T. Nieuhoff Piccard’s express testimony of Holbein having painted a

Dance of Death in fresco, at Whitehall, is, in Mr. Douce’s opinion,

further corroborated by the following circumstances: 1. “In one of

Vanderdort’s manuscript catalogues of the pictures and rarities

transported from St. James’s to Whitehall, and placed there in the newly

erected cabinet room of Charles I, and in which several works by Holbein

are mentioned, there is the following article: ‘A little piece, where

Death with a green garland about his head, stretching both his arms to

apprehend a Pilate in the habit of one of the spiritual Prince-Electors

of Germany. Copied by Isaac Oliver from Holbein.’ There cannot be a

doubt that this refers to the subject of the Elector as painted by

Holbein in the Dance of Death at Whitehall, proving at the same time the

identity of the painting with the wood-cuts, whatever may be the

inference. 2. Sandrart, after noticing a remarkable portrait of Henry

VIII. at Whitehall, states ‘that there yet remains at that palace

_another work_, by Holbein, that constitutes him the Apelles of his

time.’ This is certainly _very like an allusion_ to a Dance of Death.

3. It is _by no means improbable_ that Matthew Prior may have alluded to

Holbein’s painting at Whitehall, as it is not likely that he would be

acquainted with any other.

‘Our term of life depends not on our deed,

Before our birth our funeral was decreed;

Nor aw’d by foresight, nor misled by chance,

Imperious Death directs the ebon lance,

Peoples great Henry’s tombs, and leads up Holbein’s Dance.’

_Prior, Ode to the Memory of George Villiers._”[VI-37]

[Footnote VI-37: Douce’s Dance of Death, pp. 144, 145.]

Mr. Douce having previously _proved_ that Holbein was _not_ the designer

of the cuts in the Lyons Dance of Death, thus, in a manner _equally

satisfactory_, accounts for the verses of Bourbon, by showing, on the

_unexceptionable_ evidence of “a person, calling himself T. Nieuhoff

Piccard, _probably_ belonging to the household of William III,” that the

great work of Holbein--by the fame of which he had made himself equal

with the immortal gods--was painted as large as life, in fresco, on the

walls of Whitehall. The ingenuity displayed in depriving Holbein of the

honour of the Lyons cuts is no less exemplified in proving him to be the

painter of a similar subject in Whitehall. The key-stone is worthy of

the arch.

Though the _facts_ and _arguments_ put forth by Mr. Douce, in proof of

Holbein having painted a Dance of Death on the walls of the old palace

of Whitehall, and of this having been the identical Dance of Death

alluded to by Bourbon, might be summarily dismissed as being of that

kind which no objection could render more absurd, yet it seems necessary

to direct the especial attention of the reader to one or two points; and

first to the assertion that “it is next to impossible that the Lyons

Dance of Death of 1538 could then have been in Borbonius’s

contemplation.” Now, in direct opposition to what is here said, it

appears to me highly probable that _this_ was the very work on account

of which he addressed his epigram to Holbein; and it is moreover evident

that Bourbon expresses in Latin verse almost precisely the same ideas as

those which had previously been expressed in French by the writer of the

address to Madame Jehanne de Touszele, when speaking of the merits of

the nameless artist who is there alluded to as the designer or engraver

of the cuts.[VI-38] As Holbein is not certainly known to be the painter

or designer of any other Dance of Death which might merit the high

praise conveyed in Bourbon’s verses, to what other work of his will they

apply? Even supposing, as I do, that the alphabet of the Dance of Death

was designed by Holbein, I conceive it “next to impossible,” to use the

words of Mr. Douce, that Bourbon should have described Holbein as having

attained immortality through the fame of those twenty-four small

letters, a perfect set of which I believe is not to be found in any

single volume. That Bourbon _did_ know who was the designer of the cuts

of the Lyons Dance of Death there can scarcely be the shadow of a doubt;

he was at Lyons in the year in which the work was published; he was

connected with the printers; and another work, the Icones Historiarum

Veteris Testamenti, also published by them in 1538, has at the

commencement a copy of verses written by Bourbon, from which alone we

learn that Holbein was the designer of the cuts,--the first four of

which cuts, be it observed, being from the same blocks as the first four

in the Dance of Death, published by the same printers, in the same year.

What might be the motives of the printers for not inserting Bourbon’s

epigram in praise of Holbein in the subsequent editions of the Dance of

Death, supposing him to be the designer of the cuts, I cannot tell, nor

will I venture to _guess_. They certainly must have had some reason for

concealing the designer’s name, for the writer of the prefatory address

to Madame Jehanne de Touszele takes care not to mention it even when

speaking in so laudatory a style of the excellence of the designs. Among

the other unaccountable things connected with this work, I may mention

the fact of the French prefatory address to the abbess of St. Peter’s

appearing only in the first, and being omitted in every subsequent

edition.

[Footnote VI-38: That the reader may judge for himself of the

similarity of thought in the passages referred to, they are here

given in juxta-position.

“Car ses histoires funebres, avec leurs descriptions severement

rithmées, aux advisans donnent telle admiration, qu’ilz en _jugent

les mortz y apparoistre tresvivement_, et les vifs tresmortement

representer. Qui me faict penser, que la Mort craignant que ce

excellent painctre ne la paignist tant vifve qu’elle ne fut plus

crainte pour Mort, _et que pour cela luy mesme n’en devint

immortel_, que a ceste cause,” &c.--_Epistre des Faces de la

Mort._

“Dum mortis Hansus pictor imaginem exprimit,

Tanta arte mortem retulit, ut mors vivere

Videatur ipsa: et ipse se immortalibus

Parem Diis fecerit, operis hujus gloria.”

_Borbonius._]

With respect to T. Nieuhoff Piccard, whose manuscript addresses to

“Mynheer Heymans” and “Lord William Benting” are cited to _prove_ that

Bourbon’s verses must relate to a painting of the Dance of Death by

Holbein in the old palace of Whitehall, nothing whatever is known; and

there is not the slightest reason to believe that a Lord William

Benting, born in the old palace of Whitehall, “Lord of Rhoon,

Pendraght,” &c. ever existed. I am of opinion that the addresses of the

person calling himself T. Nieuhoff Piccard are a clumsy attempt at

imposition.[VI-39] Though Mr. Douce had seen both those addresses, and

also another of the same kind, he does not appear to have made any

attempt to trace their former owners, nor does he mention the names of

the parties in whose possession they were at the time that he saw them.

He had seen the address to “Lord William Benting” previous to the

publication of his observations on the Dance of Death in 1794, when, if

he had felt inclined, he might have ascertained from whom the then

possessor had received it, and thus obtained a clue to guide him in his

inquiries respecting the personal identity of the Lord of Rhoon and

Pendraght. But this would not have suited his purpose; for he seems to

have been conscious that any inquiry respecting such a person would only

have tended to confirm the doubts respecting the paper addressed to him

by Piccard. It is also uncertain at what time those pretended addresses

were written, but there are impressions of the etchings which

accompanied them with the date 1720; and I am inclined to think that if

the paper and handwriting were closely examined, it would be found that

those pretended presentation addresses were manufactured about the same,

or perhaps at a later period. Whoever the person calling himself

T. Nieuhoff Piccard may have been, or at whatever time the addresses to

Mynheer Heymans and others may have been written, the only evidence of

there having been a painting of the Dance by Holbein at Whitehall rests

on his unsupported statement. Such a painting is not mentioned by any

foreign traveller who had visited this country, nor is it noticed by any

English writer prior to 1697; it is not alluded to in any tragedy,

comedy, farce, or masque, in which we might expect that such a painting

would have been incidentally mentioned had it ever existed. Evelyn, who

must have frequently been in the old palace of Whitehall, says not a

word of such a painting, though he mentions the Lyons Dance of Death

under the title of Mortis Imago, and ascribes the cuts to

Holbein;[VI-40] and not the slightest notice of it is to be found in

Vertue or Walpole.

[Footnote VI-39: Hegner, in his Life of Holbein, speaking of the

Nieuhoff discovery, says: “Of this fable no notice would have been

taken here had not Mr. Douce ascribed undeserved authority to it,

and had not his superficial investigations found undeserved credit

with English and other compilers.” Hans Holbein der Jüngere,

S. 338.

Mr. Douce, at page 240 of his Dance of Death, complains of

Hegner’s want of urbanity and politeness; and in return calls his

account of Holbein’s works _superficial_, and moreover says that

“his arguments, if worthy of the name, are, generally speaking, of

a most weak and flimsy texture.” He also gives him a sharp rebuff

by alluding to him as the “above _gentleman_,” the last word, to

give it point, being printed in Italics. Mr. Douce, when he was

thus pelting Hegner, does not seem to have been aware that his own

anti-Holbenian superstructure was a house of glass.

“Cedimus, inque vicem dedimus crura sagittis.”]

[Footnote VI-40: Evelyn is only referred to here on account of his

_silence_ with respect to the pretended painting at Whitehall.

What he says of Holbein cannot be relied on, as will be seen from

the following passage, which is a fair specimen of his general

knowledge and accuracy. “We have seen some few things cut in wood

by the incomparable Hans Holbein the Dane, but they are rare and

exceedingly difficult to come by; as his _Licentiousness of the

Friars and Nuns_; _Erasmus_; _The Dance Macchabre_; the _Mortis

Imago_, which he painted in great in the Church of Basil, and

afterwards graved with no less art.”--Evelyn’s Sculpture, p. 69.

Edition 1769.]

The learned Conrad Gesner, who was born at Zurich in 1516, and died

there in 1565, expressly ascribes the Lyons Dance of Death to

Holbein;[VI-41] and, notwithstanding the contradictory statement in the

preface to the first edition of this work, such appears to have been the

general belief of all the artist’s contemporaries. Van Mander, who was

born in 1548, and who died in 1606, appears to have been the first

person who gave any account of the life of Holbein. His work, entitled

Het Schilder Boek, consisting of biographical notices of painters,

chiefly Germans and Flemings, was first published in 1604; and, when

speaking of Holbein, he mentions the Lyons Dance of Death among his

other works. Sandrart, in common with every other writer on art of the

period, also ascribes the Lyons work to Holbein, and he gives the

following account of a conversation that he had with Rubens respecting

those cuts: “I remember that in the year 1627, when the celebrated

Rubens was proceeding to Utrecht to visit Honthorst, I accompanied him

as far as Amsterdam; and during our passage in the boat I looked into

Holbein’s little book of the Dance of Death, the cuts of which Rubens

highly praised, recommending me, as I was a young man, to copy them,

observing, that he had copied them himself in his youth.” Sandrart, who

seems to have been one of the earliest writers who supposed that Durer,

Cranach, and others engraved their own designs, without any just grounds

describes Holbein as a wood engraver. Patin, in his edition of the

“Stultitiæ Laus” of Erasmus, 1676, repeats the same story; and Papillon

in his decisive manner clenches it by asserting that “most of the

delicate wood-cuts and ornamental letters which are to be found in books

printed at Basle, Zurich, and towns in Switzerland, at Lyons, London,

&c. from 1520 to about 1540, were engraved by Holbein himself.” Papillon

also says that it is believed--_on croit_--that Holbein began to engrave

in 1511, when he was about sixteen. “What is extraordinary in this

painter,” he further adds, “is, that he painted and engraved with the

left hand, so that he consequently engraved the lines on the wood from

right to left, instead of, as with us, engraving from left to

right.”[VI-42] Jansen, and a host of other compilers, without inquiry,

repeat the story of Holbein having been a wood engraver, and that the

cuts of the Lyons Dance of Death were engraved by himself. That he was

the designer of those cuts I am thoroughly convinced, though I consider

it “next to impossible” that he should have been also the engraver.

