German Sculpture of the Later Renaissance, C. 1520-1580: Art in an Age of Uncertainty 9781400849819, 1400849810

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (page xi)
PREFACE (page xxi)
INTRODUCTION (page 3)
CHAPTER ONE For Our Salvation: The Role of Religious Art in Pre-Reformation Germany (page 10)
CHAPTER TWO Art or Idol? (page 31)
Iconoclasm (page 35)
Three Case Studies (page 37)
CHAPTER THREE The Impact of the Reformation on Religious Sculpture, c. 1520-1555 (page 46)
Sculptors in a Different Age (page 46)
The Story of Four Sculptors (page 57)
CHAPTER FOUR Religious Sculpture after the Peace of Augsburg, 1555-1580 (page 95)
August of Saxony and the School of Dresden (page 96)
Other Lutheran Sculptural Programs in North Germany (page 104)
Catholic Sculpture and the Council of Trent (page 108)
Five Case Studies (page 111)
CHAPTER FIVE In Memoriam: Epitaphs and Simple Tombs (page 127)
The Vischer Family (page 129)
Loy Hering (page 138)
Hans Schenk (page 143)
Hans Bildhauer (page 147)
Cornelis Floris of Antwerp (page 149)
Changes in Memorial Form and Iconography (page 152)
CHAPTER SIX Commemorative Series and Complex Tombs (page 157)
Episcopal and Princely Series (page 157)
Complex Tomb Projects (page 171)
CHAPTER SEVEN The Renaissance Fountain (page 198)
House Fountains (page 199)
Civic Fountains (page 216)
Garden Fountains (page 226)
CHAPTER EIGHT Sculpture and Architecture (page 245)
Residential Sculpture (page 245)
Sculpture and Civic Architecture (page 260)
CHAPTER NINE Small Collectible Sculpture: A Study in the History of Taste (page 270)
Art in the Private Sphere (page 270)
The Exquisite Relief and Statuette (page 281)
Plaquettes and Replicable Sculpture (page 294)
Sculpture and the Collector (page 303)
CHAPTER TEN The Emergence of Sculptural Portraits (page 317)
The German Medal: Portrait of Success (page 321)
Portrait Alternatives: Reliefs and Busts (page 337)
CONCLUSION Steps towards a New Sculptural Legacy (page 358)
BIOGRAPHICAL CATALOGUE OF SELECTED SCULPTORS (page 363)
BIBLIOGRAPHY (page 411)
NOTES (page 423)
PHOTOGRAPHIC CREDIT (page 487)
INDEX (page 489)

Citation preview

GERMAN SCULPTURE OF THE LATER RENAISSANCE

BLANK PAGE

JEFFREY CHIPPS SMITH

German Sculpture of the Later Renaissance C. 1520—1580 Artin an Age of Uncertainty

5

Copyright © 1994 by Princeton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, Chichester, West Sussex ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Smith, Jeffrey Chipps, 1951— German sculpture of the later Renaissance, c. 1520-1580 : art in an age of uncertainty / Jeffrey Chipps Smith.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-69 1-03237-8

1. Sculpture, German. 2. Sculpture, Renaissance—Germany. 3. Reformation and art-—Germany. I. Title.

NB565.S65 1994 730° .943'09031—dc20_ ——-93-25.455

This book has been composed in Garamond #3 by The Composing Room of Michigan, Inc. Princeton University Press books are printed on acid-free paper and meet the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources

Printed in the United States of America

10987654321 Published with the assistance of the Getty Grant Program DESIGNER Laury A. Egan PRODUCTION COORDINATOR Anju Makhijani EDITOR Timothy Wardell

To Sandy

and our Children,

Spencer, Abigail, and Harlan

BLANK PAGE

CONTENTS

PREFACE XX1 INTRODUCTION 3

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS X1 CHAPTER ONE

Art or Idol? 31 Iconoclasm 35 Three Case Studies 37 NUREMBERG 37

For Our Salvation: The Role of Religious Art in Pre-Reformation Germany 1O CHAPTER TWO

