common people from imitating the dress and equipage of the nobility,
were not extended to the making of books. The copyist or calligrapher
was at liberty to decorate books according to his own fancy. There was
no occasion for restrictive legislation. The admirable romances and
books of prayer upon which the miniaturist had lavished his talents
were beyond the skill of the vulgar copyist and beyond the means of the
plebeian book-buyer. Only an artist could paint them; only a prince or
patrician could buy them. But these books, although far removed from
the multitude by price and rarity, were not above the capacity of the
ordinary reader. The illiterate man who could find no attraction in a
book of letters would readily acknowledge the charm of the pictures
[p194] in a book like the _Bedford Missal_. In this universal
appreciation of pictures, some of the early engravers of cards and
images saw an opportunity. Men who would not buy books of letters would
buy books of pictures. Books of the latter class were not only sure of
sale, but they could be engraved on blocks at a comparatively small
expense. They could be printed in quantities much more cheaply, and,
above all, with more accuracy and uniformity than they could be drawn
by hand. They could be painted or illuminated by stencil plates, and
made acceptable to men of simple tastes. Here was the beginning of the
block-books.
The term Block-Book is used to define the book printed entirely
from engraved blocks, in contradistinction to the book printed from
movable types. Bibliographers divide the block-books in two distinct
classes: books of pictures without text, in which words descriptive
of the picture are engraved at the foot of the page, or in cartouches
proceeding from the mouths of the principal figures; and books of
pictures with text, in which the explanations of the pictures are given
in the form of a full page of text, which was commonly printed on the
page opposite the picture.
It is admitted by all writers on typography that block-books of both
classes were made before and after the invention of typography. That
they were manufactured in large quantities by many printers, and in
many cities or towns, during the fifteenth century, does not admit
of doubt. It is claimed by one bibliographer that there are eight
editions of the _Ars Moriendi_; by others, that there are six editions
each of the _Bible of the Poor_ and of the _Apocalypse_, and four of
the _Mirror of Man’s Redemption_. In some instances, the so-called
later editions are reprintings, with slight alterations, of the same
blocks that were used for the first edition; in other instances, the
later editions were printed from blocks newly engraved. The number and
variety of the editions are proof that there must have been a very
large demand for the books; the alterations in the engravings are
presumptive evidence of [p195] repairs to blocks badly worn by long
use; the newly engraved blocks are evidently the replacement of a suite
completely worn out; an edition different from the others in design may
be accepted as the work of a rival or competing printer.
The few block-books known in the seventeenth century were regarded
by bibliographers as prejudicial to the claims of contestants for
the honor of the invention of typography. They were annoying facts
which could neither be rejected nor accepted without hurt to favorite
theories. There was a disposition on all sides to belittle them in
number as well as in importance. The first writer who called attention
to their value as relics could describe but nine block-books. Sotheby,
writing about them in 1858, described in the _Principia Typographica_
twenty-one block-books—not different editions of a few books, but
twenty-one distinct works. Even with these additions, the list cannot
be considered complete: it is possible that more will yet be found, but
it is certain that many have been irretrievably lost.
The neglect of the block-books by early librarians seems almost
justifiable when we consider their great inferiority to the typographic
books that followed them. From a literary point of view, they were of
no importance as works of instruction or authority. They were published
during the fifteenth century, but they really belong to the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries, during which period most of them were composed.
The legends that explain their illustrations were written in Latin, but
they are adapted to readers in a child-like state of development. It is
not strange that they should have been put aside by the world when it
had outgrown them. Childish as these books are, they are of high value
to those who wish to note the growth of printing. They indicate the
attainments of their authors and readers, and the artistic abilities
of their designers and engravers. They show the quality of the paper,
ink, and workmanship of the period. They prove that the art of printing
from blocks was practised by many persons during the second and third
quarters of the fifteenth century. [p198]
[Illustration: Fac-simile of the Last Page of the Bible of the Poor.]
THE BIBLIA PAUPERUM, OR BIBLE OF THE POOR.
This is the most famous and the most creditable specimen of the early
block-book.[105] The title, _Bible of the Poor_, seems to have been
used at an early period to distinguish it from the Bible proper, a fair
manuscript copy of which was sold in France, in the year 1460, for five
hundred crowns of gold. The Bible proper, as then made, in two or more
stout folio volumes of fine vellum, was the Bible of the rich; its
epitome, in the shape of the book of forty pages of engravings, about
to be described, was the Bible of the poor.
