A MERICAN M ARVEL
Prologue to this Translation Presenting Miguel Cabrera, the author of the essay American Marvel published in 1756 is a very special honor. Books are like friends, they will share with the reader all they contain and will be patient if put down (to rest) when needed to however they will continue, being your friend, when you return. They never stop being your friend. I get to understand such a concept late in life (sixties), nevertheless, now I know I have the power to choose my books (friends) and even attend to them, like a friend should. I am taking advantage of a God given grace, bilingualism - and I thank my family also for including such concept in my education since I was 4 feet tall, thus now I can use it to share my friend with you. It is an honor to present to the English speaking (reading) public, an awesome person, craftsman and artist: Miguel Cabrera. An accomplished master. He was in awe of what he saw regarding the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and he shared it with the world (Spanish speaking) over 250 years ago by what he wrote in his report*. He named his work (before there was a wink of the USA) American Marvel, and right he was. *The report to the Bishop, the highest authority in the Americas - second only to the none American residents, the Pope, and the King, which thanks to his caring wit and effort was written, has been a joy to read in Spanish, and now this treasure is in English for you. Enjoy!
Pepe Hernández March 2012, Mount Pleasant, SC
There is more to this translation, however the protocols of 1756 and today’s are different. This publication is going directly to the cloud (online) first, and than on to paper for those readers who wish a copy for themselves, or to share as a gift with friends. As far as content goes, we respectfully omitted the Imprimatur(s) required of those days, and the space they occupied in the final printed version of 1756 - about 20% of the original - paper and ink, and surely time to get those Imprimatur approval process done. They don’t (humble opinion) particularly add to the essence of the report. We are obviating those, but you can find them in the tab Imprimaturs on the website www.americanmarvel.org Further, and in this to our modern advantage, the images that you see through out the online version of this translation, plus the printed versions of them if you are reading from the printed book, did not go through the process of color separation which in of itself is a miracle. Until very few years, let’s say, till this XXI century, if you wanted to print a color image (not line color image) you had to separate the colors. Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black; each with their appropriate filters and screens. We will not get into that technicality, to the risk of making this Prologue’s foreword or tech side fact lengthy. Today this way of printing (digital) by-passes that as well. When you obtain the printed version of American Marvel, you will be receiving a digital copy which is - an original, thus without color separation (see above). So just the facts, as well as we can put them in this contemporary day and age for us all to enjoy. There is more information to come about Our Lady of Guadalupe. Why so much impact of Christianity in America, so early - 1531. Stay in touch with the website. On your part, there is something to do. Keep us in your prayers.
Fidelingua
So as to comply with the charge placed upon the Distinguished Church of the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe, the outcome of which is anxiously anticipated by this entire new world, the Honorable Abbot and other Prebendaries put forth all of their effort towards not only enhancing the Church with the magnificent works of art that we now see in it, but also to obtain from the Holy See a greater extension of worship and homage for Our Lady. Not satisfied with the results obtained in 1666 regarding such purpose, at the request of several devoted followers of Our Lady, further steps were taken in order to better facilitate the attainment of their desired purpose. One of those was to convene in the Sanctuary on the 30th of April of the year 1751 the most renowned painters of present-day Mexico, among which, without deserving it, I was included. At a designated hour we were allowed to calmly observe the Holy Image, without the obstacle of any glass, so that being made well aware of the singular flawlessness and unusual circumstances observable in the painting, we could judge, according to the standards of our art, if such a marvel could possibly be the work of human hands. I prepared my opinion at that time in writing but I kept it to myself because I had a need to study further some aspects that previously had captivated my attention and now I found myself newly absorbed by. I was in awe of the wonderful strangeness of this marvelous painting, and I needed to assimilate as much as possible the Original in preparation for the times when I would be allowed to copy it. News of my written opinion reached several persons, so some curious followers asked me for it so they could read it. Among them one liked it so much that he insisted it should be printed, claiming that by my consent I would bring much glory to Our Lady. I thought about the proposal and admittedly had reservations about making public my badly structured arguments; but I could not say no to this individual, because of the high esteem I had for him, and also for other reasons that moved me to please him. So that is why, in brief, I agreed to publish it and am allowing these lines to come to light. I entitle this work: American Marvel, because this land, our America, was the one chosen by Our Sovereign Queen to reveal the wonders of her portrait to mankind. I also call it A Series of Extraordinary Phenomena, because it seems to me that there are many contained in it, in this Sovereign Painting, as I shall try to manifest in this writing, which I will divide into eight paragraphs to avoid confusion. In the first I will deal with the durability of the canvas and its paint, because its hardiness is one of the wonders that most captivates. Next I will proceed as in the traditional method that we use in painting, that is, in the second paragraph I will directly address what I understand about
the canvas or cloth upon which the Holy Image is painted. In the third, I shall discuss the order, or better said, the lack of order that one can enjoy in this Celestial Image. In the fourth, a discussion of its laudable drawing. In the fifth, a discussion of the paints, or of the four classes of paints that coexist in this wonderful array. Then in the sixth I will discuss the gold leaf, the precious gold that beautifully glitters about the virginal Image. Next, in the seventh I will address the skepticisms that some have about the Image (if there indeed are any). I will end my paper with the eighth paragraph, in which I will describe as reasonably as possible the design of the original drawing of Holy Mary, whom we venerate as Guadalupe, without addressing or specifying from what material the colors that form it are made, because although they are similar to ours, to know precisely if they are or are not the same, or how they were used, or how the painting was created, I claim that as the territory of the Author of such a marvel. Miguel Cabrera
I THE REMARKABLE DURABILITY OF THE IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE I marvel at the long lasting survival – more than two hundred and twenty five years - of this painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and that in spite of the abundance of significant environmental challenges to its longevity in this region of Mexico lies this temple where she is so revered by those from the world over. This Mexico is located, not only on a lake, but surrounded by other lakes, so that these surrounding valleys are full of salitre, so that the environment becomes humid and full of salitre particles, which are fortified by the temperate climate of the region and can then crumble stone buildings, as well as rust the hardest iron, as can be seen every day. It is undeniable that far lesser adversaries than these could quickly and easily do away with the canvas on which the Holy Image is drawn - the fact of its lowly material would assure its demise and now we would be lamenting its loss. There is reason enough, I judge, for which we must attribute this strange preservation to special privilege – because the Holy Image is painted onto it. This will be more perceptible if we reflect on another very special circumstance that produced great admiration in me when I observed it. The canvas or ayate in which the Queen of Angels is painted is made of two equal panels, stitched together with a very thin cotton thread incapable by itself of resisting any stress. But this fragile thread does resist, and it has being doing so for more than two centuries against natural forces, plus the resistance of the two panels that are made of a naturally heavier and stronger fiber than the weak cotton. That same fragile thread has resisted as well all the pushing and stretching that pious hands have inflicted on it by touching other paintings or images as well as applying jewelry to the Holy Image of Our Lady in the rare occasions that the protective glass is removed; though this is not done daily, it surely must have occurred many times over more than two hundred years. On one day, around 1753, I was present, and the protective glass was removed. There were great numbers of rosaries and other devotional jewelry, in addition, five hundred images were touched to the original; there were several distinguished church people involved in this task that lasted for more than two hours. For these reasons I again repeated my conviction: that this cloth seems to be exempt from nature’s common laws.
