that it became
necessary for the Board to call in the counsel of a jurist, an appeal
could be made from the decision arrived at to a special court of
arbitration, which was also, however, to be made up of members of the
Guild. The roster of the Guild was in the special control of the Prior,
and this record was of special importance, because no one whose name
was not on this roster as a member in good standing was permitted to
print or to sell books in Milan, under a penalty for each offence of
fifty gold _scudi_.

No one was eligible for membership who had not served an apprenticeship
of eight years to a printer or book-dealer in Milan. The fee for
admission was, for one born in Milan, thirty lire, for others one
hundred lire.

One purpose of the organisation of the Guild was to prevent the
competition of foreign printers and booksellers from breaking down
the trade of the Milanese. A more legitimate object was to keep the
business of printing, publishing, and selling books in the hands of
trained men of high character, good education, and technical training,
who should conduct their work in a manner worthy of the repute of
Milan. It had been the complaint that many unworthy and unskilled men
had crowded into the business of making and selling books, lowering the
standard of the trade and diminishing the profits. It was complained
also that the paper-manufacturers or paper-dealers had undertaken
to sell books, notwithstanding a specific statute prohibiting them
from so doing. The royal commissioner, whose sanction was required
to validate on behalf of the King the regulations of the new Guild,
stipulated, however, in confirming the renewal of this prohibition,
that the paper-makers should still be permitted to sell certain special
books which had for some years been in their hands, but that no other
publications must be sold by any paper-dealer who had not secured
membership in the Guild as a properly qualified bookseller.

It is not easy, after an interval of three centuries, to decide whether
this undertaking for the closer organisation of the book-trade was
really prompted, as was contended, by the desire to keep on the highest
possible plane the business of making and selling books, or whether it
was the result of a selfish desire on the part of the older Milanese
dealers to increase their profits and to keep out competitors. It is
probable there was a mixture of motives, but it is certain that in
Milan, as in other book centres, the formation of the Guild gave an
important incentive to printing and publishing, improved the quality
of the work done, and tended to keep the business in the hands of a
good class of men, and it is evident also that such results must have
brought advantages also to the general public.

The more important of the regulations of the Guild can be summarised as
follows:

1. No member of the Guild shall reprint or shall sell any book issued
by another member, provided such book has not before been printed in
Milan, and provided also that the edition claiming protection shall
itself have been printed in Milan. A book printed outside of the duchy
cannot secure the protection of a Milanese privilege. The penalty for
infringement is the forfeiture of the copies printed and the payment of
ten gold _scudi_.

2. Each publication shall bear the imprint of its printer or publisher
(usually, of course, the same person).

3. Apprentices and assistants must be registered on the records of the
Guild.

4. The sale of books in any places other than the registered shops
or places of business is forbidden; and the purchase of books from
apprentices or from any not known to be duly authorised dealers is also
made a misdemeanour.

5. The sale of books on Sundays or holidays, either in the shops or in
the dwellings, is forbidden.

6. No printer or dealer must use for his sign a token identical with or
closely similar to that already in use with an authorised printer or
dealer.

These regulations appear to have had the desired effect of repressing
if not of entirely exterminating the business of the unauthorised
printers and traders. In 1614, however probably for the purpose of
impressing a fresh generation of unauthorised traders, the Guild
secured a fresh royal edict, which again confirmed the authority of the
Guild and enjoined, under heavy penalties, the strictest obedience to
its regulations.

Frommann points out that in the application for this new decree, the
Guild no longer lays stress upon the necessity of upholding the dignity
and honourable standard of the book-trade, but emphasises the risk
to the Church and to the community of believers if uneducated and
irresponsible persons, not familiar with the lists of forbidden works,
should be permitted to print or to sell books. Experience had evidently
made clear to the publishers that with a government like that of Spain
(which might be described as despotism tempered by the Inquisition)
this class of considerations would be much more influential than any
thought of upholding the dignity of the business of making and selling
books.

The petitioners make reference to the decree accompanying the latest
_Index Expurgatorius_, which forbids any one from carrying on business
as a printer, publisher, or bookseller, who has not taken oath before
the ecclesiastical superiors or the Inquisitor of his district to
conduct his business in full loyalty to the holy Catholic Church, and
to give explicit obedience to all the decrees and enactments of the
Church and of the Inquisitor for the regulation and supervision of the
press.

The petitioners go on to state that this edict of the Church has
largely fallen into disregard because ordinary traders, _merzeranii_,
uneducated and irresponsible men, not trained to the book-business and
having no knowledge of or no respect for the _Index Expurgatorius_,
have been allowed to print and to sell books, to the detriment not only
of the legitimate book-trade, but of the Church and of the community.
The King (Philip III.) appears to have agreed with the Guild that this
interference with an organised book-trade (which from the very fact
of its organisation could be and was effectively supervised by the
Church) constituted a very dangerous abuse.

The new edict, with its severe penalties, and with the effective
co-operation of the local inquisitors and other ecclesiastics, appears
to have had the effect desired. We hear no more from the publishers
of Milan about irresponsible competition, and the business prospered
as far as was practicable within the rather narrow limits fixed by
the censorship of the Church. The most noteworthy productions of the
Milanese presses between the years 1500 and 1700, were, as stated, in
the departments of jurisprudence and medicine. The greater activity
of publishing in these two departments may very possibly have been in
part due to the fact that they were less affected by the ecclesiastical
censorship.

=Lucca and Foligno.=--The little city of Lucca is entitled to mention
in connection with the introduction of printing into Italy, if only
because it was the only city in Italy (and possibly the only one
in Europe), in which the new art secured the direct support and
co-operation of the government in the form, first of a municipal decree
in favour of the printing-press, and secondly of a direct subvention
from the municipal treasury in encouragement of the first printer. The
printer was Clemente, a native of Padua, who was engaged in business
in Lucca as a scribe and illuminator. It was made a condition of the
appropriation (the amount of which is not stated) that the printer,
who was to be classed as a public functionary, was to hold himself in
readiness to teach the art to all who might desire to learn. Clemente
established his press in Lucca in 1477, and printed there in that year,
an edition of the _Triumphs of Petrarch_. He had previously printed
in Venice a work by John Mesne, of Damascus, on universal medicine, a
large folio of 400 pages.

A still smaller city than Lucca, Foligno in Umbria, enjoys the
distinction of having received as its first printer, Johann Numeister,
who had been a pupil and assistant of Gutenberg himself. After the
death of his master, Numeister came to Italy with the intention of
setting up a press in Rome. He was induced to settle at Foligno at
the instance of Orfinis, a wealthy citizen, who supplied the funds
necessary for the undertaking. The first publication of the Foligno
Press was _Leonardi Aretini Bruni de Bello Italico adversus Gothos_,
which bears date 1470.

The imprint states that the book was “printed by Numeister in the house
of Emilianus de Orfinis.” The second work selected was an edition of
the _Divina Commedia_ of Dante, the manuscript copy of which had been
collated and corrected for the press by Orfinis. Orfinis died in 1472,
just before the printing of the _Commedia_ was completed. Numeister
paid a tribute to his patron in the last line of the rhyming imprint:

  _Nel milla quatro cente septe e due
  Nel quarto mese; a di cinque et sei,
  Questa opera gentile impresso fue,
  Io maestro Johanni Numeister opera dei
  Alla dicta impressione, et meco fue,
  El Elfuginato, Evangelista mei._

--Humphreys interprets the words “Evangelist mine” as standing for “the
one who made me known to the world.”[450] M. Bernard writes, “better
Evangelist than I am.” The last volume bearing the name of Numeister
was an edition of Torquemada’s _Contemplations_. With his death in
1479, the brief record of the press of Foligno comes to a close.

=Florence.=--Florence, which for a century or more had been the
centre of the intellectual life of Italy, and which presented in
its great collection of manuscripts, its central position, and its
important trade connections, distinctive advantages for the work of
book-publishing, was comparatively late in giving attention to the new
art, and the issues from the Florentine presses before the close of the
fifteenth century, were much less important than those of Venice and of
Milan.

The first book printed in Florence, a commentary on Virgil, by Servius,
bears date 1471. It was issued by Bernardo Cennino, and appears to have
been his sole publication.

Cennino was by trade a goldsmith, and had been associated with Ghiberti
in the work on the famous gates of the Baptistery.[451] An enthusiast
about the artistic pre-eminence of Florence and of Italy, he was said
to have been jealous of the glory that had come to Germany through the
invention of printing, and he determined to master the art without
German aid.[452] In the colophon to his work, he describes the labour
of the creation of his press, a labour which included the engraving of
the steel punches and the casting of the type. His publishing venture
was costly and probably unprofitable, and he appears to have printed no
second book. He continued, however, in connection with his trade as a
goldsmith, the work of engraving punches for type.

The German printers speedily found their way to Florence as they had
already done to Rome, Venice, and Milan. In 1472, a certain Peter,
describing himself as “de Moguntia,” (of Mayence) printed an edition
of the _Philocolo_ of Boccaccio, and in the same year, he issued the
_Triumphs of Petrarch_.

The subscription reads: “Master Peter, son of John of Mayence, wrote
(_scripsit_) this work in Florence, the 12th day of November, 1472.”

Humphreys points out that this imprint is an example of the habit
of the early printers of considering their art as a kind of magical
_writing_ rather than as a mechanical contrivance.

The most important of the early printer-publishers of Florence was
Nicholas of Breslau. In 1477, he published Bettini’s _Monte Sancto di
Dio_, which, according to Humphreys, presents the first example of
illustrations by means of engraved plates. In 1478, Nicholas published
an edition of Dante, the most elaborate that had yet appeared. Dante
had evidently already taken possession of the intellectual interest
of Italy, and as early as 1472, no less than three editions had
appeared. The fact that the poetry of Dante was given to the public
in Italian, secured for it a much wider range of popular appreciation
than was within reach of works written in Latin. The same was true
of the works of Boccaccio and of Petrarch, which, with the aid of
the printing-press, promptly came into the hands of large circles of
readers. _Petrarch_ was first printed in 1470, and _Boccaccio_ in 1471,
and thereafter editions of both authors followed rapidly.

In 1474, a press was set up in the monastery of San Jacopo di Ripili,
near Florence, by two monks of the Brotherhood of S. Dominic. The
greater part of the books printed by them were distributed among the
monasteries as gifts or in exchange, but as the reputation of their
publications increased, they found it necessary to accept orders
from booksellers and from the outside public. Later, they added a
type-foundry to their plant.

=Genoa.=--The first printing-office in Genoa was established in
1471 by a German from Olmutz, named Moravus, who associated with
himself, in 1474, an Italian named Michael da Monaco. The scribes, or
_manuscriptists_, as they called themselves, made a vigorous protest
against the new art. They addressed, in 1471, a petition to the
magistracy in which they prayed to be protected from the competition
of these newly arrived printers, at least as far as the production
of Breviaries, Donati, and Psalters was concerned, as upon the
multiplication of these they depended for their livelihood. Humphreys
states that the original of this petition is still in existence.[453]
The record of the reply given by the magistrates has not been preserved.

The printers were evidently not forbidden to print these books of
service, as editions were speedily produced. The influence of the
scribes appears, however, in the end, to have been sufficient to
establish a kind of cabal against the printers, and in the course of
a year or two the German gave up the attempt and removed his press
to Naples. There was doubtless in all the Italian cities a large
measure of jealousy and opposition on the part of the old _librarii_,
_stationarii_, and _scriptores_, but Genoa appears to have been the
only city where they were strong enough actually to drive out the
printers, at least for a time.

The first Hebrew Bible printed in Europe was issued in Soncino in 1488,
from the press of Abraham Colonto. It is described as a very fine piece
of typography and as note-worthy for the artistic chapter-headings and
for the elaborate decorations of the marginal borders of the pages.


END OF VOLUME I.




The Question of Copyright

Comprising the text of the Copyright Law of the United States, and
a summary of the Copyright laws at present in force in the chief
countries of the world; together with a report of the legislation now
pending in Great Britain, a sketch of the contest in the United States,
1837-1891, in behalf of International Copyright, and certain papers
on the development of the conception of literary property and on the
results of the American law of 1891.


COMPILED BY GEO. HAVEN PUTNAM, A.M.,

Secretary of the American Publishers’ Copyright League.


Second Edition, revised, with additions, and with the record of
legislation brought down to March, 1896, octavo, gilt top, $1.75

CONTENTS.--The law of Copyright in the U. S. in force July 1,
1895.--Directions for securing Copyright.--Countries with which the
U. S. is now in Copyright relations.--Amendments to the Copyright
Act since July 1, 1891.--Summary of Copyright legislation in the
U. S., by R. R. Bowker.--History of the contest for International
Copyright.--The Hawley Bill of January, 1885.--The Pearsall-Smith
scheme of Copyright.--Report of the House Committee on Patents, on
the Bill of 1890-91, by W. E. Simonds.--The Platt-Simonds Act of
March, 1891.--Analysis of the provisions of the Act of 1891.--Extracts
from the speeches in the debates of 1891.--Results of the law of
1891 (considered in January 1894).--Summary of the international
Copyright cases and decisions since the Act of 1891.--Abstract of the
Copyright laws of Great Britain, with a digest of the same by Sir James
Stephen.--Report of the British Copyright Commission of 1878.--The
Monkswell Copyright bill of 1890, with an analysis by Sir Frederick
Pollock.--The Berne Convention of 1887.--The Montevideo Convention
of 1889.--The Nature and Origin of Copyright, by R. R. Bowker.--The
Evolution of Copyright, by Brander Matthews.--Literary Property:
an historical sketch.--Statutory Copyright in England, by R. R.
Bowker.--Cheap Books and Good Books by Brander Matthews.--Copyright and
the Prices of Books.--Copyright “Monopolies” and Protection.--States
which have become parties to the Convention of Berne.--Summary of the
existing Copyright laws of the world (March, 1896).--The status of
Canada in regard to Copyright, January, 1896.--General Index.


_NOTICES._

A perfect arsenal of facts and arguments, carefully elaborated and
very effectively presented.... Altogether it constitutes an extremely
valuable history of the development of a very intricate right of
property, and it is as interesting as it is valuable.--_N. Y. Nation._

A work of exceptional value for authors and booksellers, and for all
interested in the history and status of literary property.--_Christian
Register._

Until the new Copyright law has been in operation for some time,
constant resource must be had to this workmanlike volume.--_The Critic._


G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS

  New York: 27 West 23d St.      London: 24 Bedford St., Strand




Authors and Their Public

In Ancient Times

A Sketch of Literary Conditions and of the Relations with the Public of
Literary Producers, from the Earliest Times to the Fall of the Roman
Empire.

By GEO. HAVEN PUTNAM, A.M.

Author of “The Question of Copyright,” “Books and their Makers During
the Middle Ages,” etc.

Second Edition, Revised, 12º, gilt top $1.50


_NOTICES._

The Knickerbocker Press appears almost at its best in the delicately
simple and yet attractive form which it has given to this work, wherein
the chief of a celebrated publishing house sketches the gradual
evolution of the idea of literary property.... The book abounds in
information, is written in a delightfully succinct and agreeable
manner, with apt comparisons that are often humorous, and with
scrupulous exactness to statement, and without a sign of partiality
either from an author’s or a publisher’s point of view.--_New York
Times._

A most instructive book for the thoughtful and curious reader.... The
author’s account of the literary development of Greece is evidence of
careful investigation and of scholarly judgment. Mr. Putnam writes
in a way to instruct a scholar and to interest the general reader.
He has been exceptionally successful in describing the progress of
letters, the peculiar environment of those who are interested in the
career of the dramatist and the philosopher, and that habit of mind
characteristic of Hellenic life.--_Philadelphia Press._

A most valuable review of the important subject of the beginnings
of literary prosperity. The book presents also a powerful plea
for the rights of authors. The beginnings of literary matters in
Chaldea, Egypt, India, Persia, China, and Japan are exhibited with
discrimination and fairness and in a very entertaining way. The work is
a valuable contribution upon a subject of pressing interest to authors
and their public.--_New York Observer._

The work shows broad cultivation, careful scholarly research, and
original thought. The style is simple and straightforward, and the
volume is both attractive and valuable.--_Richmond Times._

The volume is beautifully printed on good paper.... Every author ought
to be compelled to buy and read this bright volume, and no publisher
worthy of the name should be without it.--_Publishers’ Circular,
London._

The book is one that will commend itself to every author, while at the
same time it is full of entertainment for the general reader.--_London
Sun._


  G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
  New York: 29 West 23d St.      London: 24 Bedford St., Strand




Books and Their Makers During the Middle Ages

A Study of the Conditions of the Production and Distribution of
Literature from the Fall of the Roman Empire to the Close of the
Seventeenth Century.

By GEO. HAVEN PUTNAM, A.M.

Author of “Authors and Their Public in Ancient Times,” “The Question of
Copyright,” etc., etc.

In two volumes, 8º, cloth extra (sold separately), each $2.50


=Volume I. 476-1500.= (Ready April, 1896.)

PART I.--BOOKS IN MANUSCRIPT.

=I.--The Making of Books in the Monasteries.=

Introductory.--Cassiodorus and S. Benedict.--The Earlier Monkish
Scribes.--The Ecclesiastical Schools and the Clerics as Scribes.--Terms
Used for Scribe Work.--S. Columba, the Apostle to Caledonia.--Nuns
as Scribes.--Monkish Chroniclers.--The Work of the Scriptorium.--The
Influence of the Scriptorium.--The Literary Monks of England.--The
Earlier Monastery Schools.--The Benedictines of the Continent.--The
Libraries of the Monasteries and their Arrangements for the Exchange of
Books.

  =II.--Some Libraries of the Manuscript Period.=
  =III.--The Making of Books in the Early Universities.=
  =IV.--The Book-Trade in the Manuscript Period.=

Italy.--Books in Spain.--The Manuscript Trade in France.--Manuscript
Dealers in Germany.

PART II.--THE EARLIER PRINTED BOOKS.

  =I.--The Renaissance as the Forerunner of the Printing-Press.=
  =II.--The Invention of Printing and the Work of the First Printers
  of Holland and Germany.=
  =III.--The Printer-Publishers of Italy.=

=Volume II. 1500-1709.= (Ready September, 1896.)

  =IV.--The Printer-Publishers of France.=
  =V.--The Later Estiennes and Casaubon.=
  =VI.--Caxton and the Introduction of Printing into England.=
  =VII.--The Kobergers of Nuremberg.=
  =VIII.--Froben of Basel.=
  =IX.--Erasmus and his Books.=
  =X.--Luther as an Author.=
  =XI.--Plantin of Antwerp.=
  =XII.--The Elzevirs of Leyden and Amsterdam.=
  =XIII.--Italy: Privileges and Censorship.=
  =XIV.--Germany: Privileges and Book-Trade Regulations.=
  =XV.--France: Privileges, Censorship, and Legislation.=
  =XVI.--England: Privileges, Censorship, and Legislation.=
  =XVII.--Conclusion: The Development of the Conception of Literary
  Property.=


  G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
  New York: 29 West 23d St.      London: 24 Bedford St., Strand




A Literary History of the English People

From the Earliest Times to the Present Day.

By J. J. JUSSERAND

Author of “The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare,” etc., etc.

To be complete in three parts, each part forming one volume. (_Sold
separately._)

=Part I.--From the Origins to the Renaissance.= 8º, pp. xxii + 545.
With frontispiece in photogravure. $3.50.

