THE LATER ESTIENNES AND CASAUBON.
1537-1659.
IT is not necessary for the purpose of this study to give the record
in detail of the careers and publishing undertakings of all the
printers of the great family of the Estiennes. I have been interested
in presenting with some fulness the account of the life and work of
Robert, because he stands out as the most distinctive and forcible
member of a famous literary family, and because his experience
illustrates very fairly the characteristic features and the chief
difficulties of the business of publishing books in France in the first
half of the sixteenth century. The business careers of the brothers and
of the descendants of Robert should be mentioned, however, if only to
indicate the exceptional position occupied by this noteworthy family in
the history of printing and publishing, and the extent of the influence
exercised by it through successive generations upon the production of
scholarly literature.
Robert’s elder brother, Francis, was a _libraire juré_ of the
University of Paris. His publications were comprised within the ten
years from 1537 to 1547. He used as a mark a tripos which stands upon a
closed book and from which issues a vine shoot. The motto is _Plus olei
quam vini_. This is sometimes followed by the adage, which seems rather
a truism than a truth, πάντων δυσχερέστατον τὸ πᾶσιν ἀρέσκειν, “Of
all things, the most difficult is to please everybody.”[23] With the
exception of one _Psalterium_ and a _Horæ Virginis_ in Greek, his few
impressions were all in Latin, and were chiefly issues of the classics.
He appears never to have come into conflict with the divines whose
censorship gave so much trouble to his brother Robert.
Charles Estienne, who was the youngest of the three brothers, was
known as a printer and publisher in Paris between the years 1550
and 1560. He had originally adopted the profession of medicine and
attained high reputation as a physician and naturalist, and as a
classical and antiquarian scholar. While travelling in Italy, he became
intimate with Paul Manutius, the son of Aldus. He was a voluminous
author, and the first productions of his Press were the work of his
own pen, and comprised a treatise on Dissection, a series of volumes
on Horticulture, issued under the title of _Prædium Rusticum_, a work
on Birds, and one on Fishes. He also wrote a history of the Dukes
of Milan, a description of the Rivers of France, and a number of
narratives of travel. Finally, he produced a number of critical works,
such as a _Dictionarium Latino-Gallicum_.
This was published in 1552, and again in 1561, and remained for many
years a scholarly authority on its subject, and was honoured by being
largely “appropriated.” Cooper’s _Thesaurus Linguæ Romanæ_, published
in London in 1565, was said by Dr. White Kennett to be a _verbatim_
transcript of Stephen’s Dictionary.[24] It seems evident from the above
brief summary that Charles Estienne secured an honourable position as a
scholar and as an author.
In order to indicate the direction of his publishing interests, I
select a few of the more important of the titles from his catalogue.
1554. “Compendium Michlol, authore Rodolpho Bayno Cantabrigiense,
et sanctæ linguæ professore Regio Lutetiæ Parisior.” 4to.
The author was an Englishman from York, who had accepted a
professorship at Paris.
“Institutiones Linguæ Syriacæ, Assyriacæ atque Thalmudicæ una cum
Æthiopicæ atque Arabicæ collatione, Angelo Caninio Anglarensi,
authore.” 4to.
1555. “Ciceronis Opera omnia.” 4 vols. Folio.
1558. “Petri Bunelli familiares aliquot epistolæ in
adolescentulorum, Ciceronis studiosorum gratiam.”
Petrus Bunellus was a native of Toulouse, who had studied in
Italy, where he had for four years lived with Paul Manutius. He
had evidently shared the interest of his friend and host in the
writings of Cicero.
1559. “Plutarque de la honte vicieuse, par Fr. le Grand.” 8vo.
“Histoire du siège de Metz en 1552, par Barthélemy de Salignac.”
“Traicté de la guerre de Malte, par de Villegagnon.” 4to.
“Missives de B. de Salignac, contenant le voyage du Roy Henry II.
aux Pays-Bas.” 4to.
“De Latinis et Græcis nominibus arborum fruticum, herbarum, piscium
et avium liber; ex Aristotele, Theophrasto, Galeno,” etc. This is
described as an original and learned work.
The famous scholar Scaliger charges Charles Estienne with vanity and
irritability of temper, but a publisher may be angry occasionally
without any permanent imputation upon his morals or character. Scaliger
had, by a breach of promise and by ill usage, given to Estienne
just cause of offence. He had promised to place with Estienne the
publication for France of all his works, while he afterwards committed
to Vascosan and others such of them as seemed most likely to prove
profitable undertakings. To Charles Estienne he offered those which
on account of their special character promised neither popularity nor
advantage. Under these circumstances, Estienne returned Scaliger’s
manuscripts with an expression of indignation.[25]
Robert Estienne the second was the eldest son of Robert Estienne the
first, and had been brought up in the business of his more famous
father. He did not accompany the latter on his removal to Geneva,
having refused to abandon the Catholic faith. His remaining in Paris
brought to him certain business advantages, as he was put in charge
of the royal printing-office. As a further mark of confidence, and
possibly as special consideration for his fidelity to the Catholic
faith after the rest of his family had gone over to the heretics,
Charles IX. further honoured him with a royal commission to travel
in Italy in search of manuscripts and rare books for use in the
publishing undertakings of the Royal Press, and appointed a provision
for his family during his absence. In 1563, Robert received the formal
appointment as _Typographus Regius_, and by that date he appears to
have fully reconstituted his father’s establishment in Paris. He
numbered among his friends and clients some of the principal scholars
of the age, including Joseph Scaliger, George Buchanan, Sir Thomas
Smith, and others, and appears to have fully maintained the family
reputation for scholarly attainments and for devotion to higher
literature.
Among his more important publications may be cited:
1565. “Josephi Scaligeri conjectanea in Varronem de Lingua Latina.”
1566. “Georgii Buchanani Scoti Psalmorum Davidis Paraphrasis
poetica.”
“Psalmi Aliquot a Theodoro Beza versi.”
1568. “De recta et emendata linguæ Græcæ pronounciatione Thomæ
Smith. Angli, tunc in Acad. Cantabr. publici prælectoris, ad
Vintoniensem episcopum Epistola.” 4to.
“De recta et emendata linguæ Anglicæ scriptione Dialogus, Thoma
Smitho equestris ordinis Anglo authore.” 4to.
Scaliger, while an Italian by race and a Frenchman by birth, is more
usually associated with Holland, where he passed the greater part of
his working years. As professor of belles-lettres in Leyden, he had
among his pupils the celebrated Grotius. He was himself possibly the
most noted of the group of Protestant scholars whose learning and
attainments secured for the Reformers of the time an intellectual
superiority over their Catholic opponents, a superiority which had as
one result a decided revival of letters within the Church of Rome. The
original editions of his books were issued in Leyden, but he was able,
as noted above, to arrange for the publication in Paris of authorised
editions from which he derived a profit, and of certain of these works
editions appeared also in Basel.
George Buchanan, poet and historian, is best known in connection with
his service as tutor for Mary Queen of Scots, and later, as preceptor
for her son James. The latter was possibly largely indebted to Buchanan
for his interest and proficiency in classical studies. Sir Thomas
Smith was the English Ambassador at Paris. The interest of scholarly
foreigners such as those named, in securing for their books the imprint
of Estienne, indicates that the repute of the firm had already extended
beyond the limits of France.
Henry Estienne the second, second son of Robert, carried on in Geneva,
after the death of his father, what may be called the Protestant branch
of the publishing concern, for a few years, when he returned to Paris
and established there a second Estienne Press. He was apparently the
most finished scholar of his scholarly family, and from an early age,
before he had entered upon business responsibilities, we find him
engaged in work as editor and translator. His father had taken special
pains with his education, and as a part of his general training had
caused him to travel as a young man in Italy, England, and the Low
Countries.
