PRINTING. 



691 



be the introducer of the art into England. But Dr 

 Conyers Middleton, in his treatise on the origin of 

 English printing, has clearly demonstrated, that the 

 date affixed to the " Exposicio" must be a mistake, 

 for the book itself bears unequivocal marks of be- 

 longing to a somewhat later period. Not to mention 

 other matters of a technical nature which go to 

 prore this, it may be enough to say that signatures 

 are used in distinguishing the sheets of the work 

 a circumstance which does not characterize any 

 other book with so early a date as 14G8, signatures 

 net having been adopted for several years later. 

 From that date, also, till eleven years after, we 

 have no production from the press at Oxford, and 

 it is difficult to imagine how long a cessation of the 

 Oxford press should have taken place, supposing 

 the above date to be correct. The only satisfactory 

 way of accounting for the matter is by assuming an 

 X to have been omitted through mistake in the im- 

 print of the " Exposicio,' 1 and that its true date was 

 M.CCCC.LXXVIII (1478). Similar inaccuracies 

 were by no means rare in the early history of the 

 art. There is a Bible at Augsburg of the date 

 1449, instead of 1494, the two last figures being 

 transposed. There is a Bible dated Paris, 1443 ; 

 another, Lyons, 1446 ; and a third, Basil, 1450, 

 although it is well known that printing was not 

 practised at any of these places till several years 

 later. Koelhoff, who printed at Cologne about the 

 beginning of the sixteenth century, might be placed 

 before even Coster or Guttenburg, for one of his 

 books is dated " anno M.CCCC." (1400 instead of 

 1500) a C being omitted ; and the celebrated 

 Nicolas Janson, who printed at Venice between 

 the years 1470 and 1480, has a work (the Decor 

 Puellarum) dated M.CCCC.LXI. instead of 

 M.CCCC. LXX1., an X being omitted. 



But even though the date of the " Exposicio" 

 were correct (of which there is little likelihood), 

 and though, by some singular incident, one little 

 book was printed in Oxford several years earlier 

 than any in Westminster Abbey, still William Cax- 

 ton must ever be considered as the father of English 

 typography, not only as having been the first who 

 successfully established the art in this country, but 

 as having, by his learning, application, and in- 

 genuity, done much towards its improvement and 

 extension. He was born in the weald or wood of 

 Kent about the year 1412, and would appear to 

 have received a good education a circumstance of 

 unusual occurrence in these days, except among the 

 titled and wealthy. " I am bounden," he says, " to 

 pray for my father and mother, that in my youth 

 sent me to school, by which, by the sufferance of 

 God, I got my living, I hope truly." When about 

 fifteen, he was put apprentice to William Large, a 

 mercer of London, and afterwards mayor. The 

 term mercer was given at this time to general mer- 

 chants, trading in all kinds of rich goods, books in- 

 cluded. After he had served his apprenticeship, 

 Caxton became a freeman of the company of mer- 

 cers and a citizen of London. Some subsequent 

 years he spent in travelling in various countries on 

 the continent of Europe. In 1464, he was appointed 

 ambassador to the court of the Duke of Burgundy. 

 It was at the request of the Duchess of Burgundy 

 that he finished his translation of the " History of 

 Troy." During his residence in the Low Countries, 

 he acquired or perfected his knowledge of the 

 French language, gained some knowledge of the 

 Flemish, imbibed a taste for literature, and at great 

 trouble and expense made himself master of the art 

 of printing. It is conjectured that he consulted 

 Zell and Olpe of the Cologne press (who had 

 learned the art at Mentz) and Colard Mansion of 



Bruges as to the materials necessary for his office 

 He is supposed to have returned to his native coun- 

 try about 1471, but we have no account of his 

 typographical labours till 1474, the date affixed 

 to the "Game of Chess," which is generally con- 

 sidered the first book printed by Caxton, though 

 Mr Dibdin thinks that the " Romance of Jason" 

 was printed before it. Caxton was indefatigable in 

 cultivating his art. The productions of his press 

 amount to sixty-four. For a catalogue of them, 

 and of the productions of other early printers, 

 we refer to the Rev. Dr Dibdin's Typographical 

 Antiquities, or to Dr Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica. 

 Besides the labour necessarily attached to his press, 

 he translated various works; among others, Virgil's 

 .iEneid, from the French, published with the title 

 "The Recuyel of the Historyes of Troye, 1 ' and 

 jEsop's Fables, a copy of which is in the Bodleian 

 Library. He seems to have been perplexed about 

 the language he should use in his translations ; for 

 while some advised him to use old and homely 

 terms, others, "honest and great clerks," he adds, 

 " have been with me, and desired me to write the 

 most curious terms that I could find and thus, 

 betwixt plain, rude, and curious, I stand abashed." 

 In 1480, he published his Chronicle andhis Descrip- 

 tion of Britain, which were both very popular, hav- 

 ing been reprinted four times in the fifteenth and 

 seven times in the sixteenth centuries. Among 

 other books which he published, were two editions 

 of Chaucer's Tales ; and it speaks well for the dis- 

 crimination of the father of English printing, that 

 he seems highly to have admired and appreciated 

 the father of English poetry. Caxton died in 1490- 

 91, and was buried in the parish church of St Mar- 

 garet, Westminster. Caxton distinguished the books 

 of his printing by a particular device, consisting of 

 the initial letters of his name, with a cipher be- 

 tween, which some imagine to stand for 74, and to 

 refer to the first year of his printing in England . 

 His first performances were very rude, the charac- 

 ters resembling those of English manuscripts before 

 the conquest. Most of his letters were joined to- 

 gether ; the leaves were rarely numbered, the pages 

 never. At the beginning of the chapters, he only 

 printed, as the custom then was, a small letter, tc 

 intimate what the initial or capital letter should be, 

 leaving that to be made by the illuminator, who 

 wrote it with a pen, with red, blue, or green ink. 



Caxton 's two most distinguished successors were 

 Wynkin de Worde and Richard Pynson. The 

 former, a native of the dukedom of Lorraine, served 

 under Caxton, and after the death of his master, 

 successfully practised the art of printing on his own 

 account. The books which he printed are very 

 numerous, and display a rapid improvement in the 

 typographic art. He died in 1 534. Pynson was a 

 native of Normandy, and it is supposed that he also 

 served under Caxton. The first book of his which 

 is known with a date, states that it was printed 

 "the V day Juyl. the yere of oure lord god. 

 m.cccc.lxxxxiii. by me Richarde Pynson at ' the 

 Temple-barre of london." How long he exercised 

 the art, or when he died, is not exactly known. 

 The works which he printed are neither so numer- 

 ous nor so beautiful as those of Wynkin de Worde. 

 He was the first printer, however, who introduced 

 the Roman letter into England. To Wynkin de 

 Worde and Pynson succeed a long list of ancient 

 typographers, into which we cannot enter here. 

 Their various works and characteristics will be 

 found duly recorded and honoured in Dr Dibdin's 

 splendid edition of Ames and Herbert's Typographi- 

 cal Antiquities. Before the middle of the sixteenth 

 century, printing had reached a flourishing condition 

 2x2 



