THE KOBERGERS OF NUREMBERG.
1440-1540.
ANTHONI KOBERGER (the elder), who for a number of years held the
position of the leading publisher of his time, came of an old Nuremberg
family. One of his ancestors had been a burgomaster of Nuremberg as
far back as 1349, and took an active part at that time in a successful
effort to overthrow the rule of the nobles over the city, and, during
the two centuries following, the Kobergers continued to be leading
citizens.
Anthoni was born about 1440, or ten years before the completion of
Gutenberg’s printing-press. He was probably brought up as a jeweller,
an occupation in which in the later years of his life he was again
interested, but in 1472, he devoted himself to the new art of printing,
and in 1473 he issued the first volume, bearing a date, which is
certainly identified as his. The work chosen was one of the great books
of the world’s literature, _Boethii Liber de Consolatione Philosophiæ
cum Commentario Thomæ de Aquino_, a dignified and judicious selection
with which to initiate the publishing undertakings of the Kobergers,
and one which was fairly representative of the general character of
their subsequent issues.
Albert Dürer, whose original trade was that of a goldsmith, had served
as godfather for Anthoni Koberger, and Anthoni’s eldest son was
apprenticed to Dürer. There was a close connection, in Germany as well
as in Italy, between the earlier book illustrators and the goldsmiths
and other artificers in metals, and not a few of the first designers
and engravers, together with some of the best of the printers, came,
like Dürer, from the ranks of the metal-workers.
The first printing-office in Nuremberg had been established in 1470, by
Heinrich Kefer, of Mayence (who had been an assistant of Gutenberg), in
company with Sensenschmid from Eger, and their first publication was a
tract on the Song of Solomon, by Dr. Gerson, Chancellor of Paris, who
had died in 1429. It was very exceptional for printers of this time to
begin their operations with a work by a contemporary or recent writer.
Anthoni’s active work as a publisher continued until about 1513. His
contemporary, Johann Neudorffer, writing about 1509, says that he was
then employing about twenty-four presses, with over a hundred workmen,
the latter comprising compositors, pressmen, binders, correctors,
illuminators, and designers.[73] All of these, says Neudorffer, were
provided with their meals by their employer, in a building apart from
the works, and they were obliged to go between the two buildings at
regular hours and with military discipline. It is noteworthy to find
so fully organised and disciplined a book-manufacturing concern within
half a century after the beginning of printing, and we may fairly
assume that the founder was a man of distinctive character and ability.
In the actual number of separate works issued, Koberger was possibly
equalled by one or more of his contemporaries, but in respect to
literary importance and costliness, and in the beauty and excellence
of the typography, the Koberger publications were not equalled by
any books of the time excepting the issues of Aldus in Venice. He
did not limit his publishing undertakings to the works printed from
his own presses, but gave contracts for the printing of a number of
important publications to printers in other cities. In 1525, for
instance, Grüninger of Strasburg prints for Koberger the translation
by Pirckheimer of the _Geography_ of Ptolemy, and Amerbach of Basel,
who had begun his work as a corrector with Koberger, printed for him,
later, a number of works.
Koberger’s correspondence shows that he had agents or active
representatives not only in the other book-centres of the empire, such
as Frankfort, Leipzig, Vienna, Basel, Strasburg, and Cologne, but in
more distant cities, with which business interchange must, during the
first years of the sixteenth century, have been subject to serious
risks and to many interruptions, such as Paris, Buda-Pesth, Warsaw,
Venice, Florence, Rome, Antwerp, Bruges, and Leyden. In this matter
of organising connections and distributing machinery throughout the
Continent, Koberger had a decided advantage over his great contemporary
Aldus, who found, as we have seen, no little difficulty in maintaining
permanent satisfactory arrangements for the distribution of his books
north of the Alps. Aldus was obliged to depend chiefly upon his direct
correspondence with individual buyers among the scholars of Europe,
but Koberger secured larger results by utilising the services of the
book-trade, the organisation of which in Germany and France was now
taking shape. He was himself, in fact, a bookseller as well as a
publisher and printer, selling both to the book-trade and at retail,
and he was the first of the booksellers of Germany, and possibly of
Europe, to issue a classified catalogue of current publications. Kapp
describes his book-shop as the best equipped repository for standard
literature (_Sortiments-Buchhandlung_), in Germany. Possessing full
knowledge and experience of all divisions of book-making and of
book-selling, Koberger was in a position to take an active part in
furthering the organisation of the German book-trade, of which for a
number of years he was recognised as the natural leader.
One of the results of the Reformation had been, as will be noted in the
chapter on Luther, to transfer the centre of literary activity from
the south to the north of Germany. Previous to this time, Nuremberg
had been conveniently enough located for the publishing trade and for
the distribution of books, but, if it had not been for the energy
and enterprise of Koberger, it would doubtless have been very much
outclassed in the importance of its book-trade by some one of the
cities possessing facilities for water transportation. Koberger appears
not to have been a bigoted Romanist, but his sympathies were on the
whole with the Church party, and his theological publications, which
formed by far the most important portion both of his undertakings
and of his retail stock, were nearly all in line with conservative
Catholic theology. The sales of all the older theological works, the
writings of the Fathers, etc., were very much lessened by the effects
of the Reformation, and, after the Reform doctrine had begun to take
root in Nuremberg, this division of the business of the Kobergers was
materially interfered with. Notwithstanding the very considerable
demand that came up in Nuremberg for the writings of the Reformers, the
imprint of Anthoni Koberger appears never to have been associated with
any of these.
In order to indicate the general character of his undertakings, I give
the titles of some of the more characteristic of his publications.
I omit half a dozen volumes issued prior to 1473, which have not
certainly been identified as Koberger’s.
