_V i tf 
 
 Cc< cf < .(^t«: 
 tc c x< < tt?c.C m, 
 CSLc <c wiim 
 
 (Lv •< niftl 
 
 <j «< x Vc. - v «<mx 5 q& 
 
 ,* lc<--'c ,; ( v «V : 
 
 ■rV**A • «. * ,,r* 
 
 texite ' 
 
 < tf'x XX * 
 
 ‘ c ((C.xx * ' ' 
 
 % c - 
 
 < Cvt x< t ■• 
 
 Cu.<\ c ■• 
 i|? vk4.Sk- C 
 
 V <UW <L 
 
 ^ Ctf£r «- 
 
 rrV cxrxxx x 
 
 ^L/etAAv 
 ^V/u 'X- 
 co< < 
 
 C<C^ (< *«. 
 
 « ^2^3- x AC" 
 C' xxtC 
 
 <o ^LCx .<& c 
 
 1 u XM&m 
 
 f.iT- A' .fex g 
 
 <!<UC C VlC « «■■ -< 
 
 xcxt^ cxxc (,fO' cc ■x , < 
 
 , ; .<.xU '<HC : \«L* C v C< «X v <l ' 
 
 < <X X X <i C X ;<tf iC« -■ « C fe-5*. 
 
 ‘ * S ( , £ 5 * >x i C e c- 1 c «r KC 
 
 C • X C . «■ «t « «f< 
 
 < t ( X I X "X X X c t«C C>r-c. ^ C- u<<« 
 
 < c« / • «;vf tc <«< c c <•<«£ 
 <-C/C } i^rr ' C ( C«-f Ct ^ 
 
 «C C X.cC.C x«><«^v-. C C ( C< * 
 
 <«- c X <t( ttf«<£ c xc CxC ct * 
 
 , er < X tc > « xCt t a (C x c< ■ a 
 
 c CvlUXX «« _ 
 
 <•'. c ; x « c« ^v, M «C-tc C<-tf 
 
 V < «C XX ( A X- tx V c «C .X «t-c< 
 
 , « « A ( c. o *; < ^ «TC xc . « « 
 
 «r ««at* «# 1( # («a: « « 
 
 CiXx a t' ' tCC ,,i '«■ x< cc i< 
 
 ...t C< '<A't ■ C <\'. cs Ai 1>5* -(«fe. xc 
 
 c C* Ct ■ (V (' A <- <c«-S « <<"• 
 
 V< u «X "-c^c «■ xr CSX* 
 
 , *•<• , ( X ■<.(!•• «.«Jip? /Cxc cc «C A< 
 
 x. «rex/ <« £((.« <giC 
 
 <ASCC< gli 3 550.' 
 
 <<<>^ tC o g|:( <T CvOvC 
 
 « c't ( «4‘vCx^. icte XC <CX4 
 'C<(' c ro ' x t <sjT-c ■ ^ 
 
 W ti-c w ..: > / c (<«• « «« 
 
 ££ cxc.I tc « ^c t«- < «« 
 
 rr X vv (1 I tc XC X^a- CCXX < ce « 
 
 y, \ ' <« o '*■<&* 
 
 $ t < c«■ a < - m, - e <r< 
 
 / ex.■ e : «(ctCt;ct c , c <<c .x 
 V , ,c<;c« «s. • x. '® . <g?c( ■ < ere 
 
 # f « <|p «v i 
 
 X(x * c ■. „ c xx ,>Cx8t x <STC< 
 
 t ( cV*/ ;fc- actcc ( ;S < «cc 
 
 x r "ll-Mfc ic^ : ;S:*Vx 
 
 , C' ^ vXXV V ( 'C ce C, 
 
 «■ ■ i* c /r v i< ® :c 
 
 - irfkucr ^c 
 
 C HvWt:‘ ; gsv § 
 
 //(ctccc«> 
 
 a" i;xv«'CC < - W ‘Sf 
 
 ■ «ce-' «'t-«.1 
 
 e v«.i v< <* ' xx ex t 
 
 er x «C x vX C t ( 1 ^.C; ^e- v Kt 
 
 - V^' C < f X> CC> 
 
 tr^'«Kx (.t e X-:(C <g~ZL_<k 
 
 A /eTsfe XX c X . XXiV 5 J 
 
 r x ; <r/«c cfi' c (grrc^^seai 
 
 - 'C Xvfe..«.<tx A X ‘ 
 
 - Sr V < •; ex ^ 
 
 v /texe xvA ccr^ e 
 
 t 'Cc ^cfr ^®fx( ‘ 
 
 p tf <XC«< 55 V <Q XXxtX 5 
 
 "l M ®x «!x«4 £ X,C'; 5ifk 
 
 ! «;f<xC«‘ v x< xt, S\ a .«,^C 
 
 ; X VKCC «tc«C xC V. a CxtfCtf 
 :•■_< "X < <c«t «< x xc< '■*- At 
 
 ■ * 44«&': 
 
 xfiS«i4'S, 
 
 . < tfA' c CC XC:, x< C «m^^eex. 
 
 x <'Xul. ee XX X xC ’ if(ixt«- . 
 
 <' Kieccc ccrxcx cc r xC< <t . 
 
 c ' \«(CfCC <Ccr < 
 x CC «C cc« X. ■< C c/# 
 
 (« ce ©( « C(C 
 (( t CCccx << p Ce 
 :. .(xu xte cccxx , ertxct^ 
 
 e (ftO C(C <3r«c rc Cj tfi «rcMtC^ 
 
 rfurif/r r7 *(' 
 
 
 mn 
 
 * I 
 
 rv Cx e x</< 
 8tC ( e -c^ 
 .f cxC. ' x 
 ( X <JS| 
 
 (X CvC x c ' C s| 
 
 x uC(,x./e| 
 
 ( vCC X < ^; 
 
 V X« (X‘'| 
 
 f (C Xx < «xjf 
 
 
 xwstm v 
 
 S^®S' <;■< 
 
 ▼ .".V' *.- ' -V 
 
 Jt Ct< uckd er<? < 
 c ce x<«: x ( 
 
 5 ®t ati _■. ^ i 
 
 i «c<('xx.<sr ' <?.< 
 
 • ^Cxxcxx «5d_-. *xc 
 
 C(C x . x<C t 
 
 JEf' ( c< .*. 7 <c 
 CxC-«," e*:;. <<r 
 
 * «cr Atcx 'x«cj .. er 
 
 -Crct«*x< emi- c 
 
 <X C-x' x: x«K: x 
 r ■ c,' xeys- < ; 
 'CftCCC C«KC c 
 
 . C 8 A' v*C <r 
 
 , C t, m t^K < ^ 
 
 « xCrj t c«cs; c ■ 
 
 , ,f et- vccr. c (, 
 
 'X <vX ffK c V, 
 
 . f §rfit , ■ V '> a 
 
 (< e txc «5 
 
 rt- € C <-x«< 
 
 C cx< «< 
 
 ' Cx C x<r 
 . <f< «tf J 
 
 C te C 
 
 ( 
 
 ■' ( ( (iC < ■ C 
 c x <rc ( 'CC 
 cCtCCC 
 tetx C /< 
 
 Ct «C xe j 
 Ctkt -t •-. < 
 
 xii^C c. : x e<cx'^x ; 
 
 < A s JSrTt '( CC « t xv( 
 
 ccxext 
 
 ce Ju( i 
 
 imi 5 
 
 - ^ <SrT^ x tx 3 ( 
 
 1 xc x et .tf x . 
 
 ' ( CC X// c ' 
 
 r «^e r ttt ^ 1 
 
 r- e t< ( re ® . < 
 ( e r t i C > x. 
 <c«C tt fintC > x 
 <c.«« xc «txteae . < 
 
 < <K (t tree f c « 
 
 cM (( t<-( ‘ e 
 
 X< 4^ te. CCf tC ctx 
 
 tc c<tt «r ; 
 
 v x rtr eccc (C % . << 
 
 ittr tc ^ c” 
 
 , << c ctxxx ce ; , u 
 
 'x 'C €C <C i c " 
 
 , ^ Mt X4t. 5 . 
 
 xc: f « 5 < 
 
 oC trttC ( , e 
 € t« cC ' V 
 
 • C Cii '«T < '".i: 
 •tf W- 4C t ■ “5fc 
 <t. *.<*.•«. 
 
 r <«* se "f 
 
 " x «e l ;S 
 
 ' C -•<(« x , x 
 
 • '*L ',XX«, ( ■ 5^, 
 
 ‘ C tx.t«r c xr 
 
 X tf c c C < ,, v< 
 
 . t ', cc< 'x-t y 
 c«< ■■■x C tcccx - c i 
 
 «c<( •- ' x « <<C4 C' r 
 
 c« v «i:tc>5 
 
 «t; • ( C AC- X < 5, 
 
 exc x x «acet! t ts 
 
 tfcC' x t C KC > '< C , 
 
 'C'«ir 1 c x •<_ c <■(■ (■ « 
 
 6 tf c < < (c tf jr 
 
 re C r t( M r C '< \ 
 
 • <C«. <tf,«( tf;f 
 
 r «t * XX ••'<> <C' X 
 
 4C t x (CCC ( Ct / 
 fit C •" xCYC ■ c Ct 'S 
 
 “«: <■ « ■ ■"■* rx . c c f 
 C ,c«r it c ex m >:•< C xf. 
 r ;<*r c 'X ..<c '<•- •< c e • • < 
 '<*Z «- ' «t 'te (n Ct<<- 
 x «K « < < (<•■«< u C x t 
 : ac < xt xxx et cc c 
 : -m. < -Xh'x:, CCC 
 X (ff. < < :.m V- C tftC 
 
 r 0KT- < ■: .<(-.(■• CvCXC 
 
 c xSc, < < •'.■(< crcxc 
 
 ■ «C x -<.' C«ctf 
 («k x • /«. creer 
 ' ■ («K~ < ( (t<( «et' 
 
 < <c««C. etftf < 
 
 x-caac- t' tccc' 
 
 < XV«t x ( r f C 5 
 
 *■ 1 X «« ■ tftf.« 
 
 X'. < caqg " r 
 
 (I x «« €EL‘tfC. 
 
 e « * • «r e 
 
 
 «<cM 
 
1 f 
 
 '€ 
 
 Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2017 with funding from 
 Getty Research Institute 
 
 https://archive.org/details/canticumeanticorOOberj 
 
■ 
 
 % 
 
 
 « 
 
 * 
 
 * 
 
 f 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ♦ 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 ’ i 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 --- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REPRODUCED IN FAC-SIMILE, 
 
 FROM THE SCEIVERIUS COPI IN THE BRITISH IUSEUI. 
 
 WITII 
 
 &n fbtstorical anD 3Sti)lto<jrapf)ical Sntrobucttoit 
 
 J. Ph. BERJEAU. 
 
 IrOitiJon: 
 
 TRUBNER & Co., 60, PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 
 M.DCCC.LX. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 it 
 
 
 
IN T R 0 D U C T10 N. 
 
 I. 
 
 The Book of Canticles is one of the five “megilloth,” or voluroes, placed immediately 
 after the Pentateucli in the MSS. of tke Jewish Scriptnres. Bossuet was of opinion 
 tliat this poem is a regular drama, or pastoral eclogue, in seven acts, each of wliicli 
 filis one day: viz., first day, chapt. i. 2, 6 ; second day, ii. 1-17; tliird day, iii. v. 1; 
 fourth day, v. 2, yi. 9; fifth day, yii. 12, viii. 3; and Sabbatb, viii. 4-14. Dr. J. Mason 
 Good, in his translation of the Song of Songs, maintains that it is really an idyl, 
 or rather a nnmber of idyls, forming a collective wliole. Dr. Adam Clarke, on the 
 contrary, conceives it to be a composition partaking more of the nature of a masque 
 than anything else—an entertainment for the guests who attended a marriage 
 ceremony; he admits, therefore, no mystical sense. If the latter hypothesis be 
 considered as the true one, we must conclude that this sacred poem is purely the 
 epithalamium of Shelomoh (the peaceful, the prince of peace) with Shulamith (the 
 peaceful, the princess of peace), since the latter name is nothing more nor less than 
 the feminine of the former. Jalin* regards the work as comprehending several 
 poems, which he distributes thus : 
 
 I. An innocent country maiden makes an undisguised profession of her 
 attachment, and her lover, a shepherd, replies to it with similar protestations of 
 affection (i. 2, ii. 7.) 
 
 II. A maiden sings of her lover, who is seeking her everywliere, and she also 
 confesses her affection (ii. 8, iii. 5.) 
 
 III. A maiden in a litter, surrounded by ShelomolTs soldiers, is brought to 
 the harem of the King. The lover prefers, far before ali the royal beauties, his own 
 beloved, in wliose society he declares he is more happy than the King himself (iii. 
 6, iv. 1.) 
 
 IY. A maiden beloved sings of her lover ; he had come to her door at night, 
 and had fled away before she opened it. She seeks him, is beaten by the watch, 
 
 * Introductio in Libros Sanctos Veteris Foederis. Viennae, 1814, 8vo., p. 420. 
 
 B 
 
4 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 anci stripped of her veil. She describes tlie beauty of her lover, who at length 
 answers, celebrating her loveliness, with a contemptuous glance at the mnltitude of 
 the King’s wives (y. 2, vi. 9.) 
 
 Y. Shulamith recounts in few words tlie allurements of the courtiers, whom 
 she has met unexpectedly in the garden, and her rejection of them, and celebrates 
 her affection for her lover (vi. 10, viii. 3.) 
 
 VI. Protestations and praises of constant affection (viii. 4—7.) 
 
 VII. A discourse between two brothers about guarding and giving away 
 their sister in marriage; she replies with scorn that she would be her own guardian 
 (viii. 8—12.) 
 
 VIII. A fragment. A lover wishes to hear his beloved; she replies by 
 persuading him to fly (viii. 13—14.) 
 
 This book says S. Gregory # is placed with reason as the third in Solomoffs 
 works, because: “In proverbiis moralis vita exprimitur...In ecclesiaste naturalis... 
 In cantico vero canticorum contemplativa vita exprimitur ...” 
 
 In his prologue S. Gregory adds : “Amoris quasi corporei verba ponuntur .... 
 
 dum membra corporis nominant: sic ad amorem nos vocat.Debemus in verbis 
 
 exterioribus corporeis quicumque interius est querere. Littera enim occidit: 
 spiritus vivificat.... Attendendum est/' says further S. Gregory, “quod liber hoc 
 non canticum sed canticorum canticum dicitur." 
 
 Baldwin (William), who translated the Book of Canticles in English verses,f 
 and dedicated his translation to the King Edward the Sixth, calls this book : “ a 
 mysticall songe of the spirituali and godly love between Christ the spouse, and the 
 church or congregacion his spousesse. 
 
 “ The whole matter as Anselme taketh it, is a prophecie, describyng the estate 
 of the church e, and with what affeccions she desyred Christ in ali tymes; ... no 
 doubt but it is an hie and mysticall matter, and more darkely hyd than other partes 
 of the Scripture, by means of the wanton wordes: which also cause many to deny 
 it to be God's wurde : whose errour to redresse is the chief cause why I have 
 medled with the matter." 
 
 Lemaitre de Sacy,:|: who translated this book in French, says in his preface : 
 “ C’est une ancienne tradition qu'on ne permettoit parmi les hebreux la lecture de 
 ce saint cantique qu'h ceux qui avoient atteint Tage d’un homme parfait; a ceux 
 qui etant capables de penetrer les choses cachees, pouvoient entendre d'une maniere 
 spirituelle ce qui, selon Tintelligence de la seule lettre, pourroit etre tres pernicieux 
 aux fideles." 
 
