Imágenes de páginas

He called himself, and his son continued the name, Æpinus; and, though he is, of course, often named by various writers, I know of only one place beside this where I have seen him designated Hepinus. (4.) I may as well plainly express my suspicion that the work is not genuine, and that some of our countrymen had a hand in the matter. That Æpinus was known to some of them who would not have hesitated to borrow his name, is beyond doubt, for he was over in this country in the year 1534. Some of his works were subsequently translated into English, and it is in one of those English translations alone that I find him called Hepinus. John Day, it seems, printed without date, “ A

very fruitful and godly exposition vpon the 15 psalm of David called, Lord who shall dwell in thy tabernacle.

Made by John Epinus, preacher to the church of Ham"borough, and translated into English by N. L. 8vo.” 4

* doctrinæ ignari, defendebant Papisticos errores : tandem etiam ex car'cere eductum, compulit me e patria commigrare, apud externos sedes

quærere, et apud'ignotos in exilio agere, et cum multis ac magnis difficultatibus luctari, ubi ob adversariorum pertinax odium et cupidi* tatem mihi nocendi, etiam coactus sum mutare gentilitium nomen, et juxta piissimorum, doctissimorum, ac prudentissimorum virorum consilium, pro teutonico gentilitio nomine Hück (quod et Hüch a multis

effertur, et scribitur) Græca voce ait elvds uti, quæ magis congruere • videbatur, et quæ tantum uno, aut ad summum immutatis duobus

elementis, Germanice gentilitium nomem meum sonat, quod adhuc re'tineo quod omnibus passim notius sit."-(Sig. A. iv.) A good deal of curious matter respecting him may be found in the Philocalia Epistolica of J. H. a Seelen. p. 8–27.

4 Herbert's Ames, vol. i. p. 673. This is the only instance in which I have observed his name without the diphthong, except in Sleidan’s Comm. Lib. xxi. p. 658, and, by the way, in Le Courayer's translation (vol. ii. p. 30) he stands in the text as “ Jean Repin," a blunder which is not corrected in the biographical note professing to give an account of him. As to this book of his, there seems to be some little puzzle about it, as about everything connected with this question. Bauer (Bib. Lib. Rar. Supp. Tom. i. p. 21) thus describes the work of which that mentioned by Herbert is a translation ;-—"Æpini (Joh.) in Psalmum XV. Commentarius, in quo de iustificatione, de vita christiani hominis, de votis et iuramentis, de consuetudine impiorum vitanda, de contractibus '&c. agitur - Recens nunc primum æditus. Argentor. 1543. Liber perrarus, &c.” Now the book from which I have just quoted a part of the dedication, is bis commentary on the XIX. Psalm. It bears the date of Frankfort, 1545, (two years, that is, later than this Strasburgh edition of the Commentary on the XV. Psalm,) and yet in that same epistle to the Marquis Joachim, he professes that he is dedicating to his highness the first fruits of his labours in the way of commentary on the

And Henry Bynneman printed at London, in 1570, a book entitled “ De arte concionandi formulæ, vt breues, ita doctæ .et piæ. Joanne Reuchlino Phorcensi, Anonymo quodam rhapsodo, Philippo Melancthone, D. Ioanne Hepino *Autoribus," &c.

But enough has been said about this author, and his works; especially considering that our only question is, whether a certain book on the Impostures of the Romish Church, circulated under his name, was (whether genuine or spurious) printed at Hamburgh. If it really was, the production of it seems to have been an effort from which the press of that city did not soon recover. Of six subsequent years, Psalms, in terms which make it impossible to believe that he had published a similar commentary on a different psalm two years before. After stating various reasons for publishing, he proceeds: " Hæc et plura alia, quæ hic prolixius persequi nolo, induxerunt me ut illis morem gererem qui a me contendebant meas annotatiunculas in Psalmos in nostra schola dictatas, edendas esse ut etiam in illorum manus venirent, quibus non 'fuit data facultas eas coram audire aut calamo excipere, et præcipue commentarium in Psalmum XIX. His monitoribus cum permiserim ut commentariolus in Psalmum xix. Typographo ad imprimendum darentur