Henry had secured a familiarity with Latin in his home circle, where,
as before stated, Latin was practically the language of the household.
He took his first instruction in Greek from Petrus Danesius, one of the
Greek scholars who had been brought to the royal college of Francis I.
He spent nearly four years in travel and in sojourn in Italy, busying
himself while there in collecting and collating manuscripts for his
father’s Press. Maittaire states that he collated for this purpose no
fewer than fifteen manuscripts of Æschylus. Certain annotations made by
him in his transcript of _Athenæus_ were subsequently utilised by his
son-in-law, the famous scholar Casaubon, in the edition printed forty
years later.
In Venice he became acquainted with the Greek scholar Muretus, who, in
addition to his work in the University of Padua, had for a number of
years given editorial assistance in the Greek division of the Aldine
Press. In Henry’s diary of his journey, he speaks of being present at
a gathering in Rome of _literati_ and poets, who ignorantly condemned
Hebrew _ut linguam asperam et horridam_. The young publisher who was
well versed in Hebrew, successfully defended the sacred language and
resolutely vindicated the cause both of David and his interpreters.
A little later, he met, in Florence, Petrus Victorius, one of the
most profound Greek scholars at that time in Italy. Henry was able to
present to his host a valuable _Codex_ of Anacreon which the Greek
professor had not before been acquainted with. In 1550, Henry’s travels
extended to England, where he was introduced, as a scholar of note, to
King Edward VI. From England, he went to Flanders and became intimate
with some of the scholars of Louvain. While in Flanders, he devoted
himself to mastering the Spanish language, and he brought back with him
from Antwerp to Paris the texts of certain Spanish classics of which
he printed French versions. In the twenty-sixth year of his age, he
returned to Paris to begin his active business career, for which he had
certainly taken pains thoroughly to equip himself.
He began his publishing undertakings in 1554, with an edition of
_Anacreon_, beautifully printed in quarto. The volume contains, in
addition to the Greek text, Latin versions of the _Odes_ prepared by
the publisher who himself acted as editor. During 1555, he was again
in Italy collecting and collating manuscripts. In 1556, he issued
an edition of the _Psalms_ presented in a Latin version which was
the combined work of George Buchanan a Scotchman, M. A. Flaminius an
Italian, Solomon Macrinus a Frenchman, and Helius Eobanus a German.
He was this year busily engaged, in company with other scholars, in
editorial work on the _Thesaurus Græcus_.
In 1557, he produced editions of _Æschylus, Aristotle, Theophrastus_,
and _Athenagoras_. The notes to _Æschylus_ were the work of the scholar
Petrus Victorius, with whom Henry had a long-time friendship. In this
year was also issued the _Lexicon Ciceronianum Græco-Latinum_, which
had been compiled by himself and in which he had brought together
whatever passages or material Cicero had utilised from philosophers,
historians, poets, or essayists. This work secured for its compiler and
publisher high repute as a scholar of wide attainments.
In 1558, Henry assumed the appellation of a _Typographus illustris
viri Huldrici Fuggeri, Domini in Kirchberg et Weyssenhorn_.[26]
Huldric Fugger was a native of Augsburg, born in 1526, and belonging
to a family conspicuous for its antiquity, its mercantile ability,
and its wealth. Huldric was himself a scholar, and became an eminent
patron of literary men. He expended very great sums in the purchase of
trustworthy manuscripts of ancient authors, and in having produced from
these satisfactory printed editions. Henry Scrimger, a Scotch professor
of considerable erudition, was engaged by him, on terms described as
magnificent, to carry into effect those literary undertakings. Scrimger
was an old friend of Henry Estienne, and it was undoubtedly at his
instance that the baron conceived the plan of appointing Henry as his
typographus. The printer received from Fugger for some years a pension
of fifty gold crowns, but I have been unable to find any specification
of the precise nature of the services which were given in consideration
of this payment.
Expenditure for the promotion of literature was still very exceptional,
and it is perhaps not surprising that the family of Huldric considered
his patronage of letters as evidence of a deranged mind. They
instituted a legal process, and succeeded in inducing the court to take
their view of Huldric’s actions. They secured a decree which caused him
to be declared incapable of the administration of his own property,
and he was for a time placed under guardians. Eventually, however, he
recovered possession of his property, and in fact succeeded also to
the estate of his brother. With increased resources, he resumed his
interest in collecting books, and at his death, in Heidelberg, in 1584,
he bequeathed to the Palatinate a very fine library. It is probable,
however, that his confinement had tended to mitigate his ardour for
expending money in printing books, and his relations with Estienne
were not resumed. The several experiences endured by this would-be
German Mæcenas may have helped to discourage future similar attempts to
further the production of good literature. If the expenditure of money
in the production of books and the collection of libraries were to be
accepted as evidences of mental derangement, it is not surprising that
the printers and publishers of Germany secured during the sixteenth
century very little patronage or compensation from the nobility of the
land.
Huldric Fugger was, however, not the only one of his family who
interested himself in literature. His elder brother, Joannes Jacobus,
had a fine collection of books both printed and in manuscript, and was
proficient in Greek. Other members of the family were in relations with
Paul Manutius in Italy, with Koberger of Nuremberg, and with Froben of
Basel.
The first book printed by Henry Estienne under his new designation
of _Huldrici Fuggeri Typographus_, was an edition of the _Edicts_ of
Justinian, printed in Greek and Latin, which bears date 1558. In 1559,
he issued the _Bibliotheca_ of Diodorus, with annotations of his own,
and in 1561, a very elaborate edition of the complete writings of
_Xenophon_.
After the death, in 1559, of Henry II. and in 1560, of the young King
Francis II., there was for a number of years, during the minority of
Charles IX., a time of trouble and disturbance for France, during
which literary undertakings and business enterprises were of necessity
seriously interfered with. The Calvinists, who had been rapidly
increasing in numbers throughout the kingdom, were making an earnest
fight for consistent toleration, and, later, for official recognition
and for equality with the Catholics before the law, a contention which
was actively opposed by the Guises, and (with occasional pretensions of
concession) by the Queen-Mother, Catharine of Medici. The result was a
series of civil wars, with only occasional brief interludes of truce
and quiet.
In 1562, Estienne completed the publication of certain theological
works which had been left unfinished in Geneva at the time of his
father’s death,--an Exposition of the New Testament and an Exposition
of the Psalms.
The editor, a certain Marloratus, a Huguenot minister at Rouen, was
unfortunately, before the printing was completed, hanged as a heretic,
under the direction of the Duke of Guise, but the books themselves
were not suppressed nor was the publisher interfered with. In fact,
the Faculty of the Sorbonne appears for the time to have suspended its
censorious watchfulness over heretical publications, perhaps because it
found its hands sufficiently full with the active work of suppressing
by fire, gibbet, and sword the heretics themselves.
Henry Estienne had, as stated, established his printing-office
in Paris, where his business may be considered as in a measure a
continuation of the concern of his father Robert, although the post of
printer to the King had, as we have noted, been given to his uncle.
Henry continued, however, to print a certain portion of his books in
Geneva, although it is not clear whether or not he retained the control
of, or even an ownership in, the Press which had been established
there by his father.[27] He appears at this time to have divided his
publishing undertakings, executing at Paris reprints of the classics
and of works in general literature, and reserving for the Geneva Press
theological works which were likely to give offence in a period of
“religious irritation.” This term is, I may mention, Maittaire’s, and
it is perhaps not too strong a description of a period in which a
divine who had taken no part in politics could be hanged simply for
editing a Protestant commentary.
I add some further selections of certain of the more important of the
titles from Henry’s Catalogue.