The author of the _Bible of the Poor_ is unknown, but the designer of
the illustrations was not the writer of the texts that explained the
designs. There are frequent incongruities between the words and the
pictures, which fully show that the author did not always understand
the intent of the artist. It is probable that the illustrations were
made first, and that, in the beginning, the _Bible of the Poor_ was
a book of pictures only.[106] Some German antiquarians say that the
book, in its [p199] original form, was designed and explained by a
monk named Wernher, who was living in 1180, and was famous during his
lifetime both as a painter and a poet. Other German authorities put
the origin of the first manuscript as far back as the ninth century,
attributing the work to Saint Ansgarius, first bishop of Hamburg. It
seems to have been a popular manuscript, for copies written before
the fifteenth century have been found in many old monasteries. These
copies are not alike. Nearly every transcriber has made more or less
alterations and innovations of his own; but the general plan of the
book—the contrasting of apostles with prophets, and of the patriarchs
of the Old Testament with the saints of the Christian Church—has been
preserved in all the copies.
At least four distinct xylographic editions—two in Latin and two in
German—of the _Bible of the Poor_ have been discovered. Three of them
were printed in Germany after the invention of typography.[107] The
edition acknowledged as the first,[108] and supposed to have been
printed before the invention of types, is in Latin, without date,
place, or name of printer. Those who favor the theory of a German
invention of printing say that it was printed in Germany between
the years 1440 and 1460. Those who believe in the priority of Dutch
printing say that it must be regarded as the work of some printer of
Holland. This is the opinion of Berjeau, who republished the book in
fac-simile. He says that the designs for the original editions must
have been made in the Netherlands, probably by Van Eyck, between 1410
and 1420. [p200]
The illustration on the preceding page, which is the exact size of the
original, gives a faithful representation of the last page of the first
edition of this curious book.
Unlike most of the block-books, the _Bible of the Poor_ was designed
with architectural symmetry. An open frame-work divides each page
in nine distinct panels or partitions, five of which are devoted to
pictorial illustrations, and four to their explanation in words. The
three large panels in the middle of the page illustrate historical
subjects drawn from the Bible, of which the central panel is, in
theological phrase, the _type_, and is taken from the New Testament.
The pictures on either side are known as the _antitypes_, and are
oftenest taken from the Old Testament. The texts that explain the
pictures are placed in the corners of the page, or in scrolls near the
figures.
To most readers the explanatory text is undecipherable. The obscurity
is not only that of a dead language: a trained Latin scholar will
always grope and often stumble in attempting to make a translation.
All the letters are carelessly drawn and cut; the words are badly
spaced, and are deformed with abbreviations. These faults appear more
noticeable when the letters are contrasted with the designs. Whoever
designed the figures on the wood drew with the bold and free hand of
an artist who had proper confidence in his ability. Whoever engraved
the figures cut the clean firm line that can be made only by an expert.
But the cutting of the letters, although probably done by the engraver
of the figures, is really barbarous. It is obvious that the designer,
skillful as he was with figures, had no experience in drawing letters,
and that the engraver was equally unsuccessful at a new kind of work.
The text and translation appended are the version of Dr. Horne,
author of the _Introduction to the Study of Bibliography_, who has
corrected the contractions of the original Latin. It is copied from the
_Typographia_ of Hansard.
Each page contains four busts—two at the top, and two lower down;
together with three historical subjects. The two upper busts represent
certain prophets, or other eminent persons, whose names are [p201]
added beneath them. Of the three historical subjects, the _chief
type_, or principal piece, is taken from the New Testament, and
occupies the centre of the page, between the two _antitypes_, or
subordinate subjects, which are allusive to it. The two busts, placed
in the middle of the upper part of the page, represent David and
Isaiah between two texts of the Bible, with brief explanations. The
former of these, on the left of the Prophets, is from the Song of
Solomon, Chapter iv, 7:
‹f›Legitur in Cantico Canticorum, quarto capite, quod sponsus
alloquitur sponsam, et eam sumendo dixit: Tota pulchra es, amica mea,
et macula non est in te. Veni, amica mea, veni, coronabere. Sponsus
verus iste est Christus, qui in assumendo eam sponsam, quæ est anima
sine macula omnis peccati, et introducit eam in requiem æternam; et
coronat cum corona immortalitatis.‹/f›
In the fourth chapter of the Song of Solomon it is read, That the
bridegroom addresses the bride, and receiving her, says, Thou art
all fair, my love, and in thee is no spot. Come, my love; come, thou
shalt be crowned. The real bridegroom is Christ, who, in receiving the
bride, which is the soul without spot of sin, also conducts her to
eternal rest, and crowns her with the crown of immortality.