1473. “Boethii Liber de Consolatione Philosophiæ, c. comm. Thomæ de
Aquino.” (Reprinted four or five times later.)
1474. “Duns Scoti, in quartum librum sententiarum.”
1475. “Thomæ de Aquino, glossa continua super quatuor Evangelistas
Biblia Latina.”
1477. “Walteri Burley, Libellus de Vita et Moribus Philos. et
Poetarum.”
“Biblia Latina.”
1478. “Biblia Latina.” (Printed twice in this year.)
“Antonini Summæ Theologicæ, pars prima.”
“Ludolphi Carthusiensis, Vita Christi.”
1479. Gritsch, Joannis, “Quadragesimale.”
1480. “Biblia Latina.”
Duranti, Gulielmi, “Rationale Divinorum Officiorum.”
Petrus Daubussen. “Relatio de Obsidione Urbis Rhodiæ.”
1481. “Biblia Latina cum postillis.” Nicolai de Lyra, 4 vols.
“Duns Scoti, in quatuor libros. Sententiarum Petri Lombardi.”
“Æneæ Sylvii Epistolæ.”
1482. “Biblia Latina.”
“Clementis Papæ V. Constitutiones c. apparatu.”
“Alexandri de Ales Summæ Theologicæ pars prima, pars tertia, pars
quarta.”
“Justiniani pandectarum opus. Digestum vetus Glossatum.”
1483. “Die Deutsche Bibel, mit Bildern.” This was the version which
preceded Luther’s by about a third of a century.
“Hugonis de Prato Sermones Dominicales Super Evangelia et epist.”
“Vincentii Belluacensis Speculum Historiale.”
“Vincentii Belluacensis Speculum Naturale.”
1484. “Antonini Opus Historiarum seu Chronicarum Tribus const.
part.”
1485. “Biblia Latina cum postillis, Nicolai de Lyra.”
“Fortalitium Fidei Contra Judæos, Hæreticos et Saracenos.”
1486. “Justiniani Institutiones cum glossa.”
“Gratiani Decretum.”
“Breviarum Romanorum,” C. Calend.
1487. “Meffreth”, “Hortulus Reginæ seu Sermones de temp. et de
Sanctis.”
1488. “Justiniani Imperatoris Codex repetitæ prælectionis cum
glossa.”
1491. “Antonini Opus Historiarum seu Chronicarum.”
1492. “Summa Angelica de Casibus.” “Conscientiæ P. Angelum de
Clavastio.”
“P. Virgilii Maronis Opera cum Comment. diversis.”
“Vocabularius Utriusque Juris.”
1493. “Gregorii IX. Decretales cum summariis.”
“Gesta Romanorum.” The first printed edition.
1494. “Psalterium Brunonis.”
1495. “Hieronymi Epistolarum omnes partes.”
1496. “Heinrici Institoris tractatus varii contra quatuor Errores
novissime exortos adv. Diviniss. Eucharistiæ Sacram.”
“Guillermi postilla in Epistolas Pauli et Evangelia.”
“Gregorii IX. libri quinque Decretalium.”
“Guillermi Opera de Fide, Legibus etc.”
“Guillermus de Universo.”
“Thesaurus Novus Sermonum de Tempore.”
“Thomæ de Aquino Summæ Theologiæ tres partes.”
1497. “Marsilii Ficinii Epistolæ.”
“Ciceronis Opera.”
“Juvenalis Satiræ.”
1498. “Alexandri Doctrinalis Partes quatuor de verborum significat.”
“Vocabularis Breviloquus.” Joh. Reuchlin.
“Summa Angelica de casibus Conscientiæ p. Angelum de Clavasio.”
1499. “Wann, Pauli, Sermones de Tempore.”
“Johannis de Friburgo Summa Confessorum.”
1500. “Revelationes S. Birgittæ.”
“Mariæ Virginis Privilegiæ et Prærogativæ.”
“Alexandri Doctrinalis tertia et quarta partes.”
1501. “Biblia Latina.”
“Jacobi de Voragine Historia Lombardica.”
1502. “Das Buch der Himmlischen Offenbarung der heil. Wittiben
Birgitta.” One of the very few German volumes from Anthoni’s press.
1503. Justiniani Pandectarum opus.
1504. “Biblia cum postilla Hugonis.” 7 vols. Printed by Amerbach.
The commentaries were those of Cardinal Hugo, written in the latter
part of the thirteenth century. This was, in point of labour and
costliness, the most important undertaking of Koberger.
“Volumen de Tortis” (Justiniani authenticæ seu novellæ
constitutiones).
1509. “Hortulus Animæ.”
1511. “Biblia Latina.”
1512. “Augustini Tractatus Super Evangelium Johannis.”
“Augustini Liber Epistolarum.”
The total list for the forty years from 1473 to 1513, in which year
Anthoni Koberger died, aggregates no less than two hundred and
thirty-six separate works. These were nearly all in large octavo or
quarto form, and the larger number comprised several volumes. The most
considerable and the most costly undertaking was the Hugo Bible issued
in eight volumes. Anthoni issued in all no less than fifteen issues or
impressions of the Scriptures. A very large proportion of his books
were, as the selection indicates, devoted to theology, and the list
includes a number of collections of sermons and tracts (always in
Latin text) by writers whose names are known otherwise little or not at
all. It is possible that the cost of the printing of these was in some
cases borne by the divines who were responsible for them, but there is
no reference in the record of Koberger’s business to any publications
“for the author’s account.” It is not easy to understand how it was
practicable, within half a century of the beginning of printing, to
build up a publishing machinery adequate for the effective distribution
of such a collection of solid literature. In fact, a publisher of
to-day, whether in Germany or elsewhere, would hardly venture to base
his business upon such a series of heavy books.