=Part II.--From the Renaissance to Pope.= (_In press._)

=Part III.--From Pope to the Present Day.= (_In preparation._)


We may say, without contradiction, that the marvellous story of our
literature in its vital connection with the origin and growth of
the English people has never been treated with a greater union of
conscientious research, minute scholarship, pleasantness of humor,
picturesqueness of style, and sympathetic intimacy.--_London Chronicle._

The most important and delightful contribution to the popular study
of English literature since Taine’s volumes were published, is to be
made by M. J. J. Jusserand in his “Literary History of the English
People.” ... Only the most meagre sketch of the pleasure in store
for the readers of M. Jusserand’s volume can be given here. No one
interested in the beginnings of English literature can fail to be
pleased with this delightful study. A thoroughly stimulating book
... which will arouse fresh interest in the early periods of our
literature.--_Literary World._

M. Jusserand is an investigator of keen insight and indefatigable
energy. He has also the quality which gives to him, from his Latin
parentage, synthesis and literary tact.... He paints a picture....
It is unquestionably true that for this generation, M. Jusserand has
said the last word on this subject.... For the period of Chaucer, he
has summarized what is known with admirable skill.... His work must
be accepted as the authority on the Middle Ages as they were lived in
England.--_N. Y. Commercial Advertiser._

The book bears witness on every page to having been written by one
whose mind was overflowing with information, and whose heart was in
abounding sympathy with his work. Mr. Jusserand possesses pre-eminently
the modern spirit of inquiry, which has for its object the attainment
of truth and a comprehension of the beginnings of things and of the
causes that have brought about effects.--_N. Y. Times._

After so many excellent works, of which English literature is the
subject, have been issued in England and on the Continent, after
even the epic work of Taine, yet M. Jusserand still contrives to be
original, fresh, and creative. The history of English literature has
been written before, but what he gives us is something new; it is the
literary history of the English people, that is to say, he makes us
follow the historical evolution of the nation in literature, and what
that evolution has created and revealed. He has employed a method
which could not be used with success, except by a man with a thorough
and correct knowledge of literature and the history of the English
people, and of the people themselves, and one who is worthy of serious
consideration by all literary historians.--_La Revue de Paris_, July 1,
1894, on the French Edition.


  G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
  New York: 27 West 23d St.      London: 24 Bedford St., Strand




INDEX


  A

  Abbon, Saint, i, 56

  Abelard, the philosophy of, i, 198; the lectures of, i, 198; the
    influence of, upon the theological school of Paris, i, 198;
    considered as the actual founder of the University of Paris, i,
    197, 198

  Academies, literary, of Italy, i, 322 _ff._, 344

  Academy, of Venice, the, literary undertakings of, i, 423 _ff._

  ---- of France, founding of the, ii, 458

  _Adagia_, the, of Erasmus, the first edition of, ii, 194; the Aldine
    edition of, ii, 199

  Adamnanus, life of S. Columba, cited, i, 50

  Adolph of Nassau, captures Mayence, i, 371

  Adrian VI, ii, 29

  Aedh, King, presides over the parliament of Drumceitt, i, 49

  Aelfric, _Homilies_ of, i, 101; the canons of, i, 101

  Agapetus, Pope, i, 22

  Agnien, _libraire_ in Paris in the 13th century, i, 271

  Agricola, librarian of Heidelberg in 1485, orders books for the
    library, i, 297

  Aimoin of Fleury, i, 56

  Albert, Abbot of Gembloux, makes collection of manuscripts, i, 231

  ---- of Brandenburg, ii, 229

  Alcuin, training of, by Egbert, i, 107; the library of, at York, i,
    62; correspondence of, with Charlemagne, i, 62, 109; the methods
    in his _scriptorium_, i, 66; institutes the imperial schools in
    Aachen, Tours, and Milan, i, 109; poem of, on the library of York
    Cathedral, i, 108; his imperial pupils, i, 109; treatise of, on
    orthography, i, 111; his injunction to pious scribes, i, 113; list
    of the writings of, i, 114; death of, at Tours, i, 115; describes
    the journeys of Aelbert, i, 228; the educational work of, ii, 479
    _ff._

  Aldersbach, monastery of, i, 40.

  Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborn, visits Berthwold in Canterbury, i, 97;
    imports books from France, i, 97.

  _Aldi Filii_, the name adopted by the son and grandson of the founder
    of the firm, i, 438

  Aldine classics, the, models for the Elzevirs, ii, 301

  ---- Press, close of the work of, i, 438; operations of the, in Rome,
    i, 441 _ff._

  Aldus Manutius, work of, in the printing of Greek texts, i, 243;
    relations of, to the book trade of Italy and of Europe, i, 415;
    earlier life of, i, 417 _ff._; letter of, stating his aims, i,
    418; first publications of, i, 420; literary undertakings of,
    i, 419; marriage of, i, 420; Greek classics issued by, i, 420;
    institutes the Academy of Venice, i, 423; correspondence of, with
    France and with Germany, i, 424 _ff._; reputation of, in Germany,
    i, 430; letter of, to Taberio, i, 430; summary of publications of,
    i, 432; financial difficulties of, competition of, with piratical
    reprinters, i, 432; secures papal privileges, i, 432; initiates
    new forms of type, i, 434; attempts to defend his office against
    literary loafers, i, 437; death of, i, 438; summary of the career
    of, i, 439; ii, 12, 22, 23, 102, 151, 194; privilege given to, for
    Greek text, ii, 346; privilege given to, for italic text, ii, 347;
    publishes the _Letters of Phalaris_, ii, 351; ii, 487

  Aldus Manutius the second, i, 438; business experience of, i, 441;
    gives up business as a printer, i, 445

  Aleander, Hieronymus, Greek scholar and theologian, i, 422, ii, 12
    _ff._

  Alexander, Bishop of Jerusalem, the library of, i, 147

  Alfano, the poem of, on monastery life, i, 127

  Alfonso, King of Aragon and Sicily, offers rewards for literary
    productions, i, 330

  Alfred, King, attends school in Oxford, i, 119; service of, to the
    literary interests of England, i, 98; makes English version of
    Gregory’s _Pastoral Care_, i, 99; complains of the ignorance of
    Englishmen, i, 99; prepares English translations of certain famous
    books, orders transcripts of the national chronicles, i, 100

  Al-hakem, Kahlif, library of, in Cordova, i, 254; pays large sums for
    the writing of books, i, 254

  Alphonso, King of Naples, the literary circle of, i, 252

  Amalasuentha, Queen of the Goths, i, 20

  Amandus, Abbot of Salem, i, 85

  Ambrose, Saint, _Legenda Aurea_ of, cited, i, 37

  Amerbach, Basilius, ii, 238

  ---- Boniface, ii, 173

  ---- Johann, editor, printer and publisher of Basel, i, 393, ii, 151;
    purchases paper stock with an edition of S. Augustine, i, 348;
    relations of, with Koberger, i, 393; relations of, with Froben, i,
    393

  Andreä, Hieronymus, ii, 410

  Andreas, Abbot of Bergen, i, 86

  Andrews, Bishop, ii, 97, 99

  Angus the Culdee, the _Festilogium_ of, i, 46

  Anjou, the Countess of, pays, in 1460, a great price for a copy of
    _Homilies_, i, 299

  Anna Gray, the monastery of, founded, i, 47

  _Annales Ecclesiastici_, ii, 97

  Anne, Queen, the Act of, ii, 472

  Anselm, Saint, the Peripatetic, cited, i, 39, 197; recommends to his
    pupils the study of an expurgated Virgil, i, 62

  Anshelm, Thomas, publisher of Tübingen, ii, 165, 172, 231

  _Antidotarium_, the, i, 196

  Antwerp as a publishing centre, ii, 255 _ff._; losses of, through the
    revolt of the Netherlands, ii, 274

  _Apologia pro Herodoto_, ii, 72 _ff._

  Aquinas, Thomas, the _de Censuris_ of, ii, 386

  Arabian writers, bring to Europe the literature of Greece, i, 181;
    medical works of, used as text-books, i, 195

  _Areopagitica_ of Milton, the, ii, 474 _ff._

  Arethas, the scribes of, i, 42

  Aretinus, Johannes, _librarius_, i, 234, 246

  Ariosto, the _Orlando_ of, ii, 370

  Arminius, the doctrines of, ii, 291

  Arnest, Archbishop of Prague, i, 44

  Arnold, Abbot of Villers, i, 75

  Arts and Industries, bureau of, in Venice, ii, 361

  Arundel, Archbishop, ii, 130

  ---- Earl of, ii, 118, 123

  Ascensius, _see_ Badius.

  Ascham, Roger, ii, 145

  Asser, Bishop, organizes education in the kingdom of Alfred, i, 99

  Athalaric, King of the Goths, i, 20

  Atkyns, Richard, on the introduction of printing into England, ii, 134

  Atticus, relations of, to the book-trade of Italy, i, 416

  _Auctores Frobeniani_, ii, 185

  Augsburg, the early printers of, i, 396

  Augustine, Saint, writings of, i, 3; literary work of, i, 32, 33; on
    the value of ignorance, i, 121; the library of, i, 147

  Augustinians, the regulations of, for the care of books, i, 148

  Aungerville, Richard (de Bury), i, 308 _ff._

  Aura, Saint, and scholar, i, 51

  Aurelian, Saint, the _Rule_ of, i, 123

  Aurispa, Johannes, dealer in manuscripts, i, 242; brings to Florence
    his collection of manuscripts, i, 251; correspondence of, with
    Filelfo, i, 251; publishing undertakings of, i, 251; fate of the
    manuscripts of, i, 253

  Austria, censorship in, ii, 249

  Author, rights of, in literary production, under the laws of Venice,
    ii. 399 _ff._

  Authors, payments to, by Plantin, ii, 276 _ff._; acting as their own
    publishers in Germany, ii, 435; in France, ii, 435

  Averrhoes, i, 181; the philosophy of, i, 196

  Avicenna, i, 181; the medical treatises of, i, 196

  Avitus, the Emperor, i, 8

  Azo, i, 183


  B

  Bacon, Roger, seeks scribes for the manifolding of his treatises,
    i, 84; makes complaint concerning the ignorance of the scribes of
    Paris, i, 218

  Badius, Jodocus, (Ascensius), ii, 10, 12, 23, 31; commends the work
    of Koberger, ii, 155

  Balzac, Jean L. G., Sieur de, ii, 310, 333 _ff._

  Barbaro, Daniele, ii, 345

  ---- Hermolao, ii, 345

  Barcelona, early manuscript-dealers in, i, 313

  Bards, orders of, i, 48

  ---- Celtic, arraigned before the Parliament of Drumceitt, i, 48;
    existence of, preserved by Columba, i, 48,

  Barnet, battle of, ii, 128

  Baronius, ii, 97

  Barrois, ii, 105

  Barstch, _Im. anz. d. Germ. Mus._ cited, i, 40 _ff._

  Basel, the Council of, i, 85; as a publishing centre, i, 391; ii,
    204; the University of, i, 391; ii, 178; the relations of the
    magistracy of, to the printing business, i, 392; world-wide
    reputation of the printers of, i, 395; University of, in its
    relations with the printers, i, 395; regulations of the magistracy
    of, concerning literary piracies, ii, 412

  Bassa, Domenico, secures an exceptional copyright or monopoly, ii,
    379 _ff._

  Baudius, ii, 289

  Baudoke, Ralph de, Dean of S. Paul’s, i, 105

  Bautzen, school regulations of, i, 283

  Bayle, the _Dictionary_ of, ii, 444

  Beaupré, the manuscripts of, i, 131

  Beauvais, Jean de, _librarius_ of Paris in the 14th century, record
    of his sales, i, 273

  Beccadelli, the _Hermaphroditus_ of, i, 331

  Beda, Noel, describes the purchase of books in Rome, i, 227; ii, 262,
    444 _ff._

  Bede, the venerable, _Chronicles_ of, i, 56; a pupil of Biscop,
    writes in Jarrow the _Chronicles_, i, 95

  Bedier, Chancellor, ii, 210

  Behem, Franz, printer of Mayence, i, 381

  ---- Martin, ii, 175

  Belisarius, captures Ravenna, i, 20

  Benaliis, Bernardino de, ii, 348

  Benedict, Saint, i, 9, 10; the Order of, instituted, i, 12; the
    _Rule_ of, i, 12, 28; the literary interests of, i, 13; his
    _scriptorium_, i, 12; relations with Cassiodorus, i, 12; life of,
    written by Pope Gregory I., i, 28

  Benedictine monasteries in their relations to literature, ii, 480
    _ff._

  Benedictines, the records by Mabillon and Ziegelbauer of the literary
    work of, i, 122

  Beowulf, an early text of, i, 92

  Berlin, the earlier book-trade of, ii, 424 _ff._; the book-dealers
    of, ii, 425

  Bernard, Saint, pious fraud upon, i, 76

  Berne, the convention of, ii, 339, 506

  Berneggerus, Matthew, ii, 309

  Berners, Juliana, ii, 138

  Berquin, bookseller of Paris, ii, 443

  Berri, Duke of, ii, 116

  Berthold, Elector of Mayence, ii, 420

  Berthold von Henneberg on the _Divine Art of Printing_, i, 368

  Berthwold, Archbishop of Canterbury, i, 96

  Bertile, the nun, gives lectures at Chelles, i, 51

  Bessarion, Cardinal, literary activities of, i, 330, 365

  Beza, ii, 54

  Bible, terms used for, in middle ages, i, 44; books of, circulated
    separately, i, 44; great cost of certain manuscript copies of,
    in the national library at Paris, i, 299; first work printed by
    Gutenberg, i, 373; the first edition of, sold in Paris, i, 374;
    editions of, in various languages, printed in Zurich, i, 396;
    printing of the first edition in Hebrew, i, 459; version of, by
    Coverdale, ii, 141; version of, by Hollybush, ii, 142; German
    versions of, published by Koberger, ii, 158; the Lutheran version
    of, i, 223 _ff._; the version of, known as Matthews’s, ii, 141;
    Tyndale’s version of, ii, 140; Wyclif’s translation of, ii, 130;
    first printed in England, ii, 140

  _Bible Polyglotte_, printed by Plantin, ii, 260 _ff._

  Bibles, the printing of, in England, ii, 128 _ff._

  _Biblia Pauperum_, i, 350 _ff._

  _Bibliotheca_, used to denote the Scriptures, i, 44

  _Bidelli_ or _Bedelli_, derivation of the term, i, 187; functions of,
    i, 187

  Biot, J. B., characterises the philosophical work of the
    universities, i, 222

  Birckmann, Franz, publisher of Cologne and of London, i, 388;
    difficulties of, with the censors of Antwerp, i, 390

  Biscop, Benedict, founds monasteries of Wearmouth and Jarrow, i,
    95; makes journeys to Rome, collects books and pictures, i, 95;
    far-reaching influence of his educational work, i, 107; purchases
    books in Rome, i, 227

  Blades, William, ii, 102 _ff._

  Blaubeuern, the monastery of, manuscript work in, i, 86;
    printing-presses established in, i, 86

  _Blickling Homilies, the_, i, 101

  Block-books, i, 350 _ff._; block-printing, i, 350

  Blois, library of the Château of, ii, 446

  Bobbio, the monastery of, founded, i, 47

  Boccaccio, translates the Iliad and the Odyssey into Latin, i, 323,
    324; influence of, upon the study of Greek, i, 325; the _Decameron_
    of, i, 325; script of, used as a model for italic type, ii, 347

  Bohic, Heinrich, manuscript of, i, 40; the commentary of, i, 230

  Boleyn, Anne, ii, 140

  Bologna, the academies of, i, 345; the earlier scribes in, i, 245;
    statutes of the city of, i, 192; University of, i, 181, 183 _ff._

  Bolomyer, Henry, ii, 119

  Bomberg, printer of Venice, ii, 371

  Bonaccorsi, paper maker and publisher, i, 238

  Bonhomme, Jean, bookseller to the University, 1486-1490, i, 276

  Boniface, Saint, i, 53

  Bonus, Abbot of St. Michael in Pisa, i, 138

  _Book of Kells_, manuscript, ascribed to Columba, i, 47

  Books, the making of, in the monasteries, i, 16 _ff._; the making
    of, in the early universities, i, 178 _ff._; the prices of, during
    the Middle Ages, i, 135, 297 _ff._; the rental of, in the Italian
    Universities, i, 189, 191; secured by chains, i, 141; pledged with
    the pawnbrokers of Oxford, i, 310; prices of those first printed,
    i, 375 _ff._

  Books in manuscript, sold by pedlars, i, 261; sales of, in Paris
    in the 14th century under formal contracts, i, 272; sold at the
    English fairs, i, 306; prices of, in Venice, in the 15th century,
    i, 413-415; importation of, to England, ii, 133; printed in Germany
    during the Reformation period, ii, 240; prices of, in Antwerp, in
    1576, ii, 279; transportation of, between Holland and Italy, ii, 301

  Book-dealers of Paris exempted from taxes, i, 203; terms describing
    the, i, 205; regulations for the examination of, i, 206; classed as
    members of a profession, i, 213 _ff._; locality occupied by, i, 217

  Book-manufacturing, cost of, with the earlier Venetian publishers, i,
    413

  Book-production in Europe, stages in the history of, i, 10, 11, 12

  Bookseller of Venice, the daybook of a, i, 414

  Booksellers, location in Paris of early, i, 262; in Venice,
    matriculation requirements for, ii, 309

  Bookselling in the monasteries, i, 134

  Book-trade, the, in Italy during the manuscript period, i, 225;
    survival of, after the fall of the Western Empire, i, 225; of
    Paris, under the control of the University authorities, i, 199
    _ff._; earlier regulations regarding the, i, 201 _ff._; of the
    University of Paris, regulations of, for the sale of books, i,
    208 _ff._; membership of the, in the 14th and 15th centuries,
    i, 210 _ff._; of Paris in the 13th century, i, 257 _ff._; of
    Germany, relations of, to the Reformation, ii, 218; in the early
    universities, i, 178 _ff._; between Venice and England, i, 242

  Bosco, instructor in Paris, i, 221

  Bossuet, relations of, to ecclesiastical censorship, ii, 462 _ff._

  Bosworth Field, the battle of, ii, 123, 129

  Bourchier, Thomas, ii, 135

  Boville, Charles, ii, 19

  Braccio, ii, 351

  Bracciolino, Poggio, i, 333 _ff._

  Bracton, Henry of, i, 308

  Brandenburg, censorship in, ii, 244; privileges in, ii, 424

  Brandis, publisher of Leipzig, i, 400

  Brazizza, orator and author, i, 355

  Breda, the peace of, ii, 317

  Brehons, an order of Celtic bards, i, 48

  Bremen, and the writings of Luther, ii, 246

  _Brœders van de Penne_, i, 89

  Brice, Hugh, ii, 116, 123

  Brome, Prior of Gorlestone, initiates the making of indexes, i, 141

  Brothers of Common Life, the, i, 88 _ff._; manuscripts produced by,
    i, 88, 89; printing-offices established by, i, 90; the work of,
    in the production and distribution of manuscripts, i, 282; early
    interest of, in printing, i, 282; the manuscript trade of the, i,
    291 _ff._; distribute cheap books among the people, i, 368; the
    first printing done by the, i, 369; the printing and publishing
    undertakings of the, i, 399, ii, 109

  Brown, Horatio F., ii, 344

  Bruges, ii, 102 _ff._

  ---- Louis de, i, 105 _ff._

  Bruin, Leonardo, on the book-trade of Florence, i, 234

  Brute, _Chronicle_ of, ii, 116, 139

  Buchanan, George, ii, 65 _ff._

  Budæus, scholar and diplomat, ii, 13 _ff._; influence of, with
    Francis I., ii, 14 _ff._, 39; work of, printed by Vascosanus, ii, 25

  Bulæus, _History of the University of Paris_, by, i, 256

  Bull, of Benedict VIII., 1022, i, 44; of Leo X., 1520, ii, 225;
    papal, concerning the productions of the printing-press, ii, 359

  Burer, Mathias, i, 40

  Burgo, Antonio de’, i, 449

  Burgundy, the dukes of, patrons of producers of books, i, 268, 294

  ---- Duke of, ii, 102

  Bury, Richard de, i, 44; buys books in Paris, i, 218; buys books
    in Rome; i, 228; describes his relations with the booksellers of
    Europe, i, 233; makes reference to the wide extent of the business
    of the manuscript-dealers, i, 296

  Busby, Doctor, ii, 81

  Busch, ii, 167

  Busleiden, ii, 41

  Bussi, Bishop of Aleria, an early patron of printing, i, 405

  Bydell, John, ii, 142


  C

  Cædmon, the songs of, i, 93; paraphrases of the Scriptures, i, 93;
    composes _The Revolt of Satan_, i, 93

