FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
103
hand; I hare also met with others who hare confirmed the same." &c. &c. The particahucs here recorded, Junius states to hare received from his totor, Nicholas Galius, an old gentle- man of very tenacious memoiy, who related that, when a boy, he often heard one Comeliu/, a bookbinder, (then upwards of eighty years of age, «ho had when a youth, assisted at the printing- office of Coster) descrihe with great earnestness tbenamerDustnalsaod experiments made by his master in the history of the invention : when he came to that part of his narrative touching the nibbeiy, he would burst into tears, and curse, with uie ereatest vehemenoe, those nights in vhicb he had slept with so rile a miscreant; uxl that, were still alive, he could with pleasure eiecnte the thief with his own hands. Junius states, that he received a similar account from Qainnns Talesius, the Burgomaster, who de- ckled that it was recited to him by the said Conielius : the latter died in the year 1515.
Mr. Ottley is of opinion that Junius is in error, ■then he states that Quirius Talesius receired the iBfoimation from the same Cornelius who worked da Coster, he imagines him to hare been a son, or nephew, of the former; as Meerman found mention of Cornelius the bookbinder in the re- wrdj of the church of S. Baron, at Haerlem, under the years 1474, 1485, 1487, 1496, 1503, 1507, 1508, and 1615. U the chronology, ob- aenes Mr. Ottley, be correct, Cornelius must ka»e been ninety in the year 1496; therefore, he cooclndes, that the latter dates refer to a younger Coneliiis, the informant of Talesius.
Authors disagree with respect to the person «b committed the robbery alledged to have talm place. There cannot be the least reason for supposing Faust to hare been the thief, he long a wealthy citizen of Mentz. Scrirerius be the theft on John Gutenberg. Some suppose the robber to hare been John Maidenbachius, others John Petersheimius, but most probably it OS Geinsfleisch, sen. whom Kohlerus states cuneto Mentz in 1441, and not before.
Theiecertainly appears a strange inconsistency in the different statements respecting this robbery. A wajantY of writers agree uiat it took place in 1441; whereas, it is nnirersally allowed that Coster died in 1440. The account is certainly I Toy natural and pleasing one, if we direst it rftkeabore and a few other inconsistencies. It B necessary to obserre, that in the confusion of BMes which follow this erent in the history of piisting, the thief has been suffered to escape, ud the crime attributed to an innocent person.
Scrirerius informs us, that he had collected fiapnents of a work upon this subject, written upon this subject, written at Haerlem, between IM9 and 1661, by Jan. Van Zuyren, Bunno- nasier of that city : Scrirerius laments its loss, ■beerting, that had this been handed down to posterity, there would now be no occasion for a ^aence to the testimonies of Junius and others, in order to prore that Haerlem is entitled to the oerit of tire discorery. He says, that he pre- aetred t hp . T i a t i n title, andsome part of the preface,
byt the name of Coster does not appear. He ad- mits that the honour of perfecting the art, and of making it known throughout Europe, is justly due to Mentz. It appears an unfortunate cir- cumstance for Haerlem, that the documents of Jan. Van Zuyren, which Scrirerius so much laments the loss of, should not have been pre- serred; if they had, it is doubtful whether they would in the least hare advanced the cause of Junius and Meerman.
That Coster carried the art no further than separate umoden typet, appears from a Dutch poem, entituled Hertmeigal, published in the sixteenth century, by Henry Spiechal, who ex- claims, "Thou first Laurentius, to supply the defect of wooden tablets, adaptedst icooden typet, and afterwards did cormect tnem with a threap to imitate writing. A treacherous servant sui- reptitiously obtained the honour of the discorery; but truth Itself, though destitute of common and wide spread fame; truth, I say, still remains."
There is no mention in this poem of metal typet; had he been robbed of these, as well as of wooden ones, such a circumstance could not hare been passed orer in silence.
That the rough specimens with which Coster amused himself should be discorered, at the dis- tance of three centuries, appears almost impro- bable : yet John Enchedius, a printer, discorered an old parchment Horarivm, printed on both sides, in eight pages, containing the Alphabet, the Lord' I Prayer, the Apottlet' Creed, and three short prayers, which he imannes to be the first productions of Laurentius. Mr. Meerman sub- mitted this to artists, (competent judges) who gare as their opinion that it exactly agreed with Uie description of Junius : it also corresponds with the first edition of the Dutch Sp^tUum Salvationit, and the fragment of the Holland Donatut, which are said to have been the pro- ductions of Laurentius, and are specimens of his piety and ingenuity, in this essay of his newly mrented art. Mr. Meerman has giren an exact engraring of this singular curiosity.
It has been urged by those who oppose the claims of Coster, that it would hare b«en more satisfactory had his descendants preserred the old type in its original state. Junius informs us, that it was melted down and conrerted into drinking cups. Coster's defenders reply, that it was not unnatural for them to hare it made into useful and ornamental articles of furniture : and that, if Junius intended to deceire his readers, he might hare stated that the type still remained in Coster's house.
It is quite unreasonable to suppose that Coster's descendants and friends would hare suffered his fame to sink into oblirion, and there rest quietly 'sepulchred for the space of one hundred and thirty years, before they thought of eren hinting that such a circumstance had erer taken place at Haerlem, either by Coster, or any otherperson.
Junius has an. able adrocate in Mr. Ottley, who boldly defends the cause of Coster and Haer- lani with much sound argument; but with respect to the robbery, he forbews to make any comment,
VjOOQ IC
