The Invention of Printing.: A Collection of Facts and Opinions, Descriptive of Early Prints and Playing Cards, the Block-Books of the Fifteenth Century, the Legend of Lourens Janszoon Coster, of Haarlem, and the Work of John Gutenberg and His AssociatesDe Vinne, Theodore Low
History
The Invention of Printing.: A Collection of Facts and Opinions, Descriptive of Early Prints and Playing Cards, the Block-Books of the Fifteenth Century, the Legend of Lourens Janszoon Coster, of Haarlem, and the Work of John Gutenberg and His Associates
De Vinne, Theodore Low
Incunabula -- Bibliography; Printing -- History -- Origin and antecedents
blemishes, which could have been produced only by means of transferred
drawing.[139] With this fact before us, the supposition of the priority
of an engraved edition of the book is untenable. Dutch authors say that
these xylographic blocks corroborate a Hollandish legend, in which it
is stated that the materials of the printer of the _Speculum_ were
stolen. They suppose that the first typographer was obliged to engrave
[p278] these twenty blocks to complete his imperfect edition. This
hypothesis does not accord with other facts: the appearance of three
successive editions of the book, each with a text of types, proves that
the practice of typography was continued.
[Illustration: Fac-simile of part of a Page of the Speculum Salutis.]
The provision of black ink for the types and brown ink for the cuts
seems unnecessary, but Van der Linde’s explanation of this peculiarity
is plausible. He says that the oily black ink used on the types may
have been rejected for the cuts because its greasy surface interfered
with the brush of the colorist. It does not appear that the inquiry has
ever been made, whether the brown ink of block-books was always brown.
It is probable that this brown ink was once black. The variability of
the color, so frequently remarked in all block-books, is the certain
indication of a faded black writing ink. It was the fluidity of this
writing ink that prevented its use on the types of the _Speculum_; the
fluid collected in globules on the metal, spreading under impression,
and blotting the paper. Oily ink was required for a surface of metal.
The unequal indentation of the letters indicates that the types were
not of a uniform height. Nor is it probable that the engravings at
the head of every page were always truly flat and of precisely the
same height as the types. They were pieces of flat boards, which must
have warped with every change from heat to cold, or from dampness to
dryness.[140] In these irregularities we find the probable reason for
the employment of two distinct methods of impression. Two impressions
were needed as much as two kinds of ink. [p279] The types required
strong, and the wood-cuts weak impression. If the impression had been
graduated to suit the wood-cuts, the print of the types would not have
been visible; if enough impression had been given to face the types,
the wood-cuts, if in the same form, would have been crushed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account