Art reproduction is seldom the focus of art-historical enquiry. In relation to the nineteenth century in particular, it remains largely uninvestigated despite the fact that the period was characterized by important changes in print technologies, including the invention of photography, the rise of intellectual property and copyright issues, the growing significance of a private art market that made extensive use of reproductive imagery, and the widespread increase in the public demand for art reproductions. These form the subject of Robert Verhoogt’s incisive and groundbreaking study, Art in Reproduction: Nineteenth-Century Prints after Lawrence Alma-Tadema, Jozef Israëls and Ary Scheffer. The monograph, a translation of his PhD dissertation (University of Amsterdam, 2004), is enriched in important ways through its inclusion of intellectual/cultural property issues, informed by Verhoogt’s interest and background in law, which he studied before turning to art history.

The book is divided into two major parts. The first (chapters 1–4) deals with the theoretical and historical questions associated with art reproduction in the nineteenth century; the second (chapters 5–7), with reproduction in relation to the work of three artists, Ary Scheffer, Jozef Israëls, and Lawrence Alma-Tadema. The careers of these Dutch-born artists unfolded primarily in France, the Netherlands, and England, respectively; and these three locations provide the setting for this study. Both halves of the book present substantial new material in respect to the larger subject of art reproduction in the nineteenth century, and either could easily have been the subject of a monograph in its own right.

Verhoogt identifies one of the central paradoxes underpinning the subject of art reproductions in the nineteenth century: “on the one hand, art reproduction burgeoned on an unprecedented scale, on the other, the period was permeated as never before by concepts of originality and authenticity” (18). With a nod toward Walter Benjamin, including the notion of “aura” as applied to the original art work, and the fact that Benjamin, “more than any one else, introduced the phenomenon of art reproduction into the sphere of reflection on art theory” (20), Verhoogt addresses numerous issues related to perceptions of the reproduction vis-à-vis the original art work, including how these have shifted over time.

In the first two chapters, Verhoogt defines his field and approach. First he discusses the many ways in which art is reproduced (including the artist’s own copies or variations of a work, forgery, etc.), before turning to the specific focus of this study: prints and photographs made after works of visual art. At every stage of this and all chapters, the complexities of the subject are set forth with numerous examples, including exceptions to the rule. The second chapter, “From Engraving to Photography,” provides an overview of the complex field of visual reproductive technologies during the nineteenth century. This important chapter provides clear and detailed information on technological developments, situating these developments within the wider art-historical context. Beginning with a discussion of the history of printmaking in the art academies in England, France, and Holland, Verhoogt traces how printmaking gained status first on the continent and later in England. The history and importance of each technique for reproducing art works is presented, beginning with engraving (“the traditional medium”), followed by the nineteenth-century inventions of lithography, steel engraving, and photography.

The third chapter, which draws on Robert Darnton’s theories of book history, traces what Darnton has termed the “life of the reproduction,” beginning with the decision that it should be made (usually instigated by the publisher), then moving from the collaboration between the various parties involved (for example, the publisher, artist, printmaker/photographer, and owner of the work) to the actual reproduction. Discussion of this “life” is continued in the following chapter, which focuses on distribution of the reproduction to the public and its general reception. The reader comes away with a great deal of knowledge about often neglected areas of studio practice, art dealers, and publishers (including John Boydell in England; Adolphe Goupil and various associates in France; Pieter and Frans Buffa, and E. J. van Wisselingh in the Netherlands), state sponsorship of art reproduction, and the role played by art “unions” and other associations. An important “Intermezzo” deals with the rise of illustrated periodicals, including the highly successful and widely emulated Penny Magazine, founded in 1832 in England, as well as L’Artiste, The Art Journal, and De Kunstkronijk.

The section devoted to the reception of art reproductions begins with a consideration of the range of exhibition venues, including the (not to be underestimated) bookshop window as well as the much better studied international exhibitions and world fairs of the second half of the century. The discussion underlines just how pervasive the practice of exhibiting art reproductions was, reminding the reader, for example, that the Paris Salons regularly exhibited a wide selection of reproductions, especially of contemporary art. Discussions of the people and places associated with the selling of art reproductions leads logically to consideration of their collectors, including individuals and sometimes artists themselves, as well as institutions such as libraries, academies, and museums. How reproductions were kept or viewed, in special albums, portfolios, or as framed works hung on the wall, is considered. Referring to Ernst Gombrich’s The Use of Images (London: Phaidon, 1999), Verhoogt points to the practice at some nineteenth-century exhibitions of hanging the art reproduction alongside the original artwork, and he delves further into the relationship between the two in respect to notions of “association,” “adaptation,” and technical means used to evoke one medium with another.

The second part of Art in Reproduction consists of case studies of Scheffer, Israëls, and Alma-Tadema, all of whom enjoyed considerable popular and professional success. Beginning with Scheffer, Verhoogt considers the significance of reproductions of Scheffer’s art to his fame. Scheffer and other artists working in his circles during the 1830s and 1840s were aware of the concept of authorship rights, albeit to varying degrees and often in a relatively limited sense. In the case of Scheffer, the artist sold the rights to reproduce his works, and it is likely that he earned as much or more from the reproductions as he did from selling the actual works. The person to benefit most financially from the reproduction, however, was not the artist but the publisher.