1563. “Rudimenta Fidei Christianæ; addita est ecclesiasticarum
precum formula; Græc. Lat.” 12mo.
This is Calvin’s Catechism, translated into Greek by Henry himself.
“De abusu linguæ Græcæ in quibusdem vocibus, quas Latina usurpat
admonitio.” 8vo. Of this treatise Henry was author as well as
publisher.
1564. “Fragmenta Pœtarum Veterum Latinorum, quorum opera non
extant, Ennii, Accii, Lucilii” etc. This work was undertaken out of
regard for the memory of his father, by whom the fragments had been
collected, but who had not been able to complete the preparation of
them for the press.
1566. “La confirmation de la discipline ecclésiastique observée
dans les églises réformées du royaume de France; avec la résponse
aux objections proposées à l’encontre.” This was printed in Geneva.
In the same year, was issued a Greek _Anthology_ to which the publisher
added certain annotations of his own. By way of exciting the emulation
of young poets, Henry promised an addition of such Greek epigrams
as had been turned into Latin metre by himself and others, and as a
proof of his own facility, he introduced into his annotations to the
_Anthology_ above mentioned more than fifty translations of a single
distich.
The publisher, in thus assuming responsibilities as an author, could,
of course, not escape the criticism of other authors claiming authority
in the same studies. Vavasseur, for instance, says of Henry’s literary
productions: “His verse is more faulty than his prose, his numbers
are harsh and unpolished, his muse is often triflingly diffuse. He is
fluent in writing, but frequently not correct. He is both fastidious
and dictatorial, talking freely of others and much of himself, and
forgetting the modesty which becomes the author.”[28] It is fair
to remember that Father Vavasseur was a Jesuit and was possibly,
therefore, no dispassionate judge of the defects of the scholarly but
heretical publisher.
1566. “Herodoti Historiæ Libri IX. et de vita Homeri Libellus,
Latine. Folio.”
This edition comprises also the _Opuscula_ of Herodotus, Plutarch,
and Porphyrius, relating to Homer’s life and poesy.
M. de Sallengre relates that Henry Estienne, having printed at a great
expense the histories of Herodotus, his enemies and above all the
monks, who sought every occasion to bring trouble upon him, decried his
history as filled with fables _et de contes à dormir debout_, and that
Henry, to repel the effect of this accusation, undertook to justify
himself by the composition of the following treatise, _Apologia pro
Herodoto, sive Herodoti Historia fabulositatis accusata_.
This _Apologia_ is described by Greswell as a serious performance,
containing nothing that should be particularly offensive to the
monks or to the Roman clergy, unless it be an incidental mention of
_La papesse Jeanne_ and a description of certain superstitions that
Estienne had observed in his visit to the Church of our Lady of Loretto.
The _Apologia_ was, later, prefixed to another issue of a Latin version
of _Herodotus_ and was subsequently printed in French in a separate
volume under the title _L’apologie pour Hérodote_.[29]
The _Apologia_ appears to have been amplified and extended and to have
been made the vehicle of a severe attack upon the Roman Hierarchy and
a means of exposing the ignorance and vices of its ecclesiastics,
the fooleries of their pulpit elocution, the astonishing credulity
of the laity instructed by them, and the laxity of discipline and
deterioration of manners which seemed to be the inevitable result of
a corrupt faith. Greswell is of opinion that the motives which led to
this attack are not to be sought for in any imaginary affront which
Henry had experienced through the monkish accusations against his
_Herodotus_, but that they were rather to be found in the irritation
occasioned by the persecutions from which his family had suffered and
in his rooted antipathy to the principles of the Church of Rome.[30]
Maittaire’s description of Henry’s criticism of the manners and works
of the monks recalls certain portions of the _Encomium Moriæ_ of
Erasmus. The author’s general line of argument is as follows: The
circumstances related by Herodotus in his History ought not to be
pronounced fables on account of their seeming want of verisimilitude,
as in recent times many things have happened which, though in
themselves apparently far less probable than much that Herodotus has
recorded, cannot be called in question. It is contended further that
it is impossible for men ever to have been so stupid and so gross as
Herodotus describes them; but Henry shows by undeniable examples how
excessive in all respects was the grossness of many of those who lived
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, persons who were probably
no less degraded than were the classes whose lives are recorded by
Herodotus. In the account of the wrong-doings and degradation of
later generations, Henry does not spare the monks, who are attacked
without mercy, and he speaks with hardly more reserve of the popes
themselves. It is difficult to understand why divines of the Sorbonne,
whose theological ire had been so bitter against Robert Estienne on
account of Greek annotations to the Testament, should have allowed to
pass, apparently without a protest, so sweeping a denunciation of the
character of the ecclesiastics.
According to De Sallengre, the _Apologia_ was a book which everyone
wished to possess. It was read with avidity, and editions of it were
multiplied. The first three, all printed in Geneva, were issued before
the close of the year 1566. The fourth, fifth, and sixth were printed
at Antwerp in 1567, 1568, and 1569. The seventh, eighth, ninth, and
tenth were printed at Rochelle (the centre of French Protestantism)
between 1572 and 1582, and the eleventh and twelfth at Lyons in 1592
and 1607. These editions were all superseded by that printed at The
Hague in 1735, with notes by M. le Duchat.
An anonymous translation appeared in London in 1607, under the title
of _A World of Wonders, or an Introduction to a treatise touching the
conformitie of ancient and modern wonders; or a Preparative Treatise
to the Apologie for Herodotus, the argument of which is taken from the
Apologie for Herodotus written by Henry Stephen, etc_. I have thought
it worth while to present the specification of the editions of a book
which achieved, if not fame, at least popularity, as an indication of
the activity of the printing-presses even during a period of political
strife and of widely extended wars.
The book appears never to have been put into print in Paris, as it was
doubtless not considered wise to test too severely the censorship of
the University. According to De Sallengre, copies were, however, in
very general circulation in Paris society, which was always ready to be
amused with the recital of clerical enormities and with pictures of the
scandals of private life.
The years 1562 and 1563 were signalised by active operations in the
continued strife between the Protestants and the Catholics, and while,
after 1563, there was a brief cessation of hostilities, the civil war
broke out again in 1567 and continued with brief intervals until the
Massacre of S. Bartholomew in 1572. In each one of these years of
disturbance, however, we find Henry Estienne’s imprint associated with
important publications, principally reissues of the classics, although
it is not easy to understand how it could have proved practicable to
secure any continued sale at this time in France for costly editions,
or how there was in fact any opportunity of interesting the public
or of bringing adequately to the attention of the public, books of
any class. The frequent interference with the communications between
Paris and the cities east of the Rhine must also have rendered it
very difficult to arrange for the distribution of French editions in
Germany, or in the Low Countries, while the latter were themselves in
the throes of the great rebellion against the dominion of Spain.
In 1568, Henry printed _Henrici Stephani annotationes in Sophoclem
et Euripidem_, etc., which is evidence that such little matters as
the battles of St. Denis and Jarnac were not permitted to interfere
with his classical studies any more than with the work of his
printing-office. In the next year, he issued another work from his
own pen: _Comicorum Græcorum sententiæ, id est Gnomæ, Græce Latinis
versibus ab H. Stephano redditæ, et annotationibus illustratæ_. He also
completed the publication of a collection of Latin historians. The
list of the year includes a number of other titles of which the most
important (with reference at least to the personality of Henry) were
the two following:
_Artis Typographicæ querimonia et Epitaphia typographorum quorundam,
per H. Stephanum_. 4to; and
_Henrici Stephani epistola de suæ typographiæ statu; Index librorum
qui ex ejusdem officina hætenus prodierunt._ 8vo.
The former is a lament concerning the degradation of the noble art of
typography. An art which had, as he complains, fallen into the hands of
the most illiterate of persons, _quibus nihil cum musis commune est_.
