John Bagford

From Whiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

read this --> Michelle Warren, “Philology in Ruins”


An Essay on the Invention of Printing, by Mr. John Bagford; with an Account of his Collections for the same, by Mr. Humfrey Wanley (January 1706)

An essay, towards a historical treatise, on that most universally famous, as well as useful art of typography, by John Bagford (1707)

John Bagford and His Collections, by W. Y. Fletcher, Transactions of the Bibliographical Society (1898)

Bagford -- brought up as a shoemaker; believed to have written "Art of Shoemaking and Historicall Account of Clouthing of ye foot," Harley manuscripts

employed by Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, Sir Hans Sloane, and John Moore, Bishop of Ely

participated in 1707 in founding of Society of Antiquaries

amassed two great collections: ballads (Bagford Ballads), and collection of title pages, fragments of books, specimens of paper, catalogues, book-plates, drawing, engravings, bindings, advertisements, and various interesting and curious pieces"

was going to write a history of printing; 1707, published "Proposals for printing an Historical Account of that most universally celebrated, as well as useful Art of Typography

this proposal is printed on a half-sheet, with a Life of William Caxton, first printer in the Abbey of Westminster and a list of his books

at the end of this article is "A Rough List of the Contents of the Bagford Collection," by A. W. Pollard -- "the following rough list of the contents of each of the volumes in its present form has been drawn up under my superintendence, in order that search may be facilitated, and a better idea obtained of the collection as a whole. In fairness, however, to Bagford, it must be stated that the collection as it now exists is only a shadow of its former self, nearly all of the most valuable prints and complete printed documents in it having been removed and separately catalogued." (143) -- Pollard divides his list into Printed Fragments and Manuscripts

Bagford's Notes on Bookbinding, by Cyril Davenport (1903)

Wanley describes Bagford's collection in Philosophical Transactions; later by A. W. Pollard

1707, Bagford attempts to secure subscriptions to his history of printing (with help of Sloane and Wanley); outline of project printed in Philosophical Transactions 1706-7 and in "Proposals for printing an historical account of that most universally celebrated, as well as useful art of typography," a pamphlet to attract subscribers with life of Caxton attached

"Of booke binding ancient" (Harl. 5910 f 131 a) -- vellum rolls and waxen diptychs; boards, pasteboards, boards made of old ropes, and sewing and headbandings; chained books are condemned

"Of Booke binding modourne" - explains processes of collating, folding, beating the leaves, ruling the books with red; at beginning of Harl 5943 are 20 pgs of thick blue paper, pasted with various speciens of bindings and MS notes; Bagford's handwritten notes on pg 8-9; "some [bindings] may have been added since, but none have been taken away" (126)

Notes on a Leaf, by Carl Bühler (1945)

points out that the Caxton leaf of Blanchardin and Eglatine (ca 1489) in Bagford's collections seems to be printer's waste; it doesn't match the Rylands Library copy, which indicates it was never meant for a printed book was instead waste used for binding

Bagford and Sloane, by Margaret Nickson (1983)

Bagford's business was well underway by the 1690s

Sloane as a custome; name "Bagf[ord]" inscribed in Sloane's hand on the flyleaves of two medial manuscripts acq around 1700 (Slaone 292 and 297)

Around 1703, John Jackson (Pepys's nephew) wrote to Bagford saying he understood B had taken Sloane to see some Italian MSS in hands of a shoemaker (51)

Bagford's account book -- Harley 5998, vols. 6, 9, 11v, 16v, 79

Caxton's second edition of the Canterbury Tales (IB.55095 in BL) was acquired by Sloane from Bagford

Sloane 885, 893, and 923 were acquired by Sloane from Bagford -- all contain notes by Bagford on the history of books

Summer 1704, Sloane and Bagford went to Bunhill Fields to see "printing and card-making" -- in Sloane 4039, fol. 330, and printed in Fletcher 1898, pp. 189-90.

1707: Bagford ready to produce his Proposals for printing 6 May 1707: Wanley wrote to Sloane of Bagford's design June 1707: Bagford's essay and Wanley's letter were published in Phil. Trans., through Sloane, who was then secretary

Sloane MS 1435, "Papers of Mr Bagford relating to printing", acq about end of 1707 -- Sloane included them in a misc volume numbered MS 1317; also included is "and early draft of the 'Essay' in the form of two letters in Bagford's hand. These are neither dated nor addressed but were obviously intended for perusal by Sloane and Wanley. In addition to material used in the 'Essay' they contain a description by Bagford of the source of his 'specimens' which is of great interest, not least because it helps to refute the charge of 'biblioclasm' made against him in the last century." (Nickson 1983, p. 52) Nickson transcribes some of these notes.