  Caen, printing in, ii, 257

  Cæsaris and Stoll, establish the second press in Paris, ii, 7

  Cæsarius of Arles, convent of, i, 51; the _Chronicles_ of, i, 225

  Calcar, Abbot Heinrich von, i, 85

  Calcedonio, ii, 350

  Calvin, ii, 51, 52 _ff._; the _Institutes_ of, ii, 55

  Calvinists, held responsible for the destruction of many monasteries,
    i, 132

  Camaldulensers, of St. Michael, carry on a trade in manuscripts, i,
    234

  Camaldulensis, Ambrosius, writes to Aretinus, i, 246

  Cambrai, the League of, i, 420; ii, 357

  Cambridge, the University of, i, 181; ii, 60; first printing in, ii,
    138

  Campanus, Bishop of Teramo, patron and press-corrector, i, 406

  Campeggi, Cardinal, ii, 246

  Campensis, (Morrhius), ii, 24

  Canonical Law, works in, published by the Kobergers, ii, 160

  _Canterbury Tales_, Caxton’s Text for, ii, 114

  Capella, Martianus, _The Satyricon_, i, 116

  Carpi, the Princess of, loans funds to Aldus, i, 419

  Carthusians, literary work in the monasteries of, i, 70; the
    regulations of, for the care of books, i, 148

  Cartolajo, Francesco, i, 238

  Cartularii or Chartularii, i, 44

  Casaubon, Arnold, ii, 88

  ---- Isaac, ii, 27, 67 _ff._, 85 _ff._; 315; ii,; death of, ii, 100

  Cassian, the _Institutes_ of, ii, 167

  Cassiodorus, i, 10; birth of, i, 14, 17; summary of career, i, 14;
    Abbot of Vivaria i, 15; offices held by, i, 17, 18; the _Letters_
    of, i, 18; _Variæ_ of, cited, i, 18 _ff._; _Chronicon_ of, i, 19;
    _History of the Goths_, of, i, 19; secures a policy of toleration
    for the Gothic Kingdom, i, 18; retires to Bruttii, i, 20; character
    of, as a minister, i, 20; founds monastery of Mons Castellius, i,
    21; writes _De Anima_, i, 22; plans school of Christian literature,
    i, 22; describes the work of his _scriptorium_, i, 26; lamps
    invented by, i, 26; transcribes Jerome’s version of the Scriptures,
    i, 26; writings of, i, 26, 27; death of, i, 27; character of, i,
    27; work of, compared with that of Alcuin, i, 110-115; 182

  Castellazzo, ii, 370

  Castiglione, ii, 376

  Castro, Leon de, ii, 262

  Catalogue of books published in England, 1666-1680, ii, 148

  _Cathac_, or “the Fighter,” name applied to the Psalter of Columba,
    i, 47

  Catharine, Saint, the monastery of, i, 146

  Catharine of Medici, ii, 70

  Caxton, Maude, ii, 123

  ---- William, relations of, with Cologne, i, 388; ii, 101 _ff._, 178,
    467

  Ceaddæ, Saint, an early manuscript of, i, 231

  Cecilia, daughter of William the Conqueror, organises the school in
    her convent at Kucaen, i, 52

  Cell, John de, Abbot of St. Albans, i, 103

  Celtes, Conrad, secures the earliest German privilege, i, 426;
    relations of, with Aldus, i, 426, 435; ii, 175, 414, 421

  Cennino, goldsmith and printer, i, 457

  Censorship, exercised by the theologians of the universities over
    the book-trade of Paris, i, 214 _ff._; ecclesiastical, i, 343; ii,
    27; in France, ii, 437 _ff._; formal institution of, in France,
    ii, 441_ff._; in Germany, ii, 242 _ff._; in Austria, ii, 249; in
    Holland, ii, 296 _ff._, 337; literary, establishment of, in Venice,
    II., 352 _ff._; 356, 403; in the Low Countries, ii, 266

  Censorship, and privileges in Italy, ii, 343 _ff._

  Chabanais, of St. Cybar, i, 56

  Chantor, the, has charge of the library of the monastery, i, 101

  Charlemagne, i, 36; enquires concerning Monastic Orders, i, 31;
    listens to reading, i, 69; policy of, in regard to education,
    i, 106; entrusts the imperial schools to Alcuin, i, 107; the
    _capitular_ of, i, 112; interested in the school of Salerno, i,
    182; orders the translation of Greek medical treatises, i, 182;
    alleged connection of, with the University of Bologna, i, 183;
    name of, associated with a group of the older schools, i, 197;
    instructions of, concerning the disposition of his books, i, 230;
    relations of, to education and literature, ii, 478 _ff._

  Charles II. and printing in England, ii, 135

  ---- IV., i, 184

  ---- of Austria, ii, 201

  ---- V., Emperor, ii, 39, 140, 242; edict of 1521, ii, 266; edict of,
    for the regulation of the Press, ii, 442

  ---- V., of France, letters-patent of, i, 206

  ---- VI., Emperor, secures the library of S. Giovanni, i, 147;
    exempts book-dealers from certain war taxes, i, 207

  ---- VII., plans to introduce printing into France, ii, 2 _ff._

  ---- VIII., ii, 357; funeral procession of, ii, 440

  ---- IX., ii. 70; issues the ordinance of Moulins, ii, 450

  _Chartularii_, definition of the term, i, 235

  Chaucer, the _Troilus and Cressida_ of, i, 302; _Canterbury Tales_,
    i, 305; ii, 114, 126; described by Caxton, ii, 132

  Chevillier, on the early book-trade of Paris, i, 200; schedule
    prepared by, of manuscripts of the 13th century, i, 259; ii, 60; on
    the relations of Francis I. with the reformers, ii, 444

  Choir books, produced as manuscripts after the invention of printing,
    i, 87

  Christina, Queen, ii, 305 _ff._

  Christine (or Cristyne), de Pisa, ii, 115, 120

  Chrodegang, Archbishop, initiates a reform of the monasteries, i, 128

  Chrysoloras, the first professor of Greek in Florence, i, 325; ii, 23

  Church and State in Germany, conflicts of, concerning the control of
    literature in Germany, ii, 418 _ff._

  Church of Rome, the, influence of, on education in the universities,
    i, 178

  Churches of North Germany, book-trade carried on in the, i, 283

  Cicero, _Letters_ of, for sale by all the earlier dealers in
    manuscripts, i, 250; early editions of, in Paris, ii, 21 _ff._

  Cistercians, regulations of the, for the care of books, i, 148

  Clarendon Press of Oxford, ii, 297

  Clark, J. W., _Libraries in the Mediæval Period_, cited, i, 29 _ff._;
    on the library methods of the Benedictines, i, 148

  Classics, Latin, preserved in the monasteries, i, 61

  Clement VII., ii, 29

  ---- VIII. grants an exceptional copyright or monopoly, ii., 379 _ff._

  Clemente, printer and illuminator of Lucca, i, 455

  _Clementine Index_, the (of Clement VIII.), ii, 377

  Clerics, as scribes, i, 36; as officials, i, 36

  Clictou, Josse, ii, 19

  Clugni, catalogue of the library in the Abbey of, i, 131

  _Clugni, the Customs of_, cited, i, 63, 70

  Cluniacs, library regulations of, i, 30, 147

  Cochläus, ii, 227

  Codeca, Matteo de, ii, 349

  _Codex Argenteus_, the, ii, 306

  Coelfried, Abbot of Jarrow, and later of Wearmouth, sells books to
    King Alfred, i, 96

  Colet, John, ii, 194

  Colines, Simon de, printer of Paris, ii, 21, 26; marries widow of
    Henry Estienne (the elder), ii, 21 _ff._, 26, 30

  _Colloquies_, the, of Erasmus, ii, 208 _ff._

  Cologne, theological interests of the University of, i, 280; as a
    commercial centre, i, 386; the library of, i, 387; the University
    of, i, 387; the earlier printers of, i, 387; piratical operations
    of the early printers of, i, 390

  Colonto, prints the first Hebrew Bible, i, 459

  Columba, Saint, chief events of his life, i, 45-50

  Comester, Peter, the _Historica Scholastica_ of, i, 104

  Commelin, ii, 90

  Common-law copyright in manuscripts, ii, 484

  Compayré, opinions of, concerning the Benedictine schools, i, 197

  Compensation of authors in Italy, i, 334

  _Concordat_ between Rome and Venice in 1597, ii, 380 _ff._; between
    Leo X. and Francis I., ii, 440

  Conrad, Abbot, ii, 168

  Constantine, a scribe of Erfurt, i, 40

  ---- the African, comes from Carthage to Monte Cassino, i, 134;
    develops the school of Salerno, i, 182

  Constantinople, Acts of the Council of, i, 226; Greek scholars of,
    migrate to Italy, i, 255

  Contract, dated 1346, for the sale of books in Bruges, i, 290

  Convention of 1793 in Paris, ii, 505

  Cooper’s _Thesaurus Linguæ Romanæ_, ii, 63

  Copeland, ii, 126

  Copenhagen, relations of the Elzevirs with, ii, 304 _ff._

  Copyists of Genoa, petition the Senate for the expulsion of the
    printers, i, 413

  Copyright, case of, in 567 A.D., the first in Europe, i, 46

  Copyright control of manuscripts, ii, 481 _ff._

  Copyright, diverse theories concerning, ii, 507 _ff._

  Copyrights in Venice, ii, 369 _ff._

  Cordova, described as the Athens of the West, i, 254; literary
    activity in, i, 254; manuscript-trade of, i, 254; library of,
    destroyed by the Berbers, i, 255; the _Index_ of, ii., 270

  Correctors and Revisers employed by Plantin, ii, 277

  Corvinus, Matthias, collects books in Florence, i, 240

  Coster, _see_ Koster

  Council at Basel, pamphlets concerning the work of, prohibited, i, 296

  Council of Ten in Venice, ii, 351; establishes a censorship for the
    literature of the Humanities, ii, 356

  Coverdale Bible, the, ii, 141

  Cranach, Lucas, ii, 168, 233; printer, painter, and apothecary, ii,
    430

  Cranmer, Archbishop, ii, 142

  Crasso, Leonardo, ii, 350

  Cratander, ii, 173

  Crévier, traces the University of Paris to Alcuin, i, 197

  Croatian versions of Luther’s writings, ii, 230

  Cromwell, Thomas, ii, 142

  Cuspinian, ii, 174

  Cuthbert, Saint, i, 94

  Cyclops, Doctor, ii, 229

  Cynewulf, the Northumbrian poet, i, 93

  Cynthio, Alvise, ii, 357


  D

  Damian, S. Peter, recommends to the monks the study of pagan writers,
    i, 62

  Danes and Normans, ravages of, in the Benedictine monasteries, i, 132

  Danesius, Petrus, ii, 66

  Dante, _The Divine Comedy_ of, i, 318

  Darmarius, ii, 88

  Daubeney, William, ii, 123

  D’Aubigné, the history of, ii, 241

  Day, John, ii, 143

  Decembrio, author of 127 books, i, 335

  _Decor Puellarum_, the first book printed in Venice, i, 407

  _Decretals_, the Isidoric, exposed by the critics of the fourteenth
    century, i, 83

  _Decretals_, published by the Kobergers, ii, 160

  Dedications, the sale of, in Germany, ii, 434

  De Honate, Brothers, i, 448

  Delalain, on the requirements of a skilled scribe, i, 200

  Delisle, reference of, to the lending of books by the monasteries, i,
    138

  Delprat, history of the Brothers of Common Life, cited, i, 88

  Denis, on the Council of Basel, i, 285

  Denk, _Gesch. des Gallo. Frank. Unterrichts_, etc., cited, i, 32 _ff._

  Denmark, relations of the Elzevirs with, ii, 305

  Denys, Saint, the _Chronicles_ of, i, 57

  De Rancé, treatise of, on the monastic life, i, 119

  Derry, monastery of, i, 45

  Descartes, ii, 316 _ff._

  Desmarets, the Bible of, ii, 317

  Deventer, the Brotherhood House at, a place of book-production, i, 88

  De Vic, ii, 94 _ff._

  De Wailly, monetary tables of, cited, i, 208

  De Worde, Wynken, ii, 138

  Diarmid, King of Tara, decides a copyright case, i, 46

  _Dictare_, use of term, i, 44

  Didier, Abbot of Monte Cassino, i, 62, 134

  Didot, Firmin, ii, 329

  Diemude, or Diemudis, nun of Wessobrunn, works written by, i, 54;
    list of works transcribed by, i, 80, 81

  Dietrich, Abbot of St. Evroul, his story of the sinful scribe, i, 64

  Dietz, Ludwig, publisher for Luther, ii, 231

  Dio, Giovanni di, ii, 353

  Ditmar, Bishop of Mersebourg, i, 58

  Dolet, Étienne, ii, 46, 449

  Dominic, Saint, monks of the Brotherhood of, establish a
    printing-office, i, 458

  _Donaldson vs. Becket_, ii, 472 _ff._

  _Donation_, of Constantine, the, ii, 227

  Döring, ii, 233 _ff._

  Dorpius, on Froben, ii, 189

  Dritzehn, the brothers, associates of Gutenberg, i, 357 _ff._

  Drumceitt, Parliament of, i, 48

  Drummond on _The Praise of Folly_, ii, 193

  Dryden, John, makes agreement for his _Virgil_, ii, 148

  Du Chastel, ii, 44, 46, 49

  Ducret, scribe for Duke of Burgundy, i, 41

  Dunstan, Saint, Archbishop of Canterbury, i, 101; institutes
    monastery schools, i, 101; orders transcripts to be made in the
    vernacular, i, 101

  Dürer, Albert, ii, 149 _ff._, 168; _Instruction in Perspective_,
    contention concerning the copyright of, ii, 410 _ff._; literary and
    art productions of, ii, 409 _ff._

  Dutch Republic, establishment of the, ii, 273 _ff._


  E

  Ebert, on the division of manuscripts, cited, i, 65

  Ecclesiastical Censorship, i, 343

  Ecclesiastical schools, i, 36

  Eckstein, Heinrich, ii, 423

  Eddas, collections of, preserved by the Benedictines, i, 61

  Edward IV., King, accounts of, for the binding of books, i, 313; ii,
    103, 122

  ---- VI., ii, 67

  Egbert of York, i, 107

  Eggestein, Heinrich, i, 381 _ff._

  Eichstadt, Abbess of, compiles the _Heldenbuch_, i, 52

  Ekkhard, Abbot of Aurach, i, 58

  Eligius, Saint, the biography of, i, 128

  Ellis, George, _Introduction to Early English Poetry_ of, cited, i,
    302

  Elton, Charles, ii, 306

  Eltville, i, 363

  Elzevirs, the, of Leyden and Amsterdam, ii, 18, 286 _ff._; House of,
    in Amsterdam, ii, 299 _ff._; publications of the, ii, 319 _ff._;
    close of the publishing operations of, ii, 329 _ff._; “piracies”
    of, ii, 332; relations of, with authors, ii, 332 _ff._; religious
    faith of, ii, 338; relations of, to the book trade of Europe, ii,
    500 _ff._

  Elzevir, Abraham, ii, 292 _ff._

  ---- Bonaventure, ii, 290 _ff._

  ---- Daniel, ii, 293 _ff._; the death of, ii, 329; the widow of, ii,
    329

  ---- Isaac, ii, 292 _ff._; 295 _ff._

  ---- John, ii, 293 _ff._

  ---- Louis (the first), ii, 280 _ff._; 286 _ff._; the six sons of,
    ii, 289 _ff._

  ---- Louis (the second), ii, 299 _ff._

  ---- Matthew, ii, 290 _ff._

  Elzevir Classics, the, ii, 292 _ff._; ii, 309 _ff._; 331

  Emo, Abbot of Wittewierum, i, 70

  Emperor, the Holy Roman, claims the control of the printing-press,
    ii, 420 _ff._

  England, the literary monks of, i, 90; the Abbey schools in, i, 118;
    beginnings of literary property in, ii, 464 _ff._

  English Crown, relations of the, to literary property, ii, 465 _ff._

  Engraving, relation of, to the work of the early printers, ii, 164

  _Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum_, the, i, 223

  Erasmus, deprecates the adverse influence of Lutheranism on
    literature, i, 224; reference of, to Birckmann, i, 389; relations
    of, with Froben, i, 394 _ff._; relations of, with Aldus, i, 423
    _ff._; makes his first sojourn in Italy, i, 427; does editorial
    work for Aldus, i, 427; publishes the Venetian edition of his
    _Adagia_, i, 427; early editions of _The Praise of Folly_, of,
    i, 428; complaints of, concerning careless typesetting, i, 428;
    friendship of, with Aleander, ii, 12; the _Colloquies_ of, ii,
    22, 23; feeling against, in the Sorbonne, ii, 24; criticised by
    Lutherans, Calvinists, and Romanists, ii, 25, 39, 41, 176, 179
    _ff._; editions of the writings of, ii, 183 _ff._; on the death of
    Froben, ii, 189, 210 _ff._; writings of, ii, 192; on Aldus, ii,
    198; Spanish editions of the writings of, ii, 210; latest writings
    of, ii, 212 _ff._; income of, ii, 214 _ff._, 226; concerning
    publishing methods, ii, 429

  Erfurt, bookselling in the churches of, i, 283

  Erlangen, collection of manuscripts in the University library of, i,
    280

  Ernest, Elector of Saxony, ii, 233

  Ernst, Archbishop, ii, 229

  Erpenius, ii, 292, 296

  Estaples, d’, ii, 19

  Estiennes, the, history of, ii, 15 _ff._

  Estienne, House of, ii, 87

  ---- Antoine, ii, 87

  ---- Charles, ii, 63 _ff._

  ---- Florence, ii, 88

  Estienne, Francis, ii, 62 _ff._

  ---- Henry (the elder), begins work as a printer, ii, 18 _ff._

  ---- Henry (the first), ii, 26

  ---- Henry (the second), ii, 37, 66 _ff._, 94; rhymed complaint of,
    on the difficulties of scholarly work, ii, 78

  ---- Paul, ii, 87, 95

  ---- Robert (the first), ii, 25 _ff._; first publications of, ii,
    30; motto of, ii, 30; appointed printer in Greek to the King, ii,
    33, 42; takes refuge at Court, ii, 34; divides the New Testament
    into verses, ii, 48; removes from Paris to Geneva, ii, 50; Geneva
    publications of, ii, 53, 54, 55; death of, ii, 55; eulogies on, ii,
    56, 254

  ---- Robert (second), ii, 64 _ff._

  Esslingen, early printing in, ii, 439

  Eusebius, praises the work of nuns as scribes, i, 53; reference of,
    to the chaining of books, i, 141

  Evelyn, John, ii, 298

  _Exemplatores_, functions of, i, 188

  _Exercitationes_ of Casaubon, ii, 98 _ff._


  F

  Faber, Johann, ii, 245

  Fabri, Felix, the _Historia Suevorum_, of, i, 369

  Fairs, in England, utilized by the dealers in manuscripts, i, 306; in
    Germany, manuscript-trade in the, i, 287

  Falstoffe, Sir John, ii, 116, 123

  Faques, William, printer to the King, ii, 467

  Fathers of the Church, Dutch editions of the writings of, ii, 331

  Felice, Fra, of Prato, ii, 355

  Fell, Bishop, memoir by, on the state of printing in Oxford, i, 310

  Ferdinand, Emperor, ii, 242 _ff._, 249

  Ferreol, Saint, the _Rule_ of, i, 63, 123

  Fichet, Wilhelm, letter of, concerning the invention of printing, i,
    359; ii, 5; the Rhetoric of, ii, 7

  Ficino, the writings of, i, 338 _ff._

  Field, Richard, ii, 146

  Fileas, the, an order of Celtic Bards, i, 48

  Filelfo, Francesco, i, 189; recovers in a book-shop a stolen volume,
    i, 234; reference of, to Melchior, i, 249; i, 335 _ff._

