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