« PreviousContinue »
true one, and so defrauded the persons to whom they were sold. To detect any cheat of this description, and to distinguish the true edition from its substitutes, remark, 1. That in the true edition the title to the dedicatory epistle to the regent is printed in red and black. 2. A detached part of twenty pages, numbered with small roman capitals, containing the preface to the first edition (in italics), the bookseller's advertisement to the third edition, and the privilege of the states of Holland. 3. And, lastly, it will be necessary to ex. amine vol. ii. and see if the article David, Roi des Juifs, be entire, as it ought to be employed twice, and in a different manuer. In the first (which is seldom omitted) this article is contained in pages 963, 964, and the greater part of 965; in the second, on the contrary, the same article, much extended, has been separately printed on three leaves, paged 963, 964, 965, 966, 967, and 968, with an asterisk before each, to distinguish them from the preceding leaves, paged with the same numbers. It is most important to possess the abovementioned three leaves; for, if they are wanting, the copy is imperfect, and its value much diminished.
Some copies were printed on large Dutch paper, with verses by Limiers, in praise of the regent, at the head of the dedicatory epistle, which verses were suppressed in the other copies of the same edition.
Copies of this kind are precious morceaux ; one sold at M. d'Angard's sale in 1789 for 1400 livres, and another, of extraordinary beauty, sold at the sale of M. Meon, December 1803, for 1173 livres.
The edition next in esteem to that of 1720 is the one in 4. vols. folio, La Haye, 1740; and by some it is preferred on account of being rather more ample.
The other editions of this Dictionary are Rotterdam, 1697, 2 tomes, in 4to.—Ditto, 1702, 3 vols.—Ditto, 3 vols. Geneva, 1715.-The same, Rotterdam, 1715. Ditto, 4 vols. Amsterdam, 1730.-Ditto, Amsterdam, (Paris) 4 vols. 1734.
The following work almost always accompanies the editions of 1720 and 1740.
Chaufepié (Jac. Georg. de) Dictionnaire Historique ef Critique, pour servir de suite à celui de Bayle. 4 vols.
folio, La Haye, 1750. When separate, this work is sold from five to six guineas, according to its condition.
There is also a supplement, printed at Genevu, 1722, I vol. folio, which completes and forms the fourth volume to the editions of 1702 and 1715. .
On the first appearance of this work the fanatic Jurieu denounced it to the consistory of the Wallonian Church, as containing much reprehensible matter, and it would have been suppressed had not Bay le promised to correct the parts objected to ; but it appears he was in no hurry to fulfil his promise ; for in the subsequent editions the only considerable alterations he made were in the article David.
Fenelon's ADVENTURES OF TELEMACHUS. Bausset, in his Life of Fenelon, says, that the transcript of this work was secretly circulated in several families previous to publication, and, according to “ Peignot Dictionnaire des Livres, condamnés au feu.” This circulation was occasioned by the faithlessness of the valet de chambre to whom he gave it to transcribe. The manuscript was afterwards sold to the widow of Claude Barbin, who committed it to the press; but only two hundred and eight pages of it had been printed, when it was discovered to be the work of Fenelon; and that suspicious king, Louis XIV. ordered strict search to be made at the printers for all the sheets that had been worked off, which were confiscated and burnt; and every effort was made to annihilate this admirable production. Fortunately, a few copies escaped, with tran. scripts of that part which had not been printed; one of these copies was obtained by Adrian Möetgeus, a bookseller at the Hague, who, in 1699, published the whole work in 4 vols. It is said by Peignot, that every edition previous to 1720 is incomplete, but I cannot hear of any edition of that date; there is one published in twelves, at Rotterdam, in 1719, with notes critical and historical, which was reprinted in 1725, but the one of 1719 is the scarcer of the two, on account of the first impressions of the plates. Some persons have believed that in this work they could recognise the characters of
Madame de Montespan......... as ......Calypso, · Mademoiselle de Fontanges.... ......Eucharis.
The Duchess of Bourgogne.... - ...... Antiope. Louvois............................ ......Prothésilas. King James....................... - ......Idomenée. Louis XIV..........
Bible.-In Field's folio edition of the Bible, 1600, as well as in his octavo editions of the same, the following alteration was made in “ Acts,” chap. vi. ver. 3: instead of “ whom we may appoint,” he printed “ whom ye may appoint,” at the instigation of the parliament, from whom he received 15001. for this forgery, which was intended to give the Independents power to choose their own teachers.