... constitui inscribere ac dedicare eum Illustr. tvæ Cels. ..... .Hic commentarius cum omnium primum sit, quem ipse publicaverim, 'tuaque Celsitudo meæ patriæ Princeps sit . jure quodam videor

me debere T. Cels. has primitias mearum lucubrationum,” &c.Sig. bb. ij. It is possible that there may be some force in the “ipse publicaverim,” and that he may refer to things with which he had, or bad not, some connexion, being published by others with his name ; but the whole style of the dedication is not what we should expect from a Superintendent of Hamburgh who had fifteen years before printed a book against the Church of Rome in his own city; and whether he did that, or whether somebody else did it for him, is our question. The reader is requested to remember this, and not to fall into the idea that I am attempting to deny that a book with that title, or something like it, and bearing the name of Æpinas, or Hepinus, was in circulation. Bauer, in his work already quoted, places among the works of Æpinus, “ Pinacidion de Ecclesiæ Rom. imposturis, adversus impudentem Canonicorum Hamburg autonomiam 1530. Liber rarissimus. Hennings, p. 17.” It is worth while to add, that he mentions in the same list another work which does not seem to have been known to Melchior Adam or Simlerat least it is not in their lists—"Liber de Purgatorio, et multi alii ejusdem auctoris tractatus. Lond. 1549. 4. Liber maxime infrequens. Bibl. Solger, ii. p. 169." A copy of this work is also mentioned in the Bibl. Bunav. Tom. III. p. ii. p. 1265. It is surely somewhat remarkable that the only edition of this work that is known at all (while none seems to have been known to countrymen of his own who gave lists of his works) should bear the name of London as its birth-place.

s Herbert's Ames, vol. ii. p. 970.

Panzer finds not a word to say. We do not hear of so much as a single book said, or (what is, indeed, all that he has yet had to offer us since the year 1491) even supposed to have been printed at Hamburgh. But after that how does the torrent of typography burst forth! Panzer reports no less than four several and independent works as belonging to that annus mirabilis 1536. His statement is as follows ;

“MDXXXVI. “3. STEPHANI Wintoniensis Episcopi, de vera obedientia Oratio. Cum præfatione Edmundi Boneri, Archidiaconi Leycestrensis, Sereniss. Reg. Mai. Angliae in Dania Legati, capita notabiliora dictae orationis complectente. In qua etiam ostenditur, causam controversiae, quae inter ipsam Regiam Maiestatem et Episcopum Romanum existit longe aliter ac diversius se habere, quam hactenus a vulgo putatum sit. Hamburgi, 1536. 4.

von der Hardt, l. c. 11. p. 194. "4. Psalmus XLVII, de regno Jesu Christi doctore Urbano Regio interprete. Hamburgi, anno 1536. apud Franc. Rhodum Calendis Septembris 8.

Maitt. Ind. 1. p. 337. Hirsch. Millen. IV. p. 58. Bibl. Schw. iun.

"5. Psalmus octuagesimus septimus de gloriosa Christi ecclesia D. Joachim. Moller Senatori Hamb. dicatus, cum commentario D. Urbani Regii. Hamburgi in officina Francisci Rhodi 1536 mense Octobri. 8.

Hirsch. Millen. IV. p. 58. Bibl. Schw. iun. “6. Canticum et Ecclesiastes cum Sect. Bibl. et Psalt. hebr. Occurrunt in Parte II. Machazor germ. Hamburgi 1536. fol. " Cl. De Rossi apparat. Hebraeo-Bibl. p. 65. n. 120. Masch. Bibl.

Sacr. Vol. IV. Suppl. p. 18.” But magnificent as this statement appears, half of it is disposed of by observing that the first article is the book of Bishop Gardiner, which is the subject of our inquiry; and the fourth is by Panzer's own direction to be expunged. It seems a pity to rob a place which has so little to spare, of the glory of printing a Hebrew book ; but if, while such persons as Wolfius and Masch dispute, such another as De Rossi decides that the book was not printed there, but at Augsburgh, what can we do 6? So there remain only these two commentaries on two Psalms by Urbanus Regius; of which

6 In his Supplement, (vol. ix. p. 473,) Panzer says, in reference to this matter, “Non Hamburgi sed Augustæ Vindelicorum impressum fuisse bunc librum docet Cl. de Rossi, l. c. p. 37, n. 238. Deleatur ergo hic."

it would be needless to say anything but that the author was a favourite with the English Reformers, and that several of his works (whether any of them were printed at Hamburgh or not) were translated into English, and printed in this country?. It will be observed, that these books of Urbanus Regius, like Bishop Gardiner's, are ascribed to the press of Franciscus Rhodus; a printer of whom, as far as I have been able to find, there is no other memorial whatsoover. He is, therefore, a very fit successor to John and Thomas Brocard, and, I suspect, one of the same inscrutable family.

