CHAPTER II.

PROGRESS OF WOOD ENGRAVING.

Playing-Cards Printed from Wood-Blocks -- Early German Wood-Engravers at Augsburg, Nuremberg, and Ulm -- Card-Makers and Wood-Engravers in Venice in 1441 -- Figures of Saints Engraved on Wood -- The St. Christopher, the Annunciation, and the St. Bridget in the Collection of Earl Spencer, with Other Old Wood-Cuts Described -- Block-Books -- The Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, and the Work Called Biblia Pauperum -- Speculum Salvationis -- Figured Alphabet Formerly Belonging to Sir George Beaumont -- Ars Memorandi, and Other Smaller Block-Books.

From the facts which have been produced in the preceding chapter, there cannot be a doubt that the principle on which wood engraving is founded,--that of taking impressions on paper or parchment, with ink, from prominent lines,--was known and practised in attesting documents in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Towards the end of the fourteenth, or about the beginning of the fifteenth century, there is reason to believe that this principle was adopted by the German card-makers for the purpose of marking the outlines of the figures on their cards, which they afterwards coloured by means of a stencil.[II-1]

[Footnote II-1: A stencil is a piece of pasteboard, or a thin plate of metal, pierced with lines and figures, which are communicated to paper, parchment, or linen, by passing a brush charged with ink or colour over the stencil.]

The period at which the game of cards was first known in Europe, as well as the people by whom they were invented, has been very learnedly, though not very satisfactorily discussed. Bullet has claimed the invention for the French, and Heineken for the Germans; while other writers have maintained that the game was known in Italy earlier than in any other part of Europe, and that it was introduced from the East.

From a passage discovered by M. Van Praet, in an old manuscript copy of the romance of _Renard le Contrefait_, it appears that cards were known in France about 1340, although Bullet was of opinion that they were invented in that country about 1376. At whatever period the game was introduced, it appears to have been commonly known in France and Spain towards the latter part of the fourteenth century. John I., King of Castile, by an edict issued in 1387, prohibited the game of cards; and in 1397, the Provost of Paris, by an ordonnance, forbid all working people to play at tennis, bowls, dice, _cards_, or nine-pins, on working days. From a passage in the Chronicle of Petit-Jehan de Saintré, written previous to 1380, it would appear that the game of cards at that period was in disrepute. Saintré had been one of the pages of Charles V. of France; and on his being appointed, on account of his good conduct, to the situation of carver to the king, the squire who had charge of the pages, lectured some of them on the impropriety of their behaviour; such as playing at dice and cards, keeping bad company, and haunting taverns and cabarets, those not being the courses by which they might hope to arrive at the honourable post of “ecuyer tranchant,” to which their companion, Saintré, had been raised.

In an account-book of Charles Poupart, treasurer to Charles VI. of France, there is an entry, made about 1393, of “fifty-six sols of Paris, given to Jacquemin Gringonneur, painter, for three packs of cards, gilt and coloured, and of different sorts, for the diversion of his majesty.” From this passage the learned Jesuit Menestrier, who was not aware of cards being mentioned by any earlier writer, concluded that they were then invented by Gringonneur to amuse the king, who, in consequence of a _coup de soleil_, had been attacked with delirium, which had subsided into an almost continual depression of spirits. There, however, can be no doubt that cards were known in France at least fifty years before; though, from their being so seldom noticed previous to 1380, it appears likely that the game was but little played until after that period. Whether the figures on the cards supplied for the king’s amusement were drawn and coloured by the hand, or whether the outlines were impressed from wood-blocks, and coloured by means of a stencil, it is impossible to ascertain; though it has been conjectured that, from the smallness of the sum paid for them, they were of the latter description. That cards were cheap in 1397, however they might be manufactured, may be presumed from the fact of their being then in the hands of the working people.

To whatever nation the invention of cards is owing, it appears that the Germans were the first who practised card-making as a trade. In 1418 the name of a “Kartenmacher”--card-maker--occurs in the burgess-book of the city of Augsburg; and in an old rate-book of the city of Nuremburg, under the year 1433, we find “_Ell. Kartenmacherin_;” that is, Ell.--probably for Elizabeth--the card-maker. In the same book, under the year 1435, the name of “_Eliz. Kartenmacherin_,” probably the same person, is to be found; and in 1438 there occurs the name “Margret Kartenmalerin”--Margaret the card-painter. It thus appears that the earliest card-makers who are mentioned as living at Nuremberg were females; and it is worthy of note that the Germans seem to have called cards “_Karten_” before they gave them the name of “_Briefe_.” Heineken, however, considers that they were first known in Germany by the latter name; for, as he claimed the invention for his countrymen, he was unwilling to admit that the name should be borrowed either from Italy or France. He has not, however, produced anything like proof in support of his opinion, which is contradicted by the negative evidence of history.[II-2]

[Footnote II-2: Cards--_Carten_--are mentioned in a book of bye-laws of Nuremberg, between 1380 and 1384. They are included in a list of games at which the burghers might indulge themselves, provided they ventured only small sums. “Awzgenommen rennen mit Pferder, Schiessen mit Armbrusten, _Carten_, Schofzagel, Pretspil, und Kugeln, umb einen pfenink zwen zu vier poten.” That is: “always excepting horse-racing, shooting with cross-bows, _cards_, shovel-board, tric-trac, and bowls, at which a man may bet from twopence to a groat.”--C. G. Von Murr, Journal zur Kunstsgesch. 2 Theil, S. 99.]

The name _Briefe_, which the Germans give to cards, also signifies letters [epistolæ]. The meaning of the word, however, is rather more general than the French term _lettres_, or the Latin _epistolæ_ which he gives as its synonyms, for it is also applied in the sense in which we sometimes use the word “paper.” For instance, “_ein Brief Stecknadeln, ein Brief Tabak_,” are literally translated by the words “a _paper_ of pins, a _paper_ of tobacco;” in which sense the word “_Brief_” would, in Latin, be more correctly rendered by the term _charta_ than _epistola_. As it is in a similar sense--cognate with “paper,” as used in the two preceding examples--that “Briefe” is applied to cards, I am inclined to consider it as a translation of the Latin _chartaæ_, the Italian _carte_, or the French _cartes_, and hence to conclude that the invention of cards does not belong to the people of Germany, who appear to have received cards, both “name and thing,” from another nation, and after some time to have given them a name in their own language.

In the town-books of Nuremberg, the term _Formschneider_-- figure-cutter,--the name appropriated to engravers on wood, first occurs in 1449;[II-3] and as it is found in subsequent years mentioned in the same page with “Kartenmaler,” it seems reasonable to conclude that in 1449, and probably earlier, the business of the wood-engraver proper, and that of the card-maker, were distinct. The primary meaning of the word _form_ or _forma_ is almost precisely the same in most of the European languages. It has erroneously been explained, in its relation to wood engraving, as signifying a _mould_, whereas it simply means a shape or figure. The model of wood which the carpenter makes for the metal-founder is properly a _form_, and from it the latter prepares his mould in the sand. The word _form_, however, in course of time declined from its primary signification, and came to be used as expressive both of a model and a mould. The term _Formschneider_, which was originally used to distinguish the professed engraver of figures from the mere engraver and colourer of cards, is still used in Germany to denote what we term a wood-engraver.

[Footnote II-3: In the town-books of Nuremberg a Hans _Formansneider_ occurs so early as 1397, which De Murr says is not meant for “wood engraver,” but is to be read thus: _Hans Forman, Schneider_; that is, “Ihon Forman, maister-fashionere,” or, in modern phrase, “tailor.” The word “_Karter_” also occurs in the same year, but it is meant for a carder, or wool-comber, and not for a card-maker.--C. G. Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 99.]

About the time that the term _Formschneider_ first occurs we find _Briefmalers_ mentioned, and at a later period _Briefdruckers_-- card-printers; and, though there evidently was a distinction between the two professions, yet we find that between 1470 and 1500 the _Briefmalers_ not only engraved figures occasionally, but also printed books. The _Formschneiders_ and the _Briefmalers_, however, continued to form but one guild or fellowship till long after the art of wood-engraving had made rapid strides towards perfection, under the superintendence of such masters as Durer, Burgmair, and Holbein, in the same manner as the barbers and surgeons in our own country continued to form but one company, though the “chirurgeon had long ceased to trim beards and cut hair, and the barber had given up bleeding and purging to devote himself more exclusively to the ornamental branch of his original profession.” “_Kartenmacher_ and _Kartenmaler_” says Von Murr, “or _Briefmaler_, as they were afterwards called [1473], were known in Germany eighty years previous to the invention of book-printing. The Kartenmacher was originally a Formschneider, though, after the practice of cutting figures of saints and of sacred subjects was introduced, a distinction began to be established between the two professions.”

The German card-makers of Augsburg, Nuremberg, and Ulm, it is stated, sent large quantities of cards into Italy; and it was probably against those foreign manufacturers that the fellowship of painters at Venice obtained an order in 1441 from the magistracy, declaring that no foreign manufactured cards, or printed coloured figures, should be brought into the city, under the penalty of forfeiting such articles, and of being fined xxx liv. xii soldi. This order was made in consequence of a petition presented by the Venetian painters, wherein they set forth that “the art and mystery of card-making and of printing figures, which were practised in Venice, had fallen into total decay through the great quantity of foreign playing-cards and coloured printed figures, which were brought into the city.”[II-4] It is hence evident that the art both of the German _Kartenmacher_ and of the _Formschneider_ was practised in Venice in 1441; and, as it is then mentioned as being in decay, it no doubt was practised there some time previously.

[Footnote II-4: “Conscioscia che l’arte e mestier delle carte & figure stampide, che se fano in Venesia è vegnudo a total deffaction, e questo sia per la gran quantità de carte a zugar, e fegure depente stampide, le qual vien fate de fuora de Venezia.” The curious document in which the above passage occurs was discovered by Temanza, an Italian architect, in an old book of rules and orders belonging to the company of Venetian painters. His discovery, communicated in a letter to Count Algarotti, appeared in the Lettere Pittoriche, tom. v. p. 320, et sequent. and has since been quoted by every writer who has written upon the subject.]

Heineken, in his “Neue Nachrichten,” gives an extract from a MS. chronicle of the city of Ulm, completed in 1474, to the following effect: “Playing-cards were sent _barrelwise_ [that is, in small casks] into Italy, Sicily, and also over sea, and exchanged for spices and other wares. From this we may judge of the number of card-makers who resided here.” The preceding passage occurs in the index, under the head, “Business of card-making.” Heineken also gives the passage in his “Idée Générale,” p. 245; but from the French translation, which he there gives, it appears that he had misunderstood the word “_leglenweiss_”-- barrelwise--which he renders “en ballots.” In his “Neue Nachrichten,” however, he inserts the explanation between parentheses, (“das ist, in kleinen Fässern”)--i. e. in small casks; which Mr. Singer renders “hogsheads,” and Mr. Ottley, though he gives the original in a note, “large bales.” The word “lägel,” a barrel, is obsolete in Germany, but its diminutive, “leglin,”--as if “lägelen”--is still used in Scotland for the name of the ewe-milker’s _kit_.

Some writers have been of opinion that the art of wood-engraving was derived from the practice of the ancient caligraphists and illuminators of manuscripts, who sometimes formed their large capital letters by means of a stencil or of a wooden stamp. That large capitals were formed in such a manner previous to the year 1400 there can be little doubt; and it has been thought that stencils and stamps were used not only for the formation of capital letters, but also for the impression of a whole volume. Ihre, in a dissertation on the Gospels of Ulphilas,[II-5] which are supposed to be as old as the fifth century, has asserted that the silver letters of the text on a purple ground were impressed by means of heated iron stamps. This, however, is denied by the learned compilers of the “Nouveau Traité de Diplomatique,” who had seen other volumes of a similar kind, the silver letters of which were evidently formed with a pen. A modern Italian author, D. Vincenzo Requeno, has published a tract[II-6] to prove that many supposed manuscripts from the tenth to the fourteenth century, instead of being written with a pen, were actually impressed by means of stamps. It is, however, extremely probable that he is mistaken; for if his pretended discoveries were true, this art of stamping must have been very generally practised; and if so, it surely would have been mentioned by some contemporary writers. Signor Requeno’s examination, I am inclined to suspect, has not been sufficiently precise; for he seems to have been too willing to find what he sought. In almost every collection that he examined, a pair of fine compasses being the test which he employed, he discovered voluminous works on vellum, hitherto supposed to be manuscript, but which according to his measurement were certainly executed by means of a stamp.

[Footnote II-5: This celebrated version, in the Mœso-Gothic language, is preserved in the library of Upsal in Sweden.]

[Footnote II-6: Osservazioni sulla Chirotipografia, ossia Antica Arte di Stampare a mano. Opera di D. Vincenzo Requeno. Roma 1810, 8vo.]

It has been conjectured that the art of wood-engraving was employed on sacred subjects, such as the figures of saints and holy persons, before it was applied to the multiplication of those “books of Satan,” playing-cards. It however is not unlikely that it was first employed in the manufacture of cards; and that the monks, availing themselves of the same principle, shortly afterwards employed the art of wood-engraving for the purpose of circulating the figures of saints; thus endeavouring to supply a remedy for the evil, and extracting from the serpent a cure for his bite.

Wood-cuts of sacred subjects were known to the common people of Suabia, and the adjacent districts, by the name of _Helgen_ or _Helglein_, a corruption of Heiligen, saints;--a word which in course of time they used to signify prints--_estampes_--generally.[II-7] In France the same kind of cuts, probably stencil-coloured, were called “dominos,”--the affinity of which name with the German Helgen is obvious. The word “domino” was subsequently used as a name for coloured or marbled paper generally, and the makers of such paper, as well as the engravers and colourers of wood-cuts, were called “dominotiers.”[II-8]

[Footnote II-7: Fuseli, at p. 85 of Ottley’s Inquiry; and Breitkopf, Versuch d. Ursprungs der Spielkarten Zu erforschen, 2 Theil, S. 175.]

[Footnote II-8: Fournier, Dissertation sur l’Origine et les Progrès de l’Art de Graver en Bois, p. 79; and Papillon, Traité de la Gravure en Bois, tom. i. p. 20, and Supplement, p. 80.]

As might, _à priori_, be concluded, supposing the Germans to have been the first who applied wood-engraving to card-making, the earliest wood-cuts have been discovered, and in the greatest abundance, in that district where we first hear of the business of a card-maker and a wood-engraver. From a convent, situated within fifty miles of the city of Augsberg, where, in 1418, the first mention of a Kartenmacher occurs, has been obtained the earliest wood-cut known,--the St. Christopher, now in the possession of Earl Spencer, with the date 1423. That this was the first cut of the kind we have no reason to suppose; but though others executed in a similar manner are known, to not one of them, upon anything like probable grounds, can a higher degree of antiquity be assigned. From 1423, therefore, as from a known epoch, the practice of wood engraving, as applied to pictorial representations, may be dated.

The first person who published an account of this most interesting wood-cut was Heineken, who had inspected a greater number of old wood-cuts and block-books than any other person, and whose unwearied perseverance in searching after, and general accuracy in describing such early specimens of the art of wood-engraving, are beyond all praise. He found it pasted on the inside of the right-hand cover of a manuscript volume in the library of the convent of Buxheim, near Memmingen in Suabia. The manuscript, entitled LAUS VIRGINIS[II-9] and finished in 1417, was left to the convent by Anna, canoness of Buchaw, who was living in 1427; but who probably died previous to 1435. The above reduced copy conveys a pretty good idea of the composition and style of engraving of the original cut, which is of a folio size, being eleven and a quarter inches high, and eight inches and one-eighth wide.[II-10]

[Footnote II-9: “Liber iste, _Laus Virginis_ intitulatus, continet Lectiones Matutinales accommodatas Officio B. V. Mariæ per singulos anni dies,” &c. At the beginning of the volume is the following memorandum: “Istum librum legavit domna Anna filia domni Stephani baronis de Gundelfingen, canonica in Büchow Aule bte. Marie v’ginis in Buchshaim ord’is Cartusieñ prope Memingen Augusten. dyoc.”--Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 104-105.]

[Footnote II-10: A fac-simile, of the size of the original, is given in Von Murr’s Journal, vol. ii. p. 104, and in Ottley’s Inquiry, vol. i. p. 90, both engraved on wood. There is an imitation engraved on copper, in Jansen’s Essai sur l’Origine de la Gravure, tom. i.]

The original affords a specimen of the combined talents of the Formschneider or wood-engraver, and the Briefmaler or card-colourer. The engraved portions, such as are here represented, have been taken off in dark colouring matter similar to printers’ ink, after which the impression appears to have been coloured by means of a stencil. As the back of the cut cannot be seen, in consequence of its being pasted on the cover of the volume, it cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty whether the impression has been taken by means of a press, or _rubbed off_ from the block by means of a burnisher or rubber, in a manner similar to that in which wood-engravers of the present day take their proofs.

This cut is much better designed than the generality of those which we find in books typographically executed from 1462, the date of the Bamberg Fables, to 1493, when the often-cited Nuremberg Chronicle was printed. Amongst the many coarse cuts which “illustrate” the latter, and which are announced in the book itself[II-11] as having been “got up” under the superintendence of Michael Wolgemuth, Albert Durer’s master, and William Pleydenwurff, both “most skilful in the art of painting,” I cannot find a single subject which either for spirit or feeling can be compared to the St. Christopher. In fact, the figure of the saint, and that of the youthful Christ whom he bears on his shoulders, are, with the exception of the extremities, designed in such a style, that they would scarcely discredit Albert Durer himself.

[Footnote II-11: The following announcement appears in the colophon of the Nuremberg Chronicle. “Ad intuitum autem et preces providorum civium Sebaldi Schreyer et Sebastiani Romermaister hunc librum Anthonius Koberger Nurembergiæ impressit. Adhibitis tamen viris mathematicis pingendique arte peritissimis, Michaele Wolgemut et Wilhelmo Pleydenwurff, quorum solerti accuratissimaque animadversione tum civitatum tum illustrium virorum figuræ insertæ sunt. Consummatum autem duodecima mensis Julii. Anno Salutis ñre 1493.”]

To the left of the engraving the artist has introduced, with a noble disregard of perspective,[II-12] what Bewick would have called a “bit of Nature.” In the foreground a figure is seen driving an ass loaded with a sack towards a water-mill; while by a steep path a figure, perhaps intended for the miller, is seen carrying a full sack from the back-door of the mill towards a cottage. To the right is seen a hermit--known by the bell over the entrance of his dwelling--holding a large lantern to direct St. Christopher as he crosses the stream. The two verses at the foot of the cut,

Cristofori faciem die quacunque tueris, Illa nempe die morte mala non morieris,

may be translated as follows:

Each day that thou the likeness of St. Christopher shalt see, That day no frightful form of death shall make an end of thee.

[Footnote II-12: As great a neglect of the rules of perspective may be seen in several of the cuts in the famed edition of Theurdanck, Nuremberg, 1517, which are supposed to have been designed by Hans Burgmair, and engraved by Hans Schaufflein.]

They allude to a popular superstition, common at that period in all Catholic countries, which induced people to believe that the day on which they should see a figure or image of St. Christopher, they should not meet with a violent death, nor die without confession.[II-13] To this popular superstition Erasmus alludes in his “Praise of Folly;” and it is not unlikely, that to his faith in this article of belief, the squire, in Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales,” wore

“A Christofre on his brest, of silver shene.”

