DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.30697#0341
Without Bate.] GASPARINUS PERGAM.
S33
700. Gasparinus Pergamensis. TVithout Name
of Printer, Place, or Date. Folio.
At the first glance of this book, we recognise what we should con-
sider to be the printing of Adam de Ambergau, or rather of Florentius de
Argentina: see vol. ii. p. 322: but a perusal of the colophon convinces
us of the contrary. This impression has been overlooked by all the
French bibliographers, since no account of it will be found in Panzer’s
Annal. Typog. vol. ii. p. 269 ; and vol. iv. p. 132, 395. It is evidently
not a production of the press of Gering, Crantz, and Friburger; how-
ever the prefatory epistle of Fichetus, according to the entire extract
of it. by Chevillier, p. 40-1, is precisely the same as that incorporated in
the impression of Gering, &c. It may follow, therefore, that this
edition is only a copy of some previous Parisian impression: but it may
no less follow, that all the Parisian impressions are reprints of some
ancient one executed in Germany; since we find this passage, about the
middle of the prefatory epistle ;
.Nam preter
alias complures litterarum grauiores iacturas hac etiam
acceperut ut librariorum uiciis effecte pene barbare
uideant At uero maxime letor hanc pestem tua proui-
detia tandem eliminari procul a parisiorum luteria .*
Etenim quos ad hac urbem e tua germania librarios
asciuisti q emendatos libros ad exemplaria reddunt
Idq; tute macto studio conaris . ut ne ullum qdem
opus ab illis prius exprimatur q sit a te coactis exem-
plaribus multis castigatu litura multa 8cc.
The reader may draw his own conclusion. Nor will it follow, because
Lapidanus was at the head of the Sorbonne Academy, that he should
not liave superintended the printing of the edition under description.
The colophon seems to bear this meaning. We proceed to a brief, yet
perspicuous, description.
The reverse of the first leaf is occupied by the prefatory epistle just
mentioned, which has this prefix :
* Sic.
S33
700. Gasparinus Pergamensis. TVithout Name
of Printer, Place, or Date. Folio.
At the first glance of this book, we recognise what we should con-
sider to be the printing of Adam de Ambergau, or rather of Florentius de
Argentina: see vol. ii. p. 322: but a perusal of the colophon convinces
us of the contrary. This impression has been overlooked by all the
French bibliographers, since no account of it will be found in Panzer’s
Annal. Typog. vol. ii. p. 269 ; and vol. iv. p. 132, 395. It is evidently
not a production of the press of Gering, Crantz, and Friburger; how-
ever the prefatory epistle of Fichetus, according to the entire extract
of it. by Chevillier, p. 40-1, is precisely the same as that incorporated in
the impression of Gering, &c. It may follow, therefore, that this
edition is only a copy of some previous Parisian impression: but it may
no less follow, that all the Parisian impressions are reprints of some
ancient one executed in Germany; since we find this passage, about the
middle of the prefatory epistle ;
.Nam preter
alias complures litterarum grauiores iacturas hac etiam
acceperut ut librariorum uiciis effecte pene barbare
uideant At uero maxime letor hanc pestem tua proui-
detia tandem eliminari procul a parisiorum luteria .*
Etenim quos ad hac urbem e tua germania librarios
asciuisti q emendatos libros ad exemplaria reddunt
Idq; tute macto studio conaris . ut ne ullum qdem
opus ab illis prius exprimatur q sit a te coactis exem-
plaribus multis castigatu litura multa 8cc.
The reader may draw his own conclusion. Nor will it follow, because
Lapidanus was at the head of the Sorbonne Academy, that he should
not liave superintended the printing of the edition under description.
The colophon seems to bear this meaning. We proceed to a brief, yet
perspicuous, description.
The reverse of the first leaf is occupied by the prefatory epistle just
mentioned, which has this prefix :
* Sic.