“What,” he exclaims, “would Aldus Manutius say if, returning to life,
he could behold the present miserable condition of the art to which his
life was devoted!” He then proceeds to adduce various instances of the
gross ignorance and corresponding obstinacy of some of the printers and
editors of his time, exemplified by their adulteration of particular
passages of classic authors. These quotations are followed by a number
of _Latin Elegiacs_ and certain _Epitaphia_, partly in Greek and partly
in Latin, which appear to have been included in the volume as evidence
that one printer at least, was both a classical scholar and a man of
literary capacity. It is doubtful whether the condition of printing
throughout Europe at this time afforded any substantial justification
for this sweeping complaint of Henry’s. The presses of Plantin were,
during these very years, active in Antwerp, although Plantin, like
Estienne himself, was contending against manifold difficulties in
the task of carrying on an international publishing business in
the midst of civil war and political disintegration; and the books
produced by Plantin will, not only for the beauty of their typography,
but especially for the perfection of the magnificent copper-plate
illustrations utilised for many of them, stand favourable comparison
with the productions of earlier or later generations. The books issued
in Nuremberg during the same decade, by the second of the Kobergers,
who had built up the greatest publishing concern that Germany had ever
known, can also be specified as excellent examples as well of scholarly
editing as of tasteful and accurate typography. It was doubtless the
case that in Paris as elsewhere, there were, during the last half of
the sixteenth century, examples of scholarly and ignorant editing and
of careless and inaccurate typography, but the same may be said of
every century since the time of Gutenberg. Henry Estienne’s essay may,
I think, be considered partly as an affectation and partly as a piece
of self-conceit.
The second of these monographs presents a description of the status of
his Press, together with an _Index librorum_ or classified catalogue
of his publications. It forms in fact the chief authority for the
history of his business. A considerable portion of the _Epistola_ is
devoted to a description of the purpose and character of the great
_Thesaurus Linguae Graecae_, then in course of production. Henry
takes pains to explain that the plan and inception of the _Thesaurus_
were due to his father Robert, who had in fact, before his death,
collected a large amount of material for the great etymological and
lexicographical undertaking, which may be considered, therefore, as the
work of two generations of scholarly publishers. Greswell is in accord
with Maittaire in describing the work as an “admirable and unrivalled
monument of ardent zeal for the advancement of learning, and as an
example of unwearied diligence and of colossal erudition.”[31]
The remainder of the _Epistola_ is devoted to a recital of the injuries
done to the authors of classical antiquity by ignorant and careless
editors and by credulous printers, ready to accept on the authority
of such editors new readings and unfounded “emendations” in the text.
Henry announces that he has in preparation a treatise to be entitled
_De Origine Mendorum in authoribus Graecis et Latinis_, but Greswell
can find no evidence that this was ever published.
The _Epistola_ closes with a humorous complaint of the trivial and
harassing interruptions to which a scholarly publisher is exposed
at the Frankfort Fair and elsewhere, on the part of applicants for
information concerning his publishing undertakings and plans. The
complaint is printed in Latin iambics. I quote some of the lines as
Englished by Greswell. It will be noted that the _Index librorum_ or
catalogue of Estienne had been printed for the purpose of answering
such inquiries in print. Aldus had, it may be remembered, been driven
to a similar course in 1498, but catalogues were still the exception
rather than the rule.
I’m harassed by the crowd of those
At Frankfort who their wares expose;
And ever ask “What are you doing
In prospect of the Fair ensuing?
New works you’ll shew, impressions splendid,
Where learning stands by Art commended?”
If I say “No,” “’Tis strange, what, none?
At least then promise--next but one.”
Still say I “No,” expostulation
Assumes the tone of indignation
That Frankfort’s mart’s so strongly slighted,
And faith is broken--never plighted.
Again, these quidnuncs set aside,
With letters, ceaseless, I’m annoyed,
Italian, English, German, French,
All on my studious hours entrench;
“What last has been achieved and ended?
What are the impressions next intended?”
Nor to such modest queries stinted,
Of books in print or to be printed
A thousand others they propound
Which e’en a prophet would confound.
* * * * *
Of what advantage all these letters?
Not stimulants are they, but fetters,
As though you’d spur a steed that’s idle
Yet check his progress with the bridle.
My press resists the condescension
That to such foppery gives attention;
Stands still and bids them longer stay for
All they suggest, or even pay for.
For this annoyance then--be sure
Not small intent to find a cure.
Of books to former fairs I’ve given,
Or now project by leave of heaven,
These pages few, as best may suit you,
In form of catalogue salute you;
Which you’ll my Rescript please to call,
Addrest to none and yet to all.
Henry’s complaints concerning futile and troublesome correspondence
might, of course, be repeated in many a publishing office to-day, but
the modern publisher is helped out of the difficulty to some extent
by his stenographers and typewriters. It remains a marvel how it was
possible, without any time-saving appliances, for the publishers of
the fifteenth century to conduct a complicated business, to give
personal labour to preparing for the press works calling for original
scholarship and detailed labour, and to carry on, in autographic
letters, literary and theological correspondence.
The _Epistola_ gives the titles or descriptions of a number of
important works which the ambitious publisher had in plan, a list, in
fact, too long to be completed within the lifetime or to be feasible
for the resources of any one publisher, and only a portion of which
were ever brought to completion. In 1571, Henry issued, among other
works, an edition of the works of Plutarch, which gives both the Greek
and the Latin text, in thirteen volumes octavo. In 1572, he completed
the great _Thesaurus_, the most important production of his busy life.
The full title is as follows:
_Thesaurus Græcæ Linguæ, ab Henrico Stephano constructus, in quo
præter alia plurima quæ primus præstitit (paternæ diligentiæ æmulus)
vocabula in certas classes distribuit, multiplici derivatorum serie
ad primigenia, tanquam ad radices unde pullulant, revocata. Thesaurus
Lectori._
_Nunc alii intrepide vestigia nostra sequantur;
Me duce, plana via est quæ salebrosa fuit._
_Anno MDLXXII. excudebat Henr. Stephanus, cum privilegio Caes.
Majestatis et Christianiss. Galliarum Regis._ 4 vols. Folio, with two
supplementary volumes containing an appendix and an index.
A seventh volume, issued a year later, adds two glossaries, and a
treatise on the dialects of Attica. This _Thesaurus Græcus_ was
completed by Henry at about the same age as that at which his father,
Robert, had published his Latin _Thesaurus_. The two works would
have been for any generation of publishers creditable examples of
scholarly and public-spirited enterprise, but when we remember that the
publishers were the compilers, and were also the authors of the notes,
commentaries, and separate treatises which make up a large portion of
the bulk of the volumes, and that their work as editors and authors
was done amidst the engrossing cares of the management in stormy times
of a complex and absorbing business, the _Thesauri_ remain magnificent
monuments to the scholarship, the capacity, and the persistent energy
of the two Estiennes.
The _Thesaurus Græcus_ was inscribed by Henry to the Emperor
Maximilian, Charles IX. of France, Elizabeth of England, and John
George, Marquis of Brandenburg. He secured for it, in addition to
the privilege of the French King, which bears date 1561, that of
the Emperor, issued in 1570. In one of the several prefatory words
Henry tells his readers that the only way in which he had found it
practicable to complete his task, was to bind himself to produce
each twenty-four hours, in readiness for the compositors who had
been detailed for the work, a stated quantity of written matter. The
interruptions were often, he says, so frequent that he was obliged to
lay aside the pen ten times in an hour; but there were few days on
which the “copy” that he had pledged himself to complete was not in
readiness at the hour fixed.