2 REGARDING THE CANVAS OR CLOTH ON WHICH IS PAINTED THE IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE The canvas or cloth (ayate) upon which the Guadalupan Virgin is painted seems to be a fabric that was coarse-woven out of a type of thread commonly known as “pita.� It was fabricated by the local indians out of a type of palm native to this country. They used this material to weave their own garments, which they call in their language ayatl and which we, commonly refer to as ayate. The weave and color is similar to the natural, unbleached muslin from Europe, which we know here as cotense; this type is considered neither of the highest nor the poorest quality, but normally what we designate as of average quality. Others have proposed that this marvelous cape is woven out of a twine extracted from the maguey cactus. I do not agree with this because the ayate made of this material we still see nowadays, still in use by the Indians, is too coarse. The fabric of the Image is not so coarse woven, even though it might seem so due to some gaps and rough spots in the weave, of the muslin already mentioned. Truth be told, in an effort to convince ourselves that this painting is an accredited, qualified miracle, it seems useless to try to discover whether the material as made out of cactus fiber or the palm fiber, because either would be an utterly inappropriate choice for a human artist to render such a noble and excellent painting, so that I feel it is entirely unique, as we shall see further on. What should indeed be awe-inspiring to us at this point is the softness one perceives in this ayate. Although it appears to be quite coarse and rough, and by its ordinary nature it should be so, this perception converts into a gentle softness very similar to that of the finest silk, such sensation I have experienced the various times I have been blessed enough to touch the painting, and surely this is not an attribute of other ayates of this type.
3 REGARDING THE ABSENCE OF NORMAL SURFACE PREPARATION BENEATH THIS PAINTING Inherent in the discussion of the raw material of our canvas, the next logical step is to address its surface preparation, which is generally the starting point of any great painting. Yet ours is again different from all others, because after a thorough examination of both the front and back in the year 1666 by contemporary artists, it was found that the canvas had no surface preparation whatsoever. This fact was documented by Father Florencia, of the Society of Jesus. Under oath, the artists affirmed that upon viewing the painting from the back, the entire Holy Image with all of its colors, is transported to the back and can be perceived in the same exact way as from the front. Hence we can obviously infer from this the total lack of a base or gesso as preparation, which would not allow us to see the colors from the back of the painting. The preparation not only makes the surface of the cloth smooth so that it can be painted without any threads in the way, but it also impedes the colors from going through the canvas to the other side; we have learned this technique through experience. Not solely by citing the above referenced painters am I convinced about this. The Holy Image itself reveals this to us even today. The back is now covered with two large sheets of fine silver, with an open space between them and the painting of about two or three fingers’ width. Between these two plates there is a small enough crack to see clearly and distinctly the objects on the other side. I have experienced this on several occasions, and therefore am convinced that there was no smoothing canvas preparation beneath this Exceptional Image, because if it did, this would not allow for the visibility of the objects across the painting. If anyone could assumes that the canvas had some type of prior preparation, it is understandable, as I myself was also confounded at first sight, but it is a mistaken assumption I shall say more about this again in a more appropriate context.
4 REGARDING THE MARVELOUS PROPORTIONS MANIFESTED IN THE IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE This work is so unique and perfectly finished, and so clearly extraordinary, that I am quite certain that anyone who is at all familiar with the principles of the art of painting, upon viewing the Image would conclude and spread the news that this wonder is indeed a miracle. The drawing is perfectly lined up, so accurate in its outline, so that the principal elements are all appropriately proportionate to the figure. Due attention is given to the panels (specialized terminology of artists); and their correspondence to the whole allows for correct symmetry. All this is rendered with special delicacy in the admirable rendering of our subject matter, to such degree that it not only conforms to the strictest painting precepts, but in this painting these are happily superseded. I cannot explain the amazement that is evoked in me by this artistic marvel, because its beauty is such, that it exceeds far beyond any matter of skill according to which it might be evaluated. Its beautiful and gracious symmetry, the tight cohesion of all of the panels, and of these to the whole all combine to astonish anyone who has even the least bit of knowledge about painting. It has not one line or element that is anything less than miraculous, as if within this wondrous likeness the Dominion of its Author were fully alive and present. Upon measuring this Holy Image with my most particular and meticulous care, I found that it has eight and one third faces, and if adding a little bit more as She is inclined to the side it results in eight and two third faces distributed in the following way: The first from the edge of the hair line to the bottom of Her jaw; the second from there to Her virginal breasts, and from there on including the two thirds which include Her total height, this is, from the top of Her head to the soles of her Holy feet. And do not be surprised that this is how our Image is measured, by “faces� and not by units, as this was the practice of the elite of this school, like Apeles, Pidias and Licipo, and of our Spaniards Juan de Arce and Gaspar Becerra. There has always been some degree of flexibility as to the number of faces or as to the proportion of the human body, because some believed it measured ten, others nine and half, plus a third, and others nine. This variation occurs because the descriptions were devised in the context of different climates and regions, that in some places people are larger framed, and in others smaller. However, these artists always depict man in his prime,
