The ebb and flow of opinion, even upon the most important questions, upon which one would suppose everybody would agree, is a remarkable psychological fact. Upon no question has this alternation of opinion been more noticeable than “On the Origin of Printing.” Indeed, from the earliest times up to now there have been divergent opinions. That movable types were used in Holland before the earliest specimens of the Gutenberg school appeared has been maintained with more or less success ever since 1499, when the author of the Cologne Chronicle published his important history. And that belief was held by many learned bibliographers when Dr. Van der Linde in 1870 issued his remarkable book, known in England as The Haarlem Legend. The vigour of his attack in that work upon the Dutch claims, and his wonderful skill in the use of his materials and the marshalling of his arguments, made his readers shut their eyes to the savage personality of his warfare and the gross unfairness of his statements. Nevertheless, he did good by sweeping away many literary cobwebs and erroneous ideas by which former writers had been entrapped, and by placing the facts of the debate upon a firmer basis. In stating the case for either Holland or Germany, theory must to some extent be introduced, but theory must always be grounded on a good substratum of fact, and then the reader must judge for himself whether the facts are sufficiently strong to support the superstructure.

The first fact adduced in favour of Holland as the birth-place of printing is the Cologne Chronicle for 1499. This evidence, coming as it does from a writer who lived and wrote in the 15th century, and who obtained his information from “Master Ulric Zell,” a celebrated Cologne printer of the Gutenberg school, demands the most serious consideration. Unfortunately there are certain discrepancies in his narrative, which, however, are not in that portion which concerns the positive invention, so much as in the sequence of the places in which the art was introduced. We must remember, too, that the account was written at a time when criticism or bibliography was unborn. The passage, which is quoted from The Haarlem Legend (1871), page 8, is as follows:—

“When, where, and by whom was found out the unspeakably useful art of printing books?

“Here we have especially to observe that of late the love and ardour of mankind have decreased very much, or have been polluted, at one time by vain glory, at another time by covetousness, idleness, etc., particularly reprehensible in the clergy, who are more watchful and anxious to gather temporal good, and to seek the enjoyments of the flesh, than the salvation of the soul; whereby the common people fall into great error, for they and their leaders seek only temporal good, as if there were no eternal good or eternal life hereafter. In order, therefore, that the negligence of our leaders, and the evil example and corruption of the Divine Word by all preachers in general, who cause their immoral covetousness to be heard and observed, at the same time might not be too great an impediment and injury to good Christians; and in order that nobody might excuse himself, the Eternal God has produced out of His impenetrable wisdom the present excellent art, whereby books are printed and multiplied, so that every person himself is able to read, or hear read, the way to salvation. How should I attempt to write or to relate the praise, the advantage, and the bliss which arise, and have arisen, from this art? for they are inexpressible. Let all who love letters testify it. God gives it to laymen who are able to read German, to the learned who make use of the Latin language, to monks and nuns, in short to all. Oh, how many prayers, what unspeakable edification, is derived from printed books! How many precious and wholesome exhortations are given in preaching! All this arises from this noble art. Oh, how great an advantage and blessing proceed, if they choose, from those who either make, or are instrumental in making, printed books. And he who wishes to read about this may peruse the little book, written by the great and celebrated Doctor Joh. Gerson, De laude scriptorum, or the book of the spiritual father and abbot of Spanheim, Joh. von Trittenheim. This highly valuable art was discovered first of all in Germany, at Mentz, on the Rhine. And it is a great honour 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 (Jubilee), and 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. Although the art, as has been said, was discovered at Mentz, in the manner as it is now generally used, yet the first pre-figuration (die erste vurbyldung) 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. One named Omnibonus wrote in a preface to the book called Quinctilianus, and in some other books too, that a Walloon from France, named Nicol. Jenson, discovered first of all this masterly art; but that is untrue, for there are those still alive who testify that books were printed at Venice before Nic. Jenson came there and began to cut and make letters. But the first inventor of printing was Junker Johan Gutenberg. From Mentz the art was introduced first of all into Cologne, then into Strasbourg, and afterwards into Venice. The origin and progress of the art was told me verbally by the honourable Master Ulrich Zell, of Harran, still printer at Cologne, Anno 1499, by whom the said art came to Cologne. There are also some confident persons who say that books had been already printed before; but this is not true, for we find in no country books printed at that time.”

We have here the account of a writer who is eminently German in his sympathies, and is proud of the position held by his countrymen in the early stage of printing. He lived in the midst of an extensive book manufactory—Cologne—and his ideas are large and biblical. When he speaks of Gutenberg’s art, he refers to Bibles and Psalters and Classics, books of literary and religious importance, and not to school-books for boys. His account reads thus: “This highly valuable art (that is, the perfected state of which he had been speaking) was discovered first in Germany, and the first book printed was the Bible, in Latin. But although the art was discovered at Mentz in the manner now generally used (the manner of the first great Bible), yet the first pre-figuration 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 (by Gutenberg) in a manner much more masterly and subtle than this (viz., the Holland school-books), and became more and more ingenious.”

Surely this is easy to understand, notwithstanding the learned mists by which it has been enveloped. The Donatuses referred to, says Dr. Van der Linde, were block-books, engraved on, and printed from, wood. But a block-printed Donatus of Dutch make does not exist, while early Dutch Donatuses in movable types are among the most common on the list of “Costeriana.” It is to me plain that Gutenberg could not have taken the idea of separate types from a Dutch block-book which did not exist, while German ones were within his reach; but that seeing a type-printed Donatus which had come from Holland, he was struck with the novel process, saw that it was capable of great improvement, and after years of trial and experiment, produced books in a manner “much more masterly and subtle” than the poor Dutch Donatus. This argument formerly was much less complete, because the type Donatuses were then unknown. Now, there are at least twenty editions in various types all belonging to Holland. The only question is, Are there reasons for believing that these Donatuses, or some of them, are products of the Dutch press anterior to the first German-printed dated piece, viz., the Indulgence of 1454? This and other arguments we will discuss in a future article.