During the forty years of his work, Anthoni’s imprint appears upon but
three publications in German. The number of classical editions is also
much smaller than is usual with the publishing lists of the period. In
planning his big series of Latin tomes, Koberger was addressing himself
to scholars, and only to scholars of the orthodox Catholic faith.
The production of editions of the pagan writers he left to his great
contemporary, Aldus of Venice, and to Badius of Paris. The latter, in
the preface to his edition of the _Letters of Politian_, refers to
Koberger as “that glorious Nuremberger ... esteemed by honourable men
everywhere as the prince of booksellers ... the man who conducted his
business with the most exact integrity, and with the highest ideals ...
with whom the production and distribution of good books was carried on
as a sacred trust.”[74]
Conrad Leontorius, a Cistercian monk, and the well-known Jacob
Wimpfeling, both speak of Koberger as “a true Humanist,” which
is evidence that, notwithstanding his theological interests and
associates, Koberger was by no means to be classed with the narrow or
bigoted Romanists. A man who stood in intimate friendly relations with
such leaders of liberal thought as Conrad Celtes, Albert Dürer, and
Pirckheimer, must himself have possessed some intellectual breadth and
distinctiveness. Koberger had a full mastery of Latin, which was, in
fact, a first requirement for any publisher of scholarly literature,
but with Greek his acquaintance appears to have been limited. He did
not venture upon any such serious editorial responsibilities with his
publications as those undertaken by Aldus, and later by the Estiennes,
but he appears to have possessed excellent judgment in the selection
of scholarly editions and advisers. One of Koberger’s associates
emphasises “his enormous capacity for persistent work, the far-seeing
and wide-reaching enterprise, the conscientious regard for the rights
of others, the large conceptions and the careful attention to details,
the keen sense of humour, and genial and cheerful manner,”[75]
qualities which must certainly have formed an exceptionally
advantageous combination for an effective business career. His
correspondents in Basel speak of him with a cordial affection which
indicated a closer relation than that of mere business, and further
evidence of such friendship is afforded, after the death in Basel of
his old associate Amerbach, by the care given by Koberger to Amerbach’s
children. In 1500, the Emperor Maximilian writes to “our trusty Anthoni
Koberger, whose great service entitles him to honour, alike from
ourselves and from the realm.”
Koberger seems to have had the all-valuable faculty of making many
friends and no enemies. He was valued by the Catholics as a most
serviceable ally and representative, while by not a few of the
Reformers he was regarded as a personal friend, and in all the bitter
controversies of the time (the years immediately preceding the
Reformation) there appear never to have been any harsh expressions used
concerning the Nuremberg publisher. It is true, however, that it was
not until after Koberger’s death that the religious contests developed
into their fiercer phase.
The most important work on the foregoing list of Anthoni’s publications
was, as said, the edition of Cardinal Hugo’s Bible, in eight volumes
folio. This work was undertaken in co-operation with Koberger’s friend
Amerbach in Basel, and the volumes were printed in Basel. The plan of
the publication had, however, originated with Koberger, and the larger
portion of the very considerable investment required for its production
was supplied by him. The Hugo, whose notes and commentaries formed the
basis for this edition, had been born at St. Cher in Dauphiné, about
the year 1200. He was for a time an inmate of the Dominican cloister
of S. Jacob, but, later, became an instructor in the Theological
Faculty of the University of Paris. He prepared a revised text of the
Vulgate, known as the _Correctorium Bibliæ_, which was never printed,
but which was afterwards utilised in the preparation of what was known
as the Bible of the Sorbonne. The work published by Koberger had been
written about 1240, under the title _Postilla in Universa Biblia juxta
Quadruplicem Sensum_. It was used for two centuries (of course in
manuscript form) as one of the theological text-books of the Sorbonne,
but the codex from which Amerbach’s type-setters did their work was
secured from the Cistercian monastery in Heilsbronn.
Hugo was made a cardinal by Pope Innocent IV., and died in Italy in
1263. The text of the Scriptures as revised by him, together with his
notes, were utilised by Luther and by a number of the later editors
and translators of the Scriptures, and the enterprise of Koberger in
preserving this text in printed form was, from a scholarly point of
view, fully justified. As a commercial venture, the undertaking was,
however, a mistake, the sales not proving sufficient to return the very
considerable outlay. The Greek Testament of Erasmus, and the Lutheran
versions of the New and of the Old Testaments, while not the only
editions of the Scriptures which proved remunerative publications,
were certainly very noteworthy exceptions as to the extent of their
popularity and of their commercial value.
Koberger’s publishing catalogue had included, as said, no less than
fifteen impressions of the _Biblia Latina_, eight of which presented
material differences of notes and commentaries which entitled them
to be described as distinct editions. In addition to these, he
interested himself in keeping in stock, and in describing in his
_Sortiments-Catalog_, examples of all the noteworthy issues of the
Bible as yet in print. These included the four-volume Bible printed
in Strasburg, 1478-1480, containing the commentary of Walafrid Strabo
(dating from 849) and the notes of Anselm of Laon, written in 1117,
the Lyons editions of Castellanus and of Gradibus, and the several
issues of Froben and others in Basel. The characteristic feature of
all the editions of the Scriptures preceding the Reformation was the
long series of notes and commentaries. Luther took the ground that the
words of God in Holy Writ had been so overlaid and overweighted with
the comments of men that their true purport was in danger of being lost
sight of or not properly apprehended. In Luther’s Bible, therefore,
the bold innovation was adopted of printing the text of the Scriptures
without note or commentary.