 The Book of Canticles, according to D. Calmet,§ “is called in Hebrew— 
 
 Expositio Beati Gregorii Pape super Cantica Canticorum. Paris. Jehan Petit, 1511. 8vo. 
 f '1 he Canticles, or Balades of Solomon, phraselyke declared in English Metres. London, 1549. 4to. 
 t Cantique des Cantiques traduit en Francois, avec une Explication. Paris, 1694. 12mo. 
 
 § Dictionnaire Historique et Critique de la Bible. Paris, 17 22 . 2 vols., fol. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 D 
 
 DHt f n W schir haschirim, the Song of Songs. It is believed tliat Solomon 
 composed it on occasion of his marriage with the King of Egyptfs daughter; but 
 this book is a continued allegory, wherein, under the ternis of a common wedding, 
 a divine and supernatural marriage is understood. 
 
 “Seven nights and seven days are distinctly marked in this Song (because 
 weddings among the Hebrews were celebrated seven days) ; and this song relates 
 poetically the adventures of these seven days. The Hebrews apprehending it might 
 be understood grossly, forbad the reading of it by any person before the age of 
 thirty. 
 
 “ The church, as well as the synagogue, reeeived this book generaliy as 
 canonical. If it be objected, tliat neither Christ nor his apostles have cited it, and 
 that the name of God is not found in it, we answer, tliat there are several other 
 sacred books which our Saviour has not quoted; and that in an allegory, wherein 
 the Son of God is concealed under the figure of a husband, it is not necessary that 
 he should be expressed by his proper nanie; it would then cease to be an 
 allegory/' 
 
 But it does not enter into our plan to review ali the suppositions raised by the 
 almost innumerable writers who have treated the subject of the Book of Canticles. 
 It is sufficient for our purpose to have shown that the most accredited writers of 
 both the Romish and Reformed Church do not agree among themselves as to the 
 meaning which is to be attaclied to it. Therefore, it is no wonder if the artist, 
 after having begun his work with the intention of representing allegorically the 
 prefiguration of the Virgin, according to the Dutch title at the head of the first 
 page, after the mystical ideas of S. Bonaventura, abandoned an ungrateful and 
 almost impracticable task, and from the second page, to the end of the book, 
 foliowed the more reasonable suggestions of S. Gregory, simply personifying a con¬ 
 templative life, or the love of Christ for his Church. 
 
 The example of a similar interpretation illustrated by the Book of Canticles 
 may be found in the mystical works of Madame Guyon, published at the end of the 
 last century.* But the engravings of Vexelberg were for the most part a simple 
 reproduction of the mystical designs of Ottovenius, or rather Octavius van Veen, 
 the master of Rubens, and of the engravings with which Christophorus von 
 Sichem illustrated Hermann Hugon’s Pia Desideria.f Although the designs of 
 Sichem, reproduced from original engravings by Bolswert, are by no means like 
 those of the Block-Book, and generaliy represent only two persons, the bride as a 
 child, and the bridegroom as an angel, it is rather interesting to note that the 
 illustrations particularly borrowed from the Book of Canticles bear on the subjects 
 chosen for the Block-Book, as may be seen from the inscriptions written under the 
 plates in the following order: 
 
 * L’ame aimante de son Dieu. Paris, 1790. 8vo. 
 
 f Pia Desideria Emblematis Illustrata. Antwerpiae, 1628. 16mo. 
 
6 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Piate 
 
 XXII. 
 
 33 
 
 XXIII. 
 
 33 
 
 XXIV. 
 
 33 
 
 XXV. 
 
 33 
 
 XXVI. 
 
 
 XXVII. 
 
 33 
 
 XXXI. 
 
 33 
 
 XXXII. 
 
 33 
 
 XXXIII. 
 
 33 
 
 XXXIV. 
 
 33 
 
 XXXV. 
 
 3) 
 
 XLV. 
 
 “Veni dilecte mi egrediamur in agrum.” 
 “ Trahe me post te.” 
 
 “ Quis mihi det te fratrem.” 
 
 “ In lectulo meo per noctes quaesivi.” 
 
 “ Surgam & circuibo.” 
 
 “ Inveni quem diligit anima mea.” 
 “Adjuro vos filiae Jerusalem.” 
 
 “ Fulcite me floribus.” 
 
 “ Dilectus meus mihi et ego illi.” 
 
 “ Ego dilecto meo.” 
 
 “ Anima mea liquefacta est.” 
 
 “ Fuge dilecte mi.” 
 
 The engravings of Sichem are reproduced in Madame Guyoifis book, in the same 
 order, and with the same numbers affixed to them, as in Hugoifis work; but four 
 designs are printed on the same page, whereas in the original book they are 
 separate. 
 
 II. 
 
 Now, whatever may be the religious allegory represented in the Book of 
 Canticles, does the Block-Book which wc reproduce actually contain a political or 
 a historical allegory, as is affirmed by various bibliographers ? Has the introduction 
 of shields bearing the arnis of kings, popes, bishops, and lords, in some engravings, 
 another meaning than the introduction, by early painters, of portraits of monks, 
 cardinals, etc., in religious pictures, where they have absolutely nothing to do ? 
 Was it not, in fact, a kind of homage paid by the artist generally to his protector ? 
 inasmuch as in these times the fine arts could not reckon for their support on the 
 public at large, who knew nothing of, and therefore did not care for, such things 
 as picture, sculpture, or engraving. 
 
 Down to the Benaissance, and even some time after, few pictures were executed 
 without such portraits; and the early engravers, such as Burgmayer, Lucas Cranach, 
 Altdorfer, etc., in particular, constantly introduce into their works the shields of their 
 patrons for the time being. If, as Mr. Chatto suggests, # the escutcheons to be seen 
 on pages 4, 6,13, and 15, imply an allusion “to the Council of Basle, which, in 1439, 
 elected Amadeus of Savoy as pope (under the title of Felix V), in opposition to 
 Eugen IV,” it must be a very faint allusion indeed, and confined to the designs, 
 pp. iv, 11, and xv, 1; since the arms of Savoy appear but in these two designs, in 
 the first instance with tliree, and in the second with eight other shields bearing 
 various arms. 
 
 In order to transform the Book of Canti cies into a political or historical allegory, 
 
 * A Treatise on Wood-Engraving. London, 1839, 8vo., p. 94. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 7 
 
 Mr. Sotheby # was obliged to reject that wliich is tlie very essence of allegory,—tlie 
 double unity of time and action. If tlie allegory relates to tlie quarrels between the 
 Pope and tlie Emperor at the beginning of the twelfth centnry (1111 to 1115), the 
 Book of Canticles liiust have been produced as a MS. about 1250, and consequently 
 it cannot make allusion to posterior events, such as the Hnssite war and the Council 
 of Constance of 1439; if it be symbolical of the great quarrel about the Communion 
 under both kinds, some of the engravings cannot refer to events wliich passed three 
 hundred years before, and were long forgotten, while the rest applied altogether to 
 contenrporary events. Therefore Mr. Sotheby is bound to place his political alle¬ 
 gory eitlier in the twelfth century or in the fifteentli; because the Book of Canticles, 
 as a wdiole, cannot be considered as applicable, at the same time, to the history of a 
 struggle about the pallium, and to the schism of the Hussites,—to religious strifes of 
 1115, and to a schism of the fifteentli century. 
 
 By the style of the drawings, the Book of Canticles belongs evidently to the 
 school of Yan Eyck. Thus the time of its production is fairly ascribable to the 
 first part of the fifteentli century. But wlio cared, at that period, for the quarrels 
 about the pallium, then three hundred years old ? If the book was intended to 
 allude to historical events, it could not, without losing ali interest, go back farther 
 than the end of the fourteentli century. This would certainly coincide with the 
 Hussite war; since John Huss was burnt, in 1415, by order of the Council of 
 Constance, assembled in 1414 by the Emperor Sigismond; and John Zizka, the 
 greatest popular w^arrior whicli Bohemia produced, died in 1424. But if the Block- 
 Book is an allegory of this struggle against the Cliurch of Pome and the “ Holy 
 Roman Empire,” the author must have taken eitlier the part of Pome, or that of 
 Huss and Zizka. 
 
 Now supposing him to be a monk, and the Champion of the pope and the “Holy 
 Poman Empire,” he must have introduced somewhere in his allegory a strong 
 condemnation of the Hussite lieresy. But we look in vain for such condemnation. 
 The entire book, true to its origin, breathes only love and charity. The author did 
 not think proper to introduce even the last attack of his own against the Jews, as 
 did the author of the Biblia Pauper um. 
 
 On the other haud, the Hussite tendencies of the book are neither ciear nor decided. 
 In page 9 is, no doubt, a cask, from which an angel is about to draw some wine; but 
 this wine seems reserved for the bride alone, and not to be partaken of by the people. 
 In the second design of the 13th page, we see on the tabi e the Communion in both 
 kinds; and the bridegroom says, “Comedite amici et bibite et inebriamini carissimi.” 
 But this invitation may be addressed to the members of the Cliurch, to the 
 ministers, rather than to the people at large; and this design, therefore, cannot be 
 considered as a Hussite allusion. In the upper design of the same page, the knight 
 bearing the shield with an eagle, cannot be considered as the Emperor of Germany, 
 
 * Principia Typographica. London, 1858. 4to. 
 
 C 
 
8 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 for the eagle is not double-headed; and whether this knight be regarded as an 
 accessory to the fact of beating the bride, or as her avenger against the misereant 
 knight who takes away her veil, we cannot pronounce that the arms of the Holy 
 Empire were introduced here either in sarcasm or in praise of the Emperor. 
 
 All things considered, therefore, it would seem that the escutcheons represented 
 in the Book of Canticles are not so many cues to an liistorical allegory, but are 
 simply the shields of those powers that were most conspicuous in the eye of the 
 author of the book. These shields occur in the following order: 
 
 Page IV. 2.—Held by four armed angels on the battlements of the “Hortus 
 Conclusus”: 
 
 i. The eagle displayed with two heads. 
 ii. A cinquefoil or rose with a chief indented. 
 iit. A single Chevron. 
 
 iv. The cross of Savoy. 
 
 Page VI. 2.—On the shield held by a female over the door of the bride: 
 
 v. The lion rampant. 
 
 Page XIII. 1.—On the battlements of the apartment of the bride: 
 
 vi. A single fleur-de-lys, borne by a pope. 
 
 vii. The lion rampant, borne by a Cardinal. 
 
 viii. An indistinct mark in an indented ori e, borne also by a Cardinal. 
 
 ix. Two keys in saltire, held by a bishop. 
 
 On the shield of one of the knights in the Street: 
 
 x. A displayed eagle (not with two heads). 
 
 Page XY. 1.—On the shields hanging from the castellated tower: 
 
 xi. Two chevrons. 
 xti. A lobster upright. 
 
 xiii. Two fishes hauriant addorsed. 
 
 xiv. The lion rampant. 
 
 xv. The cross of Savoy. 
 
 xvi. Three crowns, or the Pope’s tiara, 
 xvn. A displayed eagle with a single head. 
 xviii. Three cinquefoils or roses. 
 
 xix. Two keys in saltire. 
 
 Page XY. 2. —On the shields borne by the warriors surrounding the bed of Solomon: 
 
 xx. The lion rampant. 
 
 xxi. A single fleur-de-lys. 
 
 xxii. The lozenges of Bavaria. 
 xxm. A single rose, barbed. 
 
XNTRODUCTION. 
 
 9 
 
 Mr. Cliatto says, on tlie subject of the introcluction of these shields of arras in 
 the Block-Book: “As they were not likely to be entirely suggested by the mere 
 fancy of the artist, I think that most of them will be found to belong to Germany 
 rather than to Holland; and the charge of one of them—-two fish back to back, 
 which is rather remarkable, and by no means common—is one of the quarterings of 
 the former Counts of Wirtemberg, the very district in which I ana inclined to think 
 the wmrk was executed. I moreover fancy that in one of the cuts I can perceive an 
 allusion to the Council of Basle, which in 1439 elected Amadeus of Savoy as Pope, 
 under the title of Felix V, in opposition to Eugene IV," 
 
 It seems that Mr. Chatto was rather hasty in grounding his theory as to the 
 German origin of the Book of Canticles, on this single shield, “ two fish back to 
 back, which is remarkable, and by no means common/' We miglit as reasonably 
 ascribe the book to France, on account of the fleur-de-lys; to England, on account 
 of the rose; or to Savoy, on account of the cross, etc. But the dispute about the 
 origin now remaining between Netherlands and Germany, a readier wa}^ of arriving 
 at the truth is to ascertain whether, of the escutcheons introduced in the book, the 
 greater number belongs to Germany or to the Netherlands. 
 
 Now, if we consuit the lieraldic books of Flanders, we find in Lci Genealogie et 
 Ancienne Descente des Forestiers et Comtes de Flandres, par Corneille Martin,* a 
 portrait of “ Philippe le Bon”, duke of Burgundy and Count of Flanders, where a 
 shield bearing the identical cross of Savoy is hanging from one of the background 
 pillars, whilst the lion rampant is on the shield hanging from the fourth pillar. 
 The fleur-de-lys single, as well as multiple, belongs likewise to the Duke of 
 Burgundy, as may be seen from the “ sigillum curiae Comitatus Burgundiae," found 
 on various documents in the arcliives of Bruges.f 
 
 In another book of the same author,J in the “ tabula insignium in sigillis familiae 
 Flandricse,” we find,—1, the displayed eagle as the arms of Brandenbourg; 2, the 
 two fishes hauriant addorsed, as the arms of Ferrette; 3, the cross of Savoy; and 
 4, the three cinquefoils as the arms of Vergy: all of which belong to the Counts of 
 Flanders from family alliances. Indeed, some historians asserted that Ferrette 
 never did belong to the Dukes of Burgundy, but was only engaged by the Duke of 
 Austria to Charles the Hardy; but in this case the escutcheon ascribed to the 
 Duke of Wiirtemberg might as well be taken (as no field is indicated in these 
 shields) for the arms of Bar, to be seen on the seal of Beatrice Countess of Flanders, 
 p. 103 of the same, Genealogia Comitum Flandrice. 
 
 The alliances of the house of Burgundy with that of Savoy, viz. the marriage of 
 Robert of Burgundy with Catherine of Savoy (1333); and the marriage of Blanche 
 of Burgundy with Edward Count of Savoy (1307), sufficiently authorized the intro- 
 duction of the arms of Savoy as a quartering in those of Burgundy. 
 
 * Anvers, Balthazar, 1582. 4to., p, 109. 
 
 f Vredius (O.), Sigilla Comitum Flandrise. Brugis, 1639. Fol., p. 91. 
 
 + Genealogia Comitum Flandriae. Brugis, 1642. Fol., p. 152. 
 
10 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 As to the three cinquefoils of Yergy, they were introduced as a quartering in 
 the house of Burgnndy as early as 1198, by the marriage of Eudes III with Alice of 
 YergvA 
 
 Tlie lozenges of Bavaria were likewise a quartering of Burgundy, on account of 
 the marriage of Margaret of Bavaria with John of Burgundy, killed on the bridge 
 of Montereau in 1419.f 
 
 The two keys in saltire belong to the Netherlands, as may be seen,—1, in the 
 frontispiece of Castella et Praetoria Nobilium Brabantice;% 2, in the frontispiece 
 of SchrijveFs Beschryvinge der Graven van Nolland,§ where angels are holding 
 the escutcheons of the various pro vinces of the Netherlands, and among them one 
 bearing the two keys in saltire, and another the lion rampant.|| 
 
 Thus, from the twenty-three shields represented in the Book of Canticles, no less 
 than seventeen decidedly belong either to the Dukes of Burgundy as Counts of 
 Flanders, Brabant, etc., or to the provinces of Holland. Among the five escutcheons 
 not included in the above list, the eagle displayed with two heads, was on the arms 
 of several towns in the Netherlands, and especially of Antwerp and Alost. The 
 Chevron, rather common in Flemish heraldry, forms the arms of the castles of 
 Bonlez and BongartU and of Harlekeka. ## The two chevrons were probably 
 intended for the arms of Hainaut.ff The lobster upright was the arms of Conde, 
 likewise in the dominions of the Duke of Burgundy. 
 
