Part 1
# Printers' Marks: A Chapter in the History of Typography ### By Roberts, W. (William)
---
Produced by Louise Hope, Stephen Hope and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
[Transcriber’s Note:
This text uses utf-8 (unicode) file encoding. If the apostrophes and quotation marks in this paragraph appear as garbage, make sure your text reader’s “character set” or “file encoding” is set to Unicode (UTF-8). You may also need to change the default font. As a last resort, use the latin-1 version of the file instead.
Where possible, text contained within illustrations of printers’ marks has been transcribed. The text is shown on separate lines, corresponding to the original layout; captions--usually the printer’s name--will appear on the same line as the word “Illustration”. Note that the spelling given in the body text is often different from that of the Mark as pictured. Within illustrations, expanded abbreviations are shown in [brackets].
Typographical errors are listed at the end of the e-text. Capitalization of the word “mark” or “Mark” is arbitrary in the original and has not been changed. Misspellings or misprints within Marks are also never changed, but the most obvious errors are noted.]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PRINTERS’ MARKS.
[Illustration:
Cum Priuilegio Venetiis Impressum Anno M D V
Petrus Liechtensteyn]
Printers’ Marks
A Chapter in the History of Typography by W. Roberts
Editor of “The Bookworm”
[Illustration:
GEORGE BELL & SONS]
London: George Bell & Sons, York Street, Covent Garden, & New York. Mdcccxciij.
Chiswick Press: C. Whittingham And Co., Tooks Court, Chancery Lane.
To
T. B. BOLITHO, ESQ., M.P.,
This Volume Is Respectfully Dedicated.
[Decoration]
PREFACE.
There are few phases of typography open to the charge of being neglected. An unquestionable exception occurs, however, in relation to Printers’ Marks. This subject is in many respects one of the most interesting in connection with the early printers, who, using devices at first purely as trade marks for the protection of their books against the pirate, soon began to discern their ornamental value, and, consequently, employed the best available artists to design them. Many of these examples are of the greatest bibliographical and general interest, as well as of considerable value in supplementing an important class of illustrations to the printed books, and showing the origin of several typical classes of Book-plates (Ex-Libris). The present Handbook has been written with a view to supplying a readable but accurate account of this neglected chapter in the history of art and bibliography; and it appeals with equal force to the artist or collector. Only one book on the subject, Berjeau’s “Early Dutch, German, and English Printers’ Marks,” has appeared in this country, and this, besides being out of print and expensive, is destitute of descriptive letterpress. The principle which determined the selection of the illustrations is of a threefold character: first, the importance of the printer; secondly, the artistic value or interest of the Mark itself; and thirdly, the geographical importance of the city or town in which the Mark first appeared.
Since the text of this book was printed, however, two additions have been made to the literature of its subject: Dr. Paul Kristeller’s “Die Italienischen Buchdrucker- und Verlegerzeichen, bis 1525,” a very handsome work, worthy to rank with the “Elsässische Büchermarken bis Anfang des 18. Jahrhunderts” of Herr Paul Heitz and Dr. Karl A. Barack (to whom I am indebted for much valuable information as well as for nearly thirty illustrations in the chapter on German Printers’ Marks); and Mr. Alfred Pollard’s “Early Illustrated Books,” an admirable volume which, however, only deals incidentally with the Printer’s Mark as a side issue in the history of the decoration and illustration of books in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Mr. Pollard reproduces seven blocks from Dr. Kristeller’s monograph on the Devices of the Italian Printers. In reference to the statement on p. 116 of this volume that the Mark of Bade “is the earliest picture of a printing press,” Mr. Pollard refers to an unique copy of an edition of the “Danse Macabre” printed anonymously at Lyons in February, 1499, eight years earlier, which contains cuts of the shops of a printer and a bookseller.