In the year 1483, the year in which Luther was born, Koberger published
his German Bible. The text was translated from the Latin of the
Vulgate, and was illustrated with woodcuts. I have not been able to
ascertain what was the German idiom used for this version, but it
was a form that never took any permanent place in the literature of
the country. Luther, referring to the Nuremberg Bible, declared that
“no one could speak German of this outlandish kind.”[76] Two German
versions of the Bible had been published before this of Koberger, one
in Strasburg and one in Cologne. They were both based on the Vulgate,
and neither was complete. Some years after the death of Anthoni
Koberger, his nephew Johannes issued the first Nuremberg editions
of Luther’s version of the New Testament and of the Psalms. Both
volumes were printed by Friedrich Peypus, and both were illustrated by
woodcuts. The fonts of type were the same as those used in Anthoni’s
Bible of 1483. The imperial edict and the ecclesiastical censure do
not appear to have been effective in preventing the sale through South
Germany, in the usual channels, of these Nuremberg editions. I have
not been able to find record of any correspondence between Johannes
Koberger and Luther in regard to these editions. In 1525, Luther made
overtures to Melchior Koberger concerning publishing arrangements
for the Lutheran books in South Germany, and suggested using his
book-shop in Wittenberg as a depot for the Koberger publications. The
negotiations came to nothing however. The activity of the House appears
by that time to have been exhausted.[77]
Anthoni Koberger had born to him no less than twenty-five children, and
it appeared, therefore, as if there should have been no difficulty in
perpetuating the family name or in carrying on the work which had made
the name famous. The publishing concern was continued, however, only
until 1540, first by his nephew Johannes, and later by his sons Anthoni
and Melchior. With the death of the founder, however, the energy and
the initiative of the House appear to have departed, and, during the
succeeding twenty-seven years, but fifty-three works were added to
the list of its publications. These additions included a number of
impressions of the _Biblia Latina_, editions of _S. Augustine_, _S.
Ambrose_, and _Fulgentius_, and the _Geography_ of Ptolemy, edited
by Pirckheimer. The last work bearing the Koberger imprint was the
_Bohemian Bible_, issued by Melchior in 1540. This was printed for
him by Melchtaler, and, according to Hase, was not so much a business
undertaking as a contribution made by Melchior to the cause of the
Bohemian Brothers, a sect in the teachings of which he had interested
himself.
The fact that the first place in their undertakings was given by the
Kobergers to editions of the Bible is the more exceptional, as, in the
theological instruction of the time, the Scriptures certainly occupied
no such place, and, for the thirty years following 1493, the Kobergers
were the representative theological publishers of Germany. As their
catalogue shows, however, they added to their long series of Bibles the
chief works, first, of the Fathers of the Church, and, later, of the
great scholastic writers. The editions of _S. Ambrose_, _S. Augustine_,
_S. Jerome_, and _S. Chrysostom_, have already been referred to. Of
these works there were, however, other, if less desirable, editions
already in print. Among the authors first presented in printed form
through the enterprise of the Nuremberg publishers were Petrus
Lombardius (d. 1164), Hugo of St. Victor (d. 1141), Alexander of Hales
(d. 1245), Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274), Bonaventura (d. 1274), and Duns
Scotus (d. 1308).
The authoritative works on Canonical Law were issued from the Koberger
Press, together with the series of Papal Decretals of Gregory IX.,
Boniface VIII., and Clement V. A much smaller measure of attention was
given by him to classic writers, but his list included an edition of
_Selections from the Teachings of Plato_, prepared by Alkinous, and the
_Introduction to Aristotle_ of Porphyry. A work which has retained a
longer vitality than any of the writings of the above formidable series
of scholars is the collection of monkish tales, probably compiled
in the thirteenth century, and known as the _Gesta Romanorum_, the
first printed edition of which was issued by Koberger in 1494. In the
year 1518 (that is, five years after the death of Anthoni), there
was published from the Koberger Press the _Germania_ of Franciscus
Irenicus, which included a special chapter on Nuremberg, contributed by
Conrad Celtes. Hase speaks of this as the first noteworthy attempt to
present German national history from a popular and patriotic standpoint.
The catalogues of nearly all of the publishers whose work was done
within the half century succeeding Gutenberg were devoted to what
would to-day be described as “heavy” literature. The most noteworthy
exception to this statement is the list of publications issued by
Caxton in London, between 1476 and 1492, a list which included hardly
any “solid” books. The long lists of folios of scholastic writings give
to the student of to-day the impression that these first publishers
felt a very serious responsibility indeed in connection with the use
of this “God-given art” of printing, and would have considered the use
of the printing-press for frivolous literature as a kind of breach
of trust. This description would, however, apply with exceptional
force to the undertakings of the first Koberger, whose name appears
to have been associated with no work more trifling than the famous
_Gesta Romanorum_, which, while indeed to be described as fiction,
was fiction of a very pious character and purpose. The catalogue of
Koberger constituted, in fact, a very good representation of the
foundations of scholarly Catholicism. The Catholic teachers, who rested
their contention for the supremacy of the Roman Church upon history
and tradition as interpreted for fifteen centuries by the scholars of
the Church, depended for the material of their teachings upon such
folios as those produced by Koberger. Weighty as were these folios,
and assured as appeared to be the foundations upon which the great
structure of ecclesiasticism had been raised, their instruction was
undermined, and their authority, for a large portion at least of the
community, was overthrown a little later by the influence of the widely
circulated pamphlets and sheets, the _Flugschriften_, which brought to
the people the teachings of the Reformers.
For the years between 1517 and 1532, the contest for the control of
German thought and of German faith was fought out very largely by means
of the productions of the printing-press, and with these productions
the fight was between the folios and the pamphlets, the former standing
for the traditional faith of the Church Universal, and the latter
for the doctrines of the Reformers. In North Germany the victory
rested with the pamphlets. Anthoni Koberger’s death occurred before
the beginning of this new epoch of thought and of this new phase of
publishing. His work had been completed during the age of orthodox
scholarship, the authority of which, previous to 1513, had hardly been
seriously questioned.
