We mention Wenceslaus of Olmutz, who was engaged in engraving from the year 1481 to 1497, with the especial object of describing an allegorical print due to his _burin_; it may serve to give a notion of the fantastic tendency impressed on the ideas of the day by the religious dissensions which arose at this epoch between several princes of Germany and the court of Rome. This print, or rather this graphic satire, most of the allusions in which are now lost to us, represents the monstrous figure of a woman entirely naked, seen in profile and turning to the left, her body covered with scales, with the head and mane of an ass; her right leg terminates in a cloven foot, and the left in a bird’s claw; her right arm is terminated by the paw of a lion, and the left by a woman’s hand. The back of this fantastic being is covered with a hairy mask, and in the place of a tail she has the neck of a chimera, with a deformed head from which darts a serpent’s tongue. Above the engraving is written, “_Roma Caput Mundi_” (“Rome the head of the world”). On the left hand is a three-storied tower, upon which a flag adorned with the keys of St. Peter is floating. On the château is written, “_Castelagno_” (Castle of St. Angelo); in the foreground is a river, upon whose waves is traced the word “_Tevere_” (the Tiber); lower still is the word “_Ianrarii_” (January), below the date 1496: on the right, in the background, is a square tower, upon which is written, “_Tore Di Nona_” (Tower of the Nones); on the same side, in front, is a vase with two handles, and in the centre of the lower part the letter W, the monogrammatic signature of the engraver. Our interest in this plate is increased by the date it bears; for, being engraved by means of [Illustration: Fig. 265.--“Herodias,” a Copper-plate Engraving, by Israel van Mecken.] _aquafortis_, it proves that Albert Dürer is wrongfully regarded as the inventor of this mode of engraving, more expeditious than with the _burin_, as the oldest _aquafortis_ work of Albert Dürer is dated 1515, that is to say, nineteen years later than that of Wenceslaus of Olmutz. We now come to three great artists who, at a period in which the art of engraving had made the most remarkable progress, availed themselves of it for producing works which eminently characterise each master respectively.