that Enschedius discovered this singular specimen of typography pasted in the cover of an old book. It is certainly such a one as he was most wishful to find, and which he in his capacity of typefounder and printer would find little difficulty in producing. I am firmly convinced that it is neither printed with wooden types nor a specimen of early typography; on the contrary, I suspect it to be a Dutch typographic essay on popular credulity. [Footnote III-75: Enschedius published a fac-simile himself, with the following title: “Afbeelding van ’t A. B. C. ’t Pater Noster, Ave Maria, ’t Credo, en Ave Salus Mundi, door Laurens Janszoon, te Haarlem, ten behoeven van zyne dochters Kinderen, met beweegbaare Letteren gedrukt, en teffens aangeweesen de groote der Stukjes pergament, zekerlyk ’t oudste overblyfsel der eerste Boekdrukkery, ’t welk als zulk een eersteling der Konst bewaard word en berust in de Boekery van _Joannes Enschedé_, Lettergieter en Boekdrukker te Haarlem, 1768.--_A. J. Polak sculps. ex originali._”] Of all the works which have been claimed for Coster, his advocates have not succeeded in making out his title to a single one; and the best evidence of the fallacy of his claims is to be found in the writings of those persons by whom they have been most confidently asserted. Having no theory of my own to support, and having no predilection in favour of Gutemberg, I was long inclined to think that there might be some rational foundation for the claims which have been so confidently advanced in favour of Harlem. An examination, however, of the presumed proofs and arguments adduced by Coster’s advocates has convinced me that the claims put forward on his behalf, as the inventor of typography, are untenable. They have certainly discovered that a person of the name of Lawrence Janszoon was living at Harlem between the years 1420 and 1440, but they have not been able to show anything in proof of this person ever having printed any book either from wood-blocks or with moveable types. There is indeed reason to believe that at the period referred to there were three persons of the name of Lawrence Janszoon,--or Fitz-John, as the surname may be rendered;--but to which of them the pretended invention is to be ascribed is a matter of doubt. At one time we find the inventor described as an illegitimate scion of the noble family of Brederode, which was descended from the ancient sovereigns of Holland; at another he is said to have been called Coster in consequence of the office of custos or warden of St. Bavon’s church being hereditary in his family; and in a third account we find Lawrence Janszoon figuring as a promoter of sedition and one of the leaders of a body of rioters. The advocates for the claims of Harlem have brought forward every Lawrence that they could find at that period whose father’s name was John; as if the more they could produce the more conclusive would be the