The Abbess. 14. The Friar. 15. The Nun. 16. The Preacher. 17. The Physician. 18. The Soldier, or Warrior. 19. The Advocate. 20. The Married Couple. 21. The Duchess. 22. The Merchant. 23. The Pedlar. 24. The Miser. 25. The Waggoner with wine casks. 26. The Gamesters. 27. The Old Man. 28. The Old Woman. 29. The Infant. Of these, Nos. 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 23, 27, and 28, correspond with the Lyons wood-cuts, except that in No. 1 a stag is omitted, and there are some variations; in No. 6, the windows of the palace are altered; in No. 13, a window is added to the house next to the nunnery; and in No. 9, a figure is introduced, and the ducal palace much altered; in No. 23, a sword is omitted. They are all reverses, except No. 5. The rest of the subjects are reversed, with one exception, from the copies by [monogram: SA] in the spurious edition first printed at Cologne in 1555, with occasional very slight variations. Hollar's copies from the original cuts are in a small degree less both in width and depth. In the subject of Death and the Soldier he has not shown his judgment in making use of the spurious edition rather than the far more elegant and interesting original,[122] and it is remarkable that this is the only print belonging to the spurious ones that is not reversed. It is very probable that Hollar executed this work at Antwerp, where, at the time of its date, he might have found Diepenbecke and engaged him to make designs for the borders which are etched on separate plates, thus supplying passe-par-touts that might be used at discretion. Many sets appear without the borders, which seem to have strayed, and perhaps to have been afterwards lost or destroyed. As Rubens is recorded to have admired the beauty of the original cuts, so it is to be supposed that Diepenbecke, his pupil, would entertain the same opinion of them, and that he might have suggested to Hollar the making etchings of them, undertaking himself to furnish appropriate borders. But how shall we account for the introduction of so many of the spurious and inferior designs, if he had the means of using the originals? Many books were formerly excessively rare, which, from peculiar circumstances, not necessary to be here detailed, but well known to bibliographers and collectors, have since become comparatively common. Hollar might not have had an opportunity of meeting with a perfect copy of the original cuts, or he might, in some way or other, have been impeded in the use of them, when executing his work, and thus have been driven to the necessity of pursuing it by means of the spurious edition. These, however, are but conjectures, and it remains for every one to adopt his own opinion.