Jacob Wimpfeling, a Humanist, who was also an orthodox Catholic,
writing in 1501, says (in a phrase which is curiously akin to the
expressions from the Berlin or Leipzig of to-day): “We Germans
practically control the intellectual world. We use our power and our
influence for the service of God, for the care of souls, and for the
development of the people.... It is for this work that we owe the
largest acknowledgment for the service of a man like Koberger, who
employs his publishing facilities only for the production of that which
is best.”
At about the same date Amerbach writes to Koberger: “You have never
printed anything that is worldly or frivolous; your books are all of
righteous and godly literature. For the support of the true faith and
for the development of godly scholarship, you have brought before the
world the books which are the most trustworthy and authoritative, the
books which have stood the test of time.”[78]
It was to Koberger’s business advantage that the fiercer strife of
the Reformation was delayed until his own career was at an end. As
already indicated, the religious controversies and the strife which
they engendered interfered seriously with the demand for existing
literature. The lists of the German publishers of the first decade of
the sixteenth century, were devoted almost exclusively to editions
of the Fathers and to works of doctrine or of devotion prepared for
Catholic readers, together with editions of certain selected classics.
The Lutheran movement lessened to a very great extent the demand for
these three classes of books. With such burning issues before them as
were presented by the leaders on either side of the great controversy,
the people no longer had leisure for pagan writers or for old-time
theological writings. While large numbers were absorbed in the tracts
coming from Wittenberg, the others whose sympathies and belief remained
with the Church of Rome were more interested in the pamphlets of
writers like Eck or Cochläus, than in the _Confessions_ of S. Augustine
or the treatises of S. Jerome. The publishers heretofore devoted to
theology, who were unwilling to place their imprints upon the works of
the Lutherans, and who were also out of sympathy with the bitter and
often by no means scholarly pamphlets of their opponents, found their
business seriously undermined by the great contest which was dividing
Germany. While the Reformation did very much to increase the demand for
printed material and to further the business of a number of publishers
and booksellers throughout Germany, it had a disastrous effect upon the
business of the Kobergers, and was an important factor in bringing that
business to a close.
A further important cause of the weakening of the foundations of the
concern was the impairment of the capital, caused by the withdrawal
from year to year of the amounts due to the long series of heirs, but
few of whom were prepared to retain any interest in the book business.
Several of the sons and grandsons returned to the old occupation of the
Kobergers, and became workers in gold and silver.
Anthoni Koberger had, in common with the other printers of Germany,
followed Gutenberg in adopting for his type the style that we describe
as Gothic, but for which the German writers of the time use the term
_fractur_. In 1492, however, he used for his edition of _Virgil_ a
type based upon a Venetian model, similar to that in use at this
time by the father-in-law of Aldus. It is probable that the most
distinctive contribution which had been made by Gutenberg to the work
of book-printing was the discovery of a method of making type by
casting. The art of cutting or engraving letters and other symbols
was, of course, no new thing. The technical training of Fust, himself
a goldsmith and stamp-cutter, was doubtless of material service in
connection with the development of the manufacture of type, as well as
in the production of designs for initials and tail-pieces. Nuremberg
had long been a centre for skilled artificers in metals, gold, silver,
and copper, and their services were largely made use of by Koberger and
other of the earlier printers.
One result of utilising the letters of known scribes as models for
the fonts of type was to secure for each font a very distinctive
individuality of its own. Luther was, for instance, able to claim that
through the special character of his Wittenberg type, modelled on the
script of his own scribes, the authorised editions of his books could
be identified, and could be guaranteed as correct and complete.[79] The
fonts in Koberger’s printing-office did not include any Greek text,
and in the edition of _Boëthius_, issued by him in 1576, which was in
other respects a beautiful piece of typography, the lines of quotations
from the Greek were left blank, to be filled in by hand. Very few of
the German printers of the time possessed any Greek fonts. While Latin
was their working language, the newly revised or newly discovered
Greek had for them still an unfamiliar aspect. Thomas Anshelm, writing
from Hagenau in 1518, says of one of Koberger’s younger authors: “His
style is bad; he is bringing in too much Greek.” Hans Grüninger, of
Strasburg, who took charge for Koberger of the printing of the great
_Geography_ of Ptolemy, found no little difficulty with the Greek
terms. He writes to the editor, Pirckheimer: “The Greek is very
troublesome, and is costing me altogether too much.” Pirckheimer on
his part complains: “Koberger promised me that there should be a full
supply of Greek type, and I find out only now, in reading the proofs,
that your type has neither accents nor points.” In the printing
of Greek, the publishers of Venice and of Paris were at this time
considerably in advance of their German contemporaries.
The leading German publishers of Koberger’s generation were fortunate
in having at hand a number of scholars who were ready to render service
in the selection and editing of manuscripts, in the collating of
texts, and in the supervision of the work of the typesetters. In the
beginning of the sixteenth century, a man who was competent to fill
the office described in the publishing records as “press-corrector,”
required to possess a varied and comprehensive scholarship. A mastery
of Latin was an acquirement so usual as not in itself to constitute
any claim to scholarly attainment. With this knowledge, it was,
however, essential, at a time when so large a proportion of the works
printed belonged to the class of theology, for the corrector to be
versed in Hebrew and in Greek. As the typesetters were collected from
different parts of Europe, it was also convenient, if not necessary,
for the man who supervised their work to possess a working knowledge,
at least, of German, French, Italian, and Dutch. The selection and
collation of manuscripts, with the purpose of securing a fairly correct
“copy” for the printed text, called for a certain measure of skill in
palæography, and also necessitated such familiarity with the classic
writers or Church Fathers as would enable the more evident blunders of
the scribes to be corrected by the general sense of the context. It
was not unusual, as the records of various of the earlier publishing
offices show, to utilise as the basis of the printed text half a
dozen, or occasionally as many as a dozen manuscripts, in which case
the preparation of the final “copy” for the typesetters rested with
the correctors. Among the scholarly associates who did work of this
kind for the Press of Koberger, were his friend Amerbach, of Basel;
Professor Frissner, of Leipzig; Pirckheimer, of Nuremberg; Von Wyle,
Wimpfeling, and Beckenhaub. The last named was an ecclesiastic from
Mayence.
