Chapter II: Cambridge Books, 1521-1750 153 (1)

INDEX 188

ILLUSTRATIONS

THE PITT PRESS BUILDING FRONTISPIECE
(From a water-colour attributed to R. B. Harraden)
PAGE

PART OF HAMOND'S PLAN OF CAMBRIDGE, 1592 6

A PAGE FROM _HENRICI BULLOCI ORATIO_, THE
FIRST CAMBRIDGE BOOK 9

TITLE-PAGE OF THE SECOND CAMBRIDGE BOOK FACING 10

TITLE-PAGE OF FISHER'S SERMON FACING 13

TRADE-MARK OF JOHN SIBERCH 14

ORNAMENT USED BY THOMAS THOMAS 29

PETITION OF THE UNIVERSITY TO JAMES I, 1621 37

THE REPLY TO THE PETITION 39

PRINTING HOUSE OF THOMAS BUCK FACING 50
(Cole MSS. XLIII. 260)

TITLE-PAGE OF THE FIRST CAMBRIDGE EDITION
OF THE AUTHORISED VERSION FACING 54

TITLE-PAGE OF _THE TEMPLE_, 1633 57

A PAGE OF _LYCIDAS_ WITH CORRECTIONS IN MILTON'S HAND 59

ORNAMENT USED BY BUCK AND DANIEL 61

_IMPRIMATUR_ FOR A BIBLE, 1662 66

ALMANACK, 1675 71

RICHARD BENTLEY FACING 74
(From the portrait in the Master's Lodge, Trinity College)

TITLE-PAGE OF BENTLEY'S EDITION OF HORACE, 1711 83

KUSTER'S RECEIPT FOR A PORTION OF HIS FEE 90

A COMPOSITOR'S RECEIPT, 1705 93

TITLE-PAGE OF _CHRISTIAN MORALS_, 1716 94

TITLE-PAGE OF BENTLEY'S _BOYLE LECTURES_, 1735 FACING 99

JOHN BASKERVILLE FACING 106
(From an engraving, after the portrait by Miller, reproduced in
Straus and Dent's _John Baskerville_)

A PAGE OF BASKERVILLE'S PRAYER-BOOK, 1762 110

RIVINGTON'S ACCOUNT WITH THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1767 114

THE SENATE HOUSE, THE NEW LIBRARY, AND ST MARY'S CHURCH 119
(From _Cantabrigia Depicta_, 1763)

A PAGE FROM ISAAC MILNER'S NOTE-BOOK, 1800 121

PLAN OF THE PRESS BUILDINGS FACING 128

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cole MSS. British Museum. Minute Books of the Syndics of the Press. Registry MSS. relating to the Press. University Press Accounts.

ALDIS, H. G. The Book-Trade, 1557-1625 (_Camb. Hist. of Eng. Lit._
IV). Cambridge, 1909.

ALLEN, P. S. Opus Epistolarum Des. Erasmi. 3 vols. Oxford, 1906-13.

ARBER, E. A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers
of London, 1554-1640. 5 vols. Privately printed, 1875-94.

BARTHOLOMEW, A. T., Catalogue of Cambridge Books bequeathed to the
University by J. W. Clark. Cambridge, 1912.

BARTHOLOMEW, A. T., and CLARK, J. W., Richard Bentley, D.D. A
Bibliography. Cambridge, 1908.

BOWES, R., Biographical notes on the University printers (_C.A.S.
Proc._ V. 283-363). Cambridge, 1886.

Catalogue of Cambridge Books. Cambridge, 1894.

Note on the Cambridge University Press, 1701-1707 (_C.A.S.
Proc._ VI. 362). Cambridge, 1891.

On a copy of Linacre's Galen de Temperamentis (_C.A.S. Proc._
IX. 1).

BOWES, R. and GRAY, G. J. John Siberch: bibliographical notes,
1886-1905. Cambridge, 1906.

BRADSHAW, H. Henrici Bulloci Oratio. With bibliographical
introduction. Cambridge, 1886.

Cambridge Historical Register to 1910. Ed. J. R. TANNER. Cambridge, 1917.

CARTER, E. History of the University of Cambridge. London, 1753.

COOPER, C. H. Annals of Cambridge. 5 vols. Cambridge, 1842-1908.

COOPER, C. H. Athenae Cantabrigienses. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1858-1913.

CRANAGE, D. H. S. and STOKES, H. P. The Augustinian Friary in Cambridge
and the History of its Site (_C.A.S. Proc._ XXII. 53). Cambridge,
1921.

DARLOW, T. H. and MOULE, H. F. Historical Catalogue of the printed
editions of Holy Scripture. 4 vols. London, 1903-11.

DUFF, E. G. The English Provincial Printers, Stationers and
Bookbinders to 1557. Cambridge, 1912.

DYER, G. Privileges of the University of Cambridge. London, 1824.

GED, W. Biographical Memoirs of. London, 1781, and Newcastle, 1819.

Grace Book _Α_. Ed. S. M. LEATHES. Cambridge, 1897.

_Β_ Parts I, II. Ed. MARY BATESON. Cambridge, 1903, 1905.

_Γ_ Ed. W. G. SEARLE. Cambridge, 1908.

_Δ_ Ed. J. VENN. Cambridge, 1910.

GRAY, G. J. Bibliography of the works of Sir I. Newton. Ed. 2.
Cambridge, 1907.

Index to the Cole MSS. Cambridge, 1912.

John Siberch. Cambridge, 1921.

The earlier Cambridge stationers and bookbinders, and the first
Cambridge printer. Oxford, 1904.

GRAY, G. J. and PALMER, W. M. Abstracts from the Wills of Printers,
Binders, and Stationers of Cambridge, 1504-1699. London, 1915.

HART, H. Charles, Earl Stanhope and the Oxford University Press
(Collectanea III). Oxford, 1896.

HERBERT, W. Typographical antiquities. Begun by Joseph Ames. 3
vols. London, 1785-90.

JENKINSON, F. J. H. On a letter from P. Kaetz to J. Siberch
(_C.A.S. Proc._ VII. 188). Cambridge, 1890.

