FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[32]Variously named in contemporary documents, Johannes Gutenberg; Johannes de Moguntia, dictus Gutenberg; Johannes dictus Gensefleisch, junior, dictus Gutenberg; Johannes Gansefleisch, dictus Sulgeloch vel Sorgenloch; Henne Gensfleisch, genant Sulgeloch; Hans Genzefleisch von Mentz, genant Gutenberg. In EnglishGansefleischwould be writtenGooseflesh; in Latin,Ansicarus.[33]Meerman, and a few other writers, make mention of two John Gutenbergs, brothers, both of whom are spoken of as inventors of Typography; the elder, known as John Gansfleisch, dying, so it is stated, in 1462. The reason of this seems to be, that some one was wanted to fill the position of the thief, who, according to the tale of Junius, stole from Janssoen, the Coster of Haarlem, the moveable types he had recently invented. As John Gutenberg, junior, could not be fixed upon, and there was no other method of bringing discredit upon his claim, and as the alleged thief was a John somebody, John Gansfleisch, senior, assumed to beelder brotherto John junior, was thought of; and from him, it is asserted, the younger brother obtained his knowledge of the art of printing. The authority on which Meerman relied appears to be a document first published by Köhler (Ehrenrettung Guttenberg’s), in which it is stated, that in 1443 John Gansfleisch the elder hired a house at Mentz, his birthplace. Santander says, the phrase was used because John Gutenberg’sunclehaving died about this time, he had in reality become the elder. Later writers agree with Santander that the elder Gansfleisch here referred to was an uncle to Gutenberg junior, but they do not admit his death at this time. Being named after him, he was probably hisgodfather, and may have been living with him in Strasburg in 1443. It was to his house that Gutenberg junior went, on his return to Mentz.[34]“To the worthy nun Bertha, in the Convent of St. Clair, at Mentz, health and fraternal good wishes. My dear sister, with respect to what you say of the rents and money which were left to you by our brother Conrad, whom God bless, by his last will; that often and for a long time past, they have not been paid to you, and that they are still owing to you, and amount as you say to a considerable sum; I have to inform you, that, upon giving a receipt, you may receive the sum of twenty florins (of gold) out of my rents and revenues, coming as you know, from Mentz, and other places; by applying to Joh. Dringelter, the wax chandler; Veronica Mystersen, at Seilhoven; or at Mentz, and various other places, of which Pedirman can inform you; as at Lorzwiller, Bodenheim, and Murminheym. I purpose, if it please God, to have the pleasure of seeing you before long, and to arrange the matter with Pedirman, so that your property may be promptly delivered to you, according to the terms and intention of the will. I await your answer upon this subject. Given at Strasburg; feriâ quintâ post dominicam (the 24th March)M.CCCC.XX.IIII.”(Signed) “Henne Gensfleisch, called Sulgeloch.”—Santander, from Oberlin’s “Essai d’Annales de la Vie de J. Gutenberg,” pp. 3, 4.[35]Linseed oil, rosins, shellac, pitch, mundick, varnishes, nutgalls, turpentine, and vitriol, were made use of by the early printers in manufacturing their ink. In applying it, a small quantity was first taken up on a pair of balls or dabbers made of sheepskins padded with wool; these were then well beaten together until finely and evenly covered, after which they were beaten on the types until the pages were considered sufficiently inked.[36]Typographia: An Historical sketch of the Origin and Progress of the Art of Printing. ByT. C. Hansard, 1825. 8vo. 1000 pp.[37]The Press: a Poem; byJohn M‘Creery. The original edition, printed by the author, was beautifully illustrated with wood engravings by Mr. Hole, a pupil of the Bewicks. Mr. M‘Creery’s establishment was celebrated for the excellence of its printing.[38]“Life and Typography of William Caxton.” vol. ii. p. xlv.[39]“Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing.” p. 254.[40]These occur in what is known as the fourth edition, of which only three copies exist, two in Haarlem, and one in Lille. It is in the copy at Lille that a leaf is printed on both sides. Mr. Humphreys, in his noble work,—the greatest boon ever conferred in any age or country on students of early Typography,—says, (p. 63) this leaf has “an appearance of being printed on both sides, from the existence of a strong set off.” But if the lines of the supposed ‘set-off’ read in the usual way, they must have been set-off from a set-off, or the impression would appear reversed. Most probably the back of the original impression was printed on by an accidental oversight.[41]“The Old Printer and the Modern Press.” p. 102.London, 1854.[42]Other witnesses also deposed to purchases, and in the judgment given on the suit, some of these are referred to as having been oflead.[43]The documents containing an account of the trial, and the sentence of the magistrates of Strasburg, are dated December 1439. They were originally published with a Latin version, by Schöpflin, in hisVindiciæTypographicæ, 1760, and have since been repeatedly printed with French, English and Dutch translations.[44]In his “Dissertation sur l’Origine, l’Invention, et le Perfectionnement de l’Imprimerie,” printed at Amsterdam in 1819. This work was the one which obtained the prize offered by the Dutch Society of Arts and Sciences at Haarlem, about the year 1814, for the best Dissertation in support of the ancient tradition that the Art of Printing was invented in that city.[45]In certain parts of the north of Scotland augers and high-pitched screws are to this day called ‘wommels’ or ‘wombels,’ by old folk. The word is no doubt the same as the antiquated German ‘wurbel.’[46]“Quid, si nunc justos, aeris ratione reducta,Tentarem libros cudere mille modis?Robora prospexit dehinctorculariaBacchi,Et dixit, preli forma sit ista novi.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 65–69.[47]Kœnig’scylinder machine, erected for Mr.Bensleythe eminent printer, and first set in operation in April 1811, at the manufactory in Whitecross-street, London; when it printed 3000 sheets of theAnnual Register, to the admiration of all who saw it at work.[48]“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time which was before us.”—Ecclesiastes, i. 9, 10. Some days subsequent to that on which I had printed the description of the process, which, after a careful examination of Mr. Humphreys’ fac-simile, I felt convinced was the one which had been adopted for taking impressions of the moveable types used in theSpeculum Humanæ Salvationis, I received an illustrated advertisement sheet of Francis Donnison and Son, Printers’ Engineers of Newcastle-on-Tyne, in which is an engraving of an “Improved Galley Proof Press,” which exactly realises the idea I attempted to convey to my readers on pages 83 and 84.[49]“The Pilgrims of the Rhine,” byBulwer, (LordLytton), p. 313.[50]“Wimpheling, one of the most learned men of his time, who narrowly escaped persecution for the Protestant tendency of his writings, and who among other things which proved him to have been a thinker in advance of his time, founded a literary society at Strasburg, which soon became celebrated, and the tendencies of which were afterwards praised even by the critical Erasmus.”—Humphreys, p. 82.