 When the Germans shall have brought forward such an array of heraldic proofs 
 in support of the argument of Mr. Chatto, we are ready to supply another and 
 more complete series of illustrations, which would be out of place in the present 
 introduction, although of some importance as establishing undoubtedly the Nether- 
 landish origin of the Book of Canticles. 
 
 It would, therefore, not be difficult for us to raise a new historical allegory, as 
 embodied in the Book of Canticles, upon the romantic adventures of Jacoba, who, 
 after having married the Duke of Gloucester while John of Brabant, her former 
 husband, was stili living, carried war into Flanders, and was ultimately obliged to 
 surrender her rights over the Netherlands to the Duke of Burgundy in 1436; but 
 we think it safer to accept this Block-Book for what it is really, namely, a simple 
 attempt to explain by pictures the mystica! sense which Giovanni Fidanza, better 
 known as S. Bonaventura, attaclied to the Song of Solomon. 
 
 * Dvchesne (Andr4), Histoire Genealogiqve des Dvcs de Bovrgongne. Paris, 1628. 4to., p. 64 b. 
 
 f Martin (Corneille), p 106. J By Leroy (Jacques), Lugduni Batav., 1699. Fol. 
 
 § Gravenhage, 1678. 16mo. 
 
 || Sce also the frontispiece of Barlandi Adriani, Ilollandige Comitum Historia et Icones. Lugd. Batav., 
 1584. 4to. 
 
 Leroy (Jacques), Le Grand Theatre Profane du Duche de Brabant. Lahaye, 1730. Fol. A, No. 6, 
 and C, No. 69. 
 
 ** Sanderi (Ant.), Flandria Illustrata. Ilagcc Comit. 1735. Fol. 
 tf Vredius (0)., Sigilla Comitum Flandria?, p. 312. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 11 
 
 We confess tliat tlie mystical ideas of S. Bonaventura were not of a nature to 
 tlirow mucli light on a subject which was in itself ratlier deficient in wliat our human 
 weakness is wont to call logic and philosophical metliod. But at this early time, 
 S. Bonaventura was an incontestable and uncontested authority; and it is in his 
 writings tliat we must look for the idea, and even for the details, of works like the 
 Biblia Pauperum and the Book of Canticles. Thus, in his Tractatus super Gaudiosd 
 Ambasiata per Archangelum Gabrielem,* we find applied to the Virgin Mary almost 
 all the lines of the Book of Canticles which are in the scrolls of the Block-Book. 
 Sotzmann has remarked, that as the first piate represented monks busy with 
 the works of karvest, the book had very likely originated in a Franciscan convent. 
 S. Bonaventura (b. 1221, d. 1274), Bishop of Albano, and Cardinal, having been 
 elected General of the Franciscans, the supposition of this Block-Book having been 
 produced in a Franciscan convent, may not be far from the truth, as the author 
 evidently gave it a shape in accordance with the ideas of the head of the mystic 
 school. 
 
 The Dutch inscription on the first piate of the first edition, which Heinecken 
 and some other bibliographers consider, though without reason, as a fraud of the 
 Dutch, is quite in accordance with S. Bonaventura’s explanation of the Song of 
 Songs : “Dit is die voersienicheit va Marie der mod’ godes Eu is gehete in laty 
 catic.” (This is the prefiguration of Mary, the mother of God, which is called in 
 Latin Canticum Canticorum .) 
 
 Nevertheless it must be acknowledged that, with the exception of the second 
 design, which is clearly applicable to the assumption of the Virgin Mary, the rest 
 of the engravings can scarcely bear the same applicati on. The whole book, on the 
 contrary, may fairly be considered as the mystical explanation of the love of Christ 
 for his Church, according to the Protestant tradition. But as it was engraved 
 almost a century before the Beformation, it may be assumed that the author 
 either adopted the version of S. Gregory, or, belonging to the Church of Rome (since 
 no other existed in Europe at the time), he was one of those ratlier numerous 
 dissenters who preceded Luther. 
 
 III. 
 
 The earliest book in which we find not only an account, but also a fac-simile 
 of the first page of the present Block-Book, is a very curious periodical publi- 
 cation printed at Vienna,f of which the British Museum possesses a copy in three 
 parts, extending over the months of January, February, and Marcii, 1727. After 
 a rather extensive review of the Biblm Pauperum (bound up with the Book of 
 Canticles, found by the author in the library of Count Pertusati, and which now 
 
 * Augsburg Ant. Sorg., 1476. Fol. 
 f Das Merkwiirdige Wien, p. 110. Wien, 1727. 4to. 
 
 D 
 
12 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 forms a part of the Libreria di Brera, in Milan), the Song of Songs is deseribed in 
 the folio wing terms: “ Auf dieses Werck folgte ein knrzer Inhalt des hohen Liedes 
 Salomonis, welcher das andere Buch constituiret desjenigen raren Monumenti , so 
 zu Harlem auf den Rath-Hause so sorgfaltig verwahret wird, und um das Jalir 
 Christi 1430 gedruckt seyn soll. # Dieses bestand aus 16 Blattera nnd schien ganz 
 zu seyn. Die Figuren (so in Holtz samt den text geschnitten) waren nicht illunii- 
 niret, und war die Einrichtung also beschaffen, wie aus Figur viii zu ersehen ist.” 
 
 This fig. vm, engraved on copper-plate, shews the first page of the book without 
 the Dutch inscription, and with the word viro instead of vino. 
 
 Seizf assigns the printing of the Cantica Canticorum, by Lawrence Coster, to the 
 year 1433, immediately after the production of the Biblia Pauperum, ascribed to 
 1432, and wliich he names (i Historias aliquas Veteris et Novi Testamenti” In the 
 book of Seiz is to be found an engraving of the house of Lawrence Coster at 
 Harlem (p. 46), which is a perfect specimen of the architectural representations 
 forming the background of several designs in the Book of Canticles. 
 
 Meerman, in his Conspectus Originum Typographicarum (1761, 8vo., p. 74), 
 places the Book of Canticles first among the Block-Books printed in Belgium, and 
 ascribed to Lawrence Coster: “Belgio debentur, 1 , Historia seu Providentia Virginis 
 Mariae ex Cantico Canticorum, variis figuris comprehensa, quae in Curia Harlemensi 
 custoditur, et Belgico titulo primae tabellae inciso conspicua est: Dit is die voersie- 
 nicheit vd Marie der mod’ Goedes,” etc. 
 
 In his Origines Typographicae,% Meerman inserts the following description of 
 the Book of Canticles :—“ § v. Huic operi succedat historia seu providentia Virginis 
 Marice ex Cantico Canticorum iconice exhibita , quae in Curia Harlemensi asservatur, 
 et cum duobus libris mox recensendis per Imius urbis proceres ab ipsius Laurentii 
 posteritate emta fuit. Hoc opus sedecim viditur constitisse foliis (ut colligere est 
 ex alia editione ad hanc nostram facta) quorum tamen novem modo in exemplo 
 Harlemensi residua sunt. Singula duas figuras exhibent sub se, distantia 2 vel 
 2a- linearum, collocatas, et 4 poli., 8 lin. longitudine, 7 poli, latitudine plerumque 
 adaequantes. Cuivis inserti sunt breves e Cantico Versiculi, qui ex ore personarum 
 interlocutorum procedunt. Primo folio superne appositus, ipsique figurae, eodem 
 quo reliqua charactere, inclusus est veteri lingua Belgica titulus : unde manifestum 
 est cum librum Belgio lucem debere, quam certe non adspexit post adventum 
 demum Theod. Martini et sociorum, adeoque post a. 1472 nam in illius epochae libris 
 figurae ab utraque parte, in nostro opere ab una impressae sunt, in illis adhibitum 
 atramenti genus oleosum ad figuras aeque ac orationem, in hoc perquam pallidum 
 et aqua dilutum, ut delineationes calamo factas exprimerent, quibus certe non vidi 
 ullas figuras vetustas magis similes ; profectae enim hae sunt, quod ad delinea- 
 
 * Memoires de Litterature. Tom. i, Part II, art. 10, p. 398. Lahaye, 1716. 8vo. 
 f Annus Tertius Secularis Inventee Artis Typographicse, p. 156. Harlem, 1743. 8vo. 
 7 Hagse Comitum, 1765. 4to. Vol. i, p. 228. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 13 
 
 tionem et sculpturam, ab elegante manu, quam tamen eandem fuisse, quoe speculo 
 inserviit, neque affirmare neque negare ausim; at de impressore, sive hic ipse fuerit 
 Laurentius, ut suspicor, sive eius successores, ex antedictis satis iam constat. 
 
 “ Ceterum hoc opus in Belgio excusum alibi postea, et verosimiliter in Germania, 
 novis tabulis repetitum fuit, prout testatur exemplum a literatissimo Verdussenio 
 usibus meis concessum, quod elegantis operis deforme instar repraesentat, ut 
 instituta utriusque comparatio me docuit: imitari quippe tabulas Harlemenses 
 voluerunt novi artifices, retenta ubique eadem corporum proportione, singularum- 
 que figurarum dispositione (a qua non nisi tribus quatuorve locis recesserunt); at 
 infeliciter quod ad exsecutionem in hac palaestra sese versatos ostendunt quum et 
 ductus figurarum literarumque hic perquam rudes sint, et atramentum nigrum 
 sordideque adhibitum, denique tota impressio ipsaque etiam charta illi non absimilis, 
 qua figurae cantilenarum ad pueritiam oblectandam hodie etiam excuduntur. Inde 
 porro haec editio statim a priore discerni potest, et quod nullus in fronte operis 
 adsit titulus, et quod nova splialmata in intermixas sententias irrepserint. Illa 
 vero omnia indicia quum gerat quoque exemplum bibliothecae Bodleianae, item que 
 alterum ili. Comitis Pertusati consequens est, haec duo eiusdem esse cum Antverpi- 
 ensi editione/' 
 
 In order not to interrupt tliis account of our Block-Book, we purposely omitted 
 the various notes in which Heinecken has decipliered and copied the lieadings of 
 the inscriptions on each page, and reproduced them in the same order. In one of 
 these notes is the Dutch inscription which Meerman had rather indifferently 
 engraved (tab. ix), and which is not better reproduced in Dr. Falkensteirfis 
 Gescliiclite der Bachdruckerkunst . 
 
 In another note, Meerman indicates the signs by which the various editions 
 may be recognized: “ Scilicet fol. 9 (xi—1), quod in exemplo Harlemensi ordine 
 septimum est, in parte superiori hic numeravi sedecim arbores; quum in exemplari 
 Verdusseniano tantum extent novem, et decimae, utpote per extremum figurae 
 marginem absconditae, pars. Fol. 12 (vm—1) quod in libro Harlemensi quartum 
 locum occupat, in parte superiori illic conspicitur caper cum tribus ovibus, quum in 
 Antverpiensi additi capro duo tantum oves sint. Fol. 14 (xiv—1) quod Harlemi 
 nonum est, in parte superiori numeravi in lecto sparsas Yl\ rosas, at in exemplo 
 Verdusseniano tantum 14, in parte inferiori Harlemi 17 rosas, Antverpiae 16. 
 
 Meerman adds further, about the mistakes committed by the imitators of the 
 original Block-Book: “Nempe fol. 1 in parte superiori Harlemi recte legitur: 
 Osculet* me osculo oris sui qd meliora sunt ubera tua vino/ verum exemplar Ver- 
 dussenianum pro vino male exhibet viro, qui error etiam deprehenditur in exemplo 
 Comitis Pertusati. Fol. 10 (xn—2) quod Harlemi octavo loco occurrit, in figura 
 inferiore legitur: Facicul 3 * mirre (id est fasciculus mirrhae )/ verum Antverpiense 
 vitiose exhibet faricut mirre!’ 
 
 * Leipzig, 1840. 4to. P. 31. 
 
14 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 It is right to remark here that tlie idea suggested by Dibdin # about the 
 engraving of the Book of Canticles on a metallic substance, had been already 
 emitted by Seri verius in his Laurecranz-\ (pp. 102 and 103), and mentioned by 
 Meerman in his Origines Typographicce (p. 107), where he says: “Hae tabellae num 
 ex ligno an vero stanno fabricatae fuerint, dubius haesit Scriverius, in hanc tamen 
 sententiam deinde proclivior/' In making tliis supposition, Scriverius was no doubt 
 prompted by his desire to find for Lawrence Coster a transition between wood- 
 engraving and the founding of moveable metallic types, by which alone printing 
 became a most valuable invention; whilst xylography was but a step to it, and had 
 otherwise no great importance. 
 
 The explanation of the subjects as given by Dr. Falkenstein;): is rather singular, 
 and deserves to be mentioned here: “ Dieses Product, welches die Geschiclite der 
 Jungfrau Maria aus dem hohen Liede gezogen darstellt, und welches Heinecken, ‘le 
 plus gothique de tous les autres' nennt, hat keinen weitern Text, ais die schon in 
 der Urzeit der christlichen Kirche beliebten Allegorien in Beziehung auf das 
 Yerhaltniss des f Braiitigams' Christi zur ‘ Braut / d.i. der Jungfrau Maria ais 
 Sinnbild der Christlichen Kirche die in lateinischen Versen auf Spruchzeddeln 
 angebracht sind, welche theils die Kdpfe der Personen umgeben, theils aus ihrem 
 Munde oder auch aus ihren Hdnden hervorgehen.” 
 
 It is very doubtful whether Dr. Falkenstein ever saw a copy of this Block-Book; 
 otherwise he could not have said that the inscriptions on the scrolls are in 
 “ lateinischen Versen”, since they are merely copied from the prose text of the 
 Vulgate; nor could he have stated that the scrolls are partly going out of the 
 mouth of the persons, and partly out of tlieir hands. This may truly be said of 
 the German (Latin) edition of the Biblia Pauperum, but in no case of the Book of 
 Canticles. 
 
 The fac-simile of the Dutch inscription which Dr. Falkenstein gives, p. 31, is 
 evidently copied after Meermaifs fac-simile, which, very indifferently exeeuted, by 
 no means conveys a true idea of the original. 
 
 The political meaning attached by Mr. Chatto to the introduction of shields with 
 arms, in two of the engravings of the Book of Canticles,—afterwards so singularly 
 developed by Mr. Sotlieby,—appears to Dr. Falkenstein a gratuitous assumption, 
 wlicn he says: “Hochst sonderbare Weise glaubt der neueste Forscher im Fache 
 der Ilolzschneidekunst John Jackson in seinem Treatise on Wood-Engraving, 
 London, 1839, gr. 8vo., p. 95, wahrscheinlich durch Blatt 19 [xm—1] (wo man die 
 Bilder eines Papstes, Bischofs, und zweier Cardinale mit ihren Wappen-schildern 
 crblickt) verleitet, es mit den Streitigkeiten zwischen Papst Eugen IV und dem 
 Concilium zu Basel 1439, in Zusammenhang bringen zu konnen, welches Amadeus 
 von Savoyen, Felix V, ais Gegenpapst erwahlte.” 
 
 * Bibliotheca Spenccriana. f Haarlem, 1628. 4to. 
 
 Geschichtc der Buchdruckerkunst. Leipzig, 1840. 4to. 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 15 
 
 IV. 
 
