THE ORIGIN OF TYPOGRAPHY
The invention of typography in the fifteenth century marked the beginning of a new civilization and the end of the medieval thousand years. The Middle Ages may be said to have begun with the capture of Rome by the Vandals in 455 A.D., and to have ended with the production of what is considered the first printed book in 1455.
FRENCH PLAYING CARD
A block print of the fifteenth century
As has been shown, during most of the thousand years preceding the invention of typography, ignorance and superstition reigned thruout Europe, despite the efforts of Charlemagne and others to revive learning and encourage interest in books. The popular mind had become so perverted that ability to read and write and love for art were considered proofs of effeminacy.
As the medieval period neared its close, the brain of man became more active; he began to reason and to understand much that before had been mystery. Interest was manifested in the problems of science and religion, and notable things were accomplished by artists and craftsmen. It seemed as if the intellect of mankind was awakening from a long sleep, and civilization was being born again.
As the light of the new intelligence shone upon the earth and Europe rubbed its dazzled eyes, Typography, the star that was to light the way to modern knowledge and achievement, appeared.
Printing with separate metal types, while involving a new principle, was to some extent a development of other methods. The evolution from manuscript books to block books, and from block books to books printed from types occurred quietly in the natural course of events; so quietly, indeed, that there is mystery surrounding each change of method.
In the early part of the fifteenth century, when writing was the only agency used for making books, the demand for playing cards and sacred pictures necessitated a method of reproduction more rapid than the old; and thus engraved wood blocks were introduced.
IMAGE PRINT OF 1423
The first block print with a date
As the desire for knowledge outgrew the productive resources of the russet-gowned scribes, men with a mechanical turn of mind began to engrave pages of books on wooden blocks, a process which, tho extremely tedious, afforded a means of partly satisfying the need, and which became the stepping stone to the invention of printing with separate types. The block books, as they were called, sometimes contained whole pages of reading matter, each letter cut in relief on the face of the wood, and frequently the page included a large illustration carelessly drawn and crudely engraved. The early method of printing block books was by placing the paper on the inked surface and rubbing the back. Only one side was printed and a brown distemper ink (a kind of watercolor) was used. Simply constructed presses, prototypes of the modern hand press, were employed by block-book makers in later years. Playing cards and image prints were popular products of the block-book period, and after being printed were colored by means of stencils. A French playing card of the fifteenth century is reproduced on the preceding page, as well as a print illustrating the old legend of St. Christopher carrying the infant Jesus across a river. This last-mentioned print is dated 1423, is 8⅛ × 11¼ inches in size, and is the oldest dated specimen of printing.
The invention of printing really dates from the time books were printed from wooden blocks, altho the more important invention, that of typography (printing with separate types), is also known by the general word “printing.” The first block books, probably Donatuses, may have been printed in Holland. The “Donatus” is a Latin grammar, and received its name from its author, Ælius Donatus, a Roman grammarian of the fourth century. It is a small book of not more than thirty-four pages printed on parchment, and had a large sale.
BIBLE OF THE POOR
Famous block book of the fifteenth century
There is a morbid side to human nature, and it has been with us since the beginning. Today it finds delight in perusing in the sensational newspapers detailed descriptions of murders, train wrecks, and other happenings in which blood is spilled. During the Middle Ages it prevailed, and is reflected in the pictures that have come down to us in the block books. A doleful atmosphere is present in the block book, “Ars Moriendi” (Art of Dying), whose illustrations show weeping angels and leering demons, weird settings that are magnified by the crudeness of the engravings.
TEXT PAGE FROM A BLOCK BOOK
“Ars Moriendi,” printed in the fifteenth century
The “Biblia Pauperum” ( Bible of the Poor) is another block book very popular in the days preceding the invention of typography. It is a book of about forty pages, consisting principally of illustrations of the important happenings as told in the Scriptures. The book was for the use of illiterate monks and those that did not have access to the elaborate manuscript Bibles.
A book of similar purpose, but more complete than the Bible of the Poor, is called “Speculum Humanæ Salvationis” (Mirror of Human Salvation). This book literally presents the transition from block books to type-printed books, for of the sixty-three pages in one edition twenty are printed from wood blocks and forty-three from separate types (see reproductions herewith). The printed page of the “Mirror” is a trifle larger than the page that is now being read. Almost every monastery in Europe contained copies of the “Speculum.”
When, where and by whom was typography invented? It is surprising that there should be any real uncertainty about the facts connected with the invention of typography, but some uncertainty does exist, and various opinions and conclusions are set forth in books on the subject. The new method of printing was invented in the midst of indifference and ignorance, and for many years but few cared that it had come among them.