[51]“De l’Origine de l’Imprimerie.”Paris, 1853.[52]“Kritische Geschichte der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst durch Johann Gutenberg zu Mainz.” von J.Wetter.Mainz, 1836. 8vo. pp. xvi. 808, with 13 Tables of fac-similes.[53]“Characteres enim a primus illis inventoribus non ita eleganter et expedite, ut a nostris fieri solet, sedfilo in litterarum foramen immisso, connectebantur, sicut Venetiis id genus typos me vidisse memini.”[54]The family of the Fusts was one of great respectability. It consisted at this time of three brothers; John the banker and money-lender; James, the city architect, and subsequently a goldsmith as well; and Nicholas, a judge in one of the Courts of law. John married his wife Margaret about the year 1420; one son, Conrad, was the only issue of the marriage. Conrad married in 1445, and his daughter, Christina, was, in 1465, bestowed in marriage upon Peter Schœffer of Gernszheim. It appears from some accounts that John Faust was also a goldsmith; a business with which banking and money-lending were usually combined.[55]There is another version of the circumstances attending the connection of Gutenberg with Faust. Gutenberg senior, say the claimants of the honor of the invention for the first printer at Strasburg, returned to Mentz in 1440, having stolen the knowledge of the art from Mentelin, their countryman, who they assert was the original inventor. Dutch authorities however say, that Gutenberg’s return to Mentz, in 1440, was after he stole the types, &c., from Coster, the original inventor at Haarlem. Like Sir Boyle Roche’s bird, he was thus in two places at one and the same time. After his return he printed, in 1442, the two school-books ‘Alexandri Galli Doctrinale,’ and ‘Petri Hispani Tractatus,’ and then, in 1443, took the house ‘Zum Jungen,’ when he was joined in partnership by Faust, J. Meidenbachius, J. Petersheimius, and others, whose names have not been recorded, and in 1444 by Gutenberg junior, who then quitted Strasburg for that express purpose. That in 1450 this partnership was dissolved, when Faust and Gutenberg junior entered into a new partnership, the senior being no longer heard of. These statements are at best but conjectural, and have been made with the view of affording support to the systems of writers who deny to Gutenberg the honor of having invented the Typographic Art.The quotations in the text are from the record of legal proceedings taken by Faust against Gutenberg in 1455. This record was printed in German bySeckenburgin “Selectis Juris et Historiarum,” tom. i. pp. 269–277; byWolfius, in his “Monumenta Typographica,” tom. i. p. 472et seq., and byWetter, pp. 284–290.[56]Trithemius derived his information direct from Schœffer the [grand] son-in-law of Faust; but did not write his chronicle until thirty years after. The work usually referred to as the Catholicon, is one of some magnitude. It was written by the monk John Balbi, or John of Genoa, and consists of a Latin Grammar followed by a Vocabulary. Gutenberg probably printed only the latter portion, and perhaps but an abridgment of that. As the earliest production of his press, after his connection with Faust, a copy would now be of immense value; but as is the case with theTractsof Peter of Spain, no bibliographer has yet had the good fortune to identify it, and possibly it may have passed out of existence. There is no reason however to doubt the correctness of the Abbot’s statement on that account. There can be no question but that multitudes of works, issued from the presses of the early printers, have been utterly destroyed. It is marvellous that so many single, unique copies, have been preserved to the present time.[57]These have been fully described by Fischer, Van Praet, Wetter, Leon de Laborde, and other writers.[58]Seepostfor Zell’s account in full.[59]The entry at the end of the first volume is—“Et sic est finis prime partis biblia Scz. veteris testamenti, Illuminata seu rubricata & ligata per Henricum Albch alias cremer. Anno dni Moccccolvifesto Bartholomei apli—Deo gratias—Alleluja.” That on the end of the second volume:—“Iste liber illuminatus, ligatus & completus est per Henricum cremer vicariū ecclesie collegiate sancti Stephani maguntini sub anno dni Millesimo quatringentisimo quinquagesimo sexto, festo Assumptionis gloriose virginis Marie, Deo gracias. Alleluja, &c.”[60]With the exception of the first ten or eleven pages, which contain but forty or forty-one lines in each column.[61]The doubt was not only natural, but there is an almost absolute certainty that the letters could not have been cast at the time. Schœffer’s invention of cast fusile types did not take place,—or at any rate was not made use of,—until after the lawsuit between Gutenberg and Faust.[62]Humphreys, p. 84.[63]“Post hæc inventis successerunt subtiliora, inveneruntque modum fundendi formas omnium latini alphabeti litterarum, quas ipsi matrices nominabant ex quibus rursum aeneos sive stanneos caracteres fundebant, ad omnem pressuram sufficientes, quas prius manibus sculpebant. Et revera sicuti anteXXX.ferme annos ex ore Petri Opilionis de Gernsheim, civis moguntini qui gener erat primi artis inventoris, audivi, magnam a primo inventionis suæ hæc ars impressoria habuit difficultatem. Impressuri namque Bibliam, priusquam tertium complessent in opere quaternionem, plusquam 4000florenorumexposuerunt.”[64]This statement no doubt included Gutenberg’s personal outlay, in addition to the moneys advanced by Faust.[65]“Most of the punch-cutters at present belonging to the type-founding trade are English, and their earnings depend in a great measure upon the abilities they display in the work. A first-rate cutter will earn from £5. to £6. weekly, and even more. ‘When I first came to the trade,’ said a man to Mr. Mayhew, ‘the punch-maker who worked for my old master, had £5. a week for producing two punches a day. This was all he was expected to do for his wages; but for every punch he turned out over and above that number he had his regular premiums.’”—Mayhew’sTrades and Manufactories of Great Britain, p. 250.[66]“I shall use my best endeavours to detect and expose false or exaggerated statements and deceitful arguments, come from whom they may; leaving such good proofs and reasonable grounds of belief, on the one side or the other as may then remain, to be incorporated afterwards with such further proofs as have resulted from my own researches. Lastly ... I shall strive to merit the praise of not overstating the evidence one way or the other, and of not pressing an argument further than it will fairly go; it being my sole object to come if possible, at the truth, in this long disputed question.”—Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing, p. 5.[67]Inquiry, pp. 49–51.[68]In a book of notes, left with one Gerlach, and afterwards purchased by Johan Rot, the brother in all probability of Berthold Rot, the first printer at Basle, there occurs the following memorandum, in Schœffer’s own handwriting:—“Hic est finis omnium librorum tam veteris quam nove logice, completi per me Petrum de Gernszheim, alias Moguncia, annoM.CCCC.XLIX, in gloriosissima Universitate Parisiensi.”—(Humphreys, p. 84.) His name, variously spelt as Schöffer, Schœffer, Schoiffer, and Schoiffher, and signifying in English,Shepherd, is sometimes printed in its Latin form,Opilio.