The Early Oxford Press / A Bibliography of Printing and Publishing at Oxford, '1468'-1640; With Notes, Appendixes and Illustrations

The Oxford Press of the fifteenth century is a peculiarly interesting one. At present fifteen works are known to belong to it, ranging in date from “1468” (1478?) to 1486 (1486
7?). Not only is its origin quite independent, so far as is known, of Caxton’s printing, not only are new products of the press still from time to time discovered, but the battle which has been waged about the date of its establishment has made the “1468” book a veritable typographical battleground, and in Henry Bradshaw’s opinion a touchstone of intellectual acumen.

In the first place some details of the various books will be given: then an account of the type and presswork: and lastly a description of each book supplementary to, and corrective of, that contained on pp. 1–4.

The finest set is undoubtedly possessed by the John Rylands Library at Manchester.

Seven kinds of type were used, the use of which can be seen on p. 238. Facsimiles of all of them are given in plates II-V.

These obviously divide the books into three groups. In the first group of three (“1468”–1479
80) only type no. 1 is used. In the second group of four (1480–82, Theodoric Rood) only types 2–3 are found. In the last group consisting of eight (1483–1486
7, T. Rood and Thomas Hunte) only types 4–7 are used, except that the peculiar black initial type (no. 3) is occasionally still used.

The press was of course a wooden hand-screw one, which was at first employed to print one page at a time (Jerome), but after the first book two pages and perhaps later four were struck off together. The earliest printing press of which we have an engraving is as late as 1499
500 (see an article in Bibliographica, 1894, no. 2), but there was great conservatism in detail, and from the early engravings and such researches as those which Blades, De Vinne, Talbot Reed, and others have made, we know many of the details of working in the earliest days.

Type 1. “1468”—1479
80.

Character:—Cologne black.

Body:—English, nearly (10 lines = 115
16 in. In modern English 10 lines = 1⅞ in.).

Used in the Jerome, Aretinus and Aegidius, with no other.

The “upper case” (to use a modern expression) consisted of at least 16 divisions, G, J, K, L, T, U, W, X, Y, Z not being used, and P seldom in the Jerome, H being there used for both H and P. This misuse is not found in the other two books. On the other hand there are two forms of C, E, N, and Q, both probably mixed in the same division. Q is in the Jerome almost always (a peculiarity found in some ornamental MSS., from the convenience of extending the tail into the margin), in the Aretinus and Aegidius always Q: the letter is however identical in all three books, but being on a square body it is in the Jerome turned one quarter round.

The “lower case” consisted of at least 121 divisions. Of the simple unmodified letters k and z are wanting, and except in the Jerome j (but ij is found in all, colligated). There are two forms of p, r, and three of s, the two p’s and r’s being used indiscriminately, but the two s’s (final) and the ſ (initial and medial) having their proper use. Of colligated or modified letters there are at least eighty-three, and of other symbols eleven (for -et, &, con-, -us [two], id est, full stop, colon, ?). Of these 121 about 95 are common to all three. The signs of progress are as follows:—

In the Jerome, contrasted with the other two, Q is except in two places , H is generally used as P, and I have not elsewhere noticed ̓b, or j used by itself. On the other hand in the two others, and not in the Jerome, are found an extra short t in which the perpendicular stroke hardly appears at all above the horizontal line, and eleven new forms, including fe, ff, and pp in colligation. The Q and P are rightly used, always.

So too in the Jerome and Aretinus compared with the Aegidius we find that q is printed too high up, being in fact an inverted b, or, more accurately, an inverted broken h occasionally used for b. In the Jerome this is almost always the case, in the Aretinus as often as not, in the Aegidius hardly ever. It may be accidental that B and H and three minor modified letters are not found in the short Aegidius, that w (in wlt = vult) is only found in the Jerome, ·|· (= id est) only in the Aretinus: but the occurrence of ؟ (= ?) and of printing in red ink only in the Aegidius, is not insignificant.

The relative order of the three may therefore be assumed to be as above indicated.

Origin of the type.

It may be taken as certain that as Caxton’s type is based on Bruges models, so the first Oxford type is ultimately derived from Cologne. Ulric Zel began printing there at least as early as 1466, and the general resemblance to his letters is clear. The likeness is still nearer when we follow Zel’s influence on Arnold ther Hoernen (Cologne, from 1470), Richard Paffroet of Cologne (Deventer, from 1477), and especially a little-known Cologne printer named Gerard ten Raem de Bercka, whose only dated book is of 1478. John of Westphalia (Alost and Louvain, from 1473) and Jacobus de Breda, a successor of Paffroet at Deventer, also supply similarities. In the case of Gerard we actually find, besides a close general similarity, the same misuse of H as P. Unfortunately no works printed by him, except the dated Modus Confitendi and an undated Aesopus, are at present known, so that it must not be assumed that 1478 is his earliest or only date.

