THE COLLECTING AND DESCRIBING OF EARLY PRINTED BOOKS.
It is exactly one hundred years since Panzer, “the one true naturalist
among general bibliographers,” published the first volume of his
_Annales Typographici_, and in this period two distinct methods of
bibliography have grownup.
The more popular, generally associated with the name of Dibdin, treats
specimens of early printing merely as curiosities, valuable only
according to their rarity or intrinsic worth, or for some individual
peculiarity found in them.
The other method, of which Panzer was the first practical exponent,
was called by Henry Bradshaw the Natural History method. Each press
must be looked upon as a _genus_, and each book as a _species_, and the
more or less close connection of the different members of the family
must be traced by the characters which they present to our observation.
Bradshaw’s own work is the best example of this method, and a beginner
can follow no better model than the papers which he wrote on early
printing.
In collecting or studying early printed books, one of the most fatal
and common mistakes is the undertaking of too much. The day is
past when one man will set himself to compile such works as Hain’s
_Repertorium Bibliographicum_, or that very much greater book, Panzer’s
_Annales Typographici_; both wonderful achievements, but unfinished and
imperfect. No one who has not had practical experience can imagine the
amount of information which can be obtained by taking a small subject
and working at it carefully; or conversely, the amount of careful study
and research that is requisite to work a small subject properly.
Take as examples Blades’ _Life of Caxton_ and Edmond’s _Aberdeen
Printers_, the two best monographs we possess. They contain a very
great deal of most careful work, and sufficient material to enable any
one who desires to study those particular subjects to do so thoroughly.
In collecting, in the same way, a beginner who wishes his collection to
be of real value should not be too catholic in his tastes, but confine
his attention to one subject. A collection of fifty miscellaneous
fifteenth-century books has not, as a rule, more interest than may be
associated with the individual books. But take a collection of fifty
books printed in one town, or by one printer. Each book is then a part
of a series, and obtains a value on that account over and above its own
individual rarity or interest.
The arrangement and cataloguing of early printed books is a part of the
subject which presents many difficulties, In many great collections,
these books, for purposes of bibliographical study, are absolutely
lost. They are not bought, at any rate not once in twenty cases, for
their literary value, but simply and solely as specimens of early
printing or curiosities. But, having been bought, they are treated as
any other book bought solely for its literary value, and in no other
way, _i.e._ they are catalogued under the author or concealed in mazes
of cross-reference. If such books are to be bought at all, they should
surely be treated in some way which would enable them to fulfil the
object for which they were acquired.
In the University Library, Cambridge, the fifteenth-century books are
all placed together arranged under countries according to size, with
a press-mark indicating the country, the size, and the consecutive
number. Thus any new acquisition can be added, and placed at once
without disarranging the order on the shelves. Any further subdivision,
as, for instance, under towns, is impracticable on the shelves, but
must be done on paper.
The catalogue slips can then be arranged under towns and printers, so
that any one wishing to study the productions of a particular town or
printer can at once obtain all the books of the particular class in the
library. If he knows his books by the author’s name, they can be found
from the general catalogue of the library. In private collections, the
number of books is, as a rule, so small that they can be arranged in
any order without trouble.
In describing an early printed book, great care should always be taken
not to confuse what is common to all examples of the book with what is
specially the peculiarity of an individual copy. The description should
always be in two parts, the first general and the second particular.
The first part should give the place, the date, the name of the
printer, the size, an exact collation; the second, an account of the
binding, a list of the earlier owners, the imperfections, if any, and
similar information.