[69]“Petrus autem memoratus Opilio ... homo ingeniosus et prudens, faciliorem modum fundendi caracteres excogitavit, et artem ut nunc est complevit.”[70]“John Schœffer says, at the conclusion of theHistoria Francorum, printed in 1515, that the inventor did indeed commence the art of printing in 1450; but did not perfect and bring it to the stage when the use of the press was required until 1452.”—videWetter, p. 350. Referring the date 1450 to the original contract with Faust, this statement shews that at least two years, possibly nearly three, were spent in the preparatory arrangements, casting and cutting the letters, &c. before a single page of the Latin Bible was printed.[71]Letters made of copper or tin alone would scarcely be hard enough to use as punches, except for plaster moulds; but a mixture of metals forming brass, of which several writers say the first cut metal types were made, would answer the purpose, and could be struck into blocks of soft copper or tin without the slightest difficulty. At a pinch, however, Benjamin Franklin has shewn that even with ordinary types, matrices of lead can be made and used with success: “Our printing house,” he writes, “often wanted sorts, and there was no letter-foundry in America; I had seen types cast at James’s in London, but without much of attention to the manner; however, I contrived a mould, and made use of the letters we had as puncheons, struck the matrices in lead, and thus supplied in a pretty tolerable way the deficiencies.”[72]The wordfount, here used to indicate a complete set of types, was originallyfund, and signified a casting or founding of type. Hence also the terms founder and foundry, derived, like the former, from the Latinfundo.[73]This Faust, whose ancestors came from Mentz, was a son of the councillor and judge of the imperial tribunal at Frankfort, who died in 1619. Writing from family papers and traditions, J. F. Faust (inheriting the jealousy against Gutenberg which was engendered by the lawsuit, his opposite politics, and the honours bestowed upon him by the Elector-Archbishop) attributes the origin of Typography to Faust of Mentz, but admits that Gutenberg was his assistant. With the exception of this change of persons, the account he gives of the origin of the art accords in its main facts with the statements made by Trithemius, Zell, Wimpheling, Arnold de Bergel, and other early writers on the subject. He mentions the block Alphabet and Donatus, and the separate wooden types made by cutting the engraved tablets into single letters,—which were all for a long time preserved in Faust’s house at Mentz; where his grandfather Dr. Johan Faust, had seen them. This Dr. Faust also left with the family a written description of these first beginnings of the art. J. F. Faust’s account, taken fromWetter, with some remarks by that author, will be found in the Appendix.[74]Various metals were used in the manufacture of types. Mr.Blades, at pages xx. and xxiv. of his second volume of theLife and Typography of Caxton, gives extracts from the “Cost Book” of the Directors of the Ripoli Press at Florence, 1474–1483, a document still extant in the Magliabechi library at Florence, and printed in the “Notizie Storiche sopra la Stamperia di Ripoli, la quali possono servire all’ illustrazione della Storia Tipografica Fiorentina. Raccolta e pubblicate dal P. Vincezio Fineschi. 8vo. In FirenzeMDCCLXXXI.” From this it seems that for the steel required (probably for punches) the price paid per lb. was equivalent to 9s.of present current money; for metal (not otherwise described) 2s.0¾d.; brass, 2s.3d.; copper, 1s.3d.; tin, 1s.6d.; lead, 5¼d.; and iron wire, 1s.6d.[75]Eight great inventions may be enumerated in the history of Typography. These are, first, the block books; second, the separable types; third, the printing-press; fourth, type-founding; fifth, stereotyping, (taking plaster moulds of whole pages of type, and from them castings in solid metal plates); sixth, composition inking rollers; seventh, cylindrical printing machines, to be worked by steam-power; and eighth, steam type-setting machines. As the four last are of modern date, they do not come within the scope of the present work.[76]That Gutenberg considered himself an injured man is clear from statements which occur in bothJ. F. Faust’sandArnold de Bergel’saccounts. The former states that Gutenberg was greatly angered by the lawsuit, and not only refused to be present at the close of the proceedings, but afterwards left Mentz for Strasburg, where he established a printing office of his own. This is not exactly correct; but as it shews the belief that existed in the Faust family, it is probable that he may have supplied Mentelin, the first printer there, with types and material to commence with. Bergel states, that when the originator of the contract (Faust) began to see some hopes of gain, he raised a discord which led to a rupture: that Gutenberg protested the strife was unjust, but the upshot was a separation, each one trusting to himself and his own press. The following lines shew this, and hint also at the belief that the tribunal before which the lawsuit was tried, was under influences adverse to Gutenberg; the old grudge of BurgherversusNoble, still making itself manifest.“Hic dum cernebant raras procedere merces,Sanxerunt dextris foedera pacta suis:Quæ Deus, aut fortuna dabit, communia sunto,Æqualis nostrum sitque laboris onus.Foedera sed lucri raro concordia nutrit,Indiga sunt pacis dissidioque patent.Sit postquam autores quæstus spes cepit habendi,Ad lites vertunt pectora capta leves.In partes abeunt, sinceraque pacta resolvunt,Et promissa cadunt, irrita fitque fides;Cuilibet ut propriis serviret pergula prelis,Et sibi multijugas quisque pararet opes.Non tulit injustas mens Gutenbergica rixas,Testatur Superos foedera rupta Deos.Caussa fori tandem pavidi defertur ad ora;Scribitur ac illis dica nefanda fori.Tempore sed longo res est tractata dicaciLite, hodie pendet judicis inque sinu.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 245–263.[77]The division of the plant seems to have been made with judicial fairness. A portion of the original implements or utensils were assigned to Faust, and according to the testimony of J. F. Faust of Aschaffenberg, they remained for a length of time in the possession of the family (see note, p. 167). Bergel, or Bergellanus, who published hisEncomion Chalcographiæin 1541, and was for fifteen years a corrector of the press in a printing establishment at Mentz, states, in the Dedication of his work to the Archbishop Albert of Brandenberg, that “several very old instruments were seen by him at Mentz, which the citizens informed him had been used by Gutenberg in the art;” from which it may be inferred, that they were either preserved among the muniments of the city, or by some of Gutenberg’s family connections.[78]Also spelt Hombracht, and Hoemborch.[79]Author of “Speculum Humanæ Salvationis. Le plus ancien Monument de la Xylographie et de la Typographie réunis reproduits en fac-simile, avec Introduction Historique etBibliographique.”Londres, 1861. fol.[80]Authorities differ in respect to Gutenberg’s age, the year of his birth not having been precisely ascertained. It is broadly stated byWetter, that he was born between the years 1393 and 1400. He must therefore have been at least 68 years of age, and he may have been 75, at the time of his death.[81]Published at Heidelberg in 1499.[82]History of England, vol. ii. pp. 526–7.