On a unique fragment of a book printed at Cambridge early in the
sixteenth century (_C.A.S. Proc._ VII. 104). Cambridge, 1890.

LOFTIE, W. J. A Century of Bibles. London, 1872.

MONK, J. H. The Life of Richard Bentley, D.D. London, 1830.

MULLINGER, J. B. The University of Cambridge. 3 vols. Cambridge,
1873-1911.

NEWTH, S. On Bible Revision. London, 1881.

NICHOLS, J. Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century. 6 vols.
London, 1812.

POLLARD, A. W. Fine Books. London, 1912.

REED, T. B. A history of the old English letter foundries. London, 1887.

ROBERTS, W. The Earlier History of English Bookselling. London, 1889.

SAYLE, C. E. Early English printed books in the University
Library, Cambridge (1475-1640). 4 vols. Cambridge, 1900-7.

STOKES, H. P. Cambridge Stationers, Printers, Bookbinders, &c.
Cambridge, 1919.

The Esquire Bedells of the University of Cambridge
(_C.A.S. Publications_, 8º Series, XLV). Cambridge, 1911.

STRAUS, R. and DENT, R. K. John Baskerville. London, 1907.

WILLIS, R. and CLARK, J. W. Architectural History of the
University of Cambridge. 4 vols. Cambridge, 1886.

WORDSWORTH, C. The Correspondence of Richard Bentley. 2 vols.
London, 1842.

Scholae Academicae. Cambridge, 1877.

I

JOHN SIBERCH

Excursions into the realm of legend have long served as the traditional method of approach of the academic historian to his subject. True, the story of the foundation of the university of Cambridge by "one Cantaber, a Spaniard, about 370 years before Christ," or, as Fisher described him in 1506, "Cantaber, a king of the East Saxons, who had been educated at Athens," is now definitely rejected as unhistorical; but it was only in 1914 that the name of Sigebert, King of the East Angles, was removed from the list of royal benefactors[1].

University printing, like the university itself, has its Apocrypha. Edmund Carter, writing in 1753, includes a short section on _University Printers_:

Printing had not been long used in _England_ before it was brought hither, but by whom it is difficult to ascertain, tho' it may be supposed that _Caxton_, (who is said to be the first that brought this curious art into _England_, and was a _Cambridgeshire_ Man, born at _Caxton_ in that County, from which he takes his Name) might Erect a Press at _Cambridge_, as well as at _Westminster_, under the care of one of his Servants; (for it is Conjectured, he brought several from _Germany_ with him). The first Book we find an Account of, that was Printed here, is a Piece of _Rhetoric_, by one _Gull. de Saona_, a Minorite; Printed at _Cambridge_ 1478; given by Archbp. Parker to _Bennet_ College Library. It is in Folio, the Pages not Numbered, and without ketch Word, or Signatures.

Alas for Carter's pious suppositions! Caxton, according to his own testimony, was born in Kent and Cambridge can claim only to be the place of compilation of the _Rhetorica_; the phrase at the end of the book, _Compilata in Universitate Cantabrigiae_, no doubt led to the entry being made in the catalogue in the form _Rhetorica nova, impressa Cantab, fo._ 1478, and the mistake persisted for two centuries.

Nor is Oxford without a controversial prologue to the story of its printing. In the first Oxford book the date appears in the colophon as MCCCCLXVIII and for long it was sought to establish the claim that Oxford printing preceded Caxton. But though it has been contended that the ground for the claim "has not yet entirely slipped away," it is now generally accepted by bibliographers that the printer omitted an X from the date, which should in fact be MCCCCLXXVIII.

"The oldest of all inter-university sports," said Maitland, "was a lying match."

* * * * *

To return to Cambridge, we are on firmer, though not very spacious, ground, when we come to the name of John Siberch, the first Cambridge printer. "True it is," says Thomas Fuller, "it was a great while before Cambridge could find out the right knack of printing, and therefore they preferred to employ Londoners therein ... but one Sibert, University Printer, improved that mystery to good perfection."

Of the life of Siberch, either at Cambridge or elsewhere, we know little. He was the friend of several great humanists of the period, including Erasmus; he was in Louvain, evidently, in 1518. "I was surprised," writes Erasmus to John Caesarius on 5 April of that year, "that John Siberch came here without your letter."

The earliest appearance of his name on a title-page is in 1520, when Richard Croke's _Introductiones in rudimenta Graeca_ was printed at Cologne "expensis providi viri domini Ioannis Laer de Siborch."[2] His full name, then (of which there are many forms), is John Lair and his place of origin Siegburg, a small town south-west of Cologne.

A discovery made by Mr Gordon Duff in the Westminster Abbey Library in 1889 makes it almost certain that Siberch was already in England when Croke's book was printed; for in a copy of a book bound by Siberch there was found, besides two printed fragments and a letter from Petrus Kaetz[3], a portion of the manuscript of the _Rudimenta Graeca_. It seems clear, therefore, that Siberch was in England when proofs and 'copy' of the work were sent to him.

Richard Croke (afterwards the first Public Orator) was at this time the enthusiastic leader of Greek studies in Cambridge. He had earned fame as a teacher at Cologne, Louvain, Leipzig, and Dresden and, in succession to his friend Erasmus, was appointed Reader in Greek to the university in 1519. His text-book could not be printed in England, because there was as yet no Greek fount owned by an English printer; and it is quite probable, as Mr Duff suggests, that John Siberch, himself settled in Cambridge, had undertaken to have Croke's work printed by a friend, possibly by his old master, in Cologne. Possibly, too, Croke may have previously met Siberch in Germany and, with Erasmus, have been responsible for his coming to Cambridge. This, of course, is conjectural, but of the friendship between Erasmus and Siberch there is no doubt, since, in a letter from Erasmus to Dr Robert Aldrich, written on Christmas Day 1525, there is a message sent to "veteres sodales Phaunum, Omfridum, Vachanum, Gerardum, et Joannem Siburgum, bibliopolas."

From this it would naturally be inferred that Siberch was still in Cambridge in 1525, but his name does not appear in the Subsidy Roll of 1523-24 and it is probable, therefore, that, unknown to Erasmus, he left in the early part of 1523[4].

