Page:The Library, volume 5, series 3.djvu/436

 422 THE HISTORY OF A again when, in 1637, it was re-issued as Alabaster's work, rousing himself only in 1635 to protest against the mis-spelling of his name. Even if we were certain as to Thorndike's share in the work, it would still be possible to suggest more than one theory as to the order of the three title-pages of 1635. So far I have rather taken for granted that the 'Schindler' issue should take precedence, as being the one under which the book established itself in the trade ; that is to say, that the book was never intended to be put upon the market in any large quantities with either of the ' Thorndike ' title- pages. But it is quite possible that the issue of the lexicon without the essay was an independent venture of Jones's, taken without consultation with either Alabaster or Thorndike. In this case, the lexicon being without even a running head-line to guide him, Jones might naturally turn for a title to the entry in the Stationers' Registers, thereby calling forth the wrath at once of Thorndike for mutilating his name, and of Alabaster for mis- describing the work. Whatever points may still be in doubt, this much is clear. Alabaster was responsible for the conception and general arrangement of the c Spira- culum Tubarum,' whether he actually did the epitomizing of the lexicon or not ; Alabaster wrote the introductory note to the ' Schindler ' issue and in all probability drew up the title-page which was printed with it. Whatever share Thorndike had in the work was without doubt a subordinate