The Papers

The papers used for the Speculum blockbooks were small folio sheets about 30 × 44 cm., which barely permitted the rubbing of two adjacent woodcuts, 19.5 × 10.5 cm., across the top of the sheet. The same papers are found also in dated civic records of northern European cities, and they have been used as evidence for dating the printing of the various editions. They were generally of good quality and served well for printing the blocks by friction, though not well enough to prevent the water-based ink from coming through, and therefore the paper was printed on only one side.

Paper was made by dipping a rectangular wire screen mold, with its deckle frame, into a vat of rag pulp, shaking the mold to mesh the fibers, and depositing it on a pile with interleaved felts to absorb the water. Then the pile was squeezed in a screw press and the sheets were separated and dried.

Two molds with the same watermark design were used alternately by the workers, to keep the process continuous. They had a "laid" formation, with closely spaced wires (about six per centimeter) in the long direction and cross-wires, called "chain-lines," woven at wide intervals (about 4 cm. apart). The design of the watermark, shaped in wire, was sewn to this screen by loops of wire thread which often show as bright spots in the outline when a light is placed behind the sheet. The design can be traced (though this method is often unreliable), or it can be photographed at a one-to-one ratio. A better method is the beta-radiograph which uses an isotope plate with an X-ray film. This gives an accurate image of the variations in the thickness of the paper caused by the wires, chain-lines, watermarks, and sewing dots, but not of the printing on the paper. In 1970 Thomas Gravell developed a method which was quick, inexpensive and equally accurate.^[20] It uses Dupont Dylux 503 photo-sensitive paper, and exposure through Diazo fluorescent lamps. Electron radiography is also being used in short exposure times to make very sharp images.^[21] The precise images produced by these techniques can show the shape and position of the watermark and sewing dots which are caused by the repeated shaking of the mold. This may reveal the sequence in the production of the sheets and provide evidence for dating, when the mark is identical with one in a dated sheet.

We have no way of knowing how many copies of the first Latin edition, or any of the others, were produced. Considering its scarcity today, the number may have been small. Only nine complete copies of the first edition have survived, of which we were able to examine six (see note 13). Probably the house where the woodblocks for the proposed edition were made would have bought just enough paper for current use and sale. The printing of the text must have involved another expense. Only when the pages had been returned from the printer, gathered, glued back to back, and probably bound, could the books be sold and the investment made for more paper and printing another edition.

[20] Thomas L. Gravell and George Miller, A Catalogue of American Watermarks 1690–1835 (New York and London, 1979).

[21] See Gutenberg-Jahrbuch , edited by Hans Joachim Koppitz (Mainz, 1981); Peter Amelung, "Die Abbildung von Wasserzeichen. Vorbemerkungen zur Beschreibung eines neuen Verfahrens," pp. 97, 98; Joachim Siener, "Ein neues Verfahren zur Abbildung von Wasserzeichen," pp. 99–102.

Edition I : Each edition of the Speculum had a different basic "running" paper in the illustrated part of the book, usually beginning with the first chapter. When that was exhausted similar sheets were purchased in small lots from a paper merchant, or sheets of the same size and quality which were left over from other books were used to complete the edition. The excellently preserved copy of this edition in the New York Public Library has five gatherings: one of three sheets, three of seven sheets, and one of eight sheets, or thirty-two sheets in all. It is collated a:6, b-d:14, e:16, the numbers referring to leaves. The portion with woodblocks, in gatherings two through four (b-d), is printed on a paper with an Anchor and Cross watermark. But the fourth gathering contains a single sheet with a Unicorn. The fifth gathering starts with an Anchor sheet, but the remaining seven inside sheets have Unicorns. Finally, the first gathering, containing the Prohemium, which was printed last (when the number of chapters was known), begins with a Unicorn, but the two interior sheets have Bull's Heads.

It would appear from the evidence of the watermarks that enough paper was bought with the Anchor and Cross device for the first twenty-one chapters, or three gatherings of seven sheets, or fourteen pages. After the rubbing was completed, only eight more chapters were added, instead of the usual twenty-four more found in the manuscripts. Perhaps the paper merchant had in stock just Unicorn watermarked sheets. There was enough to print the seven interior sheets of the last signature. The Anchor and Cross sheet was used as the first wrap-around sheet for the fifth gathering. The Unicorn paper was also used to print the first sheet of the Prohemium and another few sheets were used to make up a shortage in the second sheet of the fourth gathering. (In the Haarlem copy this sheet has the normal "running" paper Anchor mark.) But two more sheets were still needed to complete the Prohemium, and for this Bull's Head stock was found. The limited paper supplies at the time normally precluded having the same watermark throughout an edition, and extra quantities were purchased as needed.

V-14.
Watermarks in Edition I.
Bull's Head; Unicorn; Anchor and Cross.

Edition II : The next printing was the first Dutch edition, of which we examined two of the four surviving copies (p. 118, n. 13). It had as its "running" stock a different Unicorn; this time the beast is found vertically on the page. In the British Library copy, the text of the first gathering, a two-sheet, four-page Prohemium, is printed on the Unicorn stock, as are the next three gatherings of seven sheets each. One sheet of this copy, the fourth in the second gathering, is on paper with a large Gothic P. The fifth gathering begins with a Unicorn sheet, but then comes a mixture of three Bull's Heads and four more Gothic P's. One Bull's Head is different from the others. This is the sheet used for the printing of the text with Hellinga Type 2:103 G. It is in a battered condition, apparently because neither the previous Bull's Head stock nor the original type, Hellinga 1, were available.

Edition III : An analysis of the watermarks of the papers of the second Latin edition shows a great variety in both the pages combining woodcuts with type and those which are entirely xylographic (see note 13). The basic "running" stock has a large Y with a tail that curls into a heart. Briquet found it only in this edition of the Speculum , but it also exists in the account books for 1475 in the Gemeente Archief in Haarlem.^[22] This mark was apparently made in honor of Yolande II when she became Duchess of Lorraine in 1473. Other marks are scattered with no apparent pattern through different copies. There is another Y with a trefoil tail, probably also intended to celebrate the Duchess. It is also found in the third edition of the Apocalypse blockbook in Copenhagen.

The Anchor and Cross watermark makes a connection with the "Printer of the Text of the Speculum." The twin marks appear several times in his printing of the Pontanus Singularia (Hellinga Type 4:142 G). They are also found in a Biblia pauperum in the British Library and a third edition of the Apocalypse in the Musée Condé at Chantilly. The Y-trefoil mark appears in his Saliceto Tractatus de salute corporis (Hellinga Type 5:123 G), as well as the Pontanus.

Edition IV : We examined three copies of the second Dutch edition with the type re-set but very worn (see note 13). The "running" paper is a Bull's Head with a shield of Metz and a star above it. Several other marks make their appearance haphazardly. There is a Gothic monogram for Maria (ma^[*] ) in a circle with a shield of Metz below. The same mark appears in Veldener's printing at Utrecht of the Fasciculus temporum dated 1480. There are also a Gothic P and two Hands of Blessing in the Spieghel edition.

Of the above watermarks which appear in Briquet's Les Filigranes , the dates given are earlier than those assigned by Allan Stevenson from his studies of the watermarks of the blockbook editions. Unfortunately it is not always possible to tell if Briquet's tracings are identical with our beta-radiographs. Precise dating by watermark is still questionable.

[22] Allan H. Stevenson, "The Problem of the Blockbooks," VIII, pp. 6–12.

V-15.
Watermarks in Editions II, III, and IV.