As regards the place, there does not yet seem to be any fixed rule
as to the form in which it should be written, whether in Latin or
in English. Many of the older bibliographies having been written in
Latin, and the colophons of the majority of early books being in
the same language, we have grown familiar with the Latin forms of
many names. But now that more books are being written in English, it
seems more sensible to use the English forms. The pedantic habit of
writing the name in the vernacular, as Köln for Cologne, Genève for
Geneva, or Kjøbenhavn for Copenhagen, should be avoided; it simply
tends to confuse, and serves no useful purpose. The great aim of a
bibliographical description should be to give the fullest information
in the most concise and clear form. Since English books are presumably
written for English readers, it is best they should be written in
English, and the exhibition of superfluous learning in the manner is
almost always a sign of a want of necessary learning in the matter.
The date should always be given in Arabic figures; and if there is
any peculiarity in the form of the date as it occurs in the book, it
should be added between brackets. The day of the month, when it is
given in the colophon, should always be put down in the description,
as it is often of great importance. In countries where the new year
began in March we are apt to get confused with the dates, and forget,
for example, that the 20th of January 1490 is later than the 20th of
December 1490.
The beginning of the year varied in different countries, and often in
different towns. The four most usual times for its commencement were:
Christmas Day (December 25), the day of the Circumcision (January 1),
the day of the Conception (March 25), and the day of the Resurrection
(Easter Day). The 25th of March was, on the whole, most common; but in
dating any book exactly, the rule for the particular town where it was
printed should be ascertained.
An approximate date should always be supplied to the description of an
undated book; but this date should not be a mere haphazard conjecture,
but should be determined by an examination of the characteristics of
the book, and comparison with dated books from the same press, so
that the date that is ascribed is merely another expression for the
characteristics noticed in the book. It is only after careful study
that accurate dates can be ascribed to books of a particular press,
and monographs on particular printers must be consulted when it is
possible.
On the question of sizes there seem to be many opinions. There was
originally no doubt on the subject, and there is no reason for any
doubt now.
There are two opposing elements at work, size and form. Originally,
when all paper was handmade, and did not vary very much in measurement,
books were spoken of as folio, quarto, octavo, etc., according to the
folding of the sheet; and these terms apply to the folding of the
sheet. In the present century, when paper is made by machinery, and
made to any size, the folding cannot be taken as a criterion, and the
various sizes are determined by measurement, the old terms, applicable
only to the size by folding, being retained. What has evidently led
to all this confusion is the application of the same terms to two
different things.
In describing old books, the old form size should be used, being the
only one which does not vary. Under the other notation, a cut-down copy
of a book in quarto becomes an octavo, and thus two editions are made
out of one.
The size of an old book is very simply recognised by holding up a page
to the light. Certain white lines, called wire-marks, will be noticed,
occurring, as a rule, about an inch apart, and running at right angles
to the fine lines, These wire-lines are perpendicular in a folio,
octavo, 32mo, and horizontal in a quarto and 16mo. In a 12mo, as the
name implies, the sheet is folded in twelve; and in the earlier part
at least of the sixteenth century this was done in such a way that
the wire-lines are perpendicular; the height of the sheet forming two
pages, as is the case in an octavo, while the width is divided into
six, instead of four as in an octavo. The later habit has been to
fold the sheet differently, the height of the sheet forming the width
of four pages, and the width of the sheet the height of three pages;
consequently the wire-lines are horizontal. Among early printed books
the 12mo is a very uncommon form; quartos are most numerous, and after
them folios.
It should always be remembered that the signature has nothing whatever
to do with the size. It is merely a guide to the binder to show him
how many leaves go to the quire, and the order in which they come. The
binder found it convenient to have his quires of from eight to twelve
leaves each, and the quires were thus made up whether the book was
folio, quarto, or octavo. Let us assume, for example, that the quires
were to consist of eight leaves each, then each quire of the folio book
contained four sheets, of the quarto book two sheets, and of the octavo
book one sheet. A book on Book Collecting, lately published, gives the
following extraordinary remarks on finding the size:—“The leaves must
be counted between signature and signature, and then if there are two
leaves the book is a folio, if four a 4to, if eight an 8vo, if twelve a
12mo, etc.... I should advise the young collector to count the leaves
between signature and signature, and to abide by the result, regardless
of all the learned arguments of specialists.” The absolute folly of
these remarks on the sizes of books will be apparent to any one who has
seen an old book. The earliest folios printed in Germany and Italy are
in quires of ten leaves, _i.e._ there are ten leaves between signature
and signature; in the majority of early folios there are eight. Again,
there is no folio book in existence among early books (excepting the
block-books, which are in a class apart) with only two leaves to the
signature.
