Roma

Engraving, 1557, signed and dated in plate in the cartouche at upper left, where the dedication of architect Francesco Paciotti is engraved: Illustriss. Atq. Integerrimo Octavio Farnesio Placentiae Et Parmae Duci Franciscus Paciottus Urbnat Maecenati. S. Urbis Romae Formam Quae Nunc Est Iam Ante Quam Me In Familiaritatem Recepisses Aeneo Typo Unde Omnes Qui Hoc Genere Delectantur Exemplum Possint Ducere Eam Ipsam Cui Potius Dicarem Dignorem Te Crete Reperi Neminem Cum Ob Magnum Quae Tua Est Humanitas Optimarum Artium Studium Tum Ob Graphicae Eximium Quemdam Amorem Itaque Hoc Quantulum Cumque Est Munus Tanquam Meae Ergate Observa[N]Tiae Pignus Vel Potius Ob Fidem Oro Ut Accipias Velisque Ac Iubeas In Lucem Tuis Auspiciis Exire. Vale.  Ex Typis Et Diligentia Ant. Lafrerii Sequani An. M.D.Lvii. Cum Gratia Et Privilegio Summi Pont.

In the lower right corner we find the monogram of Nicolas Beatrizet, the engraver of the  plate for the publisher Antonio Lafreri.

Toponymic indications are present in the map. Orientation in the four sides in the center with the names of the cardinal points: SEPTENTRION, MERIDIES, ORIENS, OCCIDENS; north is on the left.

Magnificent proof, richly toned, impressed on two joined sheets of contemporary laid paper - one with unreadable watermark - trimmed to copperplate and with contemporary margins added, in extraordinary state of preservation.

“Geometric plan with elevation, drawn by Francesco Paciotti and engraved by Nicolas Beatrizet for the publisher Antonio Lafreri. The work is dedicated by Paciotti, an architect and military engineer, to the Duke of Parma Ottavio Farnese (1524-1586). It is based on Bufalini's 1551 plan, both in terms of the road and wall layout and, even more prominently, the orographic representation. What is new, compared to the model, is the elevation representation of the main buildings, which emerge from the context. This type of representation inaugurated by Paciotti, which skillfully blends zenith topographic imprint and perspective view of the buildings, will be the basis for many future representations of the city. The work is contained both in examples of Lafreri's Speculum Romanae magnificentiae and in composite cartographic collections of the 16th century. No futher edition of the map are known” (cfr. Bifolco-Ronca, Cartografia e topografia italiana del XVI secolo, p. 2392).

The work belongs to the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, the earliest iconography of ancient Rome.

The Speculum originated in the publishing activities of Antonio Salamanca and Antonio Lafreri (Lafrery). During their Roman publishing careers, the two editors-who worked together between 1553 and 1563-started the production of prints of architecture, statuary, and city views related to ancient and modern Rome. The prints could be purchased individually by tourists and collectors, but they were also purchased in larger groups that were often bound together in an album. In 1573, Lafreri commissioned a frontispiece for this purpose, where the title Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae appears for the first time. Upon Lafreri's death, two-thirds of the existing copperplates went to the Duchetti family (Claudio and Stefano), while another third was distributed among several publishers. Claudio Duchetti continued the publishing activity, implementing the Speculum plates with copies of those "lost" in the hereditary division, which he had engraved by the Milanese Amborgio Brambilla. Upon Claudio's death (1585) the plates were sold - after a brief period of publication by the heirs, particularly in the figure of Giacomo Gherardi - to Giovanni Orlandi, who in 1614 sold his printing house to the Flemish publisher Hendrick van Schoel. Stefano Duchetti, on the other hand, sold his own plates to the publisher Paolo Graziani, who partnered with Pietro de Nobili; the stock flowed into the De Rossi typography passing through the hands of publishers such as Marcello Clodio, Claudio Arbotti and Giovan Battista de Cavalleris. The remaining third of plates in the Lafreri division was divided and split among different publishers, some of them French: curious to see how some plates were reprinted in Paris by Francois Jollain in the mid-17th century. Different way had some plates printed by Antonio Salamanca in his early period; through his son Francesco, they goes to Nicolas van Aelst's. Other editors who contributed to the Speculum were the brothers Michele and Francesco Tramezzino (authors of numerous plates that flowed in part to the Lafreri printing house), Tommaso Barlacchi, and Mario Cartaro, who was the executor of Lafreri's will, and printed some derivative plates. All the best engravers of the time - such as Nicola Beatrizet (Beatricetto), Enea Vico, Etienne Duperac, Ambrogio Brambilla, and others  - were called to Rome and employed for the intaglio of the works.

All these publishers-engravers and merchants-the proliferation of intaglio workshops and artisans helped to create the myth of the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, the oldest and most important iconography of Rome. The first scholar to attempt to systematically analyze the print production of 16th-century Roman printers was Christian Hülsen, with his Das Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae des Antonio Lafreri of 1921. In more recent times, very important have been the studies of Peter Parshall (2006) Alessia Alberti (2010), Birte Rubach and Clemente Marigliani (2016). 

Bibliografia

Bifolco-Ronca, Cartografia e topografia italiana del XVI secolo, 2018, pp. 2392-93, tav. 1231; C. Hülsen, Das Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae des Antonio Lafreri (1921), n. 3; cfr. Peter Parshall, Antonio Lafreri's 'Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, in “Print Quarterly”, 1 (2006); B. Rubach, Ant. Lafreri Formis Romae (2016), n. 256; A. Alberti, L’indice di Antonio Lafrery (2010), n. 35; Marigliani, Lo splendore di Roma nell’Arte incisoria del Cinquecento (2016), n. XI.2; cfr, D. Woodward, Catalogue of watermarks in Italian printed maps 1540 – 1600 (1996); Silvia Bianchi, Catalogo dell’opera incisa di Nicolas Beatrizet, in “Grafica d’Arte”, 2004, n. 120; Bartsch (1813): vol. XV, n. 108 (TIB 29, pp. 366-367); Bevilacqua-Fagiolo (2012): p. 121 e n. 5; Bianchi (2003): n. 120; Caldana (2013): p. 12; Frutaz (1962): n. CXVI e tav. 228; Hülsen (1915): VI, p. 51, n. 29; Robert-Dumesnil (1865): vol. IX, n. 112; Rocchi (1902): cfr. p. 105 e tav. XX; Scaccia Scarafoni (1939): p. 85, n. 150; Witcombe (2008): p. 208, n. 3.96.