 The Book of Canticles consists of thirty-two engravings printed two on each 
 page; but as tliey are printed on one side only, each printed side facing one 
 another, as in all the early Block-Books, the whole book contains only sixteen 
 pages folio, which are without mark or signature. As the subjects cannot be 
 reduced to any chronological or logical order, and the inscriptions of the scrolls are 
 arbitrarily taken, as it would seem, frorn the several chapters of the Song of 
 Solomon, the plates are seldom to be found in the same order in the various 
 copies now extant in public or private libraries. 
 
 Ottley* was the first to suggest the idea that the book had been engraved on 
 eight blocks only: “ Upon first viewing tliis work, I was of opinion that each of the 
 clesigns contained in it was engraved upon a separate block of wood; but upon a 
 more careful examination, I have discovered that the contents of each two pages—- 
 that is, four subjects—were engraved on the same block. The number of wooden 
 blocks, therefore, from which the whole was printed, was only eight. This is proved 
 in the first two pages of the copy before me, wliere, near the bottom of the two 
 upper subjects, the block appears to have been broken in two, in a horizontal 
 direction, after it was engraved, and joined togetlier again, altliough not with such 
 exactness but that the traces of the operation clearly shew themselves. The traces 
 of a similar accident are stili more apparent in the last block containing the Nos. 29, 
 30, 31, 32. The whole work was therefore printed on eight sheets of paper, from 
 the same number of engraved blocks, the first four subjects being printed from the 
 same block upon the same sheet,—and so on with the rest; and, indeed, in Lord 
 Spencer's copy, each sheet being mounted upon a guard, distinctly shows itself 
 entire.” 
 
 In confirmation of this ingenious observation of Ottley, some facts may be added, 
 derived from the comparison of three copies of the book which passed through our 
 liands. The mark of the paper in the Scriverius copy, now in the British Museum, 
 is an unicorn in filigrane, placed obliquely to the horizontal water-lines, so that the 
 liorn is on a line corresponding generally with the top right hand corner of the page, 
 while the tail is on the same line, but corresponding to the bottom left hand corner, 
 when seen looking through the woodcuts of the right hand page. This mark exists 
 only on eight pages, the other half of the book having no filigrane work at all. The 
 printer, holding a folio sheet of paper, placed it on each block, so that generally the 
 mark corresponds to each second or right hand page. Thus, in the Scriverius 
 copy, the lst, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th blocks, forming pages 1-2, 7-8, 9-10,11-12,13-14, 
 shew the unicorn, in pages 2, 8, 10, 12, and 14, head upwards, on the oblique line 
 which we have just indicated. 
 
 * Origin of Engraving. London, 1816. 4to. Yol. i, p. 142. 
 
 E 
 
16 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 On tlie contrary, when the workman printed the 2nd, 3rd, and 8th blocks, 
 forming pages 3-4, 5-6, and 15-16, he turned his folio sheet of paper upwards; the 
 resuit of which was, the unicorn placed head downwards on the left hand or first 
 page of eacli block. Thus pages 3, 5, and 15, shew the unicorn head and back 
 downwards, on a line from below the left hand, to the upper right hand corner of 
 these pages; while pages 4, 6, and 16, have no paper-mark. 
 
 Consequently we see no reason to adopt, in the foliowing description of the 
 book, any other order than that indicated by Ottley, and followed by the binder of 
 the Scriverius copy. When we refer to the Cracherode and Bodleian copies, we 
 sliall give, in a parenthesis, the corresponding number of the page : 
 
 I. —Page I. The first page of the book, headed with the Dutch inscription, “Dit 
 is die voersienicheit va Marie der mod' godes Eu is gehete in laty Catic,” shews the 
 bride, followed by her two companions, going out of the town, saying “ Osculetur ,” 
 etc., led by the bridegroom into his garden {“veni in hortum ,” etc.), where several 
 monks are making the harvest, mowing, thrashing, grinding, binding corn, etc. 
 The gate of the garden is of an English, or rather Low Country, construction,— 
 never seen in Germany nor in German engravings; therefore this gate, as well as 
 the spade in the hands of Christ in the 31 st page of the Biblia Pauperum, may 
 be considered as an indication of the Dutch or Flemish origin of the Block-Books 
 so disputed by Heinecken and other German bibliographers. 
 
 I. —2. The second subject is certainly the assumption of the Virgin in a flame 
 of glory very much like that to be seen in the front of the Duomo d’Orvieto. 
 Three of the companions of the bride are standing on the left hand, saying “ Caput 
 tuum ut Carmelus” etc., while a fourth one stands alone on the right hand side. 
 The bride taken to heaven says, “Nigra sum” etc. This application of the Book of 
 Canticles to the history of the Virgin, although not in accordance with the rest of 
 the Block-Books, is strictly conformable to the inscription at the head of the page, 
 and to the mystical ideas propagated by S. Bonaventura. 
 
 II. —1. The bride, with two foliowers, gives her hand to the bridegroom, saying 
 “Tralie me”, when he replies, “Sonet vox tua.” The landscape is a wilderness 
 lying between two mountains. Flowers are strewn about on the foreground. 
 
 II. —2. The bride, sitting with her two companions, greets the bridegroom by, 
 “En dilectus meus” etc. A shrub, on which a do ve has alighted, stands between 
 her and her bridegroom, who sings the praises of his bride, “ Quam pulchra es,” etc. 
 
 III. —1. The bride is going out of the town with three followers, who ask her, 
 “Qualis est dilectus tuus” etc.; to which slie replies, “Dilectus meus candidus.” In 
 the background is a windmill,—wanting in the second and third editions,—and a 
 strong castle, separated from the foreground by a rocky waste. 
 
 III.—2. The bride is asleep on the lap of the bridegroom, who says, “Adjuro 
 vos ... ne suscitetis dilectam meam’’ etc. Outside, kneeling, are the three followers 
 of the bride, or daughters of Jerusalem. In the background are a stag and two roes, 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 17 
 
 to convey a pictorial illustration of the words, “adjuro vos.. .per capreas, cervosque 
 camporum” 
 
 IV.—1. The bridegroom, bride, and three followers, are sitting; the two former 
 under a vine arbour. The bridegroom says, “Erunt verba” (a mistake of the engraver 
 for libera) “sicut botri vinee”; and the bride, clasping a cluster of grapes to her 
 bosom, replies, “Botrus cypri dilectus meus,” etc. 
 
 IY.—2. The bride is in an enclosed garden with a fountain. The machicolated 
 walls of the garden are defended by four angels holding shields with the arms of 
 the Holy Roman Empire (double-headed eagle),—the rose barbed and seeded on a 
 chief indented; the Chevron; the cross argent. An angel is locking with a key the 
 door of the garden. The bridegroom, outside of the garden walls, says, “Hortus 
 conclusus soror mea,” etc.; the angels on the wall say, “Fons hortorum etc.; and 
 the bride says, “Burge aquilo ” 
 
 Y.—1. One of the most graceful designs of the work, in whicli the bridegroom, 
 holding a lily flower, presents it to the bride, who is accompanied by her three 
 followers. The two scrolls appear to belong to the bride,— “Dilectus meus,” and 
 “Ego flos campi.” A lily flower piant, growing between the two chief personages, 
 is executed by the engraver in a style much superior to the designs of the Biblia 
 Pauperum, and even of the Speculum Humance Salvationis. 
 
 Y.—2. The bride, resting on the lap of the bridegroom, in an apartment sur- 
 rounded by a sort of divan, says, “Leva ejus sub capite meo”... while her three 
 followers standing on the left hand, reply, “Pulchre sunt gene tue”... 
 
 VI.—1. The bride in a garden partly enclosed b}^ a wattle fenee, at the back 
 of a country house, gathers fruits, and presents them in a basket, saying to the 
 bridegroom, “ Omnia nova et vetera servavi tibi.” The bridegroom, about to enter 
 the garden, replies, “Que habitas in hortis”... 
 
 YI.—2. The bride lying in a bed, on the coverlid of which are scattered roses, 
 says to her three companions, “Stipate me malis”.. . Two of these companions, 
 holding each a lamp,—not, as Mr. Sotheby affirms, “ a patera with the consecrated 
 wafer,”—stand at the bedside, one saying: “Quo abijt dilectus tuus”...) the other, 
 “Quid faciemus sorori nostree the third bridesmaid hastens towards the door, 
 saying, “Si ostium est”... This door is shut, and above the battlements are two 
 females,—one holding a sword and a shield bearing the “ lion rampant” of Flanders, 
 while the other directs a bent bow on some unknown enemy. We cannot admit, as 
 Mr. Sotheby assumes, that the arrow is directed against the bride herself; since the 
 chamber in which the bride is lying, being open only by a pictorial supposition, the 
 female archer placed outside cannot be considered as having a view of the apart¬ 
 ment, of which she is more probably there to defend the entrance. 
 
 The bridegroom, painted on a sort of seal borne in the air by four angels, says: 
 “ Vulnerasti cor meum soror mea”... Beneath this apparition, by a conventional 
 ubiquity to be found in the early engravings, particularly in those of Mich. Wohlge- 
 
18 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 rnuth, the bride is represented walking towards the door of her own house, saying, 
 
 “Dura ut infernus emutatio”... 
 
 VII.—1. The bridegroom saying “Descendi in liortum meum”. .. meets the bride 
 folio wed by her two companions, in a garden enclosed by a wattle fenee, and where 
 are growing five large trees bearing fruits. The bride says, “ Talis est dilectus meus!’ 
 
 VII. —2. The bridegroom, outside of the bride’s honse, says, “Aperi mihi soror 
 mea quia caput meum plenum est rore.” The bride in her bedroom, attended by 
 her tliree companions, is kneeling on her bed, and abont to draw the bolt of the 
 door: “Pessulum ostii mei aperiam.” 
 
 VIII. —1. Here the scrolls are inverted, the words in the month of the bride 
 being over the head of the bridegroom, and vice versu. The bride, attended by two 
 followers, is walking in a wilderness, and addressing the bridegroom, who liolds a 
 sheplierd’s hook, she says, “Indica mihi quem diligit anima mea”; to which the 
 bridegroom replies, “Si ignoras te o pulchra inter mulieres”.. . Between them, in 
 the background, are a goat and three sheep (two only are in the second and third 
 editions). 
 
 VIII. —2. The bride is sitting in a chamber between two of her followers 
 who are standing. She says, “Anima mea liquefacta est.” One of her companions 
 replies, “Statura tua assimilata est palme.” 
 
 IX. —1. The bride meets the bridegroom going ont of his honse, and says to 
 him, “Quis mihi det fratrem meum” • when he replies, “Ecce quam pulchra es!’ 
 
 IX. —2. In an interior, on the left, the bridegroom and the bride are sitting on 
 a richly ornamented sofa. He offers to her a chalice, over which the holy dove is 
 fluttering. She says, “Favus distillans labia tua!’ On the right hand her three 
 companions, who are standing, say, “ Comedi favum cum meile meo.” Before the 
 latter is a cask, from which an angel kneeling is abont to draw some wine in a 
 Flemish jng. 
 
 X. —1. In an interior, with a large open fireplace on the right hand, and a 
 cnpboard loaded with dishes, frnit-basket, etc., the bride looks with commiseration 
 on two mendicants (a male and female) kneeling behind her. One of her attendants 
 holds a lamp, which Mr. Sotheby again mistakes for "a patera containing the 
 consecrated wafer”; while the other spills inadvertently on the floor water from a 
 jng which she holds in her left hand. The female mendicant says, “Si dederit 
 homo”.. .; the male (a friar), “Lampades ejus!’ One of the followers replies, “Aquce 
 multas’... We cannot see how Mr. Sotheby conld construe this design as the 
 Church administering the communion to the monk and nun kneeling on the floor. 
 The allegorical intention is very clearly explained by the last scroll, “Aquae multae 
 non potuerunt extinguere caritatem”; as the lamps fully indicate in the second 
 scroll, “Lampades ejus sicut lampades ignis atque flammarum.” 
 
 X.—2. The bride carried into the air, over a vale between two rocky mountains, 
 by the bridegroom under the form of an eagle crowned with the nimbus, reminds us 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 19 
 
 involuntarily of the pagan myth of Ganimedes. On tlie left liand are two angels, 
 bearing, like mostr of tlie angels in the Book of Canticles, a small cross on the fore- 
 head,—a peculiarity wliich is likewise to be found in the French illustrations of 
 Tineent de Beauvais. # The two angels standing in the foreground say, “ Quce est 
 ista quce ascendit de deserto”; while in the foreground of the mountain on the riglit 
 hand, the three companions of the bride, wlio are kneeling, reply, “Ista est speciosa 
 inter filias Jerusalem.” 
 
 XI.—1. The bride, preceded by her two followers, is walking towards Mount 
 Lebanon, when, perceiving the bridegroom going out of the city, and pointing to 
 liim she says, “Ego dilecto meo et ad me conversio illius .” The bridegroom calls 
 her, saying, “Revertere, revertere Sulamitis”... 
 
 XI. —2. The bride is going out of the city attended by her two followers, when 
 an angel, admiring her from the battlements of the door, says, “ Quam pulchri sunt 
 gressus tui” She points to Mount Calvary, where Christ is on the cross, and says, 
 “Vadam ad montem mirrhee!’ 
 
 XII. —1. On the left hand is a large mansion, from which the bride, attended 
 by her three bridesmaids, and leaning on the shoulder of the bridegroom, seems to 
 be walking towards a vine, over which an angel appears in a glory. The bride says, 
 “Dilecte mi egrediamur in agrum”. .the bridesmaids, “Mandragorae odorem 
 dederunt”; and the bridegroom, “ Videamus si floruit vinea ” 
 
 XII. —2. In an interior the bride, holding the cross on which Christ is 
 crucified, says, “Fasciculus mirrhee dilectus meus.” One of her followers enters the 
 room. A mountain witli a tree is visible through the opened door. 
 
 XIII. —1. On the left hand is a bedroom with the bride half reclining on the 
 bed, attended by her three followers. Over the battlements which surmount the 
 bedroom, are a pope, two cardina!s, and a bishop, each holding a naked sword in his 
 right hand, and a shield with coats of arms. The escutcheon of the pope bears a 
 single fleur-de-lys; the first Cardinal has a lion rampant; the second a rose; and 
 the bishop the cross keys, which were adopted by so many bishops at this time. 
 The bride says, “Surgam et circuibo civitatem.” 
 
 On the right hand a public place, and streets with houses very much like those 
 shewn at Harlem as the dwelling of Lawrence Coster. The bride, attended by 
 her three followers, is stripped of her veil by a knight on horseback; behind whom 
 is another knight, likewise on horseback, bearing a shield with a displayed eagle,— 
 which cannot mean the arms of the empire, since the eagle is single-headed. This 
 knight being much behind the former, it is doubtful whetlier he also is maltreating 
 the bride, or coming to avenge her. The bride says, “Percusserunt et vulnerave¬ 
 runt me”... 
 
 Both subjects are enclosed by the turreted walls of the city, which are running 
 from left to right in the foreground. 
 
 * Miroir Historial. 5 vols. Paris, Ant. Yerard, 1495-96. Fol. 
 
 F 
 
20 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 XIII. —2. The bridegroom sitting at the end of a table covered with a table- 
 cloth, in what appears to be the refectory of a convent, invites the bride and her 
 three followers to take the communion in both kinds. The bride is holding a 
 clialice, while three otlier chalices and as many consecrated wafers remain on the 
 table. The bridegroom says, “ Comedite amici et bibite et inebriamini carissimi” The 
 bride replies, “Guttur illius sicut vinum optimum” 
 
 XIV. —1. The bride on the threshold of her bedroom, her hand on the shoulder 
 of the bridegroom, invites him to enter the roorn, where are the three brides- 
 maids by the side of a bed covered with eighteen roses. “Tota pulchra es” 
 says the bridegroom; when the bride replies, “Tenui eum nec dimittam donec intro¬ 
 ducam in domum matris mece.” 
 