KING CHARLES THE FIRST's WORKS. - In the year 1677, the parliament voted two months' tax, for the more decent interment of the body of the unfortunate Charles, and to raise a monument to his memory. Mr. Chiswell, son-in-law to Royston, then printer to the king, proposed a plan to supersede the necessity of a monument, which was, that part of the sum voted should be applied to the purpose of printing a new edition of Charles's works, a copy of which, was to be fixed with a chain to every parish-church in the kingdom ; this plan was approved of by many, and Charles II. himself encouraged it; but the distrusts between the king and people, the heats in parliament, and the popish plot, prevented the execution of it. On the Duke of York mounting the throne, Mr. Chiswell applied to Sir Roger L'Estrange to procure king James's recommendatory letter; this request the king refused, stating, as a reason for his
refusal, that he did not believe " 'con Basiliké” to be . his father's production ; Chiswell, on being informed of
this, said, that omitting “ Icon Lasiliké” would render the works imperfect, and therefore proposed printing it at the end of the works, as a sort of addenda after the finis; this the king consented to, on condition, that some expressions, which he thought injurious ta the monarchy, might be expunged; but Chiswell ob. jecting to this, it was at last agreed that the objeca
tionable parts should be enclosed within crotchets; and thus, “ Icon Basiliké*” stands at the end of the second part of the king's works, folio, 1686.
EXPOSICIO Sancti JERONIMI IN SIMBOLUM APOSTOLORUM. OXONII. MCCCCLX(x)vill.-From the date (1468) of this work, it was for a long time believed, that the first press set up in England was at Oxford ; and this date served as a basis for a ridiculous story, told by Atkyns, (upon the authority of a pretended manuscript in the Lambeth library, which has been since diligently, though unsuccessfully, sought after), of Bourchier, Archbishop of Canterbury, having incited Henry VI. to send “ Henry Turnour, an officer of the robes, acconipanied by William Caxton, to Flanders, to entice oder Frederick Corsellis, an under-workman in the printing-house at Harlem, where John Guttenberg had lately invented that art, and was then personally at work; which Corsellis was immediately sent down to Oxford under a guard to prevent his escape, and to oblige him to the performance of his contract;" where he produced the above-mentioned piece. The presumed non-existence of this manuscriptt, and the knowledge of Atkyns's work having been writ. ten in support of the royal prerogative to printing in opposition to the Stationers' Company, give 'strong reasons for suspecting that no such manuscript ever was in existence; and Dr. Middleton, in his Essay on the Origin of Printing in England, has fully proved the absurdity of the story, and clearly shown than an X must have been accidently dropped, or purposely omitted to serve some sinister purpose, (which practice has subsequently become nu uncommon circumstance). Most of the foreign bibliographers believed Atkyns's story, as also Maittaire in his Annals; and Palmer, in his History of Printing; and as Atkyns's works, which. is entitled “ the Original and Growth of Printing, collect
* There were seventeen editions of “ Eikon Basilike” printed in 1648 without the prayers, and in 1649 twelve more, six of which, at least, were printed with the prayers. There were fifty editions, in various languages, in the course of twelve months. Anecdotes of Bowyer, 4to.
t" The most internal proof of its forgery," says Dr. Middleton, “is ascribing the origin of printing to Harlem, for it is certain that printing was first invented and propagated from Mentz,”
ed out of History and the Records of this Kingdom, wherein is also demonstrated, that Printing appertaineth to the Prerogative Royal, and is a Flower of the Crown of Fngland, by Richard Atkyns, Esq. thin quarto, London, 1664, is very rare. The detailed account of the story may be consulted in either Maittaire's or Palmer's work, and the refutation of it in Dr. Middleton's Essay, or Dibdin's new edition of Ames's Typographical Antiquities, vol. i. quarto, 1810.
(Continued from vol. i. p. 256.) Those who have deigned to honour this lumber-room with their notice, will ere now have perceived that, under a title which might have appeared to them (to say the least) a whimsical one, I meant to treat of a subject which seems to be but little understood, although one of the most important to mankind, and one that has been discussed by many; namely, Education. I have already expressed my sense of the absurdity of general systems, and that all the defects, both physical and moral, by which man is degraded from his original dignity, arise from the blind subjection to opinion, fashion, or prejudice, of those who are instrusted with the rearing of infancy and the guidance of youth. I had not the vanity to believe that my humble exertions would be able to contend efficaciously against these three powerful destroyers of man's dignity, or that my feeble accents would prevail over the stentorian voice of the learned men, who have handled, and are still handling, the same subject. But I depended, in a great degree, for some success on the talismanic charms of novelty; for I am certain that my ideas on education are no less in opposition to those generally exposed in the many treatises hitherto extant, than to those practically adopted. Another motive of encouragement was Mr. Lancaster's extraordinary success, who seems to have bewitched the whole country, except the Anti-Jacobin reviewers, with his borrowed system, and by the delusive prospect of abruptly annihilating the