[Footnote II-13: See Brand’s Popular Antiquities, vol. i. pp. 359-364.--Bohn’s edition.]

The date “_Millesimo cccc^o xx^o tercio_”--1423--which is seen at the right-hand corner, at the foot of the impression, most undoubtedly designates the year in which the engraving was made.

The engraving, though coarse, is executed in a bold and free manner; and the folds of the drapery are marked in a style which would do credit to a proficient. The whole subject, though expressed by means of few lines, is not executed in the very simplest style of art. In the draperies a diminution and a thickening of the lines, where necessary to the effect, may be observed; and the shades are indicated by means of parallel lines both perpendicular, oblique, and curved, as may be seen in the saint’s robe and mantle. In many of the wood-cuts executed between 1462 and 1500, the figures are expressed, and the drapery indicated, by simple lines of one undeviating degree of thickness, without the slightest attempt at shading by means of parallel lines running in a direction different to those marking the folds of the drapery or the outlines of the figure. If mere rudeness of design, and simplicity in the mode of execution, were to be considered as the sole tests of antiquity in wood-engravings, upwards of a hundred, positively known to have been executed between 1470 and 1500, might be produced as affording intrinsic evidence of their having been executed at a period antecedent to the date of the St. Christopher.

In the Royal Library at Paris there is an impression of St. Christopher with the youthful Christ, which was supposed to be a duplicate of that in the possession of Earl Spencer. On comparing them, however, “it was quite evident,” says Dr. Dibdin, “at the first glance, as M. Du Chesne admitted, that they were impressions taken from _different blocks_. The question therefore was, after a good deal of pertinacious argument on both sides--which of the two impressions was the more ancient? Undoubtedly it was that of Lord Spencer.” At first Dr. Dibdin thought that the French impression was a copy of Earl Spencer’s, and that it might be as old as the year 1460; but, from a note added in the second edition of his tour, he seems to have received a new light. He there says: “The reasons upon which this conclusion [that the French cut was a copy of a later date] was founded, are stated at length in the preceding edition of this work: since which, I very strongly incline to the supposition that the Paris impression is a _proof_--of one of the _cheats_ of DE MURR.”[II-14]

[Footnote II-14: Bibliographical and Picturesque Tour, by the Rev. T. F. Dibdin, D.D. p. 58, vol. ii. second edition, 1829. The De Murr to whom Dr. Dibdin alludes, is C. G. Von Murr, editor of the Journal of Arts and General Literature, published at Nuremberg in 1775 and subsequent years. Von Murr was the first who published, in the second volume of his journal, a _fac-simile_, engraved on wood by Sebast. Roland, of the Buxheim St. Christopher, from a tracing sent to him by P. Krismer, the librarian of the convent. Von Murr, in his Memorabilia of the City of Nuremberg, mentions that Breitkopf had seen a duplicate impression of the Buxheim St. Christopher in the possession of M. De Birkenstock at Vienna.]

On the inside of the first cover or “board” of the Laus Virginis, the volume which contains the St. Christopher, there is also pasted a wood engraving of the Annunciation, of a similar size to the above-named cut, and impressed on the same kind of paper. As they are both worked off in the same kind of dark-coloured ink, and as they evidently have been coloured in the same manner, by means of a stencil, there can be little doubt of their being executed about the same time. From the left-hand corner of the Annunciation the figure of the Almighty has been torn out. The Holy Ghost, who appears descending from the Father upon the Virgin in the material form of a dove, could not well be torn out without greatly disfiguring the cut. An idea may be formed of the original from the following reduced copy.

Respecting these cuts, which in all probability were engraved by some one of the Formschneiders of Augsburg, Ulm, or Nuremberg,[II-15] P. Krismer, who was librarian of the convent of Buxheim, and who showed the volume in which they are pasted to Heineken, writes to Von Murr to the following effect: “It will not be superfluous if I here point out a mark, by which, in my opinion, old wood engravings may with certainty be distinguished from those of a later period. It is this: In the oldest wood-cuts only do we perceive that the engraver [Formschneider] has frequently omitted certain parts, leaving them to be afterwards filled up by the card-colourer [Briefmaler]. In the St. Christopher there is no such deficiency, although there is in the other cut which is pasted on the inside of the fore covering of the same volume, and which, I doubt not, was executed at the same time as the former. It represents the salutation of the Virgin by the angel Gabriel, or, as it is also called, the Annunciation; and, from the omission of the colours, the upper part of the body of the kneeling Virgin appears naked, except where it is covered with her mantle. Her inner dress had been left to be added by the pencil of the card-colourer. In another wood-cut of the same kind, representing St. Jerome doing penance before a small crucifix placed on a hill, we see with surprise that the saint, together with the instruments of penance, which are lying near him, and a whole forest beside, are suspended in the air without anything to support them, as the whole of the ground had been left to be inserted with the pencil. Nothing of this kind is to be seen in more recent wood-cuts, when the art had made greater progress. What the early wood-engravers could not readily effect with the graver, they performed with the pencil,--for the most part in a very coarse and careless manner,--as they were at the same time both wood-engravers and card-colourers.”[II-16]

[Footnote II-15: There is every reason in the world to suppose that this wood-cut was executed either in Nuremberg or Augsburg. Buxheim is situated almost in the very heart of Suabia, the circle in which we find the earliest wood engravers established. Buxheim is about thirty English miles from Ulm, forty-four from Augsburg, and one hundred and fifteen from Nuremberg. Von Murr does not notice the pretensions of Ulm, which on his own grounds are stronger than those of his native city, Nuremberg.]

[Footnote II-16: Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 105, 106.]

Besides the St. Christopher and the Annunciation, there is another old wood-cut in the collection of Earl Spencer which appears to belong to the same period, and which has in all probability been engraved by a German artist, as all who can read the German inscription above the figure would reasonably infer. Before making any remarks on this engraving, I shall first lay before the reader a reduced copy.

The figure writing is that of St. Bridget of Sweden, who was born in 1302 and died in 1373. From the representation of the Virgin with the infant Christ in her arms we may suppose that the artist intended to show the pious widow writing an account of her visions or revelations, in which she was often favoured with the blessed Virgin’s appearance. The pilgrim’s hat, staff, and scrip may allude to her pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which she was induced to make in consequence of a vision. The letters S. P. Q. R. in a shield, are no doubt intended to denote the place, Rome, where she saw the vision, and where she died. The lion, the arms of Sweden, and the crown at her feet, are most likely intended to denote that she was a princess of the blood royal of that kingdom. The words above the figure of the saint are a brief invocation in the German language, “_O Brigita bit Got für uns!_” “O Bridget, pray to God for us!” At the foot of the desk at which St. Bridget is writing are the letters M. I. CHRS., an abbreviation probably of Mater Jesu Christi, or if German, Mutter Iesus Christus.[II-17]

[Footnote II-17: St. Bridget was a favourite saint in Germany, where many religious establishments of the rule of St. Saviour, introduced by her, were founded. A folio volume, containing the life, revelations, and legends of St. Bridget, was published by A. Koberger, Nuremberg, 1502, with the following title: “Das puch der Himlischen offenbarung der Heiligen wittiben Birgitte von dem Kunigreich Schweden.”]

From the appearance of the back of this cut, as if it had been rubbed smooth with a burnisher or rubber, there can be little doubt of the impression having been taken by means of friction. The colouring matter of the engraving is much lighter than in the St. Christopher and the Annunciation, and is like distemper or water-colour; while that of the latter cuts appears, as has been already observed, more like printer’s ink. It is coarsely coloured, and apparently by the hand, unassisted with the stencil. The face and hands are of a flesh colour. Her gown, as well as the pilgrim’s hat and scrip, are of a dark grey; her veil, which she wears hoodwise, is partly black and partly white; and the wimple which she wears round her neck is also white. The bench and desk, the pilgrim’s staff, the letters S. P. Q. R., the lion, the crown, and the nimbus surrounding the head of St. Bridget and that of the Virgin, are yellow. The ground is green, and the whole cut is surrounded with a border of a shining mulberry or lake colour.

Mr. Ottley, having at the very outset of his Inquiry adopted Papillon’s story of the Cunio, is compelled, for consistency’s sake, in the subsequent portion of his work, when speaking of early wood engravings such as the above, to consider them, not as the earliest known specimens of the art, but merely as wood engravings such as were produced upwards of a hundred and thirty years after the amiable and accomplished Cunio, a mere boy and a girl, had in Italy produced a set of wood engravings, one of which was so well composed that Le Brun might be suspected of having borrowed from it the design of one of his most complicated pictures. In his desire, in support of his theory, to refer the oldest wood-cuts to Italy, Mr. Ottley asks: “What if these two prints [the St. Christopher and the Annunciation] should prove to be, not the productions of Germany, but rather of Venice, or of some district of the territory then under the dominion of that republic?”

His principal reasons for the preceding conjecture, are the ancient use of the word _stampide_--“printed”--in the Venetian decree against the introduction of foreign playing-cards in 1441; and the resemblance which the Annunciation bears to the style of the early Italian schools. Now, with respect to the first of these reasons, it is founded on the assumption that both those impressions have been obtained by means of a press of some kind or other,--a fact which remains yet to be proved; for until the backs of both shall have been examined, and the mark of the burnisher or rubber found wanting, no person’s mere opinion, however confidently declared, can be decisive of the question. It also remains to be proved that the word _stampide_, which occurs in the Venetian decree, was employed there to signify “_printed with a press_.” For it is certain that the low Latin word _stampare_, with its cognates in the different languages of Europe, was used at that period to denote _impression_ generally. But even supposing that “_stampide_” signifies “printed” in the modern acceptation of the word, and that the two impressions in question were obtained by means of a press; the argument in favour of their being Italian would gain nothing, unless we assume that the _foreign_ printed cards and figures, which were forbid to be imported into Venice, were produced either within the territory of that state or in Italy; for the word _stampide_--“_printed_,” is applied to them as well as those manufactured within the city. Now we know that the German card-makers used to send great quantities of cards to Venice about the period when the decree was made, while we have no evidence of any Italian cities manufacturing cards for exportation in 1441; it is therefore most likely that if the Venetians were acquainted with the use of the press in taking impressions from wood-blocks, the Germans were so too, and for these more probable reasons, admitting the cuts in question to have been printed by means of a press:--First, the fact of those wood-cuts being discovered in Germany in the very district where we first hear of wood-engravers; and secondly, that if the Venetian wood-engravers were acquainted with the use of the press in taking impressions while the Germans were not, it is very unlikely that the latter would be able to undersell the Venetians in their own city. Until something like a probable reason shall be given for supposing the cuts in question to be productions “of Venice, or some other district of the territory then under the dominion of that republic,” I shall continue to believe that they were executed in the district in which they were discovered, and which has supplied to the collections of amateurs so many old wood engravings of a similar kind. No wood engravings executed in Italy, are known of a date earlier than those contained in the “Meditationes Johannis de Turre-cremata,” printed at Rome 1467,--and printed, be it observed, by a German, Ulrick Hahn. The circular wood engravings in the British Museum,[II-18] which Mr. Ottley says are indisputably Italian, and of the old dry taste of the fifteenth century, can scarcely be referred to an earlier period than 1500, and my own opinion is that they are not older than 1510. The manner in which they are engraved is that which we find prevalent in Italian wood-cuts executed between 1500 and 1520.

[Footnote II-18: Those cuts consist of illustrations of the New Testament. There are ten of them, apparently a portion of a larger series, in the British Museum; and they are marked in small letters, a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. k. n. That which is marked g. also contains the words “Opus Jacobi.” In this cut a specimen of cross-hatching may be observed, which was certainly very little practised--if at all--in Italy, before 1500.]

With respect to the resemblance which the Annunciation bears to the style of the early Italian school,--I beg to observe that it equally resembles many of the productions of contemporary “schools” of England and France, as displayed in many of the drawings contained in old illuminated manuscripts. It would be no difficult matter to point out in many old German engravings attitudes at least as graceful as the Virgin’s; and as to her drapery, which is said to be “wholly unlike the angular sharpness, the stiffness and the flutter of the ancient German school,” I beg to observe that those peculiarities are not of so frequent occurrence in the works of German artists, whether sculptors, painters, or wood-engravers, who lived before 1450, as in the works of those who lived after that period. Angular sharpness and flutter in the draperies are not so characteristic of early German art generally, as of German art towards the end of the fifteenth, and in the early part of the sixteenth century.

Even the St. Bridget, which he considers to be of a date not later than the close of the fourteenth century,[II-19] Mr. Ottley, with a German inscription before his eyes, is inclined to give to an artist of the Low Countries; and he kindly directs the attention of Coster’s partisans to the shield of arms--probably intended for those of Sweden--at the right-hand corner of the cut. Meerman had discovered a seal, having in the centre a shield charged with a lion rampant--the bearing of the noble family of Brederode--a label of three points, and the mark of illegitimacy--a bend sinister, and surrounded by the inscription, “S[igillum] Lowrens Janssoen,” which with him was sufficient evidence of its being the identical seal of Laurence, the Coster or churchwarden of Harlem.[II-20]

[Footnote II-19: Mr. Ottley’s reason for considering this cut to be so old is, that “after that period [1400] an artist, who was capable of designing so good a figure, could scarcely have been so grossly ignorant of every effect of linear perspective, as was evidently the case with the author of the performance before us.”--Inquiry, p. 87. Offences, however, scarcely less gross against the rules of linear perspective, are to be found in the wood-cuts in the Adventures of Sir Theurdank, 1517, many of which contain figures superior to that of St. Bridget. Errors in perspective are indeed frequent in the designs of many of the most eminent of Albert Durer’s contemporaries, although in other respects the figures may be correctly drawn, and the general composition good.]

[Footnote II-20: An engraving of this seal is given in the first volume of Meerman’s Origines Typographicæ.]

We thus perceive on what grounds the right of Germany to three of the oldest wood-cuts known is questioned; and upon what traits of resemblance they are ascribed to Italy and the Low Countries. By adopting Mr. Ottley’s mode of reasoning, it might be shown with equal probability that a very considerable number of early wood engravings--whether printed in books or separately--hitherto believed to be German, were really executed in Italy.

An old wood engraving of the martyrdom of St. Sebastian, of a quarto size, with a short prayer underneath, and the date 1437, apparently from the same block, was preserved in the monastery of St. Blaze, in the Black Forest on the confines of Suabia;[II-21] and another, with the date 1443 inserted in manuscript, was pasted in a volume belonging to the library of the monastery of Buxheim. The latter is thus described by Von Murr: “Through the kindness of the celebrated librarian, Krismer, whom I have so often mentioned, I am enabled to give an account of an illuminated wood-cut, which at the latest must have been engraved in 1443. It is pasted on the inside of the cover of a volume which contains ‘_Nicolai Dunkelspül_[II-22] Sermonum Partem Hyemalem.’ It is of quarto size, being seven and a half inches high, and five and a quarter wide, and is inclosed within a border of a single line. It is much soiled, as we perceive in the figures on cards which have been impressed by means of a rubber. The style in which it is executed is like that of no other wood-cut which I have ever seen. The cut itself represents three different subjects, the upper part of it being divided into two compartments, each three inches square, and separated from each other by means of a broad perpendicular line. In that to the right is seen St. Dorothy sitting in a garden, with the youthful Christ presenting flowers to her, of which she has her lap full. Before her stands a small hand-basket,--also full of flowers,--such as the ladies of Franconia and Suabia were accustomed to carry in former times. In the left compartment is seen St. Alexius, lying at the foot of a flight of steps, upon which a man is standing and emptying the contents of a pot upon the saint.[II-23] Between these compartments there appears in manuscript the date ‘_anno d’ni 1443_.’ Both the ink and the characters correspond with those of the volume. This date indicates the time when the writer had finished the book and got it bound, as is more clearly proved by a memorandum at the conclusion. In the year 1483, before it came into the possession of the monastery of Buxheim, it belonged to Brother Jacobus Matzenberger, of the order of the Holy Ghost, and curate of the church of the Virgin Mary in Memmingen. The whole of the lower part of the cut is occupied with Christ bearing his cross, at the moment that he meets with his mother, whom one of the executioners appears to be driving away. Simon of Cyrene is seen assisting Christ to carry the cross. The engraving is executed in a very coarse manner.”[II-24]

[Footnote II-21: Heineken, Neue Nachrichten von Künstlern und Kunstsachen. Dresden und Leipzig, 1786, S. 143.]

[Footnote II-22: In the Table des Matières to Jansen’s Essai sur l’Origine de la Gravure, Paris, 1808, we find “Dünkelspül (Nicolas) graveur Allemand en 1443.” After this specimen of accuracy, it is rather surprising that we do not find St. Alexius referred to also as “un graveur Allemand.”]

[Footnote II-23: St. Alexius returning unknown to his father’s house, as a poor pilgrim, was treated with great indignity by the servants.]

[Footnote II-24: Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 113-115.]

In the Royal Library at Paris there is an ancient wood-cut of St. Bernardin, who is represented on a terrace, the pavement of which consists of alternate squares of yellow, red, and green. In his right hand the saint holds something resembling the consecrated wafer or host, in the midst of which is inscribed the name of Christ; and in his left a kind of oblong casket, on which are the words “_Vide, lege, dulce nomen_.” Upon a scroll above the head of the saint is engraved the sentence, “_Ihesus semper sit in ore meo_,” and behind him, on a black label, is his name in yellow letters, “_Sanct’ Bernard’_.” The cut is surrounded by a border of foliage, with the emblems of the four Evangelists at the four corners, and at the foot are the five following lines, with the date, impressed from prominent lines:--

_O . splendor . pudicitie . zelator . paupertatis . a mator. innocentie . cultor . virginitatis . lustra cors . apientie . protector . veritatis . thro num . fulgidum . eterne . majestatis . para nobis . additum . divine . pietatis . amen. (1454)_

This rare cut was communicated to Jansen by M. Vanpraet, the well-known bibliographer and keeper of the Royal Library.[II-25]

[Footnote II-25: Jansen, Essai sur l’Origine de la Gravure, tom. i. p. 237. Jansen’s own authority on subjects connected with wood engraving is undeserving of attention. He is a mere compiler, who scarcely appears to have been able to distinguish a wood-cut from a copper-plate engraving.]

“Having visited in my last tour,” says Heineken, after describing the St. Christopher, “a great many convents in Franconia, Suabia, Bavaria, and in the Austrian states, I everywhere discovered in their libraries many of those kinds of figures, engraved on wood, and pasted either at the beginning or the end of old volumes of the fifteenth century. I have indeed obtained several of them. These facts, taken altogether, have confirmed me in my opinion that the next step of the engraver in wood, after playing-cards, was to engrave figures of saints, which, being distributed and lost among the laity, were in part preserved by the monks, who pasted them in the earliest printed books with which they furnished their libraries.”[II-26]

[Footnote II-26: Idée Générale, p. 251. Hartman Schedel, the compiler of the Nuremberg Chronicle, was accustomed to paste both old wood-cuts and copper-plate engravings within the covers of his books, many of which were preserved in the Library of the Elector of Bavaria at Munich.--Idée Gén. p. 287; and Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 115.]

