ing, was the Philobiblion* of RICHARD DE BURY; who was bishop of Durham at the close of the 14th

Sive de Amore Librorum.' The first edition, hitherto so acknowledged, of this entertaining work, was printed at Spires, by John and Conrad Hiist, in 1483, 4to, a book of great rarity-according to Clement, vol. v. 435; Bauer (Suppl. Bibl. Libr. Rarior, pt. i. 276); Maichelins, p. 127; and Morhof. vol. i. 187. Mons. De La Serna Santander has assigned the date of 1473 to this edition: see his Dict. Bibliog. Chois. vol. ii. 257,—but above all, consult Clement-to whom Panzer, vol. iii. p. 22, very properly refers his readers. And yet some of Clement's authorities do not exactly bear him out in the identification of this impression. Mattaire, vol. i. 449, does not appear to have ever seen a copy of it: but what is rather extraordinary, Count Macarty has a copy of a Cologne edition in 4to, of the date of 1473. No other edition of it is known to have been printed till the year 1500; when two impressions of this date were published at Paris, in 4to; the one by Philip for Petit (of which both Clement and Fabricius (Bibl. Med. et Inf. Ætat. vol. i. 842, &c.) were ignorant; but of which, a copy, according to Panzer, vol. ii. 336, should seem to be in the public library at Gottingen; the other, by Badins Ascensius, is somewhat more commonly known. A century elapsed before this work was deemed deserving of republication; when the country that had given birth to, and the university that had directed the studies of, its illustrious author, put forth an inelegant reprint of it in 4to, 1599-from which some excerpts will be found in the ensuing pages --but in the meantime the reader may consult the title-page account of Herbert, vol. iii. p. 1408. Of none of these latter editions were the sharp eyes of Clement ever blessed with a sight of a copy! See his Bibl. Curcuse, &c. vol. v. 438.

The 17th century made some atonement for the negligence of the past, in regard to RICHARD DE BURY. At Frankfort his Philobiblion was reprinted, with a Century of Philological Letters,' collected by Goldastus, in 1610, 8vo-and this same work appeared again, at Leipsic, in 1674, 8vo. At length the famous Schmidt put forth an edition, with some new pieces, typis et sumtibus Georgii Wolffgangii Hammii, Acad. Typog. 1703,' 4to. Of this latter edition, neither Maichelius nor the last editor of Morhof take notice. It may be worth while adding, that, the subscription in red ink, which Fabricius (ibid.) notices as being subjoined to a vellum MS. of this work, in his own possession—and which states that it was finished at Auckland, in the year 1343, in the 58th of its author, and at the close of the 11th year of his episcopacy-may be found, in substance, in Hearne's edition of Leland's Collectanea, vol. ii. 385, edit. 1774.

century, and tutor to Edward III. I will at present say nothing about the merits and demerits of this short treatise; only I may be permitted to observe with satisfaction, that the head of the same see, at the present day, has given many proofs of his attachment to those studies, and of his reward of such merit, as attracted the notice of his illustrious predecessor. It is with pain that I am compelled to avow the paucity of publications in our own country, of a nature similar to the Philobiblion of De Bury, even for two centuries after it was composed; but while Leland was making his library-tour, under the auspices of that capricious tyrant Henry VIII. many works were planned abroad, which greatly facilitated the researches of the learned.

Among the men who first helped to clear away the rubbish that impeded the progress of the student, was the learned and modest CONRAD GESNER; at once a scholar, a philosopher, and a bibliographer and upon whom Julius Scaliger, Theodore Beza, and De Thou, have pronounced noble eulogiums.* His Bibliotheca Universalis was

His Bibliotheca, or Catalogus Universalis, &c. was first printed in a handsome folio volume at Zurich, 1545. Lycosthine put forth a wretched abridgment of this work, which was printed by the learned Oporinus, in 4to, 1551. Robert Constantine, the lexicographer, also abridged and published it in 1555, Paris, 8vo; and William Canter is said by Labbe to have written notes upon Simler's edition, which Baillet took for granted to be in existence, and laments not to have seen them; but he is properly corrected by De La Monnoye, who reminds us that it was a mere report, which Labbe gave as he found it. I never saw Simler's own

editions

the first thing, since the discovery of the art of printing, which enabled the curious to become acquainted with the works of preceding authors: thus kindling, by the light of such a lamp, the fire of emulation among his contemporaries and successors. I do not pretend to say that the Bibliotheca of Gesner is any thing like perfect, even as far as it goes: but considering that the author had to work with his own materials alone, and that the degree of fame and profit attached to such a publication was purely speculative, he undoubtedly merits the thanks of posterity for having compleated it even in the manner in which it has come down to us. Consider Gesner as the father of bibliography; and if, at the sale of Malvolio's busts,

editions of his excellent abridgment and enlargement of it in 1555 and 1574; but Frisius published it, with great improvements, in 1583, fol. adding many articles, and abridging and omitting many others. Although this latter edition be called the edit. opt. it will be evident that the editio originalis is yet a desideratum in every bibliographical collection. Nor indeed does Frisius's edition take away the necessity of consulting a supplement to Gesner, which appeared at the end of the Bibliothèque Françoise of Du Verdier, 1584. It may be worth stating that, Hallevordius's Bibliotheca Curiòsa, 1656, 1687, 4to, is little better than a supplement to the preceding work.

