rinting had
got well under way, type in other languages--Arabic, Greek, Hebrew--had
to be developed in order that the literature of other languages might
augment our own."

"I don't think I took that into account," remarked Paul.

"Of course," continued Mr. Cameron less seriously, "not every person of
the olden time was alert for learning. Human nature was much the same
then as now.

"I'm afraid even in the midst of all this thirst for knowledge there
were those who cared far more for the outside of a book than for the
inside," he continued humorously. "Books were bound in brocade, in
richly ornamented leather embossed with gilt; some had covers of gold or
silver studded with gems, while others were adorned with carved ivory or
enamel. As time went on and the religious manuscripts written,
illuminated, and bound by the monks gave place to the more elaborate
productions of a printing age, ecclesiasts were not skilful enough to do
the illustrating demanded, and a guild of bookbinders sprang up. Into
the hands of artists outside the cloister were put the more dainty and
worldly pictures required by secular text. Then followed a period when
scholars who owned books were no longer forced to loan them to students
to copy for their own use, as had been the case in the past. Books
became less expensive and were accessible to everybody. Slowly they were
got into more practical form--were made smaller and less bulky; not only
outside but inside they were improved. 'The Lives of Saints' and Fox's
'Book of Martyrs' gave way first to the tales of Merlin and King Arthur
in various versions, stories of Charlemagne, and romances of similar
character. Copyrights being unknown, there was no law to protect a book,
and hence all the adventures of the hero of any one tongue were passed
on to the favorite hero of another nationality; as a result French,
Italian, Spanish, and Celtic literature teem with heroes who perform
marvellous deeds of identical character."

Paul was amused.

"Amadis of France, the popular idol of the French people, worked the
same marvels as King Arthur did, only under another name. Every nation
borrowed (or rather stole) from every other. It was not considered
reprehensible to do so. Shakespeare worked over the Italian _novelle_ of
Boccaccio, weaving them into his great English dramas, and nobody
censured him. It was this craving for romance that overcame the delight
in mere display and roused interest not alone