The second passage, on the right of David and Isaiah, is partly taken
from the Book of Revelation, and runs thus:
‹f›Legitur in Apocalypsi xxiº capite, quod angelus Dei apprehendit
Jhoannem Evangelistam cum esset in Spiritu, et volens sibi ostendere
archana Dei, dixit ad eum, Veni, et ostendam tibi sponsam, uxorem
agni. Angelus loquitur ad omnem generationem ut veniant ad
auscultandum in sponsum, agnum innocentem Christum animas innocentes
coronantem.‹/f›
In the twenty-first chapter of the Revelation it is read, That the
Angel of God took John the Evangelist when he was in the Spirit, and
willing to show him the mysteries of God, said to him, Come, and I
will show thee the bride, the wife of the Lamb. The Angel speaks to
every generation, that they come and hearken to the bridegroom, the
pure Lamb Christ, crowning innocent souls.
Under the bust of David, which is indicated by his name, is a scroll
proceeding from his hand, inscribed:
‹f›Enim tamquam sponsus dominus procedens de thalamo suo.‹/f›
Even as a bridegroom cometh out of his chamber. Ps. XIX, 5.
Beneath the corresponding compartment containing a bust of Isaiah, is
the word _Ysaye_, and also the ordinal number LXI, referring to the
sixty-first chapter of that prophet; and from the hand of the figure
proceeds a label containing:
‹f›Tamquam sponsus decoravit me corona.‹/f›
As a bridegroom, he hath adorned me with a crown. LXI, 10.
Toward the bottom of the plate are two other busts, similar to those at
the top, and which represent the Prophets Ezekiel and [p202] Hosea.
From the figure that occupies the left-hand compartment extends a
scroll, at one end of which is the word _Œzeciel_, with a number
referring to the twenty-fourth chapter; and in the other part are the
words:
‹f›Corona tua capite ligata fiet, et calciamenta in pedibus.‹/f›
Thy tire shall be bound upon thine head, and thy shoes upon thy feet.
XXIV, 17.
The corresponding scroll, attached to the other figure, contains, at
one end, _Ozee_, with a reference to the second chapter; and in the
other part are the words:
‹f›Sponsabo te mihi in sempiternum.‹/f›
I will betroth thee unto me forever. II, 19.
In the central compartment, between the upper and lower busts, is
depicted the Type, or principal subject. It represents the reward of
righteousness in heaven; the designer having introduced the Redeemer
as bestowing the Crown of Life upon one of the elect Spirits. The
antitype, on the left, is the Daughter of Zion crowned by her spouse,
with the following leonine verse underneath:
‹f›Laus anime vere,‹/f›
‹f›Sponsum bene sensit habere.‹/f›
O soul divine! it rightly knew,
To have the spouse was glory true.
The other antitype, on the right, represents an Angel addressing St.
John, having beneath it this verse:
‹f›Sponsus amat sponsam,‹/f›
‹f›Christus nimis et speciosam.‹/f›
And Christ, the bridegroom, far above
Conception, the fair bride doth love.
And in the bottom space is this verse:
Tunc gaudent anime sibi quando
bonum datur omne.
Then souls rejoice with great delight,
When given is the diadem bright.
The first edition of the book contains forty engravings on wood,
printed on one side only of the leaf. The prints face each other;
two pages of illustrations are always followed by two pages of blank
paper. The book was put together in sections of two leaves, a method of
making a book contrary to prevailing usage. Manuscript books of that
period were usually made up in sections of four double leaves, which
were nested together in one section. This deviation from established
usage was, apparently, caused through the error of the engraver, who
cut, on the same block, the two pages which faced each other. It was,
consequently, impossible to nest [p203] the leaves, or make them up in
thick sections. Cracks in the wood block, which have made open seams or
white gaps in the print, and which extend in straight lines over both
pages, show conclusively that two pages were engraved on one block.
The book is without folios or paging figures to guide the reader, and
also without signatures to guide the binder. The proper order of the
pages was made manifest by engraving on each page a letter of the
alphabet. Pages 1 to 20 are marked in alphabetical order from _a_ to
_v;_ pages 21 to 40 have the same letters, but with a dot before and
after each, _.a._ to _.v._
The paper of the fifteen known copies of this edition of the book is
of variable quality. Of itself, this variability is not sufficient
indication that the paper was made by different makers, and printed
at different times, but the different designs of the paper-marks
lead directly to such a conclusion. Some copies have but one kind
of paper-mark; others have two and three kinds; taking all copies
together, there are at least fourteen distinct paper-marks. If each
decided variation of the same design could be considered the mark of a
different maker, the number could be doubled.
That the substance used for these engravings was wood, is clearly
indicated by the occasional feathering or flatting out of border-lines,
which, when crushed, show the fibres of wood in the impression. It
seems that the engravings were cut on flat plates or blocks, that had
been sawed or split on a line parallel with the fibres.
The ink is of a dull or rusty-brown color; on some pages light, and
on others of darker tint, rarely ever of uniform tint on the same
page. It has the appearance of a paste or a thick water color. This
unevenness in color was produced by some imperfect method of inking the
block—possibly by a hard-faced brush which shed color irregularly.
