| OCR Text |
Show 73 that Bodmer would have bothered. Nonetheless, although the figure is consistent with Manceau's style for the rest of the aquatint, the images of Maximilian and Bodmer-and behind them that of David Dreidoppel, Maximilian's retainer-are all good likenesses, based upon the portrait sources available.25 This may indicate that Bodmer took a hand in reproducing these four images for the aquatint. Since Manceau would not likely have had a reference for reproducing the features of Maximilian and Dreidoppel, it must be considered possible that Bodmer did draw the faces of Maximilian and Dreidoppel, as well as his own portrait and that of Charbonneau for the aquatint. Why does Travellers Meeting differ so drastically from Scalp Dance? The fact that Scalp Dance was a documented occurrence, and Travellers Meeting was not is insufficient reason to explain the vast differences in the two prints. Nor is the fact that Bodmer was a participant, rather than an observer, sufficient explanation. Although both of these elements may have contributed to the differences in reportive accuracy, a fuller explanation lies elsewhere. In addition to the fact that this vignette was obviously intended as book illustration rather than as scientific documentation, the Travellers Meeting was also one of the later prints produced; the first prints of this vignette were not completed until June 30, 1842.2® By the time this vignette was under production, most of the portrait images Bodmer typically used as references for his composite scenes had already been used at least once. Yet, it could be assumed that using some of these portraits again would have worked better with regard to the documentary accuracy expected by Maximilian. However, by 1842 Bodmer-harassed, discouraged, and chronically behind |