Among the responsibilities that came upon the correctors was that of
visiting the libraries or monasteries where famous manuscripts were
preserved, and of arranging, when practicable, for the hire or the loan
of such manuscripts. When, as was frequently the case, the custodians
were unwilling to permit their parchments to go out of their hands, the
transcripts for the use of the typesetters had to be prepared (often
with considerable difficulty) in the place where the manuscript was
stored--sometimes even on the old _armarium_ (or library chest) to
which the parchment was chained. Some of these transcripts were made
by the correctors themselves. From time to time, when it did not seem
practicable to arrange for the copying, we find the publishers offering
for the original manuscripts prices which, under modern calculations,
seem to be exorbitant, and which must have constituted a very serious
addition indeed to the risk of these earlier publishing undertakings.
Pirckheimer writes to Hans Koberger, in 1520, concerning a manuscript
of Fulgentius: “They told me in the first place that it absolutely
could not be bought, but finally, after increasing our offer step by
step to a sum that I am almost afraid to report to you, I managed
to bring the volume away with me.” In September, 1485, Busch writes
from Italy to Amerbach, who is acting on behalf of Koberger: “I am
sending to you with this what I believe to be a magnificent copy of
the _Institutes_ (of Cassian), the text of which has been carefully
collated. This parchment must be preserved with exceptional care, as,
if a single spot should come upon it, we should be liable for heavy
damages. It must be returned to me not later than S. Martin’s Day,
and the transcribing must be done in your own house, from which the
parchment must not be taken.”
Busch appears to have continued to perform this class of service for
Koberger, for we find him, ten years later (in May, 1495), writing
again as follows: “I have succeeded in getting hold of a beautiful copy
of _Hugo_. I am not allowed to remove the manuscript, but am having
transcripts prepared from it. I have three good writers employed in
the work, who are able to turn out each six _quaternes_ a week.” The
_Hugo_ here referred to was the text of the _Postillas_ or commentaries
written in the thirteenth century by Cardinal Hugo, which formed the
basis of the great Hugo edition of the Scriptures, the publication
of which was begun by Koberger in 1497, and was completed in 1504.
The set comprises seven volumes folio. The manuscripts upon which the
text was based and which were doubtless those referred to by Busch,
formed the great treasure of the library of the Cistercian Monastery at
Heilsbronn. This particular parchment, or series of parchments, had
been written by, or had been written under the direction of, Abbot
Conrad, between the years 1303 and 1329. The editors who coöperated
with Koberger in the production of the Hugo Bible were, in addition to
Amerbach, Conrad Leontorius, the Humanist Jacob Wimpfeling, and Heynlin
von Stein. For the editing of _S. Augustine_ Koberger secured the help
of Augustin Dodo, and his edition of _S. Jerome_ was supervised by the
great scholar Reuchlin.
The association of Koberger with Albert Dürer has already been referred
to. Some time before Koberger’s book-presses began their work in
Nuremberg, Dürer had been using hand-presses for the impressions of his
woodcuts and of his designs engraved on copper. Hase is of opinion that
Dürer gave direct coöperation in Koberger’s press-room, and that the
excellence and evenness of print of the Koberger editions may be very
largely credited to Dürer’s artistic supervision.[80]
At least one work remains which bears the imprint of Dürer as printer.
A volume containing the _Book of Revelation_ bears on its title-page,
_Gedrücket zu Nürnberg durch Albrecht Dürer, Maler, nach Christi Geburt
MCCCC. und danach im XCVIII. jahr_. There is, however, no record of the
establishment of any book-printing-office under Dürer’s ownership, and
it seems probable that the volume in question was printed on a Koberger
press under Dürer’s supervision.
A few years later, we shall find the artist and engraver Cranach
associating himself in a similar manner with the work of Luther’s
printers in Wittenberg. The connection between the work of designers
who were also engravers and who usually did the printing of their own
impressions, and that of the book-printers in whose volumes many of the
same designs were included, is a very obvious one.
After the time of the close of the business of the Kobergers, a
considerable change took place in the character of the publications
issued in Germany. A continually increasing proportion of these were
printed in German, while the costly folios, quartos, and octavos
were to a very great extent replaced by low-priced duodecimos, cheap
pamphlets and tracts (_Flugschriften_). The burning issues brought
to the front by the Reformers were of interest not only to scholars,
but to the mass of the people, and to supply information on these
issues called for reading-matter printed in the vernacular, and in the
cheapest possible form. There would not, at first thought, seem to
be any reason why this new demand for cheap books on the part of the
masses should lessen the sale to the educated classes of literature
in more costly and permanent form. This was, however, certainly the
effect during the quarter of a century in which the earlier issues of
the Reformation were fought over. The Reformers had their hands full
with the controversy. They were making Church history, and had little
time for the study of the history of the Church in past centuries. The
writings of the Fathers of the Church, who were the spiritual ancestors
of the Protestants no less than of the Catholics, were for the time put
to one side, although some years later they again found place in the
libraries and in the university work of the Protestants. For the study
of the philosophy of the schoolmen and for a proper appreciation of the
literature of classic times, the period of the Reformation was likewise
unfavourable. Philosophy and poetry demand periods of leisure and
cannot be pursued to advantage during periods of civil and religious
strife.
