15TH CENTURY ENGRAVED WOODBLOCK/CUT FOUND. NEED ADVICE!...

I would have handed that thing over so fast for 8K - i could be way off but I doubt you'll get a better offer.

 

Perhaps I'm not using the correct search words but I can't find anything comparable on the internet. Anyone else have better luck? (Or work smarter?)

Debora

 

8 k - hooorray. or the southern way:
Oh, won't you
Gimme three steps, gimme three steps, mister
Gimme three steps toward the door?

 

Finding this particular engraving in a book will be difficult, we dont know the publisher. There were a lot of those illustrated books from the 1840 until 1890.
It could be called the Bible, pictorial bible, biblical stories, Life of the savior, the gospels....
In the 19th century there were many books like that printed in high numbers, usually with many illustrations usually 100 or more. The record is the 1846 illuminated bible with over 1600 Illustrations and over 1000 individual Initials http://www.antiquebible.com/f26.html https://archive.org/details/illuminatedbible00adam/page/n13

If you mean a woodblock, they come up sometimes eg https://www.proantic.com/display.php?mode=obj&id=170472
But finding good dry wood, big enough for a woodcut engraving without knots or other damage was not so easy, so they sometimes used the other side or planed down the image after ts quality suffered from many prints and reused the block.
And the woodblocks were not really considered art, more printers tools. Many of the woodcuts of the old masters like Dürer were kept in the collections of the aristocracy and are in museums today, but i guess most of the younger ones were simply used as firewood once they couldnt be used any more.

Today I would consider it more a novelty than a collectible.

 

Just a brief update. My dad found another block and the certification from the auctioneer appraiser. I was told by an attorney friend to black out any names if im gonna post it on the internet. He also advised me to not post any photos of the other woodblock because it would diminish it's value.
He did mention that I have a winner. We found it on an old chest in a tight encapsulated case.

 

Neither the style nor the technology (or the name stamped on the back) are consistent with 1495. I would not put great stock in the opinion of this appraiser. His comment about gilding is interesting, though.

 

I'm certainly no expert but would have to agree.

Here's a good exposition on the history of Bible illustrations starting in the 15th century:

https://www.smu.edu/Bridwell/Specia...s/Exhibitions/First4CenturiesIllustratedBible

Here's the page on 15th century specifically:

https://www.smu.edu/Bridwell/Specia...s/First4CenturiesIllustratedBible/15thCentury

I think the image on OP's block fits more into the 18th century style:

https://www.smu.edu/Bridwell/Specia...s/First4CenturiesIllustratedBible/18thCentury

Again, just my uneducated opinion after a bit of research.

 

You should rush these over to a top flight auction house right away......

Once you can't show us what we need to see.....U should stop dicking around here because we can no longer help you.

Good luck with your great finds !!

 

I just read that the 18th century style prints were engraved on soft copper or metal.
It's only obvious by looking at the contrast and finesse of the burr marks.

 

The auction house that certified the blocks is the most reputable appraiser in CA.

 

The descriptions in the appraiser's letter do not seem to match this block. Block #1 is larger than the dimensions the OP provided, although it might be interpreted as a nativity scene in a Gothic setting (it is not a nativity scene). Block #2 does not give dimensions, but does not seem to describe this image.
If the block has been gilded (difficult to tell from the photos, but there are areas that appear oddly flat), it has been altered from its original state. The surfaces would not print properly if they have been gilded.

 

A 1971 appraisal has no relevance to areas of collectible interest and value in 2018. And your item is approximately 350 years older than those appraised then.

Debora

 

@Debora You mean younger?

Whatever happened to the "Historian at a Museum?"

 

4'' x 2 3/4 L X 1'' thick......is not 4 x 3 1/2.....

at least not for..."the most reputable appraiser in CA"

 

Yes, copper engravings largely displaced the earlier woodcuts by the 17th century. But the development of the technique of wood engraving at the end of the 18th century led to a revival of the use of woodblocks, as explained earlier in this thread. The comment of distinguishing them by the appearance of the burrs refers to the prints produced by each method, not the blocks themselves. The material of the printing plate or block itself should be self evident.

If you are interested in learning more about the minutiae of print technology, I recommend Bamber Gascoigne's "How to Identify Prints: A Complete Guide to Manual and Mechanical Processes from Woodcut to Inkjet". Thames & Hudson, 2004. ISBN 0-500-28480-6.

 

I hope you meant to say younger than 1495 rather than older. Otherwise we are all horribly confused.

 

This may be true for a previously unpublished photograph of an important person or event. But not for an object such as this, whether from the 15th or 19th century.

 

[I reposted the picture because it was making me crazy looking back & forth.]

The 'certification' from the 'auctioneer appraiser' leaves a lot to be desired. It gives the simplest of descriptions, not even identifying the Simeon scene. No mention of what is impressed on the back. Measurements for only one. It seems to be circular: the blocks are circa 1495 because it is understood that they were used in the printing of a picture Bible in France circa 1495. Is it 'understood' because it is so obvious to anyone with a brain? Or because this is what they understood from what the consignor told them?

This does not actually look like an appraisal to me, more like the auctioneers' response to an inquiry as to how they were described at the time the blocks were auctioned by their house. Or perhaps a confirmation sent to the consignor of how they were to be listed in an upcoming auction. Suspect 'it is understood that' means this is what the consignor told them, & is not any kind of expert opinion.

I used to imagine that auction houses had an expert examine all items being offered for sale & that descriptions would be reasonably accurate. I have learned that is very far from the truth. Mostly they accept whatever consignors tell them about an item & 'experts' are not always correct. The fine print of the terms & conditions will say that they do not guarantee something is what they describe it as.

The letter does not estimate value they might have in a future auction, nor does it state the hammer price for them in a previous one. There is no support for the assertion of the 1495 dating. Is there a title for the auction house representative that has been blacked out? Is the other block clearly a nativity scene, leaving the one we have seen to be the Biblical scene in the Holy Land? Or is Simeon misidentified as the nativity?

Reputable they may be, they are still primarily auctioneers. When my jeweller gives me a written appraisal, it clearly says that it what it is & gives an estimated value. This is neither a formal appraisal nor any kind of certificate of authenticity. I don't think you can rely on the letter for much other than confirmation the blocks were around in 1971.

 

While I was feeding the cats, @Bronwen said everything I was going to say, and better. Well done!

 

LOL. My cats are on their own this morning.

I may not know anything about the history of printing techniques, but I'm good at knowing what is evidence & what is not. This is not.