A great many wood-cuts of devotional subjects, of a period probably anterior to the invention of book-printing by Gutenberg, have been discovered in Germany. They are all executed in a rude style, and many of them are coloured. It is not unlikely that the most of these woodcuts were executed at the instance of the monks for distribution among the common people as helps to devotion; and that each monastery, which might thus avail itself of the aid of wood engraving in the work of piety, would cause to be engraved the figure of its patron saint. The practice, in fact, of distributing such figures at monasteries and shrines to those who visit them, is not yet extinct on the Continent. In Belgium it is still continued, and, I believe, also in Germany, France, and Italy. The figures, however, are not generally impressions from wood-blocks, but are for the most part wholly executed by means of stencils. One of the latter class, representing the shrine of “Notre Dame de Hal,”--coloured in the most wretched taste with brick-dust red and shining green,--is now lying before me. It was given to a gentleman who visited Halle, near Brussels, in 1829. It is nearly of the same size as many of the old devotional wood-cuts of Germany, being about four inches high, by two and three-quarters wide.[II-27]

[Footnote II-27: Heineken thus speaks of those old devotional cuts: “On trouve dans la Bibliothèque de Wolfenbüttel de ces sortes d’estampes, qui représentent différens sujets de l’histoire sainte et de dévotion, avec du texte vis à vis de la figure, tout gravé en bois. Ces pièces sont de la même grandeur que nos cartes à jouer: elles portent 3 pouces de hauteur sur 2 pouces 6 lignes de largeur.”--Idée Générale, p. 249.]

The next step in the progress of wood engraving, subsequent to the production of single cuts, such as the St. Christopher, the Annunciation, and the St. Bridget, in each of which letters are sparingly introduced, was the application of the art to the production of those works which are known to bibliographers by the name of BLOCK-BOOKS: the most celebrated of which are the Apocalypsis, seu Historia Sancti Johannis; the Historia Virginis ex Cantico Canticorum; and the Biblia Pauperum. The first is a history, pictorial and literal, of the life and revelations of St. John the Evangelist, derived in part from the traditions of the church, but chiefly from the book of Revelations. The second is a similar history of the Virgin, as it is supposed to be typified in the Songs of Solomon; and the third consists of subjects representing some of the most important passages in the Old and New Testament, with texts either explaining the subject, or enforcing the example of duty which it may afford. With the above, the Speculum Humanæ Salvationis is usually, though improperly, classed, as the whole of the text, in that which is most certainly the first edition, is printed from movable metal types. In the others the explanatory matter is engraved on wood, on the same block with the subject to which it refers.

All the above books have been claimed by Meerman and other Dutch writers for their countryman, Laurence Coster: and although no date, either impressed or manuscript, has been discovered in any one copy from which the period of its execution might be ascertained,[II-28] yet such appears to have been the clearness of the intuitive light which guided those authors, that they have assigned to each work the precise year in which it appeared. According to Seiz, the History of the Old and New Testament, otherwise called the Biblia Pauperum, appeared in 1432; the History of the Virgin in 1433; the Apocalypse in 1434; and the Speculum in 1439. For such assertions, however, he has not the slightest ground. That the three first might appear at some period between 1430 and 1450, is not unlikely;[II-29] but that the Speculum--_the text of which in the first edition was printed from metal types_--should be printed before 1460, is in the highest degree improbable.

[Footnote II-28: A copy of the Speculum belonging to the city of Harlem had at the commencement, “_Ex Officina Laurentii Joannis Costeri. Anno 1440_.” But this inscription had been inserted by a modern hand--Idée Générale, p. 449.]

[Footnote II-29: In the catalogue of Dr. Kloss’s Library, No. 2024, is a “Historia et Apocalypsis Johannis Evangelistæ,” imperfect, printed from wooden blocks. The following are the observations of the editor or compiler of the catalogue: “At the end of the volume is a short note, written by Pope Martin V., who occupied the papal chair from 1417 to 1431. This appears to accord with the edition described by Heineken at page 360, excepting in the double _a_, No. 3 and 4.” If the note referred to were genuine, and actually written in the book, a certain date would be at once established. The information, however, comes in a questionable shape, as the English _rédacteur’s_ power of ascertaining who were the writers of ancient MS. notes appears little short of miraculous.]

Upon extremely slight grounds it has been conjectured that the Biblia Pauperum, the Apocalypse, and the Ars Moriendi,--another block-book,--were engraved before the year 1430. The Rev. T. H. Horne, “a gentleman long and well known for his familiar acquaintance with books printed abroad,” says Dr. Dibdin, “had a copy of each of the three books above mentioned, bound in one volume, upon the cover of which the following words were stamped: Hic liber relegatus fuit per Plebanum. ecclesie”--with the date, according to the best of the Rev. Mr. Horne’s recollection, 142(8). As he had broken up the volume, and had parted with the contents, he gave the above information on the strength of his memory alone. He was, however, confident that “the binding was the ancient legitimate one, and that the treatises had not been subsequently introduced into it, and that the date was 142 odd; but positively anterior to 1430.”[II-30]

[Footnote II-30: Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. p. 4, cited in Ottley’s Inquiry, vol. i. p. 99.]

In such a case as this, however, mere recollection cannot be admitted as decisive of the fact, more especially when we know the many instances in which mistakes have been committed in reading the numerals in ancient dates. At page 88 of his Inquiry, Mr. Ottley, catching at every straw that may help to support his theory of wood engraving having been practised by the Cunio and others in the fourteenth century, refers to a print which a Monsieur Thierry professed to have seen at Lyons, inscribed “SCHOTING OF NUREMBERG,” with the date 1384; and at p. 256 he alludes to it again in the following words: “The date 1384 on the wood-cut preserved at Lyons, said to have been executed at Nuremberg, appears, I know not why, to have been suspected.” It has been more than suspected; for, on examination, it has been found to be 1584. Paul Von Stettin published an account of a Biblia Pauperum, the date of which he supposed to be 1414; but which, when closely examined, was found to be 1474: and Baron Von Hupsch, of Cologne, published in 1787 an account of some wood-cuts which he supposed to have been executed in 1420; but which, in the opinion of Breitkopf, were part of the cuts of a Biblia Pauperum, in which it was probably intended to give the explanations in moveable types underneath the cuts, and probably of a later date than 1470.[II-31]

[Footnote II-31: Singer’s Researches into the History of Playing-cards, p. 107.]

It is surprising that the Rev. Mr. Horne, who is no incurious observer of books, but an author who has written largely on Bibliography, should not have carefully copied so remarkable a date, or communicated it to a friend, when it might have been confirmed by a careful examination of the binding; and still more surprising is it that such binding should have been destroyed. From the very fact of his not having paid more particular attention to this most important date, and from his having permitted the evidence of it to be destroyed, the Rev. Mr. Horne seems to be an incompetent witness. Who would think of calling a person to prove from recollection the date of an old and important deed, who, when he had it in his possession, was so little aware of its value as to throw it away? The three books in question, when covered by such a binding, would surely be much greater than when bound in any other manner. Such a volume must have been unique; and, if the date on the binding were correct, it must have been admitted as decisive of a fact interesting to every bibliographer in Europe. It is not even mentioned in what kind of numerals the date was expressed, whether in Roman or Arabic. If the numerals had been Arabic, we might very reasonably suppose that the Rev. Mr. Horne had mistaken a seven for a two, and that, instead of “142 odd,” the correct date was “147 odd.” In Arabic numerals, such as were used about the middle of the fifteenth century, the seven may very easily be mistaken for a two.

The earliest ancient binding known, on which a date is impressed, is, I believe, that described by Laire.[II-32] It is that of a copy of “Sancti Hieronymi Epistolæ;” and the words, in the same manner as that of the binding of which the Rev. Mr. Horne had so accurate a recollection, were “stamped at the extremity of the binding, towards the edge of the squares.” It is only necessary to cite the words impressed on one of the boards, which were as follows:

“Illigatus est Anno Domini 1469 Per me Johannem Richenbach Capellanum In Gyslingen.”[II-33]

[Footnote II-32: Index Librorum ab inventa Typographia ad annum 1500, No. 37.]

[Footnote II-33: Mr. Bohn is in possession of a similarly bound volume, namely, “Astexani de Ast, Scrutinium Scripturarum,” printed by Mentelin, without date, but about 1468, on the pig-skin covers of which is printed in bold black letter, _Per me Rich-en-bach illigatus in Gysslingen 1470_.]

The numerals of the date it is to be observed were Arabic. In the library of Dr. Kloss of Frankfort, sold in London by Sotheby and Son in 1835, were two volumes, “St. Augustini de Civitat. Dei, Libri xxii. 1469,” and “St. Augustini Confessiones” of the same date; both of which were bound by “Johannes Capellanus in Gyslingen,” and who in the same manner had impressed his name on the covers with the date 1470. Both volumes had belonged to “Dominus Georgius Ruch de Gamundia.”[II-34] That the volume formerly in the Rev. Mr. Horne’s possession was bound by the curate of Geisslingen I by no means pretend to say, though I am firmly of opinion that it was bound subsequent to 1470, and that the character which he supposed to be a two was in reality a different figure. It is worthy of remark that it appears to have been bound by the “Plebanus” of some church, a word which is nearly synonymous with “Capellanus.”[II-35]

[Footnote II-34: “Catalogue of the Library of Dr. Kloss of Frankfort,” Nos. 460 and 468. Geisslingen is about fifteen miles north-west of Ulm in Suabia, and Gemund about twelve miles northward of Geisslingen.]

[Footnote II-35: Mr. Singer, at page 101 of his Researches into the History of Playing-cards, speaks of “_one_ Plebanus of Augsburg,” as if Plebanus were a proper name. It has nearly the same meaning as our own word “Curate.” “PLEBANUS, Parœcus, Curio, Sacerdos, qui _plebi_ præest; Italis, _Piovano_; Gallo-Belgis, _Pleban_. Balbus in Catholico: ‘Plebanus, dominus plebis, Presbyter, qui plebem regit.’--Plebanum vero maxime vocant in ecclesiis cathedralibus seu collegiatis canonicum, cui plebis earum jurisdictioni subditæ cura committitur.”--Du Cange, Glossarium, in verbo “Plebanus.”]

As it does not come within the plan of the present volume to give a catalogue of all the subjects contained in the block-books to which it may be necessary to refer as illustrating the progress of wood engraving, I shall confine myself to a general notice of the manner in which the cuts are executed, with occasional observations on the designs, and such remarks as may be likely to explain any peculiarity of appearance, or to enable the reader to form a distinct idea of the subject referred to.

At whatever period the Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, and the Biblia Pauperum may have been executed, the former has the appearance of being the earliest; and in the absence of everything like proof upon the point, and as the style in which it is engraved is certainly more simple than that of the other two, it seems entitled to be first noticed in tracing the progress of the art.

Of the Apocalypse,--or “Historia Sancti Johannis Evangelistæ ejusque Visiones Apocalypticæ,” as it is mostly termed by bibliographers, for the book itself has no title,--Heineken mentions no less than six editions, the earliest of which he considers to be that described by him at page 367 of his “Idée Générale d’une Collection complète d’Estampes.” He, however, declares that the marks by which he has assigned to each edition its comparative antiquity are not infallible. It is indeed very evident that the marks which he assumed as characteristic of the relative order of the different editions were merely arbitrary, and could by no means be admitted as of the slightest consequence in enabling any person to form a correct opinion on the subject. He notices two editions as the first and second, and immediately after he mentions a circumstance which might almost entitle the third to take precedence of them both; and that which he saw last he thinks the oldest of all. The designs of the second edition described by him, he says, are by another master than those of the first, although the artist has adhered to the same subjects and the same ideas. The third, according to his observations, differs from the first and second, both in the subjects and the descriptive text. The fourth edition is from the same blocks as the third; the only difference between them being, that the fourth is without the letters in alphabetical order which indicate the succession of the cuts. The fifth differed from the third or fourth only in the text and the directing letters, as the designs were the same; the only variations that could be observed being extremely trifling. After having described five editions of the book, he decides that a sixth, which he saw after the others, ought to be considered the earliest of all.[II-36] In all the copies which he had seen, the impressions had been taken by means of a rubber, in such a manner that each leaf contained only one engraving; the other side, which commonly bore the marks of the rubber, being without a cut. The impressions when collected into a volume faced each other, so that the first and last pages were blank.

[Footnote II-36: Idée Générale, pp. 334-370.]

The edition of the Apocalypse to which I shall now refer is that described by Heineken, at page 364, as the fifth; and the copy is that mentioned by him, at page 367, as then being in the collection of M. de Gaignat, and as wanting two cuts, Nos. 36 and 37. It is at present in the King’s Library at the British Museum.

It is a thin folio in modern red morocco binding, and has, when perfect, consisted of fifty wood engravings, with their explanatory text also cut in wood, generally within an oblong border of a single line, within the _field_ of the engraving, and not added underneath, as in the Speculum Salvationis, nor in detached compartments, both above and below, as in the Biblia Pauperum. The paper, which is somewhat of a cream colour, is stout, with rather a coarse surface, and such as we find the most ancient books printed on. As each leaf has been pasted down on another of modern paper, in order to preserve it, the marks of the rubber at the back of each impression, as described by Heineken, cannot be seen. The annexed outline is a reduced copy of a paper-mark, which may be perceived on some of the leaves. It is very like that numbered “vii.” at p. 224, vol. i. of Mr. Ottley’s Inquiry, and which he says occurs in the edition called the first Latin of the Speculum Salvationis. It is nearly the same as that which is to be seen in Earl Spencer’s “Historia Virginis;” and Santander states that he has noticed a similar mark in books printed at Cologne by Ulric Zell, and Bart. de Unkel; at Louvain by John Veldener and Conrad Braen; and in books printed at Utrecht by Nic. Ketelaer and Gerard de Leempt.

The size of the largest cuts, as defined by the plain lines which form the border, is about ten and five-eighths inches high, by seven and six-eighths inches wide; of the smallest, ten and two-eighths inches high, by seven and three-eighths wide.[II-37] The order in which they are to be placed in binding is indicated by a letter of the alphabet, which serves the same purpose as our modern signatures,--engraved in a conspicuous part of the cut. For instance, the first two, which, as well as the others, might either face each other or be pasted back to back, are each marked with the letter +a+; the two next with the letter +b+, and so on through the alphabet. As the alphabet--which has the i the same as the j, the v the same as the u, and has not the w--became exhausted at the forty-sixth cut, the forty-seventh and forty-eighth are marked with a character which was used to represent the words “et cetera;” and the forty-ninth and fiftieth with the terminal abbreviation of the letters “us.” In the copy described by Heineken, he observed that the directing letters +m+ and +n+ were wanting in the twenty-fourth and twenty-sixth cuts, and in the copy under consideration they are also omitted. The m, however, appears to have been engraved, though for some reason or other not to have been inked in taking an impression; for on a careful examination of this cut,--without being aware at the time of Heineken having noticed the omission,--I thought that I could very plainly discern the indention of the letter above one of the angels in the upper compartment of the print.

[Footnote II-37: In the copy of the Biblia Pauperum in the British Museum, Inches. Inches. The largest cut is 10-4/8 high, and 7-5/8 wide. The smallest -- 10-1/8 -- -- 7-5/8 --

In the Historia Virginis, also in the British Museum, The largest cut is 10-3/8 high, and 7-2/8 wide. The smallest -- 9-7/8 -- -- 6-7/8 --]

Of the forty-eight cuts[II-38] contained in the Museum copy, the greater number are divided by a horizontal line, nearly in the middle, and thus each consists of two compartments; of the remainder, each is occupied by a single subject, which fills the whole page. In some, the explanatory text consists only of two or three lines; and in others it occupies so large a space, that if it were set up in moderately sized type, it would be sufficient to fill a duodecimo page. The characters are different from those in the History of the Virgin and the Biblia Pauperum, and are smaller than those of the former, and generally larger and more distinctly cut than those of the latter; and although, as well as in the two last-named books, the words are much abbreviated, yet they are more easy to be made out than the text of either of the others. The impressions on the whole are better taken than those of the Biblia Pauperum, though in lighter-coloured ink, something like a greyish sepia, and apparently of a thinner body. It does not appear to have contained any oil, and is more like distemper or water-colour than printer’s ink. From the manner in which the lines are indented in the paper, in several of the cuts, it is evident that they must either have been subjected to a considerable degree of pressure or have been very hard rubbed.

[Footnote II-38: The two which are wanting are those numbered 36 and 37--that is, the second +s+, and the first +t+--in Heineken’s collation. Although there is a memorandum at the commencement of the book that those cuts are wanting, yet the person who has put in the numbers, in manuscript, at the foot of each, has not noticed the omission, but has continued the numbers consecutively, marking that 36 which in a perfect copy is 38, and so on to the rest. A reference to Heineken from those manuscript numbers subsequent to the thirty-fifth cut would lead to error.]

Although some of the figures bear a considerable degree of likeness to others of the same kind in the Biblia Pauperum, I cannot think that the designs for both books were made by the same person. The figures in the different works which most resemble each other are those of saints and angels, whose form and expression have been represented according to a conventional standard, to which most of the artists of the period conformed, in the same manner as in representing the Almighty and Christ, whether they were painters, glass-stainers, carvers, or wood-engravers. In many of the figures the drapery is broken into easy and natural folds by means of single lines; and if this were admitted as a ground for assigning the cut of the Annunciation to Italy, with much greater reason might the Apocalypse be ascribed to the same country.

Without venturing to give an opinion whether the cuts were engraved in Germany, Holland, or in the Low Countries, the drawing of many of the figures appears to correspond with the idea that I have formed of the style of Greek art, such as it was in the early part of the fifteenth century. St. John was the favourite apostle of the Greeks, as St. Peter was of the church of Rome; and as the Revelations were more especially addressed to the churches of Greece, they were more generally read in that country than in Western Europe. Artists mostly copy, in the heads which they draw, the general expression of the country[II-39] to which they belong, and where they have received their first impressions; and in the Apocalypse the character of several of the heads appears to be decidedly Grecian. The general representation, too, of several visions would seem to have been suggested by a Greek who was familiar with that portion of the New Testament which was so generally perused in his native land, and whose annunciations and figurative prophecies were, in the early part of the fifteenth century, commonly supposed by his countrymen to relate to the Turks, who at that time were triumphing over the cross. With them Mahomet was the Antichrist of the Revelations, and his followers the people bearing the mark of the beast, who were to persecute, and for a time to hold in bondage, the members of the church of Christ. As many Greeks, both artists and scholars, were driven from their country by the oppression of the Turks several years before the taking of Constantinople in 1453, I am induced to think that to a Greek we owe the designs of this edition of the Apocalypse. In the lower division of the twenty-third cut, _m_, representing the fight of Michael and his angels with the dragon, the following shields are borne by two of the heavenly host.

[Footnote II-39: Witness Rembrandt, who never gets rid of the Dutch character, no matter how elevated his subject may be.]

The crescent, as is well known, was one of the badges of Constantinople long previous to its capture by the Turks. The sort of cross in the other shield is very like that in the arms of the knights of St. Constantine, a military order which is said to have been founded at Constantinople by the Emperor Isaac Angelus Comnenus, in 1190. The above coincidences, though trifling, tend to support the opinion that the designs were made by a Greek artist. It is, however, possible, that the badges on the shields may have been suggested by the mere fancy of the designer, and that they may equally resemble the heraldic bearings of some order or of some individuals of Western Europe.