age-wise. This was the practice utilized by our renowned Albrecht Duhrer, the great observer of nature. He was very accomplished in reflecting appropriate stature to reflect precisely the age of the subject. And if we consider the perfectly correct stature as represented by the gracefulness of our wondrous Image at the age of fourteen or fifteen years, It is important to note that her stature is appropriate when we consider that it fits well with her tender and delicate symmetry as we observe; her likeness relates perfectly to the eight faces and two thirds, which make seven units or cuadrants, less half a third that comprises Our Lady; and she has the typical proportions for a young woman of this age. And consistent with the purpose of the Image, as mentioned before, it contains the most perfect of proportions. That the Holy Lady appears in the painting as a young girl, of fourteen or fifteen years old, is quite consistent with the contemporary illustrations produced by the Indians of the time in their writings. Luis Becerra Tanco, Professor of Mathematics and of the Mexican Language of this the Royal University, an expert in the language of the Indians, as well as in the deciphering of their hieroglyphs and written language, deduced from the translation of the conversation that the Holy Virgin had with Juan Diego, and he with Her, that at least three times did the blessed Indian call the Sovereign “Empress”. This is confirmed by the Professor in the beginning of his History and I know of additional occasions when he has made this claim. See the History, in the section on the Second Appearance, page fourteen; and in section on the Fourth Appearance, page twenty four; and again in the section on the Second Appearance, on page seventeen. Now, the very gentle Lady here addresses Juan Diego as a son; so why does he address her as a child, referring to Her, the beautiful Princess, as a child? And even more mysterious is this if we consider how profoundly respectful and deferential are the Indians in their humble manner when they addressed persons of a higher station. As I see it, the only answer is that Juan Diego actually perceived a child in the celestial Queen; and even though it may seem unusual for Our Lady to address him as “son”, it is consistent with the humble and unsophisticated nature of Juan Diego. And now it seems obvious that the way she appears in the likeness is just how she appeared to the fortunate Indian. As it has been established, then, She truly was a child, and that is why she is not represented in the Holy painting as a person of twenty or thirty years old. I would suggest that if her age in the likeness were older than that of a fourteen or fifteen year old, then we would be seeing her holding her Blessed Son in her beautiful arms. I find it important at this point to pause in order to address her height in the rendering, it is strange that for many years there was no artist, no matter how
ambitious, who was not discouraged upon attempting to copy the painting. I conferred with Don Jose de Ibarra, a very well known and respected craftsman, who is acquainted with the most accomplished painters of this century, and knowledgeable about those who were prominent in the past, and concerning those he is less familiar with, he has access to their personal notes and works. Due to this and to the wisdom of his considerable years, his observations on this matter carry great weight. The following are his own words, which he kindly put into writing and made available to me when this document was being readied for printing. “It is of note,” he says, “that in Mexico there have been great painters who have achieved widespread acclaim, such as the renowned works of Chavez, Arteagas, Juarez, Becerras, and others that I do not mention, who were producing great works at least one hundred and fifty years ago. And even though Alonso Vazquez, a very celebrated European artist, introduced marvelous painting practices upon coming to this land, and he was followed by Juan de Rua and others, none of these, nor any one else was able to draw or produce a perfect painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe. I have seen some of the paintings done during those times and they neither have the correct form nor the correct proportions that the original does have. It is apparent that they tried to imitate her, yet to no avail. Not until the original image was traced by my teacher Juan Correa, was this achieved. I was able to see this tracing and had it in my hands; it was done on oily paper, and was the same size as the original and on it was all the outlines, lines and the correct number of rays, and from this tracing there have been multiple copies that have served as a model for artists, even into the present day. I have mentioned all of this so that it is clear although nowadays there are techniques, not available in times past, to simulate an original image, it is also clear that even now it would be impossible to do so in this case without this tracing. I find it amazing that in all of Europe today, they cannot and could not reproduce the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe; and if there has been one, to which I cannot attest, it would be similar to those produced here before.” [and further he says] ”This serves to prove that this image is so unique, and indeed so strange, that it has not a human intervention, but only that of the Almighty.” This concludes the citing of what Master Juan Correa said, and thus I have nothing further to add about the design, so that now I shall address the painting of our holy canvas.
5 REGARDING THE FOUR PAINTING MEDIA THAT SO WONDROUSLY COEXIST IN THE IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE If an individual creature in nature were comprised of four distinct species of animals, it would most certainly be considered a monstrosity. Truthfully it would be considered no less of a deformity, to the art of painting if, in one work of art or on the same surface of a canvas, four different kinds of painting were present together; yet there are four kinds found together, in perfect harmony, on the Holy canvas of Our Lady of Guadalupe. This would be impossible for a human artist to accomplish because the media are so different, and even if possible the result would be most unattractive, yet in this virginal canvas, the practice results in such grace and beauty that even if I were to exaggerate I could not possibly describe what one can perceive by simply looking at the image. It can only have been a divine hand, in my humble judgement, that succeeded in this canvas in combining the four kinds of paint media, which are so different each from the other (as I shall explain). And what came out of this so unexpected union of different kinds of paints? The astonishing perfection of it, its surprising beauty, tenderness, unity and sweetness, all combine to empower the four distinct media rendered in this canvas, resulting in the most divine portrait ever seen, as if it had been painted in heaven, which could be the only creator capable of extracting the different elements of each type to form this superior set of perfections witnessed in this painting. Who ever could call these remarks exaggerations has not carefully observed this miraculous Image of Guadalupe. If I should be judged for any wrong here it would be for understating about this divine wonder. This is my understanding, but I can only say so much, I only wish I were capable of saying more. The four kinds of paint found in the image of Guadalupe are: oil, tempera, gouache, and fresco. Of course there have been masters of each of these techniques, but there is no record of any artist who used all of these together in one work. The combination has never even been attempted, to my knowledge, and until it appeared in the image of Guadalupe no one had ever conceived of the possibility. Apparently the head and the hands of the beautiful image of the Sovereign Princess Guadalupe are done in oil; her gown and the angel on the clouds on which she is perched, in tempera. Her cloak is painted in goache, and the field on which the rays are painted is done in fresco. These various painting techniques are by nature so different that each requires a different type of surface preparation and application; and the very fact that there is no surface