 XIV.—2. The bridegroom is introduced into the bedroom, and says, “Ecce 
 pulchra es amica mea” ... The bride replies, “Ecce tu pulcher es domine mi”. .. The 
 three followers are standing near the bed, on the coverlid of which are to be seen 
 seventeen roses. “Lectulus noster floridus!' 
 
 XV.—1. The bride is sitting at the foot of a machicolated tower, saying, “Ego 
 murus et ubera mea sicut turris”. .. Nine shields bearing coats of arms are hanging 
 from the walls of the tower. On the left an angel, standing, says, “Mille clypei 
 pendent ex ea” ... On the right hand another angel replies, “ Collum tuum sicut 
 turris!' The foreground is strewed with flowers. 
 
 XY.—2. The bridegroom is resting on the lap of the bride, in a bed covered 
 with flowers, the bolster of which is leaning against a castellated tower: “Ego 
 dormio sed cor meum vigilat” ... The bride replies, “En lectulum Salomonis sexaginta 
 fortes ambiunt omnes tenentes gladios” The bed, in fact, is surrounded by 
 armed men, by tlieir costume of various nations, some of whom hold shields with 
 coats of arms, such as, the first, a lion rampant; the second, a single fleur-de-lys; 
 the third, a chequered escutclieon; and the last, a rose barbed and seeded. 
 
 XVI.-—1. The bridegroom sitting in a chair, presents to the bride a sort of seal, 
 on which is engraved the Deity holding a cross on which Christ is crucified. He 
 says: “Pone me ut signaculum” ... The bride, kneeling before him, receives it 
 saying, “Fuge dilecte mi!' Her two followers are standing behind her. 
 
 XYI.—2. On the left hand is the bride sitting on Lebanon: “Species ejus 
 ut lybani”. .. Then again the bride on the foreground, attended by two followers, is 
 about to receive the crown which the bridegroom liolds in his hands, saying, “Veni 
 de lybano ... veni coronaberis!' This design has the greatest analogy with the last 
 design of the Biblia Pauperum. 
 
 Y. 
 
 The various editions of the Book of Canticles are perfectly distinet, and bear 
 numerous and unmistakable differences. Y r e have seen what trifling variations 
 are accepted by bibliographers as characteristic of new editions of the Biblia 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 21 
 
 Pauperum* Although several editions of this latter book were engraved in the 
 Netlierlands, besides tlie one engraved in Gerrnany by Wohlgemuth, the work of 
 the original engraver is so faithfully imitated in the reproductions, that, without 
 comparing a certain nnmber of copies, it is no easy matter to distinguish the copies 
 from the original. The blocks of the Biblia Pauperum having been at first printed 
 with the frotton, and then with a common press, it may be too easily inferred, from 
 the clotted appearance of some copies, that they differ from others taken from the 
 same blocks, but with perfectly ciear and distinet ontlines. 
 
 In the Book of Canticles we have not to deal with the same uncertainty : the 
 copies are bnt poor reproductions of the original, with the Dutch inscription, 
 which is thus described by Dr. Waagen:—“The compositions are generally well 
 invented, the motives speaking and even elevated, the expression often very refined, 
 the proportions slender, the drawing good, although the limbs are meagre, the 
 hands small and graceful, and the folds of the drapery conformable to style, 
 and only rarely defaced by sharp breaks. In all these instances, the influence of 
 Roger van der Weyden the elder is recognisable. A delicate feeling is visible in 
 the outlines; the exeeution is generally rendered with very fine strokes. I select a 
 few details for observation. The bridegroom in the upper part of p. 2 is an 
 especially noble figure; also, p. 6 below, the angel at the gate, with a remarkably 
 appropriate expression. I subscribe entirely to the opinion of MM. Ottley and 
 Sotzmann, who maintain this, with the Dutch text, to be the original, in opposition 
 to Heineken, who considers it a copy of the one with the Latin text.”f What Dr. 
 Waagen means here by Dutch text, is the Dutch inscription at the top of the first 
 page, although his last sentence may lead one to suppose that the text of the scrolls 
 would be Dutch in some editions, wliile this text is Latin in all the known copies 
 of the Book of Canticles. 
 
 Thus the Scriverius cop}^ in the British Museum, of which the present fac-simile 
 is a reproduction, being undoubtedly the first edition, it remains to be seen in what 
 order may be placed the Cracherode copy, also in the British Museum, and the 
 copy in the Bodleian library, Oxford. Mr. Sotheby, in his Principia Typographica , 
 vol. iii, p. 168, and index to vol. i, considers the Cracherode copy as the second 
 edition, and the Bodleian as the third; but vol. i, p. 78, he places the Bodleian 
 second and the Cracherode third. After a careful examination of the tliree copies, 
 we think that the Bodleian ought to be regarded as the second, because it differs 
 less from the first; while the Cracherode copy appears to be a reproduction from 
 the second, rather than from the first edition. The following comparison of the 
 three copies will, perhaps, enable the amateur to form a correct opinion on the 
 subject:— 
 
 * See Biblia Pauperum, reproduced in fac-simile from one of tbe copies in the British Museum, with an 
 Historical and Biographical Introduction. London, 1859. 4to. 
 
 t Treasures of Art in Great Britain. London, 8vo., 1857, p. 306. 
 
22 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. EDITION. 
 
 SCRIVERIUS COPY IN THE 
 BRITISH MUSEUM. 
 
 I.—Page 1. 
 
 2. Mesmi mirrd instead of messui 
 myrrham. 
 
 Breakage extending over this page 
 and the second, and foliovving the 
 top line of the gate in the first design. 
 2 . 
 
 2. TaVnaclu instead of tabernacula 
 as in the Vulgate. PelV for 
 pelles* 
 
 II.—1. 
 
 1 . Odore instead of odorem ; the 
 
 usual stroke over the e for m 
 being omitted. 
 
 2. Fati es instead of facies. 
 
 Breakage across this page and the 
 
 first, extending here from the bottom 
 fold of the first to that of the second 
 scroll. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. OsVi for ocidi. 
 
 III.—1. 
 
 2. Milibus instead of millibus. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . Aduiro for adjuro; the dot on 
 the i being misplaced on the 
 second stroke of the u. Ter- 
 vosq} instead of cervosque. Sus- 
 litetis instead of suscitetis. 
 
 IV.—1. 
 
 1 . Erut verba instead of ubera. 
 
 II. EDITION. 
 
 COPY IN THE BODLEIAN LIBRARY 
 (OXFORD). 
 
 I.—Page 1. 
 
 No Dutch inscription. 
 
 1 . Viro instead of vino. 
 
 2. Mesiin instead of messui. 
 
 No breakage of the block. In the 
 garden house a book is to be seen 
 on a desk. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. ih:Tm instead of ihrVm. Tab’’- 
 naclu for tabernacula. 
 
 II.—1. 
 
 1 . Turrem ’ instead of curremus. 
 
 2. Faties instead of facies. 
 
 No breakage. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2 . itriset’ instead of intrinsecus. 
 
 Two grass tufts instead of one, 
 and the lily flower under the second 
 scroll. 
 
 III. —1. 
 
 No windmill in the background. 
 2. Caudidus instead of candidus. 
 
 A single tree instead of two in 
 the background above the left hand 
 of the bride. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . Capitas instead of capreas. Ter- 
 vosq 3 instead of cervosque. 
 
 Eour trees instead of six, with a 
 double one. 
 
 IV. —1. 
 
 1 . Verba for ubera. Punrcorum 
 instead of punicorum. 
 
 III. EDITION. 
 
 CRACHERODE COPY IN THE BRITISH 
 MUSEUM. 
 
 I.—Page 1. 
 
 No Dutch inscription. 
 
 1 . Viro instead of vino. 
 
 2. Mesiin instead of messui. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . ih:Vm for ihrVm. 
 
 2. TabvacVu for tabernacula. 
 
 II.—1. 
 
 1 . Turrem* instead of curremus. 
 
 2. Faties instead of facies. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. itriset ’ instead of intrinsecus. 
 
 III.—1. 
 
 No windmill in the background, 
 as in the first edition. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . Capitas instead of capreas. Ter- 
 vosq 3 instead of cervosque. Sus¬ 
 citetis as in the Vulgate. 
 
 Four trees instead of six. 
 
 IV.—1. 
 
 1 . Verba for ubera. Punrcorum for 
 punicorum ; the second n being 
 badly formed, as in the second 
 edition. 
 
 * In this abbreviation we see an example of the contraction used in some old engravings, where the word 
 “ zwott” being written for “ zwollis” or zwollcnsis”, so many iconographers created an engraver with the 
 awkward name of Zwott. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 23 
 
 I. EDITION. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Singnatus instead of signatus. 
 
 2 . Viuecium insteacl of viventium. 
 
 3. Acuulo instead of aquilo. Fluet 
 
 instead of fluant. 
 
 V.—1. 
 
 1. Ego ille for Ego illi. Pasitur for 
 
 pascitur. 
 
 2. Couallim for convallium. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Monnlia instead of monilia. 
 
 In the second scroll a breakage 
 under amplexabitur. 
 
 VI. —1. 
 
 Breakage in the superior part of 
 the right hand border. 
 
 2 . 
 
 3. Facie for faciemus. 
 
 5. Mure ’ instead of murus. 
 
 T. Dur’ instead of dura. 
 
 VII. —1. 
 
 1. Floruisset,as in the Vulgate ; but 
 the plural vinee would have re- 
 quired floruissent. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. Hostij for ostii. Aperia, exspo¬ 
 lia, in the future tense ; whilst 
 in the Vulgate it is aperui, ex- 
 p>oliavi. 
 
 II. EDITION. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Orcus instead of ortus. Singna¬ 
 
 tus instead of signatus. 
 
 2. Acuulo instead of aquilo, 
 
 i.e. perfla, as in the first edition. 
 No tree in the background behind 
 the bridegroom. 
 
 V.— 1. (7th.)* 
 
 1. Ille instead of illi. Pasitur in¬ 
 
 stead of pascitur. 
 
 2. Covallim instead of convallium. 
 Under the first scroll a tuft of 
 
 grass instead of a stone. On the fore¬ 
 ground, under the lily piant, aflower, 
 as in the first edition. Tuft of grass 
 instead of a flower in the foreground 
 under the rock-work. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Monnlia instead of monilia. 
 
 VI.— 1 . (8th.) 
 
 At the feet of the bridegroom a 
 tuft of grass instead of a flower. 
 
 2 . 
 
 5. Mure ’ instead of murus. Edifi- 
 cumis instead of edificamus. 
 
 7. Enudaeio instead of emulatio. 
 
 VII.—1. (1 Itii.) 
 
 1. Floruisset instead of floruisset. 
 
 No wattle fenee around the gar- 
 den ; the two companions of the 
 bride are wanting ; two large trees 
 instead of five; only one flower under 
 the first scroll,—ali the others re- 
 placed by rough delineations of four- 
 teen tufts of grass. 
 
 2 . 
 
 The two flowers before and after 
 the bridegroom replaced by shadings 
 and a tuft of grass. A small window 
 in the shaft of the right hand pillar 
 or small tower. 
 
 The order of the pages in the Bodleian and Cracherode copies bein 
 c °py> ve a( I ( I the number of each page as it occurs in the two copies. 
 
 III. EDITION. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Orcus instead of ortus. Singna¬ 
 
 tus instead of signatus. 
 
 2. Acuulo instead of aquilo. Pfla 
 
 instead oipfla. 
 
 No tree in the background. 
 
 V.— 1. (7th.) 
 
 1. Ille instead of illi. Pasitur in¬ 
 stead of pa scitur. 
 
 2. Couallim instead of convallium. 
 A tuft of grass in the foreground, 
 under the lily, instead of a flower, 
 as in the two other editions. 
 
 9 
 
 <v. 
 
 1. Monnlia instead of monilia. 
 
 VI.— 1. (8th.) 
 
 The same. 
 
 2 . 
 
 5. Mure ’ instead of murus , Edifi- 
 cumis instead of edificamus. 
 
 7. Emulaeio instead of emidatio. 
 
 VII.— 1. (13th.) 
 
 No garden enclosure; the two 
 companions of the bride wanting ; 
 two large trees instead of five. 
 Quite a barbarous imitation of the 
 first edition. 
 
 The same. 
 
 not the same as in the Scriverius 
 
 G 
 
24 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. EDITION. 
 
 VIII.—1. 
 
 1. Pastas insteacl of pascas. Et’e 
 
 for etc. 
 
 Three sheep and a goat between 
 the bride and the bridegroom. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. Gratura instead of statura. As¬ 
 
 simulata instead of assimilata. 
 
 IX.—1. 
 
 1. Uidet for m l det. The sign of the 
 abbreviation m i for mihi has 
 been mistaken by the engraver 
 for ui. 
 
 X.—1. 
 
 1. Nichil for nihil. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Enixa instead of innixa. 
 
 XI.—1. 
 
 1. Ecce instead of ego. 
 
 2. Sunamitis instead of Sulamitis. 
 Left hand perpendicular border 
 
 broken. 
 
 o 
 
 1. Pulchre gressus tue instead of 
 
 pulchri gressus tui. Calciamef 
 instead of calceamentis. 
 
 2. Tolle instead of collem. 
 
 XII. 
 
 II. EDITION. 
 
 VIII. -1. (12th.) 
 
 1. Paslas instead of pascas. 
 
 A goat and two sheep only. Five 
 trees instead of three. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. Gratura instead of statura. Assi¬ 
 
 mulata instead of assimilata. 
 
 IX. — 1. (5th.) 
 
 1. Mdet for mihi det. Ivenia for 
 inveniam. 
 
 2 . 
 
 Drapery of the dress of the bride¬ 
 groom about the same as in the first 
 edition. 
 
 X. —1. (6th.) 
 
 The same. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Enixa instead of innixa. Dilectu 
 
 instead of dilectum. 
 
 Eight trees instead of nine. Fore- 
 ground the same as in the first edi¬ 
 tion. 
 
 XI. —1. (9th.) 
 
 2. Sunamitis instead of Sulamitis. 
 Nine trees instead of fifteen, with 
 
 two double ones. Tuft of grass in¬ 
 stead of a flower behind the bride. 
 2 . 
 
 1. Pulchre tue , as in the first edi¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 2. Tolle instead of collem. 
 
 This page is nearly an inch nar- 
 rower than in the first edition. The 
 five trees on a perpendicular line at 
 the left are wanting in the first de- 
 sign ; while one wing only of the 
 angel,and the door of the tower alone, 
 are to be seen in the second design. 
 
 XII.— 1. (IOth.) 
 
 No round aperture in the wall on 
 the left hand. No chimney stacks 
 on the roof of the right hand tower. 
 Grass instead of a stone behind the 
 bride. 
 
 III. EDITION. 
 
 VIII.— 1. (12th.) 
 
 1. Pastas instead of pascas. 
 
 A goat and two sheep only. Five 
 trees instead of three. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. Gratura instead of statura. As¬ 
 
 simulata instead of assimilata. 
 
 IX. — 1. (5th.) 
 
 1. Mdet instead of mihi det. Ive¬ 
 nia instead of inveniam. 
 
 2 . 
 
 The folds of the dress of the bride¬ 
 groom very rude and uncouth. 
 
 X. —1. (6th.) 
 
 The same. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Enixa instead of innixa. Dilectu 
 instead of dilectum. 
 
 Seven trees instead of nine. Fore- 
 ground not the same as in the two 
 other editions. 
 
 XI. —I. (9th.) 
 
 The same. Ten trees instead of 
 fifteen. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. The same. 
 