Sloane 1106, formerly MS. 997, is a collection made by Bagford relating to the history of London, acq by Sloane

Sloane MS. 932, "Samples of parchment papers & writings of severall hands", now Sloane 3972B, fol. 59?

Other Sloane acq from Bagford:

MS. 975 [now A. 798]. Prints of the ancient ways of writing, specimens of old hands MS. 976 [now A. 799]. Specimens of ancient books in MS. & printed MS. 977 [now A. 200]. Collections out of books relating to printing, old printed books MS. 978 [now A. 800]. Specimens of writing on vellum, ancient books

One Bagford collection acquired by Sloane included a Gutenberge fragment

John Bagford as Collector and Disseminator of Manuscript Fragments, by Milton McC. Gatch (1985)

detailed bibliographical account of various Bagfordian collections and their locations

Two volumes: fragmenta manuscripta at Unniversity of Missour at columbia, Fragmenta varia at Cambridge; deposited around 1707 in Thomas Tenison's library with invitation to interested persons to inspect the materials; "Re-bound and re-mounted in the mid-nineteenth century, the Fragmenta manuscripta and Fragmenta varia were sold to separate buyers when the Tenison library was broken up in 1861; and both passed through the hands of several different owners before reaching their present repositories." (95)

Bagford "famous (or infamous -- depending on one's view of how he got his materials) mainly as a collector of title-pages from printed books" -- at least 544 pre-1701 items in Bagford's title page collection that aren't in STC

article is about how Bagford obtained his mss and fragments

"The fact that Bagford deposited the Fragmenta manuscripta and varia in the Tenison library as a kind of advertisement for his history of printing may suggest that, in addition to selling fragments in the usual market, he made gifts of fragment collections or sold them to potential patrons." (97)

see spreadsheets for more on mss and Bagfordiana tracked by Gatch

see Gatch also for list of subscribers to Bagford's project to complete a history of printing; account book at MS Harley 5998 helps verify information from subscribers; also includes at fol. 104 a printed blank form for subscribers to fill out

at MS Harley 5910.iii, fol 120, is "Of Several sorts of Ink not only used to write with; but Printers Ink", where Bagford "acknowledges his indebtedness as a collector to the respected bookseller Christopher Bateman --

"at all times hath given me the liberty of looking over when he hath bought any parcels, & for his time he hath had more good and valuable books pass through his hands than all the Booksellers in England. Besides he always gave me notice when he had any waste boosk to sell, & freely gave me Liberty to take out of them what I thought fit, as the blank leaves at the beginning of them, old pieces of MSS, Titles, Frontispieces, borders, Printers' devies, & by this civility hath very much added to my collection." (qtd 107)

where did he get his fragments?

"As Bagford's own account would lead one to believe, the majority of his materials came from bookbindings. Bagford's friend Humfrey Wanley had understood the potential value of the pieces from manuscripts taht were frequently used in the bindings of books 'in former ages'; and, like Wanley, Bagford (who preserved a copy of Wanley's paper on the subject in one of his albums) saw nothing wrong with dismembering bindings to retrieve the leaves and strips of manuscript preserved therein. At least seven cases can be documented in which fragmenta from Bagford's collection come from the same manuscripts as fragmenta in other collections. In four of these instances, the non-Bagford fragmenta elsewhere cannot at present be connected with Bagford, and it is unlikely suhc a conneciton will be discovered." (108)

outlines other fragments that are connected to other fragments

"Making allowance for the standards of his time, one must probably conclude that John Bagford's own account of his acquisition of his collection is correct and that, with regard to manuscripts at least, he can be credited with having preserved fragments and leaves that would otherwise almost certainly have been lost. Most of his manuscript fragmenta came from bindings, and they derived from volumes that ahd been cut up in the sixteenth century. A few others came from codices that were almost certainly pillaged -- usually for their decorative pages -- before Bagford came into contact with them. The cases in which his activitie are most questionable concern leaves from already-damaged or partially incomplete mss, which Bagfrod may have removed before selling the manuscripts theemselves to two of his most distinguisehd patrons, Bishop Moore and Samuel Pepys. It is difficult to imagine, in view of the apparently high esteem in which those two patrons held him, however, that Bagford would have damaged books he was selling to Moore and Pepys in ways that would also have damaged his relationship with people on whom his livelihood depended." (114)