  Finnian, contention of, with Columba, i, 46

  Flach, Martin, i, 383

  Flamel, Nicholas, _librarius_ and speculator in real estate, i, 275

  Flanders, in its relations to the Protestants, ii, 258

  Fleury, describes the Abbey of Gembloux, i, 97; the Abbey schools of,
    i, 118

  Florence, the University of, i, 183 _ff._; gives special attention to
    belles-lettres, i, 184; the Humanists of, i, 184; takes the lead in
    the trade in manuscripts, i, 239; the earlier book-dealers of, i,
    246; the literary activities of, i, 318; the literary society of,
    i, 327 _ff._; the academies of, i, 344; early printers of, i, 457

  _Flugschriften_, the, of the Reformation, ii, 162, 241 _ff._

  Foligno, early printers of, i, 456

  Fontaine, the monastery of, founded, i, 47

  Fontainebleau, Royal Library of, ii, 14

  Fosbroke, classifies monastic catalogues, i, 142

  Foscari, Doge of Venice, ii, 373

  Fox, John, _Book of Martyrs_ of, ii, 143

  France, the Abbey schools in, i, 118; the manuscript-trade in, i,
    255 _ff._; early printers of, ii, 2 _ff._; regulations for the
    printing-press in, ii, 437; legislation in, for the encouragement
    of literature, ii, 446 _ff._; summary of the privileges in, ii, 491
    _ff._; takes the initiative in regard to the Convention of Berne,
    ii, 506; summary of copyright legislation in, ii, 508

  Francheschi, Pietro, ii, 403

  Francis I., relations of the literature and the clergy, ii, 6, 7;
    founds Royal Library at Fontainebleau, ii, 14; at issue with the
    Doctors of the Sorbonne, ii, 19 _ff._; protects Robert Estienne
    against the royal censors, ii, 34; 38, 42, 43, 45, 57, 70, 324;
    relations of, with the reformers, ii, 444; edict of, in regard to
    privileges, ii, 447 _ff._

  Franco, Bishop of Treviso, ii, 372 _ff._

  Frankfort, first sale of printed books in the fair of, i, 288;
    magistracy of, protects the publishing contracts of Schöffer, i,
    377; the book-fair of, ii, 247, 265, 302 _ff._ 365, 416; relations
    of the Elzevirs with, ii, 302 _ff._; ordinance of the city of
    concerning privileges, ii, 414

  ---- and the Thirty Years’ War, ii, 498

  Frankland, the demoralisation of, before the time of Charlemagne, i,
    110

  Franz, biographer of Cassiodorus, cited, i, 24

  Fredegar, The _Chronicle_ of, i, 128

  Frederic, Elector of Saxony, i, 432; orders books for Wittenberg, i,
    432

  Frederick I., Landgrave of Alsace, ii, 423

  ---- II., The Emperor, i, 183

  ---- III. of Germany, institutes the office of imperial supervisor of
    literature, ii, 419

  Free-thinkers and the Church of Rome, i, 333

  _Free Will_, treatise on, by Erasmus, ii, 209

  Fregeno, secures in Sweden, Roman manuscripts, i, 229

  Freising, Otto von, cited, i, 43

  French, as a literary language for Europe, ii, 504

  Friese, Ulrich, a bookseller at the Nordlingen fair, i, 283

  Frilo, father of Gutenberg, i, 357

  Froben, Jerome, son of Johann, ii, 213

  ---- Johann, i, 393; scholarly attainments of, i, 393; relations with
    Erasmus, i, 393 _ff._; ii, 39, 102, 178 _ff._, 244 _ff._, 429;
    letter of, to Zwingli, ii, 187; the literary friends of, ii, 188
    _ff._; gives up the publishing of the writings of Luther, ii, 221;
    the death of, ii, 210

  Frodoard, i, 56

  Froissart, ii, 117

  Fromund of Tegernsee, i, 68

  Froschauer, Printer for Zwingli, i, 396; ii, 141

  Froude, on the patronage system, ii, 197

  Frowin, manuscript of, i, 43

  Fryth, John, ii, 140

  Fugger, The House of, i, 431; bankers and forwarders, i, 431

  ----, Huldric, ii, 68 _ff._

  ----, Joannes Jacobus, ii, 69

  Furnivall’s _Captain Cox_, ii, 145

  Fust, Johann, first relations of, with Gutenberg, i, 360, 372;
    lawsuit of, i, 360 _ff._; relations of, with Schöffer, i, 372;
    first journey of, to Paris, i, 373; the earliest pirate of printed
    books, i, 375; death of, in 1467, i, 375; sells his Bibles in
    Paris, ii, 5

  Fust and Schöffer, earliest publications of, i, 373


  G

  Gaddesden, John of, i, 308

  Gaillard, ii, 40

  Galeotti, J., importer of manuscripts, i, 242

  Galileo, ii, 309

  Garland, Jean de, compiles a directory of the industries of Paris, i,
    256

  Gasparino, the _Letters_ of, ii, 7

  Gaul, literature in, during fifth century, i, 7

  Gaza, Theodore, Greek editor for the Aldine Press, i, 420, ii, 23

  Geneva, ii, 38, 50; University of, ii, 51; literary interests of, ii,
    51; censorship regulations of, ii, 51; pirates of, ii, 51; great
    siege of, ii, 88; theology of, ii, 91; literature of, ii, 91 _ff._;
    publishing activities of, ii, 93

  Gengenbach, dramatist and printer, i, 395

  Genoa, contests in, between the copyists and the printers, i, 413;
    early printers of, i, 458; the scribes of, protest against the
    introduction of printing, i, 459

  Gensfleisch, the family of (Gutenberg), i, 356 _ff._

  Geoffrey of St. Barbe, letter of, i, 133

  George, Duke of Saxony, puts the Protestant printers of Leipzig under
    restrictions, i, 401; ii, 232, 250

  George, Elector of Saxony, ii, 424

  Gerbert, Abbot of Bobbio, cited, i, 38; orders books from a distance,
    i, 139, 140; collects books for his libraries, i, 231; ii, 480

  Gering, printer of Paris, ii, 5

  German, book-trade, organization of the, ii, 497; universities in the
    15th century, standard of scholarship in, i, 277

  Germany, the monastic schools in, i, 118; manuscript dealers in, i,
    276 _ff._; privileges and regulations in, ii, 407 _ff._; summary
    of privileges in, ii, 493 _ff._; in its relations to literary
    property, ii, 505

  Gerson, Johann, Chancellor of University of Paris, i, 54; describes
    the literary wealth of Paris, i, 261; ii, 150

  Gertrude, Abbess of Nivelle, a buyer of books, i, 51, 53

  Gerwold, Abbot of S. Wandrille, i, 67

  Gesner, ii, 56, 432

  _Gesta Romanorum_, said to have originated in England, i, 304;
    edition of the, printed by A. Koberger, ii, 161

  Ghent, the Pacification of, ii, 273

  Ghisebrecht, ii, 277

  Gibbon criticises Caxton, ii, 127, 128

  Giesebrecht, treatise of _De litterarum Studiis_, i, 226

  Gildas, _Chronicles_ of, i, 55

  Giovanni, Saint, the library of, in Naples, i, 146

  Giraud, C., cited, i, 55

  Gita, a scribe of Schwarzenthau, i, 54

  Giunta, the family of, i, 248

  ----, Phillippo, i, 238

  Glaber, Raoul, i, 56

  Glanville, i, 308

  Glastonbury, Chapel of, i, 106

  Godo, purchases books in Rome, i, 227

  _Golden Legend, The_, ii, 118

  Gosselin, ii, 95

  Goths, rule of, in Italy, i, 9

  Gourmont, Giles, printer of Paris, ii, 10 _ff._; publications of, ii,
    23

  Gower, John, ii, 117, 126

  Graevius, on the death of Louis Elzevir (the second), ii, 318

  Grafton, printer, ii, 141

  Greek, the knowledge of, in the tenth century, i, 127; books,
    printing of, limited to a few publishers, i, 244; immigrants, as
    instructors in Italy, i, 236; fonts of the _Imprimerie Royale_, ii,
    58 _ff._; lecturers in University of Paris, ii, 23; literature,
    brought to Europe through Arabian writers, i, 181; literature,
    introduction of, into Italy, i, 236; literature, in Paris, ii, 10
    _ff._; manuscripts brought from Constantinople to Italy, i, 235

  Greek Press in Paris, history of the, ii, 10 _ff._

  Greek scholars, relations of, with Venice and with Florence, i,
    237; secure compensation in Italy for editorial work, i, 411; as
    assistants to publishers, i, 416; in Paris, ii, 23

  Greek texts, brought to Venice from the East, i, 411 _ff._; in the
    University of Paris, ii, 22

  Gregoriis, Gregorius de, ii, 354

  Gregoropoulos, Greek proof-reader for Aldus, i, 421

  Gregory I., Pope, writings of, i, 34, 35; charges against, i, 34;
    opinion of, concerning the Scriptures and grammar, i, 121; as an
    author, ii, 478

  ---- VII., utilises the work of monastic scribes, i, 81-82

  ---- XIII., ii, 262

  ---- of Tours, i, 56

  Grein, _Anglo-Saxon Library_, by, i, 92

  Grimani, the breviary of, i, 294

  Grimlaïcus, the _Rule_ of, i, 123

  Grimm, Siegmund, publisher for Hutten, ii, 229

  Grolier de Servier, ii, 43

  Groote, Gerhard, founds in Deventer a Brotherhood House, i, 88

  Grotius, ii, 65, 304; the _Mare Liberum_ of, ii, 308

  Grunenberg, Johann, publisher for Luther, ii, 222

  Grüninger, Hans, of Strasburg, ii, 151, 165

  Gruthuyse, of Bruges, a collector of manuscripts, i, 289; ii, 105

  Guignes, de, ii, 60

  Guild, of printers and publishers, in Milan, i, 450 _ff._; of S.
    John in Bruges, ii, 106; of publishers and printers in Paris,
    regulations of, ii, 453 _ff._; of printers and book-sellers in
    Venice, ii, 364 _ff._; of the Venetian book-trade, organisation of,
    ii, 395 _ff._; of the Venetian book-trade, close of the history of,
    ii, 398; Hall, for the Venetian book-trade, ii, 395

  Guiscard, Robert, i, 182

  Guldemund, Hans, ii, 410

  Gutenberg, i, 9, 349 _ff._; earlier operations of, i, 358; first
    partnerships of, i, 358; lawsuits of, i, 358 _ff._; conditions of
    the business of, i, 364; financial difficulties of, i, 364 _ff._;
    fonts of type manufactured by, i, 365; early testimony concerning
    the invention of, i, 380; ii, 17, 178


  H

  Hagen, quotes a rhyming record from a Hagenau manuscript, i, 285

  Hagenau, early manuscript-trade of, i, 284; printing introduced into,
    i, 284; relations of, with Heidelberg, i, 284 _ff._

  Hahn, printer of Ingolstadt and of Rome, i, 406

  Hallam, on Saumaise, ii, 315

  Hamburg, manuscript-dealers of, i, 283; caution of the Senate of,
    concerning dedications, ii, 434

  Hans, the brothers, ii, 425

  Hardy, Thomas Duffus, on the literary work of the British
    monasteries, i, 102

  Harlinde, Abbess, skilled as a scribe, i, 53

  Harper, the House of, ii, 335

  Harsy, Antoine de, ii, 94

  Hatzlern, Clara, scribe of Augsburg, i, 41

  Hauslik, history of the University of Prague, i, 278

  Hedwig, Duchess of Suabia, teaches Greek to Abbot Burckhart, i, 126

  Hegel, _Philosophy of History_ of, quoted, i, 367

  Heidelberg, the library of, i, 85; books bought for the library of,
    i, 232; book-trade in the University of, i, 279

  Heilsbrunn, manuscripts from the monastery of, i, 280

  Heinsius, Nicholas, ii, 298, 310, 313 _ff._, 317

  Helgaud, i, 56

  Hellenic Brothers, the, of St. Gall, i, 126

  Henry II. of France, ii, 48, 56, 70; letters-patent of, i, 203

  ---- III., ii, 82 _ff._

  ---- IV., ii, 95 _ff._

  ---- VI. of England, death of, ii, 129; interest of, in printing in
    England, ii, 135

  ---- VII., ii, 123

  ---- VIII., ii, 45, 141

  Heresbach, ii, 41

  Heresy, the Venetian Commissioners of, ii, 404

  Herluca, corresponds with Diemude, i, 54

  Hermonymus, a designer of type in Paris, ii, 10, 23

  Herneis, publisher of Paris in the thirteenth century, i, 271

  Herodotus, History of, ii, 73

  Herrad of Landsberg, writings of, i, 52

  Herrgott, Johann, ii, 249

  Heynlin, ii, 5, 111

  Higden, Ralph, the _Polychronicon_ of, i, 56, 307

  Hilary, works of, edited by Erasmus, ii, 209

  Hilda, Abbess of Whitby, i, 93

  Hildesheim, the Brothers of, producers of books, i, 90

  Hiltebrand, Johann, ii, 231

  Hippocrates and Galen, described as the “Aristotles of Medicine,” i,
    195; writings of, used as text-books, i, 195

  Hochstraten, ii, 202

  Hodgkin, Thomas, _Italy and her Invaders_, cited, i, 3 _ff._;
    summarises the services of Cassiodorus, i, 23, 24

  Hoeck, Adolph von, Prior of Scheda, i, 86

  Holbein, Hans, ii, 10, 180, 181, 200

  Holland, the increasing trade of, ii, 290 _ff._; book-trade of,
    during the Thirty Years’ War, ii, 498

  Hollybushe, John, ii, 142

  Honoratus, Saint, founds Monastery of Lerin, i, 32

  Honorius, opinion of, concerning the philosophers, i, 129

  Hopyll, Wolffgang, printer of Paris, ii, 18

  Horn, Conrad, _stadtschreiber_, sells books by contract, i, 288

  Hroswitha, daughter of Duke of Saxony, i, 52

  ---- of Gandersheim, i, 37, 52; the _Chronicon Urspergense_ of, i,
    87, 360; the dramas of, ii, 414, 420

  Hubmayer, Balthasar, ii, 243

  Hugh, Abbot of Flavigny, i, 57

  Hugo of Trimberg, schoolmaster and book collector, i, 287

  ----, Cardinal, ii, 157

  ---- Bible, the, ii, 154, 157 _ff._, 167

  Humanistic Movement, influence of the, on the production of printed
    literature, i, 370 _ff._; the leaders of the, ii, 226

  Humanists, the influence of the, in the German universities, i, 223;
    ii, 172

  Humery, Doctor Conrad, of Mayence, i, 292; co-operates with
    Gutenberg, i, 361 _ff._

  Hummelsburger, letter of, concerning Aldine editions, i, 436

  Hungarians, destroy monasteries in the tenth century, i, 132

  Hunt, Thomas, ii, 137

  Huntington, Henry of, _Chronicles_, i, 56, 307

  Huszner, George, i, 383

  Hutten, Ulrich von, ii, 176, 182, 227, 239

  ---- and Luther, ii, 251


  I

  Ibo, Bishop of Chartres, treatise of, _De Rebus Ecclesiasticis_, i,
    117

  Idung, the _Dialogues_ of, i, 54

  Illuminators, of manuscripts, i, 241

  Illustrated publications, early editions of, issued in Nuremberg, i,
    398

  Imperial cities, special privileges of, concerning book production,
    ii, 422 _ff._

  Imperial Commission for the regulation of literature, ii, 421

  Ina, King, i, 106

  _Index Expurgatorius_ of Louvain, ii, 44

  _Index_, the, of 1564, ii, 243

  _Index_, the, and the book-trade, ii, 372 _ff._

  _Index_, the, issued by the Council of Trent, ii, 375 _ff._

  _Indexes_, the, of 1546, 1550, 1551, 1554, 1559, ii, 268 _ff._, 275

  Ingolstadt, regulations of the University of, concerning text-books,
    i, 281

  Ingulphus, _Chronicles_ of, i, 56; record of, concerning the Abbey of
    Peterborough, i, 132

  Innocent IV., Pope, i, 183

  Inquisition, the, and censorship, ii, 267; relations of, with the
    printing-press, ii, 371

  Iona, the monastery of, founded, i, 47, 90

  Irnerius, jurist of Bologna, i, 183

  Isidore, Bishop of Seville, writings of, i, 35; treatise of, on
    elocution, i, 117

  Italian literature, influence of, on Elizabethan authors, ii, 144

  Italy, the monastic schools in, i, 118; monasteries in, destroyed
    by the Saracens, i, 132; the printer-publishers of, i, 403 _ff._;
    privileges and censorship in, ii, 343 _ff._; enactments concerning
    literary property in, ii, 406


  J

  Jacob of Breslau, volumes written by, i, 86

  Jacob, Saint, monastery of, in Liége, i, 114

  James I., ii, 96 _ff._

  Jehan, Jacques, grocer and book-seller, i, 274

  Jenson, Nicholas, first printer in Venice, i, 407; operations of,
    in Paris and in Mayence, i, 408; settles in Venice, i, 409; sells
    printing plant to Torresano, i, 411; sent to Mayence by Charles
    VII., ii, 2; 344

  Jerome, Saint, writings of, i, 3, 23, 32; ii, 189; befriends S. Paula
    and her daughter, i, 51; injunction of, concerning reading, i, 124;
    complains of the untrustworthiness of the work of scribes, i, 229

  Jews, forbidden to buy or sell manuscripts in the Italian
    universities, i, 194; lend moneys to monasteries on pledges of
    books, i, 231

  Jewell, John, ii, 53

  John, Bishop of Aleria, cites prices of early printed books, i, 375

  ----, King of France, buys stationery in England, i, 312

  ---- of Speyer, printer of Venice, i, 407 _ff._; secures a monopoly
    for printing in Venice, i, 408

  Jordæus, treatise on the Goths, i, 19

  Junius, Hadrian, historian of Koster, i, 352

  Jusserand, J. J., on the early literature of the Anglo-Saxons, i, 91;
    _English Wayfaring Life_, by, cited, i, 302 _ff._


  K

  Kalle, Samuel, ii, 425

  Kapp, on the selling of dedications, ii, 433

  Karoch, instructor in Erfurt, i, 220

  Kefer, Heinrich, ii, 150

  Kennett, White, ii, 63

  Kessler, Nicholas, of Basel, relations of, with Koberger, ii, 409

  Kirchhoff, on the selling of dedications, ii, 434

  Knight, Charles, _The Old Printer_ of, cited, i, 302 _ff._

  Knittel, concerning the work of the _scriptorium_, cited, i, 65

  Kobergers, the, of Nuremberg, ii, 149 _ff._; business of, interfered
    with by the Reformation, ii, 163

  Koberger, Anthoni, i, 384; the publications of, i, 397 _ff._; ii,
    76, 149 _ff._; principal publications of, ii, 152, 154; commended
    by Badius, Wimpfeling, Leontorius, and the Emperor Maximilian, ii,
    155, 156; friendship of, with Amerbach, ii, 156; relations of, with
    Celtes, Dürer, and Pirckheimer, ii, 156; editions of the Bible
    printed by, ii, 157, 158; conservatism of, ii, 204; relations of,
    to the system of privileges in Germany, ii, 409

  ----, Johannes, ii, 159

  ----, Melchior, relations of, with Luther, ii, 159

  Koelhoff, Johann, printer of Cologne, i, 388

  Koepke, _Otton. Studien_, cited, i, 36 _ff._

  König, Conrad, agent for Luther’s books, ii, 231

  Köpflin, ii, 245

  Köster, Laurens, of Harlem, i, 349 _ff._; the statue of, ii, 298

  Krantz, printer of Paris, ii, 5, 111

  Kyrfoth, Carolus, ii, 137


  L

  LaCasa, Papal Nuncio, ii, 373

  Lachner, ii, 179, 232

  Landino, the writings of, i, 340

  Lanfranc, i, 197

  Langendorf of Basel prints piracy editions of Luther’s writings, i,
    395

  Large, Robert, ii, 102

  Laskaris, Greek grammarian, i, 365; ii, 23

  Latin, the language of literature for Europe, i, 318; ii, 503

  LaTrappe, the Order of, i, 120

  Lauber, Diebold, scribe and manuscript dealer in Hagenau, i, 284
    _ff._; noteworthy manuscripts of, i, 289; rhyming advertisements
    of, i, 289

