A SUMMARY OF SOME OF THE POINTS DISCUSSED BY LAST YEAR’S GROUP

Authorship: Marcantonio’s engraving highlights the ever-increasing importance of authorship at this time, both in the broader production of art, as well as print production. The names of the most famous printmakers were starting to become selling points for their own works, and in Marcantonio’s case he was able to profit not only from Dürer’s name, whose woodcut he copied in this instance, and who was one of the most celebrated artists of the time, but from the elevation of his own. 

“Originality” and Technique: Neither of these prints were original designs. The ways in which they could be considered copies, however, varied. Marcantonio’s sheet was celebrated as an almost imperceptible replica – according to Vasari at least – of Dürer’s original. It was his skill in the art of copying which acted as a draw for consumers. The St. Christopher was a standardised small woodcut of a very popular subject of a design that was reproduced all across central and southern Europe. Its appeal was entirely based on its subject matter, as an object of devotion, rather than on any artistic skill.

Use: The Birth of the Virgin may have been collected for a number different reasons that suggest how it was used: To be kept in a studiolo and examined and discussed by humanists, scholars, and wealthy collectors. It may well have served a religious purpose too, to be prayed to or to be kept for luck. It could also have been studied by other artists both for its thematic as well as its artistic value. The St. Christopher would have almost invariably been used as a religious object, kept in pockets or notebooks, or pinned onto walls. Similar works, although enormous in number at the time, rarely survived because of how frequently they were handled, and mostly destroyed as a result of wear and tear.  

Gender: The Birth of the Virgin may have appealed somewhat more to women due to its domestic, female-centred subject-matter. The St. Christopher – who is the patron saint of travellers – could have attracted a predominantly male audience that spent their time outside the private setting of the Renaissance household. 

Concluding remarks: The St. Christopher could have been owned by almost anyone. We know that this particular image was in the possession of the Paduan notary, Jacopo Rubieri. Records show that such prints were widely accessible and very cheap. Their value as religious works may have appealed as much to those on the lowest rungs of the socio-economic ladder, as to those at its top. The draw of Marcantonio’s work went beyond its subject to the fame of its author and his technical mastery. This suggests that at least a part of its buyers would likely have been members of the Italian elite, many of whom participated in contemporary debates on art, as well as artists. Yet, even finer prints such as Marcantonio’s would have been affordable to the “middling classes”. Since few inventories from this time exist, and where they do, prints are rarely identified, it is impossible to state with certainty in how far The Birth of the Virgin was bought for the same reasons – those being religious – as the St. Christopher