John Bagford, Bookseller and Antiquary, by Milton McC. Gatch (1986)

19c saw Bagford as a biblioclast, "yet balanced scholarship in the present century has found Bagford to be a credible dealer and collector, despite his manifest shortcomings" (150)

despite Dibdin's believe the Wanley must have edited Bagford's proposal for a history of printing, surviving evidence shows that "Bagford was very much in control of the composition and development of this descriptive advertisement for and sample of the history of printing" (161)

Gatch identifies mss of "Proposal"

"Despite all this evidence, it is difficult for a modern scholar to believe that Bagford could ever have produced a satisfactory history of the very difficult subject of the technology and bibliography of printing. Yet it is necessary to respect the opinion of contemporaries of the magnitude of Hearne, Sloane, and Wanley that the collection was an important one and that Bagford himself, despite his manifest limitations, was an impressive and learned figure." (161)

seems strange today to have title-pages as primary source for Bagford's research; but "it should be recalled that B's title-page collection contained some 3,600 items printed in English alone. Of these some 800 items -- 544 of them printed before 1701 -- are not recorded in the short-title catalogues" (164)

autograph memorandum from Bagford on history of printed editions of Chaucer's works; helped stimulate Urry's edition of 1721

Anthony Wood, John Bagford, and Thomas Hearne as Bibliographers, by T. A. Birrell, in Pioneers in Bibliography (1988)

Everyman and Others, Part I: Some Fragments of Early English Printing, and their Preservers, by Arthur Freeman (2008)

"The collection and preservation of fragments of rare printed books has undergone, perhaps appropriately, a patchy history. Fragmentay manuscripts (by contrast) have been tolerated, when textually useful, by collectors from Peisistratus of Athens and the librarians of Alexandria onwards, and scraps of early writing in various forms and media have been systematically assembled during the ensuing centuries by bibliophiles and curators. But the equivalents of such membra disiecta from the era of movable type boast no such tradition of valuedness or collectability, and have been regarded by most early-modern bookmen and bibliographers with disdain -- presumably because a complete exemplar might somewhere exist, or, if now unknown, might one day re-emerge. 'Imperfect', 'defective', 'incomplete', or 'fragmentary' printed works have long been relegated to the care of the scholarly or indigent collector (often one and the same) as merely second-rate goods, however evocative. Yet as resources dry up, and the scrutiny of what exists intensifies, such neglected material has come into its own." (267)

"In England the pioneer of fragment-collecting is usually considered to have been the bookseller John Bagford (1650-1715), who may sometimes have mutilated books to extract title-pages and colophons, advertisements, borders, woodcuts, and printers' marks" (268)

thinks Bagford's New History of Printing "was probably beyond his capacities, and even the selnder 'Essay' of 1707 cited above is said to have been 'drawn up by Wanley for Bagford'" 9269) -- quoting Dibdin; notes in the note that the two extant manuscript drafts of the Essay at odley are not in Bagford's hand

Hearne considered taking over Bagford's project on his death, wanted to buy Bagford's albums but Wanley snagged them for Harley; Hearne himself had a few collections of fragments, now at Bodleian

Caxton biographer John Lewis and Joseph Ames would take up task of writing a history of print; "Beginning in 1733, Ames, like Bagford, assembled his own large working collection of fragments -- title-pages 'from ANno 1474 to 1700', woodcut initial letters 'from the Beginning of printing', printers' devices and portraits, and 'a Collection of Paper Makers Marks found upon the most early Printers Books, both at Home and Abroad', many of hwich he arranged and mounted (alphabetically) by place of printing, or annotated with 'an Account to what Books they were used, and about what Time.'" (269) -- in posthumous sale of Ames' books (Langford, 5-13 May 1760), these were lots 1318-20, purchased by James West, President of the Royal Society; lot 1321, folio volume of 'Various Alphabets, Characters, and Inscriptions, used in divers Parts and Ages of the World,' fell to Horace Walpole and is now at the Lewis Walpole Library."