Following the progress of an unfinished reproduction of Scheffer’s work by the Dutch engraver Henricus Couwenburg, Verhoogt provides an unusually complete idea of the working relationship between the artist and engraver. The latter’s considerable status indicates that there was little “socio-cultural distance” between artist and elite reproductive printmakers in early nineteenth-century France. The forms reproductions of Scheffer’s art took, from appearing as individual prints to appearing in catalogues, almanacs, and periodicals as well as albums dedicated solely to his work, is also discussed, as is their reception. The chapter ends with reference to the issues of originality and authenticity. Scheffer signed a number of his reproductions, making the latter, Verhoogt suggests, into new originals (355–56).

Reproductions of Israëls’s work are the subject of chapter 6. From the mid-century on, Israëls’s genre scenes were reproduced as engravings, lithographs, etchings, and photographs on a wide scale, appearing as independent reproductions and published in almanacs, albums, and periodicals. He appears to have had agreements with publishers about reproduction rights in at least some cases and to have supplemented his income in this way. An especially interesting episode examined by Verhoogt is the close working relationship between Israëls and the French master lithographer Adolphe Mouilleron, who was in Amsterdam in the mid-1850s working on a lithograph of Rembrandt’s Nightwatch. The established printmaker and still relatively unknown Israëls worked side by side in the latter’s studio, with Mouilleron producing reproductions of Israëls’s paintings. In at least one case the two seem to have worked on the original and a reproduction of it simultaneously. This episode underlines the close cooperation between two types of art professionals, and emphasizes the international milieu they occupied. The numerous techniques used to reproduce Israëls’s works are fully explored, as is the artist’s close working relationship with the leading Dutch publishers F. Buffa and A. C. Kruseman. The use of Israëls’s works in almanacs introduces the relationship that developed between the artist and the poet Nicolaas Beets. This use of images to accompany text in almanacs, often religious in nature, is an important subject that has far-reaching implications for the history of Dutch nineteenth-century cultural production.

The final artist dealt with is Alma-Tadema, the one most conversant with the legal system and associated matters of copyright. In 1896, for example, he chaired a committee investigating legislation in the area of authorship rights. Alma-Tadema’s success was in large part due to the early efforts of the influential Belgian-born English art dealer and publisher Ernest Gambart, who first met Alma-Tadema in 1864. The artist’s work was reproduced in all mediums and appeared in every form, including archaeological reference works. This last category introduces an important aspect of Verhoogt’s larger subject, albeit one that mostly falls outside the scope of his book: the convergence of artistic and scientific discourses when art reproductions were used in scientific publications. Alma-Tadema’s relationship with two leading French printmakers is examined: the first, the well-known engraver Auguste Blanchard, who had done engravings after the works of Scheffer, William Powell Frith, and William Holman Hunt; and the second, his friend, the widely esteemed etcher Paul Rajon. Especially in respect to the latter, one is again reminded of the close working relationship often shared by printmaker and artist and the wider acknowledgement and appreciation of the “joint work” of the artist and the printmaker in the production of art reproductions. After the late 1880s, Alma-Tadema’s work was increasingly reproduced through photography, including large-scale photomechanical photogravures.

Aside from some repetition and the frequent use of very long quotations, the material is set out clearly and the book reads smoothly. It remains complex, however, and so the person and subject indices that accompany the text are invaluable tools. The meticulous and comprehensive footnotes and extensive bibliography will also be important to scholars. At the same time, a number of areas might have been identified more explicitly. The significance of reproductions to the discipline of art history itself is pointed out in a section of chapter 8, an issue about which more attention would be welcome. More self-conscious thought about the art reproductions chosen for this book (including the anomalously large number of end plates devoted to Alma-Tadema’s works in relation to the other two artists) would be appropriate. Another area that would benefit from closer and more explicit examination is the importance of Holland to all three artists. Their continued association with the country even when residing elsewhere, and the connections to prominent figures in Dutch culture (Beets, Carel Vosmaer, etc.), tend to be treated descriptively rather than analytically. How does this decidedly Dutch focus within this study fit in relation to a wider, European arena? The recurring citations from Vincent van Gogh’s letters also deserve more explicit discussion. Finally, the relationship one encounters somewhat obliquely, especially in the art of Scheffer and Israëls, between the religious print culture and that of the larger art world represents a tantalizing entry point into a subject much too large to be treated comprehensively here, but one that would nonetheless benefit from a more extended discussion. However, these remarks are perhaps more commendation than criticism, attesting to the fact that one’s interest is piqued at every turn.

The book is a well-researched and thought-provoking study that provides an unprecedented amount of new material on art reproduction to scholars interested in nineteenth-century visual and cultural studies. It will serve as an excellent starting point for further investigations in related areas, including the history of art institutions, publishing, intellectual and cultural property issues, and science and technology. Above all, it is a book that should have a significant and immediate impact on nineteenth-century art history. To specialists in nineteenth-century print culture, it is essential reading.