[32]Variously named in contemporary documents, Johannes Gutenberg; Johannes de Moguntia, dictus Gutenberg; Johannes dictus Gensefleisch, junior, dictus Gutenberg; Johannes Gansefleisch, dictus Sulgeloch vel Sorgenloch; Henne Gensfleisch, genant Sulgeloch; Hans Genzefleisch von Mentz, genant Gutenberg. In EnglishGansefleischwould be writtenGooseflesh; in Latin,Ansicarus.

[33]Meerman, and a few other writers, make mention of two John Gutenbergs, brothers, both of whom are spoken of as inventors of Typography; the elder, known as John Gansfleisch, dying, so it is stated, in 1462. The reason of this seems to be, that some one was wanted to fill the position of the thief, who, according to the tale of Junius, stole from Janssoen, the Coster of Haarlem, the moveable types he had recently invented. As John Gutenberg, junior, could not be fixed upon, and there was no other method of bringing discredit upon his claim, and as the alleged thief was a John somebody, John Gansfleisch, senior, assumed to beelder brotherto John junior, was thought of; and from him, it is asserted, the younger brother obtained his knowledge of the art of printing. The authority on which Meerman relied appears to be a document first published by Köhler (Ehrenrettung Guttenberg’s), in which it is stated, that in 1443 John Gansfleisch the elder hired a house at Mentz, his birthplace. Santander says, the phrase was used because John Gutenberg’sunclehaving died about this time, he had in reality become the elder. Later writers agree with Santander that the elder Gansfleisch here referred to was an uncle to Gutenberg junior, but they do not admit his death at this time. Being named after him, he was probably hisgodfather, and may have been living with him in Strasburg in 1443. It was to his house that Gutenberg junior went, on his return to Mentz.