at West's sale (1773), ex-Ames material among lots 1913-20, "typographical history, antiquities, and fragments," which also included "Fragments of various Old English Bibles," etc., and "Various Fragments of old Black Letter Books, among which are many of the early Essays in the ARt of Printing" -- "perhaps not all from Ames's collection" -- although lot 1920 was; 7 large portfolios and 3 bundles containing thousands of title-pages, fragments of books and ms, porraits and devices of printers; was bought by Richard Bull, "a passionate print-collector and 'virtuoso of Grangerizing'" -- Freeman speculates that Bull took what he wanted for Grangerizing then disposed of the bulk in the trade -- since then, bulk of Ames material (+10000 fragments) at BL; see Pollard on it

after West's sale, volumes of loose papers and title-pages were presented to British Museum by Mileson Hingeston, bookseller and publisher at Temple Bar -- was it remainder of West's lots bought by Bull, after he had taken what he wanted

Sir John Fenn, editor of Paston letters; had "small but evocative collection of some 135 leaves or groups of leaves from 15 and 16c" (271); came to him from "dedicated but dodgy Norfolk antiquary 'Honest Tom' Martin of Palgrave" -- "Fenn later bound up his printed fragments in chronological order, together with his letters from herbert, as a supplementary fourth volume to his set ofHerbert's Typographical Antiquities; this subsequently resurfaced in the John Tudor Frere sale of 1896, lot 120" (271) -- now at State Library of Victoria at Melbourne

most of early fragment collectors "motivated by an interest in printing history ... or by editorial concerns, when scraps provided specific textual authority"; traditional bibliophiles "still shied away from such oddments"; but in late 18c "a new and special tolerance, or indeed affection for the ugly duckling ... found its quiet apostle in another of Herbert's bibliographical contributors, the Revd Francis Douce" (273)

Douce had a "truly hetrogeneous collections" -- "maintained what by now were traditional scrapbooks of title-pages, colophons, and printers' marks, woodcut images, and of course manuscript membra disiecta, but for the first time in British bibliophily he seemed also to pursue printed fragments not only as evidence of printing history, or (like Bagford, teste Wanley) as bibliographically accurate records of titles, but as specimens of literary text" (273) -- studied and annotated his fragments

Douce's books/mss bequeathed to Bodleian in 1834; 1841 catalogue talks of fragments pp 305-11 -- many important and unique artifacts of early English printing, including lines from first extant edition of English morality play, The Summoning of Everyman ,which would "soon reiet the attention of a new generation of students and editors of the early English drama," including John Payne Collier (275)

Philip Bliss; Frederic Madden visited him for tea in 1825 and noted his colelcting habits: quoting Madden, "This collection was made in the following manner. Whenever any of the College send their MSS. or old books to be rebound, the flyleaves & odd scraps are always torn off by the bookbinder & thrown away! Dr Bliss therefore made a bargain with the bookbinder, tht for every bundle of these old MSS. and bl.letter scraps the latter brought him, he (Dr B.) would give the man a pot of beer. In this manner he collected a vast number of curious articles." (atd 276)

William Stevenson Fitch, began scouring books at Ham House for fragments on flyleaves

"With Fitch in practice, and even with Dibdin in spirit, a new aspect of fragment-collecting had become apparent, if not conspicuous: potential cash value, highterto negligible or slight, save in bulk." 279

mid-century trade, many booksellers and dealers began keeping fragments in hopes of "making up" perfect copies with them; unintended bonus: we now have many rare pieces we otherwise wouldn't have

Collier book of fragments, as acquired by Frederick Hendriks and then Folger

James Orchard Halliwell-Phillipps; "Though not primarily concerned with unique or 'otherwise unprocurable' examples, Halliwell assembled many thousands of scraps of early books, usually through the grim expedient of dismembering or clipping passages from already imperfect copies of plays, dictionaries, chronicles, biographical compendia, lawbooks, and works on theatrical history -- but perhaps plundering some perfect but inexpensive volumes as well." (286)

"By the mid-19c our collectors and scholar-collectors had helps to inspire a new wave of bibliographers and librarians -- some of them essneitally 'non-collectors', but rather recorders, preservers, and students of fragments, who might explore their own institutional holdings for specimens, rather than haunt bookshops or comb auctions in search of them." (288)

"systematic investigation of binder's and printer's waste in Oxford's manu collections would await the advent, nearly a half-century later, of the young Robert Proctor" (288)

on cataloguing; under Panizzi's "91 rules" of cataloguing (1839), even the scrappiest fragment required the same descriptive attention [or more] than any complete book" (291) -- and rules for counting works or volumes in library didn't include fragments in total, so didn't add to holdings; cataloguing thus crucial part of why fragments don't get as much attention! (291)