AUGSBURG 39 MUNSTER 41

CHAPTER THREE

The Impact of the Reformation on Religious Sculpture, c. 1520-1555 46

Sculptors in a Difficult Age 46 The Story of Four Sculptors 57 BENEDIKT DREYER 58 PETER DELL THE ELDER Or HANS REINHART 68 Complex Church Programs 72 THE NEUE STIFT AT HALLE 72

LOY HERING 57

TORGAU 87

NEUBURG AN DER DONAU SI

CHAPTER FOUR

Religious Sculpture after the Peace of Augsburg, 1555—1580 95

August of Saxony and the School of Dresden 96 Catholic Sculpture and the Council of Trent 108 Other Lutheran Sculptural Programs in North Germany 1O4

Five Case StudiesIII III AUGSBURG TRIER 115 WURZBURG 120 INGOLSTADT AND INNSBRUCK 123 Vil

CONTENTS

CHAPTER FIVE

The Vischer Family 129 Loy Hering 138

In Memoriam: Epitaphs and Simple Tombs 127

Hans Schenck 143 Hans Bildhauer IA7

Cornelis Floris of Antwerp 149 Changes in Memorial Form and Iconography 152 CHAPTER SIX

Commemorative Series and Complex Tombs 157

Episcopal and Princely Series 157 Complex Tomb Projects I7I THE SHRINE OF ELECTOR MORITZ OF SAXONY IN FREIBERG 175 THE CENOTAPH OF EMPEROR MAXIMILIAN I IN INNSBRUCK 182

THE PRUSSIAN MEMORIALS IN KONIGSBERG 192

The Renaissance Fountain 198 House Fountains 199 CHAPTER SEVEN

Civic Fountains 216 Garden Fountains 226

Sculpture and Architecture 245 Residential Sculpture 245 CHAPTER EIGHT

OF THE ITALIAN HALL 247

THE CITY RESIDENCE AT LANDSHUT: LUDWIG X OF BAVARIA AND THE DECORATION

FROM DRESDEN TO HEIDELBERG, OR THE TRANSITION FROM ORNAMENT TO ART 251

Sculpture and Civic Architecture 260 THE SAGA OF THE NUREMBERG RATHAUS GRILLE 261

AND WITTENBERG 263

SCULPTURE AND CIVIC ASPIRATIONS: THE RATHAUS PORCHES IN COLOGNE

CHAPTER NINE

Small Collectible Sculpture: A Study in the History of Taste 270

Art in the Private Sphere 270

The Exquisite Relief and Statuette 281 Plaquettes and Replicable Sculpture 294

Sculpture and the Collector 303

CHAPTER TEN

The Emergence of Sculptural Portraits 317 The German Medal: Portrait of Success 321 HANS SCHWARZ AND THE DIET OF AUGSBURG IN 1518 323 Vill

CONTENTS

THE FIRST GENERATION OF MEDALLISTS 328 THE CREATIVE IMPULSE AND ITS OBSTACLES 335

Portrait Alternatives: Reliefs and Busts 337

HANS DAUCHER AND THE POPULARIZATION OF PORTRAITURE 338 JOHANN GREGOR VAN DER SCHARDT AND BUST PORTRAITURE 449 CONCLUSION

Steps towards a New Sculptural Legacy 358

NOTES 423 INDEX 489

BIBLIOGRAPHY ALI BIOGRAPHICAL CATALOGUE OF SELECTED SCULPTORS 363

PHOTOGRAPHIC CREDIT 487

1X

BLANK PAGE

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Map of the Major Artistic Centers in Germany and 11. Loy Hering, Monument of St. Willibald, 1512-

Parts of Central Europe in the Sixteenth Century 14, Eichstatt, Cathedral Plan of the Neue Stift (later Cathedral) at Halle 12. High Altar, 1529-34, Xanten, St. Viktor during the Reign of Cardinal Albrecht von 13. Johann Ulrich Kraus (after Johann Andreas

Brandenburg Graff), Vzew of the Interior of St. Lorenz, 1685,

Plan of the Palace at Neuburg an der Donau engraving, Nuremberg, Germanisches NaPlan of Schloss Hartenfels at Torgau during the tionalmuseum Reign of Elector Johann Friedrich of Saxony 14. Adam Kraft, Sacrament House, 1493, Nuremberg, St. Lorenz