Wynkyn de Worde made up many of his quartos in quires of eight and four
leaves alternately; most early 16mos were made up in quires of eight
leaves, and had therefore two signatures to each complete sheet. In the
same way many 24mos were made up in quires of twelve leaves. All these
books would be wrongly described by counting the leaves between the
signatures; in fact, that method comes right by accident only in the
case of some octavos and a few 12mos and 16mos.[41]
[41] On the subject of the sizes of old books, the reader would do
well to consult the _Athenæum_, 1888, vol. ii, pp. 600, 636, 673, 706,
and 744, where some instructive and amusing letters will be found.
A further series of letters relating generally to the same subject
appeared in the same paper in the early part of 1889.
The collation of a book is the enumeration of the number of leaves
according to the way in which they are arranged in quires, and this
collation should be given whether the quires are signed or not. If
there are signatures, there can be no difficulty in counting the number
of leaves which go to each quire; but when there are no signatures,
as is the case with most books before 1475, the collation is a more
difficult matter. The first thing to be looked at, if the book has
no MS. signatures, is the sewing, which shows us the centre of the
quire,[42] and we can then count from sewing to sewing. This gives
us only the halves of two quires; we must then have recourse to the
watermarks. In a folio, if one leaf has a watermark, the corresponding
leaf which forms the other half of the sheet has none. Again, in a
quarto, corresponding leaves have either no watermark, or each half a
one. Judging from the sewing and the watermarks, there is rarely any
difficulty in making out the collation, the first and last quires being
the most difficult to determine with accuracy; the others present no
difficulty. It is thus always best to settle the arrangement of the
interior quires first, and work from them to the outer ones, which are
more likely to be mutilated.
[42] It was the custom of many binders in the earlier part of the
present century, when they had to rebind an old book, to separate all
the leaves and then fix them together in convenient sections, entirely
ignoring the original “make up.” A very large number of books in the
British Museum were thus misbound, and even the celebrated Codex
Alexandrinus was treated in this way.
This method of collation by the watermarks is very often useful for
detecting made up copies. For instance, in the copy of the thirty-six
line Bible in the British Museum, the first and last leaf of the first
quire have each a watermark, showing absolutely that one of the two
leaves (in this case the first) has been inserted from another copy.
In many old books which have been rebound, the outside pages of the
quire are very much smoother and more polished than the rest, and may
thus be distinguished by touch. This, though a pretty certain test,
may mislead, if the book has been misbound, and should only be used in
conjunction with the other methods. A little practical work will soon
enable the beginner to find for himself various small points, all of
which, though hardly worthy of a lengthy description, are useful in
giving information, but are only useful when they have been acquired by
experience.
In giving an account of a fifteenth century book, a reference should
always be made to Hain’s _Repertorium Bibliographicum_. If Hain gives
a full description, and such description is correct, it will be
sufficient for all purposes to quote the number in Hain. Almost all the
books fully described in that work have an asterisk prefixed to their
number, that being the sign that Hain had himself collated the book;
and in quoting from him the asterisk should never be omitted.
The title and colophon should always be given in extenso, the end of
each line in the original being marked by an upright stroke (|). The
abbreviations should be exactly copied. Notice must always be taken of
blank leaves which are part of the book. The number of lines to the
page, the presence or absence of signatures, all such technical minutiæ
must be noted down.
In fact, the object of a good bibliographical description is to give
as clearly and concisely as possible all the information which can be
derived from an examination of the book itself.