[Footnote VI-41: “Imagines Mortis expressæ ab optimo pictore

Johanne Holbein cum epigrammatibus Georgii Æmylii, excusæ

Francofurti et Lugduni apud Frellonios, quorum editio plures habet

picturas. Vidi etiam cum metris Gallicis et Germanicis, si bene

memini.” Mr. Douce cites this passage from Gesner’s Pandectæ,

“a supplemental volume of great rarity to his well-known

Bibliotheca.” The correct title of the volume in which it occurs

is “Partitiones Theologicæ, Pandectarum Universalium Conradi

Gesneri Liber Ultimus.” Folio, printed by Christopher Froschover,

Zurich (Tiguri) 1549. The notice of the Dance of Death is in folio

86, _a_.]

[Footnote VI-42: Traité de la Gravure en Bois, tom. i. p. 165. Van

Mander asserts that Holbein painted with his left hand; but Horace

Walpole, however, in opposition to this, refers to a portrait of

Holbein, formerly in the Arundelian collection, where he appears

holding the pencil in his _right_ hand.]

Holbein’s Bible Cuts, as they are usually called, were first published

at Lyons, in 1538, the same year, and by the same printers, as the Dance

of Death. The book is a small quarto, and the title is as follows:

“Historiarum Veteris Testamenti Icones ad vivum expressæ. Una cum brevi,

sed quoad fieri potuit, dilucida earundem et Latina et Gallica

expositione. Lugduni sub scuto Coloniensi. M.D.XXXVIII.”[VI-43] On the

title-page is an emblematic cut, with the motto _Usus me genuit_,

similar to that on the title-page in the first edition of the Dance of

Death, but not precisely the same; and at the end is the imprint of the

brothers Melchior and Caspar Trechsel within an ornamental border, as in

the latter work. I am greatly inclined to think that the brothers were

only the printers of the first editions of the Dance of Death and the

Bible cuts, and that the real proprietors were John and Francis Frellon,

whose names appear as the publishers in subsequent editions.

[Footnote VI-43: A copy of this edition is preserved in the Public

Library at Basle, and there is another copy in the Royal

Collection at Dresden. Another edition, in every respect similar

to the first, was also printed by the brothers Trechsel in 1539.

Hegner, in his Life of Holbein, does not seem to have known of

this edition; speaking of that of 1538, he says, “It is probably

the same as that to which Papillon gives the date 1539.” There is

a copy of the edition of 1539 in the British Museum.]

This opinion seems to be corroborated by the fact of there being an

address from “_Franciscus Frellaeus_” to the Christian Reader in the

Bible cuts of 1538 and 1539, which in subsequent editions is altered to

“Franciscus _Frellonius_.” That the same person is designated by those

names, I think there can be little doubt, as the addresses are literally

the same. From adopting the form “Frellaeus,” however, in the editions

of 1538 and 1539, it would seem that the writer was not wishful to

discover his name. When the work becomes popular he writes it

Frellonius; and in the second edition of the Dance of Death, when the

character of this work is also established, and there seems no longer

reason to apprehend the censures of the church of Rome, we find the

names of John and Francis Frellon on the title-page under the “shield of

Cologne.” Whatever might be their motives, it seems certain that the

first publishers of the Dance of Death were wishful to withhold their

names; and it is likely that the designer of the cuts might have equally

good reasons for concealment. Had the Roman Catholic party considered

the cuts of the Pope, the Nun, and two or three others as the covert

satire of a _reformed_ painter, the publishers and the designer would

have been as likely to incur danger as to reap profit or fame.

The address of Franciscus Frellaeus is followed by a copy of Latin

verses by Nicholas Bourbon, in which Holbein is mentioned as the

designer; and immediately preceding the cuts is an address “aux

lecteurs,” in French verse, by Gilles Corrozet, who, perhaps, might be

the poet that supplied the French expositions of those cuts, and the

“descriptions severement rithmées” of the Dance of Death. The following

is an extract from Bourbon’s prefatory verses, the whole of which it

appears unnecessary to give.

“Nuper in Elysio cum fortè erraret Apelles

Una aderat Zeuxis, Parrhasiusque comes.

Hi duo multa satis fundebant verba; sed ille

Interea mœrens et taciturnus erat.

Mirantur comites, farique hortantur et urgent:

Suspirans imo pectore, Coûs ait:

O famæ ignari, superis quæ nuper ab oris

(Vana utinam!) Stygias venit ad usque domos:

Scilicet, esse hodie quendam ex mortalibus unum

Ostendat qui me vosque fuisse nihil:

Qui nos declaret pictores nomine tantum,

Picturæque omneis ante fuisse rudes.

Holbius est homini nomen, qui nomina nostra

Obscura ex claris ac prope nulla facit.

Talis apud manes querimonia fertur: et illos

Sic equidem merito censeo posse queri,

Nam tabulam siquis videat, quam pinxerit Hansus

Holbius, ille artis gloria prima suæ,

Protinus exclamet, Potuit Deus edere monstrum

Quod video? humanæ non potuere manus.

Icones hæ sacræ tanti sunt, optime lector,

Artificis, dignum quod venereris opus.”

Besides those verses there is also a Greek distich by Bourbon, to which

the following translation “pene ad verbum” is appended:

“Cernere vis, hospes, simulacra simillima vivis?

Hoc opus Holbinæ nobile cerne manus.”

When Mr. Douce stated that it was “_extremely probable_ that the

anonymous painter or designer of the Dance might have been employed also

by the Frellons to execute a set of subjects for the Bible previously to

his death, and that Holbein was afterwards employed to complete the

work,” he seems to have forgot that such a testimony of Holbein being

the designer was prefixed to the Bible cuts. In answer to Mr. Douce it

may be asked, in his own style, if the Frellons knew that another artist

was the designer of the cuts of the Dance of Death, and if he also had

been originally employed to design the Bible cuts, how does it happen

that they should allow Bourbon to give all the honour of the latter to

Holbein, who, if the Dance of Death be not his, was certainly much

inferior as a designer to the nameless artist whose unfinished work he

was employed to complete?

The total number of the Bible cuts in the first edition of the work is

ninety, the first four of which are the same as the first four of the

Dance of Death; the other eighty-six are of a different form to the

first four, as will be perceived from the specimens, which are of the

same size as the originals. Those eighty-six cuts are generally much

inferior in design to those of the Dance of Death, and the style in

which they are engraved is very unequal, some of them being executed

with considerable neatness and delicacy, and others in a much coarser

manner. The following cut, Abraham about to sacrifice Isaac, Genesis

XXII, is one of those which are the best engraved; but even these, so

far as regards the expression of the features and the delicate marking

of the hands, are generally much inferior to the cuts of the Dance of

Death.

[Illustration]

Though most of the Bible cuts are inferior both in design and execution

to those of the Dance of Death, and though several of them are rudely

drawn and badly engraved, yet many of them afford points of such perfect

identity with those of the Dance of Death, that it seems impossible to

come to any other conclusion than that either the cuts of both works

have been designed by the same person, or that the designer of the one

series has servilely copied from the designer of the other, and, what is

most singular, in many trifling details which seem the least likely to

be imitated, and which usually constitute individual peculiarities of

style. For instance, the small shrubby tree in the preceding cut is

precisely of the same species as that seen in the cut of the Old Woman

in the Dance of Death; and the angel about to stay Abraham’s hand bears

a strong general resemblance to the angel in Adam and Eve driven out of

Paradise.

The cut on the opposite page--the Fool, Psalm LIII--is copied from one

of those executed in a coarser style than the preceding. The children in

this cut are evidently of the same family as those of the Dance of

Death.

In the first cut, the Creation, a crack is perceived running nearly down

the middle from top to bottom, in the edition of the Dance of Death of

1545. It is also perceptible in all the subsequent Lyons editions of

this work and of the Bible cuts. It is, however, less obvious in the

Bible cuts of the edition 1549 than in some of the preceding, probably

in consequence of the block having been cramped to remedy the defect.

Mr. Douce speaks, at page 105, as if the crack were not discernible in

the Bible cuts of 1549; it is, however, quite perceptible in every copy

that has come under my notice. Some of the latter editions of this work

contain four additional cuts, which are all coarsely executed. In the

edition of 1547 they form the illustrations to Ezekiel XL; Ezekiel

XLIII; Jonah I, II, and III; and Habakkuk. The Bible cuts were also

printed with explanations in English. The title of a copy now before me

is as follows: “The Images of the Old Testament, lately expressed, set

forthe in Ynglishe and Frenche vuith a playn and brief exposition.

Printed at Lyons by Johan Frellon, the yere of our Lord God, 1549,” 4to.

In the latter editions there are wood-cuts of the four Evangelists, each

within an oval border, on the last leaf. They bear no tokens of

Holbein’s style.