preparation whatsoever makes the combination even more amazing. Additionally, consider the fact that all of these substances were applied to such an unlikely and difficult surface as this cloth. To me these facts taken together make for a perfectly logical conclusion that I am convinced that this wonderful painting is indeed supernatural. These very arguments, it seems to me, will serve to convince even those least knowledgeable about the art of painting, especially if the basic information about these four techniques of painting is explained. The first, the medium of oil, is made up of a mix of drying oils, which by its wonderful nature makes for a hard and beautiful finish. It always requires prior preparation of the canvas. This image is the most wondrous of all such paintings. The second kind, tempera, uses all types of pigments, mixed with glues, gums or similar agents. The third, gouache, is applied over a thin white sheet wetting the back of the cloth, which helps to thin and lighten the tones of the cloth. Fresco, which is the fourth medium, is used to not only paint the surface but also to cover up everything under it, and is mostly used when surface to be painted on is firm and solid, as in wood, or a wall, etc. Its application to the Guadalupe image would according to the masters of this medium, would not adhere due to its very density and flat color. In fact, by their nature these paints are so thick that they cannot be applied using brushes, but only with spatulas such as those used in plasterwork. These are the four painting media which are found so beautifully applied on our painting. As to this last technique (fresco) I can understand the misjudgment some have made, because I did so myself, of considering it to have been the surface preparation of the canvas. Having presented what I have, it would of course not be relevant. The other artists and I concur that three different media are certainly present, even though this is seemingly impossible, and I also believe that their failure to mention the fourth does not diminish their merit, nor does it mean that they were not true to their oath, because they did affirm that it seemed to be oil while it also seemed to be tempera. For one thing, they agreed that the head and hands appeared to be oil, as I have said; and for another, they also all agreed that it even though these three media are so different, that the canvas could be either or both tempura or oil, which does not differ from what I have said. So how could anyone claim that this combination of four painting media so different one from another yet so beautifully executed in harmony in such a surface could be the product of human art or fabrication? I for one would hesitate in good conscience to make such an assertion, because I know how impossible it would be for merely human hands to achieve. It is quite improbable that these four media could be utilized together, insofar as the mixture of colors, because it would require some to be mixed with oil, others with water, and yet others with gums. Just to achieve the mix would be very
difficult, but even more so with the level of dexterity with which each type is here so admirably applied. I believe that if the most diligent and able artist were to attempt to copy this holy image onto a canvas of this low quality without any surface preparation, in an effort to simulate the four media that can be observed on the painting, he or she after a great deal of effort could not possibly obtain such a result. And this is constantly substantiated, in the numerous attempts that are done utilizing very well prepared canvases and using only one medium, oil paint, which is the most forgiving of the media to handle. Thus far this effort has not led to a successful copy; when even the best copy is placed next to the original there is only one obvious conclusion one can make.
6 REGARDING THE BEAUTIFUL GOLD AND THE EXQUISITE GILDING ON THE MIRACULOUS IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE The gold that adorns the sacred Image of the Sovereign Empress is wondrous not only for its beauty, but it astonishes even the most accomplished masters of this craft, because of its unique nature, and also because of the peculiarity and serenity of its palette. If we observe the best work of the the most precise and careful masters of gold leaf application, we would never find such a perfect work as this unique masterpiece. The exquisite gold craft serves to embellish and work in perfect harmony with this wondrous painting, so that it leads one to conclude that no human mind nor eye could have conceived of it. I can assure you that the first time I was able to observe the image I was convinced that the gold was purely superficial, as if it were a dust that had been merely sprinkled onto the surface, so that even a gentle touch or draft of air would be sufficient to remove it from the surface. In fact, when I have been queried by those who are curious as to what kind of gold it is, and the best comparison I have found comes from nature: such as is found on butterfly wings, something that most have on occasion observed. Thus it appeared to be of such delicateness that barely touching the gold leaf on the beautiful Image of Our Lady would produce the same effect as barely touching the wings of a butterfly: that the tiny particles of pigment, being a mere superficial coating, would immediately transfer onto one’s hands. This is the way it appeared to be, but having been permitted to touch it, which I did with the reverence due such a divine Image. With great awe I observed the exact opposite to be true. I noticed how completely the gold pigment was integrated into the weave of the fabric, as if the painting and the weaving were one and the same. One can distinguish the individual threads of gold, even though the weave is quite dense. As I have mentioned, the gold is well integrated, all the gold work being so bonded to the canvas that to the touch is perceive the same concavity as with the eyes, as if it were stamped onto it. This would have required the use of strong pressure on the canvas, yet there is nothing on the entire surface of the painting to indicate that the usual materials of the gold leaf craft were used to apply the gold onto the painting. Truly it is undeniable that these circumstances can only point to a supernatural painting, because it is notable that neither the normal sequence nor the regular practices were used to produce it.
There are some peculiar golden flowers drawn on the gown of the Holy Image. They are drawn using golden lines which oddly do not adapt to the uneven texture, with its rises and falls, but instead appear to be painted on an entirely flat surface. However, the parts of the lines that are indented appear darker, but this does not detract from its grace and beauty. The hems of the tunic and of the cape are also golden, as well as the stars and the rays of the sun that adorn the Holy Image, and her crown is golden as well. I noticed yet another exquisite feature on the gown, and it occurs on both the front and the back of the image: something that I find quite impossible for any human to be capable of. This line is little more than the breadth of a human hair, and in looking at it very close it is so even, so precise, that it can only be perceived upon close observation. Due to the impossibility of duplicating this, I believe it has been omitted in all copies that have been made. At least I have not heard of or seen it being included by anyone. I noticed that the gold of the gown seems less intense and bright as that of the rays. In trying to decipher the reason behind this, I realized that it could only have been caused by in the habitual and near constant practice of touching other images, both on hard images and cloth, to the Image of Our Lady. As a result some of the gold was rubbed off from the gown that is still present in the rays. Returning to the outlines of the image, it is true that these are not present on both front and back, but only on the front. However, the hems of both the gown and the cloak are outlined by a darker line a bit thicker than the edge of a coin, and are so exquisitely drawn that they make the image project out from the canvas, something that has mystified each of the professors of this body.