The individual history of a book is of the utmost importance, and
should never be ignored. On this subject I cannot do better than quote
some words of Henry Bradshaw, applicable more to manuscripts than to
printed books, but which explain the writer’s careful method, and
practically exhaust all that has to be said on the subject.
“These notes, moreover, illustrate the method on which I have worked
for many years, the method which alone brings me satisfaction, whether
dealing with printed books or manuscripts. It is briefly this: to work
out the history of the volume from the present to the past; to peel
off, as it were, every accretion, piece by piece, entry by entry,
making each contribute its share of evidence of the book’s history
backwards from generation to generation; to take note of every entry
which shows either use, or ownership, or even the various changes of
library arrangement, until we get back to the book itself as it left
the original scriptorium or the hands of the scribe; noting how the
book is made up, whether in 4-sheet, 5-sheet, or 6-sheet quires, or
otherwise; how the quires are numbered and marked for the binder;
how the corrector has done his work, leaving his certificate on the
quire, leaf or page, or not, as the case may be; how the rubricator
has performed his part; what kind of handwriting the scribe uses; and,
finally, to what country or district all these pieces of evidence
point.... The quiet building up of facts, the habit of patiently
watching a book, and listening while it tells you its own story, must
tend to produce a solid groundwork of knowledge, which alone leads
to that sober confidence before which both negative assumption and
ungrounded speculation, however brilliant, must ultimately fall.”
INDEX OF PRINTERS AND PLACES.
Abbeville, 90, 91.
Abingdon, 182, 183.
Alban’s, St., 140.
Albi, 71, 90.
Aldus, 69, 70.
Alopa, F. de, 75.
Alost, 97, 101, 102, 103, 104.
Alyat, A., 189.
Amorbach, J., 58, 189.
Andreæ, J., 112.
Andrieu, M., 93.
Angers, 88, 89.
Angoulême, 93.
Antwerp, 103, 108, 111, 112, 134, 171, 172, 181, 190.
Appentegger, L., 114.
Arndes, S., 122.
Ascensius, J. B., _see_ Badius.
Audenarde, 110, 111.
Augsburg, 51, 52, 56, 61, 148.
Avignon, 19, 78, 80, 94.
Azzoguidi, B., 72.
Badius, J., 86, 174, 177.
Bamberg, 24, 39, 43, 45, 47.
Bamler, 41, 51.
Barbier, J., 143, 144.
Barcelona, 114, 115, 117, 121, 148.
Barmentlo, P., 110.
Barnes, J., 156.
Basle, 23, 57, 58, 111, 172.
Bechtermuntze, H., 34, 35, 36, 37.
Bechtermuntze, N., 36, 37, 54, 55.
Bedill, J., 143.
Belfortis, A., 65, 72.
Bellaert, 112.
Bellescullée, P., 89.
Benedictis, de, 72.
Bergman de Olpe, P., 51.
Beromunster, 58.
Bertolf von Hanau, _see_ B. Ruppel.
Berton, J., 94.
Besançon, 92.
Beverley, 178.
Bois-le-duc, 112.
Bollcaert, J., 190.
Bologna, 72.
---- S. de, 119.
Bonhomme, P., 83.
Botel, H., 115.
Bourgeois, J. le, 92.
Bouyer, J., 89.
Braem, C., 104.
Braga, 121.
Brandis, L., 57.
Brasichella, G. de, 70.
Breda, J. de, 110.
Bréhant-Loudéac, 90, 91.
Breslau, 57.
Brito, J., 106, 107.
Bruges, 105, 106, 111, 126, 136.
Brun, P., 115.
Brunswick, 157.
Brussels, 107, 108.
Bruxella, A. de, 76.
Buckinck, A., 63, 64.
Burgos, 117.
Butz, L., 114.
Buyer, B., 87.
Cadarossia, D. de, 79.
Caen, 89, 90.
Cagliari, 119.