Though some of the designs are very indifferent, yet there are others which display considerable ability, and several of the single figures are decidedly superior to any that are contained in the other block-books. They are drawn with greater vigour and feeling; and though the designs of the Biblia Pauperum show a greater knowledge of the mechanism of art, yet the best of them, in point of expression and emphatic marking of character, are inferior to the best in the Apocalypse.

With respect to the engraving, the cuts are executed in the simplest manner, as there is not the least attempt at shading, by means of cross lines or hatchings, to be perceived in any one of the designs. The most difficult part of the engraver’s task, supposing the drawings to have been made by another person, would be the cutting of the letters, which in several of the subjects must have occupied a considerable portion of time, and have required no small degree of care. The following is a reduced copy of the first cut.

In the upper portion of the subject, St. John is seen addressing four persons, three men and a woman; and the text at the top informs us of the success of his ministry: “_Conversi ab idolis, per predicationem beati Johannis, Drusiana et ceteri._”--“By the preaching of St. John, Drusiana and others are withdrawn from their idols.” The letter +a+, a little above the saint’s outstretched hand, indicates that the cut is the first of the series. In the lower compartment St. John is seen baptizing Drusiana, who, as she stands naked in the font, is of very small size compared with the saint. The situation in which Drusiana is placed might be alleged in support of their peculiar tenets, either by the Baptists, who advocate immersion as the proper mode of administering the rite, or by those who consider sprinkling as sufficient; but in each case with a difficulty which it would not be easy to explain: for if Drusiana were to be baptized by immersion, the font is too small to allow her to be dipped overhead; and if the rite were to be administered by mere sprinkling, why is she standing naked in the font? To the right of the cut are several figures, two of whom are provided with axes, who seem wishful to break open the door of the chapel in which St. John and his proselyte are seen. The inscription above their heads lets us know that they are--“_Cultores ydolorum explorantes facta ejus_;”-- “Worshippers of idols watching the saint’s proceedings.”

The following cut is a copy of the eighteenth of the Apocalypse, which is illustrative of the XIth and XIIIth chapters of Revelations. The upper portion represents the execution of the two witnesses of the Lord, who are in the tablet named Enoch and Helyas, by the command of the beast which ascendeth out of the bottomless pit, and which is Antichrist. He is seen issuing his commands for the execution of the witnesses; and the face of the executioner who has just used his sword, and who is looking towards him with an expression of brutal exultation, might have served Albert Durer for that of the mocker in his cut of Christ crowned with thorns.

The inscription to the right, is the 7th verse of the XIth chapter, with the names of Enoch and Helyas inserted as those of the two witnesses: “_Cum finierunt Enoch et Helyas testimonium suum, bestia quæ ascendit de abisso faciet contra eos bellum, et vincet eos et occidet illos_.” In our translation the verse is rendered thus: “And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them and kill them.”

The tablet to the left contains the following inscription: “_Et jacebunt corpora eorum in plateis, et non sinent poni in monumentis_.” It is formed of two passages, in the 8th and 9th verses of the XIth chapter of Revelations, which are thus rendered in our version of the Bible: “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street, . . . and they of the people . . . shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.”

In the lower compartment Antichrist is seen working his miracles, uprooting the two olive trees, typical of the two witnesses whom he had caused to be slain.[II-40] Two of his followers are seen kneeling as if worshipping him, while more to the left are the supporters of the true faith delivered into the hands of executioners. The design is illustrative of the XIIIth chapter of Revelations. The following is the inscription above the figure of Antichrist:--“_Hic facit Antichristus miracula sua, et credentes in ipsum honorat, et incredentes variis interficit pœnis_.”--“Here Antichrist is performing his miracles, honouring those who believe in him, and putting the incredulous to death by various punishments.” The leaves of the trees which Antichrist has miraculously uprooted are extremely like those of the tree of life engraved in one of the cuts of the Biblia Pauperum, and of which a copy will be found in a subsequent page.

[Footnote II-40: Revelations, chap. xi. verses 3d and 4th.]

In several of the cuts, the typical expressions which occur in the texts are explained. Thus, in cut eighth, we are informed that “_Stolæ albæ animarum gloriam designant_.”--“The white vestments denote the glory of departed souls.” In the lower compartment of the same cut, the “_cæli recessio_”--“the opening of the heavens”--is explained to be the communication of the Bible to the Gentiles. In the lower compartment of the ninth cut, “much incense” is said to signify the precepts of the Gospel; the “censers,” the hearts of the Apostles; and the “golden altar,” the Church.

The next block-book which demands notice is that named “Historia seu Providentia Virginis Mariæ, ex Cantico Canticorum:” that is, “The History or Prefiguration of the Virgin Mary, from the Song of Songs.” It is of small-folio size, and consists of sixteen leaves, printed on one side only by means of friction; and the ink is of a dark brown, approaching nearly to black. Each impressed page contains two subjects, one above the other; the total number of subjects in the book is, consequently, thirty-two.

Of this book, according to the observations of Heineken, there are two editions; which, from variations noticed by him in the explanatory text, are evidently from different blocks; but, as the designs are precisely the same, it is certain that the one has been copied from the other.[II-41] That which he considers to be the first edition, has, in his opinion, been engraved in Germany; the other, he thinks, was a copy of the original, executed by some engraver in Holland. The principal ground on which he determines the priority of the editions is, that in the one the text is much more correctly given than in the other; and he thence concludes that the most correct would be the second. In this opinion I concur; not that his rule will universally hold good, but that in this case the conclusion which he has drawn seems the most probable. The designs, it is admitted, are precisely the same; and as the cuts of the one would in all probability be engraved from tracings or transfers of the other, it is not likely that we should find such a difference in the text of the two editions if that of the first were correct. A wood-engraver--on this point I speak from experience--would be much more likely to commit literal errors in copying manuscript, than to deviate in cutting a fac-simile from a correct impression. Had the text of the first edition been correct,--considering that the designs of the one edition are exact copies of those of the other,--it is probable that the text of both would have been more nearly alike. But as there are several errors in the text of the first edition, it is most likely that many of them would be discovered and corrected by the person at whose instance the designs were copied for the second. Diametrically opposite to this conclusion is that of Mr. Ottley, who argues as follows:[II-42] “Heineken endeavours to draw another argument in favour of the originality of the edition possessed by Pertusati, Verdussen, and the Bodleian library, from the various errors, in that edition, in the Latin inscriptions on the scrolls; which, he says, are corrected in the other edition. But it is evident that this circumstance makes in favour of an opposite conclusion. The artist who originally invented the work must have been well acquainted with Latin, since it is, in fact, no other than an union of many of the most beautiful verses of the Book of Canticles, with a series of designs illustrative of the divine mysteries supposed to be revealed in that sacred poem; and, consequently, we have reason to consider that edition the original in which the inscriptions are given with the most correctness; and to ascribe the gross blunders in the other to the ignorance of some ordinary wood-engraver by whom the work was copied.” Even granting the assumption that the engraver of the edition, supposed by Mr. Ottley to be the first, was well acquainted with Latin, and that he who engraved the presumed second did not understand a word of that language, yet it by no means follows that the latter could not make a correct tracing of the engraved text lying before him. Because a draughtsman is unacquainted with a language, it would certainly be most erroneous to infer that he would be incapable of copying the characters correctly. Besides, though it does not benefit his argument a whit, it is surely assuming too much to assert that the artist who made the designs also selected the texts, and that he _must_ have been well acquainted with Latin; and that he who executed Mr. Ottley’s presumed second edition was some ignorant ordinary wood-engraver. Did the artists who executed the fac-similes in Mr. Ottley’s work, or in Dr. Dibdin’s “Bibliotheca Spenceriana,” understand the abbreviated Latin which in many instances they had to engrave; and did they in consequence of their ignorance of that language copy incorrectly the original texts and sentences which were before them?

[Footnote II-41: Idée Générale, p. 376.]

[Footnote II-42: Inquiry, vol. i. p. 140.]

In a copy which Heineken considers to be of the second edition, belonging to the city of Harlem, that writer observed the following inscription, from a wood block, impressed, as I understand him, at the top of the first cut. “+Dit is die voersinicheit va Marie der mod . godes . en is gehete in lath+ . _Cāti._” This inscription--which Heineken says is “en langue Flamande, ou plûtôt en Plât-Alemand”--may be expressed in English as follows: “This is the prefiguration of Mary the mother of God, and is in Latin named the Canticles.” Heineken expresses no doubt of this inscription being genuine, though he makes use of it as an argument in support of his opinion, that the copy in which it occurs was one of later edition; “for it is well known,” he observes, “that the earliest editions of printed books are without titles, and more especially those of block-books.” As this inscription, however, has been found in the Harlem copy only, I am inclined to agree with Mr. Ottley in considering it as a silly fraud devised by some of the compatriots of Coster for the purpose of establishing a fact which it is, in reality, much better calculated to overthrow.[II-43]

[Footnote II-43: Inquiry, p. 140.]

Heineken, who appears to have had more knowledge than taste on the subject of art, declares the History of the Virgin to be “the most Gothic of all the block-books; that it is different from them both in the style of the designs and of the engraving; and that the figures are very like the ancient sculptures in the churches of Germany.” If by the term “Gothic” he means rude and tasteless, I differ with him entirely; for, though there be great sameness in the subjects, yet the figures, generally, are more gracefully designed than those of any other block-book that I have seen. Compared with them, those of the Biblia Pauperum and the Speculum might be termed “Gothic” indeed.

The above group,--from that which Heineken considers the first edition,--in which the figures are of the size of the originals, is taken from the seventh subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration;[II-44] that is, from the upper portion of the fourth cut.

[Footnote II-44: Inquiry, p. 144, vol. i.]

The text is the 14th verse of the 1st chapter of the Song of Solomon: “_Botrus cipri dilectus meus inter vineas enngadi_;” which in our Bible is translated: “My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of En-gedi.” In every cut the female figures are almost precisely the same, and the drapery and the expression scarcely vary. From the easy and graceful attitudes of his female figures, as well as from the manner in which they are clothed, the artist may be considered as the Stothard of his day.

The two preceding subjects are impressed on the second leaf, in the order in which they are here represented, forming Nos. 3 and 4 in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration. They are reduced copies from the originals in the first edition, and afford a correct idea of a complete page.[II-45]

[Footnote II-45: The copy from which the preceding specimens are given was formerly the property of the Rev. C. M. Cracherode, by whom it was left, with the rest of his valuable collection of books, to the British Museum.]

On the scroll to the left, in the upper subject, the words are intended for--“_Trahe me, post te curremus in odore unguentorum tuorum_.” They are to be found in the 4th and 3rd verses of the 1st chapter of the Song of Solomon. In our Bible the phrases are translated as follows: “Draw me, we will run after thee, . . . [in] the savour of thy good ointments.” In the scroll to the right, the inscription is from the 14th verse of the IInd chapter: “_Sonet vox tua in auribus meis, vox enim tua dulcis et facies tua decora_:” which is thus rendered in our Bible: “Let me hear thy voice, for sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely.”

On the scroll to the left, in the lower compartment, is the following inscription, from verse 10th, chapter IInd: “_En dilectus meus loquitur mihi, Surge, propera, amica mea_:” in our Bible translated thus: “My beloved spake, and said unto me, Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away.” The inscription on the scroll to the right is from 1st verse of chapter IVth: “_Quam pulchra es amica mea, quam pulchra es! Oculi tui columbarum, absque eo quod intrinsecus latet._” The translation of this passage in our Bible does not correspond with that of the Vulgate in the last clause: “Behold thou art fair, my love; behold thou art fair; thou hast doves’ eyes _within thy locks_.”

The style in which the cuts of the History of the Virgin are engraved indicates a more advanced state of art than those in the Apocalypse. The field of each cut is altogether better filled, and the subjects contain more of what an engraver would term “work;” and shadowing, which is represented by courses of single lines, is also introduced. The back-grounds are better put in, and throughout the whole book may be observed several indications of a perception of natural beauty; such as the occasional introduction of trees, flowers, and animals. A vine-stock, with its trellis, is happily and tastefully introduced at folio 4 and folio 10; and at folio 12 a goat and two sheep, drawn and engraved with considerable ability, are perceived in the background. Several other instances of a similar kind might be pointed out as proofs that the artist, whoever he might be, was no unworthy precursor of Albert Durer.

From a fancied delicacy in the engraving of the cuts of the History of the Virgin, Dr. Dibdin was led to conjecture that they were the “production of some metallic substance, and not struck off from wooden blocks.”[II-46] This speculation is the result of a total ignorance of the practical part of wood engraving, and of the capabilities of the art; and the very process which is suggested involves a greater difficulty than that which is sought to be removed. But, in fact, so far from the engravings being executed with a delicacy unattainable on wood, there is nothing in them--so far as the mere cutting of fancied delicate lines is concerned--which a mere apprentice of the present day, using very ordinary tools, would not execute as well, either on pear-tree, apple-tree, or beech, the kinds of wood on which the earliest engravings are supposed to have been made. Working on box, there is scarcely a line in all the series which a skilful wood-engraver could not split. In a similar manner Mr. John Landseer conjectured from the frequent occurrence of cross-hatching in the wood engravings of the sixteenth century, that they, instead of being cut on wood, had in reality been executed on type-metal; although, as is known to every wood-engraver, the execution of such hatchings on type-metal would be more difficult than on wood. When, in refutation of his opinion, he was shown impressions from such presumed blocks or plates of type-metal, which from certain marks in the impressions had been evidently worm-eaten, he--in the genuine style of an “ingenious disputant” who could

“Confute the exciseman and puzzle the vicar,--”

abandoned type-metal, and fortified his “_stubborn_ opinion behind _vegetable putties_ or pastes that are capable of being hardened--or any substance that is capable of being _worm-eaten_.”[II-47] Such “commenta opinionum”--the mere figments of conjecture--only deserve notice in consequence of their extravagance.

[Footnote II-46: Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. p. 36. Mr. Ottley cites the passage at p. 139, vol i. of his Inquiry, for the purpose of expressing his dissent from the theory.]

[Footnote II-47: Landseer’s Lectures on the Art of Engraving, pp. 201-205, 8vo. London, 1807.]

The History of the Virgin, in the same manner as every other ancient block-book, has been claimed for Coster by those who ascribe to him the invention both of wood engraving and printing with moveable types; but if even the churchwarden of St. Bavon’s in Harlem ever had handled a graver, or made a design, or if he was even the cause of wood-cuts being engraved by others,--every one of which assertions I very much doubt,--I should yet feel strongly inclined to believe that the work in question was the production of an artist residing either in Suabia or Alsace.

Scarcely any person who has had an opportunity of examining the works of Martin Schön, or Schöngauer,--one of the earliest German copper-plate engravers,--who is said to have died in 1486, can fail, on looking over the designs in the History of the Virgin, to notice the resemblance which many of his female figures bear to those in the above-named work. The similarity is too striking to have been accidental. I am inclined to believe that Martin Schön must have studied--and diligently too--the subjects contained in the History, or that he had received his professional education in a school which might possibly be founded by the artist who designed and engraved the wood-cuts in question, or under a master who had thoroughly adopted their style.

Martin Schön was a native of Colmar in Alsace, where he was born about 1453, but was a descendant of a family, probably of artists, which originally belonged to Augsburg. Heineken and Von Murr both bear testimony,[II-48] though indirectly, to the resemblance which his works bear to the designs in the History of the Virgin. The former states that the figures in the History are very like the ancient sculptures in the churches of Germany, and Von Murr asserts that such sculptures were probably Martin Schön’s models.

[Footnote II-48: Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 374. Von Murr, Journal, 2 Theil, S. 43.]

In two or three of the designs in the History of the Virgin several shields of arms are introduced, either borne by figures, or suspended from a wall. As the heraldic emblems on such shields were not likely to be entirely suggested by the mere fancy of the artist, I think that most of them will be found to belong to Germany rather than to Holland; and the charge on one of them,--two fish back to back, which is rather remarkable, and by no means common, is one of the quarterings of the former Counts of Wirtemberg, the very district in which I am inclined to think the work was executed. I moreover fancy that in one of the cuts I can perceive an allusion to the Council of Basle, which in 1439 elected Amadeus of Savoy as Pope, under the title of Felix V, in opposition to Eugene IV. In order to afford those who are better acquainted with the subject an opportunity of judging for themselves, and of making further discoveries which may support my opinions if well-founded, or which may correct them if erroneous, I shall give copies of all the shields of arms which occur in the book. The following cut of four figures--a pope, two cardinals, and a bishop--occurs in the upper compartment of the nineteenth folio. The shield charged with a black eagle also occurs in the same compartment.

The preceding figures are seen looking over the battlements of a house in which the Virgin, typical of the Church, is seen in bed. On a scroll is inscribed the following sentence, from the Song of Solomon, chap. iii. v. 2: “_Surgam et circumibo civitatem; per vicos et plateas queram quem diligit anima mea_:” which is thus translated in our Bible: “I will rise now, and go about the city in the streets, and in the broad ways I will seek him whom my soul loveth.” In the same design, the Virgin, with her three attendants, are seen in a street, where two men on horseback appear taking away her mantle. One of the men bears upon his shield the figure of a black eagle, the same as that which appears underneath the wood-cut above given. Upon a scroll is this inscription, from Solomon’s Song, chapter V. verse 7: “_Percusserunt et vulneraverunt me, tulerunt pallium meum custodes murorum_.” In our Bible the entire verse is thus translated: “The watchmen that went about the city found me; they smote me, they wounded me: the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.”

As the incidents in the life of the Virgin, described in the Canticles, were assumed by commentators to be typical of the history of the Church, I am inclined to think that the above cut may contain an allusion to the disputes between Pope Eugene IV. and the Council assembled at Basle in 1439. The passage in the first inscription, “I will seek him whom my soul loveth,” might be very appropriately applied to a council which professed to represent the Church, and which had chosen for itself a new head. The second inscription would be equally descriptive of the treatment which, in the opinion of the same council, the Church had received from Eugene IV, whom they declared to be deposed, because “he was a disturber of the peace and union of the Church; a schismatic and a heretic; guilty of simony; perjured and incorrigible.” On the shield borne by the figure of a pope wearing a triple crown, is a fleur-de-lis; but whether or no this flower formed part of the armorial distinctions of Amadeus Duke of Savoy, whom the council chose for their new pope, I have not been able to ascertain. The lion borne by the second figure, a cardinal, is too general a cognizance to be assigned to any particular state or city. The charge on the shield borne by the third figure, also a cardinal, I cannot make out. The cross-keys on the bishop’s shield are the arms of the city of Ratisbon.

The following shields are borne by angels, who appear above the battlements of a wall in the lower compartment of folio 4, forming the eighth subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration.

On these I have nothing to remark further than that the double-headed eagle is the arms of the German empire. The other three I leave to be deciphered by others. The second, with an indented chief, and something like a rose in the field, will be found, I am inclined to think, to be the arms of some town or city in Wirtemberg or Alsace. I give the three inscriptions here, not that they are likely to throw any light on the subject, but because the third has not hitherto been deciphered. They are all from the IVth chapter of the Song of Solomon. The first is from verse 12: “_Ortus conclusus est soror, mea sposa; ortus conclusus, fons signatus_:” in our translation of the Bible: “A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.” The second is from verse 15: “_Fons ortorum, puteus aquarum vivencium quæ fluunt impetu de Lybano_:” in our Bible: “A fountain of gardens, a well of living waters, and streams from Lebanon.” The third is from verse 16: “_Surge Aquilo; veni Auster, perfla ortum et fluant aromata illius_:” in our Bible: “Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out.”

