DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28460#0182
Division B.—Dotted Prints.
157
Passion are introduced. The prints are often enclosed by a passe-
partout, of which tliere are several types, the most frequent being a
band of the frilled, conventional clouds on a black ground sprinkled
with stars, interrupted at the corners by medallions with the four
Evangelists, to whom in large prints, where space permits, the four
Doctors of the Church are sometimes added, in the middle of each side.
Another common design, with many variations, is a wreath of large
leaves twisted round a rod, interrupted at the corners by a large flower.
iSTothing is known as to the personality of any of the engravers in
this style, though we have advanced beyond the stage of attributing
all their productions to a single artist, the notorious, and all but
mythical “ Bernard Milnet.”1 Tliis narne and that of “ Bartholmeus ”
1 The name “ bernhardinus milnit (et?) ” occurs on a kind of label attached to the
passe-partout of riband-like clouds, with the symbols of the four Evangelists at the
corners, which surrounds a print of the Yirgin and Child, half-length, standing,
discovered at Frankfort in 1818, by Mr. 2s. Hill of Manchester. This print belonged
some years ago to Mr. Gr, H. Eowbotham, of Manchester, and was photographed while
in his possession, but it was lost in 1896. (Information kindly supplied by Mr. Gordon
Duff, librarian of the John Eylands Library, Manchester, April 28th, 1900, and
since confirmed by Mr. Eowbotham.) Schreiber was mistakeu in asserting that
this impression was at Althorp. (Schr. 2482. Eeproduction, Ottley, “ Invention
of Printing,” p. 197. Another impression without the passe-partout from tho
Weigel collection, passed from the hands of Mr. L. Eosenthal of Munich into
private ownershij).) Duchesne, who first published a transcript of the supposed signa-
ture, jumped to the hasty conciusion (“Essai sur les Nielles,” 1826, p. 10) that the print
of S. Bernardinoof Siena at Paris with tlie supposed date 1454 (in reality 1174), was also
by Bernardinus (or, as he calls him, Bernard) Milnet, for no better reason than that
there are dots in both, and that Bernardino (whom he confuses with Bernard) was the
engraver’s patron-saint. He ascribed to him, further, two prints of St. Catherine and
St. George (Schr. 2569 and 2633) at Paris, and others at Berlin (Schr. 2282, 2671 (?),
2743) (“ Yoyage d’uu Iconophile,” 1834, p. 223). From this it was a short step to the
description of the dotted style in general as “maniere de Bernard Milnet.” As a matter
of fact, this engraving of the Virgin is far from being typical of the style in general.
The dots and strokes are large and coarse, and the white lines leaving small black
squarcs appear to iiave been produced by the knife ratherthan by the burin. Duchesne,
not content with the reckless attribution of other dotted prints to the same eugraver,
concluded that tiiis eograver was a Frenchman, because his name ended in “et,”and St.
Bernard (sic) was a French saint (“ Essai,” p. 11). The “ h ” in “ bernhardinus ” poiuts
rather to a German origin, while the features of the Yirgin and the style of the drapery
suggests a rather late date (about 1480, Schr.) and the Lower Ehine as the locality. No
readingof the inscription more plausible thau “bernhardinus milnet” has been suggested.
It should be observed that even if this be the name of an engraver (to which, it is true,
the name “ bartholmeus” on Sehr. 2218 affords a parallel), we are not strictly justified
in attributing to him anything more than the passe-partout, which surrounds the print
itself but may have beeu produced apart from it. In the passe-partout no dots occur.
It is important to observe that the supposed impression of this print at Paris
[E. a. 3. Ee'serve], which all the writers who have discussed the subject, from Duchesne
to Schreiber, have described as an original, is merely one of the tweuty-five impressions
of the facsimile made at Antwerp in 1820 for Mr. Hill, from the original which is now
lost. For the proof of this I am indebted to M. Ilenri Bouchot of the Bibliotheque
Nationale, Paris, from whose letters, dated 16 Nov. and 18 Nov. 1898 I quote the
following passages : “ L’estampe representant la Yierge nous a e'te envoyee par M. Ilill
le 26 septembre 1820 par la poste d’Anvers. M. Hill ecrivait a Van Praet, conser-
vateur de la Bibliotheque Eoyale : ‘ L’artiste venant de me rendre le fac-simile de
l’estampe de Bernard Milnet dont il n’a encore tire' que cinq epreuves, je m’empresse
de vous en envoyer une par la poste, au risque meme de la dete'riorer. Je de'sire
beaucoup qu’il rempiisse vos vues ; daus tous les cas je vous sera tres reconnaissant
de me donner votre opinion bien detaillee sur cet objet.’ (Le reste de la lettre a trait
Signatures of
the engrayers.