It is at present also unsafe to assume that Theodoricus Rood of Cologne who printed at Oxford in 1481–85 was the first Oxford printer, or ever used type no. 1.

Type 2 (1480?-1482).

Character:—Narrow Dutch Black.

Body:—English, nearly (10 lines = just less than 2 in.).

Used in the Cicero (1480?: by itself), Latin Grammar (1481?: by itself), Ales (1481: chiefly, but with no. 3), and Latteburius (1482: chiefly, but with no. 3).

The “upper case” consisted of 22 letters (J, K, U, W omitted).

The “lower case” consisted of at least 131 divisions. Of the simple letters j only occurs in colligation with i (as ij), and there are two forms of r, s (s, ſ) and y. There are about 93 colligated or modified letters.

Unfortunately it is very difficult to institute a close comparison of the use of letters, so as to establish a proper order of the books, in consequence of the fragmentary state of the Milo and the Latin Grammar. The Milo can be clearly separated from the rest: the type is spaced, so that 10 lines = between 29
16 and 2¾ in., and ( ), ؟ (= ?), | (= comma) are found in it alone. In fact, but for the closest resemblance of actual type, the Milo would have to be regarded as printed elsewhere: and it cannot yet be said to be quite certainly printed at Oxford. The Ales and Latteburius are hardly to be distinguished in the use of type, but I have observed w only in the Latteburius and Grammar.

The origin of the type is probably to be looked for near Cologne, from whence came Theodoricus Rood, the avowed printer of the Ales, and where a Theodoricus, who may probably be identified with Rood, printed in 1485–6 in a type smaller than, but similar to, the present one. The narrow stilted look of the letters and the semicircular sweep in front of the A are noticeable features. Henry Bradshaw detected a similarity between this type and that of Arnold ther Hoernen at Cologne.

Type 3 (1481–1485).

Character:—Heading and initial Black, a large special type.

Body:—2-line English, nearly (10 lines = 4 in. -, 10 lines of 2-line English = 3¾ in. +).

Used only in the Ales (1481) and Latteburius (1482) (for the beginnings of chapters), in the Lyndewoode (1483?: head lines) and the Phalaris (1485: one line).

The type is too sparsely used to enable us to describe the extent of the fount: but F, G, J, j, K, k, v, W, w, X, Y, Z, z are not found: I and g have two forms each; s, ſ are found; V is only used for the number five; and nine modified or conjoined letters occur. The peculiarity of the letters is a slipped or detached upper corner in B, L, N, which is found in 1506 in Quentell’s printing at Cologne, and may be compared with a smaller form used by Jean Veldener at Culenburg in 1484.

Type 4 (1483?-1485?).

Character:—Small Dutch Black.

Body:—Pica, nearly (10 lines = 111
16 + in., 10 lines in Pica = 111
16 – in.).

This is the small type of the Anwykyll and Lyndewoode (both 1483?), the ordinary type of the Hampole, Logic, and Augustine (all 1483?), and the small type of the Lyndewoode (1483?), and is used in the Textus Alexandri (1485?). It is in many details similar to type 2, but may be readily distinguished by the o being broad and round in type 4, instead of narrow and oval as in type 2. There are two forms of S in type 4, and only one in type 2. The capitals are identical with those of type 6.

The fount consisted of 25 capitals (J, V, W wanting, but two forms of D, S), 27 small letters (z wanting, but r, s double) and at least 95 modified or conjoined letters, in all not less than 147 types. Seven of the last class appear to be peculiar to the Logic, which may therefore be the latest of the group.

Type 5 (1483–1486
7).

Character:—Small Caxtonian Black.

Body:—Great Primer, nearly (10 lines = 25
16 in., 10 lines of Great Primer = 2⅜ in.).

This is the larger type of the Anwykyll, the largest but one (ordinary large) of the Lyndewoode, the largest of the Augustine (all 1483?), the ordinary one of the Phalaris (1485), is used in the Textus Alexandri (1485?), and is the small type of the Festial (1486). The capitals are identical with those of type 7.