[34]“To the worthy nun Bertha, in the Convent of St. Clair, at Mentz, health and fraternal good wishes. My dear sister, with respect to what you say of the rents and money which were left to you by our brother Conrad, whom God bless, by his last will; that often and for a long time past, they have not been paid to you, and that they are still owing to you, and amount as you say to a considerable sum; I have to inform you, that, upon giving a receipt, you may receive the sum of twenty florins (of gold) out of my rents and revenues, coming as you know, from Mentz, and other places; by applying to Joh. Dringelter, the wax chandler; Veronica Mystersen, at Seilhoven; or at Mentz, and various other places, of which Pedirman can inform you; as at Lorzwiller, Bodenheim, and Murminheym. I purpose, if it please God, to have the pleasure of seeing you before long, and to arrange the matter with Pedirman, so that your property may be promptly delivered to you, according to the terms and intention of the will. I await your answer upon this subject. Given at Strasburg; feriâ quintâ post dominicam (the 24th March)M.CCCC.XX.IIII.”(Signed) “Henne Gensfleisch, called Sulgeloch.”—Santander, from Oberlin’s “Essai d’Annales de la Vie de J. Gutenberg,” pp. 3, 4.

(Signed) “Henne Gensfleisch, called Sulgeloch.”

—Santander, from Oberlin’s “Essai d’Annales de la Vie de J. Gutenberg,” pp. 3, 4.

[35]Linseed oil, rosins, shellac, pitch, mundick, varnishes, nutgalls, turpentine, and vitriol, were made use of by the early printers in manufacturing their ink. In applying it, a small quantity was first taken up on a pair of balls or dabbers made of sheepskins padded with wool; these were then well beaten together until finely and evenly covered, after which they were beaten on the types until the pages were considered sufficiently inked.

[36]Typographia: An Historical sketch of the Origin and Progress of the Art of Printing. ByT. C. Hansard, 1825. 8vo. 1000 pp.

[37]The Press: a Poem; byJohn M‘Creery. The original edition, printed by the author, was beautifully illustrated with wood engravings by Mr. Hole, a pupil of the Bewicks. Mr. M‘Creery’s establishment was celebrated for the excellence of its printing.

[38]“Life and Typography of William Caxton.” vol. ii. p. xlv.

[39]“Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing.” p. 254.

[40]These occur in what is known as the fourth edition, of which only three copies exist, two in Haarlem, and one in Lille. It is in the copy at Lille that a leaf is printed on both sides. Mr. Humphreys, in his noble work,—the greatest boon ever conferred in any age or country on students of early Typography,—says, (p. 63) this leaf has “an appearance of being printed on both sides, from the existence of a strong set off.” But if the lines of the supposed ‘set-off’ read in the usual way, they must have been set-off from a set-off, or the impression would appear reversed. Most probably the back of the original impression was printed on by an accidental oversight.

[41]“The Old Printer and the Modern Press.” p. 102.London, 1854.

[42]Other witnesses also deposed to purchases, and in the judgment given on the suit, some of these are referred to as having been oflead.

[43]The documents containing an account of the trial, and the sentence of the magistrates of Strasburg, are dated December 1439. They were originally published with a Latin version, by Schöpflin, in hisVindiciæTypographicæ, 1760, and have since been repeatedly printed with French, English and Dutch translations.

[44]In his “Dissertation sur l’Origine, l’Invention, et le Perfectionnement de l’Imprimerie,” printed at Amsterdam in 1819. This work was the one which obtained the prize offered by the Dutch Society of Arts and Sciences at Haarlem, about the year 1814, for the best Dissertation in support of the ancient tradition that the Art of Printing was invented in that city.

[45]In certain parts of the north of Scotland augers and high-pitched screws are to this day called ‘wommels’ or ‘wombels,’ by old folk. The word is no doubt the same as the antiquated German ‘wurbel.’

[46]“Quid, si nunc justos, aeris ratione reducta,Tentarem libros cudere mille modis?Robora prospexit dehinctorculariaBacchi,Et dixit, preli forma sit ista novi.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 65–69.

[46]

“Quid, si nunc justos, aeris ratione reducta,Tentarem libros cudere mille modis?Robora prospexit dehinctorculariaBacchi,Et dixit, preli forma sit ista novi.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 65–69.

“Quid, si nunc justos, aeris ratione reducta,

Tentarem libros cudere mille modis?

Robora prospexit dehinctorculariaBacchi,

Et dixit, preli forma sit ista novi.”

Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 65–69.

[47]Kœnig’scylinder machine, erected for Mr.Bensleythe eminent printer, and first set in operation in April 1811, at the manufactory in Whitecross-street, London; when it printed 3000 sheets of theAnnual Register, to the admiration of all who saw it at work.

[48]“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time which was before us.”—Ecclesiastes, i. 9, 10. Some days subsequent to that on which I had printed the description of the process, which, after a careful examination of Mr. Humphreys’ fac-simile, I felt convinced was the one which had been adopted for taking impressions of the moveable types used in theSpeculum Humanæ Salvationis, I received an illustrated advertisement sheet of Francis Donnison and Son, Printers’ Engineers of Newcastle-on-Tyne, in which is an engraving of an “Improved Galley Proof Press,” which exactly realises the idea I attempted to convey to my readers on pages 83 and 84.