1. Jost Amman, The Sculptor, woodcut illustra- 15. Veit Stoss, Angelic Salutation, 1517-18, Nution in Hans Sachs, Eygentliche Beschreibung remberg, St. Lorenz Aller Stande auff Erden (Frankfurt: Sigmund 16. Circle of Hans Multscher, Christ on the Donkey, Feyerabend, 1568), p. H iv; Wolfenbuttel, Her- 1464, Ulm, Museum

zog August Bibliothek 17. Mattadus Boblinger, Mownt of Olives, formerly in 2. Wolf Traut, Man of Sorrows-Mater Dolorosa, Ulm, 1474, drawing, Ulm, Museum 1512, woodcut, Washington, National Gal- 18. Erhard Schon, Complaint of the Poor Persecuted

lery of Art Gods and Church Images, c. 1530, woodcut, 3. Michael Ostendorfer, Pilgrimage to the Church Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum of the Beautiful Virgin in Regensburg, c. 1520, 19. Veit Stoss, Mary Altar, Bamberg Cathedral,

woodcut, Veste Coburg 1520-23

4. Adam Kraft, Schreyer-Landauer Epitaph, t490— 20. Erhard Schon, Szege of Minster, c. 1535, wood-

92, Nuremberg, St. Sebaldus cut, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Mu5. St. Moritz, Hallesches Heiltumsbuch, 1526-— seum of Art 27, Aschaffenburg, Hofbibliothek, ms. 14, 21. Johann Brabender, St. Paw/, c. 1536—40, Para-

fol. 227v dise Portal, Munster Cathedral

6. St. Ursula, Hallesches Heiltumsbuch, 1526-— 22. Johann Brabender, Epitaph of Theodor von Schade,

27, Aschaffenburg, Hofbibliothek, ms. 14, c. 1540, Munster Cathedral

fol. 353Vv 23. Sebald Beham, Complaint of the Godless against 7. Display Tower of the Holy Relics, 1487, woodcut, Luther, c. 1525, woodcut, Nuremberg, Ger-

published in Nuremberg by Peter Vischer, manisches Nationalmuseum Nuremberg, Bayerisches Staatsarchiv, Reichs- 24. Hans Durer and others, Silver Altar, com-

stadt Nirnberg Handschriften, nr. 399a pleted 1538, Cracow Cathedral, Sigismund 8. Michael Erhart, Effigy from the Tomb of St. Sim- Chapel pertus, 1492-95, originally in Augsburg, St. 25. Benedikt Dreyer, St. Anthony Altar, com-

Ulrich and Afra, now Munich, Bayerisches pleted 1522, Lubeck, St.-Annen-Museum

Nationalmuseum 26. Victor Kayser, Arrest of Christ, c. 1525-30, 9. Tilmann Riemenschneider, Tomb of Sts. Hein- London, Victoria and Albert Museum rich II and Kunigunde, 1499-1513, Bamberg 27. Master I.P., Adam and Eve, mid-1520s, Vi-

Cathedral enna, Kunsthistorisches Museum

10. Peter Vischer the Elder and Workshop, Shrine 28. Daniel Hopfer, Adler Altar, c. 1518, etching, of St. Sebaldus, c. 1488—1519, Nuremberg, St. Munich, Staatliche Graphische Sammlung

Sebaldus 29. Peter Flotner, Design for a Transfiguration Altar, xi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1530-35, drawing, Erlangen, Universitats- burg, 1535, Nuremberg, Germanisches Nabibliothek tionalmuseum

30. Claus Berg, St. Jude, c. 1530, Gustrow Cathe- 47. Hans Reinhart, Crucifixion, 1536

dral 48. Hans Reinhart, Apocalypse, obverse, 1539, Mu-

31. Hans Leinberger, Christ in Distress, c. 1525- nich, Staatliche Minzsammlung 30, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie 49. Hans Reinhart, Apocalypse, reverse, 1539, Mu32. Master H.L., St. John the Baptist, 1520-30, nich, Staatliche Munzsammlung Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum 50. Hans Reinhart, Trinity (Moritzpfennig), 1544,