There are 19 capitals (J, K, V, W, X, Y, Z wanting) and 28 small letters (j, z wanting, but d, g, r, s double), and at least 44 modified or conjoined letters, five of which seem to be peculiar to the Festial, as is also the use of k. In all there were not less than 91 types.

Type 6 (1483?).

Character:—Large Dutch Black, a Church type going with no. 4.

Body:—Pica, nearly (as no. 4).

This is the larger type of the Hampole, the larger type (two half lines only) of the Logic, the larger type imbedded in the small type of the Lyndewoode, the intermediate type (one line) in the Augustine, and occurs in the Anwykyll (all 1483?). The capitals are identical with those of type 4.

There are 22 capitals (J, K, V, W, Z wanting, but S double), 24 small letters (j, k, w, z wanting, but r, s double), and at least 16 modified or conjoined letters, in all not less than 62 types. Eight of the modified letters appear to be peculiar to the Hampole.

Type 7 (1485?–1486
7).

Character:—Large Caxtonian Black, a Church type going with no. 5.

Body:—Great Primer, nearly (as no. 5).

This is used in the Textus Alexandri (1485?) and is the large type of the Festial (1486
7). The capitals are identical with those of type 5.

To judge from the Festial, there are 18 capitals (J, K, R, V, W, X, Y, Z not being used), 24 small letters (k, w, y, z not found, but r, s double), and at least 9 modified letters, 51 in all.

WATERMARKS.

At present the study of watermarks has not reached a stage at which they are able to contribute scientific proofs of high importance, nor will any proof be ever deducible from them except the earliest possible occurrence of an undated issue, although probabilities of concurrent printing may be arrived at. Only some plain facts, therefore, will be stated with respect to their occurrence in the early Oxford books.

If we take the first group (the Jerome, Aretinus and Aegidius), we find no less than 26, out of a total of 50. The Rufinus has seven (two shared with the others, one shared with the Aretinus only, one shared with the Latteburius, and three peculiar to itself). The Aretinus has 22, most of which are found in the later groups, but eight are peculiar to itself. The Aegidius has two only, common to the group.

In the second group (Cicero, Ales, Latteburius, Latin Grammar) there appear to be 28, of which four are common to all the groups, one is shared only with group one, seven only with group three, and sixteen are peculiar.

In the third group 38 occur, four of which are common to all the groups, nine are shared with the first alone, seven with the second alone, and eighteen are peculiar.

SEPARATE BOOKS.

1. Jerome (“1468,” see p. 1).

The treatise of Tyrannius Rufinus on the Apostles’ Creed, here ascribed to St. Jerome, was undoubtedly the first product of the Oxford press. It bears the date of 17 December, 1468, as the day on which the printing was finished. The colophon is clearly printed and bears no mark of haste, nor does it show the smallest trace of alteration in any of the copies seen by the present writer. Saturday is a reasonable day on which to conclude a work. A facsimile of the colophon is given in plate II.

Unfortunately for the peace of the bibliographer two spectres have haunted this book, one of which “pulveris exigui jactu” has been laid, but the other is not yet gone, although there is a prospect of ultimate eviction.

I. The Corsellis forgery.

In 1664 Richard Atkyns, a Gloucestershire gentleman of some position, and educated at Balliol, issued a book, the title of which sets forth with unusual clearness the object of the volume:—“The Original and Growth of Printing: Collected Out of History, and the Records of this Kingdome. Wherein is also Demonstrated, That Printing appertaineth to the Prerogative Royal; and is a Flower of the Crown of England. By Richard Atkyns, Esq:” (London, printed by John Streater, for the Author, MDCLXIV: quarto: pp. [12] + 24). Atkyns’s object was to recommend himself to Charles II’s attention by proving that printing was a royal privilege: and for this it was very desirable that there should be evidence of the introduction of the art into England under royal protection. The testimony of Stowe—corroborated by Howell—that “William Caxton of London, Mercer,” introduced it in 1471, was unsuitable. Atkyns, however, came upon a copy of the “1468” Oxford book, and “the same most worthy Person who trusted me with the aforesaid Book, did also present me with the Copy of a Record and Manuscript in Lambeth-House, heretofore in his Custody, belonging to the See (and not to any particular Arch-Bishop of Canterbury); the substance whereof was this (though I hope, for publique satisfaction, the Record it self, in its due time, will appear).” Then ensues the following story:—

