There were plenty of such _Donatuses_ in existence in the Netherlands about 1470. In 1887 Dr. Hessels, in his _Haarlem the Birthplace of Printing, not Mentz_, enumerated fragments of twenty different editions, printed in eight types, of which the type used in the _Speculum Humanae Saluationis_ (see p. 26) is one, while the other seven are linked to it, or to each other, in such a way that we may either suppose them to have all belonged to the same printer, or distribute them among two or more anonymous firms. Besides these twenty editions of _Donatus_ on the Eight Parts of Speech, Dr. Hessels enumerated eight editions of the _Doctrinale_ of Alexander Gallus[16] (another school book popular in the fifteenth century), three of the Distichs of Dionysius Cato (the work from which Dame Pertelote quoted to convince Chantecleer of the futility of dreams), and one or two editions each of a few other works, the _Facetiae Morales_ of Laurentius Valla (twenty-four leaves), the _Singularia Juris_ of Ludovicus Pontanus, with a treatise of Pope Pius II (sixty leaves), and the _De Salute Corporis_ of Gulielmus de Saliceto with other small works (twenty-four leaves). These latter books offer no very noticeable features; some of the _Donatus_ fragments, on the other hand, have printing only on one side of the leaf (whence they are called by the barbarous term "anopisthographic," "not printed on the back") and have a very rude and primitive appearance. This may have been caused in part at least by their having been pasted down, and possibly scraped, by binders, for almost all of them have been found in bindings; but it counts for something. Not one of the books or fragments of which we have been speaking makes any mention of its printer, or of the place or date at which it was produced. A copy of one of the later books, the _De Salute Corporis_ of Gulielmus de Saliceto, was purchased by Conrad du Moulin while abbot of the Convent of S. James at Lille, a dignity which he held from 1471 to 1474. The earliest Haarlem account-book which contained _Donatus_ fragments was for the year 1474. It is entirely a matter of opinion as to how much earlier than this any of the extant fragments can be dated. There is no reason why some of them should not be later.