33. Johann Brabender, Choir Screen, 1546, Hil- Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum desheim Cathedral, Sankt-Anthonius-Kapelle 51. Interior View, Halle, Neue Stift (Cathedral) 34. Adolf and Hans Daucher, High Altar, 15 19- 52. Peter Schro, Salvator Mundi, 1522-26, Halle,

22, Annaberg, St. Annenkirche Neue Stift (Cathedral)

35. Loy Hering, Moritzbrunneraltar, 1548, for- 53. Peter Schro, St. James Minor, 1522-26, Halle, merly in the parish church of Moritzbrunn bei Neue Stift (Cathedral) Eichstatt, now Munich, Bayerisches National- 54. Jeremias Geisselbrunn, Salvator Mundi, c.

museum 1624-31, Cologne, Maria Himmelfahrt

36. Loy Hering, Wolfstezn Altar, 1519-20, Eich- 55. Ulrich Kreuz, Pulpit, 1526, Halle, Neue Stift

statt Cathedral (Cathedral) 37. Benedikt Dreyer, Christ as Good Shepherd, 56. Hans Vischer, Christ and the Canaanite Woman, 1533, relief from the former pulpit in the Ma- 1543, Munich, Bayerisches Nationalmuseum rienkirche in Lubeck, now Zarrentin, Parish 57. Hans Vischer (attributed), Chriit and the

Church Canaanite Woman, before 1543, drawing, Lon38. Benedikt Dreyer, Christ Warning against False don, British Museum Prophets, 1533, relief of the former pulpit in 58. Interior View, Palace Chapel, Neuburg an der

the Marienkirche in Lubeck, now Zarrentin, Donau

Parish Church 59. Hans Bocksberger, Painted Ceiling, detail, 39. Benedikt Dreyer, Annunciation, 1533, carving completed 1543, Palace Chapel, Neuburg an

for the former pulpit in the Marienkirche in der Donau Lubeck, now Lubeck, St. Annen Museum 6o. Interior View, Chapel, Torgau, Schloss Har-

40. Erhart Altdorfer, Title Page, 1533, woodcut, tenfels De Biblie vth der vthlegginge Doctoris Martini Lu- 61. Simon Schroter, Pulpit, 1540-44, Torgau,

thers. . . (Lubeck: Ludwig Dietz), Wolfen- Schloss Hartenfels biuttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Sign. 62. Stephan Hermsdorf and Simon Schroter, Altar

Bibel-S, 2° 107 Table, 1540-44, and Netherlandish Artist,

Al. Peter Dell the Elder, Crucifixion, 1525-30, Altar, c. 1554-56, Torgau, Schloss Harten-

Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie fels

42. Hans Leinberger, Crucifixion, 1516, Munich, 63. Ebert II and Jonas Wulff, Altar Table, 1603-—

Bayerisches Nationalmuseum 06, Chapel, Schloss Biickeburg 43. Peter Dell the Elder, Resurrection, 1529, Dres- 64. Wolff and Oswalt Hilger, Commemoration

den, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Griunes Tablet, 1545, Torgau, Schloss Hartenfels

Gewolbe 65. Simon Schroter, Portal, Chapel, 1540-44,

44. Peter Dell the Elder, Law and Gospel, c. 1529- Torgau, Schloss Hartenfels 30, Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, 66. Hans Walther, Portal, Chapel, 1555, Dres-

Griines Gewolbe den, Palace

45. Peter Dell the Elder, A//egory of Faith, 1534, 67. David Conrad, Interior of the Dresden Palace

um Landesbibliothek

Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuse- Chapel, 1676, engraving, Dresden, Sachsische 46. Hans Reinhart, Portrazt of Albrecht von Branden- 68. Hans Walther, Last Supper Altar, 1572-79,

xii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

formerly Dresden, Frauenkirche, now Bischofs- 86. Anton Ort and Konrad Gottlieb, Silver Altar,

werda, Kreuzkirche 1577-78, Innsbruck, Hofkirche

69. Hans Walther, Design for the Last Supper Altar, 87. Peter Vischer the Younger, Epztaph of Dr.

c. 1572, drawing, Leipzig, Museum der bil- Anton Kress, c. 1513, Nuremberg, St. Lorenz

denden Kiunste 88. Hans Valkenauer, Epitaph of Kunz Horn and 70. Bernhard Ditterich, Crucifixion Altar, 1623, Barbara Krell, 1502, Nuremberg, St. Lorenz