The shining appearance of the backs of the prints, in all places where
the raised lines of the wood-cut have indented the paper, has been
considered as sufficient evidence that the impressions were taken,
not by a press, but by means of a [p204] frotton, or by friction, or
by rubbing in some form or other. One writer of rare simplicity has
hazarded the opinion that the back of the paper, or the frotton, may
have been soaped to facilitate the work. But these methods of printing
books are imaginary and entirely impracticable. The shining appearance
on the back of the paper does not prove that the prints were made by
friction. The gloss could have been produced by any press which gave a
hard impression against a harder surface. It could have been produced
by rubbing or smoothing down with a burnisher the indentations of the
lines on the back of the paper, as is sometimes done by pressmen of
this day when they take too hard an impression. Some copies of the book
show the results of hard impression. Two of the four copies of the
_Bible of the Poor_ in the possession of the British Museum present
lines deeply sunk in the paper, as if they had been printed from a
press. Jackson, a practical engraver on wood, who had large experience
in proving wood-cuts, has unwillingly accepted the unauthorized
tradition of presswork by friction, but he has candidly stated its
difficulties.
“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 noticed only
two subjects in which the lines appear 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 color, it is
not likely that the paper could be used in a damp state, otherwise
the ink would run or spread; and even if this 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.
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_. ... A block containing only two pages [of the _History
of the Virgin_, a block of smaller size than that used for the [p205]
_Bible of the Poor_] 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 color 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 unacquainted.”[109]
This last hypothesis of an imaginary contrivance that kept the
paper steady, is as untenable as the proposition that blocks were
unquestionably printed by friction. The feat which is impossible
now was impossible then. There is nothing in the appearance of the
presswork of the block-books really inconsistent with the theory,
that the books were printed under a rude press which was deficient
in many attachments that are needed by the printer. The peculiar
appearance of the presswork of this and of other block-books will be
most satisfactorily explained by the hypothesis that they were printed
on a press. The hypothesis of printing by friction is a conjecture for
which there is no good authority. It seems to have been invented for a
purpose. If the early chroniclers of printing had not been so anxious
to magnify the merits of the early typographers, and to belittle the
printers of block-books, we should have heard nothing of printing by
friction.
The designs of the first edition have more merit than those of the
earlier manuscript copies—more than those of subsequent editions
printed by imitators. Neither the rudeness of the engravings, nor
the flagrant anachronisms in architecture and in the costumes of the
figures, are gross enough to conceal the ability of the designer, whose
skill in grouping figures is manifest on almost every page. [p206]
The illustrations have merit, but they are in the realistic and
commonplace style of the designers of Germany and of Flanders during
the fifteenth century. The want of ideality is painful. The designer
certainly had no thought of irreverence, but many of the designs are
really ludicrous. Some of the anachronisms are: Gideon arrayed in plate
armor, with medieval helmet and visor and Turkish scimitar; David and
Solomon in rakish, wide-brimmed hats bearing high conical crowns; the
translation of Elijah in a four-wheeled vehicle resembling the modern
farmer’s hay-wagon. Slouched hats, puffed doublets, tight-legged
breeches and pointed shoes are seen in the apparel of the Israelites
who are not represented as priests or soldiers. Some houses have
Italian towers and some have Moorish minarets, but in none of the
pictures is there an exhibition of pointed Gothic architecture. The old
Dutch stair-like gable is often delineated, and so is the round arch
and latticed window of the Flemish house of the fourteenth century.
With all its absurdities, this edition of the _Bible of the Poor_
commanded the respectful attention of great artists like Albert Durer
and Lucas von Leyden, who did not scruple to appropriate many of its
designs.
One of the most puzzling peculiarities of the first edition of the
_Bible of the Poor_ is the dissimilarity of the copies. In some copies
the dissimilarity is in the details of the frame-work; in others, it
is in the foliage of trees, but it is, for the most part, confined to
a few immaterial points. These differences seem to warrant the opinion
stated by Sotheby that there were six distinct editions, each printed
from a separate set of blocks; but this opinion cannot be reasonably
defended. In all important features the copies are alike. The pages
of the so-called different editions have the marks, even in little
blemishes, of impressions from the same block—a uniformity which could
not have been produced if each block had been re-engraved for each
new edition. Why the various copies of the book should be alike in
important, and unlike in minor features, cannot be explained. It has
been suggested that the [p207] dissimilarities are the evidences of
accident and repair; that when the block was injured, it was plugged,
as is frequently done with wood-cuts in our own day, and the newly
inserted plug was re-engraved with a new design. The explanation is
not plausible. The differences generally appear in the same relative
position on every page, and there are too many of them to be attributed
to accident; they seem to have been made for some unknown purpose.
Irregularities of like nature have been noticed in copies of the
typographic books of the fifteenth century which are known to be of the
same edition.