2. “Gualtheri Burley Tractatus de materia et forma ac de relativis.
Oxonii 1500. 4.” So in Panzer ii (1794) p. 244, quoting Maittaire p.
739, ex Bibl. Bodl. p. 117 (an allusion to an error in the Bodleian
Catalogue of 1674, repeated in the 1738 Catalogue p. 206). Bagford makes
the same mistake, twisting the author’s name into Johannes Buridanus
(Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 5901, fol. 3). Even Hain (no. 4142) has copied
from Panzer. The colophon of 1518. B shows how the error arose, as
Cotton points out (©Typ. Gaz.©, 1st ser., 2nd ed., p. 209).
3, 4. Bagford is responsible for two more fictitious Oxford books of
1500. a ©Quaestiones de lumine et luce© (Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 5901, fol.
3, Bodl. MS. Rawl. D. 375, fol. 103: a confusion with 1518. L) and a
Whitinton _de heteroclytis nominibus_ printed at Oxford by Peter
Treveris (!) (Bodl. MS. Rawl. D. 375, fol. 103: see 1518. W).
1506.
The following book though not printed at Oxford supplies information
about an Oxford bookseller:—[sign. a 1^r:—] “Principia seu
introduc-tiones f_rat_ris peregrini ytalici de lugo in via doctoris
subtilis: adipisci eiusde_m_ doctoris doctrinam cupientibus. [at foot:—]
Uenu_n_dant_ur_ autem in alma ac florentissima vniuersitate Oxonie_n_se.
in intacte v_ir_g_in_is ac i_m_maculate / vico: s_an_cti ioha_n_nis
eua_n_geliste / ad intersignium. [Then follow 4 tractatus: then on sign.
g 4^r:—] Expliciunt principia seu introductiones (pro iuuenib_us_)
fratris peregrini de lugo ... Imp_re_ssa aut_em_ Londini. p_er_
Richardu_m_ pyns_on_. cum solerti cura ac diligentia Honestissimi
Iuuenis ac prudentissimi Hugonis Meslier. Expe_n_s_is_ aut_em_ georgii
castellani / oxonii morantis / ad intersignium sancti Ioha_n_nis
euangeliste: in quo venundatur op_us_ hoc. Finis....” Then follows a 5th
treatise, ending with a letter from Peregrinus de Lugo dated “Tholose
quarto Kalendas Februarij . M . ccccc . vj.” Herbert’s Ames (iii. 1396)
refers this book to Oxford, although at i. 252 it is referred rightly to
Pynson’s press at London.
1510.
References to a ©Compendium quaestiuncularum de luce et lumine©, Oxford
1510, will be found in Bagford (Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 5901, fol. 22^v,
Bodl. MS. Rawl. D. 375, p. 104), no doubt from the ©Catalogus librorum
MSS^{rum} Angliæ et Hiberniæ© (Oxf. 1697, fol.), tom. 2, p. 280, col. 1,
among the printed books of John Moore bp. of Norwich. An error for 1518.
1511.
The 1481 Alexander de Hales appears in Bagford (Brit. Mus. MS. Harl.
5901, fol. 23, Bodl. MS. Rawl. D. 375, p. 104) as of 1511, printed at
Oxford.
1512.
“Walterus Burleius, super libros Posteriorum. 1512. 4^o.” So in Cotton’s
©Typ. Gaz.©, 2nd ser., p. 169, and in a longer form in Herbert’s Ames
iii. 1396, and Panzer vii. p. 494, quoting Brüggemann i. 172. The source
of the mistake is easily found in the colophon of 1517. B, a “v” having
been overlooked. The error is repeated in the ©Bookworm© (1868) p. 126.
Before 1519.
According to Cotton (©Typ. Gaz.©, 2nd ser., p. 169) an edition of “Jo.
Duns Scotus, Scriptum Oxoniense super primum Sententiarum” (Paris 1519)
professes to be “impressa juxta editionem Oxoniensem.” This cannot be
correct, unless _editio_ refers only to some traditional method of
exposition or arrangement at Oxford.
About 1519.
“The following book printed at the charge of Cardinal Wolsey, with the
King’s arms on one side, and the cardinal’s on the other; though it has
neither date nor printer’s name, was probably performed about this time
[1519] at this place [Oxford].” ‘Libellus prim. epistol. M. Tullii
Cicer. Decus Oxoniensium, finitum universitate Oxoniensi. Quarto.’ So in
Herbert’s Ames, iii. 1398, and substantially in Bagford’s account (Brit.
Mus. MS. Harl. 5901, fol. 24^v, Bodl. MS. Rawl. D. 375, fol. 103): see
Cotton’s ©Typ. Gaz.©, 2nd ser., p. 169. Clearly a blunder. The book
which is said to be at Trinity College, Dublin, could not be found there
in 1885.
1519.
