of the Benedictine edition of S. Gregory Nazianzen's works, which had been actually issued in 1778. Very frequently, however, the comparison of professedly different impressions requires, before they can be safely pronounced to be identical, the protracted scrutiny of a practised eye. An inattentive observer could not be conscious that the works of Sir James Ware, translated and improved by Harris, and apparently the progeny of the year 1764, (the only edition, and that but a spurious one, recorded in Watt's Bibliotheca Britannica,) have been skilfully tampered with, and should be justly restored—the first volume to 1739, the second to 1745.
(2.) We must admit that a bookseller gifted with mature sapience will very rarely, or never, be such an amateur in expensive methods of bamboozling, as to prefer having recourse to the title-page expedient, if he could flatter himself that his purpose would be likely to be effected simply by doctoring the date; and thus a question springs up, akin to the former one, How great is the antiquity of this timeserving device? At this moment, trusting only to memory, I am not able to adduce an instance of the depravation anterior to the year 1606, when Dr. James's Bellum Papale was put forth in London as a new book, though in reality there was no novelty connected with it, except that the last 0 in 1600 (the authentic date) had been compelled by penmanship to cease to be a dead letter, and to germinate into a 6.
(3.) If neither the judicious naturalisation of a title-page, nor the dexterous corruption of the year in which a work was honestly produced, should avail to eliminate "the stock in hand," res ad Triarios rediit—there is but one contrivance left. This is, to give to the ill-fated hoard another name; in the hope that a proverb properly belonging to a rose may be superabundantly verified in the case of an old book. What Anglo-Saxon scholar has not studied "Divers Ancient Monuments," revived in 1638? and yet perhaps scarcely any one is aware that the appellation is entirely deceptive, and that no such collection was printed at that period. The inestimable remains of Ælfric, edited by L'Isle in 1623, and then entitled, "A Saxon Treatise concerning the Old and New Testament," together with a reprint of the "Testimonie of Antiquitie," (sanctioned by Archbishop Parker in 1567,) had merely submitted to substitutes for the first two leaves with which they had been ushered into the world, and after fifteen years the unsuspecting public were beguiled. When was this system of misnomers introduced? and can a more signal specimen of this kind of shamelessness be mentioned than that which is afforded by the fate of Thorndike's De ratione ac jure finiendi Controversias Ecclesiæ Disputatio? So this small folio in fours was designated when it was published, Lond. 1670; but in 1674 it became Origines Ecclesiasticæ; and it was metamorphosed into Restauratio Ecclesiæ in 1677.
(50.) Dr. Dibdin (Typ. Antiq. iii. 350.) has thus spoken of a quarto treatise, De autoritate, officio, et potestate Pastorum ecclesiasticorum:—
"This very scarce book is anonymous, and has neither date, printer's name, nor place; but being bound up with two other tracts of Berthelet's printing are my reasons for giving it a place here."
The argument and the language in this sentence are pretty nearly on a par; for as misery makes men acquainted with dissimilar companions, why may not parsimony conglutinate heterogeneous compositions? I venture to deny altogether that the engraved border on the title-page was executed by an English artist. It seems rather to be an original imitation of Holbein's design: and as regards the date, can we not perceive what was meant for a modest "1530" on a standard borne by one of the boys in procession? In Simler's Gesnerian Bibliotheca Simon Hess (let me reiterate the question, Who was he?) is registered as the author; and of his work we read, "Liber impressus in Germania." This observation will determine its locality to a certain extent; and the tractate may be instantly distinguished from all others on the same subject by the presence of the following alliterative frontispiece:—
"Primus Papa, potens Pastor, pietate paterna,
Petrus, perfectam plebem pascendo paravit.
Posthabito plures populo, privata petentes,
Pinguia Pontifices, perdunt proh pascua plebis."