7 ADDRESSING THE VARIOUS ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO OUR MOST BEAUTIFUL PAINTING The most effective response one could provide in answer to the arguments proffered in opposition to this our most wondrous painting is the painting itself. I know very well that once examined with attention even the sharpest of eyes could not find anything less than total perfection, beyond whatever has existed in a painting before. There will be many who, without being able to see this wonder close enough, will become perturbed upon hearing an uninformed, unintelligent opinion in opposition to the image. I shall respond briefly to these, mainly by saying that the viewer was inattentive to our most beautiful Guadalupe’s image. And for those who have not yet seen Her Majesty, in case they have heard the objections, they will be addressed in this paragraph. The first objection asserts that cannot be considered a work of art because it is not perfectly perpendicular in its vertical alignment. I will respond that there is no such defect in our sovereign painting. What can be inferred here is that in those days there was not a painter in Mexico that sufficiently skilled in this way, because if there were, he would not have allowed this most venerated and respected image to be so poorly positioned within its frame. That is the reason why the Holy Image appears to be lower on one side than it should. This can easily be adjusted by lifting the image two fingers on the left side, than one would appreciate her standing perfectly straight on the perpendicular axis that she should. As to the second objection, it is asserted that the left leg, below the knee, appears to be shorter and not in perfect proportion to the whole. To address this issue it is important to note that in the art of Painting we adhere to a set of rules based on the principles of perspective, and commonly referred to as foreshortening. It is in essence the stretching or shrinking of the length of the elements of the painting in accordance with its overall proportions and perspective. Because Our Lady’s left foot is behind her right, which is in front because she is putting her weight on it, the foreshortening of that leg is obviously indicated. To interpret this as a defect is an error, and it should be established that this approach was entirely accurate for the position in which she stands. The third objection is that Our Lady’s hands are not in correct proportion to her height. It is an accepted fact that it is a sign of grace and beauty for women to have small hands. This has been affirmed by many authors and in fact by nature herself. This is effectively shown in the image: that from the
wrist, or from the base of the palm of the hand, to the tip of the long finger, there are two and a half thirds. The “third” measure is based on the height of Our Lady’s face. Thus, as I have illustrated, this objection is a mistaken one. The fourth objection asserts that the right shoulder is larger than it should be and is thus not in accordance with the standards of correct symmetry. I have measured it very carefully, taking into consideration Our Lady’s height, and of the proportions of her sacred Body, and I find it to be completely consistent with the rules of proportion as taught by our mentors and writers. As for the fifth objection, it asserts that the light sources in the painting are not artistically accurate because they are inconsistent. It is the prerogative of the artist that the source of illumination chosen for a painting be only one and that this one determines how the light and shadows are portrayed encompassing all of the figures or elements, taking into account that there may be other less important sources caused by even some reflection. However, the circumstances of the history or message being painted at times requires the depiction of additional light sources, as we can see in our celestial painting. She is illuminated by an abundance of sun rays that entirely surround her, These should not be ignored, and in fact it is due to the numerous sources of light, all coming from unknown sources, that the delightful work of the craftsman is further established. In fact, in spite of the uncertain sources of light, the ultimate effect is what we call proper positioning, or light and dark selection, and in this all the most brilliant masters unanimously concur. Finally the sixth and last objection asserts that it is not artistic that she is outlined. We should not give any credence to this objection if we note that outlining does not in any way demerit the beauty of this work. Some illustrious painters have tried to eliminate it in their works and in their writings. In her case it adds a special grace that we have not being able to imitate, in spite of all our efforts to do so. From this we should admit that being outlined makes the marvel even more believable, because no one would attempt to use this technique – which for them would surely result in disaster. What is actually admired here by the masters is a great masterpiece of Painting, which they all assert, and which brings them to believe in its divine origin. Regarding the above objections I shall limit my observations, because I would be remiss if I were to give them more credit than they deserve, especially considering that the original image manifests so clearly what we have tried to explain, establishing by its very nature the lack of any foundation for those assertions. I had thought to remain silent on an assertion about the cloak of Our Lady, that although it asserts nothing against the art or the drawing itself, it does question the permanence of her pigments. This is based on the fact that as it is today the cloak of our Image is of a color that is neither blue
nor green, but combines both colors and is of a very fine shade. Traditionally many have believed that originally it was blue. I for one, have not thought so, nor judged that it was so, and I would attribute this to my observations of the beautiful angel at her feet. The wings have such a brilliance of color and detail, as if recently painted, and this would indicate that the original color of the cloak was indeed this blueish green, and that this color was not a result of fading over time, but was the original intended color.
8 REGARDING DESIGN IN THE MIRACULOUS IMAGE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE With what I have described up to this point I believe I have complied, to the best of my limited ability, with the charge I was given, and I confess with all humbleness, that it has been as difficult for me to compose these notes, as it might be for a writer to take hold of some brushes and with them render a painting. So just as there would be limited value ascribed to the work of one who would unprepared attempt to handle colors and start painting, that is how I feel when I re-read my poorly written but very sincere statements. I might be excused, like I said, by having been charged with doing so, and I hope that I will be allowed to continue on in order to explain the design of the wondrous Image of Guadalupe, as I promised. The exceptional canvas, then, measures two yards and one twelfth in height, and measures a little more than a yard and quarter wide, and these dimensions encompasses the two sections of which it is constituted. The stitching goes straight down the middle, without interfering in her beautiful face; joining the two pieces of the gorgeous canvas with that fragile cotton thread that I mentioned in the first paragraph. Based on the gracious proportions of our Queen as seen in the drawing her portrait reflects a young woman of fourteen or fifteen years of age, as I have already indicated. Now the only thing left to address concerning this design is to address our individual observation of the wondrous Image. Her charming face is neither full nor thin. This face is graced with all the elements that are found in a fine painting, such as beauty, tenderness, softness and highlights. In this face the viewer can perceive the outline around the eyes, the nose and the mouth so wonderfully drawn and in such harmony that on viewing whoever is fortunate enough to see it is moved by it. Her forehead is well proportioned and this enhances the hair which is black, which has its own special beauty due to its simple and understated style, as we are told was used by the noble indian women of this kingdom. Her eyebrows are thin and curved; and her eyes are lowered, like those of a dove, with such kindness and peacefulness that it causes the viewer to feel an inexplicable joy and reverence. Her nose is beautiful, and in perfect proportion to the other parts. The mouth is marvelous; her lips are very thin, and the lower one, mysteriously or by fortune is placed on a knot of the ayate, lifting it just a bit so that she seems to smile in a manner that further enhances her beauty. The same can be said of her chin. The cheeks have a pinkish glow and their color is slightly