Wolfenbuttel, Hauptkirche 89. Jakob Elsner, Dr. Anton Kress in Prayer, Kress 71. Marten de Vos and Others, Chapel, Interior Missal, 1513, Nuremberg, Germanisches

View, 1565-70, Celle, Palace Nationalmuseum, Hs. 113264, fol. 3

72. Pulpit, 1555—60, Schleswig Cathedral 90. Hans Vischer, Epitaph of Bishop Sigismund von

73. Heinrich Matthes, Pulpit, 1576, Ratzeburg Lindenau, c. 1544, Merseburg Cathedral

Cathedral 91. Augsburg Artist, Epztaph of Wolfgang Peisser

74. Lorenz Strauch, Interior of the Innsbruck Hofkir- the Elder, c. 1526, Ingolstadt, Franziskaner-

che, detail, 1614, engraving, Innsbruck, Ti- kirche (Minoritenkirche) roler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum 92. Vischer Workshop, Tombplate of Godart Wige75. Daniel Mannasser, Vzew of St. Ulrich and Afva vinck, Cc. 1518, Lubeck, Marienkirche in Augsburg, 1626, engraving, Munich, Staat- 93. Peter Vischer the Younger, Epztaph of Albrecht

liche Graphische Sammlung von Brandenburg, 1523, formerly in Halle, 76. Paulus Mair, Mary Altar, 1571, Augsburg, St. Neue Stift, now in Aschaffenburg, Stiftskirche

Ulrich and Afra 94. Hans Vischer, Apocalyptic Woman—Second Epi-

77. Hans Degler, Altars of the Adoration of taph of Albrecht von Brandenburg, 1530, forthe Shepherds, Pentecost, and Resurrection, merly in Halle, Neue Stift, now in Aschaften-

1604 and 1607, Augsburg, St. Ulrich and burg, Stiftskirche

Afra 95. Hans Vischer, Baldachin, 1536, formerly

78. Hubert Gerhard, Altar of Christoph Fugger, de- in Halle, Neue Stift, now in Aschaffenburg,

tail of Prophet, 1581-84, formerly in Augs- Stiftskirche burg, Dominikanerkirche, now London, Vic- 96. Peter Vischer the Younger, Epitaph of Friedrich

toria and Albert Museum the Wise, 1527, Wittenberg, Schlosskirche

79. Hans Ruprecht Hoffmann, Pulpit, 1569-72, 97. Michael Adolph Siebenhaar, Interior of the Schloss-

Trier Cathedral kirche in Wittenberg, c. 1730, drawing, Wit-

80. Hans Ruprecht Hoffmann, Pulpit, detail, tenberg, Lutherhalle

1569-72, Trier Cathedral 98. Friedrich the Wise in Prayer, c. 1519-20, Wit-

81. Cornelis Cort (after Maarten van Heemskerck), tenberg, Schlosskirche Last Judgment, 1564, engraving, Leiden, Rijks- 99. Loy Hering, Epitaph of Martin Gozmann, c.

universiteit, Kunsthistorisch Instituut, Pren- 1536, Eichstatt Cathedral

tenkabinet 100. Loy Hering, Epztaph of Jobst Truchsess von Wetz82. Johann Leypold, View of the Juliusspital in hausen, 1524, Vienna, St. Elisabeth Wirzburg, 1603, engraving, Wurzburg, Main- 101. Loy Hering, Epitaph of Erich I and His Tuo

frankisches Museum Wives, c. 1528, Hann. Minden, St. Blasius-

83. Hans Rodlein, Foundation Scene with Prince- Kirche

Bishop Julius Echter, c. 1576-77, Wurzburg, 102. Hans Schenck, Epitaph of Joachim Zerer, c.