“Roberti Whitintoni Lichfeldiensis Protovatis Angliæ in Florentissimâ
Oxoniensi Academiâ Laureati, Opusculum de Concinnitate Grammatices &
Constructione recognitum Anno Domini xix supra Sesquimillesimum, in
4to.” So Bagford (Brit. Mus. MS. Harl. 5901, fol. 23^v, cf. Bodl. MS.
Rawl. D. 375, p. 103). Probably not printed at Oxford.
Before 1520.
John Dorne, bookseller in Oxford, sold in 1520 several copies of a small
book described in his day-book as “Bene fundatum,” “Bene fundatum
Oxonie” or “Bene fundatum uosgraf.” This seems to be a trace of a real
Oxford book now lost, but no such printer as Vosgraf or Foxgrave (Dorne
was from the Low Countries) is known. It would probably belong to the
1517–19 press. See Dorne’s book edited in the ©Collectanea© vol. i of
the Oxford Historical Society, 1885. Cotton erroneously reads the title
as “Bene sum datum.”
1542.
Shepery’s ©Hippolytus©: see under 1586. S.
1549.
“P. Martyr de Sacramento Eucharistiæ, disputatio hab. in acad., 1549,”
4^o. So in the ©Catalogus librorum R. Davisii©, pt. 4 (1692), p. 7, cf.
p. 10. Some error.
1564.
“Analysis libri Aristotelis de Sophisticis Elenchis, opera et studio
Griff. Poweli.” So in the ©Catalogus librorum R. Davisii©, pt. 2 (1686),
p. 72. Error for 1594, which see.
1565.
“Ιωαννοῦ τοῦ Χρυσοστομου Ομιλιαι. Oxonii 1565 in forma minore.” So in
the ©Bibliotheca Gudiana© (Hamb. 1706), p. 75: thence in Brüggemann, p.
422. An error for 1586, which see.
1569.
1. Guild’s ©Throne of David or an Exposition of the 2nd of Samuel©.
Error in the ©Catalogus librorum R. Davisii©, pt. 1 (1686), p. 164, for
1659, which see.
2. “1569. An account of the Lithuanian translation of the Bible is in
the Brit. Museum. Quarto.” So Herbert’s Ames, iii. p. 1398. For 1659,
which see under _Chylinski_, Samuel B.
1576.
Fabricius, J. S.: “Meditationes Sacræ de unitate Ecclesiæ Britannicæ.
1576,” 8vo. So _twice_ in the ©Catalogus librorum R. Davisii©, pt. 2
(1686) p. 20, pt. 3 (1688) p. 11. For 1676, which see.
1578.
“Thesaurus œconomiæ ... Johanne Caso Authore. 1597 ... Again 1578.” So
Herbert’s Ames, iii. 1407. Perhaps for 1598, which see, but even that is
perhaps an error for 1597!
1584.
Shepery’s ©Hippolytus©: see under 1586. S.
The Oxford University Press.
1585.
1. ¬Bilson¬, Thomas. THE TRVE DIFFE-|RENCE BETWEENE CHRI-|STIAN
SUBIECTION AND | VNCHRISTIAN REBELLION: | WHEREIN THE PRINCES LAWFULL |
power to commaund for trueth, and indepriuable | right to beare the
sword are defended against the | Popes censures and the Iesuits
sophismes vt-|tered in their APOLOGIE and DE-|FENCE OF ENGLISH |
CATHOLIKES: | _With a demonstration that the thinges refourmed in the
Church of England by the_ | _Lawes of this Realme are truely Catholike,
notwithstanding the vaine shew_ | _made to the contrary in their late_
Rhemish Testament: _by_ | THOMAS BILSON Warden of Winchester. | Perused
and allowed by publike authoritie. | [_Device_: then _two mottos_].
Impr. 2: 1585 (CIↃIↃXXCV): (eights) sm. 4^o: pp. [24] + 820 + [10]: p.
11 beg. _wee bee farre_, p. 111 _be not Judges_: chiefly Pica English.
Contents:—p. (1) title: (3–12) Epistle dedicatorie to queen Elizabeth:
(13) “the generall contents of euerie part”: (14–22) “To the Christian
Reader”: 1–820 the work, in 4 parts: (1–9) “the speciall contents of
euery part”: (9) “Faultes escaped”, i.e. errata.
For the author &c. see Wood’s ©Ath. Oxon.© ii. 169: where it is
pointed out that the book has a curious history. Its ostensible
purpose is to uphold the doctrine afterwards called “passive
obedience” by refuting two books which were regarded as subversive of
the Queen’s temporal power, (1) ©An apologie and true declaration of
the institution ... of the tvvo English colleges ... in Rome ... (and)
in Rhemes©, 1581 (ascribed to card. Will. Allen), (2) ©A true, sincere
and modest defence of English catholiques that suffer for their
faith©, n. d. (asserted by Antony à Wood to be also by card. Allen).
But Wood declares that the Queen “conceiving it convenient for her
worldly designs to take on her the protection of the Low-Countries
against the King of Spain, did employ our author ... to write the said
book” to _justify_ the Netherland revolt. And certain it is that in
consequence of the temperance and fairness with which Bp. Bilson
treats his subject, the parliamentary party in Charles I’s time used
this book to _oppose_ “passive obedience.”