darker than that of a pearl. Her neck is round and perfect. And so the whole of her image is perfection, and within it a divine kindness and beauty resides. She is stepping all her delicate stature on her right foot on the surface of the moon that is colored in a dark earth color, with the pointed edges aiming up (crescent). She is leaning her sacred face and all her body slightly to the right. She has her delicate hands close to her chest in a form as if in humbly asking or praying, in the same thirdly way. Her tunic is pink, and the light hits so beautifully that the lights and shadows of the folds and wrinkles are the admiration of the savvy masters. There is an opening on the neck buttoned with a medallion or a golden medal with a symbol of the Holy Cross, neatly made in black, and from here the tunic goes all the way to her sacred feet, where it fluffily drapes resting, from there on one side the angel receives the corner (as we shall see). The tunic is lined with a white felt, that can be noticed around her neck and in the turns of the sleeves, where you can also see some golden dots, that are ten on one side and eleven on the other. Regarding the golden parts of the tunic, besides the gold being very solidly applied, we have already spoken about the strangeness of its design, over the right foot near the main fold above there is a number eight, indicating to me, that her portentous first apparition was within the octave of her very pure Conception, of which mystery this is the most true and faithful copy; or that this number is indicating to us that this is the Eighth Wonder of the World. For her belt she has a purple lace two fingers wide, that is tied at her waist line with the extremities being loose. The cape covers modestly part of her head, over which she has the royal crown composed of ten points or rays; and from here descending on the sides all the way to rest on the moon, and going even further on the side that the angel is holding onto it; and in the other she has a fold in her arm and from there goes down; showing us at the near distance the inside lining of it, made of a lighter color than the outside, and finally comes to end at the moon, the rest is hidden behind the Lady. The color is not blue, as has been painted, it is of a color that is not perfectly green, nor blue but a very pleasing color in between these two colors, as I have said. She is served by a concentrated array of forty six stars: twenty on the right side and on the other side twenty four, all of which are orderly placed forming every four of them a cross; this way all of them filling the whole cape, excepting the lining (inner side of the cape) that does not have any stars. In addition to the moon she has as a stand for her Sacred Feet an angel that shows in his tender looking face the happiness of serving his Queen. He has his face inclined to the left, and can be seen till bellow his chest. He is dressed in a rose colored tunic buttoned up at the neck by a yellow button (not gold as has been said). I have mentioned regarding Our Lady, that on this side the
fringes of the tunic hang bellow the moon and on the right side the fringes of the cape, and holding to these two extremes the atlante is holding and carrying on his head; and his left wing touches the moon, where Holy Mary is stepping, and whose shoe is of a dark yellow color. This glorious spirit is in a moving stance as if he had just finished flying, denoted here not only in the drawing of his posture but on the - about to fold of his wings - indicating that his flight has been suspended, as well as not carrying on his right wing. It has a winged configuration that has not been done to this day by any painter, the feathers for one are divided in three classes or orders, the first on the two sides are of a very fine blue, than followed by an order of yellow feathers and those of the third row, are of a raw flesh color, though all this colors are not as bright or as intense as some have painted them. For background our Guadalupan Queen has a sun that beautifully surrounds her, and it is formed of one hundred and twenty nine rays: sixty two on the right side and sixty seven on the left, and they are bright and very well executed a good disposition to be admired. There is an equal distance between them, and some are wavy like tingling and the others are straight, placed one straight and one wavy configuration. As background to this illuminating the field and seen through the rays in a peculiar way following the figure of the Lady is a white that seems to reverberate. To this a yellowish ashy color is incorporated and concludes with the contour of the clouds that is of a color less than red. The rays finish in a point almost touching the clouds as well as breaking a form that niches or frames the center where our Royal Lady resides. In brief this is the design that I have been able to bring to these not well written lines, being it the greatest prodigy ever happen to this line of work. Thus, in the end, with everything that I have manifested, I have come to say that even if one would ignore its origin and tradition, only by seeing her would confess that it is supernatural, as I understand it. And truthfully, who could doubt the fantastic attributes of this Painting if he or she would reflect on the perishability of the canvas, when daily we know of better quality canvases being destroyed, in spite of being highly protected? In the simpleness and disproportionate material, where we can admire the beauty of the well finished work. In the lacking of preparation so necessary in paintings of this kind (portraits), because even in the softest silk, preparation of the canvas can not be omitted in order to make the surface more treatable and preventing the colors to go through the painting to the other side. In the fidelity of her drawing not less rare and exquisite and beautifully rendered, that not even imitated by the most qualified painters. In the variety of the four species of paint, so diverse one from the other and that have never been seen together; and here they not only are united, but conspire to the formation of the
most beautiful work conceived by fantasy. In the very singular gilding, that can easily be said is yet another kind of art (species) of painting, because it admires the experts in its coloring, its gracefulness and impression, with every thing that has already been said. This is why I judge that even if we did not have in favor of this miraculousness of this painting the truthful circumstances that persuade us as painted by supernatural and miraculous means, as handed down by tradition from parents to children without a spec of variation in the substance wether it be from spanish or even indian folk; the testimony sworn in 1666 by the most illustrious medics and protomedics of this city in favor of the none corruption of the Guadalupe Image; the testimony, same year of the most excellent painters of those days getting together to manifest the miraculousness of the Painting. Even, I say, if all of these was missing only by seeing this celestial marvel, it would effectively persuade, particularly the most intelligent, that every thing is the work of a miracle, exceeding with clear advantages, every thing that could courageously be ventured in art: the canvas to begin with and by the same token the paint, is the most authentic testimony of the miracle, it is in such a sovereign and incomprehensible way, that can not be explained with what is materially available to us. Our Sweet Mother having left us this miraculously memory, this beautiful portrait of her, it seems she wanted to adapt to the customs or language of the indians, because as we know, they did not know how to write, syllables or phrases more permanently than the symbolic expressions or hieroglyphics, of the brushes; if I may say that her Gracious Princess wanted to honor this kingdom’s painting art, granting us not in one, but in the four species of painting, the repeated miracles that prove her true and maternal mercy to every one in this New World, allowing to all painters a holly pride on her pilgrim painting. Lets live than thankful to such great pride, not only for the splendor and nobility that results in this painting, but much more, because such a favor has not been granted to any other nation, or part of the world. This concludes my writing, and yet thinking by myself what could be the way in which I could faithfully give the credit I could give to Our Lady in addition to the offered approval that the government and the church have done to approve to print this work. So I thought: I shall put it out in the hands of the painters which went with me to the said inspection, so as not to rely only on my opinion. So I did so, and also opened it to the censorship of three persons that I hold in high regard, and that have seen the Holy Image with the same care and diligence enough to give their opinion, because even though there are many painters well recognized in Mexico, I am not aware that they have seen, like the preceded ones, whose opinions I am here by including so that for all times they will give faith. This here is done in honor and glory of God, and to
the veneration of Our Holy Mother and in proof of her marvelous and heavenly painting.