Siberch, then, probably lived in Cambridge from 1520 to 1523, a period during which the labours of the first Cambridge humanists were beginning to bear fruit. In 1497, the Lady Margaret, mother of Henry VII, had appointed as her confessor John Fisher, Master of Michaelhouse; and "to the wealth and liberality of the one," in Mullinger's words, "and the enlightened zeal and liberality of the other the university is chiefly indebted for that new life and prosperity which soon after began to be perceptible in its history."

To the Lady Margaret were due the foundation of St John's and Christ's Colleges and the Professorship and Preachership which bear her name; Fisher, afterwards Bishop of Rochester and President of Queens' College, was the first holder of the Divinity chair and it was at his invitation that Erasmus, who had taken a degree in divinity in Cambridge in 1506, came to live, in 1509 or 1510, in the turret-chamber of Queens'. Though it is, perhaps, as the first teacher of Greek (himself for the most part self-taught and not, as Gibbon says, the importer of Greek from Oxford) that Erasmus is most famous, the result of his first lectures was disappointing:

So far I have lectured on the grammar of Chrysoloras, but to few hearers; perhaps I shall have a larger audience when I begin the grammar of Theodorus, perhaps I shall take up a theological lectureship.

This last hope was fulfilled in 1511, when Erasmus was elected to the Lady Margaret's professorship of divinity. His letters are full of petulant complaints which may be taken as seriously as those of Gray in later years. He sees no hope of lecture-fees since his conscience will not let him rob 'naked men,' and only by touting does it appear possible to get pupils. The college beer is bad and the townsmen boorish. So he retires to his garret in Queens' and applies himself to his work on the New Testament (_Novum Instrumentum_) and his edition of St Jerome, both of which were to play an important part in preparing the way for the Reformation in England.

When weary of study, "for lacke of better exercise he would take his horse and ryde about the Market Hill." But he has words of praise for the Cambridge school of theology:

In the University of Cambridge instead of sophistical arguments, their theologians debate in a sober, sensible manner and depart wiser and better men.

It was to this Cambridge and, probably, to this patron in Cambridge that John Siberch came. The single reference to his place of residence and to his position in the university occurs in the _Annals_ of Dr Caius:

The space (he writes) between the gate of humility and the gate of Virtue was formerly occupied by a tenement called the King's Arms. This was once the residence of John Sibert, alias Siberch, the University Printer, who printed some books of John Lydgate and others, and of Erasmus when he was residing at Cambridge.

The "tenement called the King's Arms" explains the use by Siberch of the royal arms as a printer's device; but although _cum gratia et privilegio_ appears on the title-page of several books printed by him, there is no official confirmation of his having held the office of university printer[5].

There are entries, however, in _Grace Books_ and in the _Audit Book_ of the university which show that in 1520 or 1521 the university advanced to him the sum of twenty pounds:

Obligatur doctor Manfeld loco et vice magistri Norres pro summa pecunie quam recepit Johannes bibliopola ab universitate[6].

Probably, Mr Duff suggests, this sum of money--a larger amount than a university stationer's fee--may have been advanced with a view to helping Siberch in the establishment of a press.

The debt is entered in the proctors' accounts until the year 1524-25 and in _Grace Book B_ it is recorded under the date 1538-9 that John Law, an alien priest, with Drs Ridley, Bulloke, Wakefield, and Maundefelde owed £20 sterling to the university, for which they had given a bond with their signature and seals; reference is made to this bond in the _Audit Book_ under the dates 1546, 1549, and 1553. From the description of Siberch as "presbiter alienigena" Mr Duff infers that Siberch eventually forsook printing for the Church.

Such are the fragmentary references that have survived concerning the career of the first Cambridge printer.

* * * * *

Fortunately, however, eight complete specimens of his book-printing have been preserved:

I The first Cambridge book (of which a page is shown in facsimile) reflects the atmosphere of the time. It is the _Oratio_ delivered by Henry Bullock, D.D., Fellow of Queens' College and afterwards Vice-Chancellor, in honour of the visit of Cardinal Wolsey to the university in the autumn of 1520. The 'frequentissimus cetus' before whom the oration was given included the imperial ambassadors and several bishops.

The cardinal was lodged at Queens' College and both town and university delighted to honour him, as may be seen from the following items from the proctors' accounts:

To the Vicechancellor for expences in going round the town with the mayor, to cleanse the streets against the coming of the Cardinal, 2_s_ 2_d_.

Gifts to the Cardinal: for wine £3 6_s_ 8_d_; for carrying the same to Queens coll. 12_d_; for 2 oxen, £3 7_s_ 8_d_; for 6 swans, 28_s_ 8_d_; for 6 great pikes, 33_s_ 4_d_; for 6 shell fish, 4_s_ 4_d_; for a river fish called a breme, 6_s_ 8_d_.

For repairing the streets on the Cardinal's coming, 13_d_.

To 2 scholars who carried an altar on the coming of the Cardinal, 4_d_.

The style of the oration is even more lavish than the ceremonial preparations. "Scarcely from the obsequious senates of Tiberius and Domitian did the incense of flattery rise in denser volume or in coarser fumes."[7]

Bradshaw pointed out that the type used for the printing of the _Oratio_ appears to be quite new. Many of the lines are wavy and irregular and there are no woodcut initials or ornaments of any kind. The second imprint, at the end of the book, runs: _Impressa est haec oratiūcula Cantabrigiae, per me Ioannem Siberch, post natum saluatorem, Millesimo quingentesimo uicesimoprimo. Mense Februario._ A second impression was printed a few months later and issued with Siberch's third book.

Four libraries possess copies: the British Museum; the Bodleian Library; Lambeth Palace; and Archbishop Marsh's Library, St Patrick's, Dublin. Cambridge unfortunately has no copy.

II The second Cambridge book is the rarest of all those printed by Siberch, only one copy (John Selden's, bequeathed to the Bodleian Library in 1659) having been preserved.