The inventor of typography, whether Coster or Gutenberg, was too modest to claim the credit in a substantial way, as he failed to print his name on the first books done by the new method.
This modesty, or whatever else it may have been, opened the way for almost every European country to claim the honor of having been the home of the invention. However, all claims have been disproved excepting those of Germany and Holland, and as the argument now stands the weight of the evidence is with Germany.
C. H. Timperley, in his “Dictionary of Printing” (1839) says that of those who had written on the subject up to his time, one hundred and nine favored Mainz and twenty-four favored Haarlem as the birthplace of typography.
There is indisputable evidence to prove that typography was practiced by Gutenberg at Mainz, Germany, from 1450 to 1455, and that the art spread from that city to all parts of Europe. There is no doubt about that. The only thing which can lose to Gutenberg and Germany the credit of the invention is proof that another man printed from separate types in another country previous to 1450. Certain investigators have attempted to supply this proof, as we shall see.
PAGE PRINTED FROM AN ENGRAVED WOOD BLOCK
From the “Mirror of Human Salvation”
By an unknown Dutch printer
PAGE PRINTED FROM SEPARATE METAL TYPES
From the “Mirror of Human Salvation”
By an unknown Dutch printer
The pretensions of Holland are that one Laurens Janszoon Coster (Lawrence, son of John, the sexton or sheriff) printed with separate types about the year 1430 at Haarlem.
The earliest testimony on the subject is a chapter in the “Chronicle of Cologne” (1499) wherein the author speaks of information about the invention of typography received by him from Ulrich Zell, who printed books at Cologne, Germany, as early as 1464. He states that the “art was discovered first of all in Germany, at Mainz on the Rhine,” and that the “first inventor of printing was a citizen . . . named Junker Johann Gutenberg.” This statement is added to by the assertion that the new art “found its first prefiguration in Holland in the Donatuses which were printed there before that time.” It has been argued that the last assertion refers to block books.
An extract from the Cologne-Chronicle account may be of interest:
This highly valuable art was discovered first of all in Germany, at Mainz on the Rhine. And it is a great honor to the German nation that such ingenious men are found among them. And it took place about the year of our Lord 1440, and from this time until the year 1450, the art, and what is connected with it, was being investigated. And in the year of our Lord 1450, it was a golden year, they began to print, and the first book they printed was the Bible in Latin; it was printed in a large letter resembling the letter with which at present missals are printed. Altho the art was discovered at Mainz, in the manner as it is now generally used, yet the prefiguration was found in Holland, in the Donatuses, which were printed there before that time. And from these, the beginning of the said art was taken, and it was invented in a manner much more masterly and subtle than this, and became more and more ingenious.... But the first inventor of printing was a citizen of Mainz, born at Strassburg, and named Junker Johann Gutenberg. From Mainz the art was introduced first of all into Cologne, then into Strassburg, and afterwards into Venice. The origin and progress of the art was told me verbally by the honorable master Ulrich Zell, of Hanan, still printer at Cologne, anno 1499, by whom the said art came to Cologne.
There was printed in the year 1561 an address to the town officers at Haarlem by Dierick Coornhert, an engraver, in which he stated that he was
often told in good faith that the useful art of printing books was invented, first of all, here in Haarlem, altho in a crude way, as it is easier to improve on an invention than to invent; which art having been brought to Mainz by an unfaithful servant, was very much improved there, whereby this town, on account of its first having spread it, gained such a reputation for the invention of the art, that our fellow-citizens find very little credence when they ascribe this honor to the true inventor. . . . And because I implicitly believe what I have said before, on account of the trustworthy evidence of very old, dignified and gray heads, who often told me not only the family of the inventor, but also his name and surname, and explained the first crude way of printing, and pointed with their finger the house of the first printer out to me.
It will be noticed that Coornhert fails to mention the name of the alleged inventor, the location of his house, or the date of the invention. The claim that “the useful art of printing books was invented, first of all, here at Haarlem, altho in a crude way,” may refer to the printing of block books and not to typography.