 2. Tolle instead of collem. 
 
 Eight trees instead of eleven. 
 
 XII.—1. (IOth.) 
 The same. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. EDITION. 
 
 1. FcicicuV instead of fasciculus. 
 
 The u of commorabitur is broken. 
 
 XIII.—1. 
 
 2. P’cusserut instead of percusse¬ 
 
 runt. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Bibite et tu inebrianti instead of 
 
 bibite et inebriamini. The in- 
 troductionof this tu in the scroll 
 cannot be accounted for. 
 
 2. Potadu instead of potadu, i.e., 
 
 potandum. 
 
 Bottom line of the border broken 
 under the right hand pillar. 
 
 XIV. —1. 
 
 Left hand border broken at the 
 top. The curtain over the bottom 
 of the bed is folded up like a ham- 
 mock. Seventeen roses are on the 
 bed itself. 
 
 2 . 
 
 2. Diie mi, i.e., domine mi, instead 
 of dilecte mi. 
 
 The front curtain of the bed is 
 folded up as in the first design. 
 Eighteen roses are on the bed. 
 
 XV. —1. 
 
 1. Almost foxiu instead of forciit, 
 
 i.e. fortium. 
 
 2. Tris instead of tPis, i.e. turris. 
 Breakage across this page and the 
 
 following, extending from the bot¬ 
 tom of the flower, and under the 
 word mille of the first scroll, to the 
 tuft of grass on the right hand of the 
 third scroll. 
 
 II. EDITION. 
 
 2 . 
 
 FaricuV instead of facicuV, i.e.fas- 
 cicidus. 
 
 XIII.—1. 
 
 The round towers in the fore- 
 ground have no barbacans. The 
 head of the horse of the knight with 
 the shield bearing an eagle is want- 
 ing, and is replaced by the folds of 
 his cloak. 
 
 2 . 
 
 No fleur-de-lys carved round the 
 room under the Windows. Right 
 hand pillar not shaded as in the first 
 edition. The mouth of the second 
 companion of the bride is wanting. 
 
 XIV. —1. 
 
 Grass instead of a flower under 
 the first scroll. No folded-up cur¬ 
 tain. 
 
 2 . Icroduca for introducam. 
 
 Fourteen roses only on the bed. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1. Pulcbra instead of pulchra. 
 
 No curtain folded up. Sixteen 
 roses only instead of eighteen. Tri- 
 angular window and right hand 
 pillar wanting. 
 
 XV. —1. 
 
 1. Fortiu for fortium. 
 
 2. Cora eo instead of coram. 
 
 3. j Edifcato instead of edifcala. 
 
 No flower, but shadings on the 
 
 left of the first scroll; the foot of the 
 tower,on the right hand of the bride, 
 ending square, as in the first edi¬ 
 tion. 
 
 2 . 
 
 This design is very like that of 
 the first edition ; but the bedstead, 
 clearly indicated in the first edition, 
 under the coverlet, is replaced by a 
 second rowof pavingtilesnot shaded. 
 
 25 
 
 III. EDITION, 
 
 The same. 
 
 XIII.—1. 
 
 The round towers of the surround- 
 ing wall have no barbacans. The 
 pavement of the room is not rao- 
 saic. 
 
 2. Potadu for potandum. 
 
 No carved work round the room. 
 Right hand pillar shaded. 
 
 XIV.—1. 
 
 2 . Icroduca instead of introducam. 
 Fourteen roses. No folded curtain. 
 o 
 
 <v • 
 
 1. Pulcbra instead of pidchra. 
 
 Sixteen roses instead of eighteen. 
 No folded curtain. 
 
 XV.—1. 
 
 2. Cora to instead of coram. 
 
 Foreground different. The bot¬ 
 tom corner of the left hand tower, 
 near the drapery of the bride’s dress, 
 is sunk in the ground; so that the 
 bottom line of the wall is not inter- 
 rupted, and reaches the drapery. 
 
 2 . 
 
 The drapery of the bed is altered. 
 The framing pillar scarcely appears 
 on the right hand. 
 
26 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I. EDITION. 
 
 XVI.—1. 
 
 2. Euge instead of fuge. 
 
 Breakage across tbis page and the 
 preceding one, extending frora the 
 left hand to the right hand pillar, 
 a little above the socie, and running 
 alinost parallel along the bottom of 
 the superior row of paving tiles. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . LybarC instead of libani. 
 
 II. EDITION. 
 
 XVI.—1. 
 
 Abacus broken above the superior 
 volute of the scroll. 
 
 2. Euge instead of fuge. 
 
 The shaft of the right hand pillar 
 is entirely wanting. 
 
 1. CaV instead of talis. 
 
 Three trees instead of five. Tuft 
 of grass instead of a flower at the 
 feet of the bridegroom. 
 
 III. EDITION. 
 
 XVI.—1. 
 
 2. Euge instead of fuge. 
 
 No pillar on the right hand. 
 
 2 . 
 
 1 . CaV instead of talis. 
 
 Three trees instead of five. Fore- 
 ground quite different to the first 
 edition. 
 
 VI. 
 
 The introduction of wood-engraving in Europe is mnch earlier than is generally 
 supposed, because being considered of little importance nobody cared to mention it. 
 Even after the production of the Block-Books, the work of the engraver was so 
 manifestly inferior to the pictnres of masters such as the Yan Eycks, or even to the 
 common illuminators of MSS., that it may be fairly assumed that the coarse deline- 
 ations of the wood-engravers were intended rnerely as a sort of underwork, to be 
 coloured afterwards by the illuminator. Such also is the opinion of Mr. Bichard 
 Thomson, who, in a lecture delivered by Mr.W.Tite,M.P., in the theatre of the London 
 Institution on the 21st January, 1857, said, “When we pass froin the age of genuine 
 illuminated manuscripts to that of printed books adorned with ornaments engraven 
 on wood, and transferred to vellum by printer s ink and the action of a heavy press, 
 and subsequently powerfully coloured, the closest imitation of written volumes is to 
 be observed in ali the earliest efforts of the first typographers. Their object appears 
 to have been to make the productions of the press pass for the more ordinary 
 painted manuscripts, whicli were probably produced at the period with great expe¬ 
 ditiori, and in Flanders were possibly to be found always ready for sale. These 
 books, wliich were usually manuals of devotion, at first consisted of real manuscript 
 leaves, interspersed with illustrations engraven in faint outlines, intended to be 
 coloured. They were subsequently printed on stout vellum, in types which were 
 cut closely to imitate the text written by the best scribes of the time. In fact it 
 requires rather an experienced eye to distinguish between a genuine illuminated 
 manuscript and a well painted book printed on vellum.” 
 
 We find a most striking example of such a book, with illuminated engravings, in 
 the only known copy on vellum of the French Biblia Pauperum, or, “Les figures 
 du Yieil Testament et du Nouvel,” printed in Paris by Anthoine Yerard circa 1503, 
 
XNTRODUCTION. 
 
 27 
 
 formerly in the possession of King Henry VII, and now in the Britisli Museum. 
 As to the date of the execution of such engravings in the Netherlands, M. Leon 
 de Laborde # relates that a Jan de Printere, or John the printer, is inscribed among 
 the Corporation of booksellers in Bruges in the years 1457 and 1458; the register 
 beginning only from 1454, all previous information is wanting. M. Leon de Burbure, 
 however, has recently found, in the archives of Antwerp, another Jan de Printere 
 mentioned four times in deeds bearing the date of 1417, one year before the date 
 engraved on the print in the royal library of Brussels.f Now the paper of the 
 Block-Books is identically the same, and bears the same mark as that used by the 
 early Dutch printers. “ Le papier venait de Brabant,” says J. Scheltema,f “ oii 
 c’etait la coutume lorsqudl survenait un changement dans la maison du souverain, 
 de changer aussi la marque du papier; ce qui fait que le papier de ce pays offre 
 une succession chronologique. Cette succession se remarque aussi dans les premieres 
 impressions et les suivantes ... au surplus ce papier est le meme que celui dont 
 on se servait a Harlem avant Tannee 1440 pour les registres publics.” If such be the 
 case, if the paper of the Block-Books is the same as that of the public records in 
 Harlem before 1440, tliere is very little reason to doubt that some at least of the 
 Block-Books were produced in Harlem, and engraved either by Lawrence Coster or 
 under his direction. 
 
 The well-known antiquary of Leipzig, Herr T. O. Weigel, is in possession of 
 precious xylographic documents which, it is said, completely overturn the theories 
 grounded upon the claims of Harlem, and restore to the German “Formschneiders” 
 the priority in the invention of wood-engraving: specimens, in fact, of a date 
 much anterior to any of the xylographic monuments known to us. We entirely 
 concur in the opinion of M. J. D. Passavant, when he refers the introduction 
 of wood-engraving into Germany, to a period much earlier than that generally 
 admitted; but in the very curious and interesting monuments which he enume- 
 rates as in the possession of Herr T. O. Weigel, no distinet proof is afforded 
 of the priority of German to Dutch and Flemish wood-engraving. The style of 
 drawing of the “Christ en Croix” (mentioned p. 20, vol. i, of Le Peintre-Graveur, 
 Leipsic, 1860, 8vo.), may very well belong to the twelfth century, thougli tliis 
 drawing may not have been engraved before the latter part of the fifteenth century. 
 
 The mention, by M. Passavant, of the Spirituale Pomerium MS., with woodcuts 
 of 1440, exeeuted in the cloister of Groenandael, near Brussels, by “ les freres de la 
 vie commune/' is much more important than any hypotheses founded merely on the 
 style of drawing. It is, indeed, rather in favour of the Netherlands, particularly 
 
 * Les Ducs de Bourgogne, Etudes sur les Arts, les Lettres, et 1’Industrie, pendant le XV eme Siecle. 
 2 P. Preuves. Paris, 8vo., 1849, p. xvii. 
 
 f M. J. D. Passavant, in his new work, Le Peintre-Graveur (Leipzig, 1860, 8vo., p. 110), refers tliis date 
 from 1418 to 1468. 
 
 + Lettre a MM. les Pedacteurs de la Galerie des Contemporains sur la Necessite de rectifier et completer 
 1’Article concernant M. J. Koning. La Haye, 1819. 8vo. 
 
 H 
 
28 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 when it is remembered that these monks were first established during tbe four- 
 teenth century, in Zwollis, the very town whose arms—the famous cross of Savoy 
 in the Book of Canticles—were bravely won by its inhabitants under the walls of 
 Jerusalem at the time of the Crusades,—the town in which was printed the Passye 
 ende dat leven van onsers liefs hern, where the pieces of an original set of blocks of 
 the Biblia Pauperum were inserted in 1489. 
 
 Until the fac-similes of Herr T. O. Weigel are published, therefore, we must 
 abide by the proofs which are at our disposal, and conclude this introduction by 
 quoting the words of the anonymous author of the Cronica van der hilliger stat vd 
 Colle, publislied at Cologne, by Joh. Kcelhof, in the year 1499, fol., who, relating the 
 information which lie received from IJlrich Zeli, the celebrated printer, contemporary 
 of Guttenberg, says (fol. 312): “Item wiewail die Kunst is vonden tzo Mentz, ais 
 vurss up die wijse, ais dan gemeynlich gebruicht wirt, so is doch die eyrste 
 vurbyldung vonden in Hollant vyss den Donaten, die dae selffst vur der tzijt 
 gedruckt syn ” 
 
 J. Ph. Berjeau. 
 
 Georgiana Street, Camden Town. 
 February, 1860. 
 
CANTICUM CANTICORUM 
 
 TEXT OF THE SCROLLS. 
 
 TEXT OF THE VULGATE. 
 
 Page I. — i. 
 
 Page I.-—i. 
 
 1. Oscule? me osculo oris sui q'a meliora sunt ubera 
 tua vino. 
 
 2 . Veni in ortu rneu soror mea sposa mesmi (messui) 
 mirra mea cu aromatib 5 meis. 
 
 1. Osculetur me osculo oris sui: quia meliora sunt 
 ubera tua vino. (i, 1.) 
 
 2. Veni in hortum meum, soror mea sponsa; messui 
 myrrham meam cum aromatibus meis, (v, 1.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Caput tuu ut carmel 9 collu tuu sicut turris 
 eburnea. 
 
 2. Nigra su sj formosa filie ihrlm sicut tab’naclu 
 (tabernacula) cedar sicut pell (pelles) Salomois. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Caput tuum ut Carmelus ;— collum sicut turris 
 eburnea, (viii, 5-4.) 
 
 2. Nigra sum, sed formosa, filiae Jerusalem, sicut 
 tabernacula cedar, sicut pelles Salomonis, (i, 4.) 
 
 Page II. — i. 
 
 Page II.-—i. 
 
 1. Trahe me post te currem 9 in odore ungeto^ tuo^. 
 
 1. Trahe me: post te curremus in odorem unguen¬ 
 torum tuorum, (i, 3.) 
 
 2 . Sonet vox tua in aurib 5 meis vox eni tua dulcf 
 et faties tua decora. 
 
 2 . Sonet vox tua in auribus meis : vox enim tua 
 dulcis, et facies tua decora, (ii, 14.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. En diltus me 9 loq)? m surge ppera amica mea. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. En dilectus meus loquitur mihi : surge, propera, 
 amica mea. (ii, 10.) 
 
 2. Qua pulchra es amica mea q pulchra es osli tui 
 colubaru absq, eo q itrisec 9 latet. 
 
 2. Quam pulchra es, amica mea ! quam pulchra es ! 
 Oculi tui columbarum, absque eo quod intrinsecus 
 latet, (iv, 1.) 
 
 Page III. — i. 
 
 Page III. — i. 
 
 1. Qualis est dilectus tuus o pulcherria mulieru. 
 
 1. Qualis est dilectus tuus, 6 pulcherrima mulierum, 
 (v, 9.) 
 
 2 . Dilectus meus candidus et rubicudus electus ex 
 milibus. 
 
 2. Dilectus meus candidus et rubicundus, electus ex 
 millibus, (v, 10.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Adiuro vos filie ihrlm p capreas tervosq (cervos¬ 
 que) capo^ ne sustitetis (suscitetis) dilectam meam 
 donec ipsa velit. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Adjuro vos, filiae Jerusalem, per capreas,cervosque 
 camporum ne suscitetis dilectam meam, donec ipsa 
 velit, (ii, 7 ; viii, 4.) 
 
30 
 
 CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 Page IV. —i. 
 
 1. Eriit verba tua sicut botri vinee odor oris tui 
 sicut maloru punicorum. 
 
 2. Botrus cipri dilectus me 9 in? vineas enngadi. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ortus conclusus est soror mea sposa ortus 
 9 onclus 5 fos singnatus (signatus). 
 
 2. Surge acuulo (aquilo) veni auster pfla ortu meum 
 et fluet aromata illi 9 . 
 
 3. Fos ortorum puteus aquaru viueciu q fluut Ipetu 
 de lybano. 
 
 Page V. —i. 
 
 1. Dilect 9 me 9 m et ego ille q* pasitur in? lylia. 
 
 2. Ego flos capi et lyliu couallim (convallium.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Pulchre siit gene tue sicut turturis coliti tuu 
 sicut monnlia (monilia). 
 
 2. Leva ei 9 sub capite meo et dextra illi 9 aplexabi? 
 me. 
 
 Page VI. —i. 
 
 1. Que habitas in ortis amici auscultat fac me audire 
 voce tua. 
 
 2. Ola noua et vetera seruaui tibi dilecte mi. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Quo abijt dilectus tuu 9 pulcherrima mulierum. 
 
 2. Filie ihrlm anuciate dilco quia amore lagueo. 
 
 3. Q’d facie soro’i nfe i die qii alloqueda est. 
 
 4. Stipate me mai fulcite me floribus quia amore 
 lagueo. 
 
 5. Si hostiu cbplgam 9 illd’ si mure 9 edificamus 
 propugnacula. 
 
 6 . Vulnerasti cor meii soror mea sposa vulnerasti 
 cor meum. 
 