[Illustration]

Among the many instances of resemblance which are to be perceived on

comparing the Dance of Death with the Bible cuts, the following may be

enumerated as the most remarkable. The peculiar manner in which fire

with smoke, and the waves of the sea, are represented in the Dance of

Death can scarcely fail to strike the most heedless observer; for

instance, the fire in the cut of Death seizing the child, and the waves

in the cut of the Seaman. In the Bible cuts we perceive the same

peculiarity; there is the same kind of fire in Moses directing the

manner of burnt offerings, Leviticus I; in the burning of Nadab and

Abihu, Leviticus X; and in every other one of those cuts where fire is

seen. In the destruction of Pharaoh and his host, Exodus XIV, are the

same kind of curling waves. Except in the Dance of Death and the Bible

cuts, I have never seen an instance of fire or water represented in such

a manner. If those cuts were designed by two different artists, it is

certainly singular that in this respect they should display so perfect a

coincidence of idea. The sheep in the cut of the Bishop in the Dance of

Death are the same as those in the Bible cut of Moses seeing God in the

burning bush, Exodus III; and the female figure in the cut of the

Elector in the former work is perceived in the Bible cut of the captive

Midianites, Numbers XXXI. The children introduced in both works are

almost perfectly identical, as will be perceived on comparing the cut of

Little Children mocking Elijah, chapter II, Kings II, with those of the

Elector, and Death seizing the child, in the Dance of Death. The face of

the Duchess in the latter work is the same as that of Esther in the

Bible cut, Esther, chapter II; and in this cut ornaments on the

tapestry, like fleurs-de-lis, behind the throne of Ahasuerus, are the

same as those on the tapestry behind the King in the Dance of Death. The

latter coincidence has been noticed by Mr. Douce, who, in direct

opposition to the evidence of the German or Swiss costume of the living

characters of the Dance of Death, considers it as contributing to

demonstrate that both the series of those cuts are of Gallic

origin.[VI-44] It is needless to enumerate more instances of almost

complete identity of figures and details in the cuts of the Dance of

Death and those of the Bible illustrations; they are too frequent to

have originated from a conventional mode of representing certain objects

and persons; and they are most striking in minor details, where one

artist would be least likely to imitate another, but where the same

individual designer would be most likely to repeat himself. “As to the

designs of these truly elegant prints,” says Mr. Douce, speaking of the

cuts of the Dance of Death, “no one who is at all skilled in the

knowledge of Holbein’s style and manner of grouping his figures would

hesitate immediately to ascribe them to that artist.”[VI-45] As this

opinion is corroborated by a comparison of the Dance of Death with the

Bible cuts, and as the internal evidence of the cuts of the Dance of

Death in favour of Holbein is confirmed by the testimony of his

contemporaries, the reader can decide for himself how far Holbein’s

positive claims to the honour of this work ought to be affected by the

passage in the anonymous address to Madame Jehanne de Touszele, which

forms the groundwork of Mr. Douce’s theory.

[Footnote VI-44: “A comparison of the 8th subject of the

Simulachres,” says Mr. Douce, “with that of the Bible for Esther

I, II, where the canopy ornamented with fleurs-de-lis is the same

in both, will contribute to strengthen the above conjecture, as

will both the cuts to demonstrate their Gallic origin. It is most

certain that the King sitting at table in the Simulachres is

intended for Francis I, which if any one should doubt, let him

look upon the miniature of that king, copied at p. 214, in

Clarke’s ‘Repertorium Bibliographicum.’” The “above conjecture”

referred to in this extract is that previously cited at page 367,

where Mr. Douce conjectures that Holbein _might have been_

employed to complete the Bible cuts which _might have been_ left

unfinished in consequence of the death of Mr. Douce’s “great

unknown” designer of the Dance of Death.--Dance of Death, p. 96.

Mr. Douce, not being able to deny the similarity of many of the

cuts, says it is highly probable that Holbein was merely employed

to finish the Bible cuts, without ever considering that it is

_primâ facie_ much more probable that Holbein was the designer of

the cuts in both works.]

[Footnote VI-45: Dance of Death, p. 82.]

Having now examined the principal arguments which have been alleged to

show that Holbein _was not_ the designer of the Dance of Death, and

having endeavoured to justify his claims to that honour by producing the

evidences on which they rest, I shall now take leave of this subject,

feeling thoroughly assured that HOLBEIN WAS THE DESIGNER OF THE CUTS OF

THE FIRST EDITION OF THE LYONS DANCE OF DEATH; and trusting, though with

no overweening confidence, that the preceding investigation will render

it necessary for the next questioner of his title to produce stronger

objections than the solitary ambiguous passage in the preface to the

first edition of the work, and to support them with more forcible and

consistent arguments than have been put forth by Mr. Douce. M. T.

Nieuhoff Piccard, I am inclined to think, will never again be called as

a witness in this cause; and before the passage in the preface can be

allowed to have any weight, it must be shown that such a personage as

Madame Jehanne de Touszele _was_ prioress of the convent of St. Peter at

Lyons at the time of the first publication of the work: and even should

such a fact be established, the ambiguity of the passage--whether the

pretendedly deceased artist were the engraver or designer, or both,--and

the obvious desire to conceal his name, remain to be explained.

In 1538, the year in which the Dance of Death and the Bible cuts were

first published at Lyons, Holbein was residing in England under the

patronage of Henry VIII; though it is also certain that about the

beginning of September in that year he returned to Basle and he remained

there a few weeks.[VI-46]

[Footnote VI-46: “Venit nuper Basileam ex Anglia Ioannes Holbein,

adeo felicem ejus regni statum prædicans, qui aliquot septimanis

exactis rursum eo migraturus est.” From a letter written by

Rudolph Gualter to Henry Bullinger, of Zurich, about the middle of

September 1538.--Quoted by Hegner, S. 246.]

As the productions of this distinguished painter occupy so large a

portion of this chapter, it perhaps may not be unnecessary to give here

a few particulars of his life, chiefly derived from Hegner’s work,

previous to his coming to England. Hans Holbein, the Younger, as he is

often called by German writers to distinguish him from his father, was

the son of Hans Holbein, a painter of considerable reputation. The year

and place of his birth have not been positively ascertained, but there

seems reason to believe that he was born in 1498, at Augsburg,[VI-47] of

which city his father was a burgher, and from whence he appears to have

removed with his family to Basle, about the end of the fifteenth or the

beginning of the sixteenth century. Young Holbein was brought up to his

father’s profession, and at an early age displayed the germ of his

future excellence. There is a portrait in oil by young Holbein of the

date of 1513, which, according to Hegner, though rather weak in colour

and somewhat hard in outline, is yet clearly and delicately painted.

From the excellence of his early productions, Patin, in his Life of

Holbein, prefixed to an edition of the Laus Stultitiæ of Erasmus[VI-48]

thinks that he must have been born in 1495. That he was born in 1498

there can, however, be little doubt, for Hegner mentions a portrait of

him, at Basle, when in the forty-fifth year of his age, with the date

1543. Several anecdotes are told of Holbein as a jolly fellow, and of

his twice or thrice discharging his account at a tavern by painting a

Dance of Peasants. Though there seems reason to believe that Holbein was

a free liver, and that he did paint such a subject in a house at Basle,

the stories of his thus settling for his liquor are highly improbable.

He appears to have married young, for in a painting of his wife and two

children, executed before he left Basle for England in 1526, the eldest

child, a boy, appears to be between four and five years old.[VI-49]

[Footnote VI-47: Dr. Dibdin, in his Bibliographical Tour vol. iii.

pp. 80, 81, Edit. 1829, mentions two paintings at Augsburg by the

elder Holbein, one dated 1499 and the other 1501. The elder

Holbein had a brother named Sigismund, who was also a painter, and

who appears to have established himself at Berne. Papillon, in his

usual manner, makes Sigismund Holbein a wood engraver. By his

will, dated 1540, he appoints his nephew Hans the heir of all his

property in Berne.]

[Footnote VI-48: Patin’s edition of this work was published in

octavo, at Basle, in 1676. It contains eighty-three copper-plate

engravings, from pen-and-ink sketches, drawn by Holbein, in the

margin of a copy of an edition printed by Frobenius, in 1514, and

still preserved (1860) in the Public Library at Basle. It is said

that Erasmus, when looking over those sketches, exclaimed, when he

came to that intended for himself, “Oho, if Erasmus were now as he

appears here, he would certainly take a wife.” Above another of

the sketches, representing a man with one of his arms about a

woman’s neck, and at the same time drinking out of a bottle,

Erasmus is said to have written the name “_Holbein._” In an

edition of the Laus Stultitiæ, edited by G. G. Becker, Basle,

1780, 8vo. those sketches are engraved (very indifferently) on

wood.]

[Footnote VI-49: Hegner, Hans Holbein der Jüngere, S. 110.]

The name of Holbein’s wife is unknown; but it is said that, like

Durer’s, she was of an unhappy temper, and that he enjoyed no peace with

her. It is not, however, unlikely that his own unsettled disposition and

straitened circumstances also contributed to render his home

uncomfortable. Like most other artists of that period, he appears to

have frequently travelled; but his journeys do not seem to have extended

beyond Switzerland and Suabia, and they were for the most part confined

to the former country. He seems to have travelled rather in search of

employment than to improve himself by studying the works of other

masters. Perhaps of all the eminent painters of that period there is no

one whose style is more original than Holbein’s, nor one who owes less

to the study of the works of his contemporaries or predecessors. Though

there can be no doubt of his talents being highly appreciated by his

fellow-townsmen, yet his profession during his residence at Basle

appears to have afforded him but a scanty income. The number of works

executed by him between 1517 and 1526 sufficiently testify that he was

not deficient in industry, and the exercise of his art seems to have

been sufficiently varied:--he painted portraits and historical subjects;

decorated the interior walls of houses, according to the fashion of that

period, with fanciful and historical compositions; and made designs for

goldsmiths and wood-engravers. It is said that so early as 1520, the

Earl of Arundel,[VI-50] an English nobleman, having seen some of his

works in passing through Basle, advised him to try his fortune in

England. If such advice were given to Holbein at that period, it is

certain that it was not adopted until several years after, for he did

not visit this country till 1526.

[Footnote VI-50: It is conjectured by Walpole that this might be

Henry Fitz-Alan, Earl of Arundel.]

[Illustration: THE SHEATH OF A DAGGER, INTENDED AS A DESIGN FOR

A CHASER.[VI-51]]

[Footnote VI-51: It is impossible to exceed the beauty and skill

that are manifested in this fine piece of art. The figures are,

a king, queen, and a warrior; a young woman, a monk, and an

infant; all of whom most unwillingly accompany Death in the Dance.

The despair of the king, the dejection of the queen, accompanied

by her little dog, the terror of the soldier who hears the drum of

Death, the struggling of the female, the reluctance of the monk,

and the sorrow of the poor infant, are depicted with equal spirit

and veracity. The original drawing is in the public library at

Basle, and ascribed to Holbein.]

Before he left Basle he had painted two or three portraits of Erasmus,

and there is a large wood-cut of that distinguished scholar which is

said not only to have been painted, but also engraved by Holbein. This

cut is of folio size, and the figure of Erasmus is a whole length. His

right arm rests upon a terminus, and from a richly ornamented arch is

suspended a tablet, with the inscription, ER. ROT. Some old impressions

have two verses printed underneath, which merely praise the likeness

without alluding to the painter, while others have four which contain a

compliment to the genius of Erasmus and to the art of Holbein.[VI-52]

The original block is still preserved in the Public Library at Basle;

but there is not the slightest reason for believing that it was engraved

by Holbein. In 1526 Holbein left Basle for England: Patin says, because

he could no longer bear to live with his imperious wife. Though this

might not be the chief cause, it is easy to conceive that a person of

Holbein’s character would feel but little regret at parting from such a

helpmate. Van Mander says that he took with him a portrait which he had

painted of Erasmus, with a letter of recommendation from the latter to

Sir Thomas More, wherein it was observed that this portrait ‘was much

more like him than any of Albert Durer’s.’ Hegner, however, thinks that

what Van Mander says about the contents of this letter is not correct,

as no such passage is to be found in the published correspondence of

Erasmus with Sir Thomas More. Erasmus had already sent two portraits of

himself to England;[VI-53] and as Sir Thomas More was personally

acquainted with him, Hegner is of opinion that it would be unnecessary

to mention that the portrait was a better likeness than any of those

painted by Albert Durer. It is, however, by no means unlikely that

Erasmus in speaking of a portrait of himself by Holbein--whether

forwarded by the latter or not--might give his own opinion of it in

comparison with one from the pencil of Durer.