It contains a letter addressed by a 'certain faithful Christian' to 'all Christians' and a sermon of Augustine _De miseria ac brevitate vitae_, of which the full title may be read in the facsimile. In addition to its uniqueness, the book has a further interest in that the Greek motto on the title-page was printed from the first genuine moveable Greek type used in England. Woodcuts depicting scenes from the Last Judgment and probably copied from a German _Book of Hours_ are also used on the title-page.

III The next book contains Lucian _περὶ δωδιψάδων_ translated by Henry Bullock, together with a reissue of the _Oratio_. On the title-page there appears for the first time the elaborate border with the Arma Regia (the sign of the house in which Siberch lived) at the foot. No other ornament is used, but Greek type appears on the title-page, in the dedication, and at the end of the book.

Four copies are known: two in the British Museum, one in St John's College, Cambridge, and one at Lambeth Palace.

IV The fourth book, Archbishop Baldwin's _Sermo de altaris sacramento_ (1521), contains for the first time a woodcut initial and the Arma Regia in another form. The book is dedicated to Nicholas West, Bishop of Ely, and in the dedication Siberch claims to be the first printer to use Greek type in England--"Ioannes Siberch primus utriusque linguae in Anglia impressor."

Nine copies have survived: two in the Bodleian, two in the University Library, Cambridge, one in Trinity College, Cambridge, one in Magdalene College, Cambridge, one in All Souls' College, Oxford, one in Lincoln and one in Peterborough Cathedral Library[8].

V The next book has many points of interest. In the first place, it is by the printer's friend, Erasmus, and its title gives a brief survey of the manner of its composition: _Libellus de Conscribendis epistolis, Autore D. Erasmo, opus olim ab eodem cœptum, sed prima manu, mox expoliri cœptum, sed intermissum, Nunc primum prodit in lucem...._ MDXXI.

Secondly, it is the first book of any size undertaken by Siberch. "Ignosces," he pleads, "candide lector iam primum experienti mihi." Further, the phrase _Cum gratia et privilegio_ is now used on the title-page for the first time; for this leave had probably been obtained through Bishop Fisher, in a dedication to whom the printer calls himself 'Cantabrigiensis typographus.'

Four copies are known: two in the British Museum, one in St John's College, Cambridge, and one in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; the last has an additional interest in that it was bound by Nicholas Speryng.

VI The sixth of the books printed by Siberch is the commonest. It is a translation of Galen by Thomas Linacre: _Caleni Pergamensis de Temperamentis, et de inaequali intemperie libri tres Thoma Linacro Anglo interprete._

It is described on the title-page, which has the same border-device as III, as "opus non medicis modo, sed et philosophis oppido q_uam_ necessariu_m_"; it is dedicated to Pope Leo X and printed "cum gratia et privilegio."

The existing copies of the book are in two states: a copy in the first state was found by the late Mr Robert Bowes in the library of Trinity College, Dublin, containing only the _De Temperamentis_ and having on the last leaf but one a woodcut of the Adoration of the Shepherds. The copy in the Royal College of Physicians consists of this first issue with the second essay added. The remaining ten copies--University Library, Cambridge (2); Bodleian Library (2); British Museum; Trinity College, Cambridge; All Souls' College, Oxford; Hunterian Museum, Glasgow; the Duke of Devonshire; Mr Bowes--are in the second state, containing both the _De Temperamentis_ and the _De inaequali intemperie_, the last two leaves of the former essay as they appear in the first state being cancelled.

VII The full title of the seventh Cambridge book may be read in the facsimile here shown. It is a Latin translation of the sermon delivered in London by Fisher when Luther's books were publicly burned.

Siberch has now discarded his ornamental title-border, but at the end of the book there appears a new device, embodying his trade-mark and initials. The book was printed late in 1521 and probably issued early in the January of the next year.

Five copies are known: two in the Bodleian Library; one in the University Library, Cambridge; one in Magdalene College, Cambridge; and one in the John Rylands Library, Manchester.

VIII The last of the eight books printed by Siberch of which complete copies survive is _Papyrii Gemini Eleatis Hermathena, seu De Eloquentiae Victoria_, printed on the 8th December, 1522. There are three different states of the title-page and six complete copies are known: University Library, Cambridge; British Museum; St John's College, Oxford; Archbishop Marsh's Library, St Patrick's, Dublin; Duke of Devonshire; Lincoln Cathedral Library.

To these eight books must be added the _De octo partium orationis constructione libellus_ of Lily and Erasmus, two leaves of which were found in the book bound by Siberch which Mr Duff discovered at Westminster. This _libellus_, originally written by William Lily and revised, at Colet's suggestion, by Erasmus, was a popular school book of the period.

It was in the binding of the same book that the letter from Petrus Kaetz, a Dutch printer, was also found. This letter has many points of interest. Kaetz sends Siberch "25 prognostications and 3 New Testaments small," as well as a parcel to be delivered to Niclas [Speryng] and we may fittingly conclude our notice of Siberch with the tribute of a contemporary to his prospects as a printer:

Know, Jan Siborch (writes Petrus Kaetz) that I have received your letter as [well as specimens] of your type, and it is very good; if you can otherwise ... and conduct yourself well, then you will get enough to print.

(Translation by Dr Hessels, Jenkinson, _C.A.S._ VIII, 186.)

II

THE CHARTER--THOMAS THOMAS AND THE STATIONERS

Though it may not be clear to what extent John Siberch was officially recognised as printer to the university, it is evident that no successor to him was immediately appointed. University stationers and bookbinders, however, had been for some time established in a privileged position. As early as 1276 we find a reference to the "writers, illuminators, and stationers, who serve the scholars only," and in a note on this phrase Fuller defines the _stationarii_ as "publicly avouching the sale of staple-books in standing shops (whence they have their names) as opposite to such circumforanean pedlers (ancestors to our modern Mercuries and hawkers) which secretly vend prohibited books."

In 1350 John Hardy, procurator of the Corpus Christi Gild, is described as "stationarius of the University" and we learn something of the stationers' duties from the prohibition by Convocation in 1408 of the use in schools of "any book or tract compiled by John Wiclif, or any one else in his time or since or to be compiled thereafter" unless first examined by the universities and afterwards approved by the Archbishop. After the book had been finally sanctioned, it was to be delivered "in the name and by the authority of the University to the stationers to be copied; and a faithful collation being made, the original should be deposited in the chest of either University, there to remain for ever."

