Chap. XXIII. that there is the very fame batteted n in Imprinted.

Here, because perhaps it may feem ftrange to fome Perfons, that a Sheet and half of one Impreffion fhould be joined to two Sheets of another Impreffion, to make one complete Book; I think it not amifs to advertise, that this is a very common thing. For when all the perfect Copies of an Impreffion are collated, fmall Numbers of particular Sheets will always remain, which the Printers call the Waft. For 'tis morally impoffible (at least 'tis never found in Fact) that the Paper fet out for each particular Sheet, efpecially of a large Impreffion (and fince the whole Body of the Clergy were to be furnished with English Copies in fo fhort a Time, by the exprefs Letter of the 13th of Eliz. doubtless the first English Impreffion of the Articles was great) fhould be fo exactly adjusted, that their fhould be nothing over or under in any of them, but every Sheet Thould hold out precifely the very fame Number. Wherefore, when a new Impreffion comes (fuch as that of G, K, unquestionably was in the very fame Year) 'tis the Printers ufual Method to perfect the Waft (especially if there be much of it) by laying a Quantity over; of fuch Sheets I mean, as were before wanting. And the Copy which my English Text expreffes, is manifeftly of that Nature.

My next Obfervation is, that G, K, are of an Impreffion prior to both H and I. It follows from what has been already faid, that H and I must be later than C, D, E. Because the Title Page and the half Sheet D, are precifely the fame in H and 1, as they are in the Copy D, except thofe Particulars in the half Sheet D, which were before mentioned, to prove G, K, later than C, D, E. And

the

the Table of the Titles of the Homilies in the Thirty fifth Article, is precifely the fame as in C, D,E. Wherefore I need not enlarge. And that H and I are later than G, K, appears from this fingle Confideration, viz.that the Waft of C, D, E, was perfected with fome Addition from G, K; which muft fuppofe, that G, K, were of the next Impreffion. For that H and I ftood compofed at the fame Time with G, K, I hope, I may now pronounce to be a ridiculous, or rather impoffible Suppofition.

()

My last Obfervation is, That H is of an Impreffion prior to I. That H and I are of different Impreffions, has been already obferved. And that both Impreffions could not ftand compofed at the fame time, appears from the Marks of Identity in fome Parts of each. Wherefore, that H is prior to I, appears from these Words, viz. Of the Names of the Homilies, in the Twenty fifth Article. For thefe Words are printed in Italic, and are of the very fame Compofition, having the very fame remarkable battered fin Of, in all the Copies except I; in which they are printed in Roman, tho' the following Table is precifely the fame in I, as in all the reft. And confequently thofe Words were compofed anew for I, after thofe Letters that printed them in all the other Copies, were broken or diftributed; altho' the Table it felf happened to remain untouch'd.

I am therefore morally certain that the Book of Articles was firft fet, as it appears in E; and that whilft that Impreffion was working off, fome few Corrections were made, and the Reference to St. Austin in the Margin of the Twenty ninth Article was taken out, which makes the Text appear as in C, D.

I am alfo fully perfuaded, that after a good Number of Copies had been printed, whilst the Forms of the feveral Sheets of the Articles stood in Expectation of a farther Demand, the Compartiment of the Title Page was wanted for fome other Book; and before 'twas replaced in A 1, of the Articles, the Printers had a fudden Call, and were obliged to compose the Title of the Articles anew (the Matter of the former, for want of the Inclo→ fure, being probably broken) and that the beforementioned Correction of an Expreffion, and the Infertions of fome Words (thofe Faults being by this time obferved, or the Reafons for thofe Alterations fully discovered) were then first made, which brought the Title to what it appears in the Copy C, of which Sort doubtlefs were all the Number then furnished. But afterwards, when the old Compartiment was at liberty, upon the first fresh Demand, they filled it with the Title, as it ftood improved in C, newly compofed. For it must be noted, that the Infide of the old Compartiment is fo much narrower than that of C, that the Title was neceffarily to be fet again. And as 'twas then fet, it remained in the House, untouched, no Piece of Work calling for the Compartiment, even till after the Black Letter of the Bodies of the Articles was all diftributed, except thofe Four Lines and a half in the 25th Page, which is D 1, which being fo fmall a Quantity stood lock'd up with the reft of that half Sheet.

Some while after a new Edition was refolved on. And accordingly they took the old Title Page and half Sheet D (only the Fault in afcent was at this time obferved and amended, and they were forced to add the Words Imprinted, &c of a new Compofition, they having been taken out of the Form for another

1

९

another Book, and probably distributed; or else 'twas lefs Labor to fet them again, than to unlock the Form and remove them) with the Table of the Titles of the Homilies, and, fuch Parcels of the running and particular Titles as they found ftanding (for they were fet in fuch Sorts of Letter as were lefs in Ufe) and thus they fent abroad G, K. At the fame time they perfected the Waft of C, D, E, with the Sheers they wanted of this new Impreffion, one Copy of which is that which my English Text expreffes in the Collation, of which the. Sheet A was wrought off fo early, that the Title was not chang'd from what it was in E.

When G,K,was diftributed, I mean the Black Letter of it (except the Four Lines and half in C 1, for the Reafon already given) findingOccafion for moreCopies,they fent abroad fuch asH,and afterwards I, u- : fing the old Title Page, the half Sheet D, and fuch other little Parcels of old Matter as were ftanding, because they were made up of thofe Sorts of Letter, which were not much in Requeft, at least not in common Ufe, and had not the hap to be broken. And 'tis exceedingly remarkable,that the very fame battered n in Imprinted, which fo plainly diftinguishes it felf in G, K (wherein that and the following Words were newly compofed, as I have already fhew'd) appears in H and I, which confirms what I have faid about the Order of the Impreffions.

How early in the Year the Firft of thefe Editions got abroad, viz. fuch Copies as C, D, E, will be fhewn in the following Chapter.

CHA P. XXIV.

That thofe English Copies of the Articles printed in 1571, which have the Controverted Clause of the Twentieth Article in them, are genuin; and that those which want it, are Spurious.

L

ET us now confider, what was done by the Convocation of this Year, with respect to the Controverted Claufe of the Twentieth Article.

I have already fhewn, that this Claufe was recorded, and confequently was agreed to by the Convocation, in 1562. The only Queftion therefore is, whether 'twas alfo agreed on (for I have already fhewn, that the Articles were not probably recorded again) in 1571.

Now the Records of this Convocation are loft; nor have we any one MS. Paper extant, that I know of, which reports this Matter. Much Stress has indeed been laid on the Bennet College English MS. of this Year, which was fubfcribed by Eleven Bishops on the rith of May. 'Tis true, this MS. has not the Claufe: nor is it to be wondered at, confidering that it was grounded on the old unauthorized English Tranflation, in which the Clause was firft omitted. But then, as the Authority of this MS. can't be pleaded for the Claufe; fo 'tis certain, that no Man who is tolerably acquainted with this MS. can plead its Authority against it, Because I have demonftrated, that after the 11th of May, on which this MS. was figned, many Alterations were made in the Tranflation, which are not in this MS. And confequently this Controverted Claufe might at the fame time be reftored to the Place which it undoubtedly had in the Record of 1562, and in Wolf's Edition. But