Calafati, N., 117.
Caliergi, Z., 70, 76.
Cambridge, 180, 194, 197.
Carner, A., 72.
Castaldi, P., 59.
Caxton, W., 48, 49, 84, 105, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132,
133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 142, 148, 157, 159, 160,
165, 166, 167, 171, 172, 191, 192, 196.
Cayllaut, A., 84.
Cennini, B., 74.
Chablis, 88, 89, 91.
Chalcondylas, D., 75.
Châlons, 93.
Chambéry, 90.
Chardella, S. N., 66.
Chartres, 90.
Chepman, W., 174.
Cividad di Friuli, 77.
Clemens Sacerdos, 68.
Cluni, 93.
Cock, G., 114.
Coeffin, M., 184.
Colini, J., 91.
Cologne, 42, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 91, 96, 108, 126, 127, 149, 154,
155, 169, 171, 172.
Copenhagen, 109, 122.
Copland, R., 129, 142.
Coria, 118.
Cosselhac, A. de, 79.
Coster, L. J., 95, 98.
Crantz, M., 81, 83.
Cremona, 77.
Crès, J., 91, 92.
Creusner, F., 53.
Dachaver, 88.
Dale, H. van den, 111.
Davidson, T., 176.
Daygne, C., 175.
Delft, 109.
De Marnef, 175.
Deventer, 109, 110, 172.
Dijon, 93.
Dinckmut, C., 16, 57.
Dôle, 92, 93.
Dorne, J., 157.
Dortas, A., 120.
Drach, P., 37, 54, 55.
Durandas, J., 90.
Durham, 188.
Edinburgh, 174, 175, 176.
Eggestein, H., 39, 41, 42, 56, 188.
Egmondt, F., 171.
Eichstadt, 55.
Eliezer, 120.
Eltvil, 34, 36, 37, 54.
Elyas, C., 57.
Embrun, 93.
Erfurth, 21.
Esslingen, 55, 73.
Eustace, G., 85.
Exeter, 184.
Eysenhut, J., 11.
Fabri, J., 122, 123.
Faques, G., 7, 197.
---- R., 197.
Faro, 121.
Fernandez, A., 113, 114.
Ferrara, 65, 72, 73.
Ferrose, G., 79.
Fèvre, G. le, 84.
Flandrus, M., 114.
Florence, 72, 74, 75, 76.
Fogel, J., 188.
Foligno, 71.
Forestier, J. le, 92.
Foucquet, R., 91.
Francour, J. de, 119.
Frankfort, 20, 32.
Frederick of Basle, 117.
Frees, F., 177, 178.
---- G., 177.
Friburger, M., 81, 83.
Friedberg, P. de, 33.
Froben, J., 58.
Fust, John, 23, 24, 25, 26, 46, 47, 80.
Fyner, C., 55, 56.
Gachet, J., 180.
Gallus, U., _see_ Hahn, U.
Gaver, J., 143.
Geneva, 58.
Gérard, P., 91.
Gerardus de Lisa, 76.
Gering, U., 81, 83.
Gerona, 114, 116, 117.
Ghemen, G. van, 109, 122, 179.
Ghent, 111, 112.
Gherlinc, J., 121.
Ghotan, B., 123.
Giunta, 70.
Godard, G., 85.
Goes, H., 177, 178, 179.
---- M. van der, 111, 134.
Gops, G., 50, 51.
Gossin, J., 106.
Gotz, N., 50, 91, 127, 198.
Gouda, 108, 109, 179.
Goupil, R., 184.
Goupillières, 93.
Gourmont, G., 86.
Gradibus, J. and S., 89.
Granada, 119.
Grenoble, 93.
Gruninger, J., 43.
Guldenschaff, J., 51, 149.
Gurniel, J. de, 115.
Gutenberg, John, 22, 23, 24, 25, 31, 34, 35, 36, 40, 46, 47, 52,
53, 57, 71, 82, 96.
