DÜRER, Albrecht

The legend (below left), “effigies Lucae Leidensis,” is not by D�rer. The “L [Lucas] 1525” above it shows that the drawing was once given out to be a work of the Dutch artist. If that was incorrect, it still cannot be denied that in its calm physiognomy the drawing is close to the Dutch manner. The hair falling in strands is not stylised in D�rer’s fashion. The whole piece is in the severe manner of the late period, with a strongly emphasized contrast between the fundamental horizontal and vertical directions. The background is dark and uniform.

The two side panels that represent two “sylvan men” are wings to the portrait of Oswolt Krel. They bear the heraldic shields of the subject and his wife, Agathe von Esendorf. They originally let the portrait be closed from the retro; one could imagine, then, that despite the large dimensions, the painting was to be conserved closed. The present frame has been made recently.

When D�rer finally returned to Nuremberg in May 1494 he was 23, fully-trained and could open his own workshop. Albrecht the Elder had felt it was time for his son to marry and had chosen a wife during his long absence. On 7 July, just a few weeks after his return, D�rer was married to Agnes Frey, the daughter of the skilled and prosperous coppersmith Hans Frey and his wife Anna Rummel. It was probably just before their wedding that D�rer sketched his fianc�e, then in her late teens. Capturing her pensive mood with just a few strokes of the pen, D�rer lovingly inscribed it: `My Agnes’.

Agnes, who still appears girlish, even childlike, here, is sitting at a table and supporting her head pensively on her right hand, her hair tied back. The intimacy of this everyday sketch is unusual, showing the depicted woman at a moment when she evidently thought herself to be unobserved.

This is a leaf from the sketchbook of the trip to the Lowlands. The legend reads:

“awff dem rin mein Weib pey poparti” (on the Rhine, my wife at Boppard). Thus the drawing was made on the boat in July 1520. It gives the best (at least the best preserved) picture of D�rer’s wife in her later years; with her cold protruding eyes and the domineering lines at the corners of her mouth, she does not look particularly lovable. Her juxtaposition with the young girl, whose coiffure is labeled “kolnisch gepend” (Cologne girl’s headdress) by the artist, is certainly only accidental here, but is nevertheless not without analogies in the context of the sketches on this journey.

Mrs. Heaton, the first English biographer of Albrecht D�rer, describes this etching as “a wild, weird conception that produces a most uncomfortable, shuddering impression on the beholder.” By eliminating accessory figures and by arranging the terrain so as to suggest a leap into the void, by diffusing the scenery with a lurid, flickering light, and by transforming the horse of the preparatory drawing into a fabulous unicorn evocative of the ideas of night, death and destruction, D�rer invested a violent but perfectly natural scene with an infernal character unparalleled in representations of the subject except for Rembrandt’s early picture in Berlin.

The head of the unicorn was sketched separately by D�rer. Pluto here appears as the leader of the wild hunt, riding a unicorn. Wild men, according to ancient belief, were the only creatures capable of overcoming the unicorn’s ferocity. The idea probably derives from an illustration in the Nuremberg Chronicle (folio CLXXXIX) relating to an event during the reign of Emperor Henry III (1017-1056). According to report a wicked English sorceress, the Berkeley Witch, was hauled off by the devil on a hideous horse. Her fearful and terrifying cry was heard four miles around.

This copy of a (lost) engraving by Antonio Pollaiuolo shows the lunge position in front and back view. The important element for D�rer was not the mere representation of the activity, but the basic Italian method of rendering articulation of the body. D�rer allowed himself freedom in individual details. He was surely not able to borrow from his original the manner in which the modeling lines follow the form, and the contour also has become gnarled in D�rer’s fashion. The rear view of the male nude recurs in the engraving “Jealousy.’

Following his copper engraving dating from 1504, D�rer produced another painted version of the theme of the first human couple three years later. The two pictures of Adam and Eve (also in the Prado, Madrid) were created by D�rer after returning from his second journey to Italy. In spite of the nearly identical size of the two pictures they were intended to be separate paintings. This is corroborated by the fact that both paintings are signed although in a different way: on the lower right corner in present picture, on the small tablet hanging on the apple-tree branch held by Eve in the painting of Eve. However, the two paintings are related to each other in their composition and the movement of the figures’ bodies. Adam, who is holding a branch from the Tree of Knowledge in front of himself, is turning yearningly towards Eve in the other panel. Like Eve, he is depicted in motion, walking with his hair blowing back.

The primary aim of the artist in both cases was not depicting a Biblical story but creating two nude figures. These are the first German paintings representing life size nude figures.

The subject of Adam and Eve offered D�rer the opportunity to depict the ideal human figure. Painted in Nuremberg soon after his return from Venice, the panels were influenced by Italian art. D�rer’s colouring is muted, and he models the bodies with the help of light and shadow, making the figures emerge from the dark background. Adam and Eve are noticeably slimmer than in his engraving of three years earlier.

D�rer’s Adam and Eve represent the earliest known life-size nudes in Northern art. Eve, whose skin is whiter than Adam’s, is next to the Tree of Knowledge, standing in a curious position with one foot behind the other. Her right hand rests on a bough and with her left hand she accepts the ripe apple offered by the coiled serpent. On a tablet is the inscription: `Albrecht D�rer, Upper German, made this 1507 years after the Virgin’s offspring.’ Adam inclines his head towards Eve and stretches out the fingers of his right hand on the other side, creating a sense of balance.

D�rer prepared his masterly engraving of Adam and Eve in numerous individual studies. This pen drawing was created immediately before the copper engraving and concentrates entirely on the depiction and three-dimensional structure of the male and female nudes. The body posture of the two figures shown here is already identical down to the last detail with that of the copper engraving.

This engraving is one of D�rer’s most famous engraved works. It draws on the sum of his four-year study of the ideal proportions of the human body. His interest in the biblical narrative is subordinate to his depiction of Adam and Eve as ideal female and male nudes in imitation of classical sculptures. The elk, hare, cat and ox symbolize the four humours into which the human soul divided after the Fall of Man. The contrasting cat and mouse embody the tense relationship between the genders, the parrot represents Mary as a second Eve and the ibex in the background represents the infidels.

The conscious application for the first time of a set of rules of proportion explains why these figures have a rigid pose, contradictory to the essence of D�rer’s concept of nature. The disagreeable impression is compensated only by the mastery of technique. It is certain that the biblical story served the artist only as a pretext for representing the nude, both male and female, based on Apollo Belvedere and on Venus. Nowhere else has D�rer treated the flesh with such caressing care, using much fine dotting in the modeling, and in no previous plate has he used such a variety of textures in the conscious striving for colour.

There are many preparatory and related drawings of D�rer to this engraving.

This engraving is one of D�rer’s most famous engraved works. It draws on the sum of his four-year study of the ideal proportions of the human body. His interest in the biblical narrative is subordinate to his depiction of Adam and Eve as ideal female and male nudes in imitation of classical sculptures. The elk, hare, cat and ox symbolize the four humours into which the human soul divided after the Fall of Man. The contrasting cat and mouse embody the tense relationship between the genders, the parrot represents Mary as a second Eve and the ibex in the background represents the infidels.

The conscious application for the first time of a set of rules of proportion explains why these figures have a rigid pose, contradictory to the essence of D�rer’s concept of nature. The disagreeable impression is compensated only by the mastery of technique. It is certain that the biblical story served the artist only as a pretext for representing the nude, both male and female, based on Apollo Belvedere and on Venus. Nowhere else has D�rer treated the flesh with such caressing care, using much fine dotting in the modeling, and in no previous plate has he used such a variety of textures in the conscious striving for colour.

There are many preparatory and related drawings of D�rer to this engraving.

The elector Frederick the Wise of Saxony ordered this painting for the Schlosskirche (the church in the castle) in Wittenberg. It was once believed to be the central part of a polyptych, with, on the side wings, the story of Job, in Frankfurt and Cologne. However, this hypothesis has already been called into question. The elector of Saxony then donated the painting to Emperor Rudolph II in 1603. An exchange with the Presentation at the Temple by Fra Bartolomeo brought it in 1793 from the gallery in Vienna to the Uffizi.