Henry makes a special appeal to scholars and to the public generally
to protect his great work against any piratical appropriations, or any
attempts on the part of epitomisers or abridgers. The appeal proved,
however, ineffective, and the _Thesaurus Græcus_ was utilised as a
convenient quarry by a number of later lexicographers. Greswell makes
special mention of Joannes Scapula as the first of the plagiarists
who took advantage of the labours of Henry. He states that Scapula
had been employed as one of Henry’s correctors, a position which gave
him convenient facilities for an early appropriation of the sheets of
Henry’s lexicon. The _Lexicon Græco-Latinum_, which bears the name of
Scapula, was printed in Basel in 1579. In his introduction, he speaks
of having had the plan of the undertaking long in mind, and of having,
in fact, made considerable progress in his work before Henry’s volumes
were printed. He does not admit the appropriation, or even the use of
any of Henry’s material, although, as Maittaire points out, whole pages
of the Basel lexicon are substantially identical with those of the
Paris work.
The lexicon of Scapula being in smaller and less costly form, was found
of convenience to students generally, but the scholars of Henry’s
generation did not hesitate to censure severely the conduct of Scapula
and to make strong condemnations of his literary dishonesty. Maittaire
quotes Malinkrot to this effect, and records also that the celebrated
Dr. Busby, of Westminster School, actually forbade his pupils, on the
ground of indignation at literary larceny, to use what he called “the
surreptitious lexicon” of Scapula. The instance is worth commemorating,
because it marks a distinct advance in the development of popular, or
at least of scholarly, opinion in regard to the rights of literary
producers. There had been not a few examples in previous generations
of indignation on the part of authors or editors concerning the
appropriation of their own works, indignation which was, to be sure,
chiefly concerned not with the diminution of the author’s proceeds,
but with the risk or certainty that the surreptitious editions would
be garbled and inaccurate, and would thus cause injustice to the
reputation of the author. I do not, however, find previous record of
instances in which scholars or readers not personally associated with
the author, had taken pains, simply on the ground of literary ethics,
to discountenance or discourage surreptitious or piratical editions.
It remains to add concerning the _Thesaurus_, that, in common with
not a few other public-spirited publishing undertakings, it brought
to its author-publisher loss instead of profits. Henry complains that
the publication involved him in serious pecuniary difficulties. La
Caille is authority for the statement that these difficulties and the
honour brought upon France by Henry’s publications were made the ground
of a donation, in 1578, by King Henry III. of three thousand livres.
Maittaire is, however, clear in his mind that while the King had
talked about such a compensation, and may even have promised it, the
money was never paid. The instance appears in several respects to be
parallel with that of the big Bible of Plantin, in connection with the
publication of which Plantin received from Philip II. promises many,
but no cash. A second edition was printed in 1572, the sale of which
may have helped to lessen the publisher’s loss. This was, however, the
year of the massacre of S. Bartholomew and of the battles of Brissac
and Moncontour, and it is probable that the business of selling books
could hardly have been in a satisfactory condition.
In 1574, Estienne printed an edition of _Apollonius Rhodius_, and, in
1575, a work of his own composition entitled _Pseudo-Cicero Dialogus
H. Stephani_, and, in the year following, a curious treatise compiled
by himself, entitled _H. Stephani Schediasmatum Variorum_. This year
also witnessed the completion of a magnificent impression of the works
of _Plato_, the editorial work on which was done largely by himself.
According to Maittaire and Fischer, hardly a single typographical error
is to be found in the three volumes. The first volume is dedicated to
Elizabeth, Queen of England, the second to James VI. of Scotland, and
the third to the Republic of Berne.
King Henry III. showed an intelligent interest in the work of the
Estienne Press, and appears to have extended to the printer not a
few marks of royal favour, although, as Maittaire points out, it was
the case in many instances that the gifts of money proffered by the
King did not get beyond the stage of promises. In 1578, the King sent
Henry into Switzerland in search of manuscripts and rare books, and in
1579, he conferred on him a general privilege, “_Tant pour tous les
Historiens Grecs et Latins que pour la Dictionnaire et Cours Civile._”
It is evident, from the various headings of the printer’s letters, that
he was continually shifting his residence. He writes most frequently,
to be sure, from Paris, but very often from Geneva, and again from
Berne, Orleans, Lyons, and Frankfort. He appears to have given his
personal attention, during many years, to the business of his House
at the Frankfort Fair. It is sufficiently surprising that, with this
migratory life, he was able to bring to a successful conclusion so many
important editorial and publishing undertakings, especially as the work
of the printing-office was so often interrupted by war or rumours of
war.
The years 1578-1583 chronicled the production of a number of important
books, chiefly editions of the classics. An edition of _Herodotus_,
issued in 1581, the publisher dedicated to Sir Philip Sidney, with a
prefatory address in which he reminds Sidney of their former literary
intercourse, first in Germany and later in Austria. During 1584,
Henry’s Press appears to have been idle, but the five following years
show a renewed activity. The assassination of his royal patron,
Henry III., in 1588, did not fail to call forth the lamentations of
Estienne’s muse, but his _Epitaphia_ on the monarch are said to evince
more loyalty than poetic excellence.
The last work bearing Henry’s imprint was an edition of the _Poemata
Varia_ of Beza, which bears the date of 1579. Henry’s death came in
1598, in a hospital at Lyons. The seventy years of his active and
eventful life had brought, as an offset to the well merited prestige
and honours that had been accorded to him for his distinctive services,
a full measure of vicissitudes and reverses. His life was full of sharp
contrasts. He had intimate relations with many of the rich and great,
and he found himself associated not infrequently with the splendours
of courts and enjoyed the favour of more than one monarch; yet poverty
was his prevailing lot, and his work was carried on under a constant
struggle with difficulties and obstacles of the most serious character.
When we recall the limited extent of the circles of students and
readers in France and throughout Europe who were interested in higher
literature, the constant absorption of the rulers and nobles and of the
active-minded citizens generally in war and in political strife to the
necessary exclusion of any adequate attention to the arts of peace;
and when, further, we remember the constant succession of wars, civil
and foreign, in which, during the lifetime of our publisher, France
was engaged, wars which must have rendered all traffic difficult and
have constituted a most serious hindrance to the business of producing
and of distributing books, we can but be surprised at the number and
the magnitude of his literary and his business achievements, and are
prepared to accord full appreciation to his courage, his patient
persistence, his enormous industry, and his omnivorous scholarship.
It has been possible in this article merely to touch upon some of
the more noteworthy of his own productions. The mere transcription
of the titles of the literary labours achieved or projected by Henry
would be a considerable task; and we gather the impression that in
his strength and capacity for continuous work he must have as far
exceeded the average literary worker of to-day, as the heroes of old
were said to have exceeded in their physical powers the men of later
times. In comparing the character of Henry with that of his father
Robert, Maittaire says that they evinced equal skill and zeal in their
profession, but speaks of Robert as less ostentatious of his own
merits, more ingenuous, and more ready to acknowledge the co-operation
of others. Greswell finds evidence of an arrogance and moroseness of
temper in Henry, which increased with age, and which frequently led him
into violent altercations.