H., I., 143, 144.
Haarlem, 97, 98, 99, 112.
Hagembach, P., 114.
Haghe, L., 183.
Hahn, U., 64, 65, 66.
Hardouyn, G., 85.
Harsy, N. de, 92.
Hasselt, 110.
Heerstraten, E. van der, 104, 172.
Hees, W., 102.
Helyas de Louffen, 58.
Hereford, 180, 183.
Hermann de Stalhœn, 32.
Hermonymus, G., 20.
Hertzog, J., 171, 172.
Higman, J., 84, 139.
Hijst, J. and C., 55.
Hochfeder, C., 91.
Hohenwang, L., 56.
Homery, C., 35, 36.
Hopyl, W., 174.
Hostingue, L., 175, 184.
Hug de Goppingen, J., 56.
Hunt, T., 151, 155.
Hurus, P., 114.
Husner, G., 43.
Jacobi, H., 156, 193.
Jaen, 119.
Janszoon, L., _see_ Coster, L. J.
Jardina, G. de la, 79.
Jenson, N., 48, 66, 67, 68, 80, 96.
John de Colonia, 50, 69.
John of Speyer, 66.
Kacheloffen, C., 16.
Kaetz, P., 181.
Kaiser, P., 82, 83, 89.
Keffer, H., 23, 35, 52.
Keller, A., 189.
---- J., 148.
Kerver, T., 85.
Kesler, N., 111.
Ketelaer, N., 102.
Keysere, A. de, 110.
Knoblochzer, J., 43.
Koburger, A., 53, 189.
Koelhoff, J., 50.
Kuilenburg, 15, 16, 104, 112.
Kyrfoth, C., 156.
Landen, J., 155.
Lantenac, 93.
Lausanne, 58.
Lauxius, D., 174.
Lavagna, P. de, 73.
Laver, G., 63.
Lavingen, 56.
Lecompte, N., 171.
Leempt, G. de, 102, 110, 112.
Leeu, G., 108, 109, 111, 112, 171, 172.
Leipzig, 16, 20.
Leiria, 120, 121.
Lerida, 115.
Lettou, J., 129, 160, 161, 197, 198.
Levet, P., 84, 139.
Leyden, 109, 112.
Lila, B. de, 118.
Limoges, 94.
Lisbon, 120.
Loeffs, R., 104.
Loeslein, P., 69.
London, 6, 107, 141, 143, 145, 156, 160, 161, 178, 181, 188, 197, 198.
Louvain, 15, 103, 104, 172, 190.
Loys, J., 184.
Lubeck, 57, 122, 123.
Ludwig zu Ulm, 10, 56.
Lyons, 72, 86, 87, 94, 175.
Machlinia, W. de, 107, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166.
Maçon, 93.
Madrid, 119.
Mainz, 21, 23, 25, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 44,
46, 47, 52, 58, 60, 67, 71, 82, 95, 96, 100, 101.
Mansion, C., 105, 106, 127.
Manthen, J., 69.
Mantua, 77.
Marchant, G., 84.
Marienthal, 37, 38, 108.
Martens, Th., 103, 104, 112.
Marti, B., 117.
Martinez, A., 114.
Mayer, H., 88, 118, 119.
Maynyal, G., 133, 171.
Melchior de Stanheim, 52.
Mentelin, J., 39, 40, 41, 42, 43.
Merseburg, 57.
Metlinger, P., 92.
Metz, 90, 91.
Milan, 68, 72, 73, 74.
Milner, U., 178, 179, 180.
Monreale, 77.
Monserrat, 119.
Monterey, 119.
Moravia, V. de, 120.
Moravus, M., 161.
Morelli, 89.
Morin, M., 92.
Murcia, 118.
Myllar, A., 174, 175.
Nantes, 93.
Naples, 72, 76, 161.
Narbonne, 93.
Nassou, H. de, 104.
