DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.30695#0261
JRomej 1476.] BIBLICAL COMMENTATORS.
163
he says, the copies upon vellum only are desirable. See his Bibliogr.
Instruct. vol. i. n°. 34. Maittaire Annal. Typog. vol. i. p. 311, has abrief
and uninteresting aceount. Laire, Spec. Hist. Typog. Roman. p. 177, is
less particular than in his Index Libror. vol. i. p. 247: in the former,
hovvever, he notices five copies of the work, in different libraries in Italy.
Masch in the Bibl. Sacra, vol. iii. pt. ii. p. 360 is less copious than Au-
diffredi: Edit. Roman. p. 81, 93, and Braun, Not. Hist. Lit. deLibris, &c.
pt. i. p. 140-3. In the Bibl. Soubise, n°. 238, there was a copy divided
into seven volumes : in this catalogue it is justly saidtliat ‘ tlie present
is the first printed commentary of the Scriptures.’ Panzer, vol. ii. p.
426, 429, briefly refers to the foregoing authorities.
63. Johannes de Turrecremata. Expositio
super Psalterio. Printed hy Lupus Gallus.
Lojne. 14^6. Folio.
The present is the sixth edition, in the order observed by Panzer,
of the once popular exposition of the Psalms by John de Turrecremata.
The first impression appeared at Rome by Udalricus Gallus, or Ulric
Han, brother to tlie printer of the present edition, in the year 1470
and not fewer than fourteen editions succeeded the one of which we are
treating, before the expiration of the fifteenth century. In regard to
the intrinsic merit of the work, Seelen thus warily observes : ‘ De ipsa
expositione pro ratione studii, quod sseculis fuit barbaris, exegetici
erit judicandum. Est enim nihil aliud, quam nuda, eademque satis
ieiuna, Versionis Psalmorum Vulgatse paraphrasis.’ Selecta Litteraria;
1726, Svo. p. 555. Yet the author, according to the same authority,
has been numbered by Ghilinus, Antonius, and Schottus, among the
* lumina suse setatis.’ Ibid.
The following description of the volume will be found somewhat
Bil'liogr. Libror. in Bibl, Cces. Reg. et Equest. Acad. Theresiana; Vienn. l8ol, 4to. p.
55. An English translation of theworkis mentioned in thecatalogue of Mr. Ogle’s books,
(bookseller) 1811, in five volumes. This latter is very uncommon.
* Audiffredi, Edit. Rom. p. 43, is somewhat more particular in his account of this first
impression, than of the one above described. He observes that what (Laire, Spec. Hist.
Typog. Rom, p. 152) has said ofUlric Han being deserted this year (1470 ‘ mense
Octobri’) by Campanus, on account of a deficiency of materials for printing—‘merae sunt
hariolatior.es, nullo in pretio habendae.’ Be Bure, Bibliogr. Inslruct. vol. i. no. 141, had
erroneously conceived the Mentz edition of 1474 to have been the first of Turrecremata’s
Exposition of the Psalms.
163
he says, the copies upon vellum only are desirable. See his Bibliogr.
Instruct. vol. i. n°. 34. Maittaire Annal. Typog. vol. i. p. 311, has abrief
and uninteresting aceount. Laire, Spec. Hist. Typog. Roman. p. 177, is
less particular than in his Index Libror. vol. i. p. 247: in the former,
hovvever, he notices five copies of the work, in different libraries in Italy.
Masch in the Bibl. Sacra, vol. iii. pt. ii. p. 360 is less copious than Au-
diffredi: Edit. Roman. p. 81, 93, and Braun, Not. Hist. Lit. deLibris, &c.
pt. i. p. 140-3. In the Bibl. Soubise, n°. 238, there was a copy divided
into seven volumes : in this catalogue it is justly saidtliat ‘ tlie present
is the first printed commentary of the Scriptures.’ Panzer, vol. ii. p.
426, 429, briefly refers to the foregoing authorities.
63. Johannes de Turrecremata. Expositio
super Psalterio. Printed hy Lupus Gallus.
Lojne. 14^6. Folio.
The present is the sixth edition, in the order observed by Panzer,
of the once popular exposition of the Psalms by John de Turrecremata.
The first impression appeared at Rome by Udalricus Gallus, or Ulric
Han, brother to tlie printer of the present edition, in the year 1470
and not fewer than fourteen editions succeeded the one of which we are
treating, before the expiration of the fifteenth century. In regard to
the intrinsic merit of the work, Seelen thus warily observes : ‘ De ipsa
expositione pro ratione studii, quod sseculis fuit barbaris, exegetici
erit judicandum. Est enim nihil aliud, quam nuda, eademque satis
ieiuna, Versionis Psalmorum Vulgatse paraphrasis.’ Selecta Litteraria;
1726, Svo. p. 555. Yet the author, according to the same authority,
has been numbered by Ghilinus, Antonius, and Schottus, among the
* lumina suse setatis.’ Ibid.
The following description of the volume will be found somewhat
Bil'liogr. Libror. in Bibl, Cces. Reg. et Equest. Acad. Theresiana; Vienn. l8ol, 4to. p.
55. An English translation of theworkis mentioned in thecatalogue of Mr. Ogle’s books,
(bookseller) 1811, in five volumes. This latter is very uncommon.
* Audiffredi, Edit. Rom. p. 43, is somewhat more particular in his account of this first
impression, than of the one above described. He observes that what (Laire, Spec. Hist.
Typog. Rom, p. 152) has said ofUlric Han being deserted this year (1470 ‘ mense
Octobri’) by Campanus, on account of a deficiency of materials for printing—‘merae sunt
hariolatior.es, nullo in pretio habendae.’ Be Bure, Bibliogr. Inslruct. vol. i. no. 141, had
erroneously conceived the Mentz edition of 1474 to have been the first of Turrecremata’s
Exposition of the Psalms.