[Footnote VI-52: The verses underneath the impressions which are

supposed to be the earliest, are as follows:

“Corporis effigiem si quis non vidit Erasmi,

Hunc scite ad vivum picta tabella dabit.”

The others:

“Pallas Apellæam nuper mirata tabellam,

Hanc, ait, æternum Bibliotheca colat.

Dædaleam monstrat musis Holbeinnius artem,

Et summi ingenii Magnus Erasmus opes.”]

[Footnote VI-53: Erasmus, writing to Bilibald Pirkheimer, in 1524,

says, “Rursus nuper misi in Angliam Erasmum bis pictum ab artifice

satis eleganti.” Hegner thinks that this artist was Holbein. In

1517 a portrait of Erasmus, with that of his friend Petrus

Aegidius, was painted at Antwerp by Quintin Matsys. It was

intended by Erasmus as a present to Sir Thomas More. This painting

came subsequently into the possession of Dr. Mead, at whose sale

it was purchased, as the production of Holbein, by Lord Radnor,

for £110.]

It would appear that in 1525 Erasmus had already mentioned Holbein’s

desire of trying his fortune in England to Sir Thomas More, for in a

letter written by Sir Thomas to Erasmus, dated from the court at

Greenwich, 18th of December 1525, there is a passage to the following

effect: “Your painter, dear Erasmus, is an excellent artist, but I am

apprehensive that he will not find England so fruitful and fertile as he

may expect. I will, however, do all that I can in order that he may not

find it entirely barren.”[VI-54] From a letter, dated 29th of August

1526, written by Erasmus to his friend Petrus Aegidius at Antwerp, it

seems reasonable to conclude that Holbein left Basle for England about

the beginning of September. Though Holbein’s name is not expressly

mentioned in this letter, there cannot be a doubt of his being the

artist who is thus introduced to Aegidius: “The bearer of this is he who

painted my portrait. I will not annoy you with his praises, although he

is indeed an excellent artist. Should he wish to see Quintin, and you

not have leisure to go with him, you can let a servant show him the

house. The arts perish here; he proceeds to England to gain a few

angels; if you wish to write [to England] you can send your letters by

him.”[VI-55] In this extract we discover a trait of the usual prudence

of Erasmus, who, in introducing his humbler friends to persons of power

or influence, seems to have been particularly careful not to give

annoyance from the warmth of his recommendations. How gently, yet

significantly, does he hint to Aegidius that the poor painter who brings

the letter is a person about whom he need give himself no trouble: if he

has not _leisure_ to introduce him personally to Quintin--that is,

Quintin Matsys--he can send a servant to show him his house. The

suggestion of the servant was a hint from Erasmus that he did not expect

the master to go with Holbein himself.

[Footnote VI-54: “Pictor tuus, Erasme carissime, mirus est

artifex, sed vereor ne non sensurus sit Angliam tam fœcundam ac

fertilem quam sperarat. Quanquam ne reperiat omnino sterilem,

quoad per me fieri potest, efficiam. Ex aula Grenwici. 18 Dec.

1525.”]

[Footnote VI-55: “Qui has reddit, est is qui me pinxit. Ejus

commendatione te non gravabo, quanquam est insignis artifex. Si

cupiet visere Quintinum, nec tibi vacabit hominem adducere,

poteris per famulum commonstrare domum. Hic frigent artes: petit

Angliam ut corradat aliquot angelatos: per eum poteris quæ voles

scribere.”--Erasmi Epist.]

Holbein on his arrival in England appears to have been well received by

Sir Thomas More; and it is certain that he resided for some time with

the learned and witty chancellor in his house at Chelsea. It is indeed

said that he continued with him for three years, but Walpole thinks that

this is very unlikely. Whether he may have resided during the whole of

the intermediate time with Sir Thomas More or not, there seems reason to

believe that Holbein entered the service of Henry VIII. in 1528. About

the autumn of 1529[VI-56], he paid a short visit to Basle, probably to

see his family, which he had left in but indifferent circumstances, and

to obtain permission from the magistracy for a further extension of his

leave of absence, for no burgher of the city of Basle was allowed to

enter into the service of a foreign prince without their sanction.

Patin, in his Life of Holbein, says that during his visit he spent most

of his time with his old tavern companions, and that he treated the more

respectable burghers, who wished to cultivate his friendship, with great

disrespect. Hegner, however, considers all those accounts which

represent Holbein as a man of intemperate habits and dissolute

character, as unworthy of credit; in his opinion it seems impossible

that he who was a favourite of Henry VIII, and so long an inmate of Sir

Thomas More’s house, should have been a dissolute person. M. Hegner

throughout his work shows a praiseworthy regard for Holbein’s moral

character, but his presumption in this instance is not sufficient to

counterbalance the unfavourable reports in the opposite scale.

[Footnote VI-56: Erasmus, in a letter to Sir Thomas More, written

from Freyburg in Brisgau, 5th September, 1529, alludes to a

picture of More and his family which had been brought over by

Holbein; and Margaret Roper, the eldest daughter of Sir Thomas

More, writing to Erasmus in the following November, says, that she

is pleased to hear of the painter’s arrival with the family

picture,--“utriusque mei parentis nostrumque omnium effigiem

depictam.” Hegner thinks that those portraits of Sir Thomas More

and his family was only a drawing in pen-and-ink, which is now in

the Public Library at Basle. The figures in this drawing are: Sir

Thomas and his wife, his father, his son, and a young lady, three

daughters, a servant, and Sir Thomas’s jester. Over and under the

figures are written the name and age of each. The drawing is free

and light; and the faces and hands are very distinctly

expressed.--Hans Holbein der Jüngere, S. 202-235-237. The drawing

in the Public Library at Basle was probably a sketch of Holbein’s

large picture of the family of Sir Thomas More.]

About the latter end of 1532, or the beginning of 1533, Holbein again

visited Basle; and his return appears to have been chiefly influenced by

an order of the magistracy, which was to the following effect: “To

M. Hans Holbein, painter, now in England. We Jacob Meier, burgomaster

and councillor, herewith salute you our beloved Hans Holbein,

fellow-burgher, and give you to understand that it is our desire that

you return home forthwith. In order that you may live easier at home,

and provide for your wife and child,[VI-57] we are pleased to allow you

the yearly sum of thirty guilders, until we can obtain for you something

better. That you may make your arrangements accordingly, we acquaint you

with this resolution. Given, Monday, 2nd September 1532.”[VI-58] It is

uncertain how long Holbein remained at Basle on his second visit, but it

was probably of short duration. Though he obeyed the summons of the

magistracy to return, he seems to have had sufficient interest to obtain

a further extension of his leave of absence. For the third and last time

he revisited Basle in 1538; and from a licence, signed by the

burgomaster Jacob Meier, dated 16th November in that year, it appears

that he obtained permission to return to England and remain there for

two years longer. In this licence fifty guilders per annum are promised

to Holbein on his return to Basle, and till then the magistrates further

agree to allow his wife forty guilders per annum to be paid quarterly,

and the first quarter’s payment to commence on the eve of St. Lucia next

ensuing,--that is, on the 12th of December. As the mention of the

allowance to Holbein’s wife would seem to imply that she was not very

well provided for by her husband, Hegner attempts to excuse his apparent

neglect by suggesting “that the great sometimes forget to pay, and will

not bear dunning;” and in illustration of this he refers to the passage

in Albert Durer’s Journal which has been previously given at page 269.

[Footnote VI-57: Holbein’s wife and _child_ only, not children,

are mentioned in this licence. It is not known what became of

Holbein’s children, as there are no traces of his descendants to

be found at Basle. Merian, a clergyman of Basle, in a letter to

Mechel on this subject, in 1779, writes to this effect: “According

to a pedigree of the Merian family, printed at Regensburg in 1727,

Christina Syf, daughter of Rodolph Syf and Judith Weissin, and

grand-daughter of Hans Holbein the unequalled painter, (born

1597,) was married on the 17th of November 1616 to Frederick

Merian.” Perhaps it is meant that Judith Weissin was Holbein’s

grand-daughter: there is evidently an error in the pedigree; and

if it be wrong in this respect, it is not entitled to much credit

in another.]

[Footnote VI-58: Hegner, S. 242.]

Holbein’s three visits to Basle have been here especially noticed in

order that the reader might judge for himself as to the probability of

his making the drawings for the Lyons Dance of Death on any of those

occasions. As this work was published in 1538, and as Holbein on his

last visit appears to have arrived at Basle about the beginning of

September in that year, it is impossible that he should have made the

drawings then; for if the forty-one cuts were executed by one person--as

from the similarity and excellence of the style there seems every reason

to believe--it would require at the least half a year to engrave them,

supposing that the artist worked as expeditiously as a wood engraver of

modern times. As it is highly probable that Holbein both made designs

and painted on his former visits, in 1529, and in 1532 or 1533, I think

it most likely that they were made on the latter occasion,--that is,

supposing them to have been designed on one of those visits. It is,

however, just as probable that the designs were made in England, and

forwarded to a wood engraver at Basle.

Of the various paintings executed by Holbein during his residence in

England it is not necessary to give any account here; those who wish for

information on this point are referred to Walpole’s Anecdotes of

Painting.[VI-59] Of his life in England there are few particulars. “In

some household accounts of Henry VIII,” says Mr. Douce, “there are

payments to him in 1538, 1539, 1540, and 1541, on account of his salary,

which appears to have been thirty pounds per annum. From this time

little more is recorded of him till 1553, when he painted Queen Mary’s

portrait, and shortly afterwards died of the plague in 1554.” Thomas

Howard, Earl of Arundel, the great patron of artists, in the time of

Charles I, was desirous of erecting a monument to the memory of Holbein,

but gave up the intention as he was unable to discover the place of the

artist’s interment. As Holbein seems to have left no will, and as his

death appears to have excited no notice, it is likely that he died poor,

and in comparative obscurity. If his satirical drawings[VI-60] of

Christ’s Passion, ridiculing the Pope and the popish clergy, were known

to Mary, or any of her spiritual advisers, it could not be expected that

he should find favour at her court.