 7. Dur 9 vt infernus emulacio ibi corrupta est mater 
 tua. 
 
 Page VII.— i. 
 
 1. Descedi i ortu nucii ut videre poma coualliu 
 & Ispicem si floruisset vinee et germinasset mala 
 punica. 
 
 2. Tai e dilcus me 9 et ipe e amic 9 meus filie 
 ihrih. 
 
 Page IV.—i. 
 
 1. Erunt ubera tua sicut botri vineae; odor oris tui 
 sicut malorum punicorum* (vii, 8 .) 
 
 2. Botrus cypri dilectus meus mihi, in vineis 
 Engaddi ( inter vineas Enngadi .) (i, 13.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Hortus conclusus, soror mea sponsa, hortus 
 conclusus fons signatus, (iv, 12 .) 
 
 2. Fons hortorum; puteus aquarum viventium, quae 
 fluunt impetu de Libano, (iv, 15.) 
 
 3. Surge, aquilo : veni auster; perfla hortum meum, 
 et fluant aromata illius, (iv, 16.) 
 
 Page V. —i. 
 
 1 . Dilectus meus mihi et ego illi, qui pascitur inter 
 lilia, (ii, 16.) 
 
 2. Ego flos campi et lilium convallium, (ii, 1.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Pulchrae sunt genae tuae sicut turturis : collum 
 tuum sicut monilia, (i, 9.) 
 
 2. Laeva ejus sub capite meo, et dextera illius 
 amplexabitur me. (ii, 6 .) 
 
 Page VI. —i. 
 
 1. Quae habitas in hortis, amici auscultant: fac me 
 audire vocem tuam, (viii, 13.) 
 
 2. Omnia ... nova et vetera, servavi tibi, dilecte mi. 
 (vii, 13.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Quo abiit dilectus tuus, pulcherrima mulierum, 
 (v, 17.) 
 
 2. Filiae Jerusalem,.... nuncietis dilecto quia amore 
 langueo, (v, 8 .) 
 
 3. Quid faciemus sorori nostrae in die quando 
 alloquenda est. (viii, 8 .) 
 
 4. Stipate me malis, fulcite me floribus: quia amore 
 langueo, (ii, 5.) 
 
 5. Si ostium compingamus illud, si murus est 
 edificamus propugnacula, (viii, 9.) 
 
 6 . Vulnerasti cor meum soror mea sponsa, vulnerasti 
 cor meum, (iv, 9.) 
 
 7. Dura sicut infernus aemulatio; ibi corrupta est 
 mater tua. (viii, 5.) 
 
 Page VII.— i. 
 
 1. Descendi in hortum nucum, ut viderem poma 
 convallium, et inspicerem si floruisset vinea, et germi- 
 nassent mala punica. (vi, 10 .) 
 
 2. Talis est dilectus meus, et ipse est amicus meus, 
 filiae Jerusalem. 
 
 * This word, which Mr. Sotheby finds confused, because he reads pomorum, is very plain in the original, but 
 has been added by the author to the text of the Vulgate. 
 
CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 31 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Aperi m 1 soror mea q 5 a caput meum plenu est 
 rore. 
 
 2. Pessulu hostij mei aperia dilecto meo exspolia 
 me tunica. 
 
 Page VIII.—i. 
 
 1. Indica m 1 que diligit ala mea ubi pascas cubes in 
 me’idie et e. 
 
 2. Si ignoras te o pulchra in? mulieres 9 g’d’e P ost 
 vestigia gregu. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Anima mea liqfta est ut dilect 2 me 2 locut 2 est. 
 
 2. Gratura (statura) tua assimulata (assimilata) e 
 palme et ubera tua botris. 
 
 Page IX.— i. 
 
 1. Quis uidet te (mihi det) te frem meti ut Ivenia 
 te foras. 
 
 2. Ecce q pulchra es et q deco’a carissima in 
 delicijs. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Fauus distilliis labia tua mei et lac sub llgua tua 
 odor vestimeto^ tuo 1 ^. 
 
 2. Comedi favu cu meile meo bibi vinti meum cum 
 lacte meo. 
 
 Page X.—i. 
 
 1. Si dederit homo oem substacia sua p dilclone 
 quasi nichil despiciet ea. 
 
 2. Lapades ei 2 sicut lapades ignis atq flamaru. 
 
 3. Aque mite n5 potuerut extigue ca’itate. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Que e ista q ascendit de deserto delicijs enixa sup 
 dilectu suum. 
 
 2. Ista e speciosa in? filias ihrim viderut ea filie 
 Syon. 
 
 Page XI.—i. 
 
 1. Ecce dilecto meo et ad me couersio illi 2 . 
 
 2. Reverte) reute) Sunamitis reute) ut Itueam te. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Qm pulchre s? gress 2 tue I calciametf filia 
 pricipis. 
 
 2. Vada ad mote mirre et ad tolle (collem) thuris. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Aperi mihi soror mea;.... quia caput meum 
 plenum est rore, (v, 2 .) 
 
 2. Pessulum ostii mei aperui dilecto meo.expo¬ 
 
 liavi me tunica.* 
 
 Page VIII.— i. 
 
 1 . Indica mihi, quem diligit anima mea, ubi pascas, 
 cubes in meridie, (i, 6 ) 
 
 2. Si ignoras te o pulcherrima inter mulieres, 
 congredere post vestigia gregum, (i, 7.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Anima mea liquefacta est, ut dilectus meus, 
 locutus est. (v, 6 .) 
 
 2. Statura tua assimilata est palmee et ubera tua 
 botris, (vii, 7.) 
 
 Page IX.—i. 
 
 1. Quis mihi det te fratrem meum .... ut inveniam 
 te foris, (viii, 1 .) 
 
 2. Ecce quam pulchra es, et quam decora, carissima, 
 in deliciis, (vii, 6 .) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Favus distillans labia tua;...mei et lac sub lingua 
 tua;...odor vestimentorum tuorum... (iv, 11 .) 
 
 2. Comedi favum cum meile meo...bibi vinum meum 
 cum lacte meo. (v, 1 .) 
 
 Page X.—i. 
 
 1 . Si dederit homo omnem substantiam...pro dilec¬ 
 tione, quasi nihil despiciet eam. (viii, 7.) 
 
 2. Lampades ejus, lampades ignis atque flammarum, 
 (viii, 6 .) 
 
 3. Aquae multae non potuerunt extinguere caritatem, 
 (viii, 7.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Quae est ista quae ascendit de deserto,...innixa 
 super dilectum suum, (viii, 5.) 
 
 2. Ista est speciosa inter filias Jerusalem—viderunt 
 eam filiae Syon. (vi, 8 .) 
 
 Page XI.— i. 
 
 1. Ego dilecto meo, et ad me conversio ejus, (vii, 
 100 . 
 
 2 . Revertere, revertere, Sulamitis: revertere ut 
 intueamur te. (vi, 19.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Quam pulchri sunt gressus tui in calceamentis, 
 filia principis, (vi, 1 .) 
 
 2. Vadam ad montem myrrhae et ad collem thuris, 
 (iv, 6 .) 
 
 * In the Block-Book this verse is in the future tense, aperiam, expoliam. 
 
 I 
 
32 
 
 CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 Page XII.— i. 
 
 1 . Dilecte mj egrediam in agrii mane surgam 9 ad 
 vineas. 
 
 2. Madragore odore dederut in portf nris. 
 
 3. Videam 9 si floruit vinea si flores fruct 9 pturiut. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Facicul mirre dilcus me 9 m in? ubera mea 
 commorabitur. 
 
 Page XIII. —i. 
 
 1. Surga et circuibo ciuitate p vicos et plateas 
 quera que diligit ala mea. 
 
 2. pcusserut et vulnerauerut me tulerut palliu meu 
 custodes murorum. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Comedite amici et bibite et tu inebriami 
 carissimi. 
 
 2. Guttur illius sicut vinu optimu dignu dilco meo 
 ad potadu. 
 
 Page XIV.— i. 
 
 1. Tota pulchra es amica mea et macia no est in te. 
 
 2. Tenui eu nec dimitta donec introduca i domii 
 matris me in cubicltn genitricis mee. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ecce pulchra es amica mea ecce tu pulchra es 
 coluba mea. 
 
 2. Ecce tu pulcher es dhe mi et decori lectui hr 
 florid. 
 
 Page XV.— i. 
 
 1. Mille clypei pendet ex ea ois armatura forciu. 
 
 2. Ego mur 9 et ubera mea sicut tr’is ex q fta su 
 coram. 
 
 3. Collu tuii sicut t’ris q edificata e in ppugnaculis. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ego dormio et cor meu vigilat. 
 
 2. En lectulu Salomols sexaglta fortes abiut oes 
 tcnetes gladios. 
 
 Page XVI.— i. 
 
 1. Pone me vt signacula sup cor tuum. 
 
 2. Euge dilecte mj fortf vt mors dilectio. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Spes ei 9 vt lyban 9 electus vt cedri tal est diltus 
 meus. 
 
 2. Veni de lybano sposa mea vei de lybano veni 
 coronaberis. 
 
 Page XII.— i. 
 
 1 . Dilecte mi, egrediamur in agrum—mane surgamus 
 ad vineas, (vii, 11, 12.) 
 
 2. Mandragorte dederunt odorem ; in portis nostris. 
 ...(vii, 13.) 
 
 3. Videamus si floruit vinea, si flores fructus partu¬ 
 riunt. (vii, 12.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Fasciculus myrrhge dilectus meus mihi, inter 
 ubera mea commorabitur, (i, 12.) 
 
 Page XIII.— i. 
 
 1. Surgam et circuibo civitatem: per vicos et plateas 
 queram quem diligit anima mea. (iii, 2 .) 
 
 2 . Percusserunt et vulneraverunt me ; tulerunt 
 pallium meum custodes murorum, (v, 7 .) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Comedite amici et bibite et inebriamini carissimi. 
 
 (D T) 
 
 2. Guttur tuum {illius) sicut vinum optimum, 
 dignum dilecto meo ad potandum, (vii, 9.) 
 
 Page XIV.— i. 
 
 1. Tota pulchra es amica mea et macula non est in 
 te. (iv, 9.) 
 
 2. Tenui eum; nec dimittam, donec introducam... 
 in domum matris me 8 e,...in cubiculum genitricis rnese. 
 (iii, 4.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ecce...pulchra es, amica mea, ecce tu pulchra 
 es; cohimba mea. (i, 14.) 
 
 2. Ecce tu pulcher es dilecte {domine) mi et decorus. 
 Lectulus noster floridus, (i, 15.) 
 
 Page XV.— i. 
 
 1 . Mille clypei pendent ex ea, omnis armatura 
 fortium, (iv, 4.) 
 
 2. Ego murus ; et ubera mea sicut turris, ex quo 
 facta sum coram... (viii, 10 .) 
 
 3. Collum tuum sicut turris, quse edificata est cum 
 propugnaculis, (iv, 4.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ego dormio, et cor meum vigilat, (v, 2.) 
 
 2. En lectulum Salomonis, sexaginta fortes ambiunt 
 ...omnes tenentes gladios, (iii, 7-8.) 
 
 Page XVI.— i. 
 
 1. Pone me ut signaculum super cor tuum, (viii, 6 .) 
 
 2. Fuge, dilecte mi,...fortis...ut mors dilectio, (viii, 
 14-16.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Species ejus ut libani, electus ut cedri...talis 
 est dilectus meus, (v, 15-16.) 
 
 2. Veni de libano, sponsa mea, veni de libano, veni; 
 coronaberis.... (iv, 8 .) 
 
CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 33 
 
 FRENCH TRANSLATIONS FROM 
 LEMAITRE DE SACY* 
 
 Page I.—i. 
 
 1. Qu’il me donne un baiser de sa bouche: car vos 
 mammelles sont meilleures que le vin. 
 
 2. Je suis venu dans mon jardin, raa soeur, mon 
 epouse: j’ay recueilli ma myrrhe avec mes parfums. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Votre tete est comme le mont Carmel; votre cou 
 est comme une tour d’yvoire. 
 
 2. Je suis noire, mais je suis belle, 6 filles de 
 Jerusalem, comme les tentes de cedar, comme les 
 pavillons de Salomon. 
 
 Page II.— i. 
 
 1. Entrainez-moy apres vous: nous courrons a 
 1 ’odeur de vos parfums. 
 
 2. Que votre voix se fasse entendre a mes oreilles: 
 car votre voix est douce et votre visage est agreable. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Voila mon bien-aime qui me parle et qui me dit: 
 levez-vous, hatez-vous, ma bien-aimee. 
 
 2. Que vous etes belle, 6 mon amie, que vous etes 
 belle ! vos yeux sont comme ceux des colombes, sans 
 ce qui est cache au-dedans. 
 
 Page III.— i. 
 
 1. Quel est celuy que vous appelez votre bien-aime. 
 . . . 6 la plus belle d’entre les femmes ? 
 
 2. Mon bien-aime eclate par sa blancheur et par sa 
 rougeur : il est choisi entre mille. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Filles de Jerusalem, je vous conjure par les 
 chevreuils et par les cerfs de la campagne, de ne point 
 reveiller celle que j’aime, jusqu’a ce qu’elle s’eveille 
 elle-meme. 
 
 Page IY.—i. 
 
 1. Vos mammelles seront comme des grappes de 
 raisin; et l’odeur de votre bouche comme celle des 
 pommes de grenade. 
 
 2. Mon bien-aime est pour moi comme une grappe 
 de raisin de Cypre dans les vignes d’Engaddi. 
 
 * Cantique des Cantiques traduit 
 Ecclesiastiques. Paris : G. Desprez. 
 
 ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE 
 VULGATE. 
 
 Page I.— i. 
 
 1. Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: 
 for thy breasts are better than wine. (i, 2.) 
 
 2. I am come into my garden, O my sister, my 
 spouse. I have gathered my myrrh, with my 
 aromatical spices, (v, 1.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Thy head is like the Carmel. Thy neck as a 
 tower of ivory. (vii, 5-4.) 
 
 2. I am black but beautiful, O ye daughters of 
 Jerusalem, as the tents of cedar, as the curtains of 
 Solomon. (i, 4.) 
 
 Page II.— i. 
 
 1. Draw me: we will run after thee to the odour of 
 thy ointments. (i, 3-4.) 
 
 2. Let thy voice sound in my ears; for thy voice is 
 sweet, and thy face comely. (ii, 14.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Behold my beloved speaketh to me: arise, make 
 haste, my love, my dove, my beautiful one, and 
 come, (ii, 10.) 
 
 2. How beautiful art thou, my love, how beautiful 
 art thou! Thy eyes are doves’ eyes, besides what is 
 hid within. (iv, 1.) 
 
 Page III. —i. 
 
 1 . IVhat manner of one is thy beloved of the 
 beloved, O thou most beautiful among women ? (v, 29.) 
 
 2. My beloved is white and ruddy, chosen out of 
 thousands. (v, 10.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . I adjure you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, by 
 the roes and the harts of the fields, that you stir not 
 up, nor make the beloved to awake, till she please. 
 (ii, 7.) 
 
 Page IV.— i. 
 
 1. Thy breasts shall be as the clusters of the vine : 
 and the odour of thy mouth like apples. (vii, 8.) 
 
 2. A cluster of Cyprus my love is to me, in the 
 vineyards of Engaddi. (vii, 8.) 
 
 en Francois, avec une Explication tiree des Saints Peres et des Auteur: 
 1694. 12mo. 
 