* * * * *
Probably issued about the end of November, 1585. Greek type is used on
p. 263 and perhaps elsewhere. Another ed. appeared at London in 1586:
an extract from pp. 520–21 was reprinted in 1641 and again in Somers’s
Tracts, 2nd ed., iv. 29 (Lond. 1810).
2. ¬Case¬, John. [_Ornament_] SPECVLVM MORALIVM | QVAESTIONVM IN
VNIVERSAM ETHICEN | Aristotelis, Authore Magistro IOHANNE CASO |
Oxoniensi, olim Collegij Diui Io-|hannis Præcursoris | Socio. | [then
the University Arms: then a _motto_ from Seneca].
Impr. 1, so also colophon: 1585: (eights) sm. 4^o: pp. [28] + 401 +
[19]: p. 11 beg. _Opp. Iuuenes_, p. 111, _Distinctio_: chiefly Pica
Roman. Contents:—p. (1) Title: (3–7) Epistola nuncupatoria to Robert
Dudley, earl of Leicester, chancellor of the University, signed
“Iohannes Casus”: (8–10) “Ad studiosos iuuenes vtriusque academiae”:
(10) “Prosopopœia Libri Ad Lectorem”: (11) “Honoratissimo suo domino
et patrono Comiti Leicestrensi &c. Iosephus Barnesius Typographus
Oxonie nsis”: (12–23) Complimentary Latin verses to the author:
between (24) and (25), “Tabula virtutum et vitiorum omnium”, a folio
leaf printed on one side only: (25–28) Præfatio: 1–401 the work in 6
books: (1–2) “Peroratio ad lectorem”: (4–17) Index: (17) Errata and
colophon.
The first book printed at the new Oxford press. The allusions to this
and kindred facts are (1) in the “Epistola Nuncupatoria.” Case says of
the reasons for dedicating the work to the Earl of Leicester “Unum est
nouum hoc præli beneficium, quod te authore nostra Academia nuper
recepit ... Prælum hoc nouum (cuius author existis) hunc nouum de
moribus libellum pressit. Ne ergo author libelli præli authori
videatur ingratus, tibi primùm eiusdem fructum ex animo propinauit
...” (2) the printer himself writes “Admirabilem hanc artem
typographicam (Mecęnas amplissime) primum Iohannes Faustus Moguntiæ
fauste genuit [the marg. supplies “Anno 1450”], eandem Guilielmus
Caxtonus ciuis Londinensis probè aluit & perpoliuit: Laus summa
debetur authori qui invenit, laus magna debetur mercatori qui primùm
ad nos transuexit ... Londinum diù in hac arte floruit, & non inuideo:
Cantabrigia eandem nunc didicit, Oxonia recepit, & certè gaudeo. Nam
si characteres typographi sint vera insignia & arma Mineruæ; vbi
terrarum potius floreret hæc nobilis scientia, quàm vbi vera publicè
docetur sapientia? vt enim à fonte in riuum dulcis aqua, ita hîc
quidem à mente in prælum dulcissima Musa fluet. Non nugæ, non aniles
fabulæ, non Aristarchi dentata opera hîc excudentur: ea solùm ex his
prælis in lucem venient quȩ sapientum calculis approbentur, & Sybillȩ
foliis sint veriora. Hoc vnum nunc restat (vir inclytissime) vt hunc
librum opus alterius ingenij & pignus laboris mei tuo honori offeram
... Vt ergo Thomas Thomasius collega meus [Cantabrigiensis] suo, ita
ego Iosephus Barnesius tibi (vir summe) meo patrono dominoque
gratulor: nos ambo & publico pro multis, & priuato nomine pro magnis
in nos meritis vobis vtriusque Academiæ patronis deuincti sumus,
gratias immortales vterque agimus, maiores in posterum pollicemur”:
(3) the Vice-chancellor, J. Underhill, writes “Non dedit hoc seclo
prælum Oxoniense priorem [librum] | Doctrinâque dabunt secula nulla
parem.” (4) Laurence Humfrey says “Hoc Speculum vobis nunc Oxoniensis
alumnus | Porrigit, en præli dat quoque primitias.”
It is clear that neither the Vice-chancellor nor the printer of this
volume had any suspicion that there had been printing in Oxford
previous to the publication of the present volume, unless “recepit” be
a vague allusion to it.
The work is a companion one to the same author’s ©Summa veterum
interpretum in universam dialecticam Aristotelis©, Lond., Tho.
Vautrollerius, 1584, see 1592. C, 1598. C: and there is even a
typographical connexion between the two.
For an account of the author, see Wood’s ©Ath. Oxon.©, i. 685. The
method adopted by Case is by _quaestiones_, _oppositiones_ and
_responsiones_ in the manner of the disputations in the schools at the
time. Other editions were issued at Oxford in 1596, and at Frankfurt
in 1589, 1610 and 1625. See 1596. C.