But taking matters as they stand, the history of Hamburgh typography up to, and including, the time when Bishop Gardiner's work is said to have been printed there, is this :- The book of Laudes in 1491–Tyndale's Testament, supposed, 1527--Hepinus's book, supposed, 1530— Gardiner's and two of Urbanus Regius, actually said to be 1536. This is the history as far, at least, as it was known to Panzer.

There might be books printed of which he knew nothing; and, on the other hand, books which he supposed to exist, may have been only imaginary. His list for any given city or town may, it is granted, be either defective or redundant, but we must take one with another; and certainly Hamburgh was not so much out of the ken of the Pastor of

p. 664,

? It would be tedious to enter into details, but it may be worth while to give one or two extracts from Herbert's Ames. “ The Sermon which Christ made on the way to Emaus to those two sorrowfull disciples, set downe in a dialogue by D. Urbane Regius," with “A brefe ingresse to the Christian Reader by John Foxe,” printed by John Day, 1578. Herb.

“A Declaration of the twelue articles of the Christen fayth"

“by D. Urbanum Regium, printed by Jugge, 1548.” Herb. 714. "An Instruccyon of Christen fayth . . . . made by Vrbanus Regius .. dedicated by J. Fox the translator, to his reuerende and singular good father Ric Melton,'” printed by Hugh Singleton without date. Herb.744. " The olde Learnyng and the new compared together, newly corrected and augmented by Wyllyam Turner. Translated from Urban Regius." Printed by Stoughton, 1548. Herb. 750. “A lytle Treatise after the maner of an Epistle wryten by the famouse Clerk Doctor Vrbanus Regius," &c., printed by Walter Lynne, 1548. Herb. 753. “ Solace of Sion, and Joy of Jerusalem," &c., being an exposition on the 87th psalm (that is, the work mentioned in the text)" by Vrbanus Regius : translated by Rich. Robinson.” Printed by Richard Jones, 1594. Herb. 1049. "A homelie or sermon of the good and euill Angell,” &c., by Urbanus Regius, translated by Rich Robinson. Printed by Jolin Charlwood, 1590. Herb. 1101.

Nuremberg as many of the places from which he gives much more numerous lists of books printed in the first thirty-six years of the sixteenth century. It would, of course, be absurd to expect from Hamburgh anything like the fecundity of Paris, which furnishes 2839 articles, or of Venice with 1959, or Basil with 1121. Panzer, however, could find at Leipsic, 965 ; at Lyons, 866; at Cologne, 859; Strasburgh, 808; and (not to speak of places where the numbers are so far beyond all comparison) he found at Cracow 283, and even at Thessalonica, he gleaned more than four times as many as at Hamburgh.8

But after so much talk about Bonner's Preface, I cannot help thinking some readers may like to see it. It is not long, and perhaps they may gain some farther ground of opinion from internal evidence. The following is the English translation as it stands in the Roane edition":

“ Archedeacon of Leicester, the king
of England his most excellent ma-
iesties embassadour in Denmarke.
"To the sincere, gentle herted,

and godly Reader. “Forasmuch as ther be som (doubtles) euen at this present, as it hath alwaies bene the wont of mens iudgementes to be variable and diuerse, which thinke, the controuersy that is betwne the kyng of England and of Fraunce his most roial maiestie and the bishop of Rome, consisteth in this point, Because the Kynges said maiestie hath taken the most excellent and most noble lady Anne to his wife : where as in very dede notwithstanding, the matter is far otherwise, and nothing so. Wherfore, to the intent al that truly and heartelye fauour the Gospell of Christ (which that most godly and most vertuous prince, doth with al diligent endeuour, in euery place aduance, to the honour of almightie God, and to the profuyt and commoditie of al christian people) and that are not enemies, but louers of the truth (which euery where iustly claimeth the vpper hand, and to her, althinges, though thei struggle with her neuer so much in the beginning, yet obey and geue place at length as mete it is thei shoulde) mai the more fully vnderstand the chief point of that controuersy, and because thei shal not be ignorant, what the whole voyce and resolute determinacion of the best and greatest

8 These numbers are taken cursorily from the first list of places, without reference to supplemental additions, by which they might have been very considerably increased ; which is not the case as it regards Hamburgh.

9 There are several trifling variations between this and the Rome edition of the preface. But I do not know that there are any of im. portance.

« AnteriorContinuar »