Juliusspital 1543, Berlin, Marienkirche

84. Hans Mielich, Hans Worner, and Hans Wies- 103. Hans Schenck, Epitaph of Gregor Bagius, c.

reutter, High Altar, front, completed 1572, 1549, Berlin, Marienkirche, formerly in Ni-

Ingolstadt, Liebfrauenmunster colaskirche

85. Hans Mielich, Hans Worner, and Hans Wies- 104. Hans Schenck, Christus Victor (Epitaph of Paul

reutter, High Altar, back, completed 1572, Schulheiss{?} and His Wife), 1556, Berlin,

Ingolstadt, Liebfrauenminster Marienkirche, formerly in Nicolaskirche XI111

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

105. Hans Schenck, Tomb of Friedrich II von Bran- 125. Dietrich Schro, Tomb of Sebastian von Heusen-

denburg, 1558, Halberstadt Cathedral stamm, C. 1555, Mainz Cathedral 106. Hans Schenck, Tomb of Friedrich III von Bran- 126. Dietrich Schro, Tomb of Sebastian von Heusen-

denburg, detail, 1558, Halberstadt Cathedral stamm, detail, c. 1555, Mainz Cathedral 107. Hans Bildhauer, Epitaph of Johann Segen, 127. Hieronymus Bildhauer, Tomb of Johann HI von

1564, Trier, Liebfrauenkirche Metzenhausen, 1542, Trier Cathedral 108. Hans Bildhauer, Epitaph of Johann Segen, de- 128. View of the Choir, Tubingen, Stiftskirche tail, 1564, Trier, Liebfrauenkirche 129. Sem Schlor, Monument to the Counts of Wurttem-

109. Christoph Walther II, Epztaph of Hugo von berg, 1578—84, Stuttgart, Stiftskirche Schonburg-Glauchau, 1567, Waldenburg, Stadt- 130. Paulus Mair, Model for Heznrich von Mompel-

kirche, formerly in the Schlosskapelle gard, 1577, Schloss Urach, on loan to the 110. Cornelis Floris, Deszgn for a Wall Tomb, 1557, Wirttembergisches Landesmuseum in Stutt-

engraving, Veelderleij niewe inventien van an- gart tigcksche sepultueren . . . (Antwerp: Hierony- 131. Sem Schlor, Monument to the Counts of Wiirttem-

mus Cock), pl. 10; Amsterdam, Rijksmu- berg, detail, 1578—84, Stuttgart, Stiftskirche

seum 132. Hans and Christoph II Walther, Wetrzn Family

111. Cornelis Floris, Epztaph of Adolf von Schauen- Monument, 1565-67, Petersberg bei Halle,

burg, c. 1556, Cologne Cathedral Klosterkirche

112. Andrea Sansovino, Tomb of Cardinal Sforza, 133. View of the Fugger Chapel, 1509-18, Augs-

1509, Rome, S. Maria del Popolo ~ burg, St.-Anna-Kirche 113. Peter Osten, Tomb of Sebastian Echter von Mes- 134. Sebastian Loscher(?), Epitaphs of Georg, Ul-

pelbrunn, 1577, Wurzburg Cathedral rich, and Jakob Fugger, 1510s, Augsburg, St.114. Peter Osten, Tomb of Sebastian Echter von Mes- Anna- Kirche, Fugger Chapel pelbrunn, detail, 1577, Wurzburg Cathedral 135. Hans Daucher (copy after), Epitaph of Jakob 115. Hans Krumper (attributed), Tomb of Johann Fugger, c. 1520, Basel, Historisches Museum Konrad von Gemmingen, 1612, Eichstatt Ca- 136. Hans Daucher and Workshop, Lamentation, c.

thedral 1523, Meissen Cathedral, Georgskapelle

116. Hans Ulrich Bueler, Interior of Wirzburg Ca- 137. Benedikt and Gabriel de Thola, Antonius van

thedral, 1627, painting, Wurzburg, Martin Zerroen, and others, Shrine of Moritz of Sax-

von Wagner-Museum ony, 1559-63, Freiberg, Marienkirche (Ca117. Tilmann Riemenschneider, Tomb of Lorenz von thedral)

Bibra, 1522, Wurzburg Cathedral 138. Hans Schlegel, Tomb of Hoyer VI, 1541, 118. Loy Hering, Tomb of Konrad von Thiingen, c. Eisleben, Andreaskirche