Nijmegen, 110, 112.
Norins, J., 189.
Notary, J., 141, 143, 144, 145, 146, 193.
Novacivitate, G. de, 91.
Numeister, J., 71, 90.
Nuremberg, 10, 11, 23, 43, 52, 53, 91, 108.
Odensee, 121, 122.
Orleans, 93.
Orrier, B. van, 111.
Os, G. de, 109, 137, 139, 140.
---- P. van, 110.
Oxford, 125, 134, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155,
156, 182, 187, 192.
P., I., 190.
Padua, 77.
Paffroed, R., 110.
Palma, 117.
Palmart, L., 113, 114.
Pannartz, A., 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65.
Paris, 18, 20, 32, 80, 86, 89, 90, 91, 92, 133, 139, 171, 172,
174, 175, 177, 189.
Parix, J., 88.
Parma, 72, 77.
Passera, G. R. de la, 119.
Pavia, 72, 76.
Périgueux, 94.
Perpignan, 94, 115.
Perusia, 122.
Pfister, A., 24, 25, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47.
Philippus Petri, 68.
Picheng, 2.
Pictor, B., 69.
Pigouchet, P., 85.
Pistoia, D. de, 74.
Poitiers, 89.
Porres, J. de, 119.
Portilia, A., 72.
Pré, J. du, 84, 90, 91, 92, 94.
Printer of Augustinus de Fide, 50, 127.
---- Dictys, 50.
---- Historia S. Albani, 50.
Promentour, 58.
Provins, 94.
Puerto, A. del, 114.
Pynson, R., 92, 145, 156, 163, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 176, 193.
Quentell, H., 51, 169.
Quijoue, E., 90.
R Printer, 42, 43.
Raem de Berka, G. ten, 149.
Ratdolt, E., 29, 69, 148.
Ravescot, L. de, 104.
Redman, R., 170.
Regnault, F., 85, 92.
Rennes, 90.
Reuchlin, 20.
Reutlingen, 56.
Reüwick, E., 33.
Reynes, J., 193.
Reyser, M., 55.
Richard, J., 92.
Richel, B., 58.
Richenbach, J., 188.
Riessinger, S., 76.
Roca, L. de, 118.
Rodt, B., see Ruppel.
Rome, 61, 64, 65.
Rood, T., 149, 151, 154, 155.
Rosembach, 115.
Rostock, 108.
Rouen, 90, 91, 92, 166, 167, 168, 172, 175, 176, 177, 184.
Rouge, G. le, 89, 91.
---- P. le, 84, 89, 91.
Roy, G. le, 87.
---- J. le, 93.
Ruppel, B., 23, 57, 58.
Rusch d’Ingwiller, A., 40, 42.
Rychard, T., 182.
St. Alban’s, 140, 157, 158, 159.
St. Maartensdyk, 110.
Salamanca, 116.
Salins, 90.
San Cucufat, 118.
Saragossa, 114.
Saxonia, N, de, 120.
Schenck, P., 89.
Schiedam, 112.
Schleswig, 122.
Schœffer, Peter, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35,
47, 48, 58, 80.
Schoensperger, J., 52.
Schott, M., 40.
Schussler, J., 52, 61.
Scolar, J., 156, 182.
Scot, J., 143.
Scotus, O., 69.
Segorbe, 116.
Segura, B., 114.
Sensenschmidt, J., 47, 52.
Seville, 88, 114, 115.
Shoenhoven, 112.
Siberch, J. L. de, 180, 181.
Snell, J., 121, 122.
Solidi, J., 89.
Sorg, A., 52.
Spindeler, N., 145.
Spire, 37, 53, 54, 55.
Sporer, Hans, 10, 11.
Spyess, W., 36, 37.
Stockholm, 122, 123, 124.
Stoll, J., 82, 83, 89.
Story, J., 176.
Strasburg, 22, 23, 39, 40, 41, 43, 55, 76, 96.