In his edition of _Grace Book A_ (1454-88) Sir Stanley Leathes summarises the position of the _Stationaries_ as follows:

They were not students, nor were they exactly servants or tradesmen. They were the official agents of the University for the sale of pledges, and official valuers of manuscripts and other valuables offered as security. They seem to have received an occasional fee from the Chest.... Like the servants and tradesmen dependent on the University they were under the University jurisdiction.

Many of the stationers were binders as well and the keeping of the university chest was included in their duties; from the will of Petrus Breynans (_c._ 1504) it also appears that they were provided by the university with a distinctive gown[9].

At the beginning of the sixteenth century, we find the stationers involved in one of the many disputes between university and town, damaging alike to study and to business. In 1502 both parties besought the "amicable interference" of the Lady Margaret, who counselled arbitration; the result was an "indenture of covenant" executed by university and town "pursuant to the award of Sir Thomas Frowycke and the other arbitrators." One clause in the indenture runs:

ITEM, yt ys covenanted, accorded, and agreed bitwene the said Parties, accordinge to the said Award, that all Bedells of the said Universitie, and all Mancipills, Cooks, Butlers, and Launders of everye Colledge, Hostell, and of other places ordeyned for Scolers, Students, and places of religion in the said Universitie, and all appotycares, Stacioners, Lymners, Schryveners, Parchment-makers, Boke-bynders, Phisitions, Surgeons, and Barbers in the sayd Universitie ... shall be reputed and taken as Common Ministers and Servants of the said Universitie, as longe as they shall use eny such occupacion, and shall have and enjoye lyke privilege as a Scolers Servant of the same Universitie shall have and enjoye....[10]

In the list at the end of the award containing the names of those privileged by the university, the last entry is "Garreit Stacioner.", This "Garreit" is the stationer and binder generally known as Garrett Godfrey. When he first began business in Cambridge is not known, but more than fifty specimens of his binding, dating from 1499 to 1535, have survived. We know also that he was churchwarden of Great St Mary's in 1516 and again in 1521 and that he died in 1539[11].

Erasmus refers to him in 1516 as his "old host, Garrett the bookseller" (which suggests that he stayed in his house during his first visit to Cambridge), and in 1525 sends a message, already quoted, to Garrett and other booksellers.

Another stationer and bookbinder of the period is Nicholas Spierinck (Speryng), whose name first appears in _Grace Book B_ under the date 1505-6. Little is known of him as a stationer. He was a Dutchman by birth and, like Garrett Godfrey, was a friend of Erasmus and a churchwarden of Great St Mary's. His will, of which he appointed Thomas Wendy, the royal physician, as supervisor, shows him to have been a man of property, since he bequeathed to Nycholas Spyrynke, his "sonnes sonne," the "howse of the Crosse Keyes"--a brewery in Magdalene Street[12]; of his work as a binder nearly fifty examples remain.

The third of the Cambridge stationers of this period whom we must consider is Segar Nicholson. He also came from Holland, and, as Mr G. J. Gray remarks, affords an early example of a member of the university engaging in business, being a pensioner of Gonville Hall from 1520 to 1523. His career has more varied features than those of his fellow-stationers.

In 1529 he was charged with holding Protestant views and further with the unlawful possession of Luther's books and other heretical works. Now Luther's books had been publicly burnt in Cambridge eight years before and the ceremony had, as we have seen, been the occasion of a notable sermon by Bishop Fisher. About this time, however, there had grown up a small society of members of the university who were sympathetic towards Lutheran doctrine. They met in secret in the White Horse inn, which stood where are now the back buildings of the Bull Hotel--a place chosen so that members might enter unobserved by the back door and nicknamed 'Germany' by the orthodox[13]. Among the heretics who frequented these meetings was Segar Nicholson.

Foxe, in his _Acts and Monuments_, gives a sad account of the treatment of Nicholson: "The handling of this man," he says, "was too too cruel." After his release from prison, Nicholson remained a stationer till the age of 60, when he was ordained deacon by the Bishop of London.

In the meantime the university had taken steps to ensure the suppression of heretical books. In 1529 a petition was presented to Cardinal Wolsey, begging:

that for the suppression of error, there should be three booksellers allowed in Cambridge by the King, who should be sworn not to bring in or sell any book which had not first been approved of by the censor of books in the University, that such booksellers should be men of reputation and gravity, and foreigners, (so it should be best for the prizing of books,) and that they might have the privilege to buy books of foreign merchants[14].

It was, no doubt, as a result of this petition that five years later Cambridge printing was formally established by royal charter on 20 July, 1534, when Henry VIII by letters patent gave licence to the Chancellor, masters, and scholars

to assign and elect from time to time, by writing under the seal of the Chancellor of the University, three stationers and printers, or sellers of books, residing within the University, who might be either aliens or natives, and hold either their own or hired houses. The stationers or printers thus assigned, and every of them, were empowered to print all manner of books approved of by the Chancellor or his vicegerent and three doctors, and to sell and expose to sale in the University or elsewhere within the realm, as well such books as other books printed within or without the realm, and approved of by the Chancellor or his vicegerent and three doctors. If aliens, these stationers or printers were empowered to reside in the University, in order to attend to their business, and were to be reputed and treated as the King's faithful subjects and lieges, and to enjoy the same liberties, customs, laws, and privileges; and to pay and contribute to lot, scot, tax, tallage, and other customs and impositions as the other subjects and lieges of the King. Provided, that the said stationers or printers, being aliens, paid all customs, subsidies, and other monies, for their goods and merchandizes imported or exported, as other aliens[15].

This is the _Magna Carta_ of Cambridge printing and Fuller quotes with quiet pride the opinion of Sir Edward Coke that "this University of Cambridge hath power to print within the same 'omnes' and 'omnimodos libros' which the University of Oxford hath not."