This altarpiece was probably conceived without the lateral panels, in contrast with the actual practice in Nordic countries, and at variance with the situation of the Paumgartner altarpiece (Alte Pinakothek, Munich). D�rer framed and delimited a large space by an architecture composed of arches of a very refined perspective. The three kings arrived at this slightly elevated space from the back and after having climbed two steps. A single figure, sharply foreshortened, followed in their footsteps from the distant background. Only the upper half of his body is shown where he now stands at the bottom of the two steps. He is Oriental and wearing a turban. The heavy traveling bag he holds probably contains precious gifts for the infant Jesus.

The Madonna is clad in azure clothes and cape, a white veil covering her head. She is holding out the infant, who is wrapped in her white veil, to the eldest king. He is offering the infant a gold casket with the image of Saint George, which the infant has already taken with his right hand. This is the only action that unfolds in the principal scene, except for the Oriental servant’s gesture of putting his hand in his bag. All the other characters are motionless; immersed in thought, they look straight ahead or sideways, creating the effect of a staged spectacle set with immobile characters.

The architecture of the fictive ruins behind the Madonna is beautiful and imaginative. D�rer had previously experimented with this design in drawings and engravings. The background is stupendous: the limpid sky, in which the cumulus clouds chase one another; the light Nordic city, climbing up the cone-like mountain; the road bending into the archway where people stop, following behind the three kings. These are represented with much imagination and variety, as far as the fashion and colour of their clothes and the differences in their expressions. In the far right are a lake and a boat.

This imagination and variety continue in the extraordinary depiction of the kings, in lavish clothing, with their precious jewels, and with the beautiful goblets and caskets that they bear as gifts. It is telling here that D�rer was also an expert goldsmith. According to the Nordic tradition, also adopted previously by Mantegna in Italy, one of the kings is a Moor. The physiognomy of the young king with long blond curly hair, standing in the middle of the painting, bears, according to recent interpretation, a resemblance to a self-portrait of D�rer.

D�rer was passionately devoted to the study of animals and plants, which he reproduced faithfully from life. He often distributed these images in his landscape passages, and particularly in his drawings and engravings of the Madonna. We find some here as well: in the foreground, to the right, a flying deer, already known from various watercolours, which here symbolizes Christ; the plantain (plantago major) seen directly behind, whose healing properties were once much appreciated, recalls the spilled blood of Christ; in the foreground, now to the left, on the millstone beside the carnation, a small coleopterum surrounded by a few butterflies, the ancient symbol of the soul, which here may be a symbol of the resurrection.

The panel of the Uffizi represents the richest and most mature actualisation of all D�rer’s altarpieces, before his second trip to Italy, and therefore before the Feast of the Rose Garlands, painted in Venice (N�rodn� Galerie, Prague).

The seated Virgin is not placed in her conventional position in the centre of the picture, but to the left and depicted in profile. Christ is a playful infant, stretching forward to grasp the golden casket tenderly offered by the kneeling Caspar. The African King Balthazar and the youthful Melchior, who has D�rer’s features with his long hair and beard, stand behind, offering their gifts.

The architectural ruins create an impression of depth in the composition and far away rises a fortified hill town, like those which D�rer saw on his visit to Italy. The shapes and colours of the ruins, the horsemen in the background and distant landscape, all create a marvellous balance with the Nativity scene.

This portrait drawing of Agnes D�rer was used as a preliminary study for the painting Virgin and Child with St Anne (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York), and she is already depicted in the same posture and gestures. The area around the head is depicted in more detail while the lower part of the drawing is left open.

This etching differs considerably from the remaining preparatory studies. Christ’s struggle is already over. He seems to be staring at the cup. The disciples are far in the background. The Saviour kneels, untouched by the raging storm; only His hands, ready to receive the chalice, reveal emotion. D�rer is as inventive as ever. This drawing too gives the impression of a tough and impetuous pen drawing rather than an engraving and already takes advantage of the etching technique in order to blend the clair-obscur effects of the preceding phase with the expressive literalism and grand pathos of the Large Passion. The plate of this etching is preserved at the Staatsbibliothek in Bamberg.

Sheet No. 2 of the Engraved Passion.

The saints Peter, James and John are shown asleep. This engraving is hardly comparable in effectiveness with the woodcut version. St Peter appears somewhat laboured, pressed toward the margin. The full force of technical and stylistic reorientation is felt in this engraving, as in the one that follows; both are in the new clair-obscur manner, although printed from a single plate. The suggestion that this new style derives from a meeting with or the influence of Matthias Gr�newald is, however, highly speculative, as no evidence of such a meeting has ever been found. This engraving is closely related to the corresponding drawing from the Green Passion. However, that drawing is not in mirror image of the engraving and may postdate it.

The picture shows the rear view of the Portrait of Albrecht D�rer the Elder.

The painted variant on the alliance coat of arms of the D�rer and Holper families, a so-called speaking coat of arms, is also depicted in a woodcut dating from 1523. It forms the back side of D�rer’s first portrait of his father in 1490. The family’s coat of arms depicts an open barn door on the left, which was presumably a symbol of the family name. The name means the same as “T�rer,” the German translation of “Ajto” (door), their place of origin Ajtos near Gyula, the capital of the B�k�s district.

This satirical drawing by D�rer is also called as Recording of the Pious and Sinful Thoughts during the Divine Office. Between the angels who celebrate the liturgical function (above) and those who present the scene to the spectator (below) are grouped, around the edge of the sheet as in a choir, a number of canons whose thoughts and fantasies during the service are illustrated in little clouds like balloons in a cartoon. Tiny angels and devils meanwhile vie with each other in trying to draw the attention of the would-be worshipers. As in contemporary legends, an angel in the centre in front of the altar writes down the thoughts of the canons, which will be later read out during the Last Judgment, and which the Archangel Michael will trow into the balance.

This drawing is from the artist’s sketchbook of his trip to the Netherlands. The waterfront is seen from an elevation; the pictorial technique is lively and bold. The reduction in the size of the objects due to perspective, as seen in the ships, generates a vivid feeling of depth, all the more because the right foreground was never elaborated.

Closely related to the very similar engraving by Jacopo de Barbari. In no other plate, except Adam and Eve is there such delicate modelling of the flesh. The contrast of male and female is emphasized by the introduction of movement. The head of Diana is almost identical to the one in the drawing Woman Riding a Dolphin, dated 1503. The D of the monogram shows a correction.

The full title: Apollo with the Solar Disc and Diana Trying to Shield Herself from the Rays with Her Uplifted Hand.

This variation on the Adam of the 1504 copperplate engraving was also conceived originally as a print, but was not engraved. The Adam of the print is more felicitous because of the contrast supplied by the turning of his head away from his extended free leg. The present drawing is finished to a great extent but not yet fully refined. The celestial background, rich in painterly effect, was added at a later stage. The original purpose was the depiction of the male figure alone, who represented the planetary god Sol. The rendering of the sun’s rays is extremely noteworthy. The word “Apolo,” written backwards with a view toward the engraving, is probably a substitute for the earlier name Sol; this would explain the conspicuous incongruity of the inscription and the space allotted to it.

The picture shows the titlepage to Messahalah, De scientia motus orbis, printed by Johann Weissenburger in Nuremberg in 1504. The cut is also attributed to Weichtlin, Peter Vischer the Elder and Kulmbach.

Through his friendship with the Nuremberg humanist Willibald Pirckheimer, D�rer had been introduced in Rome in 1494 to the wonders of the ancient world, and his knowledge of Italian art was spurred on by the prints of Mantegna, Pollaiuolo, and others which he avidly copied. The present pen drawing is a copy of Mantegna’s print.

Sheet No. 10 of the Engraved Passion.

St Veronica is shown kneeling in front of Christ. This engraved version cannot compare to the triumphant one of the woodcut. In this instance, Christ is pictured standing, turned toward the women. The rendering of this scene as a nocturne is unprecedented. This print can be called “Schongaueresque” in concept. The guardsman shouting at the people is, in fact, found in Schongauer’s version, perhaps based on Passion plays. There is an impression without the hanger of the tablet bearing the monogram at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston.

Sheet No. 3 of the Engraved Passion.