[Footnote VI-59: See Dallaway’s edition, revised by R. N. Wornum.

London, Bohn, 1849, 3 vols. 8vo. Vol. i. pp. 66 et seq.]

[Footnote VI-60: Those designs were engraved on sixteen small

plates by Hollar, but without his name. The enemies of Christ are

represented in the dress of monks and friars, and instead of

weapons they bear croziers, large candlesticks, and other church

ornaments; Judas appears as a capucin, Annas as a cardinal, and

Caiaphas as a bishop. In the subject of Christ’s Descent to Hades,

the gates are hung with papal bulls and dispensations; above them

are the Pope’s arms, and the devil as keeper of the gate wears a

triple crown. Underneath this engraving are the following verses,

which are certainly not of the period of Holbein:

“Lo! the Pope’s kitchin, where his soles are fried,

Called Purgatorie; see his pardons tied

On strings; his triple crown the Divell weares,

And o’er the door the Pope’s own arms he beares.”

In the subject of Christ before Caiaphas is the following

inscription in German: “_Wer wider die Römischen, der soll

sterben_,”--that is, “He who is against the Romans shall die.”]

Wood engraving in England during the time of Holbein’s residence in this

country appears to have been but little cultivated; but though there

cannot be a doubt that the art was then practised here by native wood

engravers, yet I very much question if it were practised by any person

in England as a distinct profession. It is not unlikely that many of the

wood-cuts which appear in books printed in this country about that

period were engraved by the printers themselves. It has indeed been

supposed that most of the wood-cuts in English books printed at that

period were engraved on the continent; but this opinion seems highly

improbable--there could be no occasion to send abroad to have wood-cuts

so rudely executed. Perhaps the difficulty, or rather the impossibility

of finding a wood engraver in England capable of doing justice to his

designs might be one reason why Holbein made so few for the booksellers

of this country during his long residence here. The following portrait

of Sir Thomas Wyatt, the poet, who died in 1541, was probably drawn on

the block by Holbein. It is given on the reverse of the title of a small

work in quarto, printed at London, 1542, and entitled “Næniæ in mortem

Thomæ Viati equitis incomparabilis. Joanne Lelando antiquario autore.”

The verses, which are printed underneath the cut, seem decisive of the

drawing having been made by Holbein. There is a drawing of Sir Thomas

Wyatt by Holbein, in the Royal Collection, which is engraved in

Chamberlain’s work, entitled “Imitations of Original Drawings by Hans

Holbein,” folio, 1792. There is little similarity between the drawing

and the cut, though on comparison it is evident that both are intended

for the same person.

[Illustration:

In effigiem Thomæ Viati.

Holbenus nitida pingendi maximus arte

Effigiem expressit graphicè: sed nullus Apelles

Exprimet ingenium felix animumque Viati.]

It has been supposed that the original cut, of which the preceding is a

fac-simile, was engraved by Holbein himself: if this were true, and the

cut itself taken as a specimen of his abilities in this department of

art, there could not be a doubt of his having been a very indifferent

wood engraver, for though there be considerable expression of character

in the drawing of the head, the cut is executed in a very inferior style

of art.

The cuts in Cranmer’s Catechism, a small octavo, printed in 1548,[VI-61]

have been ascribed to Holbein; but out of the whole number, twenty-nine,

including the cut on the reverse of the title, there are only two which

contain his mark. In the others the manner of pencilling is so unlike

that of these two, and the drawing and composition bear so little

resemblance to Holbein’s usual style, that I do not believe them to have

been of his designing. In the cut on the reverse of the title, the

subject is Cranmer presenting the Bible to Edward VI.; the others,

twenty-eight in number, but containing only twenty-six different

subjects,--as two of them are repeated,--are illustrative of different

passages of Scripture cited in the work. The following cut is one of

those designed by Holbein. It occurs at folio CL as an illustration of

“the fyrst sermon. A declaration of the fyrst peticion” [of the Lord’s

Prayer]. Holbein’s initials, H. H.--though the cross stroke of the first

H is broken away--are perceived on the edge of what seems to be a book,

to the left of the figure praying.

[Illustration]

[Footnote VI-61: The following is the title of this scarce little

volume. “Catechismus, that is to say, a shorte instruction into

Christian religion for the singuler commoditie and profyte of

childrē and yong people. Set forth by the mooste reverende father

in God, Thomas Archbyshop of Canterbury, primate of all Englande

and Metropolitane.--Gualterus Lynne excudebat, 1548.” At the end

of the book, under a cut of Christ with a child before him, is the

colophon: “Imprynted at London, in S. Jhones Streete, by Nycolas

Hyll, for Gwalter Lynne dwellyng on Somers kaye, by Byllynges

gate.” Mr. Douce, at page 96, mentions a cut with the name _Hans

Holbein_ at the bottom, as occurring in the title-page of “A lytle

treatise after the manner of an Epystle wryten by the famous clerk

Doctor Urbanus Regius,” &c. also published by Walter Lynne, 1548.]

The other cut, designed by Holbein, and which contains his name at full

length,[VI-62] occurs at folio CCI. The subject is Christ casting out

Devils, in illustration of the seventh petition of the Lord’s

Prayer,--“Deliver us from evil.” The following is a fac-simile.

[Illustration:

HANS·HOLBEN]

[Footnote VI-62: Mr. Douce, in his observations prefixed to

Hollar’s etchings of the Dance of Death, published by Edwards in

1794, says, “A _set_ of cuts with the latter mark [_Hans Holben_]

occurs in Archbishop Cranmer’s Catechism, printed by Walter Lyne,

in 1548;” and in the same page he commits another mistake by

describing the mark on the cut of the Duchess in the Lyons Dance

of Death as [[HB]], instead of [[HL]]. It has been considered

necessary to notice these errors, as it is probable that many

persons who possess the work in which they occur, but who never

may have seen a copy of the Lyons Dance of Death, nor of

Cranmer’s Catechism, may have been misled in those matters by

implicitly relying on Mr. Douce’s authority. A certain class of

compilers are also extremely liable to transmit such mistakes,

and, to borrow an expression of Hegner’s, to give currency to

them, as if they stood ready for use “in _stereotype_.”]

For the purpose of showing the difference of style between those two

cuts and the others contained in the same work, the three given on the

following page have been selected. The first, illustrating the Creation,

occurs at the folio erroneously numbered CXCV, properly CIX, No. 1; the

second, illustrating the sermon of our redemption, at folio CXXI, No. 2;

and the third, illustrating the third petition of the Lord’s

Prayer,--“Thy will be done,”--at folio CLXVIII, No. 3. The following are

the introductory remarks to the explanation of what the archbishop calls

the third petition: “Ye have herde how in the former petycions, we

require of our Lorde God to gyve us al thinges that perteyne to his

glorye and to the kyngdom of heaven, whereof he hath gyven us

commaundemente in the three preceptes written in the first table. Nowe

folowethe the thirde peticyon, wherein we praye God to graūte us that we

may fulfyll the other seven commaūdementes also, the whiche intreat of

matiers concerning this worldly kingdome and transitorye lyfe, that is

to saye, to honoure our parentes and gouernours, to kyl no man, to

committe none adulterye, to absteyne from thefte and lyinge, and to

behave our selfes in all thinges obedientlye, honestlye, peaceably, and

godly.”

[Illustration: No. 1.]

[Illustration: No. 2.]

[Illustration: No. 3.]

The feebleness of the drawing and the want of distinctness in these

three cuts, are totally unlike the more vigorous delineation of Holbein,

as exemplified, though but imperfectly, in the two which are doubtlessly

of his designing. None of them have the slightest pretensions to

delicacy or excellence of engraving, though they may be considered as

the best that had been executed in this country up to that time. Those

which, in my opinion, were not designed by Holbein have the appearance

of having been engraved on a _frushy_ kind of wood, of comparatively

coarse grain. It is not, however, unlikely that this appearance might

result from the feebleness of the drawing, conjoined with want of skill

on the part of the engraver.

The following cut will not perhaps form an inappropriate termination to

the notice of the principal wood engravings which have been ascribed to

Holbein. It occurs as an illustration of the generation of Christ,

Matthew, chapter I, in an edition of the New Testament, printed at

Zurich, by Froschover, in 1554,[VI-63] the year of Holbein’s death.

Though there be no name to this cut, yet from the great resemblance

which it bears to Holbein’s style, I have little doubt of the design

being his.

[Illustration]

[Footnote VI-63: The title-page of this book--which has previously

been referred to at page 357, in illustration of the word

_picta_--is as follows: “Novi Testamenti Editio postrema per Des.

Erasmum Roterodamum. Omnia picturis illustrata. Accesserunt

Capitum argumenta Elegiaco carmine, Rudolpho Gualtero authore,

conscripta. Tiguri, in Officina Froschoviana. Anno M.D.LIIII.”

8vo.]

The three following specimens of the cuts in Tindale’s Translation of

the New Testament, printed at Antwerp in 1534,[VI-64] ought, in strict

chronological order, to have preceded those of the Dance of Death; but

as Holbein holds the same rank in this chapter as Durer in the

preceding, it seemed preferable to give first a connected account of the

principal wood-cuts which are generally ascribed to him, and which there

is the strongest reason to believe were actually of his designing. The

celebrity of Tindale’s translation, as the earliest English version of

the New Testament which appeared in print, and the place which his name

occupies in the earlier part of the history of the Reformation in

England, will give an interest to those cuts to which they could have no

pretensions as mere works of art. It is probable that they were executed

at Antwerp, where the book was printed; and the drawing and engraving

will afford some idea of the style of most of the small cuts which are

to be found in works printed in Holland and Flanders about that period.

The first of the preceding cuts represents St. Luke employed in painting

a figure of the Virgin, and it occurs at the commencement of the Gospel

of that Evangelist. The second, which occurs at the commencement of the

General Epistle of James, represents that Saint in the character of a

pilgrim. The third, Death on the Pale Horse, is an illustration of the

sixth chapter of Revelations.

[Footnote VI-64: The volume is of octavo size, and the title is as

follows: “The Newe Testament. Imprinted at Antwerp by Marten

Emperour. Anno M.D.XXXIIII.” The letters on the wood-cut of the

printer’s device, seen in the copies on paper, are M. K. The first

edition of Tindale’s Translation was printed in 1526. William

Tindale, otherwise Hitchins, was born on the borders of Wales, but

was of a Northumberland family, being descended from Adam de

Tindale of Langley, near Haydon Bridge, in that county. He was

strangled, and his body was afterwards burnt as that of a heretic

by the popish party, at Vilvorde, near Brussels, in 1536.]

[Illustration: No. 1.]

[Illustration: No. 2.]

[Illustration: No. 3.]