[49]“The Pilgrims of the Rhine,” byBulwer, (LordLytton), p. 313.

[50]“Wimpheling, one of the most learned men of his time, who narrowly escaped persecution for the Protestant tendency of his writings, and who among other things which proved him to have been a thinker in advance of his time, founded a literary society at Strasburg, which soon became celebrated, and the tendencies of which were afterwards praised even by the critical Erasmus.”—Humphreys, p. 82.

[51]“De l’Origine de l’Imprimerie.”Paris, 1853.

[52]“Kritische Geschichte der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst durch Johann Gutenberg zu Mainz.” von J.Wetter.Mainz, 1836. 8vo. pp. xvi. 808, with 13 Tables of fac-similes.

[53]“Characteres enim a primus illis inventoribus non ita eleganter et expedite, ut a nostris fieri solet, sedfilo in litterarum foramen immisso, connectebantur, sicut Venetiis id genus typos me vidisse memini.”

[54]The family of the Fusts was one of great respectability. It consisted at this time of three brothers; John the banker and money-lender; James, the city architect, and subsequently a goldsmith as well; and Nicholas, a judge in one of the Courts of law. John married his wife Margaret about the year 1420; one son, Conrad, was the only issue of the marriage. Conrad married in 1445, and his daughter, Christina, was, in 1465, bestowed in marriage upon Peter Schœffer of Gernszheim. It appears from some accounts that John Faust was also a goldsmith; a business with which banking and money-lending were usually combined.

[55]There is another version of the circumstances attending the connection of Gutenberg with Faust. Gutenberg senior, say the claimants of the honor of the invention for the first printer at Strasburg, returned to Mentz in 1440, having stolen the knowledge of the art from Mentelin, their countryman, who they assert was the original inventor. Dutch authorities however say, that Gutenberg’s return to Mentz, in 1440, was after he stole the types, &c., from Coster, the original inventor at Haarlem. Like Sir Boyle Roche’s bird, he was thus in two places at one and the same time. After his return he printed, in 1442, the two school-books ‘Alexandri Galli Doctrinale,’ and ‘Petri Hispani Tractatus,’ and then, in 1443, took the house ‘Zum Jungen,’ when he was joined in partnership by Faust, J. Meidenbachius, J. Petersheimius, and others, whose names have not been recorded, and in 1444 by Gutenberg junior, who then quitted Strasburg for that express purpose. That in 1450 this partnership was dissolved, when Faust and Gutenberg junior entered into a new partnership, the senior being no longer heard of. These statements are at best but conjectural, and have been made with the view of affording support to the systems of writers who deny to Gutenberg the honor of having invented the Typographic Art.The quotations in the text are from the record of legal proceedings taken by Faust against Gutenberg in 1455. This record was printed in German bySeckenburgin “Selectis Juris et Historiarum,” tom. i. pp. 269–277; byWolfius, in his “Monumenta Typographica,” tom. i. p. 472et seq., and byWetter, pp. 284–290.

The quotations in the text are from the record of legal proceedings taken by Faust against Gutenberg in 1455. This record was printed in German bySeckenburgin “Selectis Juris et Historiarum,” tom. i. pp. 269–277; byWolfius, in his “Monumenta Typographica,” tom. i. p. 472et seq., and byWetter, pp. 284–290.

[56]Trithemius derived his information direct from Schœffer the [grand] son-in-law of Faust; but did not write his chronicle until thirty years after. The work usually referred to as the Catholicon, is one of some magnitude. It was written by the monk John Balbi, or John of Genoa, and consists of a Latin Grammar followed by a Vocabulary. Gutenberg probably printed only the latter portion, and perhaps but an abridgment of that. As the earliest production of his press, after his connection with Faust, a copy would now be of immense value; but as is the case with theTractsof Peter of Spain, no bibliographer has yet had the good fortune to identify it, and possibly it may have passed out of existence. There is no reason however to doubt the correctness of the Abbot’s statement on that account. There can be no question but that multitudes of works, issued from the presses of the early printers, have been utterly destroyed. It is marvellous that so many single, unique copies, have been preserved to the present time.

[57]These have been fully described by Fischer, Van Praet, Wetter, Leon de Laborde, and other writers.

[58]Seepostfor Zell’s account in full.

[59]The entry at the end of the first volume is—“Et sic est finis prime partis biblia Scz. veteris testamenti, Illuminata seu rubricata & ligata per Henricum Albch alias cremer. Anno dni Moccccolvifesto Bartholomei apli—Deo gratias—Alleluja.” That on the end of the second volume:—“Iste liber illuminatus, ligatus & completus est per Henricum cremer vicariū ecclesie collegiate sancti Stephani maguntini sub anno dni Millesimo quatringentisimo quinquagesimo sexto, festo Assumptionis gloriose virginis Marie, Deo gracias. Alleluja, &c.”

[60]With the exception of the first ten or eleven pages, which contain but forty or forty-one lines in each column.

[61]The doubt was not only natural, but there is an almost absolute certainty that the letters could not have been cast at the time. Schœffer’s invention of cast fusile types did not take place,—or at any rate was not made use of,—until after the lawsuit between Gutenberg and Faust.

[62]Humphreys, p. 84.