  Laurentium, the monastery of, in Liége, i, 87

  Laurie, summarises the Christian conception of education, i, 120

  Lavagna, printer of Milan, i, 408, 447

  Law, Roman and canonical, the study of, in Bologna, i, 190

  ---- text-books required in Bologna and Montpellier, i, 194

  Lay-clerics, functions of, i, 38

  League, influence of the wars of the, on the supervision of the
    Press, ii, 450

  _Lectores_, the work of, i, 116

  Leew, Gerard, ii, 134

  LeFevre, (d’Estaples), ii, 19

  LeGrand, Jaques, ii, 119

  Leipzig, the earlier printers of, i, 399; ii, 29, 202; as a centre
    for the distribution of printed books, i, 401; the book fair of,
    ii, 303, 426; as a centre of book production, ii, 422 _ff._;
    the literary commission of, ii, 423; caution of magistracy of,
    concerning dedications, ii, 434

  Leland, catalogue prepared by, of the abbatial libraries of England,
    i, 102

  Leo, Bishop of Ostia, i, 57

  Leo X., Pope, sends emissaries to collect manuscripts, i, 301; the
    literary interests of, i, 322; relations of, with the earlier
    printers, i, 368; excommunicates Luther, ii, 225; Bull of, in
    regard to the licencing of books, ii, 439

  LeRoys, printer of Lyons, ii, 10

  Lerin, monastery of, founded by Honoratus, i, 32

  Leukardis, a scribe of Mallesdorf, i, 54

  Lewis, a scribe of Wessobrunn, i, 75

  Leyden, the University of, ii, 280 _ff._; as a publishing centre, ii,
    286; the Press of University of, ii, 297; the University in its
    relations with publishing, ii, 336

  Liaupold, Brother, i, 39, 54

  _Libraires jurés_, regulations concerning the, i, 207 _ff._; of
    Paris, ii, 365

  _Librairie_, origin of the term, i, 189

  _Librariers Gild_ of Ghent and of Brussels, i, 290

  Libraries of the monasteries, the, and their arrangements for the
    exchange of books, i, 133 _ff._; of the manuscript period, i, 146
    _ff._

  _Librarii_, i, 10; of Paris, regulations concerning, i, 260 _ff._; of
    Paris in the 15th century, i, 269 _ff._

  Ligugé, monastery of, founded, i, 32

  Linacre, Sir Thomas, ii, 194

  Lincoln, manuscript-dealers of, i, 312

  Lioba, Saint, a pupil of S. Boniface, organises schools in North
    Germany, i, 51

  Lipsius, ii, 281, 284

  Listrius, Gerard, ii, 200

  _Litera Romana_, i, 67

  Literary property, in England, beginnings of, ii, 464 _ff._;
    development of the conception of, ii, 477 _ff._; diverse theories
    concerning, ii, 507 _ff._; in Italy, enactments concerning, ii, 406

  Literature, beginnings of property in, ii, 343 _ff._

  Locke, on the death of Daniel Elzevir, ii, 319

  Longarard, the unintelligible writings of, i, 45

  Longinus, Vincenzo, relations of, with Aldus, i, 435

  Lotter, printer of Leipzig, i, 400 _ff._ Melchior, first printer of
    Wittenberg, i, 401; ii, 230 _ff._; 430

  Louis the Débonnaire, i, 97

  ---- IX., pays for transcribing an Encyclopædia, i, 230

  ---- XI., borrows books from the University of Paris, i, 136; lays
    claim to the estate of a publisher, i, 270; in 1474, pledges silver
    for the loan of a manuscript, i, 299; a collector of books, ii, 4;
    recognises the library of the Louvre, ii, 4; intervenes for the
    protection of Schöffer, ii, 8; institutes the Parliament of Paris,
    ii, 441

  ---- XII., edict of, in behalf of booksellers, ii, 6; interest of, in
    printing, ii, 6; toleration of, for heretical literature, ii, 6

  ---- XIV., ii, 318; relations of, to literature, ii, 458 _ff._

  Louvain, _Index Expurgatorius_ of, ii, 44; the University of, ii,
    258; theologians of, ii, 261; the _Indexes_ of, ii, 268 _ff._; the
    University of, in its relations to censorship, ii, 373

  Lowell, on Socinians, ii, 53

  Lübeck, book sales in the churches of, i, 283

  Lucca, early printers of, i, 455

  Luden, concerning the printing-press of Germany, ii, 427

  Lufft, Hans, claims copyright in Luther’s Bible, ii, 235

  Lupus, Abbot, orders transcripts prepared in York, i, 229

  Luther, complaints of, concerning the piracy editions of his works,
    i, 402; ii, 408; heresies of, condemned at the Council of Sens, ii,
    22, 26, 45; relations of, with the Kobergers, ii, 159; Froben’s
    edition of the writings of, ii, 190 _ff._; as an author, ii, 216
    _ff._; the published writings of, ii, 219 _ff._; completes his
    version of the New Testament, ii, 225; Catechism of, printed in
    Slovenic, ii, 230; compensation paid to, for his literary work, ii,
    232; letter of, to Lang, ii, 245; and the war of the peasants, ii,
    250; and von Hutten, ii, 251; the _Table-talk_ of, ii, 429; on the
    compensation of authors, ii, 431

  Lutheran tracts printed in out-of-the-way places, ii, 248

  Luxeuil, the monastery of, founded, i, 47

  Lydgate, John, ii, 116 _ff._

  Lyons, early printers of, ii, 8 _ff._; a publishing centre for light
    literature, ii, 9 _ff._; printers of, “appropriate” the productions
    of Paris and other cities, ii, 9, 495; publishing activities of,
    ii, 93


  M

  Mabillon, Jean, treatise of, on monastic studies, i, 120; work of, in
    behalf of the Benedictines, i, 122, 123; literary journeys of, i,
    123; on the prices of books during the Middle Ages, i, 135

  Machiavelli, _The Prince_ of, ii, 202

  Madan’s _Early Oxford Press_, ii, 134

  Magdeburg, as a publishing centre, ii, 229, 248

  _Magdeburg Centuries_, ii, 97

  Maintenon, Madame de, relations of, to ecclesiastical censorship, ii,
    461

  Maitland, _The Dark Ages_, cited, i, 31 _ff._; opinion of, concerning
    palimpsests, i, 72; describes the arrangements of the _scriptoria_,
    i, 75; on the book production of the Middle Ages, i, 77, 78;
    calculation of, concerning the speed of the work of the scribes, i,
    98; criticises Robinson’s description of the Church in the Middle
    Ages, i, 117; points out the inaccuracies of Milner, i, 130; on the
    prices of books in the Middle Ages, i, 135; analyses the value of
    MSS., i, 137

  Maittaire, Bibliography of, ii, 22, 25 _ff._, 40

  Makkari, historian of the Mohammedan dynasties, i, 255

  Malmesbury, William of, The _Chronicles_ of, i, 56; writes life of
    Aldhelm, i, 97; his account of the chapel at Glastonbury, i, 106;
    collector of books, i, 307

  Malory, Sir Thomas, ii, 118, 126

  Manenti of Urbino, copyright secured by, ii, 348

  Mansfield, Lord, ii, 473

  Mansion, Colart, or Colard, _escripvain_ and printer, i, 289; ii, 102
    _ff._

  Manuscript, the earliest existing example of monastic scribe-work, i,
    34

  Manuscripts, trade in, in Bologna, i, 184; formalities connected
    with the sale of, in Paris, i, 212; the trade in, carried on by
    pedlars, grocers, and mercers, i, 232; production of, continued
    after the invention of printing, i, 243; Moorish trade in, i, 254;
    illuminated with the arms of noble families, i, 268; copyright in,
    ii, 481 _ff._

  Manuscript-dealers, the historians of the, i, 180; of Italy, i, 244
    _ff._; of Germany, i, 276 _ff._; of Paris, i, 256 _ff._

  Manuscript period in England, the i, 302 _ff._

  Manuscript-trade, of the Brothers of Common Life, i, 291 _ff._; of
    France, i, 255 _ff._; of Germany, i, 287, 291; of the Netherlands,
    i, 290 _ff._; of London, in the 14th century, i, 312 _ff._

  Manutius, Paul, inherits business of his father, i, 438; settles in
    Rome, i, 440; letters of, to his son Aldus, i, 441; journeys to
    Milan, i, 444; completes his commentaries on Cicero, i, 444; death
    of, i, 445; coöperation of, with Plantin, ii, 264

  Map, Walter, _De Nugis Curiatum_ of, i, 304

  Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy, ii, 103, 122, 126

  Margounios, Maximus, ii, 377

  Marguerite de Valois, ii, 46

  _Mariegole_, or by-laws of the Venetian Guild, ii, 366 _ff._

  Marillac, ii, 40

  Marloratus, ii, 70

  Marmontier, monastery of, founded, i, 32

  Marquard, Abbot, pawns the library of his Abbey, i, 232

  Marsam, Jehan de, master of arts and dealer in manuscripts, i, 273

  Marsham, cited, i, 55

  Martene and Montfaucon, the literary journeys of, i, 131

  Martyr, Peter, ii, 53

  Mary, Saint, of Robert’s Bridge, inscription in a manuscript from, i,
    73

  Mary, Queen of Scots, ii, 66

  Mascon, Bishop of, ii, 44

  Maseyk, the nuns of, i, 53

  Massimi, the brothers, introduce printing into Rome, i, 405

  Massmann, _Die Goth. Urkunden von Neapel_, etc., cited, i, 43

  Mathesius, ii, 228

  Maximilian, the Emperor, befriends Reuchlin, ii, 203

  ---- II., relations of, to book privileges, ii, 422 _ff._

  Mayence, connection of, with the origin of printing, i, 358 _ff._;
    the sack of, by Adolph of Nassau, i, 362, 372; printers driven
    from, i, 372

  Medici, the, purchased books from scribes, i, 240

  ----, Cosimo de’, i, 322; institutes libraries, i, 328; founds the
    Platonic Academy, i, 328

  ----, Lorenzo de’, i, 338

  Meerman, reference of, to Koster, i, 354

  Melanchthon, Philip, ii, 231, 238 _ff._

  Melania, Saint, makes a living as a scribe, i, 33; founds convent at
    Tagaste, i, 33; beauty of transcripts of, i, 53

  Melchior, Abbot, founds printing-office in Augsburg, i, 87;
    manuscript-dealer, i, 249

  Mellin, Réclus, ii, 446

  Memmingen, caution of the burgomaster of, concerning dedications, ii,
    434

  Ménage, ii, 312

  Mendicant monks, work of, in copying and distributing books, i, 84;
    libraries of, i, 148

  Mensing, Doctor, ii, 229

  Mentel, Johann, printer of Strasburg, i, 375, 381 _ff._

  Mercers’ Company, the, of London, ii, 122

  Metal workers, relations of the, to early printers, ii, 164

  Metz, Cathedral of, as a resort for booksellers, i, 283

  Milan, the manuscript-trade of, i, 228, 241; literature at the
    Court of, i, 334; the printing, publishing, and bookselling Guild
    of, i, 450 _ff._; various activities of, i, 446 _ff._; the first
    printing in, i, 447; Publishing Association of, i, 448 _ff._; the
    regulations of Printers’ Guild of, i, 453

  _Millar vs. Taylor_, ii, 472, 505

  Milner, the historian, criticised by Maitland, i, 130

  Milton, John, _Paradise Lost_, possibly suggested by Cædmon’s _Revolt
    of Satan_, i, 93; agreement of, for publication of _Paradise Lost_,
    ii, 147; the _Defensio Populi Anglicani_ of, ii, 308; on the
    liberty of the printing-press, ii, 474 _ff._

  Minner, Johann, _scriptor_, i, 288

  Minorite Order, literary work of, i, 84

  Minutianus, professor and printer, i, 447

  Mirandola, Pico della, i, 339

  Mocenigo, Andrea, ii, 357

  Modena, Statutes of the High School of, concerning the book-trade, i,
    189

  Mohammedan states, literary activity in, i, 180

  Monasteries, Irish and Scotch, founded by S. Columba, i, 45-47

  Monastery cells, the severe temperature of, i, 64

  ---- schools, the earlier, i, 106

  Monk, Roger, ii, 117

  Monks, of England, literary work of the, i, 90

  Monkish chroniclers of England, i, 55-60, 307 _ff._

  Monmouth, Geoffrey of, _Chronicles_ of, i, 56, 307

  Monopolies conceded by Venice to earlier printers, i, 408

  Mons Castellius, monastery of, i, 21

  Montalembert, _The Monks of the West_, cited, i, 30 _ff._

  Montanus, Arius, ii, 260 _ff._

  Monte Cassino, monastery of, founded, i, 10, 182

  Montfaucon, cited, i, 42 _ff._; quoted by Robertson, i, 72; the
    literary journeys of Martene and, i, 130

  Montpellier, the book-dealers of the University of, i, 266 _ff._; the
    Press of, ii, 92

  Moors, destroy monasteries in Spain, i, 132

  More, Sir Thomas, ii, 130, 194, 200; prints books in Basel, i, 395

  Morel, Frederic, ii, 25

  Moretto, Antonio, ii, 351

  Moretus, John, ii, 283

  Morhart, Ulrich, ii, 230

  Morier, on the prices of MSS. in Persia, i, 136

  Morosini, Andrea, historian of Venice, ii, 387

  Morrhius (Campensis), ii, 24

  _Morte d’Arthur_, ii, 118

  Moulins, ordinance of, ii, 450

  Mount Athos, the monastery of, i, 146

  Mountjoy, Lord, ii, 215

  Mühlberg, battle of, ii, 421

  Mullinger, summarises the _Apostolic Constitutions_, i, 121

  Münster as a publishing centre, ii, 248 _ff._

  Muratori, the _Chronicles_ of, i, 57; reference of, to books
    presented to churches, i, 137; concerning the monastery collection
    of books, i, 138

  Murbach, the monastery of, i, 83

  Mure, Conrad de, i, 40

  Muretus, ii, 67

  Murner, Thomas, ii, 183, 431

  Murray, the House of, ii, 335

  Musurus, Marcus, appointed professor of Greek, i, 416; appointed
    censor by the Venetian Senate, i, 422; script of, utilised as a
    model for Greek type, ii, 347; censor of Greek books in Venice, ii,
    356

  Mutianus, the work of, at Erfurt, i, 223

  Myrop, C., ii, 305


  N

  Nantes, the edict of, ii, 451 _ff._

  Naples, the University of, i, 182; the Academy of, i, 344

  Napoleon and the freedom of the printing-press, ii, 427 _ff._

  Navagero, Andrea, appointed censor for the literature of the
    Humanities, ii, 356

  Néobar, (or Neobarius), Conrad, appointed royal printer in Greek, ii,
    33, 42, 448

  Neri, S. Philip, ii, 97

  Neudorffer, J., ii, 150

  Nevelo, works of penance in the _scriptorium_, i, 70

  _New Testament_, the paraphrase of, by Erasmus, ii, 207

  Niccoli, Niccolo de’, funeral oration upon, i, 240; bequeaths books
    to Florence, i, 240

  Niceron, ii, 46

  Nicholas, l’Anglois, bookseller and tavern-keeper in Paris, in the
    fourteenth century, i, 272

  ---- of Breslau, printer and engraver of Florence, i, 458

  ---- V., Pope, i, 329 _ff._

  Nicholson, John, ii, 142

  Niclaes, ii, 266

  Nicolai, publisher of Berlin, ii, 417

  Niedermünster, the nuns of, famed as scribes, i, 54

  Noailles, Cardinal de, ii, 462

  Nordlingen Fair, the book-trade of, i, 283; first sale of printed
    books in the, i, 287

  Normans, ravages of, in the Benedictine monasteries, i, 132; piracies
    of the, i, 231

  Notker, of St. Gall, writes to the Bishop of Sitten, i, 39, 229

  Novantula, monastery of, burned by the Hungarians, i, 132; the
    manuscripts of, i, 131

  Numeister, printer of Mayence and of Foligno, i, 456

  Nuns as scribes, i, 51-55

  Nuremberg, the printer-publishers of, i, 397 _ff._; and the writings
    of Luther, ii, 236; piracy editions issued in, ii, 236; edict of,
    ii, 242; censorship in, ii, 243


  O

  Obscene literature and the papal censorship, i, 333

  Odo, Abbot of Clugni, i, 129

  ----, Abbot of Tournai, i, 67, 77

  Œcolampadius, ii, 23

  Offa, King, gives a Bible to the church at Worcester, i, 97

  Olbert, Abbot of Gembloux, i, 97; transcribes the Old and the New
    Testaments, i, 98

  _Old Testament_, Luther’s version of the, ii, 233

  Olivier, _librarius_ of Paris, schedule of his book sales, i, 274

  Omons, work of, entitled _The Picture of the World_, i, 142

  Origen, Saint, literary work of, i, 32; the library of, in Cesarea,
    i, 147; requires the service of scribes, i, 228

  Orleans, literary interests of the dukes of, i, 268

  Orosius, a manuscript of, i, 43, 226

  Orphanage, publishing concern of Halle, ii, 425

  Össler, Jacob, appointed imperial supervisor of literature, ii, 419

  Othlo of Tegernsee, his work as a scribe, i, 64

  Othlonus, a scribe of S. Emmeram, i, 78, 79. (Same as Othlo.)