The claims of Holland were first presented definitely about 1566 in a history of the Netherlands called “Batavia,” the author of which was known in his own tongue as Adrian de Jonghe; in English as Adrian the Younger, and in Latin as Hadrian Junius. The story as written by Junius has been dubbed the “Coster Legend” and it reads in part as follows:
About one hundred and twenty-eight years ago there dwelt in a house of some magnificence (as may be verified by inspection, for it stands intact to this day) in Haarlem, near to the market, and opposite the royal palace, Laurentius Joannes, surnamed Æditus, or Custos, by reason of this lucrative and honorable office, which by hereditary right appertained to the distinguished family of that name. . . . When strolling in the woods near the city, as citizens who enjoyed ease were accustomed to do after dinner and on holidays, it happened that he undertook as an experiment to fashion the bark of a beech tree in the form of letters. The letters so made, he impressed the reverse way, consecutively, upon a leaf of paper, in little lines of one kind and another.... Thereupon he made, by the addition of letters, explanations for pictures on engraved wood. Of this kind of printing, I myself have seen some stamped block books, the first essays of the art, printed on one side only, with the printed pages facing each other, and not upon both sides of the leaf. Among them was a book in the vernacular written by an unknown author, bearing the title “Spieghel onzer Behoudenis” [Dutch edition of the “Mirror of Salvation,” two pages of the Latin edition of which are here shown].... He subsequently changed the beech-wood letters for those of lead, and these again for letters of tin, because tin was a less flexible material, harder and more durable. To this day may be seen in the very house itself ... some very old wine flagons, which were made from the melting down of the remnants of these very types. The new invention met with favor from the public and ... attracted purchasers from every direction.... He added assistants to his band of workmen, and here may be found the cause of his troubles. Among these workmen was a certain John. Whether or not, as suspicion alleges, he was Faust ... or another of the same name I shall not trouble myself to ascertain. This man, altho bound by oath to the typographic art, when he knew himself to be perfectly skilled in the operation of type setting, in the knowledge of type founding, and in every other detail appertaining to the work, seized the first favorable opportunity ... and flew into the closet of the types, and packed up the instruments used in making them that belonged to his master, and ... immediately after slunk away from the house with the thief. He went first to Amsterdam, thence to Cologne and finally regained Mainz.... Within the space of a year, or about 1442, it is well known that he published, by the aid of the same types which Laurentius had used in Haarlem, the “Doctrinal” of Alexander Gallus ... and also the “Treatises” of Peter, of Spain.... I remember that Nicholas Gallius, the preceptor of my boyhood, a man of tenacious memory, and venerable with gray hairs, narrated these circumstances to me. He, when a boy, had more than once heard Cornelis, an old bookbinder and an underworkman in the same printing office when not an octogenarian and bowed down with years, recite all these details as he had received them from his master.
This is the strongest proof the friends of Coster can present, and it has been thoroughly dissected by investigators representing both sides of the controversy. The weak points of the document appear to be:
(1) The date of the experiment with wood letters in the garden (about 1440) does not leave enough time for completion of the invention of separate metal types and the equipment of a large printing office until the theft which Junius says occurred in 1441.
(2) The date of the theft of 1441 does not reconcile itself with the fact that Gutenberg in 1436 was probably experimenting with his invention at Strassburg.
(3) The claim that a Dutch edition of the “Mirror of Salvation” was printed with separate types cut from wood seems doubtful, because even the best modern machinery has not demonstrated that wood type can be made as accurately as is necessary for arrangement of small types in a massed page. When it is considered that the size of types used on the edition mentioned was about fourteen point, and the lines were printed in alignment, the modern printer is sure to question the accuracy of the assertion.
Four editions, two in Latin and two in Dutch, of the “Mirror of Salvation,” are known to exist, all printed from types except twenty pages of the second edition, which are printed from engraved blocks. They are the work of some early printer of Holland; whether his name was Coster or whether the books were printed before or after 1450 will probably never be ascertained.
One Peter Scriverius in 1628 wrote a new version of the invention in which he says that “In the year 1428, Laurens Coster, then a sheriff of Haarlem, strolled into the Haarlem woods. He took up the branch of an oak-tree, cut a few letters in relief on the wood, and after a while wrapped them up in paper. He then fell asleep, but while he slept, rain descended and soaked the paper. Awakened by a clap of thunder, he took up the sheet, and to his astonishment discovered that the rain had transferred to it the impress of the letters,” etc.
Junius had placed the date of Coster’s invention at about 1440; Scriverius put it at 1428. The date was again changed, this time to 1420, by Marcus Boxhorn, who wrote on the subject in 1640.
In 1722 a statue of Coster was erected in Haarlem, but no date was placed upon it.
A “true and rational account of the invention” was published at Haarlem by one Leiz in 1742, which gives in detail the supposed events of Coster’s life as a printer, from the cutting of the wood letters on the tree bark in 1428 to his death in 1467, but does not reveal the source of information.
