The present work was undertaken early in 1889, and is an attempt to describe in detail the products and working of the Oxford Press in its early days. Though eclipsed by the glories of the later University Press, the first period, included in this book, has a natural importance of its own. The Fifteenth and early Sixteenth Century presses^[1] are necessarily of interest, and when printing became firmly established in 1585 it began to reflect faithfully the current tendencies of thought and study in the University. Theology is predominant, animated on its controversial side with fierce opposition to the Church of Rome, but the quieter fields of classical work are well represented, and side by side is seen an increasing study of English literature. Of lighter books there are few, and of chapbooks perhaps only one (1603, no. 5).

The most important works produced at Oxford between 1585 and 1640 were Richard de Bury’s Philobiblon (1599), Wycliff’s treatises (1608), capt. John Smith’s Map of Virginia (1612), Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy (1621, &c.), Field on the Church (1628, &c.), Sandys’ translations of Ovid’s Metamorphoses (1633), the University Statutes (1634), Chaucer’s Troilus and Cressida in English and Latin (1635), Chillingworth’s Religion of Protestants (1638), and Bacon’s Advancement and Proficience of Learning, in English (1640: see frontispiece). There are of course many books on logic, philosophy and the like, intended for the University curriculum, and many collections of the rhetorical poems by which the University was expected to condole or rejoice with every change in the royal estate. 180 pages of mechanical grief at Elizabeth’s death in 1603 are at once followed by 200 pages of equally mechanical congratulations to James I: and the metrical tears dropped in turn on the grave of the latter monarch in March 1625, are in May succeeded with indecorous haste by songs of joy on the marriage of his successor. Some volumes of English poems and plays occur, by Skelton, Nicholas Breton, Churchyard, Fitz-Geffrey, Randolph, Cartwright, Fletcher, and others, and a few still lighter pieces, such as a Masque at Richmond, partly in Wiltshire dialect, and “Bushell’s Rock,” both in 1636. There are traces of the study of Spanish, French and Welsh, as well as of Latin and Greek; and an attempt to introduce phonetic writing and spelling was made by Charles Butler in 1633 and 1634. Even theological disputes are lightened by the solemn account of certain Jesuits in the East, who dressed up a carcase as that of a queen recently deceased, obtained much glory from the miracles it wrought, until the real corpse arrived and the priests vacated the vicinity (1633, Gregorius). There is something surprising in Oxford being chosen as the printing-place of a book to persuade mothers to nurse their own children (1622, Clinton); and an episcopal alchemist is not often to be met with in real life (1621, Thornborough). It is less to be wondered at that a college which had leased land to Queen Elizabeth for a quiet five thousand years, should try to be relieved of its agreement within fifty (1623, Oxford).

There is no need of a general history of the University Press at this time, as distinguished from the annals which the Appendixes of this work present. The printers were privileged members of the University, and occasionally printed “cum privilegio,” but there is little to invest their personal proceedings with importance. Though it is true that money was advanced in 1585 by the Earl of Leicester, Chancellor of the University, to set up Joseph Barnes with a new press, and that the charter of privileges in 1632 gave the University direct control of the printing, there are as yet few signs of actual academical patronage or interference, and the failures and successes of the printers and publishers, which can be traced in detail in Appendixes C and F, are the ordinary fluctuations of trade. Nor can the Oxford press at this time claim much connexion with the greater world of the English Court or Church. After it was placed on a permanent footing by the Earl of Leicester, its one great patron and protector within our period was Archbishop Laud, who occupied a similar position to that of Bishop Fell at a later period in the same century.

The year 1640 has been chosen as the inferior limit of this bibliography, partly because both the British Museum Catalogue of early English books and Arber’s Transcript of the Registers of the Stationers’ Company stop at that point, partly because the interest in the products of the press as such was found to be rapidly diminishing, and partly in consequence of the break-up of all quiet progress during the convulsions of the Rebellion, combined with the dismal prospect of that trackless wilderness—the literature of the Civil War.

The present bibliography presents, it is believed, four features of novelty:—the better representation of the titlepage by the use of Roman and Italic capitals as well as ordinary type; the mention of the chief type used in each book; the furnishing of the first words of certain pages, to facilitate the identification of imperfect copies; and the insertion of actual pages^[2] of books printed at Oxford, selected from works which are cheap and common. These points are explained and discussed in a paper on Method in Bibliography, printed at pp. 91–106 of vol. 1 of the Transactions of the Bibliographical Society (1893), to which the reader is referred, if he wishes to see a fuller account of the whole aim and method of the present book.

The best thanks of the writer are due for general help to Mr. E. Gordon Duff, Librarian of the John Rylands (late Spencer) Library at Manchester, to Mr. F. J. H. Jenkinson, Librarian of the Cambridge University Library, and to Mr. W. H. Allnutt of the Bodleian: but especially to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press both for undertaking on liberal terms a work which can scarcely prove remunerative, and for enabling the Oxford Historical Society to supply copies to its members, as vol. xxix, at a price far below its actual cost^[3]. Mr. Horace Hart, the Controller of the Press, has taken a warm personal interest in the printing, and any merits of form which may be found are due to his experience and to the co-operation of his compositors. Nothing, however, can relieve the writer of responsibility for the errors and shortcomings which will be detected; and he can only plead that it is better to bring out an imperfect book, if it is a useful one and the result of hard work, than, by straining after an unattainable completeness, to delay indefinitely its publication.

Minor Points.

Dates. The books classed under a given year, such as 1615, are necessarily such as were issued between 25 March 1615 and 24 March 1616, since no means exist for dividing them according to the historical year. In recording a date between Jan. 1 and March 24, the form used is invariably the double one, such as 23 Feb. 1615
6, by which is implied what we understand by 23 Feb. 1616.

Numbers of books. Some notes on the number of books printed at Oxford will be found on p. 291, and of books printed or published at Oxford on p. 292, among the Notanda.

References. The usual style of reference throughout the book (including index) is to the year followed by the initial letter of the particular heading; as 1634 C, when the reference is to no. 9 on p. 177 (Cosin). A few references will be found in the earlier pages to years beyond 1640, made before it was decided to close the work at that year.

Titles. The heading usually presents the author’s name in the form by which he is generally known to posterity, as “James ii, king,” although at the time of the book referred to he was prince James.