In the upper division of folio 15, which is the twenty-ninth subject in Mr. Ottley’s enumeration, the above shields occur. They are suspended on the walls of a tower, which is represented by an inscription as “the armoury whereon hang a thousand bucklers, all shields of mighty men.”[II-49]

[Footnote II-49: Song of Solomon, chap. iv. verse 4.]

On the first four I shall make no remark beyond calling the attention of those skilled in German heraldry to the remarkable charge in the first shield, which appears something like a cray-fish. The sixth, “two trouts hauriant and addorsed,” is one of the quarterings of the house of Wirtemberg as lords of Mompelgard. The seventh is charged with three crowns, the arms of the city of Cologne. The charge of the eighth I take to be three cinquefoils, which are one of the quarterings of the family of Aremberg. The cross-keys in the ninth are the arms of the city of Ratisbon.

The four following shields occur in the lower division of folio 15. They are borne by men in armour standing by the side of a bed. On a scroll is the following inscription, from the 7th and 8th verses of the third chapter of Solomon’s Song. “_En lectulum Salomonis sexaginta fortes ambiunt, omnes tenentes gladios_:” in our Bible: “Behold his bed, which is Solomon’s; three score valiant men are about it . . . . . they all hold swords.”

The first three of the shields on the following page I shall leave to be assigned by others. The fourth, which is charged with a rose, was the arms of Hagenau, a town in Alsace.

As so little is known respecting the country where, and the precise time when, the principal block-books appeared,--of which the History of the Virgin is one,--I think every particular, however trifling, which may be likely to afford even a gleam of light, deserving of notice. It is for this reason that I have given the different shields contained in this and the preceding pages; not in the belief that I have made any important discovery, or established any considerable facts; but with the desire of directing to this subject the attention of others, whose further inquiries and comparisons may perhaps establish such a perfect identity between the arms of a particular district, and those contained in the volume, as may determine the probable locality of the place where it was executed. The coincidences which I have noticed were not sought for. Happening to be turning over Sebastian Munster’s Cosmography when a copy of the History of the Virgin was before me, I observed that the two fish in the arms of the Counts of Wirtemberg,[II-50] and those in the 15th folio of the History, were the same. The other instances of correspondence were also discovered without search, from having occasionally, in tracing the progress of wood engraving, to refer to Merian’s Topographia.

[Footnote II-50: Those arms are to be seen in Sebastiana Munsteri Cosmographia, cap. De Regione Wirtenbergensi, p. 592. Folio, Basiliæ, apud Henrichum Petri, 1554.]

Considering the thickness of the paper on which the block-books are printed,--if I may apply this term to them,--and the thin-bodied ink which has been used. I am at a loss to conceive how the early wood-engravers have contrived to take off their impressions so correctly; for in all the block-books which I have seen, where friction has evidently been the means employed to obtain the impression, I have only noticed two subjects in which the lines appeared double in consequence of the shifting of the paper. From the want of body in the ink, which appears in the Apocalypse to have been little more than water-colour, it is not likely the paper could be used in a damp state, otherwise the ink would run or spread; and, even if this difficulty did not exist, the paper in a damp state could not have borne the excessive rubbing which it appears to have received in order to obtain the impression.[II-51] Even with such printer’s ink as is used in the present day,--which being tenacious, renders the paper in taking an impression by means of friction much less liable to slip or shift,--it would be difficult to obtain clear impressions on thick paper from blocks the size of those which form each page of the Apocalypse, or the History of the Virgin.

[Footnote II-51: The backs of many of the old wood-cuts which have been taken by means of friction, still appear bright in consequence of the rubbing which the paper has sustained in order to obtain the impression. They would not have this appearance if the paper had been used in a damp state.]

Mr. Ottley, however, states that no less than two pages of the History of the Virgin have been engraved on the same block. His observations on this subject are as follows: “Upon first viewing this work, I was of opinion that each of the designs contained in it was engraved upon a separate block of wood: but, upon a more careful examination, I have discovered that the contents of each two pages--that is, four subjects--were engraved on the same block. The number of wooden blocks, therefore, from which the whole was printed, was only eight. This is proved in the first two pages of the copy before me;[II-52] where, near the bottom of the two upper subjects, the block appears to have been broken in two, in a horizontal direction,--after it was engraved,--and joined together again; although not with such exactness but that the traces of the operation clearly show themselves. The traces of a similar accident are still more apparent in the last block, containing the Nos. 29, 30, 31, 32. The whole work was, therefore, printed on eight sheets of paper from the same number of engraved blocks, the first four subjects being printed from the same block upon the same sheet,--and so on with the rest; and, indeed, in Lord Spencer’s copy, each sheet, being mounted upon a guard, distinctly shows itself entire.”[II-53]

[Footnote II-52: This must have been a copy of that which Heineken calls the second edition; no such appearances of a fracture or joining are to be seen in the first.]

[Footnote II-53: Inquiry, p. 142.]

The appearance of a corresponding fracture in two adjacent pages would certainly render it likely that both were engraved on the same block; though I should like to have an opportunity of satisfying myself by inspection whether such appearances are really occasioned by a fracture or not; for it is rather singular that such appearances should be observable on the _first_ and the _last_ blocks only. I always reluctantly speculate, except on something like sufficient grounds; but as I have not seen a copy of the edition to which Mr. Ottley refers, I beg to ask if the traces of supposed fracture in the last two pages do not correspond with those in the first two? and if so, would it not be equally reasonable to infer that eight subjects instead of four were engraved on the same block? A block containing only two pages would be about seventeen inches by ten, allowing for inner margins; and to obtain clear impressions from it by means of friction, on dry thick paper, and with mere water-colour ink, would be a task of such difficulty that I cannot conceive how it could be performed. No traces of points by which the paper might be kept steady on the block are perceptible; and I unhesitatingly assert that no wood-engraver of the present day could by means of friction take clear impressions from such a block on equally thick paper, and using mere distemper instead of printer’s ink. As the impressions in the History of the Virgin have unquestionably been taken by means of friction, it is evident to me that if the blocks were of the size that Mr. Ottley supposes, the old wood-engravers, who did not use a press, must have resorted to some contrivance to keep the paper steady, with which we are now unacquainted.

Heineken describes an edition of the Apocalypse consisting of forty-eight leaves, with cuts on one side only, which, when bound, form a volume of three “_gatherings_,” or collections, each containing sixteen leaves. Each of these gatherings is formed by eight folio sheets folded in the middle, and placed one within the other, so that the cuts are worked off in the following manner: On the outer sheet of the gathering, forming the first and the sixteenth leaf, the first and the sixteenth cuts are impressed, so that when the sheet is folded they face each other, and the first and the last pages are left blank. In a similar manner the 2nd and 15th; the 3d and 14th; the 4th and 13th; the 5th and 12th; the 6th and 11th; the 7th and 10th, and the 8th and 9th, are, each pair respectively, impressed on the same side of the same sheet. These sheets when folded for binding are then placed in such a manner that the first is opposite the second; the third opposite the fourth, and so on throughout the whole sixteen. Being arranged in this manner, two cuts and two blank pages occur alternately. The reason for this mode of arrangement was, that the blank pages might be pasted together, and the cuts thus appear as if one were impressed on the back of another. A familiar illustration of this mode of folding, adopted by the early wood-engravers before they were accustomed to impress their cuts on both sides of a leaf, is afforded by forming a sheet of paper into a little book of sixteen leaves, and numbering the second and third pages 1 and 2, leaving two pages blank; then numbering the fifth and sixth 3 and 4, and so to No. 16, which will stand opposite to No. 15, and have its back, forming the outer page of the gathering, unimpressed.

Of all the block-books, that which is now commonly called “BIBLIA PAUPERUM,”--the Bible of the Poor,--is most frequently referred to as a specimen of that kind of printing from wood-blocks which preceded typography, or printing by means of moveable characters or types. This title, however, has given rise to an error which certain learned bibliographers have without the least examination adopted, and have afterwards given to the public considerably enlarged, at least, if not corrected.[II-54] It has been gravely stated that this book, whose text is in abbreviated Latin, was printed for the use of the _poor_ in an age when even the _rich_ could scarcely read their own language. Manuscripts of the Bible were certainly at that period both scarce and costly, and not many individuals even of high rank were possessed of a copy; but to conclude that the first editions of the so-called “Biblia Pauperum” were engraved and printed for the use of the poor, appears to be about as legitimate an inference as to conclude that, in the present day, the reprints of the Roxburghe club were published for the benefit of the poor who could not afford to purchase the original editions. That a merchant or a wealthy trader might occasionally become the purchaser of “Biblia Pauperum,” I am willing to admit,--though I am of opinion that the book was never expressly intended for the laity;--but that it should be printed for the use of the poor, I cannot bring myself to believe. If the poor of Germany in the fifteenth century had the means of purchasing such books, and were capable of reading them, I can only say that they must have had more money to spare than their descendants, and have been more learned than most of the rich people throughout Europe in the present day. If the accounts which we have of the state of knowledge about 1450 be correct, the monk or friar who could read and expound such a work must have been esteemed as a person of considerable literary attainments.

[Footnote II-54: “It is a manual or kind of Catechism of the Bible,” says the Rev. T. H. Horne, “for the use of young persons and of the common people, whence it derives its name _Biblia Pauperum_,--_the Bible of the Poor_,--who were thus enabled to acquire, at a comparatively low price, an imperfect knowledge of some of the events recorded in the Scripture.”--Introduction to the Critical Study of the Scriptures, vol. ii. p. 224-5. The young and the poor must have been comparatively learned at that period to be able to read cramped Latin, when many a priest could scarcely spell his breviary.]

The name “Biblia Pauperum” was unknown to Schelhorn and Schœpflin, and was not adopted by Meerman. Schelhorn, who was the first that published a fac-simile of one of the pages engraved on wood, gives it no distinctive name; but merely describes it as “a book which contained in text and figures certain histories and prophecies of the Old Testament, which, in the author’s judgment, were figurative of Christ, and of the works performed by him for the salvation of mankind.”[II-55] Schœpflin calls it, “Vaticinia Veteris Testamenti de Christo;”[II-56]--“Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning Christ;” but neither this title, nor the description of Schelhorn, is sufficiently comprehensive; for the book contains not only prophecies and typical figures from the Old Testament, but also passages and subjects selected from the New. The title which Meerman gives to it is more accurately descriptive of the contents: “Figuræ typicæ Veteris atque antitypicæ Novi Testamenti, seu Historia Jesu Christi in figuris;” that is, “Typical figures of the Old Testament and antitypical of the New, or the History of Jesus Christ pictorially represented.”[II-57]

[Footnote II-55: J. G. Schelhorn, Amœnitates Literariæ, tom. iv. p. 297. 8vo. Francofurt. & Lips. 1730. Lichtenberger, Initia Typographica, p. 4, says erroneously, that Schelhorn’s fac-simile was engraved on copper. It is on wood, as Schelhorn himself states at p. 296.]

[Footnote II-56: J. D. Schœpflin, Vindiciæ Typographicæ, p. 7, 4to. Argentorati, 1760.]

[Footnote II-57: Ger. Meerman, Origines Typographicæ, P. 1, p. 241. 4to. Hagæ Comit. 1765.]

Heineken appears to have been the first who gave to this book the name “Biblia Pauperum,” as it was in his opinion the most appropriate; “the figures being executed for the purpose of giving a knowledge of the Bible to those who could not afford to purchase a manuscript copy of the Scriptures.”[II-58] This reason for the name is not, however, a good one: for, according to his own statement, the only copy which he ever saw with the title or inscription “Biblia Pauperum,” was a manuscript on vellum of the fourteenth century, in which the figures were drawn and coloured by hand.[II-59] Meerman, however, though without adopting the title, had previously noticed the same manuscript, which in his opinion was as old as the twelfth or thirteenth century. As the word “Pauperum” formed part of the title of the book long before presumed cheap copies were printed from wood-blocks for the use of the poor, it could not be peculiarly appropriate as the title of an illumined manuscript on vellum, which the poor could as little afford to purchase as they could a manuscript copy of the Bible. In whatever manner the term “poor” became connected with the book, it is clear that the name “Biblia Pauperum” was not given to it in consequence of its being printed at a cheap rate for circulation among poor people. It is not indeed likely that its ancient title ever was “Biblia Pauperum;” while, on the contrary, there seems every reason to believe that Heineken had copied an abridged title and thus given currency to an error.

[Footnote II-58: Idée Générale, p. 292, note.]

[Footnote II-59: Camus, speaking of one of those manuscripts compared with the block-book, observes: “Ce dernier abrégé méritoit bien le nom de BIBLIA PAUPERUM, par comparison aux tableaux complets de la Bible que je viens d’indiquer. Des ouvrages tels que les tableaux complets ne pouvoient être que BIBLIA DIVITUM.”--Notice d’un Livre imprimé à Bamberg en 1462, p. 12, note. 4to. Paris, 1800.]

Heineken says that he observed the inscription, “Incipit Biblia Pauperum,” in a manuscript in the library at Wolfenbuttel, written on vellum in a Gothic character, which appeared to be of the fourteenth century. The figures, which were badly designed, were coloured in distemper, and the explanatory text was in Latin rhyme. It is surprising that neither Heineken nor any other bibliographer should have suspected that a word was wanting in the above supposed title, more especially as the word wanting might have been so readily suggested by another work so much resembling the pretended “Biblia Pauperum” that the one has frequently been confounded with the other.[II-60] In the proemium of this other work, which is no other than the “Speculum Salvationis,” the writer expressly states that he has compiled it “propter pauperes predicatores,”--for _poor_ preachers.

+Predictu’ p’hemiu’ hujus libri de conte’tis compilavi, Et p’pter paup’es p’dicatores hoc apponere curavi; Qui si forte nequieru’t totum librum sibi co’p’are, Possu’t ex ipso p’hemio, si sciu’t p’dicare.+

This preface of contents, stating what this book’s about, For the sake of all _poor preachers_ I have fairly written out; If the purchase of the book entire should be above their reach, This preface yet may serve them, if they know but how to preach.

[Footnote II-60: “Entre ces abrégés [de la Bible] on remarque le SPECULUM HUMANÆ SALVATIONIS et le BIBLIA PAUPERUM. Ces deux ouvrages ont beaucoup d’affinité entre eux pour le volume, le choix des histoires, les moralités, la composition des tableaux. Ils existent en manuscrits dans plusieurs bibliothèques.”--Camus, Notice d’un Livre, &c. p. 12.]

That the other book might be called “Biblia Pauperum _Predicatorum_,” in consequence of its general use by mendicant preachers, I can readily believe; and no doubt the omission of the word “predicatorum” in the inscription copied by Heineken has given rise to the popular error, that the pretended “Biblia Pauperum” was a kind of cheap pictorial Bible, especially intended for the use of the poor. It is, in fact, a series of “skeleton sermons” ornamented with wood-cuts to warm the preacher’s imagination, and stored with texts to assist his memory. In speaking of this book in future, I shall always refer to it as the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum,”--“the Poor Preachers’ Bible;” for the continuance of its former title only tends, in my opinion, to disseminate an error.

Nyerup, who in 1784 published an “Account of such books as were read in schools in Denmark prior to the Reformation,”[II-61] objected to the title “Biblia Pauperum,” as he had seen portions of a manuscript copy in which the drawings were richly coloured. The title which he preferred was BIBLIA TYPICO-HARMONICA. In this objection, however, Camus does not concur: “It is not from the embellishments of a single copy,” he observes, “that we ought to judge of the current price of a book; and, besides, we must not forget to take into consideration the other motives which might suggest the title, ‘Bible of the Poor,’ for we have proofs that other abridgments of greater extent were called ‘Poor men’s books.’ Such is the ‘Biblia Pauperum’ of St. Bonaventure, consisting of extracts for the use of _preachers_, and the ‘Dictionarius Pauperum.’ Of the last the title is explained in the book itself: ‘Incipit summula omnibus _verbi divini seminatoribus pernecessaria_.’” It is surprising that Camus did not perceive that the very titles which he cites militate against the opinion of the “Biblia” being intended for the use of poor _men_. St. Bonaventure’s work, and the Dictionary, which he refers to as instances of “Poor men’s books,” both bear on the very face of them a refutation of his opinion, for in the works themselves it is distinctly stated that they were compiled, not “ad usum pauperum _hominum_;” but “ad usum pauperum _predicatorum_, et _verbi divini seminatorum_:” not for the use of “poor _men_,” but for “poor _preachers_ and _teachers of the divine word_.” Camus has unwittingly supplied a club to batter his own argument to pieces.

[Footnote II-61: “Librorum qui ante Reformationem in scholis Daniæ legebantur, Notitia. Hafniæ, 1784;” referred to by Camus, Notice d’un Livre, &c. p. 10.]

Of the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum,” there are, according to Heineken, five different editions with the text in Latin. Four of them contain each forty leaves, printed on one side only from wood-blocks by means of friction, and which differ from each other in so trifling a degree, that it is not unlikely that three of them are from the same set of blocks. The other edition,--the fifth described by Heineken--contains fifty leaves, printed in a similar manner, but apparently with the figures designed by a different artist. Besides the above, there are two different editions, also from wood-blocks, with the text in German: one with the date 1470; and the other, 1471 or 1475, for the last numeral appears as like a 1 as a 5. There are also two editions, one Latin, and the other German, with the text printed from moveable types by Albert Pfister, at Bamberg, about 1462.

Without pretending to decide on the priority of the first five editions,--as I have not been able to perceive any sufficient marks from which the order in which they were published might be ascertained,--I shall here give a brief account of a copy of that edition which Heineken ranks as the third. It is in the King’s Library at the British Museum, and was formerly in the collection of Monsieur Gaignat, at whose sale it was bought for George III.

It is a small folio of forty leaves, impressed on one side only, in order that the blank pages might be pasted together, so that two of the printed sides would thus form only one leaf. The order of the first twenty pages is indicated by the letters of the alphabet, from +a+ to +v+, and of the second twenty by the same letters, having as a distinguishing mark a point both before and after them, thus: +. a .+ In that which Heineken considers the first edition, the letters +n+, +o+, +r+, +s+, of the second alphabet, making pages 33, 34, 37, and 38, want those two distinguishing points, which, according to him, are to be found in each of the other three Latin editions of forty pages each. Mr. Ottley has, however, observed that Earl Spencer’s copy wants the points,--on each side of the letters +n+, +o+, +r+, +s+, of the second alphabet,--thus agreeing with that which Heineken calls the first edition, while in all other respects it answers the description which that writer gives of the presumed second. Mr. Ottley says, that Heineken errs in asserting that the want of those points on each side of the said letters is a distinction exclusively belonging to the first edition, since the edition called by him the second is likewise without them.[II-62] In fact, the variations noticed by Heineken are not only insufficient to enable a person to judge of the priority of the editions, but they are such as might with the greatest ease be introduced into a block after a certain number of copies had been taken off. Those which he considers as distinguishing marks might easily be broken away by the burnisher or rubber, and replaced by the insertion of other pieces, differing in a slight degree. From the trifling variations noticed by Heineken[II-63] in the first three editions, it is not unlikely that they were all taken from the same blocks. Each of the triangular ornaments in which he has observed a difference, might easily be re-inserted in the event of its being injured in taking an impression. The tiara of Moses, in page 35, letter +. p .+ would be peculiarly liable to accident in taking an impression by friction, and I am disposed to think that a part of it has been broken off, and that in repairing it a trifling alteration has been made in the ornament on its top. Heineken, noticing the alteration, has considered it as a criterion of two different editions, while in all probability it only marks a trifling variety in copies taken from the same blocks.