The bearing of these influences upon the publishing conditions of
Germany in the sixteenth century is obvious. There was, after 1517,
an enormous increase in the circulation of printed matter and a very
great development in the habit of reading on the part of the people
at large, and the intellectual activities engendered by the popular
interest in the religious and ecclesiastical controversies had in the
end a very important part in furthering the growth of the literary and
the publishing activities of Germany. During the earlier years of the
contest, however, the first result was an actual diminution in the
demand in Germany for the class of books to the production of which
publishers of the higher grade had devoted themselves. Some of the
firms, who could not easily adapt themselves to the new conditions,
or who did not find themselves in sympathy with the new influences,
decided, like the Kobergers, to retire altogether. New men took the
lead in the publishing business of Germany. The first period in the age
of printing, the period in which its service had been rendered almost
exclusively to scholars, came to a close. German replaced Latin, and
the Press became the servant of the people at large.
In the general course of Koberger’s publishing undertakings, the
question of compensation for authors, or at least for original work
of authors, could have arisen but very seldom, and in this respect
his experience was identical with that of publishers generally in his
generation. Their publications consisted chiefly, and with some firms
exclusively, of works of an earlier time, the authors of which had long
been dead; in the limited instances in which they used their presses
for the books of living writers, the main purpose of these writers
was to bring their productions before the public, and they considered
themselves under obligations to the publishers who were willing to
incur the risk and expense of the undertaking. The books written by the
few authors of Koberger’s generation were for the most part works of
doctrine or having a dogmatic purpose of some kind. The object of their
production was not the possibility of gain, but the influencing of
public opinion, the furthering of a cause, the overthrow of abuses, or
the defence of institutions that had been assailed. For such aims the
chief thing, almost the only thing, to be considered was the securing
of as wide a circulation as possible. Apart from this consideration,
these writers might easily have considered it presumptuous to expect
compensation for the publication of their productions, when the
publishers had available for their use all the literary heritage of
antiquity, together with the long series of writings of the Church
Fathers. It was also, of course, the case that under the publishing and
bookselling conditions of the time, when it was by no means easy to
bring effectively before a reading public the works of authors whose
names were famous in literature or in the records of the Church, the
difficulty must have been enormously greater in the case of books,
however distinctive in themselves, by writers who were not known to
the public. There was, in fact, no adequate machinery for bringing
new books to the attention of possible readers. Many years were still
to elapse before anything in the shape of a periodical came into
existence, and in the impossibility of reviews or of advertisements,
there was no way of giving or of distributing information about new
books except by word of mouth or by personal correspondence.
It is to be borne in mind that I am speaking of the years immediately
preceding the Reformation. The enormous public interest aroused by
the writings of Luther and his associates brought about an immediate
change in publishing methods and possibilities, a change which will
be described in a later chapter. The books of Erasmus, which in large
part preceded the Lutheran writings, must be considered as having
constituted a noteworthy exception to the literary conditions of his
time. Their record also will be given farther on. It remained the case,
however, that with a few inconsiderable exceptions, the only moneys
paid to authors by the first Koberger were for editorial service. Hase
mentions that in the production of the great _Chronicle_ of Schedel,
funds had to be provided only for the illustrations and for the
printing, the compiler, Hartmann Schedel, and his associate, George
Alt, being willing to accept their compensation in the form of sets of
the work.
The scholars of the Humanistic school had made it their chief interest
to further the production and the understanding of the works of the
classic writers, and when the influence of the Reformation brought
about a reaction against the influence of the literature of Greece and
Rome, these Humanist scholars found their special occupation gone.
Many of them sought occupation on the staffs of the publishers and
earned a livelihood in editorial service of a different character,
or sometimes in purely hack work in collating and proof-reading.
When the Basel edition of _S. Jerome_ was in preparation, Amerbach
applied to Reuchlin for aid in connection with the printing of the
Hebrew portions, and wrote, “We shall be very ready to pay for your
help whatever you may ask.” Reuchlin had shortly before completed
the publication of his _Rudimenta_. The work had been undertaken at
the author’s cost, and as the sales were but small, he found himself
in trouble with his printer, Anshelm. He wrote to his good friend
Amerbach, “I shall be well pleased to do the editorial work required
for the _Jerome_ without compensation if you will relieve me from the
claims of this troublesome Anshelm.”[81] It is evident that Reuchlin,
while imagining that he was publishing his _Rudimenta_ at his own risk,
had in fact left the payment of the printer’s bill to be contingent
upon the sales of the book, having no other resources available, and
the printer had, therefore, been made involuntarily a sharer of the
risk, while if the work had succeeded, he would have been entitled to
no share in the profits. Anshelm’s account must, however, have been
settled by Amerbach, in consideration of the work done by Reuchlin on
the _Jerome_, as we find him, later, again in friendly relations with
the Hebrew scholar.
Shortly after the death of Anthoni Koberger, we begin to find more
frequent references in the correspondence of the publishers of Germany
to compensation for original literary work. Boniface Amerbach had
recommended to Froben the _Lucubrations_ of Zasius, and writes in 1518
concerning the author: “Zasius thinks that he ought to be paid for
this work, and speaks of thirty florins as a proper price. I should,
however, not assent to any such demand. He is anxious to get his book
into print, and had said before that he should expect to be paid well
if it succeeded, and should be quite ready to accept little or nothing
if it failed to sell, a result which, however, he could not believe
possible.”[82] In 1524, Hans Koberger arranged with Zasius, through Dr.
