printed at Westminster. Some of Caxton's biographers have stated that Caxton's office was the scriptorium of the abbey, lent to him by the abbot (John Esteney). There is, however, no proof that Esteney showed Caxton any special favour. Caxton dedicated no book to him, and only mentions him once in the prologue of the ‘Eneydos’ (1490), where the printer states that the abbot had sent him some old documents of the abbey with a view to his translating them into modern English. Stow states, very inaccurately, that about 1471 Islip (who was not dean till 1500) erected ‘the first presse of booke-printing’ in that part of the abbey precincts at Westminster known as the Almonry, and that Caxton practised printing there. In an advertisement sheet issued by Caxton about 1479, announcing the sale of ‘ony pyes of two and three comemoracions of salisburi vse’ (i.e. books of ecclesiastical offices), the printer bids the customer ‘come to Westminster in to the almonesrye at the reed pale.’ Mr. Blades's conclusion is that Caxton rented of the abbot's chamberlain, in the ordinary way of business, a house which bore the sign of a red pale, in the enclosure ‘west-south-west of the western front of the abbey,’ well known as the Almonry, and so called from the presence of a number of almshouses there, built by Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII. Wynkyn de Worde, who occupied Caxton's workshop for some years after his master's death, dates many books from ‘Caxton's hous,’ or ‘In domo Caxston,’ at Westminster and near the abbey, but gives no more precise particulars.
Another difficulty is the meaning of the device which appears in twelve of Caxton's books, all printed after 1487. The device is first met with at the end of a ‘Sarum Missal.’ This book, of which a unique copy belongs to Mr. W. J. Legh, was, unlike Caxton's other books, printed for him at Paris by W. Maynayl. On the arrival of the sheets at Westminster Caxton added a leaf with his device upon it, and published the work at Westminster in 1487. The device consists of Caxton's initials in capitals, with a strange interlacement of lines between the two letters, while near the W is a stroke resembling a small s, and near the C a stroke resembling a small c. The whole is enclosed in floral borders. The central lines have been assumed by the best critics to be a fantastic imprint of the figures ‘74,’ and a reference to the all-important fact that in 1474 Caxton printed the first English book. The circumstances attending the first employment of the device prove that Caxton regarded it as his peculiar trade-mark, and may support the conclusion that the design has no special meaning, and was merely intended to enable the public to identify easily Caxton's wares. The small letters ‘s. c.’ have been explained by M. J. P. A. Madden as the initials of ‘Sancta Colonia,’ i.e. Cologne; and this interpretation plays an important part in his argument in favour of Cologne rather than Bruges as Caxton's printing school. Although no other suggestion has been offered, this looks too fantastic to be probable. Wynkyn de Worde adopted Caxton's device as his own after Caxton's death; but he modified the cut, and often omitted the s and c, so that it is possible for an expert to detect the difference between Caxton's trade-mark and that of his pupil and successor.
There is no authentic portrait of Caxton. In Lewis's ‘Life’ and in Ames's ‘Typographical Antiquities’ a supposed portrait appears, but its association with Caxton's name is unwarranted. The print from which it is in both cases inaccurately copied belonged to John Bagford [q. v.], and is attributed to the well-known engraver, William Faithorne. Although Faithorne and Bagford pretended that it was an authentic representation of the great printer, Dr. Dibdin discovered that it was in reality a reproduction of the portrait of an Italian poet, Burchiello, which is prefixed to the 1554 edition (small octavo) of his poems. Faithorne is believed to have originated the fraud, and Bagford is regarded as the engraver's dupe.
Caxton printed on paper made in most cases in the Low Countries, and very rarely used vellum. He employed from first to last movable types of the Gothic character, but his type is copied so closely from the caligraphy of his time that many of his books have been mistaken for manuscript. He often renewed his fount, and each fount that he employed differed in some respect from its predecessor. Caxton never mixed his founts in his books. The earliest fount, evidently imitated from contemporary French handwriting, was only used in Bruges. The second fount, used in England from 1477 to 1479, was also derived from Mansion's office, and is known as ‘gros bâtarde;’ a new variety of this fount, employed in 1479–80, has thinner facings and fewer ornamental strokes. Caxton's third distinct fount, in use from 1479 to 1483, chiefly for Latin books, is imitated from the church text of the scribes, and closely resembles the later ‘black letter.’ The fourth fount, in use from 1480 to 1485, is smaller than any of its forerunners, and resembles Caslon's standard type; another variety of this fount appears in Gower's ‘Confessio’ (1483) and ‘The Knight of the Tower’ (1483). The fifth fount, in use from 1487 to 1491, has large Lombardic capi-