That this volume has considerably exceeded its intended limit must be my excuse for not including, with a very few exceptions, any modern examples from the Continent. Nearly every French printer and publisher of any note indulges in the luxury of a Mark of some sort, and an interesting volume might be written concerning modern continental examples. The practice of using a Printer’s Mark is an extremely commendable one, not merely as a relic of antiquity, but from an æsthetic point of view. Nearly every tradesman of importance in this country has some sort of trade mark; but most printers agree in regarding it as a wholly unnecessary superfluity. As the few exceptions indicated in the last chapter prove that the fashion has an artistic as well as a utilitarian side, I hope that it will again become more general as time goes on.
As regards my authorities: I have freely availed myself of nearly all the works named in the “Bibliography” at the end, besides such invaluable works as Brunet’s “Manual,” Mr. Quaritch’s Catalogues, and the monographs on the various printers, Plantin, Elzevir, Aldus, and the rest. From Messrs. Dickson and Edmonds’ “Annals of Scottish Printing” I have obtained not only some useful information regarding the Printer’s Mark in Scotland, but, through the courtesy of Messrs. Macmillan and Bowes of Cambridge, the loan of several blocks from the foregoing work, as well as that of John Siberch, the first Cambridge printer. I have also to thank M. Martinus Nijhoff, of the Hague, Herr Karl W. Hiersemann, of Leipzig, Herr J. H. Ed. Heitz, Strassburg, Mr. Elliot Stock, Mr. Robert Hilton, Editor of the “British Printer,” and the Editor of the “American Bookmaker,” for the loan either of blocks or of original examples of Printers’ Marks; and Mr. C. T. Jacobi for several useful works on typography. Mr. G. P. Johnston, of Edinburgh, kindly lent me the reduced facsimile on p. 252, which arrived too late to be included in its proper place. The publishers whose Marks are included in the chapter on “Modern Examples” are also thanked for the courtesy and readiness with which they placed electros at my disposal.
The original idea of this book is due to my friend, Mr. Gleeson White, the general editor of the series in which it appears; but my thanks are especially due to Mr. G. R. Dennis for the great care with which he has gone through the whole work.
W. R.
86, Grosvenor Road, S.W., _October_, 1893.
[Decoration]
[Decoration]
CONTENTS.
Page
PREFACE vii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xiii INTRODUCTION 1 SOME GENERAL ASPECTS OF THE PRINTER’S MARK 40 THE PRINTER’S MARK IN ENGLAND 52 SOME FRENCH PRINTERS’ MARKS 100 PRINTERS’ MARKS OF GERMANY AND SWITZERLAND 139 SOME DUTCH AND FLEMISH PRINTERS’ MARKS 178 PRINTERS’ MARKS IN ITALY AND SPAIN 209 SOME MODERN EXAMPLES 233 BIBLIOGRAPHY 253 INDEX 255
[Decoration]
[Decoration]
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
Page