There is a beautiful copy, printed on vellum, of this edition of

Tindale’s Translation of the New Testament in the Library of the British

Museum. It appears to have formerly belonged to Queen Anne Boleyn, and

was probably a presentation copy from the translator. The title-page is

beautifully illuminated; the whole of the ornamental border, which is

seen in the copies on paper, is covered with gilding and colour, and the

wood-cut of the printer’s mark is covered with the blazoning of the

royal arms. On the edges, which are gilt, there is inscribed, in red

letters, ANNA REGINA ANGLIÆ. This beautiful volume formerly belonged to

the Reverend C. M. Cracherode, by whom it was bequeathed to the Museum.

The first complete English translation of the Old and New Testaments was

that of Miles Coverdale, which appeared in folio, 1535,[VI-65] without

the name or residence of the printer, but supposed to have been printed

at Zurich by Christopher Froschover. The dedication is addressed to

Henry VIII, by “his Graces humble subjecte and daylie oratour, Myles

Coverdale;” and in the copy in the British Museum the commencement is as

follows: “Unto the most victorious Prynce and our most gracyous

soveraigne Lorde, kynge Henry the eyght, kynge of Englonde and of

Fraunce, lorde of Irlonde, &c. Defendour of the Fayth, and under God the

chefe and supreme heade of the churche of Englonde. ¶The ryght and just

administracyon of the laws that God gave unto Moses and unto Josua: the

testimonye of faythfulnes that God gave of David: the plenteous

abundance of wysdome that God gave unto Salomon: the lucky and

prosperous age with the multiplicacyon of sede which God gave unto

Abraham and Sara his wyfe, he gevē unto you most Gracyous Prynce, with

your dearest just wyfe and most virtuous Pryncesse, Quene Anne. Amen.”

In most copies, however, “Quene Jane” is substituted for “Quene Anne,”

which proves that the original dedication had been cancelled after the

disgrace and execution of Anne Boleyn, and that, though the colophon is

dated 4th October 1535, the work had not been generally circulated until

subsequent to 20th May 1536, the date of Henry’s marriage with Jane

Seymour.

[Footnote VI-65: The title of this edition is as follows: “BIBLIA.

The Bible, that is, the holy Scripture of the Olde and Newe

Testaments, faithfully translated out of Douche and Latyn in to

Englishe. M.D.XXXV.” This title is surrounded with an ornamental

wood-cut border of ten compartments: 1. Adam and Eve. 2. The name

of Jehovah in Hebrew characters in the centre at the top.

3. Christ with the banner of the cross trampling on the serpent,

sin, and death. 4. Moses receiving the tables of the law.

5. Jewish High Priest,--Esdras. 6. Christ sending his disciples to

preach the Gospel. 7. Paul preaching. 8. David playing on the

harp. 9. In the centre at the bottom, King Henry VIII. on his

throne giving a book--probably intended for the Bible--to certain

abbots and bishops. 10. St. Paul with a sword. The day of the

month mentioned in the colophon was probably the date of the last

sheet being sent to press: “Prynted in the yeare of our Lorde

M.D.XXXV, and fynished the fourth daye of October.” Copies of this

edition with the title-page are extremely rare. Some copies have a

modern lithographed title prefixed, which is not exactly correct,

though professedly a fac-simile: in one of the scrolls it has

“_telius meus_” for “filius meus.” In the corresponding scroll in

a copy in the British Museum the words are in English: “This is my

deare Son in whom I delyte, heare him,”--above the figure of

Christ with the banner of the cross. I have not the least doubt of

this title-page having been designed by Holbein.]

This edition contains a number of wood-cuts, all rather coarsely

engraved, though some of them are designed with such spirit as to be not

unworthy of Holbein himself, as will be apparent from two or three of

the following specimens. In the first, Cain killing Abel, the attitude

of Abel, and the action of Cain, sufficiently indicate that the original

designer understood the human figure well, and could draw it with great

force in a position which it is most difficult to represent.

[Illustration: No. 1.]

The figure of Abraham in No. 2 bears in some parts considerable

resemblance to that of the same subject given as a specimen of Holbein’s

Bible cuts at page 368; but there are several others in the work which

are much more like his style; and which, perhaps, might be copied from

earlier cuts of his designing. The two preceding may be considered as

specimens of the best designed cuts in the Old Testament; and the

following, the return of the Two Spies, is given us one of the more

ordinary.

[Illustration: No. 2.]

[Illustration: No. 3.]

The three next cuts are from the New Testament. The first forms the

head-piece to the Gospel of St. Matthew; the second, which occurs on the

title-page, and displays great power of drawing in the figure, is John

the Baptist; and the third represents St. Paul writing, with his sword

before him, and a weaver’s loom to his left: the last incident, which is

frequently introduced in old wood-cuts of this Saint, is probably

intended to designate his business as a tentmaker, and also to indicate

that, though zealously engaged in disseminating the doctrines of Christ,

he had not ceased to “work with his hands.”

[Illustration: No. 1.]

[Illustration: No. 2.]

[Illustration: No. 3.]

Many of the cuts in this work are copied in a subsequent edition, also

in folio, printed in 1537; and some of the copies are so extremely like

the originals--every line being retained--as to induce a suspicion that

the impressions of the latter had been transferred to the blocks by

means of what is technically termed “rubbing down.”

About 1530 the art of chiaro-scuro engraving on wood, which appears to

have been first introduced into Italy by Ugo da Carpi, was practised by

Antonio Fantuzzi, called also Antonio da Trente. Most of this engraver’s

chiaro-scuros are from the designs of Parmegiano. It is said that

Fantuzzi was employed by Parmegiano for the express purpose of executing

chiaro-scuro engravings from his drawings, and that, when residing with

his employer at Bologna, he took an opportunity of robbing him of all

his blocks, impressions, and designs. Between 1530 and 1540 Joseph

Nicholas Vincentini da Trente engraved several chiaro-scuros, most of

which, like those executed by Fantuzzi, are from the designs of

Parmegiano. From the number of chiaro-scuros engraved after drawings by

this artist, I think it highly probable that the most of them were

executed under his own superintendence and published for his own

benefit. Baldazzar Peruzzi and Domenico Beccafumi, both painters of

repute at that period, are said to have engraved in chiaro-scuro; but

the prints in this style usually ascribed to them are not numerous, and

I consider it doubtful if they were actually of their own engraving.

From about 1530, the art of wood engraving, in the usual manner, began

to make considerable progress in Italy, and many of the cuts executed in

that country between 1540 and 1580 may vie with the best wood engravings

of the same period executed in Germany. Instead of the plain and simple

style, which is in general characteristic of Italian wood-cuts previous

to 1530, the wood engravers of that country began to execute their

subjects in a more delicate and elaborate manner. In the period under

consideration, we find cross-hatching frequently introduced with great

effect; there is a greater variety of _tint_ in the cuts; the texture of

different substances is indicated more correctly; the foliage of trees

is more natural; and the fur and feathers of animals are discriminated

with considerable ability.

The following cut will afford perhaps some idea of the best Italian

wood-cuts of the period under consideration. It is a reduced copy of the

frontispiece to Marcolini’s Sorti,[VI-66] folio, printed at Venice in

1540. There is an impression of this cut on paper of a greenish tint in

the Print Room of the British Museum, and from this circumstance it is

placed, though improperly, in a volume, marked I. W. 4, and lettered

“Italian chiaro-scuros.” Underneath this impression the late Mr. Ottley

has written, “Not in Bartsch;” and from his omitting to mention the work

for which it was engraved, I am inclined to think that he himself was

not aware of its forming the frontispiece to Marcolini’s Sorti.

Papillon, speaking of the supposed engraver, Joseph Porta Garfagninus,

whose name is seen on a tablet near the bottom towards the right, says,

“J’ai de lui une fort belle Académie des Sciences,”[VI-67] but seems not

to have known of the work to which it belonged. This cut is merely a

copy, reversed, of a study by Raffaele for his celebrated fresco,

usually called the School of Athens, in the Vatican. It is engraved in a

work entitled “Vies et Oeuvres des Peintres les plus célèbres,” 4to.

Paris, 1813; and in the Table des Planches at the commencement of the

volume in which it occurs, the subject is thus described: “Pl. CCCCV.

Etude pour le tableau de l’Ecole d’Athènes. Ces différens episodes ne se

retrouvant pas dans le tableau qui a été exécuté des mains de Raphaël,

ne doivent être considérées que comme des essais ou premières pensées.

_Grav. M. Ravignano._” From this description it appears that the same

subject had been previously engraved on copper by Marco da Ravenna, who

flourished about the year 1530. Though I have never seen an impression

of Marco’s engraving of this subject, and though it is not mentioned in

Heineken’s catalogue of the engraved works of Raffaele,[VI-68] I have

little doubt that Porta’s wood-cut is copied from it.

[Footnote VI-66: The following is the title of this curious and

scarce work: “Le Sorti di Francesco Marcolini da Forli, intitolate

Giardino di Pensieri.” Dedicated, “Allo Illustrissimo Signore

Hercole Estense, Duca di Ferrara.” At the conclusion is the

colophon: “In Venetia per Francesco Marcolini da Forli, ne gli

anni del Signore MDXXXX. Del mese di Ottobre.” In a _proemio_, or

preface, the author explains the manner of applying his

“_piacevole inventione_,” which is nothing more than a mode of

resolving questions by cards, and was probably suggested by

Fanti’s Triompho di Fortuna, of which some account is given at

page 315.]

[Footnote VI-67: Papillon, Traité de la Gravure en Bois, tom.

i. p. 137.]

[Footnote VI-68: This catalogue is printed in the second volume of

Heineken’s Nachrichten von Künstlern und Kunst-Sachen, 8vo.

Leipzig, 1768-1769. This work, which appeared two years before his

Idée Générale d’une Collection complette d’Estampes, contains much

information on the early history of art, which is not to be found

in the latter. All the fac-similes of old engravings in the Idée

Générale originally appeared in the Nachrichten. Heineken, in the

first volume of this work, p. 340, mentions Porta’s cut, but says

nothing of its being copied from a design by Raffaele.]

[Illustration]

Joseph Porta, frequently called Joseph Salviati by Italian authors, was

a painter, and he took the surname of Salviati from that of his master,

Francesco Salviati.[VI-69] There are a few other wood-cuts which contain

his name; but whether he was the designer, or the engraver only, is

extremely uncertain.

[Footnote VI-69: Heineken, in his Nachrichten, 1er. Theil, S. 340,

says that Joseph Porta “was a pupil of _Cecchino_ Salviati, who is

not to be confounded with _Francesco_ Salviati;” and yet in his

Idée Générale, published subsequently, page 134, we find

“Francesco del Salviati, autrement Rossi, de Florence, et son

disciple Giuseppe Porta, appellé communément Giuseppe Salviati.”