The Pandects of Gesner, 1548, fol. are also well worth the bibliographer's notice. Each of the 20 books, of which the volume is composed, is preceded by an interesting dedicatory epistle to some eminent printer of the day. Consult Baillet's Jugemens des Savans, vol. ii. p. 11. Bibl. Creven. vol. v. p. 278; upon this latter work more particularly; and Morhof's Polyhistor. Literar. vol. i. 197, and Vogt's Catalog. Libr. Rarior, p. 164: upon the former. Although the Dictionnaire Historique, published at Caen, in 1789, notices the botanical and lexicographical works of Gesner, it has omitted to mention these Pandects: which, however, are uncom

mon.

there be one of this great man, purchase it, good Lisardo, and place it over the portico of your library.

LIS. All this is very well. Proceed with the patriarchal age of your beloved bibliography.

LYSAND. I was about resuming, with observing that our BALE speedily imitated the example of Gesner, in putting forth his Britanniæ Scriptores ;* the materials of the greater part of which were supplied by Leland. This work is undoubtedly necessary to every Englishman, but its errors are manifold. Let me now introduce to your notice, the little work of Florian TREFLER, published in 1560;† also the first thing in its kind, and intimately connected with our present subject. The learned, it is

The first edition of this work, under the title of Illustrium maioris Britanniæ Scriptorum, hoc est, Angliæ, Cambriæ, ac Scotia summarium, in quasdam centurias divisum,' &c. was printed at Ipswich, in 1548, 4to, containing three supposed portraits of Bale, and a spurious one of Wicliffe. Of the half length portrait of Bale, upon a single leaf, as noticed by Herbert, vol. iii. 1457, I have doubts about its appearance in all the copies. The above work was again published at Basil, by Opornius, in 1559, fol. greatly enlarged and corrected, with a magnificent half length portrait of Bale, from which, the one in a subsequent part of this work, was either copied on a reduced scale-or of which it was the prototype. His majesty has perhaps the finest copy of this last edition of Bale's Scriptores Britanniæ, in existence.

+ Les Savans n'ont nullement été satisfaits des règles prescrites par FLORI. AN TREFFER [Trefler] le premièr dont on connoisse un écrit sur ce sujet -[de la disposition des livres dans une biliothèque]. Sa méthode de classer les livres fut imprimée à Augsbourg en 1560.' Camus: Memoires de l'Institut. vol. i. 646. The title is,- Methodus Ordinandi Bibliothecam,' Augustæ, 1560. The extreme rarity of this book does not appear to have arisen from its utility-if the authority quoted by Vogt, p. 857, edit. 1793, may be credited. Bauer repeats Vogt's account; and Teisser, Morhof, and Baillet, overlook the work.

true, were not much pleased with it; but it afforded a rough outline upon which Naudæus afterwards worked, and produced, as you will find, a more pleasing and perfect picture. A few years after this, appeared the Erotemata of MICHAEL NEANDER;* in the long and learned preface to which, and in the catalogue of his and of Melancthon's works subjoined, some brilliant hints of a bibliographical nature were thrown out, quite sufficient to inflame the lover of book-anecdotes with a desire of seeing a work perfected according to such a plan: but Neander was unwilling, or unable, to put his design into execution. Bibliography, however, now began to make rather a rapid progress; and in France, the ancient writers of history and poetry seemed to live again in the Bibliotheque Françoise of LA CROIX DU MAINE and DU VERDIER.† Nor

• It would appear from Morhof, that NEANDER meditated the publication of a work similar to the Pandects of Gesner; which would, in all probability, have greatly excelled it. The Erotemata Græca Linguæ,' was published at Basil in 1565, 8vo. Consult Polyhist. Liter. vol. i. 199: Jugemens des Savans, vol. iii. art. 887, but more particularly Niceron's Memoires des Hommes Illustres, vol. xxx.—in regard to Neander. Vogt has given the title at length (a sufficiently tempting one!) calling the work very rare,' and the preface of Neander (which is twice the length of the work) curious and erudite.' See his Catalog. Libror. Rarior, p. 614, edit. 1793.

+ LA CROIX DU MAINE'S book appeared towards the end of the year 1584; and that of his coadjutor, ANTONY VERDIER, in the beginning of the subsequent year. They are both in folio, and are usually bound in one volume. Of these works, the first is the rarest and best executed; but the very excellent edition of both of them, by DE LA MONNOYE and JUVIGNY, in six volumes, 4to, 1772, which has realized the patriotic wishes of Baillet, leaves nothing to be desired in the old editions-and

these