[Footnote II-62: Inquiry, vol. i. p. 129.]

[Footnote II-63: Idée Générale, p. 307, 308.]

On each page are four portraits,--two at the top, and two at the bottom,--intended for the prophets, and other holy men, whose writings are cited in the text. The middle part of the page between each pair of portraits consists of three compartments, each of which is occupied with a subject from the Old or the New Testament. In the 14th page, however, letter +o+, two of the compartments--that in the centre, and the adjoining one to the right--are both occupied by the same subject, Christ’s entry into Jerusalem. The greatest portion of the explanatory text is at the top on each side of the uppermost portraits; and on each side of those below there is a Leonine, or rhyming Latin, verse. A similar verse underneath those portraits forms the concluding line of each page. Texts of Scripture, and moral or explanatory sentences, having reference to the subjects in the three compartments, also appear on scrolls. The following cut, which is a reduced copy of the 14th page, letter +k+, will afford a better idea of the arrangement of the subjects, and of the explanatory texts, than any lengthened description.

The whole of this subject--both text and figures--appears intended to inculcate the necessity of restraining appetite. The inscription to the right, at the top, contains a reference to the 3rd chapter of Genesis, wherein there is to be found an account of the temptation and fall of Adam and Eve, who were induced by the Serpent to taste the forbidden fruit. This temptation of our first parents through the medium of the palate, was, as may be gathered from the same inscription, figurative of the temptation of Christ after his fasting forty days in the wilderness, when the Devil came to him and said, “If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.”

In the inscription to the left, reference is made to the 25th chapter of Genesis, as containing an account of Esau, who, in consequence of his unrestrained appetite, sold his birth-right for a mess of pottage.

In the compartments in the middle of the page, are three illustrations of the preceding text. In the centre is seen the pattern to imitate,--Christ resisting the temptation of the Devil; and on each side the examples to deter,--Adam and Eve with the forbidden fruit; and hungry Esau receiving the mess of pottage from Jacob.

Underneath the two half-length figures at the top, is inscribed “David 34,” and “Ysaie xxix.”[II-64] The numerals are probably intended to indicate the chapters in the Psalms, and in the Prophecies of Isaiah, where the inscriptions on the adjacent scrolls are to be found. On similar scrolls, towards the bottom of the page, are references to the 7th chapter of the 2nd book of Kings, and to the 16th chapter of Job. The two half-length figures are most likely intended for the writers of those sacred books. The likenesses of the prophets and holy persons, thus introduced at the top and bottom of each page, are, as Schelhorn has observed,[II-65] purely imaginary; for the same character is seldom seen twice with the same face. As most of the supposed figurative descriptions of Christ and his ministry are to be found in the Psalms, and in the Prophecies of Isaiah, the portraits of David and the last-named prophet are those which most frequently occur; and the designer seems to have been determined that neither the king nor the prophet should ever appear twice with the same likeness.

[Footnote II-64: The passages referred to are probably the 8th, 9th, and 10th verses of the xxxivth Psalm; and the 8th verse of the xxixth chapter of Isaiah.]

[Footnote II-65: “Has autem icones ex sola sculptoris imaginatione et arbitrio fluxisse vel inde liquet, quod idem scriptor sacer in diversis foliis diversa plerumque et alia facie delineatus sistatur, sicuti, v. g. Esaias ac David, sæpius obvii, Protei instar, varias induerunt in hoc opere formas.”--Amœnitates Literariæ, tom. iv. p. 297.]

The rhyming verses are as follows. That to the right, underneath the subject of Adam and Eve:

Serpens vicit, Adam vetitam sibi sugerat escam.

The other, on the opposite side, underneath Jacob and Esau:

Lentis ob ardorem proprium male perdit honorem.

And the third, at the bottom of the page, underneath the two portraits:

Christum temptavit Sathanas ut eum superaret.

The following cuts are fac-similes, the size of the originals, of each of the compartments of the page referred to, and of which a reduced copy has been already given.

The first contains the representation of David and Isaiah, and the characters which follow the name of the former I consider to be intended for 34. They are the only instances in the volume of the use of Arabic, or rather Spanish numerals. The letter +k+, at the foot, is the “signature,” as a printer would term it, indicating the order of the page. On each side of it are portions of scrolls containing inscriptions, of which some of the letters are seen.

The next cut represents Satan tempting Christ by offering him stones to be converted into bread.

In the distance are seen the high mountain, to the top of which Christ was taken up by the Devil, and the temple from whose pinnacle Christ was tempted to cast himself down. The figure of Christ in this compartment is not devoid of sober dignity; nor is Satan deficient in diabolical ugliness; but, though clawed and horned proper, he wants the usual appendage of a tail. The deficiency is, however, in some degree compensated by giving to his hip the likeness of a fiendish face. In two or three other old wood engravings I have noticed a repulsive face indicated in a similar manner on the hip of the Devil. A person well acquainted with the superstitions of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries may perhaps be able to give a reason for this. It may be intended to show that Satan, who is ever going about seeking whom he may devour, can see both before and behind.

The cut on the following page (90), which forms the compartment to the right, represents Adam and Eve, each with an apple: and the state in which Eve appears to be, is in accordance with an opinion maintained by several of the schoolmen of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The tree of knowledge is without fruit, and the serpent, with a human face, is seen twined round its stem. The form of the tree and the shape of the leaves are almost precisely the same as those of the olive-trees in the Apocalypse, uprooted by Antichrist. The character of the designs, however, in the two books is almost as different as the manner of the engraving. In the Apocalypse there is no attempt at shading, while in the book under consideration it is introduced in every page, though merely by courses of single lines, as may be perceived in the drapery of Christ in the preceding cut, and in the trunk of the tree and in the serpent in the cut subjoined. In this cut the figure of Adam cannot be considered as a specimen of manly beauty; his face is that of a man who is past his prime, and his attitude is very like that of one of the splay-footed boors of Teniers. In point of personal beauty Eve appears to be a partner worthy of her husband; and though from her action she seems conscious that she is naked, yet her expression and figure are extremely unlike the graceful timidity and beautiful proportions of the Medicean Venus. The face of the serpent displays neither malignity nor fiendish cunning; but, on the contrary, is marked with an expression not unlike that of a Bavarian broom-girl. This manner of representing the temptation of our first parents appears to have been conventional among the early German Formschneiders; for I have seen several old wood-cuts of this subject, in which the figures were almost precisely the same. Notwithstanding the bad drawing and the coarse engraving of the following cut, many of the same subject, executed in Germany between 1470 and 1510, are yet worse.

In the opposite cut, which forms the compartment to the left, Esau, who is distinguished by his bow and quiver, is seen receiving a bowl of pottage from his brother Jacob. At the far side of the apartment is seen a “kail-pot,” suspended from a “crook,” with something like a ham and a gammon of bacon hanging against the wall. This subject is treated in a style which is thoroughly Dutch. Isaac’s family appear to have been lodged in a tolerably comfortable house, with a stock of provisions near the chimney nook; and his two sons are very like some of the figures in the pictures of Teniers, more especially about the legs.

The following cut, a copy of that which is the lowest in the page, represents the two prophets or inspired penmen, to whom reference is made on the two scrolls whose ends may be perceived towards the lower corners of each arch. The words underneath the figures are a portion of the last rhyming verse quoted at page 87. It is from a difference in the triangular ornament, above the pillar separating the two figures, though not in this identical page, that Heineken chiefly decides on three of the editions of this book; though nothing could be more easy than to introduce another ornament of a similar kind, in the event of the original either being damaged in printing or intentionally effaced. In some of the earliest wood-blocks which remain undestroyed by the rough handling of time there are evident traces of several letters having been broken away, and of the injury being afterwards remedied by the introduction of a new piece of wood, on which the letters wanting were re-engraved.

The ink with which the cuts in the “Poor Preachers’ Bible” have been printed, is evidently a kind of distemper of the colour of bistre, lighter than in the History of the Virgin, and darker than in the Apocalypse. In many of the cuts certain portions of the lines appear surcharged with ink,--sometimes giving to the whole page rather a blotched appearance,--while other portions seem scarcely to have received any.[II-66] This appearance is undoubtedly in consequence of the light-bodied ink having, from its want of tenacity, accumulated on the block where the line was thickest, or where two lines met, leaving the thinner portions adjacent with scarce any colouring at all. The block must, in my opinion, have been charged with such ink by means of something like a brush, and not by means of a ball. In some parts of the cuts--more especially where there is the greatest portion of text--small white spaces may be perceived, as if a graver had been run through the lines. On first noticing this appearance, I was inclined to think that it was owing to the spreading of the hairs of the brush in inking, whereby certain parts might have been left untouched. The same kind of break in the lines may be observed, however, in some of the impressions of the old wood-cuts published by Becker and Derschau,[II-67] and which are worked off by means of a press, and with common printer’s ink. In these it is certainly owing to minute furrows in the grain of the wood; and I am now of opinion that the same cause has occasioned a similar appearance in the cuts of the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum.” Mr. Ottley, speaking of the impressions in Earl Spencer’s copy, makes the following remarks: “In many instances they have a sort of horizontally striped and confused appearance, which leads me to suppose that they were taken from engravings executed on some kind of wood of a coarse grain.”[II-68] This correspondence between Earl Spencer’s copy and that in the King’s Library at the British Museum tends to confirm my opinion that there are not so many editions of the book as Heineken,--from certain accidental variations,--has been induced to suppose.

[Footnote II-66: Schelhorn has noticed a similar appearance in the old block-book entitled “Ars Memorandi:” “Videas hic nonnunquam literas atramento confluenti deformatas, ventremque illarum, alias album et vacuum, atramentaria macula repletum.” Amœnitat. Liter. tom. i. p. 7.]

[Footnote II-67: This collection of wood engravings from old blocks was published in three parts, large folio, at Gotha in 1808, 1810, and 1816, under the following title: “Holzschnitte alter Deutscher Meister in den Original-Platten gesammelt von Hans Albrecht Von Derschau: Als ein Beytrag zur Kunstgeschichte herausgegeben, und mit einer Abhandlung über die Holzschneidekunst und deren Schicksale begleitet von Rudolph Zacharias Becker.” The collector has frequently mistaken rudeness of design, and coarseness of execution, for proofs of antiquity.]

[Footnote II-68: Inquiry, vol. i. p. 130.]

The manner in which the cuts are engraved, and the attempts at something like effect in the shading and composition, induce me to think that this book is not so old as either the Apocalypse or the History of the Virgin. That it appeared before 1428, as has been inferred from the date which the Rev. Mr. Horne fancied that he had seen on the ancient binding, I cannot induce myself to believe. It is more likely to have been executed at some time between 1440 and 1460; and I am inclined to think that it is the production of a Dutch or Flemish, rather than a German artist.

A work, from which the engraved “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum” is little more than an abstract, appears to have been known in France and Germany long before block-printing was introduced. Of such a work there were two manuscript copies in the National Library at Paris; the one complete, and the other--which, with a few exceptions, had been copied from the first--imperfect. The work consisted of a brief summary of the Bible, arranged in the following manner. One or two phrases in Latin and in French formed, as it were, the text; and each text was followed by a moral reflection, also in Latin and in French. Each article, which thus consisted of two parts, was illustrated by two drawings, one of which related to the historical fact, and the other to the moral deduced from it. The perfect copy consisted of four hundred and twenty-two pages, on each of which there were eight drawings, so that the number contained in the whole volume was upwards of five thousand. In some of the single drawings, which were about two and one-third inches wide, by three and one-third inches high, Camus counted not less than thirty heads.[II-69]

[Footnote II-69: Notice d’un Livre, &c. p. 11.]

In a copy of the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum” from wood-blocks, Heineken observed written: “S. ANSGARIUS est autor hujus libri,”--St. Ansgarius is the author of this book. St. Ansgarius, who was a native of France, and a monk of the celebrated Abbey of Corbey, was sent into Lower Saxony, and other places in the north, for the purpose of reclaiming the people from paganism. He was appointed the first bishop of Hamburg in 831, and in 844 Bishop of Bremen, where he died in 864.[II-70] From a passage cited by Heineken from Ornhielm’s Ecclesiastical History of Sweden and Gothland, it appears that Ansgarius was reputed to have compiled a similar book;[II-71] and Heineken observes that it might be from this passage that the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum” was ascribed to the Bishop of Hamburg.

[Footnote II-70: Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 319.]

[Footnote II-71: Ornhielm’s book was printed in 4to. at Stockholm, 1689. The passage referred to is as follows: “Quos _per numeros et signa_ conscripsisse cum [Ansgarium] libros Rembertus memorat indigitatos _pigmentorum_ vocabulo, eos continuisse, palam est, quasdam aut e divinarum literarum, aut pie doctorum patrum scriptis, pericopas et sententias.”]

In the cloisters of the cathedral at Bremen, Heineken saw two bas-reliefs sculptured on stone, of which the figures, of a moderate size, were precisely the same as those in two of the pages--the first and eighth--of the German “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum.” The inscriptions, which were in Latin, were the same as in block-book. He thinks it very probable that the other arches of the cloisters were formerly ornamented in the same manner with the remainder of the subjects, but that the sculptures had been destroyed in the disturbances which had occurred in Bremen. Though he by no means pretends that the cuts were engraved in the time of Ansgarius, he thinks it not impossible that the sculptures might be executed at that period according to the bishop’s directions. This last passage is one of the most silly that occurs in Heineken’s book.[II-72] It is just about as likely that the cuts in the “Biblia Pauperum Predicatorum” were engraved in the time of Ansgarius, as that the bas-reliefs in the cloisters of the cathedral of Bremen should have been sculptured under his direction.

[Footnote II-72: “Ces conjectures sont foibles; elles ont été attaquées par Erasme Nyerup dans un écrit publié à Copenhague en 1784. . . . . Nyerup donne à penser que Heinecke a reconnu lui-même, dans la suite, la foiblesse de ses conjectures.”--Camus, Notice d’un Livre, &c. p. 9.]

The book usually called the “Speculum Humanæ Salvationis,”[II-73]--the Mirror of Human Salvation,--which is ascribed by Hadrian Junius to Lawrence Coster, has been more frequently the subject of discussion among bibliographers and writers who have treated of the origin of printing, than any other work. A great proportion, however, of what has been written on the subject consists of groundless speculation; and the facts elicited, compared with the conjectures propounded, are as “two grains of wheat to a bushel of chaff.” It would be a waste of time to recite at length the various opinions that have been entertained with respect to the date of this book, the manner in which the text was printed, and the printer’s name. The statements and the theories put forth by Junius and Meerman in Coster’s favour, so far as the execution of the Speculum is concerned, are decidedly contradicted by the book itself. Without, therefore, recapitulating arguments which are contradicted by established facts, I shall endeavour to give a correct account of the work, leaving those who choose to compare it, and reconcile it if they can, with the following assertions made by Coster’s advocates: 1. that the Speculum was first printed by him in Dutch with wooden types; 2. that while engraving a Latin edition on blocks of wood he discovered the art of printing with moveable letters; 3. that the Latin edition, in which the text is partly from moveable types and partly from wood-blocks, was printed by Coster’s heirs and successors, their moveable types having been stolen by John Gutemberg before the whole of the text was set up.

[Footnote II-73: It is sometimes named “Speculum Figuratum;” and Junius in his account of Coster’s invention calls it “Speculum Nostræ Salutis.”]

The Speculum which has been the subject of so much discussion is of a small folio size, and without date or printer’s name. There are four editions of it known to bibliographers, all containing the same cuts; two of those editions are in Latin, and two in Dutch. In the Latin editions the work consists of sixty-three leaves, five of which are occupied by an introduction or prologue, and on the other fifty-eight are printed the cuts and explanatory text. The Dutch editions, though containing the same number of cuts as the Latin, consist of only sixty-two leaves each, as the preface occupies only four. In all those editions the leaves are printed on one side only. Besides the four editions above noticed, which have been ascribed to Coster and have excited so much controversy, there are two or three others in which the cuts are more coarsely engraved, and probably executed, at a later period, in Germany. There is also a quarto edition of the Speculum, printed in 1483, at Culemburg, by John Veldener, and ornamented with the identical cuts of the folio editions ascribed to Coster and his heirs.

The four controverted editions of the Speculum may be considered as holding a middle place between block-books,--which are wholly executed, both text and cuts, by the wood-engraver,--and books printed with moveable types: for in three of the editions the cuts are printed by means of friction with a rubber or burnisher, in the manner of the History of the Virgin, and other block-books, while the text, set in moveable type, has been worked off by means of a press; and in a fourth edition, in which the cuts are taken in the same manner as in the former, twenty pages of the text are printed from wood-blocks by means of friction, while the remainder are printed in the same manner as the whole of the text in the three other editions; that is, from moveable metal types, and by means of a press.

There are fifty-eight cuts in the Speculum, each of which is divided into two compartments by a slender column in the middle. In all the editions the cuts are placed as head-pieces at the top of each page, having underneath them, in two columns, the explanatory text. Under each compartment the title of the subject, in Latin, is engraved on the block.

The following reduced copy of the first cut will give an idea of their form, as every subject has pillars at the side, and is surmounted by an arch in the same style.

The style of engraving in those cuts is similar to those of the Poor Preachers’ Bible. The former are, however, on the whole executed with greater delicacy, and contain more work. The shadows and folds of the drapery in the first forty-eight cuts are indicated by short parallel lines, which are mostly horizontal. In the forty-ninth and subsequent cuts, as has been noticed by Mr. Ottley, a change in the mode of indicating the shades and the folds in the draperies is perceptible; for the short parallel lines, instead of being horizontal as in the former, are mostly slanting. Heineken observes, that to the forty-eighth cut inclusive, the chapters in the printed work are conformable with the old Latin manuscripts; and as a perceptible change in the execution commences with the forty-ninth, it is not unlikely that the cuts were engraved by two different persons. The two following cuts are fac-similes of the compartments of the first, of which a reduced copy has been previously given.

In the above cut, its title, “Casus Luciferi,”--the Fall of Lucifer,--is engraved at the bottom; and the subject represented is Satan and the rebellious angels driven out of heaven, as typical of man’s disobedience and fall. The following are the first two lines of the column of text underneath the cut in the Latin editions:

+Inchoatur speculum humanae salvacionis In quo patet casus hominis et modus repactionis.+

Which may be translated into English thus:

In the Mirror of Salvation here is represented plain The fall of man, and by what means he made his peace again.

The following is the right-hand compartment of the same cut. The title of this subject, as in all the others, is engraved at the bottom; the contracted words when written in full are, “Deus creavit hominem ad ymaginem et similitudinem suam,”--God created man after his own image and likeness.