Liechtenstein, Petrus. _Frontispiece_ Bell, George, and Sons. _Title-page_ Andlau, G. U. Von 1 Couteau, Gillet 4 Du Pré, Galliot 5 Lecoq, Jehan 7 Petit and Kerver 9 Du Puys, Jacques 11 Pavier, T. 12 Janot, Denys 15 Faques, William 16 Steels, J. 19 Vérard, Antoine 21 Plate of thirty Marks used chiefly by the Italian Printers 25 Chaudière, Guillaume 28 Roffet, Jacques 30 Tournes, Jean de 31 Breuille, Mathurin 33 Snellaert, C. 35 Rastell, John 37 Leeu, Gerard 39, 185 Fust and Schoeffer 40 Froben, J. 43 Cratander’s Mark (attributed to Holbein) 45 Cox, T. 46 Dulssecker, Johann Reinhold 47, 153, 154 Beck, Reinhard 50, 143, 144 Goltz, Hubert 51 Lynne, Walter 52 Caxton, William 55 St. Albans Printer, The 56 De Worde, Wynkyn 58 Pynson, R. 59, 60 Notary, Julian 61 Fawkes, R. 63 Treveris, Peter 64 Scott, John 65 Copland, Robert 66, 68 Wyer, Robert 69 Hester, Andrew 70 Berthelet, Thomas 71 Byddell, John 72 Vautrollier, Thomas 74 Grafton, Richard 75 Middleton, William 76 Wolfe, John 78 Day, John 79 Arbuthnot, A. 81 Singleton, Hugh 83 Wight, John 84 Hall, Rowland 85 Bynneman, Henry 86 Woodcock, Thomas 87 Jaggard, William 88 Kingston, Felix 89 Creede, Thomas 90 Walthoe, John 91 Ware, R. 92 Scolar, John 93 Siberch, John 95 Myllar, Andro 96 Chepman, Walter 97 Davidson, Thomas 98 Charteris, H. 99 Estienne, F. 100 Rembolt, B. 102 Vostre, Simon 103 Regnault, François 104 Regnault, Pierre 105 Marchant, Guy 106 De Marnef 107 Du Pré, J. 108 Le Rouge, Pierre 109 Le Noir, Philippe 110 Kerver, Thielman 111 Pigouchet, Philippe 113 Petit, Jehan 114 Bade, J. 115 Hardouyn, Gillet 116 Tory, Geoffrey 117 De Colines, Simon 119 Estienne, Robert 120, 121 Vidoue, P. 124 Cyaneus, Louis 125 Wéchel, André 126 Wéchel, Chrestien 127 Nivelle, Sébastien 128 Merlin, Desboys and Nivelle 130 Topie, M. 131 Treschel, J. 132 Dolet, E. 133 Hughes de la Porte and A. Vincent 134 Gryphe, Sébastien 135 Colomies, Jacques 136 Morin, M. 137 Le Chandelier, Pierre 138 Thanner, Jacobi 139 Grüninger, Johann 140 Schott, Martin 141 Knoblouch, Johann 142 Köpfel, Wolfgang 145, 146 Müller, Craft (Crato Mylius) 147, 149 Biener, Matthias (Apiarius) 148 Rihel, Theodosius; Rihel, Josias (und Deren Erben) 150 Zetzner, Lazarus 151 Berger, Thiebold 151 Scher, Conrad 152 Hauth, David 152 Anshelm, Thomas 155 Kobian, Valentin 156 Hoernen, A. Ther 157 Bumgart, Herman 158 Koelhoff, Johann 160 Cæsar, Nicholas 161 Soter, J. 162 Birckmann, Arnold 163 Oglin, Erhard 164 Pfortzheim, Jacobus de 165 Henricpetri 166 Endter’s, Wilhelm Moritz, Daughter 167 Weissenburger, J. 168 Lotter, Melchior 169 Schumann, V. 170 Baumgarten, Conrad 171 Feyrabend, J. 172 Guerbin, L. 172 Stadelberger, Jacob 173 Girard, Jehan 174 Rivery, J. 174 Froschover, C. 175 Brylinger, N. 176 Le Preux, F. 177 Veldener, J. 178 Johann of Westphalia 179 Martens, Theodoric 180 Mansion, Colard 181 The Brothers of Common Life 182 Paffraej, Albertus 183 Van der Meer, Jacob Jacobzoon 186 Van der Goes, Mathias 187 Van den Dorp, R. 188 Back, Godefroy 188, 190 Cæsaris, A. 191 Hillenius, Michael 192 Bellaert, J. 193 Henrici, H. 194 Destresius, Jodocus 195 Van der Noot, Thomas 196 Grapheus, J. 197 Van den Keere, Henri 198 Waesberghe, J. 199 Hamont, Michel de 200 Velpius, Rutger 201 Hovii, J. M. 202 Plantin, C. 203, 204 Elzevir Sage, The 206 Elzevir Sphere, The 207 Janssens, Guislain 208 Fritag, A. 209 Riessinger, Sixtus 210 Besicken, J. 211 Martens, Thierry 211 Ratdolt, Erhardus 212 Scotto, Ottaviano 214 Sessa, Melchior 216 Meietos, P. and A. 217 Aldine Anchor, The First 218 Torresano, Andrea 219 Aldine Anchor, 1502-15 220 „ „ 1546-54 221 „ „ 1555-74 222 „ „ 1575-81 223 