  Othmar, Sylvan, publisher for Luther, ii, 229

  Oxford, the University of, i, 181; early purchases of books for the
    libraries of, i, 306; early printing in, ii, 134 _ff._; first
    printers of, ii, 137

  Ozanam, _La Civilisation Chrétienne_ cited, i, 36 _ff._


  P

  Padua, the University of, i, 181, 421, ii, 348; regulations of
    the University of, concerning the book-trade, i, 188, 193;
    commissioners of the University of, appointed censors of Venetian
    publications, ii, 362 _ff._

  Paedts, Jean, ii, 294

  Palencia, the University of, i, 196

  Pallavicini, Cardinal, ii, 388

  Palm, publisher, shot by order of Napoleon, ii, 427

  Pannartz, Arnold, printer of Subiaco and of Rome, i, 405

  Panthoul, Macé, bookseller and paper-maker of Troyes, i, 276

  Panzer, ii, 12

  Papacy, claim of the, to the supervision of books in Venice, ii, 355
    _ff._

  Paper, first manufactured from rags, i, 409

  Paper-makers, relations of, with the early publishers, i, 237

  Paper-making in Italy, i, 409

  Paper manufacturers, the earlier work of, in France, i, 266;
    protected by University privileges, i, 266

  Papyrus, latest use of, i, 43, 44

  _Paradise Lost_, agreement for the publication of, ii, 147

  Paravisinus, printer of Milan, i, 447

  Parchment, the scarcity of, i, 70; used for palimpsests, i, 72;
    regulations for the sale of, in Paris, i, 204; costliness of, in
    the 14th and 15th centuries, i, 332

  Parchment-dealers in Paris, regulations concerning, i, 265

  Parentucelli, Tommaso, (Pope Nicholas V.), founds the Vatican
    Library, i, 329

  Paris, Matthew, _Chronicles_ of, i, 56, 69, 307; writes _Lives of the
    Two Offas_ and the _Chronicles_, i, 105

  ----, city of, in 1600, ii, 95; scribes of, i, 41; instructions
    of the Council of, concerning the lending of books, by the
    monasteries, i, 138; printed books first sold in, ii, 5; relations
    of the Elzevirs with, ii, 303 _ff._

  ----, the University of, i, 51, 181; foundation and constitution of
    the, i, 197 _ff._; regulations of, concerning the early book-trade,
    i, 201 _ff._; the earlier scribes in, i, 256; students of, 1524,
    ii, 28; censures the writings of Erasmus, ii, 210; publishes an
    _Index Expurgatorius_, ii, 373; relations of, to censorship of the
    Press, ii, 439 _ff._

  Parliament of Paris, relations of the, to the censorship of the
    Press, ii, 440 _ff._, 470 _ff._; contests of, with the Crown, ii,
    441; suppression of, ii, 441; relations of, with the book-trade,
    ii, 442

  Parrhasius, Janus, institutes the library of S. Giovanni, i, 146

  Paruta, contentions of, against the _Clementine Index_, ii, 377 _ff._

  Pasqualigo, ii, 370

  Passau, the library of, i, 228

  Patronage provides compensation for Italian writers, i, 334

  Pattison, Mark, ii, 27, 85 _ff._; analysis by, of the literary
    influence of Italy, France, Holland, and Germany, i, 346

  Paul, Abbot of St. Albans, i, 69

  ---- III., ii, 29

  ---- IV., issues an _Index_, ii, 374

  Paula, Saint, writes Hebrew and Greek, i, 51; assists S. Jerome in
    his writing, i, 51

  Paulsen, characterises the instruction in the mediæval universities,
    i, 223

  Pavia, the University of, i, 183

  Peasants, the war of the, ii, 250

  _Pecia_, definition of, i, 186

  _Peciarii_, functions of, i, 187

  Pedlars, regulations limiting the book-trade of, i, 213; as dealers
    in books, i, 232

  Pellican, Conrad, ii, 232

  Penalties for literary piracies in Venice, ii, 352

  _Pentateuch_, the, printed in Constantinople, ii, 260

  Penzi, Jacomo di, of Lecco, ii, 353

  Permit for publication, earliest record of, ii, 439

  Perugia, the early manuscript-dealers of, i, 249

  Peter of Blois, describes the manuscript collections of Paris, i, 256

  ---- of Celle, borrows books from S. Bernard, i, 143

  ---- the Venerable, Abbot of Clugni, i, 130; makes translation of the
    Koran, i, 145; correspondence of, i, 144, 145; orders books from
    Aquitaine, i, 144

  ---- of Bacharach, writes a _Schwabenspiegel_, i, 41

  ---- of Ravenna, ii, 439, 488

  Peterborough, the abbey of, burned by the Danes, i, 132

  Petrarch, appreciative reference of, to Aretinus, i, 246; the
    influence of, in behalf of the study of Greek, i, 323; as a
    collector of manuscripts, i, 324; script of, used as model for the
    type founders, i, 324

  Petri, Adam, of Basel, ii, 223, 225, 228

  ----, Heinrich, printer-publisher, of Basel, knighted by Charles V.,
    i, 395; sends books to Casaubon, ii, 90

  Pez, the _Chronicles_ of, cited, i, 39 _ff._

  _Phalaris_, the _Letters of_, ii, 351

  Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, a collector of books, i, 273;
    purchases manuscripts, shirts, hats, and more manuscripts, i, 274,
    275

  ---- the Fair of Burgundy, regulations of, concerning
    manuscript-dealers, i, 263; and the Parliament of Paris, ii, 441

  ---- the Good of Burgundy, ii, 105

  ---- II., of Spain, gives charter to the Milan printers’ guild, i,
    451; ii, 265, 284, 272; refuses to accept the _Tridentine Index_,
    ii, 382; and the Papal censorship, ii, 388

  ---- III. confirms the monopoly of the Milan printers’ guild, i, 454

  _Philobiblon_, of de Bury, cited, i, 308 _ff._

  Piacenza, the University of, i, 183

  Pio, Albert, Prince of Carpi, treatise of, against Erasmus, ii, 445

  Piracies, literary, regulations in Basel concerning, ii, 412

  Pirckheimer, translator of the _Geography_ of Ptolemy, i, 385 _ff._;
    ii, 151, 174, 165, 167

  Pius IV., Pope, calls Paul Manutius to Rome, i, 440

  ---- V., institutes the Congregation of the _Index_, ii, 377;
    relations of, with Paul Manutius, i, 442 _ff._

  Plantin, the House of, ii, 255 _ff._; publications of, ii, 259 _ff._

  ----, Christopher, ii, 255 _ff._; the Press of, ii, 76; relations of
    with Leyden, ii, 294; the _Bible_ of, ii, 334

  ---- Museum, the, ii, 283

  Plantinerus, purchasing agent for manuscripts, i, 242

  Plater, Thomas, ii, 238

  Poggio, funeral oration of, upon Niccoli, i, 240; translates the
    _Cyropaedia_, i, 329

  Poliziano, the writings of, i, 340

  Polliot, Etienne, ii, 449

  Pontchartrain, Chancellor of France, ii, 460 _ff._

  Porson, ii, 37

  Prague, the University of, i, 181; regulations for the copyists in
    the University of, i, 220; bookdealers in the University of, i, 278

  _Praise of Folly_, the first edition of, ii, 194

  Pratt, William, mercer and manuscript-dealer, i, 313; friend of
    Caxton, ii, 119, 123

  Prayer-book, first printed in England, ii, 142

  Premonstratensians, the regulations of, for the care of books, i, 148

  Press, the freedom of, in Venice, ii, 404

  Press-correctors, in the 16th century, ii, 165

  Preston, Thomas, the writings of, ii, 386

  Prices of Plantin’s publications, ii, 279

  Printers, early, in France, ii, 3 _ff._; of Paris, regulations for,
    in 1581, ii, 453 _ff._

  Printers’ Guild, of Venice, the, and Press legislation, ii, 394 _ff._

  Printing, the invention of, i, 348 _ff._; in France, ii, 3 _ff._; in
    Germany, begun for the benefit of the middle classes, i, 363; in
    Germany, initiated without the aid of princes, universities, or
    ecclesiastics, i, 378

  Printing undertakings, in Florence, Bologna, Milan, Rome, and Venice,
    up to 1500, i, 327

  Printing-press, service of the, for the Reformation, ii, 218; in
    France, regulations for the control of, ii, 437 _ff._

  Printing-presses, in Venice, at the close of the 16th century, ii,
    367; reduction in the number of, under the papal censorship, ii, 384

  Privileges, in England, ii, 465 _ff._, 468 _ff._; and regulations in
    Germany, ii, 407 _ff._; imperial, in Germany, ii, 416 _ff._; in
    Holland, ii, 332; and censorship in Italy, ii, 343 _ff._; the terms
    of, in Venice, ii, 350 _ff._; summary of, in Venice, ii, 486

  _Probi Vita_, cited, i, 9

  Procopius, history of the campaign of Belisarius, i, 20

  Property in literature, summary of the diverse theories concerning,
    ii, 507 _ff._

  Protestant tracts, distribution of, in Germany, ii, 249

  Proto-typographer, the, of the Netherlands, ii, 272 _ff._

  Prussia, book production in, ii, 425; earlier legislation of, in
    regard to copyright, ii, 506

  Publishers and printers in Paris, the guild of, ii, 453 _ff._

  Publishing, by subscription in England, ii, 436; methods in Germany,
    the earlier, i, 429 _ff._; in Venice, burdens upon, in the 17th
    century, ii, 393

  Puteanus, ii, 309

  Pütter, concerning privileges in Germany, ii, 415

  Pynson, Richard, King’s printer, ii, 133, 138, 467


  R

  Rabanus, M., treatise by, _De Instituto Clericorum_, i, 116

  Rabelais, a student in Montpellier, i, 196

  Radegonde, Saint, i, 51

  Radewijus, Florentius, i, 89

  Rahn, _Die Künste in der Schweiz_, cited, i, 43 _ff._

  Raphelengius, ii, 282 _ff._, 294

  Rapond, Dyne, banker and book-seller, i, 274 _ff._

  Ratdolt, printer-publisher of Augsburg, ii, 396

  Rauchler, Johann, first Rector of Tübingen High School, i, 369

  Ravenna, Peter of, ii, 345

  Reading aloud at meals, i, 69

  Reculfus, Bishop of Soissons, the _Constitutions_ of, i, 117

  Reformation, the, influence of, upon the literary activities of
    Germany, i, 224; literature of, sold under prohibitory regulations,
    i, 399; literature of, printed in Leipzig and in Wittenberg,
    i, 401; influence of, on the production of literature, ii, 26
    _ff._; the influence of, on publishing in Germany, ii, 152; an
    intellectual revolution, ii, 217

  Regino, Abbot of Prüm, i, 57

  Reinhart, Johann, an early printer of popular literature, i, 384 _ff._

  Renaissance, the, as the forerunner of the printing-press, i, 317
    _ff._

  Renilde, Abbess, skilled as a scribe, i, 53

  Reno, Guillaume de, i, 85

  Resbacense, catalogue of the library in monastery of, i, 128

  Resch, publisher of Paris, ii, 442

  Reuchlin, Johann, relations of with Aldus, i, 426 _ff._; founder
    of Greek studies in Germany, i, 429; appointed professor in
    Ingolstadt, i, 429; ii, 172, 202, 226, 237

  Rhaw, George, publisher for Luther, ii, 231

  Rhenanus, Beatus, writes introduction for the works of Erasmus,
    i, 435; as corrector for Henry Estienne (the elder), ii, 21; on
    Froben, ii, 188; writes to Erasmus, ii, 232; death of, ii, 45

  Rhenish-Celtic Society, ii, 414

  Richard II., ii, 117

  ---- de Bury, on the Mendicant Friars, i, 148

  ---- of Wedinghausen, the preservation of his writing hand, i, 65

  Richelieu, institutes the French Academy, ii, 458

  Richer, French chronicler, i, 56

  _Rifformatori_, the, of Venice, ii, 367; regulations of, in 1767,
    concerning the book-trade, ii, 397

  Riquier, Saint, books possessed by the monks of, i, 97

  Rivers, Earl, ii, 103, 122

  Rivington, the House of, ii, 335

  ---- Charles, ii, 335

  Robertson, quotes Montfaucon erroneously, i, 72; inaccurate
    statements of, concerning the prices of books in the Middle Ages,
    i, 135; misquotes Muratori concerning monastery collection of
    books, i, 138

  Rochelle, publishing operations in, ii, 452

  Rodolphus of Fulda, i, 57

  Roger of Wendover, historiographer of St. Albans, i, 104;
    _Chronicles_ of, i, 56, 104 _ff._, 307

  Rogers, J. E. Thorold, on early bookselling in England, i, 306

  Rolewinck, the _Outline History of the World_ by, i, 368

  _Romana Littera_, definition of, i, 227

  Romance writing in England in the 14th and 15th centuries, i, 303
    _ff._

  Romans, church of (in Dauphiny), destroyed six times, i, 133

  Rome, as a book market in the seventh century, i, 226

  Rood, Theodore, printer of Oxford, i, 242; ii, 137

  Rooses, Max, ii, 256

  Rouen, the manuscript-dealers of, i, 270

  Royal privileges in England, ii, 468 _ff._

  Royes, Joseph, ii, 140

  Rufus, Mutianus, letter of, concerning the interference of war with
    literature, i, 431

  Rühel and Sulfisch secure a privilege for Luther’s Bible, ii, 235

  _Rule_ of S. Benedict, the original MSS. destroyed in the monastery
    of Teano, i, 133

  Ruppel, Berthold, first printer of Basel, i, 392

  Rusch, Adolph, printer-publisher and paper-dealer, i, 384


  S

  Sabellico, Antonio, ii, 345, 488

  Sachs, Hans, ii, 243 _ff._

  _Sachsenspiegel_, early editions of the, i, 392

  St. Albans, literary work in the monastery of, i, 69; the abbey of,
    i, 102; the _scriptorium_ and library of, i, 102; the _Chronicles_
    of, i, 104; printing in, ii, 137; _The Book of_, ii, 138

  St. Gall, monastery of, i, 40; work of the nuns of, i, 55; curious
    inscription in a manuscript of, i, 73; the abbey of, i, 125;
    decadence in monastery of, during the 13th century, i, 84

  Salamanca, the monastery of, i, 196

  Salerno, the school of, i, 182

  Sallengre, M. de, ii, 72

  Salmasius (Saumaise).

  Sanuto, Marino, ii, 357

  Saracens, destroy monasteries in Italy, i, 132

  Sarpi, Fra Paolo, ii, 372 _ff._; and the interdict, ii, 384;
    formulates the scheme of a legitimate _Index_, ii, 389

  Saumaise (Salmasius), ii, 315 _ff._

  Saxony, censorship in, ii, 244

  Saxon literature, early, i, 91

  Scævola, ii, 56

  Scaliger, ii, 64 _ff._, 304

  Scapula, Joannes, plagiarist, ii, 81

  Schedd, the _Chronicle_ of, ii, 171

  Scheffel’s, _Der treue Ekkehart_, i, 127

  Schöffer, Peter, printer, admitted as a citizen in Frankfort, i,
    288, 359; employed by Gutenberg, i, 372; taken into partnership
    by Fust, i, 373; _Impressor Librorum_, i, 375; appointed agent
    for the University of Paris, i, 376; suit of, against Inkus, i,
    376; summary of the publishing undertakings of, i, 378 _ff._;
    establishes an agency in Paris, ii, 7, 178

  Schönsperger, publisher of Augsburg, ii, 225, 229

  Schools, the earlier monastery, i, 106

  Schoolbooks in manuscript, prices of, i, 284, 286; prices of, in
    North Germany, in the 15th century, i, 300

  Schott, Johann, imperial privilege secured by, ii, 414

  Schürer, printer of Strasburg, ii, 200

  Schurmann, opinion of, concerning the imperial control of literature,
    ii, 417

  Schweinheim, printer of Subiaco and of Rome, i, 405

  Scolar, Johannes, ii, 137

  Scott’s _Elizabethan Translations from the Italian_, cited, ii, 144

  Scotus, Erigena, appointed master of the palace school at Tours, i,
    116

  Scribes, of African and Eastern monasteries, i, 33; monastic
    privileges of, i, 69; licensed for German towns, i, 294 _ff._; of
    Germany, carry on their work in the porches of the churches and
    cathedrals, i, 295

  Scrimger, Henry, ii, 68

  _Scripta notaria_, i, 43

  _Scriptorium_, the consecration of the, i, 61; form of benediction
    for, i, 76

  Seanachies, an order of Celtic bards, i, 49

  Séguier, Chancellor of France, ii, 457

  Selden, the _Mare Clausum_ of, ii, 308

  Senate, the Venetian, takes action to protect the printing-press, ii,
    391

  Seneca, maxim of, i, 195

  Senis, Guidomarus de, _librarius_ and poet, i, 273

  Sens, Council of, ii, 22

  Sensenschmid of Eger, ii, 150

  Servetus, ii, 52, 54

  Sforza, Francesco, i, 337

  Shakespeare’s plays, sources of certain of the plots of, ii, 145

  Shakespeare, published works of, ii, 146

  Scheurl, writes to Campeggi, ii, 246

  _Ship of Fools_, the, first English edition of, ii, 139

  Sidney, Sir Philip, ii, 84

  Sidonius, Caius Sollius Apollinaris, i, 5, 6, 7

  Sigismund, John, ii, 425

  Silvius, Æneas, the _Europa_ of, i, 281

  ----, William, ii, 287, 294 _ff._

  Simler, Josias, ii, 376

  Simmons, Samuel, ii, 147

  Simon, Abbot of St. Albans, i, 103

  Sintram, noteworthy as a copyist, i, 126

  Sisebut, King, pupil of Isidore, i, 36

  Sithiu, the monks of, secure from Charlemagne hunting privileges, i,
    124

  Sixtus V., and the _Tridentine Index_, ii, 377

  Slovenic versions of the writings of the Reformers, ii, 230

  Soardi, publisher of Venice, ii, 354

  Socinus, Lelius, and Faustus, ii, 52, 53

  Solomon, Abbot of St. Gall, the vocabulary of, i, 126

  Somerset, Duchess of, ii, 127

  Soncino, the first Hebrew Bible printed in, i, 459

  Sorbonne, college of the, the foundation of, i, 216; the special
    functions of, i, 217; the Doctors of the, ii, 19 _ff._, 47 _ff._;
    Theological Faculty of, ii, 29 _ff._; relations of the, with Robert
    Estienne, ii, 49 _ff._

  Sorg, printer-publisher of Augsburg, i, 396

  Southampton, Earl of, ii, 146

  Spain, monasteries in, destroyed by the Moors, i, 132; the early
    universities of, i, 196; activity of the Moorish scholars in, i,
    253 _ff._; manuscript-dealers of, in the fifteenth century, i, 313

  Spalatin, librarian of the Elector of Saxony, i, 432

  Spalato, Archbishop of, ii, 388

  “Spanish Fury,” the, ii, 273

  _Speculum Humanæ Salvationis_, i, 352

  Spengler, Syndic of Nuremberg, ii, 237

  Speyer, John of, and the writings of Luther, ii, 246, 344

  Spiegel, Jacob, supervisor of literature, ii, 420

  Spottswood, ii, 96

  Stab, Johann, secures an imperial privilege, ii, 419

  Stadius, John, imperial privilege secured by, ii, 414

  _Stadtschreiber_, licensed for the cities of North Germany, i, 283

  Star-Chamber, the, relations of, to the supervision of the Press, ii,
    470

  Stathoen, Herman von, _librarius_ of Paris, i, 270

  _Stationarii_, i, 10; first use of the term, i, 184 _ff._; of the
    German universities, i, 220; of Paris, regulations concerning, i,
    260 _ff._; status of, in Oxford, i, 310 _ff._

  _Stationarii peciarum_, functions of, i, 191

  Stationers’ Company, organisation of the, in England, i, 219; charter
    granted to, i, 219, 311; ii, 365, 465 _ff._; regulations of, ii,
    469 _ff._

  Stationers’ Hall, the, of London, i, 311

  Stavelot, Johann of, work as a scribe, i, 87

  Stenzel, Thomas, historian, cited, i, 59

  Stephani (or Estiennes), ii, 15 _ff._

  Stephanus, Robertus, _see_ Estienne.