Bagford and Ames material not included in General Catalogue of 1880-1905; Pollard's "rough Guide" was first inventory of the material (292) -- this isn't strictly speaking true; they are noted in Harley catalogues

Henry Bradshaw, second half of 19c, acquirer of early books for Cambridge University Library; known to occasionally take apart books (293); see Bradshaw's essay "Notice of a Fragment"

in Sayle, following Bradshaw rules in his catalogue (place and printer then date, instead of author title), fragments listed as "Another Copy" below substantial description -- so the "entire holding, rather than a choice of outstanding specimens, as in Bullen, found a permanent record among the 8,083 title-listings in Early English Printed Books in the UL, Cambridge, 1475-1640" (296)

William Carew Hazlitt examined Bagford and Ames collection of title pages (296)

Furnivall examined Bagford's ballad collection since the mid-1860s

Edward Gordon Duff examined it in 1889, writing to Francis Jenkinson that it was uncatalogued (299)

Robert Proctor; succeeded by friend A W Pollard after his early death; New Bibliographers (McKerrow, Greg, Chambers) later turned to drama and "for this group of students printed fragments, recorded or otherwise, possessed a special appea: perhaps no history of a literary genre is more dependent on the report of lost material and the existence of suggestive membra disiecta" (303)

of 42 16c editions of all pre-Elizabethan English printed drama identified by Greg, 10 are known only from fragments (303)

The Bagford Chapel Rules: A Set of English Printing House Regulations ca. 1686-1707, by Alan Boehm (2008)

generally thought that only 3 sets of English printing house regulations - "chapel rules" - have come down to us from period before 1800: from the Bowyer firm, written in a ledge book in late 1750s by William Bowyer; from Samuel Richardson's printing house, preserved in a broadsheet bearing date of 30 August 1734; and in Joseph Moxon's Mechanick Exercises -- se Boehm n1 for where to find these rules

4th "and practically unknown set of chapel rules from the period" preserved in Bagford title page collection, Harley 5915, f. 112; marked item 217 in the volume

"Unfortunately, the 'Orders' is something of a fragment. In its original state, the document's dimensions apparently exceeded the leaves of the volume into which it was pasted, and so to make the 'Orders' fit Bagford cropped the head, foot,a nd side margins, and he also cut away a strip of white space in the middle of the sheet between the last rule directed to compositors and the sub-headline over the press room rules (consequently, the 'orders' survives in two pieces and each bears a British museum stamp)." (137) <--probably not Bagford who did this; in the 1759 Harley catalogue, these are listed as "Porte-folios," and so were probably loose sheets

estimates the orders "likely originated no earlier than 1686"

concludes that Chapel Rules are on the whole similar to those found earlier -- same fines even persist, despite the fact that these rules are about 50 years before Bowyer rules; indications of printing as a conservative industry

Fortunate Survivors: Maps and Map Fragments in the Bagford Collection, by Tom Harper (2010)

Harley 5935; includes printed maps from books, 15-18c, and cuttings from maps, engravings of scientific instruments, and "at least three separately issued maps which are not known to exist elsewhere"

Harper says it is "one of 129 scrapbooks of prints put together by the antiquary and book dealer John Bagford" -- but possible this was not actually put together by him

"the composite nature of the collection, and Bagford's scholarly motivations for compiling it, implies a stronger affinity with leaf books and certain extra-illustrated volumes than the gatherings of traditional bibliophiles. Bagford's collection enables us not only to study prints which have not survived elsewhere, but to evaluate changing attitudes towards prints, books, and collecting." (2)

-- history of collection after Bagford's death especially show this

some printed materials moved to Dept of Printed Books in 1890; "suggests a particular impression of the Bagford Collection as somehow problematic, ill-suited or at worst irrelevant to the institution. It was, after all, made up largely of title-pages of books which the Museum either already owned or would subsequently purchase." (3)

unpacks history of 5935 -- but seems to write this from belief that Bagford pasted these down, when the 1759 catalogue has them as "porte-folios" of loose prints (see Griffiths on this); this would explain why one print has a British Museum stam on its verso -- but says paper is contemporary to Bagford (1707ish) -- doing a reading of juxtapositions, though, on the assumption that Bagford glued these materials down; did he?

