DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28460#0233
Division B.—Dotted Prints.
205
protect the surface from excessive wear.1 The material could never
have been very durable, even when protected by a liard varnish. It
is easy to imagine that the decorative effect would have been good,
but that the experiment would have been abandoned, as experience
showed that the bindings wore badly. Against this whole hypothesis
must be set the fact that the impressions in paste described by
Schreiber (44 in number, omitting some badly damaged examples)
have been found, when their origin has been recorded at all, pasted on
the inner covers of books, generally MSS., dating about 1460-80. It
is certainly very improbable that a bookbinder’s waste proofs shoulcl
be usecl in the same way as ordinary engravings for the decoration of
devotional books.
METAL-CUTS.
The whole of Willshire’s Class C, describecl by him as metal-cuts
has been fused with his Class D, following tlie more recent criticism
which regards this rough kincl of work as printed from wood-blocks,
not from metal plates.
Of metal-cuts properly' so called, after the prints in the mani'ere
criblee have been described, very few remain. These are describecl by
Willshire in Classes A ancl E. Here it has been necessary to clear
the grouncl of a number of prints described by Willshire, and in part
also by Schreiber, which have no claim to a place in a catalogue of
xv century woodcuts, however widely that term may be stretchech
I. Prints describecl by Willshire, but omitted by Schreiber.
These consist, first, of modern impressions from ornamental
plates of golclsmitlTs work, which were intended simply as decorative
objects in themselves, and were in no way calculated to yield
impressions on paper ; secondly, of modern impressions from etchecl
or engraved plates of cloubtful authenticity, which, if their genuine-
ness were acknowleclged, would be rightly placed among etcliings or
engravings, and have nothing in common with the class of prints here
described ; thirdly, of works by known artists of the xvi century.
Thus AVillsh, A 1 and App. 1 are impressions of the eugravecl
metal plates on a chanclelier of a.d. 1165-70 and a processional cross
of a.d. 1129. (A 2 has been described above among the woodcuts.)
A 3 and A 4 are impressions from the original ancf the copy respectively
1 Early in the middle ages carYings in ivory or reliefs in precious metals had thus
"been placed in panels on the bindings of MSS. A Crucifixion on vellurn, formerly in tbe
Weigeliana (W. u. Z. II, Schr. 372), of which tlie present whereabouts is unknown, was
actually found attached in this way to a sunk panel on the outside of a book-binding.
(See P. i, 20, 21, W. u, Z. I, pp. 25, 33.) Weigel believed this design to have heen
engraved on metal, and altered by hand, but Schr., following other recent critics, believes
it to have been entirely drawn by hand. It is in the style of the xii or early xiii
century. It is only mentioned here on account of the purpose to which it was put.
205
protect the surface from excessive wear.1 The material could never
have been very durable, even when protected by a liard varnish. It
is easy to imagine that the decorative effect would have been good,
but that the experiment would have been abandoned, as experience
showed that the bindings wore badly. Against this whole hypothesis
must be set the fact that the impressions in paste described by
Schreiber (44 in number, omitting some badly damaged examples)
have been found, when their origin has been recorded at all, pasted on
the inner covers of books, generally MSS., dating about 1460-80. It
is certainly very improbable that a bookbinder’s waste proofs shoulcl
be usecl in the same way as ordinary engravings for the decoration of
devotional books.
METAL-CUTS.
The whole of Willshire’s Class C, describecl by him as metal-cuts
has been fused with his Class D, following tlie more recent criticism
which regards this rough kincl of work as printed from wood-blocks,
not from metal plates.
Of metal-cuts properly' so called, after the prints in the mani'ere
criblee have been described, very few remain. These are describecl by
Willshire in Classes A ancl E. Here it has been necessary to clear
the grouncl of a number of prints described by Willshire, and in part
also by Schreiber, which have no claim to a place in a catalogue of
xv century woodcuts, however widely that term may be stretchech
I. Prints describecl by Willshire, but omitted by Schreiber.
These consist, first, of modern impressions from ornamental
plates of golclsmitlTs work, which were intended simply as decorative
objects in themselves, and were in no way calculated to yield
impressions on paper ; secondly, of modern impressions from etchecl
or engraved plates of cloubtful authenticity, which, if their genuine-
ness were acknowleclged, would be rightly placed among etcliings or
engravings, and have nothing in common with the class of prints here
described ; thirdly, of works by known artists of the xvi century.
Thus AVillsh, A 1 and App. 1 are impressions of the eugravecl
metal plates on a chanclelier of a.d. 1165-70 and a processional cross
of a.d. 1129. (A 2 has been described above among the woodcuts.)
A 3 and A 4 are impressions from the original ancf the copy respectively
1 Early in the middle ages carYings in ivory or reliefs in precious metals had thus
"been placed in panels on the bindings of MSS. A Crucifixion on vellurn, formerly in tbe
Weigeliana (W. u. Z. II, Schr. 372), of which tlie present whereabouts is unknown, was
actually found attached in this way to a sunk panel on the outside of a book-binding.
(See P. i, 20, 21, W. u, Z. I, pp. 25, 33.) Weigel believed this design to have heen
engraved on metal, and altered by hand, but Schr., following other recent critics, believes
it to have been entirely drawn by hand. It is in the style of the xii or early xiii
century. It is only mentioned here on account of the purpose to which it was put.