We should now expect to see a steady continuance of university printing. But, in spite of the King's letters patent, the history of Cambridge printing for nearly fifty years is a blank. It is true that the university immediately availed itself of the privilege conferred upon it, and the "three stationers and printers or sellers of books residing within the university" who were appointed were Nicholas Speryng, Garrett Godfrey, and Segar Nicholson, whose careers have been sketched above. That two of these were bookbinders and churchwardens, that one owned a brewery, and that one took holy orders we have evidence, but of printing there is no trace. The strangest appointment is that of Nicholson, since the aim of the university in petitioning Wolsey for the control of printing and bookselling was the suppression of those Lutheran doctrines for which Nicholson had recently been imprisoned.

But it is clear that, for a time at any rate, the university, while showing no desire to encourage the art of printing, was quick to establish its control and censorship of books.

Some idea of a university bookseller's stock at this time may be obtained from the will of Nicholas Pilgrim[16], appointed in 1539 as successor to Garrett Godfrey, from whom he inherited a "furryd gown and iij presses with a cuttynge knife." Of the 717 books of which an inventory is given in Pilgrim's will 216 were bound and 501 unbound, the whole stock being valued at £26 11_s_ 6_d_. Most of the books are either editions of the classics or theological works, but there are a few on medical and botanical subjects.

But like Richard Noke, appointed in 1540, and Peter Sheres (1545-6) Pilgrim appears to have been university printer only in name.

At the beginning of Elizabeth's reign, when all unlicensed printing was prohibited, the powers of the chancellors of the universities to license books were duly recognised and in 1576, when John Kingston was appointed as printer, the university seems definitely to have contemplated the establishment of a printing-press:

On the 18th of July, Lord Burghley wrote from Theobalds to Dr Goad Vicechancellor and the Heads, with reference to their intention of bringing the exercise of printing into the University, for which purpose they had engaged one Kingston of London, whom they purposed to protect with the University privilege to print Psalters, Books of Common Prayer, and other books in English, for which the Queen had already granted special privileges to William Seres, Richard Jugge, John Day, and others. His Lordship disapproved of any attempts to prejudice the Queen's grants, but thought they might employ an artificer for printing matters pertaining to the schools &c.[17]

In the light of this pronouncement it is easy to understand why John Kingston, who was well-known as a London stationer, printed no books in Cambridge.

At last, in 1583, we come to the name of a university printer who in fact printed books at Cambridge: Thomas Thomas, Fellow of King's College, was appointed University printer by grace of 3 May, 1583, and in the same year began to print a work by William Whitaker.

The Stationers' Company of London quickly seized his press and declared that his attempt was an infringement of their rights. In a letter to Burghley, dated 1 June, 1583, the Bishop of London wrote:

There was alsoe found one presse and furniture which is saide to belonge to one Thomas a man (as I heare) utterlie ignoraunte in printinge, and pretendinge that he entendeth to be the printer for the universitie of Cambridge.

The Vice-Chancellor and Heads, however, took up the cause of their printer and in reply to a letter from Burghley suggesting a conference with the Stationers, wrote as follows:

Our most humble duties to your honour remembred.

Whereas we understand by your honours letters, that certain of the company of the stationers in London have sought to hinder the erecting of a print within the university of Cambridg, and to impugne that antient privilege, granted and confirmed by divers princes for that purpose, to the great benefit of the university and augmentation of learning: these are in most humble manner to desire your honour, not so much in respect of Mr Thomas, who hath already received great injury and dammage at their hands, as in behalf of the university; which findeth itself very much aggrieved with the wrongful detaining of those goods, wherewithal, as we are persuaded, in right and equity they ought not to meddle, to continue our honorable patron, and to direct your favourable warrants to the warden of the stationers, that he may have his press delivered with speed; lest that by their means, as he hath been disappointed of Mr Whitakers book, so by their delays he be prevented of other books made within the university, and now ready for the press.

As for the doubts which they caused, rather in respect of their private gain and commodity, and to bring the universities more antient privileges in this behalf than theirs under their jurisdiction at London, than for any other good consideration, the deciding or peril whereof also pertaineth not to them; we dare undertake, in the behalf of Mr Thomas whom we know to be a very godly and honest man, that the press shall not be abused, either in publishing things prohibited, or otherwise inconvenient for the church and state of this realm. And this we promise the rather, for that his grace (whereof we have sent a copy to your honour by himself) was granted unto him upon condition that he should stand bound from time to time to such articles as your honour and the greatest part of the heads of colleges should ty him unto.

And for the conference, whereunto your honour moveth us, if it shall be your honours pleasure, wee, as desirous of peace and concord, (the premisses considered,) shall be ready to shew our willingness thereunto, if it shall please the company of stationers in London to send hither some certain men from them with sufficient authority for that purpose. Thus most humbly desiring that the press may no longer be stayed, and hoping that your honour will further our desire herein, we do in our daily prayer commend your lordship to the blessed tuition of the Almighty.

From Cambridge, this 14th of June[18].

This letter has been quoted in full partly because it is the first of a long series of protests, partly because it is a good example of the attitude consistently adopted by the university in regard to printing--a dutiful desire not to abuse their privilege coupled with a dignified determination not to be bullied by the Stationers.

As a result of the appeal contained in the letter, the charter of 1534 was submitted to the Master of the Rolls, who concurred in the opinion that it was valid; and on 24 July, 1584, Thomas entered into a recognizance in 500 marks before the Vice-Chancellor.

Books now began to issue from Thomas's press and some of them quickly excited the odium theologicum; when, for instance, a work by Walter Travers in support of Presbyterianism was printed, the greater part of the edition was confiscated.