St Peter, striking Malchus, seems to take the spotlight away from Christ. The head of Malchus is strongly reminiscent of that in a Schongauer’s engraving. The episode in the background, showing a fleeing youth, represents the rarely illustrated passage Mark 14:51-52, perhaps transmitted by Passion plays. The object underneath Malchus is a lantern, which he customarily carries in Passion plays. The emphasis is here shifted from the commotion of the arrest to the tragedy of the betrayal. Physical violence is limited to the duel between St Peter and Malchus. Christ, unconscious of the noose which threatens his neck, bends his head and closes his eyes to receive the kiss, as though Judas and he were alone in the universe. Closely related to the corresponding subject in the Green Passion.

This engraving is one of six copper plate portraits of Cardinal Albrecht of Brandenburg, one of the most influential representatives of the empire. This portrait is based on a preparatory drawing which presumably dates from the time of D�rer’s stay at Augsburg during the Imperial Diet of 1518. In a letter to Georg Spalatin, an adviser of Frederick the Wise, D�rer reports the circumstances: “I am enclosing three prints of an engraving for my gracious lord. It was engraved upon the request of my gracious lord of Mainz. I sent the copper plate to him together with two hundred impressions as a present. He then sent me most kindly two hundred gold guilders in return and twenty ells of damask for a coat.” The plate was used subsequently to illustrate the book Das Heiligtum zu Sachsen, Halle, 1524.

The portrayed man is placed before a screen. His erect posture, diagonal line of sight out of the picture, the coat of arms and the two inscriptions all emphasize the official nature of the portrait.

The inscription above the portrait reads: “Albrecht by Divine Mercy Presbyter Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, Titular of St. Chrysogonus, Archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg, Primate Elector of the Empire, Administrator of Halberstadt, Margrave of Brandenburg.” The legend on the bottom states: “Thus were his eyes, his cheeks, his features at the age of 29.”

Cardinal Albrecht of Brandenburg was born on June 28, 1490. He became Archbishop of Magdeburg in 1513, Archbishop of Mainz in 1514 and Cardinal in 1518. In 1514 Jacob Fugger of the wealthy trading house of Augsburg had advanced 21,000 ducats to Albrecht in order to secure for him the Archbishopric of Mainz, which entailed the electorship. The Pope authorized the sale of indulgences to reimburse the Fuggers, provided one half of the proceeds was turned over to the Papal treasury. An agent of the Fuggers subsequently traveled in the Cardinal’s retinue in charge of the cashbox. It was Albrecht who appointed the Dominican Tetzel and thus indirectly caused Luther to post his 95 theses on the church doors at Wittenberg:.

“Before I became ill this year I sent an engraved copper plate to Your Electoral Grace with your portrait together with five hundred impressions thereof. Finding no acknowledgment of this in Your Grace’s letter, I fear that either the portrait did not please Your Grace - this would sadden me, as my diligence would have had poor results - or else, I fear that it may not have reached Your Grace at all. I beg Your Grace for a gracious reply.” Thus we have in D�rer’s own words the history of this engraving.

The fact that D�rer sent five hundred copies to the Cardinal, all produced at the same time, explains the uniform quality of so many impressions found in various collections. All these have the identical watermark, a small jug. This engraving is based on a new preparatory drawing that probably dates from the Diet of Nuremberg, ¹⁵²²⁄₂₃. The Cardinal had gained weight since the earlier portrait (The Small Cardinal) he had wild, protruding eyes, a bulbous mouth and layers of fat on chin and cheeks. D�rer offset the predominant lower part of the face with a large cap. It suggests that beneath it a large impressive head is to be found. In actuality that was not the case. D�rer used utmost discretion in the treatment of the physiological details without denying the monstrous reality. It is D�rer’s most interesting utilization of a profile.

In contrast with the Small Cardinal, and in accordance with other late portrait engravings, this portrait has depth and substance. It is treated as a real tablet, carved and framed after the fashion of Roman tombstones, which were common in Germany, as in Italy and France.

This is a leaf from the sketchbook of the trip to the Lowlands. The legend reads:

“1520 Caspar Sturm alt 45 Jor zw ach gemacht” (1520, Caspar Sturm, 45 years old, done at Aix-la-Chapelle [Aachen]). The lighting is peculiar, the landscape is related to the portrait. It is conjectured that the word “toll” indicates a tollhouse. The drawing is mentioned in the journal of the trip to the Lowlands: “Ich hob den Sturm conterfet” (I did a portrait of Sturm).

At the same time as the Feast of the Rose Garlands, D�rer was working on the painting of Christ among the Doctors. The theme derives from the Gospel of St Luke (Luke 2, 41-52).

On the bookmark at the bottom left of the panel, D�rer has recorded that this picture was `the work of five days’, a pointed reference to his inscription on The Altarpiece of the Rose Garlands, the work of five months. Christ among the Doctors is not only a smaller panel, but the brushwork is much more spontaneous and the paint is applied with broad and fluid strokes. Despite D�rer’s statement about five days, he based it on a number of careful studies, including one of Christ’s gesticulating fingers. Although not present on the original painting, two early copies of the panel have the word `Romae’ added to the inscription on the bookmark and this suggests that D�rer visited Rome late in 1506. It may also be significant that the original painting was in Rome’s Galleria Barberini until its acquisition by Baron Heinrich von Thyssen-Bornemisza in 1935.

The story recorded in the panel is of Christ’s visit to Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, where he debated with the learned Jewish doctors (or scribes). According to the Bible, this was the first occasion on which Christ taught. D�rer’s daring composition does not use the conventional temple setting which he earlier used in the lower left panel of The Seven Sorrows of the Virgin. Instead he gives a close-up view of the faces of six doctors crowding round the young Jesus. The elderly doctors, caricatured faces which may well have been influenced by Leonardo da Vinci, argue with Christ by quoting from the Scriptures and gesticulating. Christ, a sober boy of 12, quietly gestures with his fingers to make a point. D�rer contrasts Christ’s youthful hands with the gnarled fingers of the ugly old man with the white cap and a gap-toothed grin.

The beauty of the twelve year-old Jesus contrasts with the ugliness of the doctors surrounding him. The depiction concentrates on the heads, books and hand gestures. It is likely that D�rer already knew Leonardo da Vinci’s caricatures at this time, and the latter’s Treatise on Painting dealt, amongst other things, with the contrast between absolute beauty and ugliness.

The depiction concentrates on the heads, books and hand gestures.

Sheet No. 7 of the Engraved Passion.

Christ is shown in profile, yet quite differently from the woodcut versions of this subject. This is richer and more picturesque. Nevertheless, greater clarity is not quite achieved. The similarity of the spatial arrangement to the Flagellation can be observed. Pilate is seen in the background, standing next to Caiaphas. The bald bearded man is reminiscent of Italian model heads.

This work depicts Jesus after he had been scourged and mocked by the soldiers, just before he was led away to be crucified. Jesus bleeds profusely from his wounds and he holds the instruments used to beat him, a three-knotted whip and bundle of birches. He wears the crown of thorns, leaning his head on his right hand in a gesture of grief. His other hand rests on a ledge, a pose which D�rer often used to add a sense of depth to a portrait. The face is painted with great realism. Set against a gold background, Christ stares out of the picture, expressing resignation at his fate.

This devotional panel was identified as a D�rer in 1941 and although unsigned it is now widely accepted as a work by the young artist. It dates from his journeyman days and may well have been done in Strasbourg, probably in 1493 or early in 1494.

Sheet No. 4 of the Engraved Passion.

The ceiling, in this instance, gives the engraving a feeling of architectural enclosure, quite in contrast to other subjects of the series. The ceiling beams are directed toward the vanishing point on the left. This serves to emphasize the dialogue between Christ and Caiaphas, which is further enhanced by the lighting. The guardsman on the right seems Leonardesque. This engraving is based on the corresponding subject in the Green Passion. The main figures, especially the deceitful Caiaphas, are drawn in a masterly manner.

Sheet No. 5 of the Engraved Passion.

The false witness is pointing at Christ. The close relationship of this engraving to the Green Passion has been noted by most commentators. Nevertheless, it has recently been asserted that the Green Passion sheets may have been based on the engravings and executed by Hans von Kulmbach. This high degree of similarity of the two renderings casts great doubt on the authenticity of the Green Passion sheet.