Thomas Bourchier, Arch-Biſhop of Canterbury, moved the then King (Hen. the 6th) to uſe all poſſible means for procuring a Printing-Mold (for ſo ’twas there called) to be brought into this Kingdom; the King (a good Man, and much given to Works of this Nature) readily hearkned to the Motion; and taking private Advice, how to effect His Deſign, concluded it could not be brought about without great Secrecy, and a conſiderable Sum of Money given to ſuch Perſon or Perſons, as would draw off ſome of the Workmen from Harlein in Holland, where John Cuthenberg had newly invented it, and was himſelf perſonally at Work: ’Twas reſolv’d, that leſs then one Thouſand Marks would not produce the deſir’d Effect: Towards which Sum, the ſaid Arch-Biſhop preſented the King with Three Hundred Marks. The Money being now prepared, the Management of the Deſign was committed to Mr. Robert Turnour, who then was of the Roabs to the King, and a Perſon moſt in Favour with Him, of any of his Condition: Mr. Turnour took to his Aſſiſtance Mr. Caxton, a Citizen of good Abilities, who Trading much into Holland, might be a Creditable Pretence, as well for his going, as ſtay in the Low Countries: Mr. Turnour was in Diſguiſe (his Beard and Hair ſhaven quite off) but Mr. Caxton appeared known and publique. They having received the ſaid Sum of One Thouſand Marks, went firſt to Amſterdam, then to Leyden, not daring to enter Harlein it ſelf; for the Town was very jealous, having impriſoned and apprehended divers Perſons, who came from other Parts for the ſame purpoſe: They ſtaid till they had ſpent the whole One Thouſand Marks in Gifts and Expences: So as the King was fain to ſend Five Hundred Marks more, Mr. Turnour having written to the King, that he had almoſt done his Work; a Bargain (as he ſaid) being ſtruck betwixt him and two Hollanders, for bringing off one of the Work men, who ſhould ſufficiently diſcover and teach this New Art: At laſt, with much ado, they got off one of the Under-Workmen, whoſe Name was Frederick Corſells (or rather Corſellis), who late one Night ſtole from his Fellows in Diſguiſe, into a Veſſel prepared before for that purpoſe; and ſo the Wind (favouring the Deſign) brought him ſafe to London.

’Twas not thought ſo prudent, to ſet him on Work at London, (but by the Arch-Biſhops meanes, who had been Vice-Chancellor, and afterwards Chancellor of the Univerſity of Oxon) Corſellis was carryed with a Guard to Oxon; which Guard conſtantly watch’d, to prevent Corſellis from any poſſible Escape, till he had made good his Promiſe, in teaching how to Print: So that at Oxford Printing was firſt ſet up in England, which was before there was any Printing-Press, or Printer, in France, Spain, Italy, or Germany, (except the City of Mentz) which claimes Seniority, as to Printing, even of Harlein it ſelf, calling her City, Urbem Maguntinam Artis Tipographicæ Inventricem primam, though ’tis known to be otherwiſe, that City gaining that Art by the Brother of one of the Workmen of Harlein, who had learnt it at Home of his Brother, and after ſet up for himſelf at Mentz.

This Preſs at Oxon was at leaſt ten years before there was any Printing in Europe (except at Harlein, and Mentz) where alſo it was but new born. This Preſs at Oxford, was afterwards found inconvenient, to be the ſole Printing-place of England, as being too far from London, and the Sea: Whereupon the King ſet up a Preſs at St. Albans, and another in the Abby of Weſtminster, where they Printed ſeveral Bookes of Divinity and Phyſick, (for the King, for Reaſons beſt known to himſelf and Council) permitted then no Law-Books to be Printed; nor did any Printer exerciſe that ART, but onely ſuch as were the Kings ſworn Servants; the King himſelf having the Price and Emolument for Printing Books.

Printing thus brought into England, was moſt Graciouſly received by the King, and moſt cordially entertained by the Church, the Printers having the Honour to be ſworn the King’s Servants, and the Favour to Lodge in the very Boſome of the Church; as in Weſtminſter, St. Albans, Oxon, &c.

As no one believes in this story it is not worth while to do more than to point out that no corroboration of it has ever been found, (much less the original record discovered), that Henry VI was deposed 4 March 1460
1, and that the type shows no resemblance to that of Haarlem. Nor does the rest of the book concern us. The tale, however, in the absence of contradiction, obtained some vogue, so that we find for instance in Layer Marney church in Essex some such inscription as the following “Præ-missus, non amissus, Nicolas Corsellis Armiger Dominus hujus manerii hic requiescit, hâc vitâ ad meliorem commigratus Anno D 1674 Die Octobris 19^o.