some/many maps left behind when prints were removed to dept of prints -- "the impression is that the Department was simply not interested in maps, regardless of their rarity and execution" (3)

maps in 5935 are rare, but Bagford didn't necessarily know of their publishers; could simply be they both had arms of Charles V; "A simple approach to the contents of Harl.5935 may therefore be the best method of understanding its selection, its arrangement, and the mind of its compiler. Though he was interested in them, Bagford was not attempting to provide a historyo f printed maps, and this is clear fro mthe absence of certain cartographic material which would have been seen as important in the late sevententh century." (17) -- no maps important to late 17c; "Bagford's choice of maps appears to have been based, quite simply, on which interested him for their imprints or subjects, the fact that he had not seen them before, or some other reason which remains unclear." (17)

"The prints in Harl.5935 do not relate to each other in a way that suggests a coherent collecting strategy, but the volume's eclectic nature may be better described as a piecemeal and opportunist gathering of printing samples than the product of indiscriminate collecting." (17) -- "speaks of a man with more of an appreciation than an agenda" (18) <--YES but good; agenda is what caused Museum/Library to mutilate the collection

Manuscripts Supplied to Robert Harley by Bagford: Further Information from BL, Harl. MS. 5998, by Colin Tite (2012)

Most of volumes that Harley received from Bagford are listed in Wright, Fontes Harleiani; but Harley MS 5998 include considerable list of books transferred or to be transferred to Harley, Wanley, etc.

Tite transcribes list of books meant to go to Harley, identifies a few -- but many are probably not identifiable

A few more attributions in the comments to this blog post:

On Antiquaries

George Spratt, satirical print showing an antiquary composed of old manuscripts (ca 1830):

  • Antiquaries, book collectors, and the circles of learning, edited by Robin Myers and Michael Harris (1996)
  • Antiquaries : the discovery of the past in eighteenth-century Britain, by Rosemary Sweet (2004)
  • Making history : antiquaries in Britain, 1707-2007 (2007)
  • The trophies of time: English antiquarians of the seventeenth century, Graham Parry (2007)
  • Antiquaries & archaists : the past in the past, the past in the present, edited by Megan Aldrich and Robert J. Wallis (2009)
  • The Antiquary: John Aubrey's historical scholarship (2016)
  • Papers of British antiquaries and historians

on British historiography of the time:

  • Levy, Tudor Historical Thought (1967)
  • Noelle Gallagher, Historical literatures: writing about the past in England, 1660-1740
  • The Social circulation of the past: English historical culture, 1500-1730, by D. R. Woolf (2003)
  • D. R. Woolf, Reading history in early modern England (2000)
  • The historical imagination in early modern Britain: history, rhetoric, and fiction, 1500-1800, ed. Donald Kelley, David Harris Sacks (1997)
  • Clarendon and history, Penn Press book
  • Patrick Collinson, "One of Us? William Camden and the Making of History "The Camden Society Centenary Lecture"" (1998)

On lists and listmaking

Keller 2012 article on Pancirolli -- suggests a method for saving scraps of the past (things lost, deperdita) in order to better understand new things today (things found, nova reperta) -- Bacon expanded to a third category, objects desired for the future; much of note in here regarding failed projects (still worthwhile because of scraps they contained, getting halfway there is good) and collaborative knowledge endeavors

Copyright and histories of printing

see Johns 1998 chapter 5; points out that there was a need to tell the history of printing because of its relationship to powers of Stationers' Company and copyright law; was printing always common, or was it owned by the King? brought to England by Caxton independently, or as part of crown-funded expedition to steal it from Continental printers? competing stories of the history of printing as a technology would be used to adjudicate who had the right to print, who had the right to copy

Bagford's proposal is mentioned briefly in Johns but not examined in full

"Book trade conflicts conditioned the making and content of histories of printing; and historical knowledge in turn conditioned the outcome of book trade conflicts." (Johns 1998 372)

Other histories of printing at the time

<< also look at Royal Society, Cl.P. 17/45, Proof sheet from an Arabic book on the art of printing amongst the Turks:

Richard Smyth, "Of the first Invention of the Art of Printing", BL Ms. Sloane 772

Joseph Ames, Typographical Antiquities

Ames also kept a collection of title pages (see Freeman 2008); after listing Bagford's mss, Pollard also roughly described Ames's collection in Transactions: -- Pollard notes that "The titlepages being thus all arranged chronologically are of real historical value and in strong contrast to Bagford's haphazard collections."