Gerard Meerman, a learned but impractical writer of Rotterdam, in 1765 published a book, “Origines Typographical,” and comes to the conclusion that typography was invented by Louwerijs Janszoon, known as Laurens Coster, who was sheriff at various times between 1422 and 1434, and who died between 1434 and 1440; he used separate wooden types about 1428 or 1430, and did not (as Junius had claimed) use lead or tin types; he was robbed on Christmas night 1440 by Johann Gensfleisch (elder brother of Johann Gutenberg), who carried the art to Mainz; he printed one edition of the “Mirror” from wooden types.
In the early part of the nineteenth century a scientific society of Holland offered a prize for the best treatise on the subject of the invention and in 1816 Jacob Koning was given the award for his essay, “The Origin, Invention and Development of Printing.” Koning was the first writer on the subject to make researches in the Haarlem archives and in his book he claimed to have carefully collected from the registers, account books, and other official data all the entries that could throw light on the subject, and to have got together all the documentary evidence to be found.
The investigations of Koning, as reported by himself, corroborated some of the details of the stories of those who preceded him, and he found that Louwerijs Janszoon lived at Haarlem from 1370 to 1439, when he died.
For many years the discussion stood as Koning had left it and Coster was universally given equal honors with Gutenberg as the inventor of typography; but for several years previous to 1869 rumors of errors and defects in the Haarlem claim were in circulation in Holland.
Dr. Anton Van der Linde took up the task of investigating these rumors and the results of his labors were given in a series of articles in the Dutch Spectator during 1870. These articles were revised and issued in book form under the title, “The Haarlem Legend of the Invention of Printing.”
Van der Linde showed how Coster’s cause had been bolstered by Koning and others with misrepresentations, evasions and even forgeries, and Holland practically surrendered its claims and altered its school books to meet the new conditions.
The town records revealed no mention of printing in connection with Louwerijs Janszoon, the sheriff, who died in 1439, or with Laurens Janszoon Coster.
Van der Linde went to Germany as librarian of the royal library at Wiesbaden, became Von der Linde and in 1878 published an enlarged edition of his former book under the title “Gutenberg,” in which he argued that Gutenberg was the inventor of typography.
In 1879 J. H. Hessels, who had translated into English Van der Linde’s first book, was asked to write a review of the new book, “Gutenberg,” and in doing this he became so interested in the subject that he began a careful investigation into the question. He afterward declared in the preface of his book, “Gutenberg” (1882). “Had I myself been able to realize beforehand the time, the trouble, and the expense that this Gutenberg study would cost me, I should have abandoned the subject at the outset.” But the work was so infatuating that in 1887 he published another book: “Haarlem, the Birthplace of Printing; not Mentz.”
To demonstrate the fickle workings of the human mind it may be interesting to note that in his book of 1882 Mr. Hessels wrote, “I have never made any thoro examination of the Haarlem question, but such inquiries as I have made have led me to believe that the Haarlem claim cannot be maintained.” Contrast this with the title of his book of 1887: “Haarlem, not Mentz,” and notice his change of base.
While Mr. Hessels had come to believe in Haarlem, Van der Linde’s faith in the cause of Gutenberg was so strong he forsook his native land, and in America Theodore L. De Vinne in his book “The Invention of Printing” (1876) had reasoned out the tangle in a way to satisfy himself and many others that Gutenberg, and not Coster, was the inventor of typography.
It is impossible here to go into detailed discussion of the points at issue, and only because the burden of proof is upon the Holland advocates has so much space been given to Coster.
While there may be some truth in the Coster story, the proofs are weak, and Haarlem claimants do not seem able to agree as to the identity of the man Coster.
Gutenberg, on the contrary, is shown by records too numerous to here mention separately, to have been a real, tangible human being, one who printed with separate metal types, and the probable inventor of the art.
It is believed that Gutenberg was born at Mainz, Germany, about the year 1399. His parents were Frielo Gensfleisch (goose-flesh) and Else Gutenberg (good-hill). The boy Johann took the last name of his mother, in accordance with the German custom of perpetuating a name.
Because of civil strife in Mainz, the Gensfleisch family left that city about 1420 and took up residence presumably at Strassburg.
There is a possibility that typography spent its infant days at Strassburg. Gutenberg lived there in 1439 and was practicing a secret art, which resulted in a lawsuit. The records of the case had lain, with other records of the time, in an old tower, and were not found until about 1740. They were removed to the Library of Strassburg, remaining there until the Franco-Prussian War (1870), when they were destroyed by soldiers.