The first state, the lower part absent, is rare (Berlin, Bremen, Gotha, Stuttgart, Vienna). The second state has the lower angel added in a rough style. Two editions are known from the enlarged block, with prayers in 32 and 24 lines, as indulgences. The big, but somewhat empty design , and particularly the type of the angels which often occurs in the heads of the proportion studies, are characteristics which indicate the years 1523-25.

Heading to a sheet with a poem in two columns, printed by H�ltzel at Nuremberg. D�rer’s monogram is at the end of the text, proving that he was also the author of the verses.

Christ is lying completely flat on the ground (“fell on his face, and prayed”); D�rer could have seen this posture depicted by Mantegna. The rocks in starlike layers and the veil of mist pressing down from above lend support to the effect of the motif. The Apostles are small and are sitting off to a side by themselves.

Christ is facing the angel with arms thrust upward. The curve of the sleeping Apostles leads toward him in a broad sweep. Despite the size of the Apostles and the specific characterization of each of them in his position, they remain subordinate to the principal figure. In the centre foreground the stage is completely empty. This drawing is the final version of a theme that interested D�rer at almost all times. It is a study for the late Passion woodcut series of which only The Last Supper was transferred to the wood block.

The block is badly cut and in the Small Passion its place was taken by another picture. This belongs to the earliest compositions of the series Small Passion.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 14 minutes):

Ludwig van Beethoven: Christ on the Mount of Olives, op. 85, Introduction and Jesus’ aria

Christian II (1481–1559) was king of Denmark and Norway 1513–23, and Sweden 1520–23. He was hated by the nobility in Denmark and Norway for his system of taxation. Jutland (Denmark) revolted and gave the Danish crown to Frederick I in 1523. Christian fled to the Netherlands, but attempted to regain his throne in 1531 by invading Norway. He was captured by Danish forces in 1532 and imprisoned until his death.

This engraving is not mentioned in D�rer’s diary of his trip to the Low Countries in ¹⁵²⁰⁄₂₁. The subject seems to be connected with the Bavarian War of 1503. Duke George the Rich had died that year without male issue. Contrary to Imperial law, he left his lands to his daughter. This led to the War of the Bavarian Succession, in which the city of Nuremberg was deeply involved. Her army captured much of the surrounding territory and Nuremberg became the largest of the “free cities” of the Empire. This engraving appears to be an allegory of this war, which ended badly for the ill-advised titled lady. The Emperor deprived her of her lands, while Nuremberg was permitted to retain the conquered territory.

The combined coat of arms of Tucher-Rieter is depicted on the verso of the Hans Tucher portrait, which became the anterior side of the closed diptych.

The picture shows a second variation of the castle courtyard in the Tirol, with clouds. The courtyard of the Gothic building is seen from a different side than in the first view. Here D�rer chose the balcony in the gate tower as his viewpoint, while in the first sheet a window in the opposite transverse wing was his starting point. There is still some uncertainty in his application of perspective here. However, the variety of forms of the Late Gothic buildings are recorded in detail.

This watercolour, together with another view of a castle courtyard in the Tirol, was presumably created during D�rer’s first Italian journey in about 1494. The location of the castle is still disputed. Together with the other sheet, we have two differing views of the same castle courtyard. They show an extended courtyard with various Gothic castle buildings grouped around it. The bay-like staircase on the left is at its front side opposite the gate tower from which the second view of the courtyard was produced.

The artist executed this watercolour during his first stay in Venice. The model was a living animal.

This woodcut is one of the sheets of the Great Passion.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 22 minutes):

Heinrich Sch�tz: Die sieben Worte am Kreuz SWV 478

The group of mourners standing beneath the Cross in is central construction is closely related Italian principles of composition. In this the group in question resembles the Lamentation, and both show direct influence of Italian art. The influence of D�rer’s studies in Italy is also plainly seen in the single figures: the cramped movement of the thief on the left with the head falling on the drawn up shoulders and the disordered hair distinctly recalls Pollaiolo; then again the somewhat affected pose of the standing mourners makes us think of the drawings of Credi; while the St John is closely related to the art of Mantegna.. The domed building in the background is a reminiscence of St Mark’s, Venice.

The woodblock consisted of two parts, one above the other. There is a difference in the quality of the technique of the cutting of the two parts. It was pointed out that the cutting cannot have been done under D�rer’s direct supervision, but that D�rer delivered the drawing to a publisher while far away from Nuremberg.

D�rer mentions in the diary of his trip to the Netherlands that he gave the factor of Portugal an impression of this engraving at Antwerp on August 20, 1520. St John, on the right, is clearly reminiscent of the corresponding figure in Mantegna’s engraved Deposition.” This engraving was conceived as a single sheet, as evidenced by the format, slightly larger than that of the Engraved Passion. The figures are, in this case, not placed in front of a black backdrop, as in Adam and Eve, but actually set into the darkened surroundings. This print ca be called a nocturne, the most striking feature of which is the expressive figure of St John, reminiscent of Matthias Gr�newald. The women, strictly placed into a triangle, counterbalance St John’s figure.

Sheet No. 11 of the Engraved Passion.

Probably the moment is pictured when Christ commends his mother to St John. The feeling of this engraving is statuesque rather than passionate. The principals are here joined in a triad, almost like a restful pause in the flow of the series. D�rer’s rendering, in this instance, is considerably more restrained than the version of 1508. It is based on a preparatory drawing.

This delightful watercolour tells the story of Cupid, the god of love, who ran to his mother Venus, vainly trying to escape a swarm of bees whose honeycomb he had stolen. In his rush to escape, Cupid dropped his arrows. According to the fable told by the Greek poet Theocritus, in his Idylls, Venus laughs and says: “Are you not just like the bee - so little yet able to inflict such painful wounds?” Cupid the Honey Thief was part of a series of watercolour illustrations of mythological subjects which D�rer painted in 1514.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 4 minutes):

Francesco Gasparini: The Meddlesome Cupid, aria

This drawing is probably derived from a painting by Andrea Mantegna, whose printed graphics D�rer copied. Mantegna in his turn was using Greco-Roman models. This landscape, the details of the drapery folds and the handling of the line in general are worked out in a quite independent fashion. The centre of the picture is the male nude in motion. According to the Metamorphoses by the classical author Ovid (43 B.C.-¹⁷⁄₁₈ A.D.), Orpheus introduced homosexual love to Thrace and for that reason is beaten to death by two Thracian women during a bacchanal. The group of figures is placed before a central tree in which an open book with music is hanging. The classical singer’s lyre is lying at his feet.

In the tree a banderole with legends: “Orfeus der erst puseran” (Orpheus, the first pederast). The woman at the left and the boy were used by D�rer a few years later in the engraving known as “Jealousy” (more correctly “Chastity and Unchastity”).

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 7 minutes):

Cristoph Willibald Gluck: Orfeo, Act I, Orpheus’ aria in G Major

Sheet No. 13 of the Engraved Passion.

In this case the engraved and woodcut version can be easily compared. Both were executed at about the same time. One is the most complicated, the other the simplest solution. In the engraving some of the dignity is sacrificed by the complicated overlappings, as in the case of Christ’s body. The woodcut version of the Small Passion was difficult to surpass in the engraving. D�rer decided to use the tomb as seen from the front, making for the interesting overlappings. The gentle dignity of the woodcut version was, however, lost. It is not quite clear which one of the praying women is the Virgin Mary.

In D�rer’s later years he devoted an increasing proportion of his time to writing about art rather than practicing as an artist. The first book that D�rer actually finished was his Manual of Measurement, published in 1525. It deals with geometry and its importance to the artist, a subject which D�rer believed was fundamental because so many young artists lacked the necessary theoretical knowledge to become good painters. `Even if some of them acquire a good hand through constant practice, they produce work instinctively and without thought,’ he wrote. The book includes practical advice on how to draw accurate pictures with the help of various devices. These included an upright grid of wires through which the artist views his subject, sketching it on a similar grid on his paper.

The picture shows an illustration from the Manual of Measurement.

