DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.73058#0053
Bartolomei's Improvements in Copying.
transformed the smudge into a pretty and highly finished medallion of a female head.
But pages might be filled with a description of liberties or "improvements" of this kind,
which in fact extend more or less through the whole of the portraits. Dibdin says truly
that Bartolozzi had a notion that he could improve everything he touched. He did, in
fact, improve nearly everything he touched ; but why, in the name of common sense, the
multitude of "improvements " in the Holbein portraits should be laid to Bartolozzi's charge
it is difficult to conceive. Be it remembered that Chamberlaine held the appointment of
Keeper of the King's Drawings; to these he had free and constant access, and Bartolozzi
no doubt frequently saw them also; and be it further remembered that the assertion in the
Introduction to the finished work, that the engravings were facsimiles of the original draw-
ings, was Chamberlaine's and not Bartolozzi's. It is simply monstrous to suppose that
Chamberlaine, with the original drawings in his keeping and before his very face, would
have allowed Bartolozzi to proceed with plate after plate, proofs of which he must have
seen, unless he had not only been content with the work, but satisfied that his instructions
were being carried out. The inference is, that in Chamberlaine's idea absolute facsimiles
of the Holbein portraits would not have been appreciated by the public, and he therefore
selected Bartolozzi as the most suitable and skilful engraver he could employ, who, while
not deviating too far from the originals, would make pleasing pictures that the public would
like and purchase. Dibdin seems to think that copies of the drawings were made for
Bartolozzi to engrave from; but if so, they have disappeared. It is more probable he had
the original drawings; and there is, in the writer's opinion, internal evidence of a distinct
understanding between Chamberlaine* and Bartolozzi as to the general character of the
* In the advertisement preceding the issue of the work, it is notified—“ In regard to the present publication of these
portraits, it is merely necessary to state that it will exhibit the most faithful copies of the originals—for it were idle
to say more of a work which can require no recommendation ; the world need not be told what to expect from
Bartolozzi's engravings after Holbein's drawings." The Introduction says: "Every man of taste must discern how
much the beauty of this work is indebted to that inimitable artist, Francis Bartolozzi, Esqre."
engravings, the sketchiness of the originals, notwithstanding their intense vigour and
strength, being evidently considered unattractive to the public. If this explanation be
not accepted, then the further difficulty remains to be disposed of, as to why Chamberlaine
allowed Bartolozzi to proceed, not only from proof to proof of a plate, but from plate to
plate of the series; and why on its completion he himself, with an intimate knowledge
of the original drawings, described them in the Introduction as facsimiles.
Under Chamberlaine's supervision the copperplates were beautifully printed in
colours.* Being of opinion that the public would take up a prodigious number of
* " Printing has not produced anything finer than these heads."—Manuel des Curieux et des Amateurs de V Art, par
Michel Huber. Zurich, 1800.
copies of the work, which they did not, he kept his printers going for many months. The
over-production was so great that examples can even now be obtained at a very small
cost. The two small portraits of the children of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk,
at the end of the work, instead of being printed in colours direct from the copperplates,
are coloured by hand, so as to more closely approximate to the original miniatures, now
preserved in the Queen's Library at Windsor.
35 Lowndes
D 2
transformed the smudge into a pretty and highly finished medallion of a female head.
But pages might be filled with a description of liberties or "improvements" of this kind,
which in fact extend more or less through the whole of the portraits. Dibdin says truly
that Bartolozzi had a notion that he could improve everything he touched. He did, in
fact, improve nearly everything he touched ; but why, in the name of common sense, the
multitude of "improvements " in the Holbein portraits should be laid to Bartolozzi's charge
it is difficult to conceive. Be it remembered that Chamberlaine held the appointment of
Keeper of the King's Drawings; to these he had free and constant access, and Bartolozzi
no doubt frequently saw them also; and be it further remembered that the assertion in the
Introduction to the finished work, that the engravings were facsimiles of the original draw-
ings, was Chamberlaine's and not Bartolozzi's. It is simply monstrous to suppose that
Chamberlaine, with the original drawings in his keeping and before his very face, would
have allowed Bartolozzi to proceed with plate after plate, proofs of which he must have
seen, unless he had not only been content with the work, but satisfied that his instructions
were being carried out. The inference is, that in Chamberlaine's idea absolute facsimiles
of the Holbein portraits would not have been appreciated by the public, and he therefore
selected Bartolozzi as the most suitable and skilful engraver he could employ, who, while
not deviating too far from the originals, would make pleasing pictures that the public would
like and purchase. Dibdin seems to think that copies of the drawings were made for
Bartolozzi to engrave from; but if so, they have disappeared. It is more probable he had
the original drawings; and there is, in the writer's opinion, internal evidence of a distinct
understanding between Chamberlaine* and Bartolozzi as to the general character of the
* In the advertisement preceding the issue of the work, it is notified—“ In regard to the present publication of these
portraits, it is merely necessary to state that it will exhibit the most faithful copies of the originals—for it were idle
to say more of a work which can require no recommendation ; the world need not be told what to expect from
Bartolozzi's engravings after Holbein's drawings." The Introduction says: "Every man of taste must discern how
much the beauty of this work is indebted to that inimitable artist, Francis Bartolozzi, Esqre."
engravings, the sketchiness of the originals, notwithstanding their intense vigour and
strength, being evidently considered unattractive to the public. If this explanation be
not accepted, then the further difficulty remains to be disposed of, as to why Chamberlaine
allowed Bartolozzi to proceed, not only from proof to proof of a plate, but from plate to
plate of the series; and why on its completion he himself, with an intimate knowledge
of the original drawings, described them in the Introduction as facsimiles.
Under Chamberlaine's supervision the copperplates were beautifully printed in
colours.* Being of opinion that the public would take up a prodigious number of
* " Printing has not produced anything finer than these heads."—Manuel des Curieux et des Amateurs de V Art, par
Michel Huber. Zurich, 1800.
copies of the work, which they did not, he kept his printers going for many months. The
over-production was so great that examples can even now be obtained at a very small
cost. The two small portraits of the children of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk,
at the end of the work, instead of being printed in colours direct from the copperplates,
are coloured by hand, so as to more closely approximate to the original miniatures, now
preserved in the Queen's Library at Windsor.
35 Lowndes
D 2