DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18734#0240
t 43 3
Picart was certainly a very able artift in his way;
but not being fond of the graver, his prints are never
highly finiflied. His great excellence lay in defighmg
and engraving fmall compofitions for vignettes and
other book plates ; and his works in this line are ex-
ceedingly meritorious. In juftice to him we ought to
obferve, that he did not live to publifli the above-men-
tioned work; but being approved of by his friends,
it was given to the public after his death. It is much
to be lamented, that they had not judgment fufficient
to fupprefs it. His misfortune was fuch as many other
great men have experienced through the zeal of their
friends to publifh all their productions, which zeal has
often been more prejudicial to their fame, than all the
malevolence of their enemies.
c It is probable that Picart's judgment was milled by
his vanity; but this motive can hardly be attributed
to a writer of our own country, who, poffeffed of very
little more knowledge in the arts, than what is difplayed
by a lift of technical terms, and a few theoretical ob-
fervations, has taken a decided part with Picart, and
levelled his anathemas againft the old mailers, in
general, through the medium of Marc Antonio.
' Picart was not the firft artift, who attempted to de-
ceive the unwary connoifTeurs. Henry Goltzius, a
German mafter, and a man of fuperior abilities, being
difgufted at the preference which was given to the works
of Albert Durer, Lucas of Leyden, and other artifts of
thofe fchools, when compared with his own, (for he
had attempted to improve the tafte of his country, and
this attempt was not immediately relifhed) undertook in
a deci-
Picart was certainly a very able artift in his way;
but not being fond of the graver, his prints are never
highly finiflied. His great excellence lay in defighmg
and engraving fmall compofitions for vignettes and
other book plates ; and his works in this line are ex-
ceedingly meritorious. In juftice to him we ought to
obferve, that he did not live to publifli the above-men-
tioned work; but being approved of by his friends,
it was given to the public after his death. It is much
to be lamented, that they had not judgment fufficient
to fupprefs it. His misfortune was fuch as many other
great men have experienced through the zeal of their
friends to publifh all their productions, which zeal has
often been more prejudicial to their fame, than all the
malevolence of their enemies.
c It is probable that Picart's judgment was milled by
his vanity; but this motive can hardly be attributed
to a writer of our own country, who, poffeffed of very
little more knowledge in the arts, than what is difplayed
by a lift of technical terms, and a few theoretical ob-
fervations, has taken a decided part with Picart, and
levelled his anathemas againft the old mailers, in
general, through the medium of Marc Antonio.
' Picart was not the firft artift, who attempted to de-
ceive the unwary connoifTeurs. Henry Goltzius, a
German mafter, and a man of fuperior abilities, being
difgufted at the preference which was given to the works
of Albert Durer, Lucas of Leyden, and other artifts of
thofe fchools, when compared with his own, (for he
had attempted to improve the tafte of his country, and
this attempt was not immediately relifhed) undertook in
a deci-