Heineken, in his first work, committed the mistake of supposing

that Francesco Salviati’s to-name was the Christian name of

another person. In Huber’s Notice Générale des Graveurs et

Peintres, Francis Salviati appears as “François Cecchini, dit

Salviati.”]

Marcolini’s work contains nearly a hundred wood-cuts besides the

frontispiece, but, though several of them are designed with great

spirit, no one is so well engraved.[VI-70] The following is a fac-simile

of one which occurs at page 35. The relentless-looking old woman is a

personification of _Punitione_--Punishment--holding in her right hand a

tremendous scourge for the chastisement of evil-doers. Though this cut

be but coarsely engraved, the domestic Nemesis, who here appears to

wield the retributive scourge, is designed with such spirit that if the

figure were executed in marble it might almost pass for one of Michael

Angelo’s. The drapery is admirably cast; the figure is good; and the

action and expression are at once simple and severe.

[Footnote VI-70: The first forty-six cuts are the best, generally,

both in design and execution. The others, commencing at page 108,

are illustrative of the sayings and doctrines of ancient

philosophers and moralists, and one or two of the cuts are

repeated. In this portion of the work, each page, except what is

occupied by the cut, is filled with explanatory or illustrative

verses arranged in triplets.]

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

The preceding cut, also a fac-simile, occurs at page 81 as an

illustration of Matrimony. The young man, with his legs already tied,

seems to be deliberating on the prudence of making a contract which may

possibly add a yoke to his shoulders. The ring which he holds in his

hand appears to have given rise to his cogitations.

The following small cuts of cards--“Il Re, Fante, Cavallo, e Sette di

denari”--are copied from the instructions in the preface;[VI-71] and the

beautiful design of Truth rescued by Time--VERITAS FILIA

TEMPORIS--occurs as a tail-piece on the last page of the work. This cut

occurs not unfrequently in works published by Giolito, by whom I believe

the Sorti was printed; and two or three of the other cuts contained in

the volume are to be found in a humorous work of Doni’s, entitled

“I Marmi,” printed by Giolito in 1552.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

[Footnote VI-71: The first hundred and seven pages of the work are

chiefly filled with similar figures of cards variously combined,

with short references. How Marcolini’s pleasant invention is to be

applied to discover the secrets of Fate, I have not been able to

comprehend.]

The wood engravers of Venice about the middle of the sixteenth century

appear to have excelled all other Italian wood engravers, and for the

delicacy of their execution they rivalled those of Lyons, who at that

period were chiefly distinguished for the neat and delicate manner of

their engraving small subjects. In the pirated edition of the Lyons

Dance of Death, published at Venice in 1545 by V. Vaugris, the cuts are

more correctly copied and more delicately engraved than those in the

edition first published at Cologne by the heirs of Arnold Birkman in

1555. In fact, the wood engravings in books printed at Lyons and Venice

from about 1540 to 1580 are in general more delicately engraved than

those executed in Germany and the Low Countries during the same period.

Among all the Venetian printers of that age, Gabriel Giolito is entitled

to precedence from the number and comparative excellence of the

wood-cuts contained in the numerous illustrated works which issued from

his press. In several of the works printed by him every cut is

surrounded by an ornamental border; and this border, not being engraved

on the same block as the cut, but separately as a kind of frame, is

frequently repeated: sixteen different borders, when the book is of

octavo size and there is a cut on every page, would suffice for the

whole work, however extensive it might be. The practice of _ornamenting_

cuts in this manner was very prevalent about the period under

consideration, and at the present time some publishers seem inclined to

revive it. I should, however, be sorry to see it again become prevalent,

for though to some subjects, designed in a particular manner, an

ornamental border may be appropriate, yet I consider the practice of

thus _framing_ a series of cuts as indicative of bad taste, and as

likely to check the improvement of the art. Highly ornamented borders

have, in a certain degree, the effect of reducing a series of cuts,

however different their execution, to a standard of mediocrity; for they

frequently conceal the beauty of a well-engraved subject, and serve as a

screen to a bad one. In Ludovico Dolce’s Transformationi--a translation,

or rather paraphrase of Ovid’s Metamorphoses--first printed by Giolito

in 1553, and again in 1557, the cuts, instead of having a border all

round, have only ornaments at the two vertical sides. The preceding is a

fac-simile of one of those cuts, divested of its ornaments, from the

edition of 1557. The subject is the difficult labour of Alcmena,--a

favourite with Italian artists. This is the cut previously alluded to at

page 217.

A curious book, of which an edition, in quarto, was printed at Rome in

1561, seems deserving of notice here, not on account of any merit in the

wood-cuts which it contains, but on account of the singularity of four

of them, which are given as a specimen of a “Sonetto figurato,” in the

manner of the cuts in a little work entitled “A curious Hieroglyphick

Bible,” first printed in London, in duodecimo, about 1782. The Italian

work in question was written by “Messer Giovam Battista Palatino,

Cittadino Romano,” and from the date of the Pope’s grant to the author

of the privilege of exclusively printing it for ten years, it seems

likely that the first edition was published about 1540. The work is a

treatise on penmanship; and the title-page of the edition of 1561--which

is embellished with a portrait of the author--may be translated as

follows: “The Book of M. Giovam Battista Palatino, citizen of Rome, in

which is taught the manner of writing all kinds of characters, ancient

and modern, of whatever nation, with Rules, Proportions, and Examples.

Together with a short and useful Discourse on Cyphers. Newly revised and

corrected by the Author. With the addition of fifteen beautiful

cuts.”[VI-72] In Astle’s Origin and Progress of Writing, page 227,

second edition, Palatino’s work is thus noticed: “In 1561, Valerius

Doricus printed at Rome a curious book on all kinds of writing, ancient

and modern. This book contains specimens of a great variety of writing

practised in different ages and countries; some of these specimens are

printed from types to imitate writing, and others from carved

wood-blocks. This book also contains a treatise on the art of writing in

cipher, and is a most curious specimen of early typography.”

[Footnote VI-72: The following is a literal copy of the title:

“Libro di M. Giovam Battista Palatino, Cittadino Romano, Nelqual

s’insegna à Scriver ogni sorte lettera, Antica & Moderna, di

qualunque natione, con le sue regole, & misure, & essempi: Et con

un breve, et util Discorso de le Cifre: Riveduto novamente, &

corretto dal proprio Autore. Con la giunta di quindici tavole

bellissime.” At the end of the work is the imprint: “In Roma per

Valerio Dorico alla Chiavica de Santa Lucia. Ad Instantia de

M. Giovan della Gatta. L’Anno M.D.LXI.” 4to. Papillon says that

the work first appeared in 1540, and was reprinted in 1545, 1547,

1548, 1550, 1553, and 1556. An edition was also published at

Venice in 1588.]

After his specimens of “Lettere Cifrate,” Palatino devotes a couple of

pages to “Cifre quadrate, et Sonetti figurati,” two modes of

riddle-writing which, it appears, are solely employed for amusement. The

“Cifro quadrato” is nothing more than a monogram, formed of a cluster of

interwoven capitals, but in which every one of the letters of the name

is to be found. In the following specimen the name thus ingeniously

disguised is LAVINIA.

[Illustration]

The following is a slightly reduced copy of the first four lines of the

“Sonetto figurato;” the other ten lines are expressed by figures in a

similar manner. “As to figured sonnets,” says the author, “no better

rule can be given, than merely to observe that the figures should

clearly and distinctly correspond with the matter, and that there should

be as few supplementary letters as possible. Of course, orthography and

pure Italian are not to be looked for in such exercises; and it is no

objection that the same figure be used for the beginning of one word,

the middle of another, or the end of a third. It is the chief excellence

of such compositions that there should be few letters to be supplied.”

[Illustration]

The “interpretatio” of the preceding figured text is as follows:

“Dove son gli occhi, et la serena forma

Del santo alegro et amoroso aspetto?

Dov’ è la man eburna ov’ e ’l bel petto

Ch’ appensarvi hor’ in fonte mi transforma?”

This figured sonnet is a curious specimen of hieroglyphic and “phonetic”

writing combined. For those who do not understand Italian, it seems

necessary to give the following explanation of the words, and point out

their phonetic relation to the things. _Dove_, where, is composed of

_D_, and _ove_, eggs, as seen at the commencement of the first line.

_Son_, are, is represented by a man’s head and a trumpet, making a

sound, _son_. The preceding figures are examples of what is called

“phonetic” writing, by modern expounders of Egyptian antiquities,--that

is, the figures of _things_ are not placed as representatives of the

things themselves, but that their names when pronounced may form a word

or part of a word, which has generally not the least relation to the

thing by which it is _phonetically_, that is, vocally, expressed.

_Occhi_, eyes, is an instance of hieroglyphic writing; the figure and

the idea to be represented agree. _La_, the, is represented by the

musical note _la_; _serena_, placid, by a Siren,--_Sirena_,--

orthography, as the author says, is not to be expected in figured

sonnets; and _forma_, shape, by a shoemaker’s last, which is called

_forma_ in Italian.

In the second line, _Santo_, holy, is represented by a Saint, _Santo_;

_allegro_, cheerfulness, by a pair of wings, _ale_, and _grue_, a crane,

the superfluous _e_ forming, with the T following, the conjunction _et_,

and. The words _amoroso aspetto_ are formed of _amo_, a hook, _rosa_, a

rose, and _petto_, the breast, with a supplementary _s_ between the rose

and the breast.

In the third line we have _ove_, eggs, and the musical _la_ again;

_man_, the hand, is expressed by its proper figure; _eburna_,

ivory-like, is composed of the letters EB and an urn, _urna_; and in the

latter part of the line the eggs, _ov’_, and the breast, _petto_, are

repeated.

At the commencement of the fourth line, a couple of cloaks, _cappe_,

stand for _ch’ appe_ in the compound word _ch’ appe_nsarvi; _hor’_, now,

is represented by an hour-glass, _hora_, literally, an hour; _fonte_, a

fountain, is expressed by its proper figure; and the words _mi

transforma_, are phonetically expressed by a mitre, _mitra_, the

supplementary letters NS, and the shoemaker’s last, _forma_.

In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, a taste for inventing devices in this

manner seems to have been fashionable among professed wits; and the

practice of expressing a name by a rebus was not unfrequent in an

earlier age. It is probable that the old sign of the Bolt-in-Tun in

Fleet Street derives its origin from Bolton, a prior of St.