  Stereotyping, date of invention of, ii, 329

  Strasburg, library of the Cathedral of, i, 301; an early publishing
    centre, i, 381; and the writings of Luther, ii, 246

  Strozzi, Palla degli, i, 327 _ff._

  _Studia publica or generalia_, i, 181

  Subiaco, the monastery of, i, 12; the place of the first printing in
    Italy, i, 404

  Subscription method of publishing in England, ii, 435 _ff._

  Suger, Abbot, historian, i, 58

  Sully, ii, 96

  Sylvester II., ii, 480

  Symonds, J. A., _The Renaissance in Italy_, of, i, 319 _ff._


  T

  Tacitus, important manuscript of, secured in Corvey, i, 301

  Tegernsee, the monks of, i, 39; the monastery of, a place of book
    production, i, 86

  Terms used in scribe work, i, 42 _ff._

  Terracina, monopoly granted to, ii, 347

  _Testament_, the _New_, edition by Erasmus, ii, 205 _ff._; Lutheran
    version of, ii, 223 _ff._

  Text-books in manuscript, prices of, i, 286

  Thafar, Al-baghdádé, chief among Moorish scribes, i, 254

  Thausing, M., concerning the work of Dürer, ii, 409

  Theodadad, King of the Goths, i, 20

  Theodoric, King of the Goths and the Romans, i, 9, 18; his Arian
    faith, i, 18; his toleration of the Athanasians due to Cassiodorus,
    i, 18

  Theodosius II., as a scribe, i, 42

  Theology, importance of the study of, in the University of Paris, i,
    261

  Theses, the ninety-five, ii, 222

  Thirty Years’ War, the, ii, 290 _ff._; influence of, on literary
    production, ii, 498

  Thomaïtes, the Patriarch’s library in, i, 146

  Thomson’s _Seasons_, ii, 472

  Thurot, citation from, concerning methods of instruction in the
    Middle Ages, i, 216

  Tilly, ii, 248

  Tiphernas, ii, 23

  Tiraboschi, i, 183

  Tischendorf, Testament MSS. discovered by, i, 146

  Tissard, Francis, furthers the study of Greek in Paris, ii, 10

  Tonson, Jacob, ii, 148

  Torquemada, _see_ Turrecremata

  ----, Tomas, Inquisitor-General, i, 404

  Torresano, father-in-law of Aldus, buys printing plant from Jenson,
    i, 411; unites his printing concern with that of Aldus, i, 420;
    takes over the business of Aldus, i, 438

  Toulouse, Press of, ii, 92

  Tousé, Guillaume, publisher of Paris, sends out travellers, i, 218

  Towton, battle of, ii, 116

  Traversari, Ambrosio, makes reference to the book-shops of Florence,
    i, 235

  Trevers, printer of London, ii, 468

  _Tridentine Index_, the, ii, 375 _ff._

  Trithemius (Johann Trittenheim), Abbot of Sponheim, i, 21, 22;
    cited, i, 71; rebukes his monks, i, 73 _ff._; writes _De Laude
    Scriptorum_, i, 88, 359, 366

  Truber, Primus, ii, 229

  Trutwetter, ii, 238

  Tübingen, as a publishing centre, ii, 229 _ff._

  Turrecremata, Juan, Cardinal, introduces printing into Italy, i, 404;
    invites to Rome Hahn, printer, of Ingolstadt, i, 406

  Tyndale, William, ii, 140

  Type, fonts of, used by the earlier Italian printers, i, 412; style
    of, used by the Kobergers, ii, 164


  U

  Ulfilas, ii, 306

  Ulm, the magistracy of, protects the contracts of Schöffer, i, 377;
    the early printers of, i, 397

  Ulpian Library, in Rome, i, 8, 9

  Ulrich III., Abbot of Michelsberg, i, 85

  Ungnad, the Freiherr of, ii, 230

  University, definition of the term, i, 181; the term defined by
    Malden, i, 199

  ---- of Paris, controls the book-trade of the city, i, 214;
    regulations of, concerning book-dealers, i, 263 _ff._; publishes an
    _Index Expurgatorius_, ii, 373

  Universities, early, influence of the, upon the education of the
    monasteries, i, 85; the making of books in the, i, 178 _ff._; the
    historians of the, i, 180; of Europe, character of the membership
    of the earlier, i, 221; of France, members of, exempted from taxes,
    etc., i, 199; of Germany, the earlier text-books of, i, 220; of
    Spain, i, 196

  Unkel, Bartholomäus, prints in Low German, the _Sachsenspiegel_, i,
    388

  Urbanus orders books from Aldus, i, 425

  Urbino, the ducal library of, i, 366


  V

  Valdarfer, prints the first edition of the _Decameron_ in Florence,
    i, 325; printer of Milan, i, 447

  Valla, Laurentius (or Lorenzo), exposes the fraudulent character
    of the _Donation_ of Constantine, i, 83, 331; ii, 227; writings
    of, printed in Paris, ii, 10, 203; compensation paid to, i, 329;
    literary controversies of, i, 332 _ff._

  Valladolid, the _Index_ of, ii, 270

  Vandals, besiege Hippo, i, 4

  Van Dyck, Anthony, ii, 307

  ----, Christophe, ii, 307

  Van Praet, ii, 108

  Vascosanus, ii, 25

  Vatablus, ii, 36, 45

  Vavasseur, ii, 72

  Venice, relations of, to the manuscript-trade, i, 234, 242;
    development of the manuscript-trade of, i, 242, 243; the academy
    of, i, 345; takes the lead in the printing undertakings of Italy,
    i, 407 _ff._; the Senate of, prohibits the exportation of rags,
    i, 409; facilities of, as a centre of trade, and for publishing
    undertakings, i, 409 _ff._; the wars of, i, 420; Protectionist
    policy of, ii, 347; earliest legislation in, concerning literature,
    ii, 359 _ff._; relations of, with Germany, ii, 376; requirements
    for the matriculation of booksellers of, ii, 396

  Venetian book-trade, last contests of, with Rome, ii, 401 _ff._

  Vérard, Anthony, printer in Paris, ii, 8

  Vercelli, the University of, i, 183; early regulations in University
    of, concerning the book-trade, i, 188

  Vere, the Lady of, ii, 197

  Vergetius, ii, 42

  _Verlags- und Drück-Privilegien_, ii, 426

  Verona, the manuscript-trade of, i, 228; the manuscript-dealers of,
    i, 246

  Vespasiano, author, dealer in manuscripts, book collector and
    librarian, i, 235, 247 _ff._, 341 _ff._, 365

  Victorius, Petrus, ii, 67 _ff._

  Vidouvé, ii, 23

  Vienna, regulations for the copyists in the University of, i, 220;
    book-trade in the University of, i, 279; the Cathedral of S.
    Stephen in, a centre of the book-trade, i, 283

  Viliaric, a Gothic scribe, i, 43; an _antiquarius_, i, 245

  Virgil, an Italian conjurer, i, 143

  Visconti, Filippo Maria, i, 335

  ----, Galeazzo, i, 183

  Visigoths, code of laws of, i, 225

  Vitalis, Ordericus, _Chronicles_ of, i, 56, 60, 307

  Vitensis, Victor, cited, i, 3

  Vitet, concerning the Press in France in the sixteenth century, ii,
    450

  Vivaria, or Viviers, monastery of, founded, i, 10

  _Voyage Littéraire de Deux Religieux Benedictins_, i, 131

  Vüc, Joorquin de, bookseller to Duke Philip of Burgundy, i, 289

  Vycey, Thomas, earliest _stationarius_ recorded in London, i, 312


  W

  Waldorfer, _see_ Valdarfer

  Wandrille, Saint, _Chronicles_ of the monastery of, i, 227

  Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, ii, 215

  Warton, describes the library of the Abbey of Gembloux, i, 97

  Wattenbach, _Das Schriftwesen_, etc., cited, i, 38 _ff._

  Wearmouth, library collected for the monastery of, i, 95

  Weissenburger, Johann, publisher for Luther, ii, 221

  Wendover, Roger of, _see_ under Roger.

  Wenzel, King of Bohemia, buys books in Paris, i, 218, 261

  Westminster, Caxton’s printing-office at, ii, 113

  White, Andrew, ii, 147

  Wilfred, Saint, institutes the Benedictine monasteries, organises
    monastic schools, initiates instruction in music, i, 94

  Willems, Alphonse, ii, 286

  Willer, bookseller of Augsburg, prints the first classified catalogue
    known to the German book-trade, i, 397

  William, Abbot of Hirschau, i, 70, 71; defends the cause of the Pope
    against the Emperor, i, 82

  Wimpfeling, Jacob, on the intellectual supremacy of the Germans, ii,
    162, 168

  Windelin, secures a monopoly of printing in Venice, i, 408

  Windesheim, the nuns of, producers of books, i, 90

  Wipo, the _Tetralogus_ of, i, 225

  Witigis, defeated by Belisarius, i, 20

  Wittenberg as a publishing centre, ii, 233, 248

  Wittikind, of Corvey, i, 58

  Wittwer, Wilhelm, the catalogue of, i, 87

  Wohlrabe, prints in Leipzig piracy editions of Lutheran literature,
    i, 402

  Wolf, publisher of Basel, ii, 225

  Wolff von Prunow, _Bibliopola_ of Heidelberg, i, 289

  Women as book-dealers in Paris, i, 211

  Women medical students in Salerno, i, 182

  Worde, Wynken de, ii, 125, 133 _ff._, 468 _ff._

  Worms, the Diet of, ii, 266; Edict of, ii, 241

  Wright, Thomas, on the early English romances, i, 305

  Wulfstan, Bishop of York, sermons of, i, 101


  X

  Xylography, i, 350


  Y

  York Cathedral, the library of, i, 108

  York-Powell, and Vigfusson, _Corpus Poeticum Boreale_, of, i, 92


  Z

  Zainer, printer of Augsburg, i, 396

  Zane, Archbishop of Spalato, ii, 354

  Zarotus, printer of Milan, i, 447

  Zasius, Ulrich, i, 173, 174; ii, 432

  Zell, Matthäus, ii, 246

  ----, Ulrich, the first printer of Cologne, i, 292, 359, 387; ii,
    109, 110, 136

  Zeno, _libraire_ of Paris in the fourteenth century, schedule of his
    books, i, 271

  Ziegelbauer, _Observationes Literariæ S. Benedicti_ of, i, 122;
    statistics of, concerning the monastery libraries, i, 135

  Zink, Burkard, scribe of Augsburg, i, 41

  Zosimus, Pope, the canons of, i, 116

  Zurich, early printers of, i, 396

  Zwingli, publishing arrangements of, i, 396; friend of Zasius, ii,
    174; letters of, to Rhenanus, ii, 185 _ff._, 253


FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Italy and Her Invaders_, ii., 246.

[2] Victor Vitensis, cited by Hodgkin, ii., 247.

[3] _Italy_, ii., 297, 298.

[4] For this form of the name I am following the authority of Hodgkin.

[5] _Italy_, ii., 319.

[6] Cited by Hodgkin, iv., 119, 120.

[7] _Vita Probi_, ii., cited by Hodgkin.

[8] _The Letters of Cassiodorus._ Translated, with an Introduction, by
Thomas Hodgkin, London, 1884, p. 57.

[9] _Letters of Cassiodorus_, p. 59.

[10] Cassiodorus, _Letters_, 8.

[11] Cassiodorus, _Letters_, 14.

[12] _Variæ_, ii., 17.

[13] _Hic post aliquot conversionis suæ annos abbas electus est,
et monasterio multo tempore utiliter præfuit._--Quoted by Migne,
_Patrologia_, lxix., 498.

(He was elected abbot here several years after his conversion, and for
a long time he ruled the monastery wisely.)

[14] _Letters of Cassiodorus_, 54.

[15] _Italy_, iv., 391.

[16] Franz, _Cassiodorus_, p. 42.

[17] _De Institutione Div. Litt._ xxx. _Letters_, 57.

[18] In chapter xv., after cautioning his copyists against rash
corrections of apparent faults in the Sacred MSS., he says: _Ubicunque
paragrammata in disertis hominibus_ [Hodgkin interprets this term as
referring to classical authors] _reperta fuerunt, intrepidus vitiosa
recorrigat_. (Wherever mistakes in syntax are found in classical
authors, he fearlessly corrects them.) The larger part of chapter
xxviii. is devoted to an argument against _respuere sæcularium
literarum studia_ (rejecting the study of secular literature).

[19] From the version by Clark.

[20] Clark, 15.

[21] Montalembert, ii., 45.

[22] Hodgkin, _Italy_, iv., 497, 498.

[23] _The Dark Ages_, London, 1845, Preface.

[24] _Gesch. des Gallo-Frankischen Unterrichts und Bildungs-wesens von
den ältesten Zeiten bis auf Karl den Grossen_, Mainz, 1892, p. 37.

[25] Montalembert, _The Monks of the West_, i., 225.

[26] _Epistle_, 225. Cited by Montalembert.

[27] Denk, 127.

[28] Liv. v. _Primum Regum_, ch. xxx., Sec. 30. Montalembert, i., p.
144.

[29] Ozanam, _La Civilisation Chrétienne chez les Francs_, c. 9.

[30] Koepke, _Otton. Studien_, ii., p. 387.

[31] Ep. 130.

[32] Wattenbach, _Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter_, p. 396.

[33] Dümmler, _Anselm der Peripatetiker_, 32.

[34] Grimm, J., _Kleine Schriften_, v., 190.

[35] _Pez, Thes._, vi., 2.

[36] _Das Schriftwesen_, p. 399.

[37] _Barstch, im anz. d. Germ. Mus._, v. 293.

[38] Paris, 1852, page 54.

[39] Géraud, _Paris sous Philippe-le-Bel_, 1837, p. 506.

[40] Lalanne, _Curiosités Bibl._, p. 318.

[41] _Die Chroniken der Deutschen Stadte_, v., 129.

[42] Barack, _Handschriften zu Donaueschingen_, p. 564.

[43] Wattenbach, 351.

[44] Wattenbach, 351.

[45] Rahn, Gesch. _der Bildenden Künste in der Schweiz_, i., 34.

[46] Massmann, _Die Goth. Urkunden von Neapel und Arezzo_, Wien, 1838,
402.

[47] Wattenbach, 90.

[48] Wattenbach, 357.

[49] _De Remediis Utriusque Fortunæ_, lib. i., dial. 43.

[50] Ep. vi., _Ad Flor._, i., 19.

[51] _Festilogium of Angus the Culdee._ Quoted by O’Curry.

[52] Montalembert, iii., 122.

[53] Montalembert, iii., 127.

[54] Montalembert, iii., 193.

[55] Adamnani, _Vita S. Columbæ_, edit. J. T. Forster, Introduction.

[56] Montalembert, vi., 167.

[57] Montalembert, vi., 169.

[58] _Fortunat. Oper._, lib. viii., c. i.

[59] _Théâtre de Hroswitha_, Paris, 1857.

[60] _Hist. Litt. de France_, ix., 130.

[61] Engelhart, _Herrad von Landsberg und ihr Werk_, Stuttgart, 1818.

[62] Görres, _Histor. Polit. Blätter_, xviii., 482.

[63] Père Cahier, c. i., 215.

[64] Mabillon, _Traité_, etc., 39.

[65] Montalembert, iv., 174.

[66] _Vita Cæsarii_, i., 33, 375.

[67] _Vita Harlindis et Reinilæ_ (written between 850 and 880), p. 5.

[68] Montalembert, iv., 375.

[69] Rockinger, ii., 7.

[70] Leuter, _Hist. Wessofont._, i., 166.

[71] Rockinger, ii., 13.

[72] _De Laude Scriptorum_, ii., 697. Paris, 1708.

[73] _Recherches sur la Bretagne_, 579.

[74] Marsham, Προπύλαιον, in _Monast. Anglican._, i.

[75] _De Excidio Britannorum_, London, 1586.

[76] Mont., iv., 204.

[77] Mabillon, _Annal. Bened._, book lxxii., ch. xlvi.

[78] _Gesch. der Frank. Kaiser_, ii., 15, 16.

[79] Mont., vi., 213.

[80] Mont., vi., 215.

[81] Vitalis, book iii., chap. xv.

[82] D’Achéry, in _Not. Oper. Guibert Novig._

[83] Ziegelbauer, ii., 520.

[84] Mont., vi., 185.

[85] Mont., vi., 186.

[86] Giesebrecht, _De Litter. Studiis apud Italos_, 52.

[87] _Epist._, i., 55.

[88] _Petri Dam. Opusc._, c. ix., p. 635.

[89] Mont., vi., 188.

[90] Martene, _De Antiq. Monach. Ritibus_, book iv., c. xviii., p. 289.

[91] Mont., vi., 191.

[92] Mont., vi., 194.

[93] Mabillon, _Analect._, book iv., p. 448.

[94] Ordericus Vitalis, cited by Mabillon, A. S. ix., 137.

[95] _Cæsar. Heisterb._, xii., 47. W. Schmidt. _Im Anz. des Germ. Mus.
Iq._, 328-366.

[96] _Ulphilæ Fragm._, 380.

[97] _Zur Handschriftenkunde_, 138-140.

[98] _Alcuin and the Rise of the Christian Schools_, 73.

[99] _Gesta Abb. Fontanell._, iii., 16. _Mon. Germ._, xi., 292.

[100] _Mon. Germ._, ii., 95.

[101] Laurisheim, in Hesse-Darmstadt.

[102] Reifferscheid, lvi., 451.

[103] Maitland, 371.

[104] Winter, _Die Cisterc._, ii., 145.

[105] Cited by Maitland, 341.

[106] Delisle, _Recherches sur l’Ancienne Bibliothèque de Corbie_,
xxiv., 288.

[107] Maitland, 40.

[108] _Canis. Ant. Lect._ ii., 230, cited by Maitland.

[109] Martene, _Voy. Lit._, 67.

[110] Wanley, _Cat. Lib. Sept._, p. 152.

[111] Martene, _Voy. Lit._, 56.

[112] Mait., 405.

[113] Pez, _Thes. Anecd. Noviss. Diss. Isagog._ in tom. i., 20.

[114] _Voy. Lit._, 99.

[115] _Nouv. Traité de Diplom._, iii., 190, cited by Mait., 407.

[116] _Ap. Nomast. Cisterc._, cap. lxxxvii., 272.

[117] _Herimanni Narratio Rest. Abb. S. Martini Torn._, 79; _Ap. Dach.
Spicileg._, ii., 913.

[118] Mait., 414.

[119] Mait., 416.

[120] Mabillon, _Anal._, iv., 448.

[121] A Missal, containing, in addition to its usual contents, the
Epistles and Gospels.

[122] Pez, _Thes. Anec. Noviss. Diss. Isagog._ in tom. i., p. 20.

[123] Mont. vi., p. 445.

[124] Trithemius, 235, 268.

[125] Trithemius, 266.

[126] Neugart, _Cod. Dipl. Alem._, ii., 334-338.

[127] _Oper. Inedita_, ed. Brewer, ii., p. 13.

[128] Pez, _Thes., Diss._, i., p. 4.

[129] _Mon. Germ. SS._, xiii., 557.

[130] Delprat, p. 324.

[131] Johann Busch, _Chron. Wind._, ii., 35, 409.

[132] _Libn. SS. Brunswick_, ii., 855.

[133] Turner’s _History of the Anglo-Saxons_, iv., c. 3.

[134] Montalembert, iv., 464.

[135] _Ang. Sac._, ii., 21.

[136] _Ibid._, i., 470.

[137] _Chron. Centul. ap. Dach. Sp._, ii., 311.

[138] Liv. lviii., chap. lii., p. 424.

[139] Mab., _A. S._, vii., 36.

[140] Maitland, 202.

[141] Sweet, H. King Alfred’s version of Gregory’s _Pastoral Care_.
Early English Text Society. Lond., 1871-1872.

[142] Maitland, 29.

[143] _Collect._, iii., 7, 17.

[144] Descriptive catalogue of materials relating to the _History of
Great Britain and Ireland_, vol. iii., preface.

[145] Wilkins, _Monast._, ii., 708.

[146] Dugd., _Monast._, iii., 309.

[147] _Ap. Gale. ser._, xiv., 311.

[148] See p. 95.

[149] _Alcuin_, 31.

[150] Cited by West, 34.

[151] _Alcuin_, 42.

[152] Version of West, 102.

[153] _Ep._ 101, Migne; 112., Jaffé, cited by West.

[154] Wattenbach, p. 362.

[155] West, 72.

[156] Wattenbach, 366.

[157] _Alcuin_, 92.

[158] _Alcuin_, 122, 123.

[159] Mullinger, 197.

[160] Lib. i., cap. xiii., _Ap. Bib. Pat._, tom. x., 572, cited by
Maitland.

[161] _Alcuin_, 134.

[162] _Const._, ix., 418.

[163] _Alcuin_, 164.

[164] Ziegelbauer, i., 326.

[165] _Rise and Institution of Universities_, 26.

[166] _Schools of Charles the Great_, 8.

[167] Cited by West, _Alcuin_, II.

[168] Aug. Vindeloc, 4 vols., 1784.

[169] Cassiod., _Inst._, ch. xxiii.

[170] Mabillon, _Traité_, 43, 44.

[171] _Epist. ad Rustic._

[172] _Epist. ad Occam._ Quoted by Mabillon, 80.

[173] _History of Poetry_, dissert. ii.

[174] Montalembert, 147.

[175] Digby, _Mores Catholica_, x., 242.

[176] Ekk. in _Cassib._, c. i., p. 20.

[177] Ekkehart, _Lib. Benedict._, 345.

[178] _Ibid._, 247.

[179] Ekkehart, in _Cassib._, c. x.

[180] Arx, i., 260.

[181] Mabillon, _Réflexions sur la Réponse de M. l’Abbé de la Trappe_,
i., 199.

[182] Giesebrecht. Quoted by Montalembert, vi., 150.

[183] Denk, 260.

[184] Denk, 270.

[185] D’Achéry, _Spicill._, ii., 77 (_Vita S. Eligii_).

[186] Mab., _Traité_, vii., 187.

[187] _Prov. Bib. Pat._, x., 1179.

[188] Maitland, 364.

[189] Ingulph, _Ap. Gale. ser._, v. 23.

[190] Maitland, 229.

[191] _Voy. Lit._, 252, cited by Maitland.

[192] _Voy. Lit._, ii., 13.

[193] Maitland, 200 (cited also by Wattenbach, see p. 112).

[194] Loup Ferrar, _Epist._, 62.

[195] Mont., vii., 178.

[196] _Petr. Diac. Chron. Cassin L._, iii., chap. xxxv.

[197] Mabillon, _Annal._, book 70, chap. vi.

[198] Maitland, 67.