Subiaco, 31, 52, 59, 60, 61, 62.
Sursee, 58.
Sweynheym, C., 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65.
Talleur, G. le, 92, 166, 168, 175.
Taro, 121.
Tarragona, 115, 119.
Tavistock, 182.
Theodoricus, 154, 155.
Ther Hoernen, A., 50, 108, 149, 155.
Thorne, J., 157.
Toledo, 114, 116.
Tolosa, 88, 118, 119.
Toro, 121.
Torresani, A. de, 70.
Toulouse, 87, 118, 119.
Tours, 93.
Trechsel, J., 86.
Tréguier, 90.
Treveris, P., 157.
Treves, 91.
Treviso, 72, 76.
Trogen, 58.
Troyes, 89, 90, 91.
Turre, J. de, 89.
Udina, 77.
Ulm, 16, 56, 57, 61.
Ulric and Afra, Monastery of, 52.
Urach, 56.
Utrecht, 15, 16, 97, 99, 101, 102, 103, 104, 107.
Valdarfer, C., 68, 73.
Valence, 94.
Valenciennes, 94.
Valentia, 113, 114, 118.
Valladolid, 115, 119.
Vasqui, J., 116.
Vavassore, G. A., 17.
Veldener, J., 15, 16, 99, 103, 104, 107, 189.
Vendrell, M., 114, 117.
Venice, 17, 66, 67, 68, 69, 76, 83, 86, 96, 103, 148, 171, 172.
Verard, A., 84, 85, 167.
Verona, 77.
Vienne, 89.
Villa, J. de, 114.
Violette, P., 175, 177.
Vitalis, M., 78, 79.
Vivian, M., 93.
Vostre, S., 85.
Vulcanius, M., 190.
W., G., 192.
Wadsten, 123, 124.
Waldfoghel, P., 78, 79.
Wanseford, G., 177, 179, 180.
Watson, H., 178.
Weidenbach, 42, 43, 108.
Wenssler, 58, 117, 172.
Werrecoren, P., 110.
Westminster, 128, 141, 144, 145, 148, 178.
Westphalia, C. de, 104.
---- John of, 103, 104.
Windelin of Speyer, 67.
Winters de Homborch, C., 51.
Worde, W. de, 7, 84, 109, 126, 127, 134, 135, 136,
137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 157, 158,
167, 170, 178, 179, 180.
Woudix, J. de, 190.
Xeres, 117.
York, 141, 177, 179.
Zainer, G., 51, 52, 56.
---- J., 56, 60, 189.
Zamora, 116.
Zarotus, A., 73.
Zel, U., 47, 48, 49, 60, 96.
Zeninger, C., 43.
Zorba, S., 120.
Zwolle, 110, 149.
Printed by T. & A. CONSTABLE, Printers to Her Majesty, at the Edinburgh
University Press.
[Illustration:
The
Great Book
Collectors.
by
Charles & Mary
Elton
BOOKS ABOUT BOOKS
EDITED BY
ALFRED W. POLLARD
Book
Bindings.
by Herbert
P. Horne.
Book
Plates.
by W. J.
Hardy
Early
Printed Books
E. Gordon Duff
MDCCCXCIII
The
Decoration
of Books.
by A. W.
Pollard.
Books
in
Manuscript.
by Falconer
Madan.
Early
Printed
Books.
by E. Gordon
Duff.
]
Transcriber’s Notes
The illustrated advertisement from the front of the book has been
placed at the end of the book.
Page 54: in the footnote, ondon has been changed to London.
Page 54: Bechtermuncze has been changed to Bechtermuntze which is the
predominant usage throughout the book.
Page 159: abbrevation has been changed to abbreviation.
Hyphenation has been standardised.
In this text version, text in italics is delimited by _underscores_.
End of Project Gutenberg's Early Printed Books, by E. (Edward) Gordon Duff