Florence, the eldest daughter of Henry Estienne, had married (in 1586)
the famous scholar Isaac Casaubon, a son-in-law of whom a father like
Henry Estienne might well have been proud. Mark Pattison, in his
biography of Casaubon, suggests that the latter had probably fallen
in love with the manuscript collections of the father before he began
to pay his court to the daughter. It was fortunate for Casaubon that
his wife proved satisfactory in herself, as the jealousy of her
father prevented him from securing any benefit from the manuscript
collections. After a good deal of friction, Casaubon appears to have
given up the attempt to carry on scholarly work with Estienne, and,
according to Pattison, he never saw the inside of Estienne’s library,
notwithstanding the absence of the latter for months and even for years
at a time, excepting on one memorable occasion when he and Florence
summoned courage to break it open.[32]
According to Casaubon, Estienne was in fact a perfect dragon in the
close keeping of his books and manuscripts. Speaking of a new book of
Camerarius, Casaubon writes to Bongars, “Read it I have not; seen it
I have, but it was in the hands of Henry Estienne who would not so
much as allow me to touch, much less to read it, while he is every day
using or abusing my books as if they were his own.”[33] Pattison goes
on to point out, however, that Casaubon exaggerates the facts, when
he complains that Estienne would lend him no books, as both with the
_Strabo_ and with the _Athenæus_, he derived material assistance from
collations which Henry Estienne had made in Italy.
Casaubon contributed also to certain of the editions issued by his
father-in-law, such as the _Thucydides_ of 1588, the Latin _Dionysius_
of the same year, the _Plinius_ of 1591, and the _Diogenes Laertius_ of
1593. According to his own account, he was, however, jealously excluded
from all share in the text and the translation, or from any control of
the contents of the volumes, and his contributions appear to have been
limited to notes and commentaries.
Casaubon appears never to have secured from Estienne the payment of a
certain dower, that belonged to or had been promised to his wife, while
the portion of the property that finally came to Florence after the
settlement of her father’s very meagre estate was but trifling and was,
later, more than offset by a claim for which the estate was adjudged to
be liable for the re-payment of certain moneys that had been advanced,
on the security of the matrices of the famous royal font of Greek type,
which had been brought by Robert Estienne from Paris.
The business of the House of Estienne was carried on after Henry’s
death by his son Paul and his nephews. The publications of these
Estiennes of the fourth generation were chiefly, as heretofore, in the
division of Greek and Roman classics, and were of a character fairly
to maintain the high scholarly standard which had been established.
Robert was himself a classicist and a poet, and Maittaire speaks of his
literary productions as having secured a good repute.
Antoine, the son of Paul, succeeded his father in 1620, and in 1623 was
appointed _Imprimeur du Roy_. His son Henry succeeded in 1649 to the
latter title. Henry’s work closed about 1659. He left no children, and
was the last of the family who devoted himself to the work of printing
and publishing, and with his death, therefore, the history of the House
comes to an end.
During a term of more than a century and a half the Estiennes or
Stephani had, as printers, as publishers, and as scholars filled a
large place in the literary history of France and of Europe, and I find
record of no other family which has contributed to the profession of
publishing so many distinctive and distinguished men.
=Isaac Casaubon.=--As a supplement to this sketch of the history of the
Estienne family, I will add a brief reference to the literary work and
the publishing relations of Isaac Casaubon, the famous scholar, who, as
above mentioned, entered into the family circle as the son-in-law of
the second Henry.
In 1589, the city of Geneva was being besieged by the Duke of Savoy.
The siege continued, in form at least, during the ensuing nine years,
and although it was, of course, not practicable during the whole of
that period to maintain a close investment, the city suffered all the
privations and many of the horrors of continued war.
Geneva contained in 1589, at the time of the beginning of the siege, a
population of about 12,000. It was able to muster for its defence 2186
men capable of bearing arms. Against this little force the Duke brought
up an army of 18,000 regular troops, with the determination to destroy
the nest of heretics once for all. The importance of destroying the
city was fully understood by the Catholic party, and was especially
urged by S. Francis de Sales. The schools and the printing-presses were
particularly pointed out by the Saint as instruments of mischief. The
struggle against these odds was a gallant one, but the little Republic
succeeded in preserving its existence and its independence, although
when, by the peace of Vervins in 1598, it was released from its state
of siege, it had lost out of its little levy nearly three fourths.
Isaac Casaubon, who, later, took rank as one of the most learned
scholars of his time, was born in Geneva in 1559. He was the son of
Arnold Casaubon, a Protestant pastor of Dauphiné. He held the Chair of
Greek and of History in the Academy of Geneva from 1581 to 1596, (a
term which included the period of the great siege) when he migrated
to Montpellier. Isaac’s salary as professor in Geneva was two hundred
and eighty florins, to which he was able to add ninety florins from
boarding students. On this meagre income he ventured (in 1584) to marry
a wife and managed also to bring together a considerable collection of
books.
This first wife, who was a native of Geneva, died in two years, leaving
a daughter. In 1586, Casaubon took for his second wife Florence, the
daughter of Henry Estienne.
One of the manuscript-dealers with whom Casaubon, as an impecunious
collector, came into relations, was Darmarius, described as one of the
last of the caligraphs, a class which in Italy and in the university
towns of Germany survived for nearly half a century the invention of
printing. Darmarius had access to the libraries of Venice and Florence
and travelled about Europe to sell his copies. His manuscripts, says
Pattison, were not works of art like the productions of the pen of a
Vergecio or a Rhosus, made to adorn the collections of princes and
cardinals. The books sold by Darmarius were hasty transcripts, written
on poor paper, chiefly of certain unpublished works that he had found
in the library of Cardinal Bessarion.[34] They did not make up for
their want of beauty by the accuracy of their text, for the transcriber
does not seem to have known even the grammar of classic Greek, but for
these wretched copies he was able to secure from scholars hungry for
books, great prices. For a _Polyæmus_, Casaubon paid, in 1578, “a great
sum,” _magno ære_, and for a _Julius Africanus_ three hundred crowns,
almost its weight in silver, but neither of these authors was as yet in
print.
The admission of Casaubon into the family of the great publisher, so
far from adding to his opportunities for getting his writings before
the public, did not even secure for him any additional facilities for
their preparation. Reference has already been made in the sketch of
Henry Estienne to the jealous selfishness with which, particularly
in the later years of his life, he retained in his own hands his
collections of books and of manuscripts. But few friends appear to have
ever secured from him permission to utilise his literary stores, while
of his learned son-in-law he was particularly jealous. Casaubon was
one of the few scholars in Europe who was competent to edit, from the
original, a Greek text, and although in certain respects Estienne’s
scholarly ideals were high, he seems to have laid more stress upon his
individual prestige than upon the advance of learning.
Impecunious as Casaubon was during by far the greater portion of
his life, he appears to have been always ready to give orders or
commissions for the purchase of books or manuscripts. In some cases
he was able to arrange to pay for these by services in one direction
or another; in 1592, for instance, Henricus Petri of Basel sends
him two copies of his second edition of _Homer_, one for the King
of France and one for himself, the gift being accompanied with the
request that Casaubon would secure for the book a (copyright) privilege
for France.[35] In 1608, Biondi of Venice has a standing commission
to send books to Casaubon.[36] Many presents of manuscripts were
made to Casaubon, and in other instances manuscripts and books were
loaned to him which were never returned. Pattison speaks of this part
of Casaubon’s collection as becoming his by “process of adhesion.”
In 1595, Casaubon writes to Commelin, a publisher of Heidelberg, as
follows:
“If I ask you to send me direct all that issues from your press, it
is not, believe me, dearest Commelin, because I am unwilling to buy
these, but because I am unable. Our booksellers here in Geneva are a
blind sort, who are unwilling to bring back from Frankfort any books
that may not pay. I except Favre, who is not so stupid as the rest. You
will have to write to De Tournes [a printer of Geneva] directing him
to deliver to me the _Chrysostom_, as he refuses to do so without your
express commands.” Casaubon’s complaint about the lack of enterprise on
the part of the booksellers of Geneva has, of course, been frequently
enough repeated by scholars of later date, who are not always able to
understand that the bookseller who takes unwise risks in accumulating
stock that may not sell, will very soon cease to be a bookseller at
all. His annoyance at De Tournes for declining to hand over property of
Commelin’s without authority from the owner is equally naïve.