157
Passion are introduced. The prints are often enclosed by a passe-
partout, of which tliere are several types, the most frequent being a
band of the frilled, conventional clouds on a black ground sprinkled
with stars, interrupted at the corners by medallions with the four
Evangelists, to whom in large prints, where space permits, the four
Doctors of the Church are sometimes added, in the middle of each side.
Another common design, with many variations, is a wreath of large
leaves twisted round a rod, interrupted at the corners by a large flower.
iSTothing is known as to the personality of any of the engravers in
this style, though we have advanced beyond the stage of attributing
all their productions to a single artist, the notorious, and all but
mythical “ Bernard Milnet.”1 Tliis narne and that of “ Bartholmeus ”
1 The name “ bernhardinus milnit (et?) ” occurs on a kind of label attached to the
passe-partout of riband-like clouds, with the symbols of the four Evangelists at the
corners, which surrounds a print of the Yirgin and Child, half-length, standing,
discovered at Frankfort in 1818, by Mr. 2s. Hill of Manchester. This print belonged
some years ago to Mr. Gr, H. Eowbotham, of Manchester, and was photographed while
in his possession, but it was lost in 1896. (Information kindly supplied by Mr. Gordon
Duff, librarian of the John Eylands Library, Manchester, April 28th, 1900, and
since confirmed by Mr. Eowbotham.) Schreiber was mistakeu in asserting that
this impression was at Althorp. (Schr. 2482. Eeproduction, Ottley, “ Invention
of Printing,” p. 197. Another impression without the passe-partout from tho
Weigel collection, passed from the hands of Mr. L. Eosenthal of Munich into
private ownershij).) Duchesne, who first published a transcript of the supposed signa-
ture, jumped to the hasty conciusion (“Essai sur les Nielles,” 1826, p. 10) that the print
of S. Bernardinoof Siena at Paris with tlie supposed date 1454 (in reality 1174), was also
by Bernardinus (or, as he calls him, Bernard) Milnet, for no better reason than that
there are dots in both, and that Bernardino (whom he confuses with Bernard) was the
engraver’s patron-saint. He ascribed to him, further, two prints of St. Catherine and
St. George (Schr. 2569 and 2633) at Paris, and others at Berlin (Schr. 2282, 2671 (?),
2743) (“ Yoyage d’uu Iconophile,” 1834, p. 223). From this it was a short step to the
description of the dotted style in general as “maniere de Bernard Milnet.” As a matter
of fact, this engraving of the Virgin is far from being typical of the style in general.
The dots and strokes are large and coarse, and the white lines leaving small black
squarcs appear to iiave been produced by the knife ratherthan by the burin. Duchesne,
not content with the reckless attribution of other dotted prints to the same eugraver,
concluded that tiiis eograver was a Frenchman, because his name ended in “et,”and St.
Bernard (sic) was a French saint (“ Essai,” p. 11). The “ h ” in “ bernhardinus ” poiuts
rather to a German origin, while the features of the Yirgin and the style of the drapery
suggests a rather late date (about 1480, Schr.) and the Lower Ehine as the locality. No
readingof the inscription more plausible thau “bernhardinus milnet” has been suggested.
It should be observed that even if this be the name of an engraver (to which, it is true,
the name “ bartholmeus” on Sehr. 2218 affords a parallel), we are not strictly justified
in attributing to him anything more than the passe-partout, which surrounds the print
itself but may have beeu produced apart from it. In the passe-partout no dots occur.
It is important to observe that the supposed impression of this print at Paris
[E. a. 3. Ee'serve], which all the writers who have discussed the subject, from Duchesne
to Schreiber, have described as an original, is merely one of the tweuty-five impressions
of the facsimile made at Antwerp in 1820 for Mr. Hill, from the original which is now
lost. For the proof of this I am indebted to M. Ilenri Bouchot of the Bibliotheque
Nationale, Paris, from whose letters, dated 16 Nov. and 18 Nov. 1898 I quote the
following passages : “ L’estampe representant la Yierge nous a e'te envoyee par M. Ilill
le 26 septembre 1820 par la poste d’Anvers. M. Hill ecrivait a Van Praet, conser-
vateur de la Bibliotheque Eoyale : ‘ L’artiste venant de me rendre le fac-simile de
l’estampe de Bernard Milnet dont il n’a encore tire' que cinq epreuves, je m’empresse
de vous en envoyer une par la poste, au risque meme de la dete'riorer. Je de'sire
beaucoup qu’il rempiisse vos vues ; daus tous les cas je vous sera tres reconnaissant
de me donner votre opinion bien detaillee sur cet objet.’ (Le reste de la lettre a trait
Signatures of
the engrayers.