Bartholomew’s in Smithfield, who gave a bird-_bolt_ in the bung-hole of

a _tun_ as the rebus of his name. The peculiarities of the Italian

figured sonnet are not unaptly illustrated in Camden’s Remains, in the

chapter entitled “_Rebus,[VI-73] or Name-Devises_:” “Did not that

amorous youth mystically expresse his love to _Rose Hill_, whom he

courted, when in a border of his painted cloth he caused to be painted

as rudely as he devised grossely, a rose, a hill, an eye, a loafe, and a

well,--that is, if you will spell it,

_Rose Hill I love well._”[VI-74]

[Footnote VI-73: There is a curious allusion to a _Rebus_ in

Horace, Satyr. Lib. I. Sat. V., Vers. 88, which has escaped the

notice of all his commentators:

“Quatuor hinc rapimur viginti et millia rhedis,

Mansuri oppidulo, quod versu dicere non est,

_Signis perfacile est._”

The place which he did not think proper to name was undoubtedly

Asculum, whose situation exactly corresponds with the distance

from _Trivicum_, where he rested the preceding night. From the

manner in which Horace alludes to the _signa_-- _as_ and _culum_--

of which the name is composed, it seems likely that a certain

vulgar benison was not unknown at Rome in the age of Augustus.]

[Footnote VI-74: Remaines concerning Britaine, with additions by

John Philpot, Somerset Herald, p. 164. Edit. 1636.]

Among the wood engravers of Lyons who flourished about the middle of the

sixteenth century, the only one whose name has come down to modern times

is Bernard Solomon; and if he were actually the engraver of the numerous

cuts which are ascribed to him, he must have been extremely industrious.

I am not, however, aware of any cut which contains his mark; and it is

by no means certain whether he were really a wood engraver, or whether

he only made the designs for wood engravers to execute. Papillon, who

has been blindly followed by most persons who have either incidentally

or expressly written on wood engraving, unhesitatingly claims him as a

wood engraver; but looking at the inequality in the execution of the

cuts ascribed to him, and regarding the sameness of character in the

designs, I am inclined to think that he was not an engraver, but that he

merely made the drawings on the wood. Sir E. L. Bulwer has committed a

mistake of this kind in his England and the English: “This country,”

says he in his second volume, page 205, edition 1833, “may boast of

having, in Bewick of Newcastle, brought wood engraving to perfection;

his pupil, Harvey, continues the profession with reputation.” The writer

here evidently speaks of that which he knows very little about, for at

the time that his book was published, Harvey, though originally a wood

engraver, and a pupil of Bewick, had abandoned the profession for about

eight years, and had devoted himself entirely to painting and drawing

for copper-plate and wood engravers. Indeed I very much question if Sir

Edward Lytton Bulwer ever saw a cut--except, perhaps, that of

Dentatus,--which was actually engraved by Harvey. With about equal

propriety, a writer, speaking of wood engraving in England twenty years

ago, might have described the late John Thurston as “continuing the

profession with reputation,” merely because he was one of the principal

designers of wood engravings at that period.

Bernard Solomon, whether a designer or engraver on wood, is justly

entitled to be ranked among the “little masters” in this branch of art.

All the cuts ascribed to him which have come under my notice are of

small size, and most of them are executed in a delicate manner; they

are, however, generally deficient in effect,[VI-75] and may readily be

distinguished by the tall slim figures which he introduces. He evidently

had not understood the “capabilities” of his art, for in none of his

productions do we find the well-contrasted “black-and-white,” which,

when well managed, materially contributes to the excellence of a

well-engraved wood-cut. The production of a good _black_ is, indeed, one

of the great advantages, in point of conventional colour, which wood

possesses over copper; and the wood engraver who neglects this

advantage, and labours perhaps for a whole day to cut with mechanical

precision a number of delicate but unmeaning lines, which a copper-plate

engraver would execute with facility in an hour, affords a tolerably

convincing proof of his not thoroughly understanding the principles of

his art. In Bernard’s cuts, and in most of those executed at Lyons about

the same period, we find much of this ineffective labour; we perceive in

them many evidences of the pains-taking workman, but few traits of the

talented artist. From the time that a taste for those little and

laboriously executed, but spiritless cuts, began to prevail, the decline

of wood engraving may be dated. Instead of confining themselves within

the legitimate boundaries of their own art, wood engravers seem to have

been desirous of emulating the delicacy of copper-plate engraving, and,

as might naturally be expected by any one who understands the

distinctive peculiarities of the two arts, they failed. The book-buyers

of the period having become sickened with the glut of tasteless and

ineffective trifles, wood engraving began to decline: large

well-engraved wood-cuts executed between 1580 and 1600 are comparatively

scarce.

[Footnote VI-75: Papillon, who speaks highly of the execution of

the cuts ascribed to Bernard Solomon, admits that they want

effect. “La gravure,” says he, speaking of the cuts contained in

‘Quadrins Historiques de la Bible,’ “est fort belle, excepté

qu’elle manque de clair obscur, parce que les tailles sont presque

toutes de la même teinte, ce qui fait que les lointains ne fuyent

pas assez. C’est le seul defaut des gravures de Bernard Salomon;

ce qui lui a été commun avec plus de quarante autres graveurs en

bois de son temps.”--Traité de la Gravure en Bois, tom.

i. p. 209.]

Bernard Solomon, or, as he is frequently called, _Little_ Solomon, from

the smallness of his works, is said to have been born in 1512, and the

most of the cuts which are ascribed to him appeared in works printed at

Lyons between 1545 and 1580. Perhaps more books containing small

wood-cuts were printed at Lyons between those years than in any other

city or town in Europe during the corresponding period. It appears to

have been the grand mart for Scripture cuts, emblems, and devices; but

out of the many hundreds which appear to have been engraved there in the

period referred to, it would be difficult to select twenty that can be

considered really excellent both in execution and design. One of the

principal publishers of Lyons at that time was Jean de Tournes; many of

the works which issued from his press display great typographic

excellence, and in almost all the cuts are engraved with great neatness.

The following cut is a fac-simile of one which appears in the title-page

of an edition of Petrarch’s Sonnetti, Canzoni, e Trionfi, published by

him in a small octodecimo volume, 1545.

[Illustration]

The design of the cut displays something of the taste for emblem and

device[VI-76] which was then so prevalent, and which became so generally

diffused by the frequent editions of Alciat’s Emblems, the first of

which was printed about 1531. The portraits of Petrarch and Laura,

looking not unlike “Philip and Mary on a shilling,” are seen enclosed

within a heart which Cupid has pierced to the very core with one of his

arrows. The volume contains seven other small cuts, designed and

engraved in a style which very much resembles that of the cuts ascribed

to Bernard Solomon; and as there is no mark by which his productions are

to be ascertained, I think they are as likely to be of his designing as

three-fourths of those which are generally supposed to be of his

engraving.

[Footnote VI-76: Several editions of Alciat’s Emblems and Claude

Paradin’s Devises Heroïques were published at Lyons in the

sixteenth century. The first edition of the latter work was

printed there by Jean de Tournes, in 1557, 8vo.]

The work entitled “Quadrins Historiques de la Bible,” with wood-cuts,

ascribed to Bernard Solomon, and printed at Lyons by Jean de Tournes,

was undoubtedly suggested by the “Historiarum Veteris Testamenti

Icones”--Holbein’s Bible-cuts--first published by the brothers Frellon

in 1538. The first edition of the Quadrins Historiques was published in

octavo about 1550, and was several times reprinted within the succeeding

twenty years. The total number of cuts in the edition of 1560 is two

hundred and twenty-nine, of which no less than one hundred and seventy

are devoted to the illustration of Exodus and Genesis. At the top of

each is printed the reference to the chapter to which it relates, and at

the bottom is a “Quadrin poëtique, tiré de la Bible, pour graver en la

table des affeccions l’amour des sacrees Histories.” Those “Quadrins”

appear to have been written by Claude Paradin. The composition of

several of the cuts is good, and nearly all display great _neatness_ of

execution. The following is a fac-simile of the seventh, Adam and Eve

driven out of Paradise. It is, however, necessary to observe that this

is by no means one of the best cuts either in point of design or

execution.

[Illustration]

A similar work, entitled “Figures du Nouveau Testament,” with cuts,

evidently designed by the person who had made the drawings for those in

the “Quadrins Historiques de la Bible,” was also published by Jean de

Tournes about 1553, and several editions were subsequently printed. The

cuts are rather less in size than those of the Quadrins, and are, on the

whole, rather better engraved. The total number is a hundred and four,

and under each are six explanatory verses, composed by Charles Fonteine,

who, in a short poetical address at the commencement, dedicates the work

“A Tres-illustre et Treshaute Princesse, Madame Marguerite de France,

Duchesse de Berri.” The following, Christ tempted by Satan, is a copy of

the sixteenth cut, but like that of the expulsion of Adam and Eve, it is

not one of the best in the work.

[Illustration]

Old engravings and paintings illustrative of manners or of costume are

generally interesting; and on this account a set of large wood-cuts

designed by Peter Coeck of Alost, in Flanders, is deserving of notice.

The subjects of those cuts are the manners and costumes of the Turks;

and the drawings were made on the spot by Coeck himself, who visited

Turkey in 1533. It is said that he brought from the east an important

secret relative to the art of dyeing silk and wool for the fabrication

of tapestries, a branch of manufacture with which he appears to have

been connected, and for which he made a number of designs. He was also

an architect and an author; and published several treatises on

sculpture, geometry, perspective, and architecture. The cuts

illustrative of the manners and costume of the Turks were not published

until 1553, three years after his decease, as we learn from an

inscription on the last.[VI-77] They are oblong, of folio size; and the

seven of which the set consists are intended to be joined together, and

thus to form one continuous subject. The figures, both on foot and

horseback, are designed with great spirit, but they want relief, and the

engraving is coarse. One of the customs which he has illustrated in the

cut No. 3 is singular; and though this _orientalism_ has been noticed by

a Scottish judge--Maclaurin of Dreghorn--Peter Coeck appears to be the

only traveller who has graphically represented “_quo modo Turci

mingunt_,” i. e. _sedentes_. Succeeding artists have availed themselves

liberally of those cuts. As the Turks in the sixteenth century were much

more formidable as a nation than at present, and their manners and

customs objects of greater curiosity, wood engravings illustrative of

their costume and mode of living appear to have been in considerable

demand at that period, for both in books and as single cuts they are

comparatively numerous.

[Footnote VI-77: The following explanatory title occurs on the

first cut: “Ces moeurs et fachons de faire de Turcz avecq’ les

Regions y appartenantes, ont este au vif contrefactez par Pierre

Coeck d’Alost, luy estant en Turquie, l’an de Jesu Christ M.D. 33.

Lequel assy de sa main propre a pourtraict ces figures duysantes à

l’impression d’ycelles.” From another of the cuts we thus learn

the time of his death: “Marie Verhulst vefue du dict Pierre

d’Alost, trespasse en l’anne MDL, a faict imprimer les dicts

figures soubz Grace et Privilege de l’Imperialle Maiestie. En

l’Ann MCCCCCLIII.”]