Read this:

Michael Bull, friend and customer

See Last Will and Testament in folder, dated 1763; bequeathed to his cousen Elizabeth Dyer "her Choice of a few Books out of my study":

"This Will was proved at London the Day of September in the year of our Lord One thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty three before the Worshipful George ... of Laws Surrogate of the Right Worshipful Sir Edward Simpson Knight also --- of Laws Master Keeper or Commissary of the --- Court of Canterbury lawfully --- by the Oath of James i Bovingdon the son of the

I Michael Bull Minister of Brasted in the County of kent most Humbly Commanding my Soul -- Christ Jesus into the Hands of Almighty God who Gave it Do by this my last -- Will and Testament Dispose of my Worldly Goods in fforward manner following Imprimis I Give five pounds in Money to the most Deserving Poor of the Parish aforesaid at the Discretion of my Executor I leaue and bequeath to my Cousen George harris the Elder Ten pounds in Money and all what Is contained in the upper Draw of the lower part of my --- Standing in my Bed Chamber I leave and bequeath to my Cousin Elizabeth Dyer her Choice of a few Books out of my Study I Give to my Servant Elizabeth Lookudson five pounds in Money To Joseph Crosslaus the Elder Two Guineas the remainder of my Goods and Chattels Moneys Debts and whatsoever I shall die possessed of I leave and Bequeath to my Cosen Thomas Harris the Elder whom I Appoint Solo Executor of this my last will and testament Trusting that he will most faithfully [---] it, It is for Want of present ability that i do not have more Legacys To others whom i wish well to. I desire that my ffunerall May be as private and as little expensive as [...]"

Elizabeth Dyer is mentioned as having a monument in Throwley Church; died in Belmont, near Brasted, 14 November 1814, age 80; monument erected by her cousin Lord Harris (a Harris is also mentioned in Bull's will):

if E Dyer is the same related to Michael Bull, she would have been about 30 when he gave her his books

see her will in the folder

Christopher Bateman, printer

Seems to have a close relationship with Bateman; see Gatch 1985, Nickson 1983 p. 52

In Dictionary of Printers and Printing, Bateman says he has suffered much from people taking leaves out of the books in his shop:

Adriaan Beverland, pornographer

Adrian Beverland seems to have feuded with Bagford, as well as Michael Bull and the publisher Pierce Tempest, who produced Cryes of the City of London; see bio here, and "Discovery of Three Imposters":

Mentioned in the Biographical History of England (1775):

Feminization of collecting

Bagford's Essay on the invention of printing was satirized by King as "An Essay on the Invention of Samplers; communicated by Mrs. Judith Bagford: with an Account of her Collections of the Same." Oddly, if you search ECCO for "Bagford," this comes up, but as a page or leaf tacked to the end of Mary Chudleigh's "Ladies defence," a feminist poem! Why? Would have to consult the original at the BL. Prob just microfilm fluke.

Johns 1998 cites this -- see 352n78

Bagford haterade

Boehm 2008, p. 137, assumes Bagford did the cutting of the "Orders to be Observed in this Printing-House," but probable this was done later, as it seems Bagford's title pages came to Harley's library in 1716 as loose portfolios -- someone later pasted them down and organized them (see Griffiths and Wright, Fontes Harleiani)

shouldn't lump him in with later forgers like TJ Wise, who probably cut leaves from books at British Museum, only to be rediscovered when he sold the leaves back to the institution

Tracking fragments: possible case studies

Fragment 177 in Fragmenta manuscripta at University of Missouri comes from Pepys 2030, which also has note at beginning from Bagford about the book; this same ms also has initials cut out and sewn back in:;smode=basic;text=bagford;docsPerPage=1;fullview=yes;startDoc=178


Ralph Thoresby's diary, mentions buying materials from Bagford:

Pepys's diary, editor's intro

Letters of Humfrey Wanley 1672-1726 (Oxford, 1989) -- some additional typescript letters that didn't make it into the book are at the Bodley:

Thomas Hearne, Remarks and collections

Bagford prints removed to British Museum:

McKenzie, Cambridge printing house

C. E. Wright's papers at BL also contain some transcripts and notes on correspondence between Wanley and Bagford:

Melvin Wolf, Catalogue and indexes to the title-pages of English printed books preserved in the British Library's Bagford Collection

On the removal of prints to the Dept of Prints and Drawings, perhaps The Diary of Sir F. Madden, Bodleian, Ms.Eng.Hist.C.151