LIBRI MISCELLANEİ.

HAVING thus far fulfilled my engagements with my readers, with respect to the class of books, and the early printers, of whom I undertook to give an account, I hope the remainder of this volume may not improperly be occupied with the description of such miscellaneous books of uncommon occurrence, as, from the prosecution of my ordinary pursuits, I have had the opportunity to examine.

No particular arrangement, either of dates or of subjects, is therefore to be expected, nor does it indeed appear to be necessary. I am well aware that the field of rare books is exceedingly extensive, and the term itself not always defined with sufficient accuracy. I therefore pledge myself to nothing more, in the miscellaneous volumes hereafter to be described, than that, in my humble judgment, they all may claim the distinction which I have assigned them, and may all deserve the attention of curious collectors.

The first to be introduced in this class, besides its extreme rarity, possesses many peculiarities.

MAMMO

MAMMOTRECTUS seu expositio vocabulorum quæ in Bibliis, Hymnis Ecclesiasticis, Homiliis,

&c. occurrunt.

At the end

Explicit Mammotrectus sive primicereus arte imprimendi seu caractarizandi per Helyam he lye alias de Louffen Canonicum Ecclesie Ville Veronensis in pago Ergovie site absque calami exaracione Vegelia sancti Martini Episcopi sub anno ab incarnacione domini: Millesimo Quadrengentesimo Septuagesimo. Deo laus et gloria per infinita secula seculorum. Amen.

The first striking peculiarity about this book is the above colophon, which, with the exception of the place and printer, is word for word the same as that which is found in the Mammotrectus printed in this very same year by Schoiffer at Mentz. Is it probable that these two printers should begin the same book in the same year and finish it precisely on the same day, namely on the vigil of St. Martin? The fact seems to be that the printer of Switzerland copied the Mammotrectus of Schoiffer even to the date. That it was the first book printed in Switzerland with a date there is no doubt, but I am inclined to suspect that it was not printed till some years afterwards.

In this MAMMOTRECTUS by Helias Helye,. there are signatures. The smaller letters of the

alphabet

1

alphabet are placed at the extremity of the last line in the page, a, b, c, &c. But the introduction of signatures is ascertained to have been in 1472. It is further observable that the two editions of the SPECULUM VITE printed subsequently by this same printer, and which I shall hereafter describe, have no signatures, catchword, or any thing of the kind. We may perhaps be justified in assigning this book to somewhere about the year 1474.

The book itself is printed in a long, thin, and very rude Gothic character, so rude indeed as hardly to be legible. It is in columns, has 32 lines in a page, and is full of the most perplexing abbreviations.

I give the first sentence as a specimen, and released from the abbreviations.

"Impaciens Proprie Inpericie ac ruditate compaciens pauperum clericorum qui ad predicacionis officium promoventur decrevi bibliam transcurrendo perlegere, nec non et alia que in ecclesia recitantur si vita comes fuerit inspicere diligenter et parcium differtium significanicus et accentus et genera insinuare lectori pauperculo," &c. &c.

The title is variously written, Mommot rectus, Mammotrectus, Mammætrectus, Mammetractus, Mammothreptus, obviously meaning, that it is intended as mothers milk to those clergymen who are infants in professional knowledge.

The author of the book was named Marchesinus, to which the title of his work has usually been added. I have not been able to find any satisfactory account of him. Galdastus calls him ineptum Mammotrecti Auctorem, and I believe the book intrinsically to be of no great importance.

There is a copy of this book in Earl Spencer's collection.

The other editions of the work which merit attention, are one printed in this same year at Mentz by Schoiffer, and one at Venice by Jen

son.

Let me take this opportunity of observing once for all, that it may possibly happen, as in the example of the book above described, that many of the succeeding articles are introduced, as bibliographical curiosities alone. They may

some of them serve merely to mark the progressive improvement of the typographical art, or as uncommon specimens of the presses which severally produced them.

The above is the only notice I propose to take of the observations of certain critics, that many of the books described in these volumes possess no intrinsic value.

RODERICI