Giunta, P. 224 Giunta, L. 225 Giunta, F. de 225 Sabio, The Brothers 226 Legnano, Gian Giacomo di 227 Rizzardi, Giammaria 228 Rosembach, Juan 230 Fernandex, V. 231 Kalliergos, Zacharias 232 Legnano, J. A. de 232 Vingle, J. de, of Picardy 232 Hugunt, M. 232 Longman and Co. 233, 237 Stationers’ Company, The 233 „ „ „ 234 Rivingtons, The 235 Clarendon Press, The 238 Pickering, William 239 Pickering, Basil Montagu 239 Chiswick Press 240, 241 Chatto and Windus 243 Nutt, David 243 Cassell and Co. 243 Macmillan and Co. 243 Unwin, T. Fisher 243, 245 Lawrence and Bullen 243 Kegan Paul and Co. 243 Clark, R. and R. 244 Constable, T. and A. 246 Morris, William 247, 248 Appleton, D., and Co. 250 Cushing, J. S., and Co. 250 Harper Brothers 250 Lockwood, H., and Co. 250 Berwick and Smith 251 De Vinne, Theodore L., and Co. 251 Lippincott, J. B., Co. 251 Nijhoff, M. 251 Norton, William 252 Bell, George, and Sons 261
[Decoration]
[Decoration]
PRINTERS’ MARKS.
INTRODUCTION.
Shorn of all the romance and glamour which seem inevitably to surround every early phase of typographic art, a Printer’s Device may be described as nothing more or less than a trade mark. It is usually a sufficient proof that the book in which it occurs is the work of a
## particular craftsman. Its origin is essentially unromantic, and its
employment, in the earlier stages of its history at all events, was merely an attempt to prevent the inevitable pirate from reaping where he had not sown. At one time a copy, or more correctly a forgery, of a Printer’s Mark could be detected with comparative ease, even if the body of the book had all the appearance of genuineness.
[Illustration: G. U. VON ANDLAU.]
This self-protection was necessary on many grounds. First of all, the privileges of impression which were granted by kings, princes, and supreme pontiffs, were usually obtained only by circuitous routes and after the expenditure of much time and money. Moreover, the counterfeit book was rarely either typographically or textually correct, and was more often than not abridged and mutilated almost beyond recognition, to the serious detriment of the printer whose name appeared on the title-page. Places as well as individualities suffered, for very many books were sold as printed in Venice, without having the least claim to that distinction. The Lyons printers were most unblushing sinners in this respect, and Renouard cites a Memorial drawn up by Aldus himself on the subject, and published at Venice in 1503.
But apart from the foregoing reasons, it must be remembered that many of the earliest monuments of typographic art appeared not only without the name of the printer but also without that of the locality in which they were printed. Although in such cases various extraneous circumstances have enabled bibliographers to “place” these books, the Mark of the printer has almost invariably been the chief aid in this direction. The Psalter of 1457 is the first book which has the name of the place where it was printed, besides that of the printers as well as the date of the year in which it was executed. But for a long time after that date books appeared without one or the other of these attributes, and sometimes without either, so that the importance of the Printer’s Mark holds good.