The watercolour and accompanying text describe an apocalyptic dream which D�rer had on the night of 7-8 June 1525. The picture depicts a landscape with scattered trees. An enormous column of water gushes down, spreading out near the ground and flooding, while other smaller columns of water start to fall from the heavens. The dream occurred during a period of great religious uncertainty, with the birth of the Reformation, and many people feared that a flood would destroy the world.

Below the watercolour D�rer wrote a description of his dream:

`In 1525, during the night between Wednesday and Thursday after Whitsuntide, I had this vision in my sleep, and saw how many great waters fell from heaven. The first struck the ground about four miles away from me with such a terrible force, enormous noise and splashing that it drowned the entire countryside. I was so greatly shocked at this that I awoke before the cloudburst. And the ensuing downpour was huge. Some of the waters fell some distance away and some close by. And they came from such a height that they seemed to fall at an equally slow pace. But the very first water that hit the ground so suddenly had fallen at such velocity, and was accompanied by wind and roaring so frightening, that when I awoke my whole body trembled and I could not recover for a long time. When I arose in the morning, I painted the above as I had seen it. May the Lord turn all things to the best.’

In the draft of his unpublished `Nourishment for Young Painters’, dating from over a decade earlier, D�rer had written: `How often do I see great art in my sleep, but on waking cannot recall it; as soon as I awake, my memory forgets it.’ But on this occasion, D�rer made great efforts to recall the dream and painstakingly recorded it in an image and words. The result is probably one of the most realistic early depictions of a scene accurately recalled from a dream, as opposed to more composed visions which had previously figured in European paintings and illuminated manuscripts.

Sheet No. 8 of the Engraved Passion.

The concept as pictured in the The Large Woodcut Passion has here been brought to its ultimate conclusion. Two opposites are here presented with the greatest economy and limitation. Suffering is contrasted with compassion. Although the expression of suffering is subdued, it is unmistakable. The uninterrupted contour of the stoic observer is likewise characteristic and striking in expressing the contrast of feeling. The public, in the background is barely shown, but its presence is felt.

The idealized portrait of Emperor Charlemagne was intended for the “Heiltumskammer” in the Schoppersche House by the marketplace, together with the portrait of Emperor Sigismund of Poland (also in Nuremberg). This was where the coronation insignia and relics were kept, which were put on display once a year at the so-called “Heiltumsweisungen.” The physiognomy of Charlemagne, shown in the magnificent original coronation robes, is reminiscent of depictions of God the Father. The crown, sword and imperial orb were prepared by D�rer in sketches. The German imperial coat of arms and French coat of arms with the fleur-de-lis are emblazoned at the top.

D�rer’s only commission for panel paintings from Nuremberg’s city council was for a pair of portraits of the Emperors Charlemagne and Sigismund. These were ordered for the Treasure Chamber in the Schopper House, where the imperial regalia were kept the night before they went on ceremonial display on the Friday after Easter. For the rest of the year the regalia were housed in the Church of the Hospital of the Holy Ghost. D�rer was probably commissioned for the portraits in 1510 and received his final payment three years later. His panels are believed to have been ordered to replace two earlier works, now lost, which had been painted soon after the regalia were brought to Nuremberg in 1424.

The half length pictures are larger than life. No likenesses are known of Charlemagne, who ruled from 800-14, and D�rer therefore invented his portrait, presenting him frontally in an imposing posture. His interpretation of Charlemagne’s appearance was to influence depictions of the Emperor until well into the nineteenth century. For Sigismund, who ruled from 1410-37, D�rer must have had access to a portrait done during his reign.

The two paintings include the appropriate coats of arms, the German eagle and French fleur-de-lis for Charlemagne and the arms of the five territories ruled by Sigismund, the German Empire, Bohemia, Old and New Hungary and Luxembourg. Inscriptions name the two men and state the number of years they ruled, 14 years for Charlemagne and 28 for Sigismund. Around the four sides of the panels are explanatory texts on the frames. The first records: `Charlemagne reigned for 14 years. He was the son of the Frankish King Pippin, and Roman Emperor. He made the Roman Empire subject to German rule. His crown and garments are put on public display annually in Nuremberg, together with other relics.’ On the second panel is the text: `Emperor Sigismund ruled for 28 years. He was always well-disposed to the city of Nuremberg, bestowing upon it many special signs of his favour. In the year 1424, he brought here from Prague the relics that are shown every year.’

Although the two panels were originally designed as a diptych, they were ultimately displayed separately. Other texts on the reverse of the panels suggest that the painted side was normally hung facing the wall, with the portraits only being shown on special occasions, presumably for the annual display of the regalia. The two panels were hung on either side of the shrine in which the relics were housed.

D�rer prepared studies of the individual pieces of the regalia and reproduced them with great accuracy. Charlemagne wears the imperial crown and brandishes his sword and orb. Sigismund has a Gothic crown and holds a sceptre and orb. The annual display of the imperial regalia ended in 1525 and D�rer’s panels were then moved to the city hall. Since 1880 they have been on loan to the Germanisches Museum in Nuremberg. As for the regalia, the Habsburgs later took them to Vienna where they remained in the imperial treasury, except for a brief period when they were seized by the Nazis and returned to Nuremberg.

Maximilian I of Austria (1459-1519) became head of the Habsburgs in 1493 and was elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1508. He was a learned ruler with a strong interest in the arts. D�rer first met him during a visit to Nuremberg in 1512 and was commissioned to work on the gigantic woodcuts of The Triumphal Arch and The Triumphal Procession, as well as decorations for Maximilian’s prayer book. In 1515 he was awarded an annual payment of 100 florins by the Emperor.

On 28 June 1518 D�rer had sketched Maximilian during the Imperial Diet at Augsburg. He inscribed the drawing: `This is Emperor Maximilian, whom I, Albrecht D�rer, portrayed up in his small chamber in the tower at Augsburg on the Monday after the feast day of John the Baptist in the year 1518.’ In the relatively informal sketch D�rer captured a hint of the fatigued resignation of the 59 year-old ruler.

Maxmilian I died on 12 January 1519 and D�rer then used his drawing as the basis for a woodcut and two painted portraits, one in tempera (Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg) and this one in oil. These finished works are formal portraits and lack some of the human character which comes out in the original sketch. In the oil portrait, the Emperor is dressed in an elegant fur, which D�rer has painted with great care. Instead of an orb, the Emperor holds a broken pomegranate, a symbol of the Resurrection and Maximilian’s personal emblem. At the top of the picture is the Habsburg coat of arms with the double-headed eagle and a lengthy inscription on Maximilian’s achievements. The Emperor looks aloof and withdrawn, an expression of his dignity.

In 1518, D�rer went to the Diet of Augsburg following a delegation of dignitaries from Nuremberg. On that occasion, he did the portrait of Jakob Fugger (Staatsgalerie, Augsburg) and also one in a half-bust of the emperor, then fifty-nine. It is a pencil drawing carried out on 28 June (as indicated by the inscription on the same paper).

Shortly thereafter, probably still during his sojourn in Augsburg, he did a second portrait, still in a half-bust, but this time painted on canvas: D�rer probably preferred canvas to panel because it simplified the execution, for the painting as well as for the transportation. This painting, now in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum in Nuremberg, did not have the inscription on parchment, which was added only after the emperor’s death on 12 January 1519. The inscription is in German. It was transcribed, translated in Latin, in capital letters on the third panel portrait, now in Vienna.

D�rer had originally planned the two imperial portraits of Charlemagne (also in Nuremberg) and Sigismund to be a foldable diptych. In accordance with the prescriptions of the Nuremberg town council, who had commissioned the works, the two portraits were supposed to be based on the paintings which had previously decorated the “Heiltumskammer” in the Schoppersche House by the marketplace, where every year the state jewels were kept for a short time. Emperor Sigismund is turned towards Charlemagne. The portrait, which is rather wooden in appearance when compared to other portraits by D�rer, presumably was based on a miniature copy in a portrait book by Hieronimus Beck of Leopoldsdorf, which is in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The coats of arms of the German Empire, Bohemia, old Hungary, new Hungary and Luxembourg appear at the top of the painting.