The first two lines of the text in the column underneath this cut are,

+Mulier autem in paradiso est formata De costis viri dormienti est parata.+

That is, in English rhyme of similar measure,

The woman was in Paradise for man an help meet made, From Adam’s rib created as he asleep was laid.

The cuts in all the editions are printed in light brown or sepia colour which has been mixed with water, and readily yields to moisture. The impressions have evidently been taken by means of friction, as the back of the paper immediately behind is smooth and shining from the action of the rubber or burnisher, while on the lower part of the page at the back of the text, which has been printed with moveable types, there is no such appearance. In the second Latin edition, in which the explanatory text to twenty of the cuts[II-74] has been printed from engraved wood-blocks by means of friction, the reverse of those twenty pages presents the same smooth appearance as the reverse of the cuts. In those twenty pages of text from engraved wood-blocks the ink is lighter-coloured than in the remainder of the book which is printed from moveable types, though much darker than that of the cuts. It is, therefore, evident that the two impressions,--the one from the block containing the cut, and the other from the block containing the text,--have been taken separately. In the pages printed from moveable types, the ink, which has evidently been compounded with oil, is full-bodied, and of a dark brown colour, approaching nearly to black. In the other three editions, one Latin and two Dutch, in which the text is entirely from moveable types, the ink is also full-bodied and nearly jet black, forming a strong contrast with the faint colour of the cuts.

[Footnote II-74: The cuts which have the text printed from wood-blocks are Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 21, 22, 26, 27, 46, and 55.--Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 444.]

The plan of the Speculum is almost the same as that of the Poor Preachers’ Bible, and is equally as well entitled as the latter to be called “A History typical and anti-typical of the Old and New Testament.” Several of the subjects in the two books are treated nearly in the same manner, though in no single instance, so far as my observation goes, is the design precisely the same in both. In several of the cuts of the Speculum, in the same manner as in the Poor Preachers’ Bible, one compartment contains the supposed type or prefiguration, and the other its fulfilment; for instance: at No. 17 the appearance of the Lord to Moses in the burning bush is typical of the Annunciation; at No. 23 the brazen bath in the temple of Solomon is typical of baptism; at No. 31 the manna provided for the children of Israel in the Desert is typical of the Lord’s Supper; at No. 45 the Crucifixion is represented in one compartment, and in the other is Tubal-Cain, the inventor of iron-work, and consequently of the nails with which Christ was fixed to the cross; and at No. 53 the descent of Christ to Hades, and the liberation of the patriarchs and fathers, is typified by the escape of the children of Israel from Egypt.

Though most of the subjects are from the Bible or the Apocrypha, yet there are two or three which the designer has borrowed from profane history: such as Semiramis contemplating the hanging gardens of Babylon; the Sibyl and Augustus; and Codrus king of Athens incurring death in order to secure victory to his people.

The Speculum Salvationis, as printed in the editions previously noticed, is only a portion of a larger work with the same title, and ornamented with similar designs, which had been known long before in manuscript. Heineken says, at page 478 of his Idée Générale, that the oldest copy he ever saw was in the Imperial Library at Vienna; and, at page 468, he observes that it appeared to belong to the twelfth century.

The manuscript work, when complete, consisted of forty-five chapters in rhyming Latin, to which was prefixed an introduction containing a list of them. Each of the first forty-two chapters contained four subjects, the first of which was the principal, and the other three illustrative of it. To each of these chapters were two drawings, every one of which, as in the printed copies of the work, consisted of two compartments. The last three chapters contained each eight subjects, and each subject was ornamented with a design.[II-75] The whole number of separate illustrations in the work was thus one hundred and ninety-two. The printed folio editions contain only fifty-eight cuts, or one hundred and sixteen separate illustrations.

[Footnote II-75: Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 474.]

Though the Speculum from the time of the publication of Junius’s work[II-76] had been confidently claimed for Coster, yet no writer, either for or against him, appears to have particularly directed his attention to the manner in which the work was executed before Fournier, who in 1758, in a dissertation on the Origin and Progress of the Art of Wood-engraving,[II-77] first published some particulars respecting the work in question, which induced Meerman and Heineken to speculate on the priority of the different editions. Mr. Ottley, however, has proved, in a manner which carries with it the certainty of mathematical demonstration, that the conjectures of both the latter writers respecting the priority of the editions of the Speculum are absolutely erroneous. To elicit the truth does not, with respect to this work, seem to have been the object of those two writers. Both had espoused theories on its origin without much inquiry with respect to facts, and each presumed that edition to be the first which seemed most likely to support his own speculations.

[Footnote II-76: The “Batavia” or Junius, in which the name of Lawrence Coster first appears as a printer, was published in 1588.]

[Footnote II-77: Dissertation sur l’Origine et les Progrès de l’Art de Graver en Bois. Par M. Fournier le Jeune, 8vo. Paris, 1758.]

Heineken, who assumed that the work was of German origin, insisted that the _first_ edition was that in which the text is printed partly from moveable types and partly from letters engraved on wood-blocks, and that the Dutch editions were executed subsequently in the Low Countries. The Latin edition with the text entirely printed from moveable types he is pleased to denominate the second, and to assert, contrary to the evidence which the work itself affords, that the type resembles that of Faust and Scheffer, and that the cuts in this _second_ Latin edition, as he erroneously calls it, are coarser and not so sharp as those in the Latin edition which he supposes to be the first.

Fournier’s discoveries with respect to the execution of the Speculum seem to have produced a complete change as to its origin in the opinions of Meerman; who, in 1757, the year before Fournier’s dissertation was printed, had expressed his belief, in a letter to his friend Wagenaar, that what was alleged in favour of Coster being the inventor of printing was mere gratuitous assertion; that the text of the Speculum was probably printed after the cuts, and subsequent to 1470; that there was not a single document, nor an iota of evidence, to show that Coster ever used moveable types; and lastly, that the Latin was prior to the Dutch edition of the Speculum, as was apparent from the Latin names engraved at the foot of the cuts, which certainly would have been in Dutch had the cuts been originally destined for a Dutch edition.[II-78] In the teeth of his own previous opinions, having apparently gained a new light from Fournier’s discoveries, Meerman, in his Origines Typographicæ, printed in 1765, endeavours to prove that the Dutch edition was the first, and that it was printed with moveable wooden types by Coster. The Latin edition in which the text is printed partly from moveable types and partly from wood-blocks he supposes to have been printed by Coster’s heirs after his decease, thus endeavouring to give credibility to the story of Coster having died of grief on account of his types being stolen, and to encourage the supposition that his heirs in this edition supplied the loss by having engraved on blocks of wood those pages which were not already printed.

[Footnote II-78: A French translation of Meerman’s letter, which was originally written in Dutch, is given by Santander in his Dictionnaire Bibliographique, tom. i. pp. 14-18, 8vo. Bruxelles, 1805.]

Fournier’s discoveries relative to the manner in which the Speculum was executed were: 1st, that the cuts and the text had been printed at separate times, and that the former had been printed by means of friction; 2d, that a portion of the text in one of the Latin editions had been printed from engraved wood-blocks.[II-79] Fournier, who was a type-founder and wood-engraver, imagined that the moveable types with which the Speculum was printed were of wood. He also asserted that Faust and Scheffer’s Psalter and an early edition of the Bible were printed with moveable wooden types. Such assertions are best answered by a simple negative, leaving the person who puts them forth to make out a probable case.

[Footnote II-79: Dissertation, pp. 29-32. The many mistakes which Fournier commits in his Dissertation, excite a suspicion that he was either superficially acquainted with his subject, or extremely careless. He published two or three other small works on the subject of engraving and printing,--after the manner of “Supplements to an Appendix,”--the principal of which is entitled “De l’Origine et des Productions de l’Imprimerie primitive en taille de bois; avec une refutation des préjugés plus ou moins accredités sur cet art; pour servir de suite à la Dissertation sur l’Origine de l’Art de graver en bois. Paris, 1759.”]

The fact having been established that in one of the editions of the Speculum a part of the text was printed from wood-blocks, while the whole of the text in the other three was printed from moveable types, Heineken, without diligently comparing the editions with each other in order to obtain further evidence, decides in favour of that edition being the first in which part of the text is printed from wood-blocks. His reasons for supposing this to be the first edition, though specious in appearance, are at variance with the facts which have since been incontrovertibly established by Mr. Ottley, whose scrutinizing examination of the different editions has clearly shown the futility of all former speculations respecting their priority. The argument of Heineken is to this effect: “It is improbable that a printer who had printed an edition wholly with moveable types should afterwards have recourse to an engraver to cut for him on blocks of wood a portion of the text for a second edition; and it is equally improbable that a wood-engraver who had discovered the art of printing with moveable types, and had used them to print the entire text of the first edition, should, to a certain extent, abandon his invention in a second by printing a portion of the text from engraved blocks of wood.” The following is the order in which he arranges the different editions:

1. The Latin edition in which part of the text is printed from wood-blocks.

2. The Latin edition in which the text is entirely printed from moveable types.

3. The Dutch edition with the text printed wholly from moveable types, supposed by Meerman to be the _first edition_ of all.[II-80]

4. The Dutch edition with the text printed wholly from moveable types, and which differs only from the preceding one in having the two pages of text under cuts No. 45 and 56 printed in a type different from the rest of the book.

[Footnote II-80: Heineken seems inclined to consider this as the second Dutch edition; and he only mentions it as the first Dutch edition because it is called so by Meerman.--Idée Gén. pp. 453, 454.]

The preceding arrangement--including Meerman’s opinion respecting the priority of the Dutch edition--rests entirely on conjecture, and is almost diametrically contradicted in every instance by the evidence afforded by the books themselves; for through the comparisons and investigations of Mr. Ottley it is proved, to an absolute certainty, that the Latin edition supposed by Heineken to be the second is the _earliest of all_; that the edition No. 4, called the second Dutch, is the next in order to the actual first Latin; and that the two editions, No. 1 and No. 3, respectively proclaimed by Heineken and Meerman as the earliest, have been printed subsequently to the other two.[II-81] Which of the pretended _first_ editions was in reality the _last_, has not been satisfactorily determined; though there seems reason to believe that it was the Latin one which has part of the text printed from wood-blocks.

[Footnote II-81: Inquiry into the Origin and Early History of Engraving, pp. 205-217. Though differing from Mr. Ottley in the conclusions which he draws from the facts elicited by him respecting the priority of the editions of the Speculum, I bear a willing testimony to the value of his discoveries on this subject, which may rank among the most interesting that have resulted from bibliographical research.]

It is well known to every person acquainted with the practice of wood-engraving, that portions of single lines in such cuts as those of the Speculum are often broken out of the block in the process of printing. If two books, therefore, containing the same wood-cuts, but evidently printed at different times, though without a date, should be submitted to the examination of a person acquainted with the above fact and bearing it in mind, he would doubtless declare that the copy in which the cuts were most perfect was first printed, and that the other in which parts of the cuts appeared broken away was of a later date. If, on comparing other copies of the same editions he should find the same variations, the impression on his mind as to the priority of the editions would amount to absolute certainty. The identity of the cuts in all the four editions of the Speculum being unquestionable, and as certain minute fractures in the lines of some of them, as if small portions of the block had been broken out in printing, had been previously noticed by Fournier and Heineken, Mr. Ottley conceived the idea of comparing the respective cuts in the different editions, with a view of ascertaining the order in which they were printed. He first compared two copies of the edition called the _first Latin_ with a copy of that called the _second Dutch_, and finding, that, in several of the cuts of the former, parts of lines were wanting which in the latter were perfect, he concluded that the miscalled _second Dutch_ edition was in fact of an earlier date than the pretended _first Latin_ edition of Heineken. In further comparing the above editions with the supposed _second Latin_ edition of Heineken and the supposed _first Dutch_ edition of Meerman, he found that the cuts in the miscalled second Latin edition were the most perfect of all; and that the cuts in Heineken’s first Latin and Meerman’s first Dutch editions contained more broken lines than the edition named by those authors the _second Dutch_. The conclusion which he arrived at from those facts was irresistible, namely, that the earliest edition of all was that called by Heineken the second Latin; and that the edition called the second Dutch was the next in order. As the cuts in the copies examined of the pretended _first_ Latin and Dutch editions contained similar fractures, it could not be determined with certainty which was actually the _last_.

As it is undoubted that the cuts of all the editions have been printed separately from the text, it has been objected that Mr. Ottley’s examination has only ascertained the order in which the cuts have been printed, but by no means decided the priority of the editions of the entire book. All the cuts, it has been objected, might have been taken by the engraver before the text was printed in a single edition, and it might thus happen that the book first printed with text might contain the last, and consequently the most imperfect cuts. This exception, which is founded on a very improbable presumption, will be best answered by the following facts established on a comparison of the two Latin, and which, I believe, have not been previously noticed:--On closely comparing those pages which are printed with moveable types in the true second edition with the corresponding pages in that edition which is properly the first, it was evident from the different spelling of many of the words, and the different length of the lines, that they had been printed at different times: but on comparing, however, those pages which are printed in the second edition from engraved wood-blocks with the corresponding pages, from moveable type, in the first edition, I found the spelling and the length of the lines to be the same. The page printed from the wood-block was, in short, a fac-simile of the corresponding page printed from moveable types. So completely did they correspond, that I have no doubt that an impression of the page printed from moveable types had been “transferred,”[II-82] as engravers say, to the block. In the last cut[II-83] of the first edition I noticed a scroll which was quite black, as if meant to contain an inscription which the artist had neglected to engrave; and in the second edition I perceived that the black was cut away, thus having the part intended for the inscription white. Another proof, in addition to those adduced by Mr. Ottley of that Latin edition being truly the first in which the whole of the text is printed from moveable types.

[Footnote II-82: Wood-engravers of the present day are accustomed to transfer an old impression from a cut or a page of letter-press to a block in the following manner. They first moisten the back of the paper on which the cut or letter-press is printed with a mixture of concentrated potash and essence of lavender in equal quantities, which causes the ink to separate readily from the paper; next, when the paper is nearly dry, the cut or page is placed above a prepared block, and by moderate pressure the ink comes off from the paper, and leaves an impression upon the wood.]

[Footnote II-83: The subject is Daniel explaining to Belshazzar the writing on the wall.]

Though there can no longer be a doubt in the mind of any impartial person of that Latin edition, in which part of the text is printed from engraved wood-blocks, and the rest from moveable types, being later than the other; yet the establishment of this fact suggests a question, as to the cause of part of the text of this second Latin edition being printed from wood-blocks, which cannot perhaps be very satisfactorily answered. All writers previous to Mr. Ottley, who had noticed that the text was printed partly from moveable types and partly from wood-blocks, decided, without hesitation, that this edition was the first; and each, accordingly as he espoused the cause of Gutemberg or Coster, proceeded to theorise on this assumed fact. As their arguments were founded in error, it cannot be a matter of surprise that their conclusions should be inconsistent with truth. The fact of this edition being subsequent to that in which the text is printed wholly from moveable types has been questioned on two grounds: 1st. The improbability that the person who had printed the text of a former edition entirely from moveable types should in a later edition have recourse to the more tedious operation of engraving part of the text on wood-blocks. 2d. Supposing that the owner of the cuts had determined in a later edition to engrave the text on blocks of wood, it is difficult to conceive what could be his reason for abandoning his plan, after twenty pages of the text were engraved, and printing the remainder with moveable types.

Before attempting to answer those objections, I think it necessary to observe that the existence of a positive fact can never be affected by any arguments which are grounded on the difficulty of accounting for it. Objections, however specious, can never alter the immutable character of truth, though they may affect opinions, and excite doubts in the minds of persons who have not an opportunity of examining and judging for themselves.

With respect to the first objection, it is to be remembered that in all the editions, the text, whether from wood-blocks or moveable types, has been printed separately from the cuts; consequently the cuts of the first edition might be printed by a wood-engraver, and the text set up and printed by another person who possessed moveable types. The engraver of the cuts might not be possessed of any moveable types when the text of the first edition was printed; and, as it is a well-known fact that wood-engravers continued to execute entire pages of text for upwards of thirty years after the establishment of printing with moveable types, it is not unlikely that he might attempt to engrave the text of a second edition and print the book solely for his own advantage. This supposition is to a certain extent corroborated by the fact of the twenty pages of engraved text in the second Latin edition being fac-similes of the twenty corresponding pages of text from moveable types in the first.

To the second objection every day’s experience suggests a ready answer; for scarcely anything is more common than for a person to attempt a work which he finds it difficult to complete, and, after making some progress in it, to require the aid of a kindred art, and abandon his original plan.

As the first edition of the Speculum was printed subsequent to the discovery of the art of printing with moveable types, and as it was probably printed in the Low Countries, where the typographic art was first introduced about 1472, I can discover no reason for believing that the work was executed before that period. Santander, who was so well acquainted with the progress of typography in Belgium and Holland, is of opinion that the Speculum is not of an earlier date than 1480. In 1483 John Veldener printed at Culemburg a quarto edition of the Speculum, in which the cuts are the same as in the earlier folios. In order to adapt the cuts to this smaller edition Veldener had sawn each block in two, through the centre pillar which forms a separation between the two compartments in each of the original engravings. Veldener’s quarto edition, which has the text printed on both sides of the paper from moveable types, contains twelve more cuts than the older editions, but designed and executed in the same style.[II-84] If Lawrence Coster had been the inventor of printing with moveable types, and if any one folio edition of the Speculum had been executed by him, we cannot suppose that Veldener, who was himself a wood-engraver, as well as a printer, would have been ignorant of those facts. He, however, printed two editions of the Fasciculus Temporum,--one at Louvain in 1476, and the other at Utrecht in 1480,--a work which contains a short notice of the art of printing being discovered at Mentz, but not a syllable concerning its discovery at Harlem by Lawrence Coster. The researches of Coster’s advocates have clearly established one important fact, though an unfortunate one for their argument; namely, that the Custos or Warden of St. Bavon’s was not known as a printer to one of his contemporaries. The citizens of Harlem, however, have still something to console themselves with: though Coster may not be the inventor of printing, there can be little doubt of Junius, or his editor, being the discoverer of Coster,--

“Est quoddam prodire tenus, si non datur ultra.”

[Footnote II-84: Heineken gives an account of those twelve additional cuts at page 463 of his Idée Générale. It appears that Veldener also published in the same year another edition of the Speculum, also in quarto, containing the same cuts as the older folios, but without the twelve above mentioned.]