A very natural question now suggests itself, “Who invented these Marks?” Laire, “Index Librorum” (Sæc. xv.), ii. 146, in speaking of a Greek Psalter says: “_Habet signaturas, registrum ac custodes, sed non numerantur folia. Litteræ principales ligno incisæ sunt, sicut et in principio cujuslibet psalmi viticulæ quæ gallicé _vignettes_ appellantur, quarum usum primus excogitavit Aldus._” The volume here described was printed about 1495, and the invention therefore has been very generally attributed to Aldus. That this is not so will be shown in the next chapter. We shall confine ourselves for the present to some of the various points which appear to be material to a proper understanding of the subject.
One of the most important and interesting phases in connection with Printers’ Marks is undoubtedly the _motif_ of the pictorial embellishment. Both the precise origin and the object of many Marks are now lost to us, and many others are only explained after a thorough study of the life of the particular printer or the nature of the books which he generally printed or published. The majority, however, carry their own _prima facie_ explanations. The number of “punning” devices is very large, and nearly every one has a character peculiarly its own. Their antiquity is proved by the fact that before the beginning of the fifteenth century, a picture of St. Anthony was boldly, not to say irreverently, used by Antoine Caillaut, Paris. A long series of punning devices occur in the books printed by or for the fifteenth century publishers, one of the most striking and successful is that of Michel le Noir, whose shield carries his initials, surmounted by the head of a negress and sometimes supported by canting figures in full. This Mark, with variations, was also employed by Philippe and Guillaume le Noir, the work of the three men covering a period of nearly 100 years. The device of Gilles or Gillet Couteau, Paris, 1492, is apparently a double pun, first on his Christian name, the transition from which to _œillet_ being easy and explaining the presence of a pink in flower, and secondly on his surname by the three open knives, in one of which the end of the blade is broken. It was almost inevitable that both Denis Roce or Ross, a Paris bookseller, 1490, and Germain Rose, of Lyons, 1538, should employ a rose in their marks, and this they did, one of the latter’s examples having a dolphin twining around the stem. Jacques and Estienne Maillet, whose works at Lyons extended from the last eleven years of the fifteenth century to the middle of the sixteenth, give in the centre of their shield a picture of a mallet.
[Illustration: GILLET COUTEAU.
Du grant aux petis Gillet couteau]
[Illustration: GALLIOT DU PRÉ.
VOGVE LA GVALLEE GALLIOT DV PRE]
One of the boldest of the early sixteenth century examples is that employed by Galliot Du Pré, Paris, and in this we have a picture of a galley propelled with the aid of sails and oars, and with the motto “Vogue la gualee.” This device (with several variations) was used by both father and son, and possesses an interest beyond the subject of Printers’ Marks, for it gives us a very clear idea of the different boats employed during the first three quarters of the sixteenth century. Another striking Mark of about the same time and covering as nearly as possible the same period, was that of the family De La Porte. The earlier example used in Paris about 1508 was a simple doorway; but the elder Hugues de la Porte, Lyons, and the successors of Aymon De La Porte of the same place, used several exceedingly bold designs in which Samson is represented carrying away the gates of Gaza, the motto on one door or gate being “libertatem meam,” and on the other “mecum porto.” The two printers of the same name, Jehan Lecoq, who were practising the art continuously during nearly the whole of the sixteenth century at Troyes, employed a Mark on the shield of which appears the figure of a cock; whilst an equally appropriate if much more ugly design, was employed by the eminent Lyons family of Sébastien Gryphe or Gryphius: he had at least eight “griffin” Marks, which differed slightly from one another. François Gryphe, who worked in Paris, had one Mark which was original to the extent of the griffin being supported by a tortoise. J. Du Moulin, Rouen, employed a little picture of a windmill on his Mark, as did Scotland’s first printer, Andro Myllar; but