Ever sens I hard that they had a Printer in Cambridg (wrote Archbishop Whitgift to Lord Burghley), I did greatlie fear this and such like inconveniences wold followe, nether do I thingk that yt wyll so stay, for althowgh Mr Vicechancellor that now ys, be a verie careful man and in all respectes greatlie to be commended, yet yt may fawle owt hereafter, that some such as shal succeade hym wyll not be so well affected, nor have such care for the publike peace of the Church, and of the state, but whatsoever your Lordship shall thingk good to be done in this matter ... I wyll performe yt accordinglie. I thingk yt verie convenient that the bokes should be burned, beeing verie factius and full of untruthes: and that (yf printing do styll there continew) sufficient bonds with suerties shold be taken of the printer not to print anie bokes, unlesse they be first allowed by lawfull authoritie, for yf restrante be made here and libertie graunted there, what good can be done....[19]

From this time forward, indeed, Cambridge printing was for many years continually harassed by two disturbing forces--theological suspicion and by commercial jealousy. Thus, in 1585, when it was discovered that London printers had printed various books already printed by the universities, a grace was passed forbidding Cambridge booksellers to sell, and Cambridge students to buy, "any book printed at London or elsewhere in England, which had been or thereafter should be printed at Cambridge or Oxford," always provided that the university printers did not sell their books at a higher price than that fixed by the Vice-Chancellor and the others named in Thomas's articles.

In the next year the archbishop was again growing anxious; in June, 1586, it was laid down by a Star Chamber ordinance that no book was to be printed without either his own or the Bishop of London's approval, and a few months later Whitgift wrote to his very loving friend the Vice-Chancellor:

Salutem in Christo. I understand that there is now in printing by the printer of that university, a certain book, called Harmonia Confessionum Fidei, in English, translated out of Latin; which book, for some special causes, was here [i.e. in London] rejected, and not allowed to be printed. These are therefore to require you, that presently upon receipt hereof you cause the said book to be stayed from printing any further; and that nothing be don more therein, until you shall receive further direction from me. And whereas there is order taken of late by the lords of the council, that from henceforth no book shall be imprinted either in London or in either of the universities, unless the same shall be allowed and authorized by the bishop of London or my self, I do likewise require you to take special care, that hereafter nothing be imprinted in that university of Cambridge but what shall be authorised accordingly. And so not doubting of your diligent circumspection herein, I commit you to the tuition of Almighty God[20].

As the _Harmony of Confessions_ was duly published in the same year, it would appear that it eventually received the archbishop's approval; Macaulay's view of Whitgift as a "narrow-minded, mean, and tyrannical priest" would certainly have been confirmed had he considered him in the light of his censorship of Cambridge books.

Thomas Thomas's greatest achievement, perhaps, was the compilation and printing of his _Latin Dictionary_ and when the London stationers began to publish editions of this and other Cambridge books, the university made another long protest to the Chancellor, pointing out that it was a "verie hard matter" either for the university to maintain its privilege or for the printer to do any good by his trade and begging of him "to become a meanes to her highnes in this behalf ... to graunt a speciall lycence to this our Universitie."

As the Star Chamber decree of 1586, to which reference has been already made, ordained that "none of the printers in Cambridge or Oxford for the tyme being shal be suffered to have any moe apprentices then one at one tyme at the most," it is not to be expected that the output from Thomas's press should be very large. But we know that before his death at the early age of 35 he printed at least twenty books[21]. Many of these reflect the theological controversies of the time as, for instance, _Two Treatises of the Lord His holie Supper ... written in the French tongue by Yues Rousseau and Iohn de l'Espine ... translated into English_ ("a very elegant type, and as carefully printed," according to Herbert) and _Antonii Sadeelis viri clarissimi vereque Theologi de Rebus Grauissimis controuersis Disputationes accuratae Theologice et scholastice Tractatae_, both printed in 1584. In the inventory of his will it is interesting to note that, with one exception, Thomas had stock, at the time of his death, of all books printed by himself; he left, too, 39 Reames of pott paper in the garret (£8) and 8 skynnes of parchment ruled with read ynck (2_s_ 8_d_). His serviceable type, consisting of long primer, pica, and brevier (Roman and Italique), together with some "greeke letter," amounted to 1445 lb and was valued at 3_d_ a lb. In his "necessaries for pryntinge" are included "one presse with the furneture" (66_s_ 8_d_), "iiijͦͬ payer of chases" (13_s_ 4_d_), "ij great stooles" (12_d_), "iiijͦͬ gallies" (16_d_) and "the wasshing troufhe" (12_d_)[22].

* * * * *

But it is on his _Latin Dictionary_ that the fame of Thomas Thomas chiefly rests. "In hoc opere" he writes on the title-page, "quid sit praestitum ad superiores _λεξικογραφοὺς_ adjectum, docebit epistola ad Lectorem" and in the _epistola_ we learn how the work came into being:

Precibus enim Ludimagistrorum ac studiosorum victus, quibus accessit etiam amicorum frequens postulatio, ex immenso Lexicorum pelago nostrum contraxi, quod trivialibus saltem ludis inserviret.

The last words of this same address to the reader show that, like Johnson's, the dictionary was not compiled "in the soft obscurities of retirement, or under the shelter of academick bowers":

Cantebrigiae ex nostris aedibus, carptim inter operarum susurros, Tertio Nonas Septembres, Anno salutis per Christum Dominum partae, 1587.

In the eleventh edition, printed by Thomas's successor in 1619, the following tribute is paid to him in the dedication to Francis Bacon:

He was about 30 years ago a famous Printer among your Cantabrigians; yes something more than a Printer such as we now are, who understand the Latin that we print no more than Bellerophon the letters he carried, and who sell in our shops nothing of our own except the paper _black with the press's sweat_. But he, a companion of the Stephenses and of the other, very few, printers of the true kind and best omen, was of opinion that it was men of learning, thoroughly imbued with academic studies, who should give themselves to cultivating and rightly applying that illustrious benefit sent down from heaven and given to aid mankind and perpetuate the arts. Accordingly what more fit than that when he had wrought what was worthy of type, he should himself, needing aid of none, act as midwife to his own progeny.

Thomas's printing-office was in the Regent Walk, immediately opposite the west door of Great St Mary's; his death is said to have been hastened by the labours of the dictionary, and in 1588 he was buried in the churchyard of Great St Mary's.

III

FROM JOHN LEGATE TO ROGER DANIEL

No time was lost, after the death of Thomas Thomas, in appointing a successor, for John Legate was elected by grace of 2 November, 1588, "as he is reported to be skilful in the art of printing books"; and almost immediately the new printer became involved in disputes with the Stationers' Company.