Casaubon tells us that Geneva in his day had a public library, but that
the collection, although valuable, was very small. The _Commentaries_
published by Casaubon in 1592, on Perseus, Theophrastus, Suetonius,
and Diogenes Laertius, were based upon the lectures given by him in
the Geneva Academy. The volumes were printed in Geneva, but I can
find no record of the arrangement made by him of their publication.
The references that he makes to the several sources of his very small
income include no mention of receipts from the sale of his books, and
it seems probable that these brought to their author no returns other
than the occasional expression of recognition or honorarium on the
part of scholarly patrons. If Henry Estienne had been willing to give
to these _Commentaries_ the service of the imprint of his Paris House,
the commercial results would probably have been much more satisfactory,
but, whatever the difficulty, it was the case that no writings of
Casaubon were issued by his father-in-law.
Casaubon tells us that the ministers of Geneva exercised a strict
surveillance over the teaching both of the scholar and of the Academy,
and that a professor in the latter could not even publish without first
submitting his book to the censorship of divines. It seems probable
that the Calvinistic scrutiny in Geneva may easily have been in its
narrowness and in its persistency a more serious obstacle during the
last ten years of the sixteenth century, in the way of publishing and
literary undertakings, than the censorship of the Catholic theologians
of Paris.
It is the conclusion of Pattison (which is not in harmony with the
earlier descriptions of the intellectual activities of Geneva) that
during the term of Casaubon’s work there existed in the town nothing
that could properly be called a literary interest. There was a poor
and starved seminary for pious instruction; an academic printing-press
devoted to the production of sermons and text-books; a theology
not formal or nominal, but interfused throughout the life and the
thought of each day. An armed enemy crouched at the gates of the
city, watching his opportunity for the death spring; while each week
brought news of some fresh outrage on believers with whom Geneva was in
sympathy in the countries where the Catholic reaction was in its full
tide.
On this ungenial soil, Casaubon developed out of his own instincts
the true ideal of classical learning. Not a scheme of philology, as
we now conceive it, but the idea of a complete mastery, by exhaustive
reading, of the thought of the ancient world, a reconstruction of Greek
and Roman antiquity out of the extant remains of the literature.[37]
Casaubon’s first literary work of importance, the _Animadversiones_
on Athenæus, was printed at Lyons in the year 1600. He was at the
time occupying a Chair in the Protestant University of Montpellier,
but there was no press in Montpellier with facilities for printing
Greek text. In fact, the printing of books in the city appears to have
begun only in 1597. Seventy years earlier, Rabelais had been obliged
to have printed at Lyons his edition of the _Hypocratic Aphorisms_.
Casaubon endeavoured to induce a Geneva printer to establish in
Montpellier a Press with a Greek font and a skilled corrector, but the
business connected with the little University did not offer sufficient
encouragement for the undertaking. It may be remembered that Oxford did
not possess any Greek type until 1586, and that Greek was first printed
in Cambridge some years later. Pattison is of opinion that there was
probably at the time a Greek Press at Toulouse, but no heretic could
print or even sojourn in this city of fanatical Romanism, a city in
which even the edict of toleration could never be put in force.
What Casaubon would, of course, have preferred and what ought, through
his father-in-law, to have been secured for him, was the advantage of
the Greek Press of Paris, which, during the previous half-century, had
secured for itself a well-earned pre-eminence. For the impecunious
professor a journey to Paris was, however, at this time, out of the
question, and he was obliged to content himself with a provincial
publisher. Of the book-trade of the French provinces, Lyons was at
that time the centre. In facilities for reaching the book markets of
Switzerland and Germany, it had advantages over Paris itself. Its
connections with Italy were, of course, very much more direct than
those possessed by the publishers of Paris, and it utilised these
connections not only for the prompt importation of the publications
of France, of Florence, and of Rome, but for the reproduction, often
in pretty close fac-simile, of the more noteworthy books issued from
the Italian presses. With the smaller outlay requisite in reprinting
works upon which the expense of editing and preparing for the press had
already been covered, the publishers of Lyons were able to undersell
Aldus and his successors and to secure for the Aldine texts a large
part of the returns from the markets of southern Europe. They did
not even limit their “appropriations” to the productions of foreign
publishers, such as Aldus of Venice, Froben of Basel, and Koberger of
Nuremberg. We find continual record of complaints on the part of the
publishers of Paris that their “privileges” were not respected and
that their more marketable books were reproduced by their piratical
competitors in Lyons. The “enterprise” of the publishers in Lyons seems
not even to have been restricted by their relations with the Catholic
Church, for they built up a trade in the production of Calvinistic
hymn-books for the use of the congregations of Switzerland.
The printers of Geneva, who were naturally of the opinion that
Calvinism was their legitimate stock in trade and should be for them
an exclusive possession, equally unmindful of their denominational
obligations, retorted by manufacturing cheap editions of missals,
books of hours, and even of Jesuit publications. The Lyonese printers
availed themselves of the brand of heretic to secure the confiscation
at the frontier of a good many shipments of the books from Geneva even
when these books belonged to “orthodox” Jesuit literature. The Genevese
could not easily meet this weapon, as there was at that time in force
in the Republic no _index expurgatorius_, and there was, therefore,
no means of securing an examination of books on the frontier. They
continued, however, their invasion of the French market after peace
had been restored between France and the Republic, and they managed
to evade the prohibition or the restriction upon the importation
of books printed in the Protestant city of Geneva, by placing upon
their title-pages the name of some other publishing centre, such as
Cologne or Antwerp. Occasionally even, the name of a French city was
substituted for the obnoxious Geneva. For instance, the edition of
_Aristotle_, printed in 1590 by Le Maire of Geneva, had upon it the
title _Lugdunæ_ (Lyons).
Henry Estienne died at Lyons in January, 1598, and Casaubon, on his way
to Geneva, to look after the settlement of his wife’s interest in the
estate, stopped at Lyons. He found there, in the person of a certain
Meric de Vic, a patron who was willing to co-operate with him in the
publication of the _Animadversiones_, and who, afterwards, gave him
the means of making his visit to Paris. In later years, De Vic was
known as a friend and patron of Grotius. I have been able to find no
exact record of the arrangement with the Lyons publisher. The work was
printed for the account of the author, by Antoine de Harsy, the cost
being in large part provided by De Vic.
Pattison speaks of De Harsy as “one of those cormorants who about this
time began to sit hard by the tree of knowledge,”[38] but he does
not give us the evidence for this unfavourable estimate. He goes on
to say, as if in mitigation of his harsh description of Casaubon’s
first publisher, that up to this time the publisher had usually been
the friend of the author, and often his collaborator, even when not an
author in his own name.
In arriving at Geneva, after the death of Estienne, Casaubon entered,
only for the second time in his life, his father-in-law’s library.
“Such a wreck of vast projects! A memorial of stupendous labour!” he
exclaimed, on seeing it. We learn from his diary that it was due to
his influence that the co-heirs permitted the manuscripts to pass to
Paul Estienne, to whom the Greek Press had been bequeathed. The printed
books were sold for the benefit of the creditors. Such a termination
of the scholarly labours and enormous energy of Estienne was hardly to
have been looked for.
In the year 1600, at the instance of his friend De Vic, Casaubon
journeyed to Paris, where he was hoping to receive from the King some
kind of appointment that would secure him an income. He was received
for a time as the guest of his wife’s cousin, Henry Estienne. The
publishing business of the old House of Estienne was then being carried
on in Paris by the Patissons, who had connected themselves with the
family by marriage.
