DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52444#0151
DRY-POINTS, AND ETCHINGS.
tinting, and therefore transparent throughout. From the Ruhl Collec-
tion.
c. Similar to b, ink somewhat colder, the distance wiped more closely,
which throws it back better. Duplicate from the Berlin Cabinet, form-
erly in the Von Nagler Collection.
d. A very good impression, the face in quite perfect condition. Printed
in soft warmish ink, with a very perceptible tint all over the plate, which
gives to the impression a somewhat heavy appearance, and reduces the
contrasts too much.
e. Copy. If this is the copy by Jan Wierix, which, at first sight, it
would seem to be, it is a proof before letter. Alvin, No. 1576, says that
in the lower margin of this copy is engraved : “Johan. Wiricx. Fecit. Ann.
1603,” and others say that this margin is generally cut away. But here
the margin evidently is not cut away, and yet there is no lettering.
Possibly it is Heller’s copy No. 847, with which it agrees in size.
Impressions a and b offer again a good opportunity to observe the difference
between filling and tinting. The best impressions in the European cabinets ex-
amined are those in London and Berlin. The former is a beautiful silvery gray
impression, in rather coldish black ink, practically clean wiped, with only very
slight tinting here and there,— on the polygon for instance,— probably acci-
dental. The impression in Berlin is in warmish black ink, with very little tinting.
In the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, there are no less than three impressions, one
belonging to the Print Collection of the Museum itself, the two others to the Gray
Collection. Of these, the first is the finest, a silvery gray impression, in soft
black ink, clean wiped, the face quite intact. The face of the brooding genius,
which never was a success as a piece of engraving, technically considered, soon
began to wear, and it is therefore often defective. The slight blemish in the
water, a black spot about one quarter of an inch above the polygon, seems to
occur in all impressions.
This has always been one of the popular favorites among Diirer’s works, and
all the more so because of its enigmatical character. Within certain limits, the
subject is easy enough to understand. Differ calls it “ Melancholy ” in his
Netherlands Diary, and this title, “ Melencolia. I.,” is plainly indicated on the
print itself. But here the difficulty begins. Is the character after the word Me-
lencolia the figure one or the letter I ? Passavant (HI, p. 153) claims that it is
the latter, and that it means “ Melencolia i! ”—“ Melancholy avaunt 1 ” Thau-
61
tinting, and therefore transparent throughout. From the Ruhl Collec-
tion.
c. Similar to b, ink somewhat colder, the distance wiped more closely,
which throws it back better. Duplicate from the Berlin Cabinet, form-
erly in the Von Nagler Collection.
d. A very good impression, the face in quite perfect condition. Printed
in soft warmish ink, with a very perceptible tint all over the plate, which
gives to the impression a somewhat heavy appearance, and reduces the
contrasts too much.
e. Copy. If this is the copy by Jan Wierix, which, at first sight, it
would seem to be, it is a proof before letter. Alvin, No. 1576, says that
in the lower margin of this copy is engraved : “Johan. Wiricx. Fecit. Ann.
1603,” and others say that this margin is generally cut away. But here
the margin evidently is not cut away, and yet there is no lettering.
Possibly it is Heller’s copy No. 847, with which it agrees in size.
Impressions a and b offer again a good opportunity to observe the difference
between filling and tinting. The best impressions in the European cabinets ex-
amined are those in London and Berlin. The former is a beautiful silvery gray
impression, in rather coldish black ink, practically clean wiped, with only very
slight tinting here and there,— on the polygon for instance,— probably acci-
dental. The impression in Berlin is in warmish black ink, with very little tinting.
In the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, there are no less than three impressions, one
belonging to the Print Collection of the Museum itself, the two others to the Gray
Collection. Of these, the first is the finest, a silvery gray impression, in soft
black ink, clean wiped, the face quite intact. The face of the brooding genius,
which never was a success as a piece of engraving, technically considered, soon
began to wear, and it is therefore often defective. The slight blemish in the
water, a black spot about one quarter of an inch above the polygon, seems to
occur in all impressions.
This has always been one of the popular favorites among Diirer’s works, and
all the more so because of its enigmatical character. Within certain limits, the
subject is easy enough to understand. Differ calls it “ Melancholy ” in his
Netherlands Diary, and this title, “ Melencolia. I.,” is plainly indicated on the
print itself. But here the difficulty begins. Is the character after the word Me-
lencolia the figure one or the letter I ? Passavant (HI, p. 153) claims that it is
the latter, and that it means “ Melencolia i! ”—“ Melancholy avaunt 1 ” Thau-
61