Page:The spiritual venality of Rome.djvu/25

2 in the outset^ that these two works^ although frequently confounded, are really distinct — at least, as portions under the general denomina- tion. The first author, who may Le considered to have examined this subject critically, and to any extent, is doubtless the celebrated Bayle, in his Dictionary, under the articles, Banck, Pinet, Tuppius. The first French edition, indeed, of a form of the Taxae by Antoine du Pinet, in 1564, under the title of Taxe des Parties Ctisiceiles, &c. and the re-impressions previous to the time of Bayle, although accom- panied with prefaces, contain nothing to sa- tisfy almost necessary curiosity. The edition of 1744 has a preface of large dimensions : and so have the respective reprints of another form of the Taxae by Banck in 1651, and by Du Mont in 1664. Charles Chais, in his valuable Lettres sur les Jnbiles, &c. published in 1753, has, in the XXVIth Lettre, given the subject the best form which the existing materials would allow. But by none of the editors of these editions have we the information, either for kind or degree, which most of them pos- sessed, and which it was obviously of most importance to communicate. Evidently, the