[63]“Post hæc inventis successerunt subtiliora, inveneruntque modum fundendi formas omnium latini alphabeti litterarum, quas ipsi matrices nominabant ex quibus rursum aeneos sive stanneos caracteres fundebant, ad omnem pressuram sufficientes, quas prius manibus sculpebant. Et revera sicuti anteXXX.ferme annos ex ore Petri Opilionis de Gernsheim, civis moguntini qui gener erat primi artis inventoris, audivi, magnam a primo inventionis suæ hæc ars impressoria habuit difficultatem. Impressuri namque Bibliam, priusquam tertium complessent in opere quaternionem, plusquam 4000florenorumexposuerunt.”

[64]This statement no doubt included Gutenberg’s personal outlay, in addition to the moneys advanced by Faust.

[65]“Most of the punch-cutters at present belonging to the type-founding trade are English, and their earnings depend in a great measure upon the abilities they display in the work. A first-rate cutter will earn from £5. to £6. weekly, and even more. ‘When I first came to the trade,’ said a man to Mr. Mayhew, ‘the punch-maker who worked for my old master, had £5. a week for producing two punches a day. This was all he was expected to do for his wages; but for every punch he turned out over and above that number he had his regular premiums.’”—Mayhew’sTrades and Manufactories of Great Britain, p. 250.

[66]“I shall use my best endeavours to detect and expose false or exaggerated statements and deceitful arguments, come from whom they may; leaving such good proofs and reasonable grounds of belief, on the one side or the other as may then remain, to be incorporated afterwards with such further proofs as have resulted from my own researches. Lastly ... I shall strive to merit the praise of not overstating the evidence one way or the other, and of not pressing an argument further than it will fairly go; it being my sole object to come if possible, at the truth, in this long disputed question.”—Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing, p. 5.

[67]Inquiry, pp. 49–51.

[68]In a book of notes, left with one Gerlach, and afterwards purchased by Johan Rot, the brother in all probability of Berthold Rot, the first printer at Basle, there occurs the following memorandum, in Schœffer’s own handwriting:—“Hic est finis omnium librorum tam veteris quam nove logice, completi per me Petrum de Gernszheim, alias Moguncia, annoM.CCCC.XLIX, in gloriosissima Universitate Parisiensi.”—(Humphreys, p. 84.) His name, variously spelt as Schöffer, Schœffer, Schoiffer, and Schoiffher, and signifying in English,Shepherd, is sometimes printed in its Latin form,Opilio.

[69]“Petrus autem memoratus Opilio ... homo ingeniosus et prudens, faciliorem modum fundendi caracteres excogitavit, et artem ut nunc est complevit.”

[70]“John Schœffer says, at the conclusion of theHistoria Francorum, printed in 1515, that the inventor did indeed commence the art of printing in 1450; but did not perfect and bring it to the stage when the use of the press was required until 1452.”—videWetter, p. 350. Referring the date 1450 to the original contract with Faust, this statement shews that at least two years, possibly nearly three, were spent in the preparatory arrangements, casting and cutting the letters, &c. before a single page of the Latin Bible was printed.

[71]Letters made of copper or tin alone would scarcely be hard enough to use as punches, except for plaster moulds; but a mixture of metals forming brass, of which several writers say the first cut metal types were made, would answer the purpose, and could be struck into blocks of soft copper or tin without the slightest difficulty. At a pinch, however, Benjamin Franklin has shewn that even with ordinary types, matrices of lead can be made and used with success: “Our printing house,” he writes, “often wanted sorts, and there was no letter-foundry in America; I had seen types cast at James’s in London, but without much of attention to the manner; however, I contrived a mould, and made use of the letters we had as puncheons, struck the matrices in lead, and thus supplied in a pretty tolerable way the deficiencies.”

[72]The wordfount, here used to indicate a complete set of types, was originallyfund, and signified a casting or founding of type. Hence also the terms founder and foundry, derived, like the former, from the Latinfundo.

[73]This Faust, whose ancestors came from Mentz, was a son of the councillor and judge of the imperial tribunal at Frankfort, who died in 1619. Writing from family papers and traditions, J. F. Faust (inheriting the jealousy against Gutenberg which was engendered by the lawsuit, his opposite politics, and the honours bestowed upon him by the Elector-Archbishop) attributes the origin of Typography to Faust of Mentz, but admits that Gutenberg was his assistant. With the exception of this change of persons, the account he gives of the origin of the art accords in its main facts with the statements made by Trithemius, Zell, Wimpheling, Arnold de Bergel, and other early writers on the subject. He mentions the block Alphabet and Donatus, and the separate wooden types made by cutting the engraved tablets into single letters,—which were all for a long time preserved in Faust’s house at Mentz; where his grandfather Dr. Johan Faust, had seen them. This Dr. Faust also left with the family a written description of these first beginnings of the art. J. F. Faust’s account, taken fromWetter, with some remarks by that author, will be found in the Appendix.

[74]Various metals were used in the manufacture of types. Mr.Blades, at pages xx. and xxiv. of his second volume of theLife and Typography of Caxton, gives extracts from the “Cost Book” of the Directors of the Ripoli Press at Florence, 1474–1483, a document still extant in the Magliabechi library at Florence, and printed in the “Notizie Storiche sopra la Stamperia di Ripoli, la quali possono servire all’ illustrazione della Storia Tipografica Fiorentina. Raccolta e pubblicate dal P. Vincezio Fineschi. 8vo. In FirenzeMDCCLXXXI.” From this it seems that for the steel required (probably for punches) the price paid per lb. was equivalent to 9s.of present current money; for metal (not otherwise described) 2s.0¾d.; brass, 2s.3d.; copper, 1s.3d.; tin, 1s.6d.; lead, 5¼d.; and iron wire, 1s.6d.