OPINIONS that the professors of this noble art of painting in Mexico City give about Miguel Cabrera’s written monogram.
D. José de Ibarra’s Opinion Sir Miguel Cabrera: FRIEND: I have seen the booklet that contains the inscription and circumstances related to the well considered and admirable canvas that we venerate of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Having well read the manuscript and grateful as this has been something I have been wanting for so many years that you declare what you have often mentioned with so much certainty and in such sweet and pious ways, that has finally put my mind to rest, because there is not more to say about it. Though I may sound redundant in mentioning anything (I do so because I have observed and seen as you very well know that with yourself, Master Manuel Osorio, Master Juan Patricio Ruiz, and for what I have in front of me) that our greater ones, either did not see carefully or did not become aware that for one thing to appear fine, all attention of everyone that sees it, either being aware of it or not. And to be absorbed in such a way is reason enough to be a perfect image. That is why everyone’s heart gets absorbed at observing Our Queen and Lady of Guadalupe, thus she is perfect, no faults, and the objections that often were among painters, now you have gracefully dissipated in the seventh chapter of your notebook. Talking about the lighting I say that as in poetry one may say an opposing thought to highlight and distinguish a concept, so has the Divine Master Painter in this Our Sovereign Image given such illumination strokes that we painters call “back-lighting” (or light that enhances the texture of the paintings) which in our subject painting enhances even more the perfection of the Image. In all else I have nothing to add, because you have said it all with more candor and preciseness than what any of us painters jointly could have done and also because Our Lord has allowed more times for you to observe the Blessed Image with which you have well nurtured yourself on what it is right to give thanks to God, and for that, me too. After thanking Our Divine Majesty, I want to thank you for the care and effort you have put forth in this matter that I so much cherish and I believe so many do as well. May Our Lord grant in his Divine Majesty all the glory to the devotion of Our Blessed Mother and that the world some how knows the shield we have
for our defense; I say some how, because no matter how much could be said with these words, this is just a brief sketch of what the Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe is in reality. May Our Lady reach for us from her Blessed Son what is good for us, and may They keep you many years for Their work. Home, this September 7, 1756. JosĂŠ De Ibarra
Opinion of Master Manuel de Osorio Dear Sir: With special gladness I have read the very true declarations that you have made about the prodigious painting of Our Mexican Image of Guadalupe, and certainly I have not found any discrepancy in your referral about the original picture, yet what I will mention, I feel, that as true as you mention in your declarations that the Image belongs to the Archbishops because Our Lady donated to them, that it is true as well all the concepts expressed in your notebook thus worthy of praise and fit to print, because we have not seen after two hundred and twenty five years, that someone has dedicated to the glorious work you have done, in spite of you having kept it a secret. I thank you many times for that. Friend: You have not ignored that for my happiness I was also one cited by the Abath and the Council for the inspection made of the Holy Image; and I can assure you that your writings are so truthful that I would have no hesitation or scruple in swearing by every thing you mention in them about the painting of Guadalupe, this is as much as I can say, with which I feel I comply with what you have asked of me. But I would like, apart, to thank you for two things in particular; one of them is about the cause or motive that you refer in your fourth chapter about the stature, height, of the Divine Image. This has caused in me such joy, that I admit that though there have been other reasons for such, not one of those has persuaded me as much. The other is that you have gracefully torn apart in your seventh chapter, with the same rules of art all the objections that ignorance unjustly had put on our Painting, dignified not to be ignored by silence, thus a painter, and a Michael (Miguel), now has destroyed them. May the Blessed Lady repay you for your effort and keep you many years in the grace of God. From this your home, in Mexico, September 20, 1756. Manuel de Osorio
Censure by Don Juan Patricio Morlete Ruiz I have seen and read diligently the notebook entitled American Marvel that kindly was put in my hands, for its acknowledgment, his author, the illustrious professor of the highly noble art of painting, Sir Miguel Cabrera. Who describes in eight chapters his opinions about the marvelous Painting of Blessed Mary, Our Lady of Guadalupe on the joyful canvas that our catholic devotion venerates. In compliance with his orders I testify that I was en eye witness, that I was called by his grace the Abbot of the Sanctuary and that together with all the members of the Illustrious Council and with other witnesses that concurred on that 30th of April of the year 1751. And having seen and observed with our most attentive stance and reflected on this Divine Painting and its attributes that I confess being as I said before, even greatly having speculated for so many repeated times of having the fortune to being present there to imitate (copy) it by orders of our most Reverend Archbishop, Doctor Manuel Rubio y Salinas. And in attention to what has been said I not only concur and approve with your opinion, but also as having been present at the inspection, I refer in everything to it, with my personal ingenuity, to being very obliged for seeing you to have taken the task to manifest the marvels that happen in Our Sovereign Virgin. This is what I think, unless better said, hence I will add my opinion to his. From this your house, in Mexico, September 18, year of 1756. Yours, with affection. Juan Patricio Morlete Ruiz
Opinion of Don Francisco Antonio Vallejo Sir and friend: With high esteem and care I have looked into the notebook that you sent me, so that also with what I have seen for myself I can issue my opinion about such writings entitled American Marvel and set of rare marvelous happenings observed with the rules of the art of painting on the Miraculous Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe; and thus I mention here that your narration is so comprehensive because out of my own joy I also have been in two occasions present with yourself at a viewing and even touched that marvelous cape. Thus I find nothing to add or advert. For everything that is mentioned in the narration of your notebook is truthful to the two times I was in great admiration in front of this awesome set of marvelous artistic rarities. Though everything around this Holy Image is prodigious, or better said, many prodigious things of the Omnipotence are in this Holy Image; never the less what attracts me more is the gold appliquÊ and the black profiling that surround the contour of the dress of Our Lady. Since this is so rare of a practice among all painters due to the difficulty in doing it that it is better not to attempt it, as you well noted in your writings on page 43 of your manuscript, because they take away the finesse of the paintings. By not happening this inconvenience in our celestial Painting when it should have happened, this is to my understanding one of the marvelous things that we can particularly appreciate. So rare it is than, thus my opinion conforming to yours, that not the most dextrous painter would have dared to execute it that way, yet here with, we don’t know with what graces, such traces highlight our Guadalupan Image your phrase explains even better the inexplicable, and really I have no better explanation of that. I even think it is impossible the compatibility to mix these extremely different two painting genders. So just from these observations as well as for what else can be admired in this Holy Image, like the lack of preparing the cloth to be painted, be it to be used in water colors or oil based paints, or in the total mix of different paints on one surface that I infer and piously believe that this is supernatural, miraculous, and done by a Superior and Divine painter, and that at the same time is so linked this way of painting of Our gracious Patroness of Guadalupe that just this one image style and circumstances make it so unique that it can only be a Heavenly Painting. May Our Lady grant you the corresponding prize for your cordial devotion to this lovely endeavor you have undertaken, which I hope serves for a greater credit to this prodigy, I say this just because I was one of the chosen to inspect and also witness the artful way in which this Painting has gained so many well deserved credits. Thus I mention the above that admittedly could have been better expressed. In this your house. Mexico City, September 24 of 1756. Francisco Antonio Vallejo.