34 
 
 CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Ma soeur, mon epouse, est un jardin ferm£; elle 
 est un jardin ferme, et une fontaine scellde. 
 
 2 . La fontaine des jardins, et le puits des eaux 
 vivantes, qui coulent avec impdtuosite du Liban. 
 
 3. Ketirez-vous, Aquilon : venez, 6 vent du midy: 
 soufflez de toutes parts dans mon jardin, et que les 
 parfums en decoulent. 
 
 Page Y.—i. 
 
 1. Mon bien-aime est a moy, et je suis & luy, et il 
 se nourrit parmi les lys. 
 
 2. Je suis la fleur des champs, et je suis le lys des 
 valle es. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Yos joues ont la beaute de la tourterelle; et 
 votre coi est comme de riches colliers. 
 
 2. II met sa main gaucbe sous ma tete, et il m’em- 
 brasse de sa main droite. 
 
 Page VI.—i. 
 
 1 . O vous qui habitez dans les jardins, nos amis 
 sont attentifs a ecouter: faites-moy entendre votre voix. 
 
 2. Je vous ay garde, mon bien-aime, les nouveaux 
 et les anciens. 
 
 TI. 
 
 1 . O la plus belle d’entre les femmes, ou s’est retire 
 votre bien-aime ? 
 
 2. Je vous conjure, 6 filles de Jerusalem, de dire a 
 mon bien-aime que je languis d’amour. 
 
 3. Que ferons-nous a notre soeur, au jour qu’il 
 faudra luy parier ? 
 
 4. Soutenez-moy avec des fleurs, fortifiez-moy avec 
 des fruits : parceque je languis d’amour. 
 
 5. Si elle est comme une porte, fermons-la avec des 
 ais ; si elle est comme un mur, batissons dessus des 
 forteresses. 
 
 6 . Vous avez blesse mon coeur, ma soeur, mon 
 epouse, vous avez blesse mon coeur. 
 
 7. Le zele de Pamour est inflexible comme 1’enfer: 
 c’est la que votre mere s’est corrompue. 
 
 Page VII.—i. 
 
 1. Je suis dcscendue dans le jardin des noyers, pour 
 voir les fruits des valides, pour considerer si la vigne 
 avoit fleuri, et si les pommes de grenade avoient 
 pousse. 
 
 2. Tei est mon bien-aime, et celuy qui est veritable- 
 mcnt mon ami, 6 filles de Jerusalem. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Ouvrez-moy, ma soeur; parceque ma tete est 
 picine de ros^e. 
 
 2. J’ouvris ma porte a mon bien-aim£, en ayant tire 
 le verrou; je me suis depouillee de ma robe. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. My sister, my spouse, is a garden enclosed, a 
 garden enclosed, a fountain sealed up. (iv, 12.) 
 
 2. The fountain of gardens; the well of living 
 waters, which run with a strong stream from the 
 Libanus, (iv, 15.) 
 
 3. Arise, O north wind, and come, O south wind, 
 blow through my garden, and let the aromatical spices 
 thereof flow. (iv, 16.) 
 
 Page Y.—i. 
 
 1. My beloved to me, and I to him who feedeth 
 among the lilies. (ii, 16.) 
 
 2. I am the flower of the field, and the lily of the 
 valleys. (ii, 1. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Thy cheeks are beautiful as the turtle dove’s, thy 
 neck as jewels. (i, 9.) 
 
 2. His left hand is under my head, and his right 
 hand shall embrace me. (ii, 6.) 
 
 Page YI.— i. 
 
 1. Thou that dwellest in the gardens, the friends 
 hearken; make me hear thy voice. (viii, 13.) 
 
 2. The new and the old, my beloved, I have kept 
 for thee. (vii, 13 ) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Whither is thy beloved gone, O thou most 
 
 beautiful among women ? (v, 17.) 
 
 2. I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, if you 
 find my beloved, that you teli him that I languish 
 with love. (v, 8.) 
 
 3. What shall we do to our sister in the day when 
 she is to be spoken to ? (viii, 8.) 
 
 4. Stay me up with flowers, compass me about with 
 apples : because I languish with love. (ii, 5.) 
 
 5. If she be a door, let us join it together with 
 boards of cedar ; if she be a wall, let us build upon it 
 bulwarks of silver. (viii, 9.) 
 
 6 . Thou hast wounded my heart, my sister, my 
 spouse; thou hast wounded my heart. (iv, 9.) 
 
 7. Jealousy is hard as hell; there thy mother was 
 corrupted. (viii, 6.) 
 
 Page YII.— i. 
 
 1 . I went down into the garden of nuts, to see the 
 fruits of the valleys, and to look if the vineyard had 
 flourished, and the pomegranates budded. (vi, 10.) 
 
 2. Such is my beloved, and he is my friend, O ye 
 daughters of Jerusalem. (v, 16.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Open to me, my sister; for my head is full of 
 dew. (v, 8.) 
 
 2 . I opened the bolt of my door to my beloved; I 
 have put off my garment. (v, 6.). 
 
CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 35 
 
 Page VIII.— i. 
 
 1 . O vous qui etes le bien-aime de mon ame, 
 apprenez-moy ou vous menez paitre votre troupeau, 
 ou vous vous reposez a midi. 
 
 2 . Si vous ne vous connoissez pas, 6 vous qui etes 
 la plus belle d’entre les femmes, sortez, suivez les 
 traces des troupeaux. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Mon ame s’etoit comme fondue au son de sa voix. 
 
 2. Votre taille est semblable a un palmier, et vos 
 mammelles a des grappes de raisin. 
 
 Page IX. —i. 
 
 1. Qui me procurera le bonheur de vous avoir pour 
 frere... .afin que je vous trouve debors. 
 
 2 . Que vous etes belle et pleine de grace, 6 vous 
 qui etes ma tres-chere, et les delices de mon coeur. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Vos levres sont comme un rayon qui distille le 
 miel; le miel et le lait sont sous votre langue ; et 
 1 ’odeur de vos vetements. . . . 
 
 2. J’ay mange le rayon avec mon miel: j’ay bu 
 mon vin avec mon lait. 
 
 Page X.— -i. 
 
 1. Quand un homme auroit donne toutes les 
 richesses de sa maison pour le saint amour, il les 
 mepriseroit comme s’il n’avoit rien donne. 
 
 2. Ses lampes sont des lampes de feu et de flammes. 
 
 3. Les grandes eaux n’ont pu eteindre la charite. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Qui est celle-cy qui s’eleve du desert, toute 
 remplie de delices, et appuyee sur son bien-aime. 
 
 2. Elie est belle {parmi les Jilles de Jerusalem ) ; les 
 filles (de Syon) l’ont vue. 
 
 Page XI. —i. 
 
 1. Je suis a mon bien-aime et son coeur se tourne 
 vers moy. 
 
 2 . Revenez, revenez, 6 Sulamite; revenez . . . afin 
 que nous vous considerions. 
 
 n. 
 
 1. Que vos demarches sont belles, 6 fille du prince, 
 a cause de Vagrement de votre chaussure! 
 
 2. J’iray a la montagne de la myrrhe, et a la colline 
 de l’encens. 
 
 Page XII. —i. 
 
 1. Mon bien-aime, sortons dans les champs... levons- 
 nous des le matin pour aller aux vignes. 
 
 2. Les mandragores ont dejd repandu leur odeur .. . 
 a nos portes. 
 
 3. Voyons si la vigne a fleuri; si les fleurs 
 produisent des fruits. 
 
 Page VIII.— i. 
 
 1. Shew me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where 
 thou feedest, where thou liest in mid-day. (i, 6.) 
 
 2. If thou know not thyself, O fairest among women, 
 go forth, and follow after the steps of the flocks. (i, T.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. My soul melted when he spoke. (v, 6.) 
 
 2. Thy stature is like to a palm-tree, and thy 
 breasts to clusters of grapes. (vi, 7.) 
 
 Page IX.—i. 
 
 1. Who shall give thee to me for my brother, that I 
 may find thee without. (viii, 1.) 
 
 2. How beatitiful art thou, and how comely, my 
 dearest, in delights ! (vii, 6.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Thy lips, my sponse, are a dropping honeycomb, 
 honey and milk are under thy tongue, and the smell 
 of thy garments. . . . (iv, 11.) 
 
 2. I have eaten the honeycomb with my honey ; I 
 have drunk my wine with my milk. (v, 1.) 
 
 Page X.— i. 
 
 1. If a man would give ali the substance of his 
 house for love, he shall despise it as nothing. (viii, 7.) 
 
 2. The lamps thereof are fire and flames. (viii, 6.) 
 
 3. Many waters cannot quench charity. (viii, 7.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Who is this that cometh up from the desert, 
 flowing with delights, leaning upon her beloved ? 
 (viii, 5.) 
 
 2. She is beautiful (among the daughters of Jeru¬ 
 salem), the daughters of Syon have seen her. (ii, 2, 13.) 
 
 Page XI.— i. 
 
 1. I to my beloved, and his turning is towards 
 me. (vii, 10.) 
 
 2. Return, return, O Sulamitess: return, that we 
 may behold thee. (vi, 12.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. How beautiful are thy steps in shoes, Q prince’s 
 daughter. (vii, 1.) 
 
 2. I will go to the mountain of myrrh and to the 
 hili of frankincense. (iv, 6.) 
 
 Page XII.— i. 
 
 1. Come, my beloved, let us go forth into the field. 
 . . . Let us get up early to the vineyards. (vii, 11.) 
 
 2. The mandrakes give a smell. In our gates. . . . 
 (vii, 13. 
 
 3. Let us see if the vineyard flourish, if the flowers 
 be ready to bring forth fruits. (vii, 12.) 
 
 K 
 
36 
 
 CANTICUM CANTICORUM. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Mon bien-aime est pour moy comme un bouquet 
 cie myrrhe, il demeurera entre mes mammelles. 
 
 Page XIII.— i. 
 
 1. Je me leveray . . . je feray le tour de la ville; et 
 je chercheray dans les rues et dans les places publiques 
 celuy qui est le bien-aime de mon ame. 
 
 2. Les gardes qui font le tour de la ville m’ont 
 rencontree; iis m’ont frappee et blessee; ceux qui 
 gardent les murailles m’ont otd mon manteau. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Mangez, mes amis, et beuvez; enyvrez-vous, 
 vous qui etes mes tres-chers amis. 
 
 2. Ce qui sort de votre gorge est comme un vin 
 excellent, digne d’etre bu par mon bien-aime. 
 
 Page XIV.—i. 
 
 1 . Vous etes toute belle, 6 mon amie, et il n’y a 
 point de tache en vous. 
 
 2. Je l’ay arrete; et je ne le laisseray point aller, 
 jusqu’a ce que je le fasse entrer dans la maison de ma 
 mere, et dans la chambre de celle qui m’a donne 
 la vie. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . O que vous etes belle, ma bien-aimee! 0 que 
 
 vous etes belle, ma colombe! 
 
 2. Que vous etes beau, mon bien-aime ! Que vous 
 avez de graces et de charmes ! Notre lit est couvert 
 de fleurs. 
 
 Page XV.— i. 
 
 1. Mille boucliers y sont suspendus, et toutes les 
 armes des plus vaillants. 
 
 2. Je suis moy-meme comme un mur; et mes 
 mammelles sont comme une tour depuis que j’ai paru 
 en sa presence. 
 
 3. Votre cou est comme la tour (de David) qui est 
 batie avec des boulevards. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Je dors et mon coeur veille. 
 
 2 . Voicy le lit de Salomon environne de soixante 
 hommes des plus vaillans ... et qui portent tous des 
 eptics. 
 
 Page XVI.— i. 
 
 1. Mettez-moy comme un sceau sur votre coeur. 
 
 2. Fuyez, 6 mon bien-aime . . . parceque 1 ’amour est 
 fort comme la mort. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Sa figure est comme celle du mont Liban, et il se 
 distingue entre les aatres, comme les cedres parmi tous 
 les arbres. Tei est mon bien-aime. 
 
 2. Vencz du Liban, mon epouse; venez du Liban, 
 venez, vous serez couronnee. 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. A bundle of myrrh is my beloved to me, he shall 
 abide between my breasts. (i, \2.) 
 
 Page XIII.— i. 
 
 1 . I will rise, and will go about the city : in the 
 streets and the broad ways I will seek him whom my 
 soul loveth. (iii, 2.) 
 
 2. The keepers that go about the city found me ; 
 they struck me and wounded me; the keepers of the 
 walls took away my veil from me. (iii, 2.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1. Eat, O friends, and drink, and be inebriated, my 
 dearly beloved. (v, 1.) 
 
 2. Thy throat is like the best wine, worthy for my 
 beloved to drink. (vii, 9.) 
 
 Page XIV.— i. 
 
 1. Thou art all fair, O my love, and there is not a 
 spot in thee. (iv, 7.) 
 
 2. I held him: and I will not let him go, till I 
 bring him into my mother’s house, and into the 
 chamber of her that bore me. (iv, 7.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . Behold thou art fair, O my love; behold thou art 
 fair, thy eyes are as those of doves. (i, 14.) 
 
 2. Behold thou art fair, my beloved, and comely. 
 Our bed is flourishing. (v, 15.) 
 
 Page 15.—i. 
 
 1. A thousand bucklers hang upon it, all the armour 
 of valiant men. (iv, 4.) 
 
 2. I am a wall: and my breasts are as a tower, 
 since I am become in his presence. (viii, 10.) 
 
 3. Thy neck is as the tower of David, which is built 
 with bulwarks. (iv, 4.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . I sleep and my heart wateheth. (v, 2.) 
 
 2. Behold three score valiant men of the most 
 valiant of Israel, surround the bed of Solomon : all 
 holding swords. (iii, 7, 8.) 
 
 Page XVI.— i. 
 
 1. Put me as a seal upon thy heart. (viii, 6.) 
 
 2. Flee away, O my beloved .... for love is strong 
 as death. (viii, 14.) 
 
 ii. 
 
 1 . His form is of Libanus, excellent as the cedars 
 . . . such is my beloved. (v, 15, 16.) 
 
 2. Come from Libanus, my spouse; come, thou 
 shalt be crowned. (iv, 8.) 
 

 
 
 * X ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 M' 
 
 •; * * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *► 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ - 
 
 
 ¥ X * 
 
 
 .% * 
 
 
 
 
 
 ♦ 
 
 •# 
 
 
 ♦ * ' 
 
 I #t 
 
 *% * 
 
 .♦A 
 
 • ‘,* 4 
 
 
 
 •* 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 i* 
 
ibit 10 b te tj o et tiim ic b eVt oatnatiF trcmotfgoi*u <£a itfgfcltilQtij catic 
 


* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ♦ 
 
 *■ 
 
 «• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 « 
 

u. 
 
« r\ \ \ \ 
 
 i*‘ 1 ' \ \ \ \ HI 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < * | 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 /• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
wr 
 
 vMi 
 
 ^^^x\\\\\\\\ w wwwwwwwww Vw\\\^\n\n\nnnnn mnnn n\)////^^/ , ^V/// l ///y//>//////////////////'////////^///////////y 
 

 . 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 GETTY CENTER LIBRARY 
 
 3 3125 00952 2240 
 
35 »» •» 
 
 >? J 
 
 "»>"> 3 » 
 
 *? > a’- a 
 
 v >) ■!)'» 
 
 » > >» i 
 ■ » }>' 
 
 > >JWB 
 
 > f) '-» ts 
 
 OTM 
 
 J >' j>-> .3 
 
 > >■ > 3 
 
 » ■: ■ j T»t 
 
 ) >; m u 
 
 ) 9 V»U 
 
 )J 5 »>: 
 
 j))03>v)>:a 
 
 3'3J> 
 
 'Di ®ij!> X» 
 
 WMvJvAw, 
 
zz^.zz^z