Desiderius Erasmus (1467-1536) was the most celebrated humanist north of the Alps and in certain ways a pioneer of the Reformation. He visited England in 1499 and again in 1505, when he stayed at the house of Sir Thomas More. He met D�rer on at least two occasions in 1520 at Brussels. In November 1521 he settled permanently at Basel as a literary adviser to Froben’s press.

On August 31, 1520, D�rer noted in his diary at Brussels: “I have given an Engraved Passion to Erasmus of Rotterdam and sketched his likeness once more.” In a letter to Pirckheimer, dated from Basel, January 8, 1525, Erasmus writes: “I have received your portrait. I wish I could also be portrayed by D�rer. Why not by such an artist? But how could it be accomplished? He began my portrait in charcoal at Brussels, but he has probably put it aside long ago. If he could do it from my medal or from memory, let him do what he has done for you, that is, add some fat.” (Erasmus was notoriously lean.) D�rer complied with Erasmus’ wish. In another letter, dated July 30, 1526, Erasmus writes to Pirckheimer: “I wonder how I can show D�rer my gratitude, which he deserves eternally. It is not surprising that this picture does not correspond exactly with my appearance. I no longer look as I did five years ago.”

This engraving is technically superior to the portrait of Melanchthon, but in corresponding measure less true to life. As the Greek inscription states, his writings present a better picture of the man than this portrait. Perhaps this is the only instance in which D�rer was notably unfortunate in attempting a portrait. Much attention has been given to the accessories, but the representation has a lifeless quality. D�rer with all his efforts produced merely an excellent portrait of a cultured, learned and God-fearing humanist. He failed to capture that elusive blend of charm, serenity, ironic wit, complacency and formidable strength that was Erasmus of Rotterdam. D�rer presumably made use of the medal of Erasmus designed by Quentin Massys. Before World War II the plate of this engraving was in the Gotha Print Room at Friedenstein Castle. There are posthumous impressions on satin at Berlin and Vienna. The engraving is based on a preliminary drawing.

Erasmus of Rotterdam was D�rer’s last engraving. If the last engraved portraits of his friends and patrons are indeed memorial tablets, it is remarkable that D�rer should not have prepared a self-portrait of this type. Throughout his life he had sketched his likeness to the point of having been accused of vanity by some later commentators. There is, in fact, some reason to believe that a drawing existed at the time of D�rer’s death which may have been intended for this very purpose.

In the Web Gallery of Art you can view several portraits of Erasmus by Renaissance painters, such as Hans Holbein the Younger, Albrecht D�rer and Quentin Massys.

Desiderius Erasmus (1467-1536) was the most celebrated humanist north of the Alps and in certain ways a pioneer of the Reformation. He visited England in 1499 and again in 1505, when he stayed at the house of Sir Thomas More. He met D�rer on at least two occasions in 1520 at Brussels. In November 1521 he settled permanently at Basel as a literary adviser to Froben’s press.

On August 31, 1520, D�rer noted in his diary at Brussels: “I have given an Engraved Passion to Erasmus of Rotterdam and sketched his likeness once more.” In a letter to Pirckheimer, dated from Basel, January 8, 1525, Erasmus writes: “I have received your portrait. I wish I could also be portrayed by D�rer. Why not by such an artist? But how could it be accomplished? He began my portrait in charcoal at Brussels, but he has probably put it aside long ago. If he could do it from my medal or from memory, let him do what he has done for you, that is, add some fat.” (Erasmus was notoriously lean.) D�rer complied with Erasmus’ wish. In another letter, dated July 30, 1526, Erasmus writes to Pirckheimer: “I wonder how I can show D�rer my gratitude, which he deserves eternally. It is not surprising that this picture does not correspond exactly with my appearance. I no longer look as I did five years ago.”

This engraving is technically superior to the portrait of Melanchthon, but in corresponding measure less true to life. As the Greek inscription states, his writings present a better picture of the man than this portrait. Perhaps this is the only instance in which D�rer was notably unfortunate in attempting a portrait. Much attention has been given to the accessories, but the representation has a lifeless quality. D�rer with all his efforts produced merely an excellent portrait of a cultured, learned and God-fearing humanist. He failed to capture that elusive blend of charm, serenity, ironic wit, complacency and formidable strength that was Erasmus of Rotterdam. D�rer presumably made use of the medal of Erasmus designed by Quentin Massys. Before World War II the plate of this engraving was in the Gotha Print Room at Friedenstein Castle. There are posthumous impressions on satin at Berlin and Vienna. The engraving is based on a preliminary drawing.

Erasmus of Rotterdam was D�rer’s last engraving. If the last engraved portraits of his friends and patrons are indeed memorial tablets, it is remarkable that D�rer should not have prepared a self-portrait of this type. Throughout his life he had sketched his likeness to the point of having been accused of vanity by some later commentators. There is, in fact, some reason to believe that a drawing existed at the time of D�rer’s death which may have been intended for this very purpose.

In the Web Gallery of Art you can view several portraits of Erasmus by Renaissance painters, such as Hans Holbein the Younger, Albrecht D�rer and Quentin Massys.

Like the depiction of Adam (also in the Prado, Madrid), that of Eve should also be considered in the context of the studies relating to the ideal proportions of the human body which D�rer had been making since his first Italian journey in 1496. The plastic values of the painting are toned down compared to those in the copper engraving, and the interior detail is gentler. Eve is gazing seductively across at Adam. In her left hand she is receiving the apple from the serpent, and in her right she is holding a branch from the Tree of Knowledge from which hangs a cartellino, a small inscribed plaque with the signature and phrase “Albertus D�rer alemanus faciebat post virginis partum 1507” (The German Albrecht D�rer made this after the Virgin gave birth 1507).

This panel was painted for an altar for the German community in Venice, in the church of S. Bartolomeo near the Fondaco dei Tedeschi, the social and commercial centre of the German colony, where it remained until 1606. It was then acquired, after many negotiations, for 900 ducats by Emperor Rudolph II. According to Sandrart (1675), four men were hired to bring the packaged painting to the emperor’s residence in Prague.

Stationed elsewhere during the invasion of the Swedish troops, the painting, already very damaged, returned to its place in 1635. It underwent a first restoration in 1662. In 1782, it was sold in an auction for one florin. After having passed through the hands of various collectors, it was acquired by the Czechoslovakian state in 1930.

The painting, severely damaged chiefly in the centre portion, from the head of the Madonna and continuing downward to the bottom, was clumsily restored in the nineteenth century; in this restoration, the upper side portion, left of the canopy and to Saint Dominic’s head, was also included. Three copies of the work are known: one - considered the most important and which now belongs to a private collection - is attributed to Hans Rottenhamer, who sojourned in Venice from 1596 to 1606, where he took care of many acquisitions on behalf of Rudolph II; another is in Vienna; and the third, a rather modified version of the original, is in Lyon.

The preparatory work of the panel occupied the artist for a long time, from 7 February until the last half of April in 1506. It consists of twenty-one preparatory drawings, executed chiefly in pen and ink on azure paper, according to the Venetian tradition; others are drawings of various characters, in the dimensions then adopted for the painting. In a letter dated 25 September, addressed to Willibald Pirckheimer, the artist communicates the completion of the work.

It seems that the Confraternity of the Blessed Rosary was officially recognized by the Venetian authorities in 1506, that is, in the year D�rer carried out the painting. It is assumed that the painting was ordered by this Confraternity. On the whole, the majority of the figures in the painting have not been identified. The exceptions to this include the self-portrait of the artist; the portrait of Emperor Maximilian I; the one of the architect Hieronymus of Augsburg, engineer of the new Fondaco dei Tedeschi (1505-8) after it was completely destroyed in a fire, and who is recognizable in the far right by the square he holds; and Burckhard from the city Speyer, identified as the fourth figure form the left.