Roth, for the publication of the _Intellectus Juris_. He first offered
as honorarium fifty or sixty copies of the book. To this suggestion
Zasius replied: “I must have my honorarium in hard cash.... I have
had an enormous amount of labour and pains in getting this material
into shape, and I ought to receive not less than fifty guldens.”
This was an early instance of the very natural, though not very
reasonable, expectation or requirement on the part of the author that
his compensation ought to be based upon the extent of the labour given
to the book, instead of upon the return that the public was willing to
make for the book itself.
Koberger did not come to terms for the _Intellectus Juris_, and it
was finally published by Cratander, who paid for it twenty florins.
Zasius does not appear, however, to have got along very well with
Cratander, for we find him a little later breaking away from him
with the word, “The devil take the printers [_zum Teufel mit deinen
Drückern_], who never have treated me decently.”[83] Zasius appears to
have had his full share of the _genus irritabile_. Some expressions in
his correspondence recall the references made by Martial to his four
publishers.
He was a near friend of Zwingli, and a number of the letters preserved
in the _Epistolæ_ were addressed to Zwingli. Zasius was in sympathy
with the earlier efforts of the Reformers against the abuses that
had crept into the Church, but he held with Erasmus that the duty of
Christians was to reform and not to destroy or to divide the Church.
The authors were doubtless in a position in many cases to dispose of
their free copies for money. It is evident, however, from the literary
correspondence of the time, that the practice was very general on
the part of authors of sending complimentary copies to each other, a
practice which, as developed, came to absorb a substantial portion of
the edition. Authors were able to build up their libraries with books
received in exchange, but collections of books, however essential or
desirable, did not help directly towards income. This distribution
of complimentary copies became naturally a still more considerable
item when there was question, not simply of an exchange of scholarly
compliments, but of the widest possible distribution of a teaching or
a doctrine. Thus Luther is described as giving away whole editions of
certain of his monographs, which he could do the more easily as the
editions printed in Wittenberg were, for the most part, the property of
the author.[84]
The practice of securing money presents in consideration of dedications
or of eulogies printed in prefatory epistles, seems to have played
an important part in the calculations of certain classes of authors
during the first half of the sixteenth century. Cuspinian writes to
Pirckheimer, in 1501, asking counsel concerning the advisability of
dedicating the first volume of a work he had in press with Koberger
to the chief magistrate of Nuremberg. Pirckheimer tells his friend
that some more advantageous patron could doubtless be found. “You
must remember,” he writes, “that we are here a very commercial
people ... and some among our magistrates hardly understand what
literature is.”[85] Five years earlier, however, Martin Behaim (or
Behem) had received from the Nuremberg magistrate of that day a gift
of twenty-four florins for some honourable mention of the magistrate’s
name on his big map of the world.[86] A year or two earlier, namely in
1488, the magistrates in Nuremberg had given to Siegmund Mensterlin
thirty-seven florins for his _Chronicle_ of the city. This may,
however, be considered in the light of a direct payment for a service
to the city, rather than as an honorarium for a compliment. In 1502,
Conrad Celtes received in like manner from the treasury in Nuremberg
the sum of twenty florins, “for his labour in the description of our
city and for the record of its origin.”
The general question whether it befitted the dignity of authors
(considered possibly not so much in the light of literary producers as
of gentlemen who had happened to interest themselves in literature) to
receive compensation for their work, was a matter of debate during a
large part of the sixteenth century. It was inevitable, while all the
conditions of literary production and distribution were still to be
shaped, and while the difficulties of estimating with any degree of
accuracy the possibilities of securing commercial returns for literary
productions were still so great, that many questions concerning the
division of ownership and returns, when any returns accrued, must
arise and must for some time remain unsettled. The whole matter of
compensation for literary service remained, therefore, during the
period between the beginning of printing and the establishment of some
system of control of the books printed, in a hap-hazard and anomalous
condition. We find authors of one group, whose interest is limited
exclusively to the circulation of sound doctrine, wondering that any
writers of doctrinal works could permit themselves to receive pay
for bringing the truth to mankind. We find other equally unselfish
but more far-seeing authors like Luther and Melanchthon, accepting
pay for books sold, if only for the purpose of instituting a larger
production and a wider distribution of similar books. We find writers
devoting their pens to the defence of the Roman Church unwilling to
accept any returns from their booksellers, but quite ready to receive
compensation for their labours in the form of presents of money from
pope, cardinals, or bishops. Other authors, such as Cuspinian, whose
letter has been quoted, who considered it beneath their dignity to make
an agreement with their publishers for a royalty or an honorarium, were
quite willing to utilise their pens in the composition of high-flown
complimentary epistles or of fulsome dedications, which were, as they
hoped, to result in bringing to the writers substantial presents from
the patrons thus flattered. In the bitter controversy which Ulrich
von Hutten, in the last year of his life, carried on with Erasmus,
and in the course of which the knight took pains to bring together a
long series of invectives, he found no ground for criticism in the
relations borne by Erasmus to various patrons for whose gifts he had
been a supplicant, but thought he could say nothing more invidious
of his scholarly opponent than that he had received moneys from the
publisher Froben, moneys which had been earned by the sale of the works
of Erasmus.
The point of view and the standard of action were, however, in the
course of a few years to be materially changed. The organisation of
the German book-trade, carrying with it a substantial though by no
means complete measure of protection for the productions of each of
the publishers taking part in the organisation, had as its immediate
result a great development in literary production, in the circulation
of books, and in the extent of the returns secured. A later and hardly
less important result was the securing for original literature of an
assured business foundation. Literary producers, thus placed in a
position to secure a compensation for their labours proportioned to
the extent of the value placed by the community upon their production,
were freed from the necessity of earlier years, of seeking gifts and of
depending upon patrons.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]