[199] _Travels in Persia_, ii., 582.

[200] Gabr. Naudé, _Addit. à l’Histoire de Lowys XI._, par Comines,
edit. de Fresnoy, iv., 281.

[201] Maitland, 68.

[202] Maitland, 70.

[203] Muratori, iii., 836.

[204] Montalembert, vi., 184.

[205] Murat., _Antiq._, iv., 789. (Quoted by Robertson as vol. ix. The
work contains but six volumes.)

[206] 55, note.

[207] Maitland, 177.

[208] Fosbroke, 172.

[209] Maitland, 441.

[210] Lib. i., ep. xxiv., Bib. Clun., 653.

[211] Lib. iv., ch. xvii., Bib. Clun., 843.

[212] Watt., 482.

[213] _Iter Ital._, iv., 3.

[214] Valéry, _Correspondance de Mabillon et de Montfaucon_, i., 185.

[215] J. W. Clark, _Libraries in Mediæval Periods_, 12.

[216] Clark, 13.

[217] Quoted by Clark, 21.

[218] Clark, 27.

[219] Clark, 42.

[220] Maitland, 286.

[221] Blume, _Iter Ital._, i., 41.

[222] Bede, v., 20.

[223] Alcuin, _De Epp. Eborac_, v., 532. (See p. 108.)

[224] _Recherches sur l’Ancienne Bibliothèque de Corbie_, par Léopold
Delisle. _Mém. de l’Institut_, xxiv., 266-342.

[225] _Gesch. der Stifts-Bibliothek_, Weidmann, 1841 (p. 486, Watt.).

[226] Wattenbach, 486.

[227] _Mon. Boic._, vii., 40, cited by Wattenbach.

[228] _Chron. Teg._ in Pez, _Thes._, iii., 3, 516.

[229] “Die Kongregation der Schöttenkloster,” _Archäol. Zeitschrift_
von Otte. und Quast., i., 55.

[230] Reifferscheid, quoted by Wattenbach, p. 489.

[231] Cod. 93, Schrift. v. Merlet, s. 263.

[232] Schulte, in d. _Wiener_, lxviii., 37 (Wattenbach, p. 490).

[233] _Arundel Catal._, p. 22.

[234] Guérard, _Cartulaire de St. Père-de-Ch._, ii., 395.

[235] Merlet, _Catal. des Livres de l’Abbaye de St. P.-de-Ch. au XIe
Siècle_.

[236] Merryweather, p. 134. Dugdale, _Monast. Anglican_, ii., 24.

[237] Bentham, _Church of Ely_, p. 52, and Stevenson’s supplement to
the same, p. 167.

[238] _Mecklenburger Urkundenbuch_, i., 501.

[239] Mone, _Zeitschr. f. Gesch. d. Oberrh._, viii., 308.

[240] Watt., p. 495.

[241] Pez, _Thes._, iii., 3, 541.

[242] Merzdorf, _Bibliothek Unterh._, N. S., 1850, p. 7.

[243] Blume, _Iter Ital._, ii., 78.

[244] _Histoire Lit. de la France_, xxiii., 710-714.

[245] A. Franklin, 224.

[246] Franklin, i., 340.

[247] Franklin, i., 257.

[248] J. Mone, _Im Anz. d. deutsch. Vorzeit_, vi., 255.

[249] _Codex Carolinus_, Jaffé. _Bibl._, iv., 101.

[250] Watt., p. 501.

[251] _Adem. Caban._, iii., 54.

[252] Watt., p. 502.

[253] Barrois, iv., 2.

[254] _Bibliothèque d. l’École de Chartres_, série v., iii., 45.

[255] Le Roux d. Lincy, in the _Bibl. de Lec. des Ch._, série iii., i.,
151.

[256] Wilkens, _Gesch. d. Heidelb. Büchersammlungen_.

[257] Martin, Erzherzogin Mechthild, in _Der Zeitschrift für Gesch.
Freiburgs_., 1871.

[258] The great work of Rashdall on the Universities of the Middle Ages
was, unfortunately for me, published too late in 1895, to be available
for use in the preparation of this chapter. It seemed proper, however,
to include its title in my bibliography.

[259] Laurie, 69.

[260] Laurie, 101.

[261] Compayré, 112.

[262] Tiraboschi, Girolamo, _Litteratura Italiana_, tom. v., lib. i.,
p. 4.

[263] Tiraboschi, v., ii., 39.

[264] Savigny, i., 590.

[265] Kirchhoff, 23.

[266] Denifle, _op. cit._, iii., 295.

[267] Compayré, 231.

[268] Compayré, 250.

[269] Compayré, 61.

[270] Crévier, _Hist. de l’Université de Paris_, vii., 92.

[271] Compayré, 19.

[272] _Ibid._, 23.

[273] _Ibid._, 24.

[274] Malden, 15.

[275] Fournier, i., 8, cited by Compayré.

[276] Chevillier, Preface.

[277] Delalain, xi.

[278] _Recueil des Priviléges de Paris_, 1-9.

[279] _Cartulaire de l’Univ. de Paris_, i., 59.

[280] _Recueil des Priviléges_, v., 88.

[281] _Recueil des Priviléges._

[282] Pierre de Blois, cited by Vallet de Viriville, 96.

[283] Delalain, xi.

[284] Guérard, _Cartulaire de l’Église de Notre Dame de Paris_, iii.,
73. 1270.

[285] Chassant, _Dict. des Abréviations Latines et Françaises Usitées
dans les Manuscrits_, Paris, 1864.

[286] Chevillier, _op. cit._, 347.

[287] _Recueil des Priviléges_, 1674, 89, 95.

[288] _Actes Concernants le Pouvoir_, etc., _de l’Université de Paris_.

[289] The _livre Parisis_. De Wailly, cited by Delalain, xxix.

[290] Denifle, iii., 29.

[291] The _livre Parisis_ was the equivalent of twenty sols or
twenty-five francs. The _sol_ equalled twelve deniers or one franc, or
twenty cents. The _denier_ was of the value of one and three-fifths
cents. In considering these “equivalents,” due allowance must of course
be made for the very much larger purchasing power possessed by money
in the fourteenth century than in the nineteenth. De Wailly, cited by
Delalain, xxix., xl.

[292] Denifle, iii., 280.

[293] This regulation was identical with that of Bologna.

[294] Delalain, p. xxxvi.

[295] Delalain, p. xxxvi.

[296] Du Breuil, _op. cit._, 608.

[297] Kirchhoff, 68. Delalain (xl.) specifies a limit of 10 _sols_,
10.13 francs. This is, I think, an error.

[298] _Lettres Obtenues par des Imprimeurs et Libraires_, etc., 1649.
_Recueil_, i., 3.

[299] Thurot, p. 65, cited by Compayré, 188.

[300] _Opus Major_, cited by Compayré, 188.

[301] Delisle, _Cartulaire de Normandie, Mém. des Antiquaires de
Normandie_, 1852, ii., 6, 326.

[302] _Oper. Inedita._ Ed. Brewer, p. 13, Watt., 470.

[303] Broderie, _Bibl. de l’École de Chartres_, v., 3. 49. Watt., p.
472.

[304] The “Stationers or Text-Writers who wrote and sold all sorts of
books then in use” secured their privileges as a Guild in 1403 from the
Lord Mayor and Board of Aldermen of London.

The Company had, however, no control over printed books until it
received its charter from Mary and Philip, in 1557. Curwen, 18.

[305] Kirchhoff, 115.

[306] Kirchhoff, 187.

[307] Paulsen, 41.

[308] _Griech. u. Lat. Messen._, p. 155.

[309] (V., 4, 22.)

[310] p. 449.

[311] Wipo, _Tetralogus_, v., 197 _ff._

[312] Wattenbach, 450.

[313] _Mab. Acta. Ss._, ii., 445, Ed. Ven.

[314] _Vita Benedicti Abb._, c. 4, 6, 9, cited by Wattenbach, p. 450.

[315] _Chron. Fontanell._, c. 7; _Mon. Germ._, ii., 274.

[316] _De Pontiff Eborac._, v. 1453; _Alcuini Opera_, ii., 256;
_Bibl._, vi., 125.

[317] p. 451.

[318] _Georg. Cedrenus._, i., 444, Ed. Bonn.

[319] Wattenbach, 452.

[320] Grimm, _Kleine Schriften_, v., 191.

[321] _Vita S. Ludovici_, Gaufrido de Belloloco, Bouq. xx., 15.

[322] Wattenbach, 457.

[323] Westwood, _Miniatures and Ornaments_, xxii., 6.

[324] Gesta. Abb. Gemblacensium, _Mon. Germ. Ss._, viii., 540.

[325] Wattenbach, 459.

[326] Wittwer, in Steichele’s _Arch. f. Gesch. der Bisth._, Augsburg,
iii., 164.

[327] Wattenbach, p. 465.

[328] Mone, in der _Zeitsch. f. Gesch. der Oberrh._, i., 309, 310.

[329] _Philobiblon_, c. 8.

[330] _Iter Ital._, iv., 179.

[331] _Epp. Leon. Aret._, Ed. Mehus., iv., 8.

[332] _Ambrogii Epistolæ_, Ed. Mehus., p. 517.

[333] The Faculty of theology in Bologna was not established until
1352, but the statement is sufficiently correct for the period here
referred to.

[334] Blume, _Iter_, vol. ii., p. 71.

[335] Poggii Florentini, _Opera_, Argentinæ, 1513, vol. ii., 102.

[336] Schier, _De Regia Bibliothecæ Budensis_, Viennæ, 1799, vol.
viii., 21.

[337] Denis, tom. i., 849.

[338] Mittarelli, p. 258.

[339] Tiraboschi, ii., 40.

[340] Mittarelli, 383.

[341] Mittarelli, 933.

[342] Mucciolo, J. M., _Catalogus Codd. Mss. Malatest Cæsan._ Biblioth.
Fratr. Min. Convent, i., 95. Cæsanæ, 1780.

[343] Petit-Radel, _Recherches sur les Bibliothèques Anciennes_, etc.,
Paris, 1819, p. 155.

[344] Kirchhoff, p. 40.

[345] p. 41.

[346] Bandini, _Codd. Lat._, ii., 727.

[347] Pasini, _Rivantella et Berta_, pars ii., 77.

[348] Endlicher, _Catalogus Codd. MSS. Biblioth. Palat. Vendo
Bonensis_, tom. i., 89.

[349] Martene et Durand, tom. iii., 536.

[350] Coxe, _Coll. Lincoln_, tom. i., pp. 31 and 32.

[351] Kirchhoff, _Weitere Beiträge_, vii., 8.

[352] Filelfo, _Epistolæ_, x., 25.

[353] Bandini, _Codd. Lat._, tom. ii., 145.

[354] Bandini, _Codd. Lat._, tom. ii., 251.

[355] Kirchhoff, p. 55.

[356] _History of the Mohammedan Dynasties in Spain._ By Ahmed Ibu
Mohammed Al-Makkari, translated by Pascual de Gayangos. 2 vols.,
quarto. London, 1843.

[357] Géraud, H., _Paris sous Philippe-le-Bel_, Paris, 1837, iv., 608.

[358] Petit-Radel, 106.

[359] Kirchhoff, 62.

[360] _Catalogue Général des Manuscrits des Bibliothèques Publiques_,
etc., Paris, 1849, tom. i., 172.

[361] Chevillier, _L’Origine de l’Imprimerie de Paris_, 1694, iv., 346.

[362] Chevillier, 369.

[363] _Gesch. der Präger Univers. Bibliothek._, Prague, 1851, viii., 8
and 9.

[364] Denis, part ii., p. 1262.

[365] Denis, part ii., p. 1285, quoted by Kirchhoff, p. 71.

[366] Chevillier, 336.

[367] Adrian, J. V., _Catalogus Codd. MSS. Biblioth. Acad. Gissensis_,
1840, iv., 276-278.

[368] Géraud, p. 175.

[369] Bulæus, iv., 62.

[370] _Chronique Métrique de Godefroy de Paris_, Buchon, Paris, 1827,
viii., 167.

[371] De La Caille, _Histoire de l’Imprimerie_, Paris, 1689, iv., 5.

[372] Garnier, 275.

[373] Bulæus, iv., 449.

[374] Lalanne, 307.

[375] _Bibli. de l’École de Chartres_, v., 67.

[376] Kirchhoff, 100.

[377] _Gesch. der Prager Univ. Biblioth._, Prague, 1851, p. 24.

[378] _Kirch._, p. 112.

[379] Kirch., p. 114.

[380] Delprat, _Verhandlung over de Broederschop van G. Groote_,
Amsterdam, 1858.

[381] Wattenbach, 476.

[382] Wattenbach, 478.

[383] Haupt, in _Der Zeitschrift f. Deutsches Alterthum_, iii., 191.

[384] Denis, ii., 2144. Cited by Kirchhoff, 131.

[385] Mone, _Zeitschrift f. Gesch. d. Oberrheins_, i., 312.

[386] _Litterar. Grundiss zur Gesch. d. Deutsch. Poesie_, Berlin, 1812,
307.

[387] Kirchhoff, 119.

[388] Kirchhoff, 120.

[389] _Gesch. d. Offentl. Bibliothek zu Bamberg_, Nurnberg, 1832, p.
xvii.

[390] Kirch., 120.

[391] Kirch., 121.

[392] Else, i., 242.

[393] Kapp, 18.

[394] Kapp, 20.

[395] Kapp, 21.

[396] Kapp, 24.

[397] _Early English Poetry_, Introduction, xi.

[398] _English Wayfaring Life_, 188.

[399] _The Old Printer_, p. 43.

[400] _Literary History_, i., 176.

[401] _Literary History_, i., 182.

[402] Oesterly, _Die Literatur der Urkundensammlungen_, 2 vols.,
Berlin, 1885-86.

[403] _Selection of Latin Stories from the MSS. of the Thirteenth and
Fourteenth Centuries._ Percy Society, London, 1842.

[404] Harrison’s _Description of England_. Ed. Furnivall. Part i., book
ii., chap. xviii.

[405] Roger’s _History of Agriculture and Prices in England_, iv., 155.

[406] Delisle, _Hist. Litt. de la France_, xxx., 334.

[407] _Philobiblon_, Lond. 1888, chap. i., pp. 12, 13.

[408] Huber, _The English Universities_, London, 1840, p. 273.

[409] Hartshorne, C. A., _The Book Rarities of the University of
Cambridge_, London, 1829, p. 338.

[410] Coxe, _College of Merton_, p. 107.

[411] _Donnée des Comptes des Roys de France, au 14e Siècle._ Paris,
1852, p. 227.

[412] Coxe, _History of New College_, p. 37.

[413] _Renaissance in Italy--The Revival of Learning_, pp. 15, 16.

[414] _Renaissance in Italy--The Revival of Learning_, pp. 55-56.

[415] _Revival of Learning_, p. 43.

[416] _Revival of Learning_, p. 256.

[417] _Civilisation During the Middle Ages_, 378.

[418] _Revival of Learning_, 22.

[419] _Revival of Learning_, p. 284.

[420] Pattison’s _Casaubon_, 453, 454.

[421] Kapp, _Geschichte_, etc., I.

[422] Humphreys, 38.

[423] Humphreys, 39.

[424] Cited by Humphreys, 59.

[425] Humphreys, 57.

[426] Meerman, cited by Humphreys, 58.

[427] Humphreys, 66.

[428] Kapp, 42.

[429] Kapp, 59.

[430] Burckhardt, _Die Kultur der Renaissance_, i., 239.

[431] Kapp, 60.

[432] Schneegans, p. 142.

[433] Kapp, 62.

[434] Kapp, 62.

[435] Wetter, J., _Gesch. der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst_, 483.

[436] Schmidt, C., _Gesch. der ältesten Bibliothek in Strasburg_, 1881,
p. 92.

[437] Kapp, 71.

[438] Madden, iv., 40.

[439] Humphreys, 99.

[440] Linde, p. 65.

[441] Schmidt, C., 160.

[442] Kapp, 91.

[443] Kirchhoff, A., _Gesch. des Deutsch. Buchhandels_, Leipzig, 1851,
i., 41.

[444] Erasmi, _Opera_, London, 1703, iii., 105.

[445] Kirch., i., 103.

[446] Kapp, 121.

[447] _Aufsätze der Buchhandlung_, p. 6.

[448] Frommann, p. 30.

[449] _Sagittarii Historia Gothana_, Jena, 1701, quoted by Frommann, 43.

[450] Humphreys, 117.

[451] Humphreys, 121.

[452] Lorck, C. B., _Handbuch der Gesch. der Buchdrucker-Kunst_, 13,
Leipzig, 1882.

[453] Humphreys, 124.




Corrections

The first line indicates the original, the second the correction:

p. xvi

The Inventon of Printing and the Work of the First Printers of Holland
and Germany

The Invention of Printing and the Work of the First Printers of Holland
and Germany

p. xx

  British Monachisn; Manners and Customs of Monks and Nuns
  British Monachism; Manners and Customs of Monks and Nuns

p. xxiv

  Geschichte der Enstehung u. Entwickelung der hohen Schulen
  Geschichte der Entstehung u. Entwickelung der hohen Schulen

  Zeitschrift fur Gesch. des Oberrheins.
  Zeitschrift für Gesch. des Oberrheins.

p. xxvi

  Iter Litterarium in Alsatiant
  Iter Litterarium in Alsatiam

p. xxvii

  Geschichte der Erfindung der Buchdrückerkunst
  Geschichte der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst

p. 7

  “... should stigmatise him as a dangerous and heterodox author.”
  “... should stigmatise him as a dangerous and heterodox author.”[5]

p. 15

  for the purpose of my narrrative,
  for the purpose of my narrative,

p. 144

forms an important contribution to the monastic history of the country
and contain not a few references

forms an important contribution to the monastic history of the country
and contains not a few references

p. 166

  as a guide for the same, a work entited _Biblionomia_.
  as a guide for the same, a work entitled _Biblionomia_.

p. 213

  conservés en la jouissance de tours les droicts;
  conservés en la jouissance de tous les droicts;

p. 217

  found themselves very largely dependent upon the scholary interests
  found themselves very largely dependent upon the scholarly interests

p. 221

  As Savigny puts its:
  As Savigny puts it:

p. 227

  In 658, S. Gertrud
  In 658, S. Gertrude

p. 238

  Di Sasso who, in 1481, came into asssociation with the Brothers Brushi
  Di Sasso who, in 1481, came into association with the Brothers Brushi

p. 245

  This codex was completed in the stall of Master Valiaric, bookseller;
  This codex was completed in the stall of Master Viliaric, bookseller;

p. 291

  and among the citzen class an earlier interest
  and among the citizen class an earlier interest

p. 297

  between the scholars of Italy and the instructtors
  between the scholars of Italy and the instructors

p. 300

  At the end of the fourteeth century
  At the end of the fourteenth century

p. 302

  very largely by means of reciters or ministrels.
  very largely by means of reciters or minstrels.

p. 309

  prepare plentiful stores of provisons
  prepare plentiful stores of provisions

p. 311

  with the book-trade by its use as an appelation
  with the book-trade by its use as an appellation

p. 390

  censorship upon the press which occured
  censorship upon the press which occurred

p. 408

  Jenson was afforded any opportunity for excercising his art in Paris
  Jenson was afforded any opportunity for exercising his art in Paris

Footnote 320

  Grimm, _Kleine Schrifter_, v., 191.
  Grimm, _Kleine Schriften_, v., 191.

Footnote 452

Lorck, C. B., _Handbuch der Gesch. der Buchdrücker-Kunst_, 13, Leipzig,
1882.

Lorck, C. B., _Handbuch der Gesch. der Buchdrucker-Kunst_, 13, Leipzig,
1882.


Errata

p. 255

Ibun-l-abbáns and Ibun-l-abbar should read Ibn al-Abbar

p. xxviii, Footnote 254, 303, 375

Bibliothèque de l’École de Chartres should read Bibliothèque de l’École
de Chartes

p. 462, 463

The address New York: 29 West 23d St. London: 24 Bedford St., Strand
should read New York: 27 West 23d St. London: 24 Bedford St., Strand