St Dominic is clearly the saint whom we see to the left of the Madonna, since the institution of the rosary is attributed to him. For all the others, many names have been proposed. However, the identifications are still uncertain. The Madonna is enthroned in a field, beneath a green canopy that cherubs hold up with ribbons. Other cherubs on little clouds hold a crown of precious stones suspended above her head. At her feet kneel the pope and the emperor, on the left and right, having placed before themselves a tiara and a crown, respectively. And while the Madonna places a garland of roses on the head of the emperor, the Blessed Child places an identical one over the head of the pontifice. St Dominic, in turn, crowns a bishop. Behind the pope and the emperor, the patrons are arranged symmetrically, some of whom, in both parts of the background, divert their gaze from the Madonna. Other Bellinian cherubs descend upon them with rose garlands. In the centre of the painting, seated in front of the throne, an angel playing a lute recalls the angels playing at the feet of the enthroned Madonna in Giovanni Bellini’s paintings. These details aside, the setting of the work is typically Venetian. The rigidly pyramidal composition of the painting is not Venetian. This painting has indicated that D�rer was one to have been of the first who created such composition.

The Feast of the Rose Garlands is undoubtedly the most important work that D�rer created during his sojourn in Venice and was the work that ushered in the Renaissance. D�rer was obviously aware of this, as his letters and the painting itself demonstrate. The painting shows this in the distinction he gives his self-portrait: in the top right, in front of the typically German landscape passage at the foot of the mountains, with his face framed by long blond hair, donning luxurious clothes - even a precious fur cloak, in spite of the warm season - so as to be noticed among the other characters. He alone has ostentatiously turned his gaze to the spectator. Even the writing on the paper he holds is unusual for Italy. It indicates not only the time of production (five months), but next to his own name is the indication germanus. This detail was to distinguish himself from his Venetian colleagues, who evidently held him in very high regard, since even the doge and the patriarch came to his workshop to admire his work.

This panel was painted for an altar for the German community in Venice, in the church of S. Bartolomeo near the Fondaco dei Tedeschi, the social and commercial centre of the German colony, where it remained until 1606. It was then acquired, after many negotiations, for 900 ducats by Emperor Rudolph II. According to Sandrart (1675), four men were hired to bring the packaged painting to the emperor’s residence in Prague.

Stationed elsewhere during the invasion of the Swedish troops, the painting, already very damaged, returned to its place in 1635. It underwent a first restoration in 1662. In 1782, it was sold in an auction for one florin. After having passed through the hands of various collectors, it was acquired by the Czechoslovakian state in 1930.

The painting, severely damaged chiefly in the centre portion, from the head of the Madonna and continuing downward to the bottom, was clumsily restored in the nineteenth century; in this restoration, the upper side portion, left of the canopy and to Saint Dominic’s head, was also included. Three copies of the work are known: one - considered the most important and which now belongs to a private collection - is attributed to Hans Rottenhamer, who sojourned in Venice from 1596 to 1606, where he took care of many acquisitions on behalf of Rudolph II; another is in Vienna; and the third, a rather modified version of the original, is in Lyon.

The preparatory work of the panel occupied the artist for a long time, from 7 February until the last half of April in 1506. It consists of twenty-one preparatory drawings, executed chiefly in pen and ink on azure paper, according to the Venetian tradition; others are drawings of various characters, in the dimensions then adopted for the painting. In a letter dated 25 September, addressed to Willibald Pirckheimer, the artist communicates the completion of the work.

It seems that the Confraternity of the Blessed Rosary was officially recognized by the Venetian authorities in 1506, that is, in the year D�rer carried out the painting. It is assumed that the painting was ordered by this Confraternity. On the whole, the majority of the figures in the painting have not been identified. The exceptions to this include the self-portrait of the artist; the portrait of Emperor Maximilian I; the one of the architect Hieronymus of Augsburg, engineer of the new Fondaco dei Tedeschi (1505-8) after it was completely destroyed in a fire, and who is recognizable in the far right by the square he holds; and Burckhard from the city Speyer, identified as the fourth figure form the left.

St Dominic is clearly the saint whom we see to the left of the Madonna, since the institution of the rosary is attributed to him. For all the others, many names have been proposed. However, the identifications are still uncertain. The Madonna is enthroned in a field, beneath a green canopy that cherubs hold up with ribbons. Other cherubs on little clouds hold a crown of precious stones suspended above her head. At her feet kneel the pope and the emperor, on the left and right, having placed before themselves a tiara and a crown, respectively. And while the Madonna places a garland of roses on the head of the emperor, the Blessed Child places an identical one over the head of the pontifice. St Dominic, in turn, crowns a bishop. Behind the pope and the emperor, the patrons are arranged symmetrically, some of whom, in both parts of the background, divert their gaze from the Madonna. Other Bellinian cherubs descend upon them with rose garlands. In the centre of the painting, seated in front of the throne, an angel playing a lute recalls the angels playing at the feet of the enthroned Madonna in Giovanni Bellini’s paintings. These details aside, the setting of the work is typically Venetian. The rigidly pyramidal composition of the painting is not Venetian. This painting has indicated that D�rer was one to have been of the first who created such composition.

The Feast of the Rose Garlands is undoubtedly the most important work that D�rer created during his sojourn in Venice and was the work that ushered in the Renaissance. D�rer was obviously aware of this, as his letters and the painting itself demonstrate. The painting shows this in the distinction he gives his self-portrait: in the top right, in front of the typically German landscape passage at the foot of the mountains, with his face framed by long blond hair, donning luxurious clothes - even a precious fur cloak, in spite of the warm season - so as to be noticed among the other characters. He alone has ostentatiously turned his gaze to the spectator. Even the writing on the paper he holds is unusual for Italy. It indicates not only the time of production (five months), but next to his own name is the indication germanus. This detail was to distinguish himself from his Venetian colleagues, who evidently held him in very high regard, since even the doge and the patriarch came to his workshop to admire his work.

St Dominic is clearly the saint whom we see to the left of the Madonna, since the institution of the rosary is attributed to him. For all the others, many names have been proposed. However, the identifications are still uncertain. The Madonna is enthroned in a field, beneath a green canopy that cherubs hold up with ribbons. Other cherubs on little clouds hold a crown of precious stones suspended above her head. At her feet kneel the pope and the emperor, on the left and right, having placed before themselves a tiara and a crown, respectively. And while the Madonna places a garland of roses on the head of the emperor, the Blessed Child places an identical one over the head of the pontifice. St Dominic, in turn, crowns a bishop. Behind the pope and the emperor, the patrons are arranged symmetrically, some of whom, in both parts of the background, divert their gaze from the Madonna.

In the crowd of believers D�rer combined real portraits which he prepared in studies with fictitious ones. In the Feast of the Rose Garlands, D�rer created his first single panel altar, though its compositional structure is like a triptych.

Other Bellinian cherubs descend upon them with rose garlands; the setting of the work is typically Venetian. The rigidly pyramidal composition of the painting is not Venetian. This painting has indicated that D�rer was one to have been of the first who created such composition.

The Feast of the Rose Garlands is undoubtedly the most important work that D�rer created during his sojourn in Venice and was the work that ushered in the Renaissance. D�rer was obviously aware of this, as his letters and the painting itself demonstrate. The painting shows this in the distinction he gives his self-portrait: in the top right, in front of the typically German landscape passage at the foot of the mountains, with his face framed by long blond hair, donning luxurious clothes - even a precious fur cloak, in spite of the warm season - so as to be noticed among the other characters. He alone has ostentatiously turned his gaze to the spectator. Even the writing on the paper he holds is unusual for Italy. It indicates not only the time of production (five months), but next to his own name is the indication germanus. This detail was to distinguish himself from his Venetian colleagues, who evidently held him in very high regard, since even the doge and the patriarch came to his workshop to admire his work.

The artist’s companion is likely to be Leonhard Vilt, founder of the Brotherhood of the Rosary in Venice. The man in the far right, recognizable by the square he holds, is the architect Hieronymus of Augsburg, engineer of the new Fondaco dei Tedeschi (1505-8) after it was completely destroyed in a fire.

Inscription on the sheet in the artist’s hand, monogrammed and autograph writing: EXEGIT QUINQUE MESTRI SPATIO ALBERTUS DURER GERMANUS MDVI. (`Albrecht D�rer, a German, produced it within the span of five months. 1506.‘)

The detail shows the artist’s self-portrait in front of ae typically German landscape.

The panel is the right side of a diptych that includes the portrait of her husband Hans. Inscription in the top right, by someone else(?): FELITZ. HANS. TUCHERIN, 33 JOR. ALT. SALUS. In 1824, the two portraits were included in the inventory of the museum in the Jägerhaus of Weimar. After 1918, they were passed from the grand dukes to the museum.