The position which Casaubon understood from De Vic had been promised
by the King was not secured without discouraging delay. He had hoped
to be associated in some way with the instruction of Greek in the
University, but his Protestant faith proved an insuperable obstacle to
any University appointment. In 1601, after he had been kept waiting
nearly a year, a royal patent was given to him as keeper of the Royal
Library, where he succeeded the mathematician Gosselin. The salary was
1,200 livres, and the duties of the post left to the incumbent a large
measure of leisure time.
The Paris of that day contained about 400,000 people. Coryat, writing
in 1608, says that the Rue S. Jacques was “very full of booksellers
that have faire shoppes most plentifully furnished with bookes.” The
library in which the scholar from Geneva now found himself installed
contained about nine hundred works, a large proportion of which were in
manuscript. The collection of Greek manuscripts was said to be second
only to that of the Vatican.[39]
The new librarian found himself in favour with the King, who visited
the library from time to time and made gracious inquiries of the keeper
concerning the contents of the books. It was said by Scaliger of Henry
IV. that he could not keep his countenance and could not read a book.
Moderate as was the salary of the keeper of the King’s books, it was,
by not a few of those in authority in a Court where literature was
held in such low esteem, considered to be a wasteful and excessive
expenditure. “You cost the King too much, Sir,” said Sully to Casaubon;
“your pay exceeds that of two good captains, and you are of no use to
the country.”[40]
Casaubon’s position in Paris proved, after a few years, to be an
impossible one. It had, it seems, been the expectation of the King that
his librarian would, for the sake of remaining in Paris, follow the
royal example and accept (in form at least) the faith of Rome. This
course the student from Geneva had, however, no idea of taking. The
opposition of the theologians of the University and of the politicians
of the Court (including the great minister Sully) proved in the end
sufficient to withdraw from the librarian the King’s favour, and
Casaubon foresaw that he could not be assured of the continuance of
the royal protection. At the invitation of some scholarly English
friends--Spottswood, later, Archbishop of Glasgow, and Lamb, afterwards
Bishop of Galway,--Casaubon went to London, ostensibly for a visit.
He was presented to King James, whose ambition to be recognised as a
member of the fraternity of European scholars induced him to offer to
Casaubon a pension of three hundred pounds if he would make his home in
England. The offer was accepted, and the remaining years of Casaubon’s
life were spent in London, with an occasional sojourn in Ely, where his
good friend, Bishop Andrews, was always ready to tender appreciative
hospitality.
One of the famous controversial publications of the latter half of the
sixteenth century was the series entitled the _Magdeburg Centuries_.
The purpose of the Lutheran writers of this work was to present a true
history of the Church of Christ. According to this Protestant view, the
Church had been instituted in the Apostolic age in perfect purity, but
had been perverted by a process of slow canker, until it had become the
Church, not of Christ but of Anti-Christ, an instrument not for saving
men, but for destroying them. The _Centuries_ were completed, in 1574,
in no less than thirteen folio volumes. It was evident that, for a
work of this compass, no wide circulation could be looked for with the
impecunious public of Protestant Germany, but the historical thesis of
which these folios were the laborious evidence made a deep impression
upon the thought of the time.[41]
A young priest named Baronius was selected by the authorities in Rome,
or rather by S. Philip Neri, to prepare a reply to the _Centuries_,
and he devoted his life to the task. The result was the production
of the _Annales Ecclesiastici_, the most comprehensive work which
the controversies of the Protestant revolt had as yet produced. The
_Annales_ were completed, as far as the work of Baronius was concerned,
in thirteen folio volumes, in 1600, but the series was continued by
various writers until, in the edition issued at Lucca in 1738-1786, it
had grown to thirty-eight folio volumes, a work of which purchase was
difficult and perusal impossible.
Of the original work, the circulation, considering the bulk and the
costliness of the volumes, was unprecedented. The printing was done at
the Papal Press, the same press which had originally been organised
by Paul Manutius. The cost was borne by the papal treasury and the
full weight of the authority of the influence of the Church was given
to securing the widest possible distribution. As a result, edition
after edition was taken off by the demands from the libraries of the
monasteries, the cathedral chapters, and the Jesuit colleges and also
by individual prelates and princes, who had remained in the orthodox
fold.[42] The amount of the original labour put into the book by
Baronius must have been enormous, as his texts, his notes, and even
his extracts were all made with his own hand. According to his own
statement, the continuous labour could never have been supported, had
it not been in the first place for the stimulating authority of S.
Philip Neri, and secondly for the special aid given by the Virgin, the
saints, and the apostles Peter and Paul. Pattison sums up the purpose
and the result of the work as follows: “Baronius exhibited the visible
unity and impeccable purity of the Church founded upon Peter and
handed down inviolate; such at this day as it had ever been ... the
_Annales_ transferred to the Catholic party the preponderance in the
field of learning, which ever since Erasmus had been on the side of the
innovators.”
It was the turn of the Protestants to feel the need of an antidote
to Baronius and an attempt to supply this need was made in the
_Exercitationes_ of Casaubon. Casaubon’s work, however, never
passed beyond the status of a fragment, although this fragment was
sufficiently ponderous to form eight hundred folio pages. According
to the Protestant authorities, Casaubon had no difficulty in showing
the great lack of accurate scholarship on the part of Baronius and in
pointing out in the earlier portions of the _Annales_ (it was only
the first two volumes that were considered in his _Exercitationes_) an
enormous number of errors and misstatements. It was in fact difficult
to understand how the task of writing the early history of the Church
could have been undertaken (even with the aid of S. Peter and S.
Paul) by an author who was ignorant both of Greek and of Hebrew. The
volume of _Exercitationes_ did not, however, secure any such general
circulation or wide-spread influence with Protestant readers as had
been gained among the Catholics by the great series of _Annales_. There
was no ecclesiastical authority to induce the purchase as an act of
piety and no ecclesiastical machinery available to further circulation.
These three works seemed to me to call for some special reference,
because they present noteworthy and characteristic examples of the
theological controversies of the century and of the employment of
scholarly labour to secure or to affirm the foundations of religious
faith. The very great advantages possessed by the Roman writer in
securing immediate channels of distribution and an assured reading
public are also to be noted in connection with the serious obstacles
existing at the time in the way of any general distribution of books by
means of such machinery as was available for the publishers.
The _Exercitationes_ was printed for Casaubon by the King’s printer in
London and was issued by a publisher named Bell. I can find no record
of the publishing arrangement, but the cost of the undertaking appears
to have been provided for in part by the royal treasury and in part by
the aid of Bishop Andrews, who was an old friend of the author.
Casaubon’s sojourn in England was more favourable for his literary
labour than had been his position as royal librarian in Paris, but
while he was the most industrious of students, and, according to
his biographies, practically killed himself by close application to
his desk, the number of his completed works is but inconsiderable.
Pattison gives the titles or descriptions of not less than twenty-four
books, which had been planned out and many of which had been in
part written, but which remained at the death of the scholar either
fragments or simply titles.
Of the twenty-five works that were finished during the lifetime of
the scholar, a portion were afterwards characterised by himself as
_juvenilia_ which he was unwilling even to acknowledge. The edition
of _Theophrastus_, published in 1592, is the first work with which in
later years Casaubon expressed himself as satisfied. No one of the
books appears to have retained for itself a literary life, that is to
say, to have become a part of the world’s literature or even to have
remained in demand with the scholars. It was the case with Casaubon,
as with Scaliger, that his reputation has remained greater than that
of his productions. The scholar was more important than his books. It
seems evident, as far as can be gathered from the scanty references to
business details in Casaubon’s correspondence, that he never earned
anything, at least directly, through the labours of his pen. His books
must all have produced deficiencies instead of profits, and the sum
required for their publication had to be obtained from the few wealthy
friends who were able to appreciate the value to the world of a life
devoted to scholarship.
Casaubon died in London in 1614, in his 55th year.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]