Luigi Fabri (aka Aloysius Fabri) (1775/78–1835)
“Libyan Sibyl”
(La Sibilla Libica), 1831-34, from the series of 37 plates, “Volta Della
Cappella Sistina” (of which Fabri etched 13 plates), published by Calcografia
Camerale (Rome), after the drawing by Francesco
Giangiacomo (1782–1864) of Michelangelo
Buonarroti’s (1475–1564) fresco in the Sistine Chapel.
Etching on
heavy wove paper with margins (as published?).
Size: (sheet) 96.5
x 67.5 cm; (plate) 88.7 x 59.5 cm; (image borderline) 82.5 x 55 cm
Inscribed
within the image: (upper left) “MICHAEL ANGELUS / BONAROTIUS /
PINXIT”; (upper right) “IN SIXTINO / VATICANO / SACELLO”
Lettered in the
plate below the image borderline: (left) “Franc. Giangiacomo del.”; (centre) “GREGORIO
DECIMO SEXTO PONT. MAX. / Rome ex Calcographia R.C.A.”; (right) “Al. Fabri
scul.”
National
Institute for Graphics / Istituto Centrale per la Graficaoffers offers a
description of this print:
Condition: richly
inked, excellent impression with generous margins. This is an exceptionally
large print. The image area is in near faultless condition but the margins show
signs of handling with kinks, small dents and tears, folds and light soiling.
I am selling
this immense (absolutely huge!) etching of Michelangelo’s very famous “Libyan
Sibyl” for the total cost of [deleted] including postage and handling to anywhere in
the world.
If you are
interested in purchasing this visually stunning print, please contact me
(oz_jim@printsandprinciples.com) and I will send you a PayPal invoice to make
the payment easy.
This print has been sold
I was leafing
through Bernadine Barnes’ (2010) scholarly book, “Michelangelo in Print:
Reproductions as Response in the Sixteenth Century”, and stumbled upon a
proposed reason why reproductive printmakers tended to focus on Michelangelo’s
paintings of sibyls and prophets more than other images in the Sistine Chapel.
Sadly, I’ve lost the place in the book where this idea was proposed, but it
makes sense to me: these figures were the
easiest for draughtsmen to examine looking up to the ceiling without craning
their heads too uncomfortably (my apologies to Barnes if my memory of the proposal
isn’t quite right). I like answers like this that are rooted in fundamental creature
comfort as I too would be a tad lazy as an artist if I were to choose a section of the ceiling to spend hours upon hours to draw.
After reading
this idea I had a look at photographs of the ceiling to see where the biblical
luminaries were positioned and then the thought hit me: I now know why
Michelangelo shows some architectural features as if one is looking
upwards—which of course one does when looking up to the ceiling—and yet he
shows an eye-level view of the sibyl’s head. In fact Michelangelo shows even a
slightly higher than eye-level view of this head. The answer is simple: the
pendentive (i.e. the curved triangle of vaulting) upon which the sibyl is
painted, is vertically curved around the sibyl’s feet but “flattens” out to a
vertical-eye-level view towards the head. For me this is fascinating … I had
forgotten about anamorphic projection!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please let me know your thoughts, advice about inaccuracies (including typos) and additional information that you would like to add to any post.