There is in the Print Room of the British Museum a small volume of wood-cuts, which has not hitherto been described by any bibliographer, nor by any writer who has treated on the origin and progress of wood engraving. It appears to have been unknown to Heineken, Breitkopf, Von Murr, and Meerman; and it is not mentioned, that I am aware of, either by Dr. Dibdin or Mr. Douce, although it certainly was submitted to the inspection of the latter. It formerly belonged to the late Sir George Beaumont, by whom it was bequeathed to the Museum; but where he obtained it I have not been able to learn. It consists of an alphabet of large capital letters, formed of figures arranged in various attitudes; and from the general character of the designs, the style of the engraving, and the kind of paper on which the impressions have been taken, it evidently belongs to the same period as the Poor Preachers’ Bible. There is only one cut on each leaf, the back being left blank as in most of the block-books, and the impressions have been taken by means of friction. The paper at the back of each cut has a shining appearance when held towards the light, in consequence of the rubbing which it has received; and in some it appears as if it had been blacked with charcoal, in the same manner that some parts of the cartoons were blacked which have been pricked through by the tapestry worker. The ink is merely a distemper or water-colour, which will partly wash out by the application of hot water, and its colour is a kind of sepia. Each leaf, which is about six inches high, by three and six-eighths wide, consists of a separate piece of paper, and is pasted, at the inner margin, on to a slip either of paper or parchment, through which the stitching of the cover passes. Whether the paper has been cut in this manner before or after that the impressions were taken, I am unable to determine.[II-85]

[Footnote II-85: The following is a reduced copy of the paper-mark, which appears to be a kind of anchor with a small cross springing from a ball or knob at the junction of the arms with the shank. It bears a considerable degree of resemblance to the mark given at page 62, from an edition of the Apocalypse. An anchor is to be found as a paper-mark in editions of the Apocalypse, and of the Poor Preachers’ Bible. According to Santander, a similar paper-mark is to be found in books printed at Cologne, Louvain, and Utrecht, from about 1470 to 1480. [Illustration]]

The greater part of the letter A is torn out, and in that which remains there are pin-marks, as if it had been traced by being pricked through. The letters S, T, and V are also wanting. The following is a brief description of the letters which remain. The letter B is composed of five figures, one with a pipe and tabor, another who supports him, a dwarf, an old man kneeling, and an old woman with a staff. C, a youthful figure rending open the jaws of a lion, with two grotesque heads like those of satyrs. D, a man on horseback, and a monk astride on a fiendish-looking monster. E, two grotesque heads, a figure holding the horn of one of them, and another figure stretching out a piece of cloth. F, a tall figure blowing a trumpet, and a youth beating a tabor, with an animal like a dog at their feet.[II-86] G, David with Goliath’s head, and a figure stooping, who appears to kiss a flagellum. H, a figure opening the jaws of a dragon. I, a tall man embracing a woman. K, a female with a wreath, a youth kneeling, an old man on his knees, and a young man with his heels uppermost. [Engraved as a specimen at page 109.] L, a man with a long sword, as if about to pierce a figure reclining. [Engraved as a specimen at page 110.] M, two figures, each mounted on a kind of monster; between them, an old man. N, a man with a sword, another mounted on the tail of a fish. O, formed of four grotesque heads. P, two figures with clubs. Q, formed of three grotesque heads, similar to those in O. R, a tall, upright figure, another with something like a club in his hand; a third, with his heels up, blowing a horn. X, composed of four figures, one of which has two bells, and another has one; on the shoulder of the upper figure to the right a squirrel may be perceived. Y, a figure with something like a hairy skin on his shoulder; another thrusting a sword through the head of an animal. Z, three figures; an old man about to draw a dagger, a youth lying down, and another who appears as if flying. [Engraved as a specimen at page 111.] The last cut is the ornamental flower, of which a copy is given at page 113.

[Footnote II-86: The initial F, at the commencement of this chapter, is a reduced copy of the letter here described.]

In the same case with those interesting, and probably unique specimens of early wood engraving, there is a letter relating to them, dated 27th May, 1819, from Mr. Samuel Lysons to Sir George Beaumont, from which the following is an extract: “I return herewith your curious volume of ancient cuts. I showed it yesterday to Mr. Douce, who agrees with me that it is a great curiosity. He thinks that the blocks were executed at Harlem, and are some of the earliest productions of that place. He has in his possession most of the letters executed in copper, but very inferior to the original cuts. Before you return from the Continent I shall probably be able to ascertain something further respecting them.” What might be Mr. Douce’s reasons for supposing that those cuts were executed at Harlem I cannot tell; though I am inclined to think that he had no better foundation for his opinion than his faith in Junius, Meerman, and other advocates of Lawrence Coster, who unhesitatingly ascribe every early block-book to the spurious “Officina Laurentiana.”

In the manuscript catalogue in the Print Room of the British Museum the volume is thus described by Mr. Ottley: “Alphabet of initial letters composed of grotesque figures, wood engravings of the middle of the fifteenth century, apparently the work of a Dutch or Flemish artist; the impressions taken off by friction in the manner of the early block-books. . . . I perceive the word ‘_London_’ in small characters written upon the blade of a sword in one of the cuts, [the letter L,] and I suspect they were engraved in England.”

As to whether these cuts were engraved in England or no I shall not venture to give an opinion. I am, however, satisfied that they were neither designed nor engraved by the artists who designed and engraved the cuts in the Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, and the Poor Preachers’ Bible. With respect to drawing, expression, and engraving, the cuts of the Alphabet are decidedly superior to those of every block-book, and generally to all wood engravings executed previous to 1500, with the exception of such as are by Albert Durer, and those contained in the Hypnerotomachia, an Italian rhapsody, with wood-cuts supposed to have been designed by Raffaele or Andrea Mantegna, and printed by Aldus at Venice, 1499. Although the cuts of the Alphabet may not have been engraved in England, it is, however, certain that the volume had been at rather an early period in the possession of an Englishman. The cover consists of a double fold of thick parchment, on the inside of which, between the folds, there is written in large old English characters what I take to be the name “Edwardus Lowes.” On the blank side of the last leaf there is a sketch of a letter commencing “Right reverent and wershipfull masters and frynds; In the moste loweliste maner that I canne or may, I here recomende me, duely glade to her of yor good prosperitye and welth.” The writing, as I have been informed, is of the period of Henry VIII; and on the slips of paper and parchment to which the inner margins of the leaves are pasted are portions of English manuscripts, which are probably of the same date. There can, however, be little doubt that the leaves have been mounted, and the volume covered, about a hundred years subsequent to the engraving of the cuts.

I agree with Mr. Ottley in thinking that those cuts were engraved about the middle of the fifteenth century, but I can perceive nothing in them to induce me to suppose they were the work of a Dutch artist; and I am as little inclined to ascribe them to a German. The style of the drawing is not unlike what we see in illuminated French manuscripts of the middle of the fifteenth century; and as the only two engraved words which occur in the volume are French, I am rather inclined to suppose that the artist who made the drawings was a native of France. The costume of the female to whom the words are addressed appears to be French; and the action of the lover kneeling seems almost characteristic of that nation. No Dutchman certainly ever addressed his mistress with such an air. He holds what appears to be a ring as gracefully as a modern Frenchman holds a snuff-box, and upon the scroll before him are engraved a heart, and the words which he may be supposed to utter, “_Mon Ame_.” At page 109, is a fac-simile of the cut referred to, the letter K, of the size of the original, and printed in the same kind of colour.

Upon the sword-blade in the original cut of the following letter, L, there is written in small characters, as Mr. Ottley has observed, the word “_London_;” and in the white space on the right, or upper side, of the figure lying down, there appears written in the same hand the name “_Bethemsted_.” In this name the letter B is not unlike a W; and I have heard it conjectured that the name might be that of John Wethamstede, abbot of St. Alban’s, who was a great lover of books, and who died in 1440. This conjecture, however, will not hold good, for the letter is certainly intended for a B; and in the cut of the letter B there is written “_R. Beths._,” which is in all probability intended for an abbreviation of the name, “_Bethemsted_,” which occurs in another part of the book. The ink with which these names are written is nearly of the same colour as that of the cuts. The characters appear to be of an earlier date than those on the reverse of the last leaf.

The cut at page 111, is that of the letter Z, which stands the wrong way in consequence of its not having been drawn reversed upon the block. The subject might at first sight be supposed to represent the angel staying Abraham when about to sacrifice Isaac; but on examining the cut more closely it will be perceived that the figure which might be mistaken for an angel is without wings, and appears to be in the act of supplicating the old man, who with his left hand holds him by the hair.

The opposite cut, which is the last in the book, is an ornamental flower designed with great freedom and spirit, and surpassing everything of the kind executed on wood in the fifteenth century. I speak not of the style of engraving, which, though effective, is coarse; but of the taste displayed in the drawing. The colour of the cuts on pages 109, 110, 111, from the late Sir George Beaumont’s book, will give the reader, who has not had an opportunity of examining the originals, some idea of the colour in which the cuts of the Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, the Poor Preachers’ Bible, and the Speculum, are printed; which in all of them is a kind of sepia, in some inclining more to a yellow, and in others more to a brown.

In the volume under consideration we may clearly perceive that the art of wood engraving had made considerable progress at the time the cuts were executed. Although there are no attempts at cross-hatching, which was introduced about 1486, yet the shadows are generally well indicated, either by thickening the line, or by courses of short parallel lines, marking the folds of the drapery, or giving the appearance of rotundity to the figures. The expression of the heads displays considerable talent, and the wood-engraver who at the present time could design and execute such a series of figures, would be entitled to no small degree of commendation. Comparing those cuts with such as are to be seen in books typographically executed between 1461[II-87] and 1490, it is surprising that the art of wood engraving should have so materially declined when employed by printers for the illustration of their books. The best of the cuts printed with letter-press in the period referred to are decidedly inferior to the best of the early block-books.

[Footnote II-87: The first book with moveable types and wood-cuts both printed by means of the press is the Fables printed at Bamberg, by Albert Pfister, “Am Sant Valentinus tag,” 1461.]

As it would occupy too much space, and would be beyond the scope of the present treatise to enter into a detail of the contents of all the block-books noticed by Heineken, I shall give a brief description of that named “Ars Memorandi,” and conclude the chapter with a list of such others as are chiefly referred to by bibliographers.

The “ARS MEMORANDI” is considered by Schelhorn[II-88] and by Dr. Dibdin as one of the earliest block-books, and in their opinion I concur. Heineken, however,--who states that the style is almost the same as in the figures of the Apocalypse,--thinks that it is of later date than the Poor Preachers’ Bible and the History of the Virgin. It is of a quarto size, and consists of fifteen cuts, with the same number of separate pages of text also cut on wood, and printed on one side of each leaf only by means of friction.[II-89] At the foot of each page of text is a letter of the alphabet, commencing with +a+, indicating the order in which they are to follow each other. In every cut an animal is represented,--an eagle, an angel, an ox, or a lion,--emblematic of the Evangelist whose Gospel is to be impressed on the memory. Each of the animals is represented standing upright, and marked with various signs expressive of the contents of the different chapters. To the Gospel of St. John, with which the book commences, three cuts with as many pages of text are allotted. St. Matthew has five cuts, and five pages of text. St. Mark three cuts and three pages of text; and St. Luke four cuts and four pages of text.[II-90]

[Footnote II-88: “Nostrum vero libellum, cujus gratia hæc præfati sumus, intrepide, si non primum artis inventæ fœtum, certe inter primos fuisse asseveramus.”--Amœnitates Literariæ, tom. i. p. 4.]

[Footnote II-89: Heineken had seen two editions of this book, and he gives fac-similes of their titles, which are evidently from different blocks. The title at full length is as follows: “_Ars memorandi notabilis per figuras Ewangelistarum hic ex post descriptam quam diligens lector diligenter legat et practiset per signa localia ut in practica experitur_.”--“En horridum et incomtum dicendi genus, Priscianumque misere vapulantem!” exclaims Schelhorn.]

[Footnote II-90: Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 394.]

“It is worthy of observation,” says J. C. Von Aretin, in his Essay on the earliest Results of the Invention of Printing, “that this book, which the most intelligent bibliographers consider to be one of the earliest of its kind, should be devoted to the improvement of the memory, which, though divested of much of its former importance by the invention of writing, was to be rendered of still less consequence by the introduction of printing.”[II-91]

[Footnote II-91: Über die frühesten universal historischen Folgen der Erfindung der Buchdruckerkunst, von J. Christ. Freyherrn Von Aretin, S. 18. 4to. Munich, 1808.]

The first cut is intended to express figuratively the first six chapters of St. John’s Gospel. The upright eagle is the emblem of the saint, and the numerals are the references to the chapters. The contents of the first chapter are represented by the dove perched on the eagle’s head, and the two faces,--one of an old, the other of a young man,--probably intended for those of Moses and Christ.[II-92] The lute on the breast of the eagle, with something like three bells[II-93] suspended from it, indicate the contents of the second chapter, and are supposed by Schelhorn to refer to the marriage of Cana. The numeral 3, in Schelhorn’s opinion, relates to “nonnihil apertum et prosectum circa ventrem,” which he thinks may be intended as a reference to the words of Nicodemus: “Nunquid homo senex potest in ventrem matris suæ iterum introire et renasci?” Between the feet of the eagle is a water-bucket surmounted by a sort of coronet or crown, intended to represent the principal events narrated in the 4th chapter, which are Christ’s talking with the woman of Samaria at the well, and his healing the son of a nobleman at Capernaum. The 5th chapter is indicated by a fish above the eagle’s right wing, which is intended to bring to mind the pool of Bethesda. The principal event related in the 6th chapter, Christ feeding the multitude, is indicated by the two fishes and five small loaves above the eagle’s left wing. The cross within a circle, above the fishes, is emblematic of the consecrated wafer in the Lord’s supper, as celebrated by the church of Rome.[II-94]

[Footnote II-92: “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”--St. John’s Gospel, chap. i. v. 17.]

[Footnote II-93: “Forte tamen ea, quæ tintinnabulis haud videntur dissimilia, nummulariorum loculos et pecuniæ receptacula referunt.”--Schelhorn, Amœnit. Liter. tom. i. p. 10.]

The above reduced copy of the cut will afford some idea of the manner in which the memory is to be assisted in recollecting the first six chapters of St. John. Those who wish to know more respecting this curious book are referred to Schelhorn’s Amœnitates Literariæ, tom. i. pp. 1-17; Heineken, Idée Générale, pp. 394, 395; and to Dr. Dibdin’s Bibliotheca Spenceriana, vol. i. p. 4, where a copy is given of the first cut relating to the Gospel of St. Matthew.

[Footnote II-94: The following are the contents of the first page, descriptive of the cut: “Evangelium Johannis habet viginti unum capittula. Primum. In principio erat verbum de eternitate verbi et de trinitate. Secundum capittulum. Nupcie facte sunt in Chana Galilee et qualiter Christus subvertit mensas nummulariorum. Tertium capittulum. Erat antem homo ex Phariseis Nycodemus nomine. Quartum capittulum. Qualiter Ihesus peciit a muliere Samaritana bibere circum puteum Jacob et de regulo. Quintum capittulum. De probatica piscina ubi dixit Ihesus infirmo Tolle grabatum tuum & vade. Sextum capittulum. De refectione ex quinque panibus & duobus piscibus Et de ewkaristia.”--Schelhorn, Amœnit. Lit. tom. i. p. 9.]

Block-books containing both text and figures were executed long after the introduction of typography, or printing by means of moveable types; but the cuts in such works are decidedly inferior to those executed at an earlier period. The book entitled “Die Kunst Cyromantia,”[II-95] which consists chiefly of text, is printed from wood-blocks on both sides of each leaf by means of a press. At the conclusion of the title is the date 1448; but this is generally considered to refer to the period when the book was written, and not the time when it was engraved. On the last page is the name: “+jorg schapff zu augspurg+.” If this George Schapff was a wood-engraver of Augsburg, the style of the cuts in the book sufficiently declares that he must have been one of the very lowest class. More wretched cuts were never chiselled out by a printer’s apprentice as a head-piece to a half-penny ballad.

[Footnote II-95: This work on Palmistry was composed in German by a Doctor Hartlieb, as is expressed at the beginning: “Das nachgeschriben buch von der hand hätt zu teutsch gemacht Doctor Hartlieb.” Specimens of the first and the last pages, and of one of the cuts, are given in Heineken’s Idée Générale, plates 27 and 28.]

Of the block-book entitled “Ars Moriendi,” Heineken enumerates no less than seven editions, of which one is printed on both sides of the leaves, and by means of a press. Besides these he mentions another edition, impressed on one side of the paper only, in which appear the following name and date: “+Hans eporer, 1473, hat diss puch pruffmo er+.”[II-96]

[Footnote II-96: I am of opinion that this is the same person who executed the cuts for a German edition of the Poor Preachers’ Bible in 1475. His name does not appear; but on a shield of arms there is a spur, which may be intended as a rebus of the name; in the same manner as Albert Durer’s surname appears in his coat of arms, a pair of doors,--_Durer_, or, as his father’s name was sometimes spelled, _Thurer_.]

Of the book named in German “+Der Entkrist+”--Antichrist--printed from wood-blocks, Heineken mentions two editions. In that which he considers the first, containing thirty-nine cuts, each leaf is printed on one side only by means of friction; in the other, which contains thirty-eight cuts, is the “brief-maler’s” or wood-engraver’s name: “+Der jung hanss priffmaler hat das puch zu nurenberg, 1472+.”

At Nuremberg, in the collection of a physician of the name of Treu, Heineken noticed a small volume in quarto, consisting of thirty-two wood-cuts of Bible subjects, underneath each of which were fifteen verses in German, engraved on the same block. Each leaf was printed on one side only, and the impressions, which were in pale ink, had been taken by means of friction.

The early wood-engravers, besides books of cuts, executed others consisting of text only, of which several portions are preserved in public libraries in Germany,[II-97] France, and Holland; and although it is certain that block-books continued to be engraved and printed several years after the invention of typography, there can be little doubt that editions of the grammatical primer called the “Donatus,” from the name of its supposed compiler, were printed from wood-blocks previous to the earliest essays of Gutemberg to print with moveable types. It is indeed asserted that Gutemberg himself engraved, or caused to be engraved on wood, a “Donatus” before his grand invention was perfected.

[Footnote II-97: Aretin says that in the Royal Library at Munich there are about forty books and about a hundred single leaves printed from engraved wood-blocks.--Über die Folgen, &c. S. 6.]

In the Royal Library at Paris are preserved the two old blocks of a “Donatus” which are mentioned by Heineken at page 257 of his Idée Générale. They are both of a quarto form; but as the one contains twenty lines and the other only sixteen, and as there is a perceptible difference in the size of the letters, it is probable that they were engraved for different editions.[II-98] Those blocks were purchased in Germany by a Monsieur Faucault, and after passing through the hands of three other book-collectors they came into the possession of the Duke de la Vallière, at whose sale they were sold for two hundred and thirty livres. In De Bure’s catalogue of the La Vallière library, impressions are given from the original blocks. The letters in both those blocks, though differing in size, are of the same proportions and form; and Heineken and Fischer consider that they bear a great resemblance to the characters of Faust and Scheffer’s Psalter, printed with moveable types in 1457, although the latter are considerably larger.

[Footnote II-98: Meerman had an old block of a Donatus, which was obtained from the collection of a M. Hubert of Basle, and which appeared to belong to the same edition as that containing sixteen lines in the Royal Library at Paris.--Heineken, Idée Générale, p. 258.]

The art of wood engraving, having advanced from a single figure with merely a name cut underneath it, to the impression of entire pages of text, was now to undergo a change. Moveable letters formed of metal, and wedged together within an iron frame, were to supersede the engraved page; and impressions, instead of being taken by the slow and tedious process of friction, were now to be obtained by the speedy and powerful action of the press. If the art of wood engraving suffered a temporary decline for a few years after the general introduction of typography, it was only to revive again under the protecting influence of the PRESS; by means of which its productions were to be multiplied a hundred fold, and, instead of being confined to a few towns, were to be disseminated throughout every part of Europe.