X. "Imagines Mortis: item epigrammata è Gall. à G. Æmilio in Latinum versa. Lugdun. Frellonius, 1574." 12mo.[114] XI. In 1654 a Dutch work appeared with the following title, "De Doodt vermaskert met swerelts ydelheyt afghedaen door G. V. Wolsschaten, verciert met de constighe Belden vanden maerden Schilder Hans Holbein. _i. e._ Death masked, with the world's vanity, by G. V. Wolsschaten, ornamented with the ingenious images of the famous painter Hans Holbein. T'Antwerpen, by Petrus Bellerus." This is on an engraved frontispiece of tablet, over which are spread a man's head and the skin of two arms supported by two Deaths blowing trumpets. Below, a spade, a pilgrim's staff, a scepter, and a crosier, with a label, on which is "sceptra ligonibus æquat." Then follows another title-page, with the same words, and the addition of Geeraerdt Van Wolsschaten's designation, "Prevost van sijne conincklijcke Majesteyts Munten des Heertoogdoms van Brabant, &c. MDCLIV." 12mo. The author of the text, which is mixed up with poetry and historical matter, was prefect of the mint in the Duchy of Brabant.[115] This edition contains eighteen cuts, among which the following subjects are from the original blocks. 1. Three boys. 2. The married couple. 3. The pedlar. 4. The shipwreck. 5. The beggar. 6. The corrupt judge. 7. The astrologer. 8. The old man. 9. The physician. 10. The priest with the eucharist. 11. The monk. 12. The abbess. 13. The abbot. 14. The duke. Four others, viz. the child, the emperor, the countess, and the pope, are copies, and very badly engraved. The blocks of the originals appear to have fallen into the hands of an artist, who probably resided at Antwerp, and several of them have his mark, [monogram: SA], concerning which more will be said under one of the ensuing articles. As many engravings on wood by this person appeared in the middle of the sixteenth century, it is probable that he had already used these original blocks in some edition of the Dance of Death that does not seem to have been recorded. There are evident marks of retouching in these cuts, but when they first appeared cannot now be ascertained. The mark might have been placed on them, either to denote ownership, according to the usual practice at that time, or to indicate that they had been repaired by that particular artist. All these editions, except that of 1574, have been seen and carefully examined on the present occasion: the supposed one of 1530 has not been included in this list, and remains to be seen and accurately described, if existing, by competent witnesses.