This suit against Gutenberg was brought by the relatives of Andrew Dritzehen, one of his workmen, whom Gutenberg had agreed to teach certain things connected with the business in which he was engaged. The testimony of the several witnesses includes references to secrets which Gutenberg would not impart to his associates: four pieces lying in a press (which De Vinne claims was a type-mould); lead, melted forms, work connected with printing, etc.
It is argued that Gutenberg could not have printed in such a perfect manner at Mainz in 1455 if he had not devoted many of the years before to perfecting the new art, and for this reason Strassburg may reasonably claim to be the birthplace of typography.
Gutenberg’s greatest misfortune, the seizure by Fust of his printing office and the just completed edition of the famous Forty-Two-Line Bible, furnishes a strong link in the chain of evidence that goes to prove him the inventor of printing.
The story has been often told how Johann Gutenberg, in need of cash to finance his invention, went to Johann Fust, a citizen of Mainz, and obtained a sum of money for which he mortgaged his printing office. This was in 1450. Five years later we find Fust appearing before a public notary in the convent of the Bare-Footed Friars to enforce his claim. Fust evidently caught Gutenberg unawares, for the courts decided against the inventor, and all types, presses and books in the possession of Gutenberg were taken to the house of Johann Fust.
The records of the agreement and lawsuit just mentioned are proof that Johann Gutenberg printed with separate metal types at Mainz, Germany, during the years 1450–1455. While he did not print his name on any of the products of his printing office, there are specimens of Mainz printing such as Indulgences, Donatuses, etc., which corroborative evidence shows to have been done before 1455.
The greatest achievement of Gutenberg, the culmination of his efforts in the new art, was the famous Forty-Two-Line Bible. There are a number of copies of this book in existence, some printed on vellum, some on paper. It consists of almost thirteen hundred pages, about twelve by sixteen inches, two columns to the page, the columns containing for the most part forty-two lines, whence the name by which the book is known. The types in size are equivalent to the present-day twenty-point, and in style are a copy of the book-Gothic letters of the fifteenth century.
The reproduction of an illuminated page of the Bible herewith is less than one-half the size of the original, which is in the British Museum, but will give an idea of the style of treatment accorded what is probably the first type-printed book. The text portion was printed in black ink only. The illuminators put a dab of red on the initial beginning each sentence, and filled all blank spaces with decoration, with which the initials I and P are cleverly blended. The smaller reproduction shows two pages from the copy that was sold for fifty thousand dollars in 1911.
Johann Gutenberg, after his printing outfit was taken by Fust, did not entirely lose heart, but again established himself as a printer, altho he never afterward produced the equal of his great work, the Forty-Two-Line Bible. In 1465 he was appointed a gentleman of the court of the Bishop of Mainz, as a reward either for his invention or for political activity.
Gutenberg died about 1468 and his printing material and equipment went to one Conrad Humery, who had some rights of ownership in them.
Among Gutenberg’s workmen in 1455 was a young man about twenty-five years of age named Peter Schœffer, who previously had copied books while a student at the University of Paris. He was a valued assistant to Gutenberg, and when Fust took over the equipment forfeited by the inventor, Schœffer assumed charge, married Fust’s daughter and became a partner in the business.
Two years later the new firm published a Psalter, which has become, along with Gutenberg’s Bible, one of the great books of historic printerdom. Seven copies are known to exist. The Psalter consists of one hundred and seventy-five vellum leaves nearly square. The Psalms are in types of about forty-point body, twice the size of those used on Gutenberg’s Bible and of a similar style. The features of the Psalter are the large printed two-color initials, generally credited to Schœffer, altho some authorities have declared that they originated with Gutenberg.
This Psalter was the first book with a printed date, the colophon at the end containing “August 14, 1457.”
The portion of a page shown in this connection, being full size and in colors, should convey an idea of the appearance of the Psalter. The four cross lines are for the music notes, which were inserted by hand.
Fust died about 1466 from the plague while at Paris arranging for the sale of books. Schœffer continued to print, and many books came from his presses. The last book he printed, just before his death (about 1502), was, a fourth edition of his Psalter.
THE GUTENBERG BIBLE OF FORTY-TWO LINES
Photographed by Walter Gilliss from the copy for which Henry E. Huntington paid fifty thousand dollars at the sale of Robert Hoe’s library in 1911
THE GUTENBERG BIBLE, ILLUMINATED
Less than half the size of the original which is in the British Museum. Not all pages in the book were decorated like this, and copies in other collections are illuminated in a different style. From Humphrey
The Venetian style of typography and decoration