[75]Eight great inventions may be enumerated in the history of Typography. These are, first, the block books; second, the separable types; third, the printing-press; fourth, type-founding; fifth, stereotyping, (taking plaster moulds of whole pages of type, and from them castings in solid metal plates); sixth, composition inking rollers; seventh, cylindrical printing machines, to be worked by steam-power; and eighth, steam type-setting machines. As the four last are of modern date, they do not come within the scope of the present work.

[76]That Gutenberg considered himself an injured man is clear from statements which occur in bothJ. F. Faust’sandArnold de Bergel’saccounts. The former states that Gutenberg was greatly angered by the lawsuit, and not only refused to be present at the close of the proceedings, but afterwards left Mentz for Strasburg, where he established a printing office of his own. This is not exactly correct; but as it shews the belief that existed in the Faust family, it is probable that he may have supplied Mentelin, the first printer there, with types and material to commence with. Bergel states, that when the originator of the contract (Faust) began to see some hopes of gain, he raised a discord which led to a rupture: that Gutenberg protested the strife was unjust, but the upshot was a separation, each one trusting to himself and his own press. The following lines shew this, and hint also at the belief that the tribunal before which the lawsuit was tried, was under influences adverse to Gutenberg; the old grudge of BurgherversusNoble, still making itself manifest.“Hic dum cernebant raras procedere merces,Sanxerunt dextris foedera pacta suis:Quæ Deus, aut fortuna dabit, communia sunto,Æqualis nostrum sitque laboris onus.Foedera sed lucri raro concordia nutrit,Indiga sunt pacis dissidioque patent.Sit postquam autores quæstus spes cepit habendi,Ad lites vertunt pectora capta leves.In partes abeunt, sinceraque pacta resolvunt,Et promissa cadunt, irrita fitque fides;Cuilibet ut propriis serviret pergula prelis,Et sibi multijugas quisque pararet opes.Non tulit injustas mens Gutenbergica rixas,Testatur Superos foedera rupta Deos.Caussa fori tandem pavidi defertur ad ora;Scribitur ac illis dica nefanda fori.Tempore sed longo res est tractata dicaciLite, hodie pendet judicis inque sinu.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 245–263.

“Hic dum cernebant raras procedere merces,Sanxerunt dextris foedera pacta suis:Quæ Deus, aut fortuna dabit, communia sunto,Æqualis nostrum sitque laboris onus.Foedera sed lucri raro concordia nutrit,Indiga sunt pacis dissidioque patent.Sit postquam autores quæstus spes cepit habendi,Ad lites vertunt pectora capta leves.In partes abeunt, sinceraque pacta resolvunt,Et promissa cadunt, irrita fitque fides;Cuilibet ut propriis serviret pergula prelis,Et sibi multijugas quisque pararet opes.Non tulit injustas mens Gutenbergica rixas,Testatur Superos foedera rupta Deos.Caussa fori tandem pavidi defertur ad ora;Scribitur ac illis dica nefanda fori.Tempore sed longo res est tractata dicaciLite, hodie pendet judicis inque sinu.”Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 245–263.

“Hic dum cernebant raras procedere merces,

Sanxerunt dextris foedera pacta suis:

Quæ Deus, aut fortuna dabit, communia sunto,

Æqualis nostrum sitque laboris onus.

Foedera sed lucri raro concordia nutrit,

Indiga sunt pacis dissidioque patent.

Sit postquam autores quæstus spes cepit habendi,

Ad lites vertunt pectora capta leves.

In partes abeunt, sinceraque pacta resolvunt,

Et promissa cadunt, irrita fitque fides;

Cuilibet ut propriis serviret pergula prelis,

Et sibi multijugas quisque pararet opes.

Non tulit injustas mens Gutenbergica rixas,

Testatur Superos foedera rupta Deos.

Caussa fori tandem pavidi defertur ad ora;

Scribitur ac illis dica nefanda fori.

Tempore sed longo res est tractata dicaci

Lite, hodie pendet judicis inque sinu.”

Encomion Chalcographiæ, v.v. 245–263.

[77]The division of the plant seems to have been made with judicial fairness. A portion of the original implements or utensils were assigned to Faust, and according to the testimony of J. F. Faust of Aschaffenberg, they remained for a length of time in the possession of the family (see note, p. 167). Bergel, or Bergellanus, who published hisEncomion Chalcographiæin 1541, and was for fifteen years a corrector of the press in a printing establishment at Mentz, states, in the Dedication of his work to the Archbishop Albert of Brandenberg, that “several very old instruments were seen by him at Mentz, which the citizens informed him had been used by Gutenberg in the art;” from which it may be inferred, that they were either preserved among the muniments of the city, or by some of Gutenberg’s family connections.

[78]Also spelt Hombracht, and Hoemborch.

[79]Author of “Speculum Humanæ Salvationis. Le plus ancien Monument de la Xylographie et de la Typographie réunis reproduits en fac-simile, avec Introduction Historique etBibliographique.”Londres, 1861. fol.

[80]Authorities differ in respect to Gutenberg’s age, the year of his birth not having been precisely ascertained. It is broadly stated byWetter, that he was born between the years 1393 and 1400. He must therefore have been at least 68 years of age, and he may have been 75, at the time of his death.

[81]Published at Heidelberg in 1499.

[82]History of England, vol. ii. pp. 526–7.

Back to Index Next