Appreciation of D. José de Alcíbar Dear Sir: I have seen and read the open declaration of yours, entitled American Marvel, and set of rare marvels observed following the rules of art on the painting of the miraculous Image of Our Lady of Guadalupe of Mexico. You gave me this manuscript so that I could search in it if I could find anything that was not according to what we saw on the 15 of April of 1752, in which I had the great privilege of your invite to help make the three copies of the Image that you made. The first one that was taken to His Holiness the Pope Benedictus XIV - may God bless him; the other for the illustrious Sir and Doctor don Manuel Rubio y Salinas, Archbishop of Mexico; and the one that you have kept, so that it may serve as a whicker of the flame that burns in your heart in devotion to this Holy Lady, and that it serves as model for the many images that are ask of you to make, without offending the many other masters of painting that have reproduced this beautiful image. This one it is to my judgement the most alike. And getting back to the request that you ask of me denoting your great humbleness that I have read the eight paragraphs, the eight marvels and in the whole of these eight, by which I infer that the number eight that you painted in the image and that you showed us on that day was in anticipation of your very well though idea. I don’t find anything that disagrees with what we saw and reflected, however I may ingeniously add that if any explication can be done about this miraculous painting is this that your self has done through a lot of hard work, I may also testify on that, and thus I don’t want to do any other thing but sum myself to everyone and especially to the faculty of this noble art of painting, to thank you profusely for the dedication you have bestowed unto this work. You have not let any item for as small or insignificant as it may be from this miraculous canvas been analyzed with so much adequacy, that again I repeat couldn’t possibly have another explanation. I confess though with this I disclose my ineptitude, that since I saw this heavenly painting I have been so mesmerized that I have never been able to explain what I saw, and thus my answer to everyone that has ask me has always been it is something that cannot be explained. So your work has given my heart respite and consolation and I would like to turn myself in praise of it yet I shall omit that so that I may not appear passionate, because thus far my remarks are under oath. May the Blessed Lady augment your devotion and keep you for long years. At home, September 17 of 1756. My highest regards are at your service, José de Alcíbar
Approval of Don José Ventura Arnáez My dear Sir: Having received in my hands, by your orders the manuscript entitled American Marvel and a set of rare marvels, in which its contents declares the miraculous painting of the Immaculate Guadalupan Image, and acting upon your request I find nothing to challenge of its contents though I admire your judicious study of the matter. I thank thee for the arduous path you have taken, because by doing so you have cleared all doubts that could oppose the right interpretation by clarifying the faculties of us painters, in addition to upholding the high esteem of the sovereignty of this Queen by representing herself in such miraculous painting with which she enlarges, as you nicely put it in your manuscript, this noble art of painting, thus I condescend with yourself whom I recognize as a humble and none pompous of your study, being yourself one of the most advanced painters of our times which would have been enough credit to the manuscript without having to beg other painters opinions. And just to comply with your request I must add that after having been assisting you in your work shop for more than six years I did come across the embryonic stages of your notebook which I recognized that it would become the benefits that today I experience though I was not aware of the orderly way in which you divided it into eight paragraphs, and the able composition, your vivacious wittiness, because with simple clarity you dissipate the doubts that none “painters” could raise. I have never come across anyone that has approach this matters with such clarity, knowing well that this effort took away your sleep many times. I have wanted to accomplish my task of sanctioning your study, alike the notorious work of the Archangel Michael whose powers were used to dissipate the dragon’s clouds of darkness that were trying to obscure Mary’s candor and virtuosity, here another Michael, with the jealousy of his pen, dissipates the darkness of the unknowledgeable. Because all of us painters are aware with admiration of the marvels of this painting, and those not aware will have their superstitious doubts vanished. And returning to your request of my opinion, I shall point out the none deserving joy I felt on April 15 of the year 52, in which day in your company and with don Jose Alcíbar, to be one of the chosen ones to make three copies. One for Sir Doctor don Manuel Rubio y Salinas, Archbishop of this metropolis, the second one for the Reverend Father Juan Francisco López, from the Jesuit Company, who was ready to depart as Procurator to Rome, where he presented the image to Our Holy Father, and the third; the one that you keep in your home to the benefit of the many more copies to be made of the original, with which the purpose of allowing repeated viewing and reviewing that painters need to do when they are copying or tracing a painting. And everything that I read noted on your manuscript I confess is true in reality, and in the necessary case I would affirm under oath, and as far as I can see your manuscript perfectly contains the matter of the
painting that it does not allow even the smallest reasonable challenge, neither any scrupulous appearance to make you uncomfortable. With this I declare that I find no possible interference within the limits of my knowledge, that this work should see the light, more over it is deserving of high esteem and applauds for the deserving devotion of the Virgin Mary, which prodigiously stamped in Guadalupe granted us an appellate and Her divine protection. Thus I judge this work to be deserving of sublime opinions, etc., etc. From this your house, Mexico and September 19 of 1756 years. Respectfully and with high esteem, JosĂŠ Ventura ArnĂĄez
To obtain the printed version, as well as larger images go to American Marvel
To request translations Fidelingua