It was commissioned in the same year as the diptych of Nicolas and Elsbeth Tucher (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Kassel). They had approximately the same composition because Wolgemut, D�rer’s master, had already done portraits of the members of the Tucher family years before. Even the setting of the portraits is very similar. The presence of an embroidered curtain in the background, the almost identical landscape passage seen through the windows, and lastly, the windowsill set equal spatial limits to the portraits. The foreshortenings of the landscape passage are imaginative and mannered, showing roads, lakes, and mountains. On the road, in the landscape behind the man’s portrait, one discerns a wayfarer; on the path, in the woman’s portrait, a man on horseback. The same clouds are seen in the clear sky behind the man, as in the wife’s portrait, and in Elsbeth Tucher’s.

Felicitas holds a carnation, with a bud and a flower. Her plump face is turned to the left, but her gaze, with slightly melancholic eyes, looks to the right. Like her sister-in-law, she wears a gold chain around her neck, and the waistcoat, according to custom, is held by a buckle , which is engraved with the initials of her consort, H. T.

By the autumn of 1493 D�rer had travelled from Basel back through Colmar and reached Strasbourg. Two oil paintings survive from his stay, his first painted self-portrait (Mus�e du Louvre, Paris) and a devotional panel of Christ as the Man of Sorrows (Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe). Among his pen and ink drawings is this female nude, dated 1493. The preliminary drawing is visible and this shows that D�rer made substantial adjustments to the work, such as on the upper thigh. This little sketch, perhaps done in a bathhouse, represents the earliest surviving life drawing in Northern art. The squat girl, her hair wrapped in a towel, is faithfully depicted, unadorned and unidealized. The woman, shown in a frontal view, is smiling in embarrassment as she modestly holds her right hand in front of her body. There are still signs of uncertainty in the proportions of individual sections such as the shoulders and neck.

This female nude seen from behind records D�rer’s interest in human proportions during his first Italian journey. The attributes, staff and cloth, suggest that this freely drawn nude study was created from a model. The firmly sketched shape of her body forms a charming contrast with the glazed, freely swinging cloth. The head and cloth are executed with gentle brushstrokes and clearly show a spatially plastic relationship between the figure and pictorial space.

D�rer’s most important contribution to the theoretical study of art was his work on the question of human proportion, a problem which arose from the Italian artists’ search for the ideal measurements of the body. After years of study, D�rer ultimately decided that there was no absolute ideal. Choosing the head as the basic measurement for other parts of the human body, he established a series of proportions devised according to different physiques. His theory was published in his Four Books on Human Proportion, but although he had begun to correct the proofs it was not published until six months after his death.

The picture shows an illustration from Four Books on Human Proportion.

In early commentaries the scene was described as a band of robbers attacking D�rer, or as William Tell. More recently it has been suggested that it had originally been intended as a scene beneath the Cross. Italian influence is manifest, but the grouping, particularly the position of the Oriental horseman, is a little awkward. Note the scotch plaid pattern of the Turk’s saddlecloth.

This drawing, in woodcut style, may have been a study for a Resurrection.

Sheet No. 6 of the Engraved Passion.

D�rer himself is seen standing in the doorway. The masterly drawing of Christ’s body, the predominant profile and its quivering movement are notable. The device of cutting off the column suggests the true expanse of the chamber. The bearded guard appears also in Christ Crowned with Thorns. The rendering is superior to that of the same subject in the Small Woodcut Passion.

The Green Passion, so named after the green primed paper, consists of twelve sheets, the purpose of which is not known. It has been assumed that they were used as preliminary sketches for stained glass windows. Like the other pictures, the sheet of Christ before Caiaphas distinguishes itself through its fine white highlights which achieve a magical plasticity and dramatic lighting - as was created by the “clair-obscur” technique - in their harmony with the green base colour of the scene. Christ and Pilate, the two antagonists in the foreground, are positioned opposite each other and emphasized both by the lighting and the architecture.

The picture shows an illustration from the Four Books on Human Proportions, Book I, published posthumously by Willibald Pirckheimer and D�rer’s wife Agnes.

The panel is the left side of a diptych that includes the portrait of his wife Felicitas. Inscription in the top left in another’s hand: HANS TUCHER, 42 IERIG 1499. In 1824, the two portraits were included in the inventory of the museum in the Jägerhaus of Weimar. After 1918, they were passed from the grand dukes to the museum.

It was commissioned in the same year as the diptych of Nicolas and Elsbeth Tucher (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Kassel). They had approximately the same composition because Wolgemut, D�rer’s master, had already done portraits of the members of the Tucher family years before. Even the setting of the portraits is very similar. The presence of an embroidered curtain in the background, the almost identical landscape passage seen through the windows, and lastly, the windowsill set equal spatial limits to the portraits. The foreshortenings of the landscape passage are imaginative and mannered, showing roads, lakes, and mountains. On the road, in the landscape behind the man’s portrait, one discerns a wayfarer; on the path, in the woman’s portrait, a man on horseback. The same clouds are seen in the clear sky behind the man, as in the wife’s portrait, and in Elsbeth Tucher’s.

Hans Tucher, a descendant of an old Nuremberg family and an important member of the city council, is depicted in lavish clothes, with a fur collar, a symbol of his high-ranking position. The head, portrayed in a more elevated position than that of his consort, is framed by soft and wavy hair. The eyes, which have slightly different size, have an open gaze, the eyelids are somewhat lowered, the nose is long and sharp, the lips thin: the result is a proud but winning look, which is also emphasized by the points of the beret folded to the back and front. Besides the ring he wears on his thumb, he holds - like Elsbeth Tucher in her portrait - another ring, gold, in his hand as evidence of his marriage, contracted in 1482 with Felicitas. She, in turn, holds a carnation, with a bud and a flower. Her plump face is turned to the left, but her gaze, with slightly melancholic eyes, looks to the right. Like her sister-in-law, she wears a gold chain around her neck, and the waistcoat, according to custom, is held by a buckle , which is engraved with the initials of her consort, H. T.

The combined coat of arms of Tucher-Rieter is depicted on the verso of the Hans Tucher portrait, which became the anterior side of the closed diptych.

Sheet No. 14 of the Engraved Passion.

Adam and Eve are on the left, Moses is behind them, Cerberus above. The contrast between engraved and woodcut versions is similar to that described for the Deposition. The man whose arm Christ is touching is probably St John the Baptist. This print is a new and felicitous rendering, bearing witness to D�rer’s inventiveness and imagination. Eve looks charming next to the aged Adam.

This is a study for the Apostle in the great Munich painting. In its expression of spiritual excitement the head in this drawing is decidedly superior to the one in the painting. Tossing briskly, the locks of hair continue the theme of movement. At the same time, the natural appearance of the hair seems to have been oddly neglected in the rendering (“pretzel locks”). Drawings of this type, in very large format and only superficially finished, do not occur in the earlier period.

This study was done in Nuremberg. A Negro always figured in scenes of the Adoration of the Wise Men. This drawing is parallel in time with the studies for the Heller Altar; in comparison with them it has a special freshness.

This drawing shows an infant’s head tilted back and viewed from slightly below.

The date top right is a later addition.

The dating of this painting is debated. Some critics think it is an early work from c. 1497. However, due to the relations to some drawings, the late dating is generally accepted.

The drawing shows the head of a woman, turned to front, her eyes closed, with hair tied back. The unusual technique of this drawing with its lavish use of grey bodycolour to give the effect of a grisaille painting was favoured by D�rer during the last decade of his life.

There are a total of 22 preliminary studies, every one of which can be considered an autonomous work of art, in which D�rer prepared the Feast of the Rose Garlands (N�rodn� Galerie, Prague). The head of the lute-playing angel by the Madonna’s feet is a masterpiece of drawing. The technique of the brush drawing with white highlights on blue paper was one D�rer became acquainted with in Venice. The interplay of white and dark parallel and cross-hatchings which gently follow the curves of the face create the plastic effect of the light and dark shades.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 4 minutes):

C�sar Franck: Panis angelicus