DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28460#0184
Division B.—Dotted Prints.
159
printing, by which the book is dated, and the binding. On the other
hand, it is possible, though not so likely, that the print so inserted
may be older than the book (for an undoubted instance of this, in the
case of a woodcut, see Schr. 265). Much more important is the
internal evidence afforded by the drawing of the human figure and
features, by the folds of the drapery, and by the details of costume
and ornament. This evidence, in the great majority of cases, points
to the years 1470-1500 as the period of the chief production of these
prints.
Stages in. the development of the technique can be traced vTith
some degree of certainty, though it is impossible to fix, even
approximately, the date of the transition from one stage to another,
and there are many specimens which will not fall conveniently into
any of the groups so formed. The stages are marked in part by the
number of tools used in the work. The earliest specimens are those
in which the whole surface, even to the faces and hands of the persons,
is covered thickly with dots, varying in size but all small, and made,
for the most part, not with a punch but with tlie graver or some
pointed instrument, the largest dots only being regular in shape and
uniform in size. The background was entirely cut away, leaving no
border to the print, so that the figure stands out detached in strong relief
from the white paper. The best instances of this are the St. Catherine
at Paris, Schr. 2569 (reproduction, Schr. tom. vi, pl. xxviii), and the St.
Christopher at Munich and Paris, Schr. 2590 (reproduction, Schmidt,
pl. 32). A slight advance was made when the dots were removed
from the faces, as in the St. George at Paris, Schr. 2633 (reproduction
in H. Delaborde, “ Engraving,” translated by R. A. M. Stevenson, 1886,
p. 45), and the St. Christopher at Oxford, Schr. 2593 (see reproduction
—here dots are still used on the legs), or only sparingly used in the
modelling of some of the features, as in the “ Mazarin Crucifixion ” in
the British Museum, Schr. 2333. The latter already has a border,
though the whole background within it has been cut away. The
probable date of this group is about 1450-60. In the last-mentioned
print and in the St. George at St. Gallen, Sclir. 2635, portions of the
surface, especially the fianks of the horses, are remarkable for the
elaborate and careful grouping of dots of various sizes for the sake of
colour and modelling. Another good instance of this is the St.
Jerome, Schr. 2675, formerly in the Weigel collection (see repro-
duction, W. u. Z. ii, 228), and now in that of Baron Edrnond de
Rothschild. It is curious that this peculiarity, wlrich one might well
take for a late refinement, is confined tt> the earliest prints, in which
the technique otherwise is simple. It was abandoned in favour of
Development
to be traced in
tbe technique.
159
printing, by which the book is dated, and the binding. On the other
hand, it is possible, though not so likely, that the print so inserted
may be older than the book (for an undoubted instance of this, in the
case of a woodcut, see Schr. 265). Much more important is the
internal evidence afforded by the drawing of the human figure and
features, by the folds of the drapery, and by the details of costume
and ornament. This evidence, in the great majority of cases, points
to the years 1470-1500 as the period of the chief production of these
prints.
Stages in. the development of the technique can be traced vTith
some degree of certainty, though it is impossible to fix, even
approximately, the date of the transition from one stage to another,
and there are many specimens which will not fall conveniently into
any of the groups so formed. The stages are marked in part by the
number of tools used in the work. The earliest specimens are those
in which the whole surface, even to the faces and hands of the persons,
is covered thickly with dots, varying in size but all small, and made,
for the most part, not with a punch but with tlie graver or some
pointed instrument, the largest dots only being regular in shape and
uniform in size. The background was entirely cut away, leaving no
border to the print, so that the figure stands out detached in strong relief
from the white paper. The best instances of this are the St. Catherine
at Paris, Schr. 2569 (reproduction, Schr. tom. vi, pl. xxviii), and the St.
Christopher at Munich and Paris, Schr. 2590 (reproduction, Schmidt,
pl. 32). A slight advance was made when the dots were removed
from the faces, as in the St. George at Paris, Schr. 2633 (reproduction
in H. Delaborde, “ Engraving,” translated by R. A. M. Stevenson, 1886,
p. 45), and the St. Christopher at Oxford, Schr. 2593 (see reproduction
—here dots are still used on the legs), or only sparingly used in the
modelling of some of the features, as in the “ Mazarin Crucifixion ” in
the British Museum, Schr. 2333. The latter already has a border,
though the whole background within it has been cut away. The
probable date of this group is about 1450-60. In the last-mentioned
print and in the St. George at St. Gallen, Sclir. 2635, portions of the
surface, especially the fianks of the horses, are remarkable for the
elaborate and careful grouping of dots of various sizes for the sake of
colour and modelling. Another good instance of this is the St.
Jerome, Schr. 2675, formerly in the Weigel collection (see repro-
duction, W. u. Z. ii, 228), and now in that of Baron Edrnond de
Rothschild. It is curious that this peculiarity, wlrich one might well
take for a late refinement, is confined tt> the earliest prints, in which
the technique otherwise is simple. It was abandoned in favour of
Development
to be traced in
tbe technique.