The corporate existence of the London Stationers dates back to 1407, but their first charter was granted by Mary in 1557. The result of this charter of incorporation was that no one, except the holders of special licences or privileges, could print books for sale; by the rules of the company a member who wished to print a book and claim the ownership of it was required to enter its name in the register of the company. Thus he obtained the only kind of 'copyright' which then existed.

On her accession, Elizabeth confirmed the Stationers' charter, but shortly afterwards, _Injunctions_ were issued which required all books to be licensed either by the Queen herself, or six members of the Privy Council, or the Archbishops, or the Bishop of London, or the Chancellors of the Universities, or the bishop of the diocese.

It was, however, found to be impossible to enforce such a stringent regulation and in 1577 we find a number of printing licences issued to private persons. Thus John Jugge became Her Majesty's printer of Bibles; to Richard Tothill was given the "printinge of all kindes _Lawe bookes_"; to John Day the monopoly of the _ABC_ and _Catechism_; to Thomas Marshe "Latin books used in the grammar schools"; to William Seres "salters, primers and prayer books."

As we have already seen, it was these grants which, in spite of the confirmation of the university's licence at the beginning of the reign, effectually stood in the way of the establishment of a press at Cambridge by John Kingston.

The London Stationers also took alarm and petitioned the Queen. At first they were merely rebuked for daring to question the royal prerogative but, "approaching her Majesty a second time more humbly than before," the Company was granted a monopoly of both printing and selling psalters, primers, almanacks, _ABC_'s, the little Catechism, and Nowell's English and Latin Catechism.

Of all such monopolies the university, by the power given to it in the charter of 1534 to print _omnimodos libros_, had been made nominally independent, and it was therefore inevitable that disputes should arise; furthermore, there being as yet no regularised law of copyright, such disputes were likely to be most violent when there was competition in the sale, as well as in the printing, of a text-book.

Thus when John Legate, himself a freeman of the Stationers' Company, printed an edition of Terence for the use of scholars in 1589 and sent copies to be sold in London, the Stationers quickly confiscated them; on their part, the Stationers were at the same time contemplating another pirated edition of Thomas's _Dictionary_. The university made its usual, dignified complaint to Lord Burghley.

Again, in 1591, Legate, who had in that year produced the first English bible printed at Cambridge, was accused of infringing the monopoly of Barker and Day, the privileged printers. In their reply to the charge, the Vice-Chancellor and Heads of Houses whilst hinting that the doctrine "that the prince by virtue of prerogative may, by a later grant, either take away or abridge a former" is not only "against the rule of natural equity" but also "dangerous to all degrees, opening a way to the overthrow of all patents and privileges," base their appeal upon an _ad misericordiam_, with a final reminder of the charter and its ratification; in particular, they emphasise the plight of the printer himself:

The suit which they [the Stationers] have made unto your lordship for the stay of our printer until the next term, is so prejudicial to the poor man, as if they should prevail therein, it could not but tend to his utter undoing; especially Sturbridge-fair now drawing near; being the chiefest time wherein he hopeth to reap greatest fruit of this his travail[23].

Similarly, in 1596, Legate was charged--this time by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners--with infringing the right of the Queen's patentees by printing the Grammar and Accidence. The Vice-Chancellor was required to collect all copies printed at Cambridge and to take bond with surety in £100 of each of the university printers not to print either book without leave. Some months later the Vice-Chancellor reported to the Archbishop that search had been made "by honest men sworn who said upon their oath that there were no such books printed here." This is the last we hear of such disputes for some time, but it is clear that the university jealously guarded its right of selling, as well as of printing, books, since in 1592 J. Tidder, of London, was sued in the Vice-Chancellor's Court for selling books in the Cambridge market[24].

In the later part of his career Legate became intimately associated with the London stationers. An entry in the Stationers' Registers under the date 1 August, 1597, shows that his official position was then recognised:

WHEREAS John legat hathe printed at Cambridge by Aucthoritie of the vniuersitie there a booke called the _Reformed Catholike_: This seid booke is here Registred for his copie so that none of this Company shall prynt yt from hym. PROVIDED that this entrance shalbe voyd yf the seid booke be not Aucthorised by the seid vniuersitie as he saieth it is, vjͩ.[25]

Legate married the daughter of Christopher Barker and became Master of the Stationers' Company in 1604. He left Cambridge in 1609 and after that date all books printed by him have _London_ on the title-page; the title, however, of "printer to the university" he retained until his death in 1620.

In Cambridge he rented a shop for _5s_ per annum in St Mary's parish from 1591 to 1609, probably the same house in the Regent Walk as that in which Thomas had lived, and was the first printer to use the device _Alma Mater Cantabrigia_ with the motto _Hinc Lucem et Pocula Sacra_ surrounding it.

In partnership with Legate was John Porter. There is no record of his appointment, but it is evident that he was one of the university stationers appointed under the charter. In 1593 we find him associated with Legate in the prosecution of John Tidder and several books of 1595 and other dates are described as printed for him and John Legate[26].

* * * * *

In the Register of the Stationers' Company it is recorded under the date 26 April, 1589:

Cantrell Legge sonne of Edwarde Legge of Burcham in the Countie of Norffolk Yoman, hathe put himself apprentize to John Legat Citizen and Stacioner of London for Eighte yeres from midsomer nexte[27].

This Cantrell Legge was appointed one of the university printers in 1606 and appears to have issued many books in co-operation with the Stationers. Later, however, difficulties again arose, for in 1620 Legge was prosecuted by the company for printing Lily's _Grammar_. The university vehemently protested to the Archbishop of Canterbury:

Ferunt enim Londinenses Bibliopolas suum potius emolumentum quam publicum spectantes, (quae res et naturae legibus et hominum summe contraria est) monopoliis quibusdam inhiare, ex quo timemus librorum precia auctum iri, et privilegia nostra imminutum. Nos igitur hoc metu affecti, ubi sanguis solet in re dubia ad cor festinare, ita ad Te confugimus primariam partem ecclesiastici corporis....

and to Lord Chancellor Bacon: