section eight as an afterthought) to the printer of five, who added it to his section, but rather carelessly retained the original catchword instead of altering it as the printer of two had done. Further, Moseley engaged a new printer, who had had no share in the original distribution, to complete what remained of sections four and eight. This printer set the Prophetess and Bonduca for four, and Four Plays in One for eight, betraying his individuality by the non-capitalization of the verse. The removal of the play which originally concluded section four accounts for the fact that as printed this section has no catchword at the end. up When all was But this was not the end of the trouble. finished it was discovered that the original printer of section eight had never even completed his first play, Love's Pilgrimage, and that the Masque had been wholly omitted. To remedy the defect Moseley caused the single sheet *8D to be printed containing on the first leaf the conclusion of the play and on the second the short Masque. The work was entrusted to the printer of section five, who used in it the four-line factotum he had already employed for the Pilgrim and the Knight of Malta, numbered the pages in continuation of 8C, 25-28, thus duplicating the beginning of 8D, and placed at the end of the Masque as catchword Foure Plays in one' to connect with the following play. It thus appears that in the text of the volume, apart from preliminaries, we have the work of no less than nine different printers. Two other slight dislocations merit passing notice. On D4, at the end of the Mad Lover, the catchword is 'Prologue' the verso is blank, and on Er begins the Spanish Curate. Apparently, therefore, the prologue and epilogue to the Mad Lover, which now appear on D4, were originally set for the other side of the leaf. Also it will be observed that on A2" the catchword is 'THE'. The next page is headed To the Reader', and the catchword may be a mere misprint. It looks, however, as though it had been intended to connect with 'The Stationer to the Reader', which follows on A4*, and in the copy at the British Museum (C. 39. k. 5) the two leaves have consequently been transposed. An examination of the water-marks, however, leaves no doubt as to the correct order. W. W. GREG. The Ulrich and Afra Vincent of Beauvais HIS edition of the Speculum Historiale (Proctor 1639) Tis one of the books printed in the monastery of Ulrich and Afra in Sorg's is dated 1474, but as it was unfinished at the death of Abbot Melchior von Stamhaim, which occurred on 30 January 1474, and is a large book in three volumes, it was probably begun early in 1473, as soon as the Speculum humanae salvationis (in Günther Zainer's Type 2-Proctor 1631) and the Dialogi of St. Gregory (in Bämler's Type 2-Proctor 1631 A) were finished, or even before. The fact of its composition and printing in the monastery is known from two manuscript notices quoted by Dom Placidus Braun in his Notitia HistoricoLitteraria (Augsburg, 1788) of the early books in the Monastery Library, of which he was librarian. The first of these is reproduced in the British Museum Catalogue of Early Printed Books, Part II, p. 338; the second is given by Dom Braun as follows: Secundum testimonium ex exemplari, Ioanni de Werdenberg Episcopo Augustano a nostris oblato, quod in bibliotheca Pfaffenhusiana extat, ad cuius finem eiusdem Episcopi insignia adspiciuntur depicta, & sequentia manu coaeua adscripta: Melchior de Stainhaim Abbas SS. Vdalrici & Auffrae ordinis S. Benedicti Nomina dictorum, & ciuitatis Augustensis incepit opus illud impressoriae artis perficere, & antequam finiit ipsum, huius aduenit . . amara mors. Post eum successit Fr. Hainricus Fries, qui . . . Iohanni Episcopo Augustano Vincentium illum in historia dedit, dedicauit. ... This copy has lately come into my possession; and as it is in some details incorrectly described by Dom Braun, it may be worth while to transcribe anew the final inscription. I think possibly he never himself saw it,1 but worked from an account given him by a correspondent; the arms are not at the end of vol. iii (and are neither those of the Werdenberg family nor of the see of Augsburg), but at the beginning of all three volumes, and the inscription (which is not wholly easy to read) runs as follows: Melchior de Stamhaim abbas Sanctorum vdalricj et auffre ordinis Sanctj benedictj nostre dyocesis et Ciuitatis augustensis incepit opus illud impressorie artis perficere et antequam finis operis huius advenit preclusit sibi mors amara post eum successit frater hainricus friess qui nobis Iohanni Episcopo augustensi vincentium illud in hystoria dedit. The problem of the relations of Zainer, Bämler, and Sorg with the monastery is not yet solved. We are fortunate to have such inscriptions as these and those in the Ellenbog volume at Cambridge, and can only hope that further discoveries in archives or elsewhere may afford us new evidence. S. GASELEE. 1 After being the property of the Bishops of Augsburg (ex Bibliotheca Rmi Augustani) it belonged at one time to the Jesuits of Dillingen, and is afterwards a Königliches Staatseigenthum '-of the Kingdom of Bavaria, I suppose. 2 They are in their original binding of stamped leather over wooden boards; doubtless the monastery's work, but not, like the first volume of another copy in my possession (of which the binding is perhaps a few years later), bearing the stamps VLRICVS, AFRA, SIMPERTVS. 3 Proctor's Bibliographical Essays, 1905, p. 73. We must also hope for a re-discovery of the printed advertisement of this book quoted in Denis's Supplement to Maittaire. T A LITTLE-KNOWN BOHEMIAN HERBAL BY S. SAVAGE HE greatness of Italian Art might lead one to expect that Italy would excel in the illustrations to its herbals. If, however, we look for anything at all equal to the illustrations of Brunfels's or Fuchs's herbals previous to the sixth decade of the sixteenth century, we shall be disappointed. There are no doubt many reasons for this. Perhaps with the Italian herbalists there was not the same vis a tergo driving them to study their native plants, since they were surrounded by a flora similar to that known to the old Greeks they worshipped as the gods of medicine. Certainly their earliest printed herbal, the Herbarium Apuleii Platonici, printed before 1484, is, if possible, more crudely illustrated than the German Herbarius Moguntinus. There was one writer of herbals, however, who deserves the whole credit of endeavouring to uphold Italy as the producer of a finely illustrated herbal. This was Pier Andrea Mattioli, who was born in Siena in 1500, and whose fate it was to die of the plague in 1577. His Commentaries on the Materia Medica of Dioscorides appeared first in Italian in 1544, and afterwards in numerous editions (Saccardo, the Italian botanist, estimated that there were over sixty different editions) in Latin, Italian, and other European languages. The book represented the sum total of plant-knowledge in Italy at that period, and was widely read. The earlier editions were illustrated with small woodcuts of no great artistic merit. Later, Mattioli must have conceived the idea of producing an edition of his Commentaries with fine large woodcuts to rival those |