Jehan Petit, a prolific fifteenth century printer of Paris, confined his punning to the words “Petit à Petit,” as is seen in the reduced facsimile title, given on p. 9, of a book printed by him for T. Kerver. Mathias Apiarius, Strassburg, used at least two Marks expressing the same idea, namely, a bear discovering a bee’s nest in the hollow of a tree--an obvious pun on his surname. The latter part of the sixteenth century is not nearly so fruitful in really good or striking devices. Guillaume Bichon, Paris, employed a realistic picture of a lap-dog (in allusion to his surname) chasing a hare, with the motto “Nunc fugiens, olim pugnabo”; and equally realistic in another way is the Mark of P. Chandelier, Caen, in which effective use is made of a candle-stick with seven holders, the motto being “Lucernis fideliter ministro.” Antoine Tardif, Lyons, employed the Aldine anchor and dolphin, and also a motto, “Festina tarde,” which is identical in meaning, if not in the exact words, of that of Aldus. Guillaume De La Rivière, Arras, used a charmingly vivid little scene of a winding river, with the motto “Madenta flumine valles”; and it is not difficult to distinguish the appropriateness of the sprig of barley in the Mark of Hugues Barbon, Limoges. The Mark of Jacques Du Puys, Paris, was possibly suggested by the word _puits_ (or well), and of which Puys is perhaps only a form: the picture at all events is a representation of Christ at the well. In the case of Adam Du Mont, Orange, the christian name, is “taken off” in a picture of Adam and Eve at the tree of forbidden fruit; and exactly the same idea occurs with equal appropriateness in the Mark of N. Eve, Paris, the sign of whose shop was Adam and Eve. Michel Jove naturally went to profane history for the subject of his Mark, and with a considerable amount of success.
[Illustration: JEHAN LECOQ.
Jehan Lecoq]
Among the numerous other examples with mottoes derived from sacred history, special mention, as showing the connection between the sign of the shop and its incorporation in the Mark, may be made to the following printers of Paris: D. De La Noue, who not only had “Jesus” as the sign of his shop, but also as his Mark; J. Gueffier had the “Amateur Divin” as his sign, and an allegorical interpretation of the device, “Fert tacitus, vivit, vincit divinus amator,” as a Mark; Guillaume Julian, or Julien, had “Amitie” as his sign, and a personification of this (Typus Amicitiæ) as his Mark, with the motto “Nil Deus hac nobis majus concessit in usus”; Abel L’Angelier (and his widow after his death) adopted the sacrifice of Abel as the subject of his Sign and Mark, with the motto “Sacrum pinque dabo nec macrum sacrificabo”; and the motto of both the first and the second Michel Sonnius was “Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?”
[Illustration: PETIT AND KERVER.
PETIT A PETIT
Le second Volu
me Des Cronicques & Annalles de France, augmentées en la fin dudit volume daucuns faictz dignes de memoire des feux roys Charles huytiesme. Loys douziesme & fra[n]- cois premier du nom Iusques en Lan Mil cinq cens vingt Nouuellement imprime a Paris.
PETIT PETIT T K THIELMAN KERVER I P PETIT]
A few punning devices occur among the early English printers, but they are not always clever or pictorially successful. The earliest example is that of Richard Grafton, whose pretty device represents a tun with a grafted tree growing through it, the motto, “Suscipite insertum verbum,” being taken from the Epistle to St. James (i., verse 21). John Day’s device, with the motto “Arise! for it is day,” is generally supposed to be an allusion to the Reformation as well as a pun on his name; tradition has it, however, that Day was accustomed to awake his apprentices, when they had prolonged their slumbers beyond the usual hour, by the wholesome application of a scourge and the summons “Arise! for it is day.” We may also mention the devices of Hugh Singleton, a single tun; and of W. Middleton, a tun with the letter W at bottom and M in the centre of the tun; of T. Pavier, in which, appropriately enough, we have a pavior paving the streets of a town, and surrounded by the motto “Thou shalt labour till thou return to dust.” Thomas Woodcock employed a device of a cock on a stake, piled as for a Roman funeral, with the motto “Cantabo Iehovæ quia benefecit”; Andrew Lawrence, a St. Andrew cross.
[Illustration: JACQUES DU PUYS.]