1540, Wurzburg Cathedral 139. Cornelis Floris, Tomb of Frederik I, 1551-55, 119. Peter Dell the Elder, Tomb of Konrad von Bibra, Schleswig Cathedral

c. 1544, Wiirzburg Cathedral 140. Antonius van Zerroen and others, Shrine of 120. Peter Dell the Younger, Tomb of Melchior Zobel Moritz of Saxony, detail—Elector Moritz, 1559-

von Giebelstadt, 1561, Wurzburg Cathedral 63, Freiberg, Marienkirche (Cathedral) 121. Nikolaus Lenkhart, Tomb of Julius Echter von 141. Antonius van Zerroen and others, Shrine

Mespelbrunn, c. 1613, Wurzburg Cathedral of Moritz of Saxony, detail-Muse, 1559-63, 122. Dietrich Schro, Tomb of Albrecht von Branden- Freiberg, Marienkirche (Cathedral)

burg, c. 1545, Mainz Cathedral 142. Giovanni Maria Nosseni, Carlo de Cesare, 123. Dietrich Schro, Tomb of Albrecht von Branden- and others, View into the Choir, 1589-94,

burg, detail, c. 1545, Mainz Cathedral Freiberg, Maritenkirche (Cathedral) 124. Augsburg Artist, Deszgn for an Altar, 1510s, 143. Hans Walther, Saxon Electoral Succession Monu-

drawing, Basel, Offentliche Kunstmuseum, ment, C. 1553, Dresden, Briihl Terrace

Kupferstichkabinett 144. Zacharias Wehme, Saxon Electoral Succession xiv

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Monument, 1591, watercolor, formerly in 1515, woodcut, Berlin, SMBPK, Kupfer-

Dresden, Sachsische Landesbibliothek stichkabinett

145. Lorenz Strauch, Interior of the Innsbruck Hofkir- 161. Hans Frey (attributed), Design for a Table

che, 1614, engraving, Innsbruck, Tiroler Fountain with a Mountain Scene and Morris

Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum Dancers, 1490s, drawing, Erlangen, Univer146. Interior View with the Tomb of Maximilian I, sitatsbibliothek 1502-84, Innsbruck, Hofkirche 162. Albrecht Durer, Design for a Table Fountain, c. 147. Albrecht Diirer (cast by the Vischer Work- 1500, drawing, London, British Museum shop), Tomb of Maximilian I, detail—King Ar- 163. Peter Flotner and Melchior Baier, Ho/zschuher

thur, 1510s, Innsbruck, Hofkirche Cup, late 1530s, Nuremberg, Germanisches 148. Jacques de Gérines, Tomb of Louis of Male, Nationalmuseum mid-1450s, engraving in A.-L. Millin, 164. Matthias Ziundt, Deszgn for a Table Decoration, Antiquités Nationales ou Recueil de Monumens c. 1570, etching, Nuremberg, Germanisches

(V, {Paris, 1790}, pl. 4), formerly Lille, Sc. Nationalmuseum Pierre, Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale Albert 165. Wenzel Jamnitzer, Design for a Table Fountain,

ler, Cabinet des Estampes) mid-1550s, drawing, Veste Coburg

149. Jorg Muscat, Bust of Julius Caesar, 1509-17, 166. Augsburg Artist, Acteon Table Fountain, Innsbruck, Schloss Ambras, formerly in the 1550s, London, Victoria and Albert Museum

Hofkirche 167. Nuremberg Artist, Cleopatra Fountain, 1540s,

150. Florian Abel, Design for the Base of the Tomb Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie of Maximilian I, 1561, drawing, Vienna, 168. Erhart Altdorfer, Banguet Scene, c. 1506, Kunsthistorische Museum (Schloss Ambras) drawing, Berlin, SMBPK, Kupferstichkabi-

151. Alexander Colin or Bernhard and Arnold nett, KdZ 85 Abel, Tomb of Maximilian I, detail—Maximil- 169. Sebald Beham, Design for a Fountain, c. 1540,

ian’s Marriage to Mary of Burgundy, 1562-66, drawing, Erlangen, Universitatsbibliothek

Innsbruck, Hofkirche 170. Master of the Budapest Abundance, Abun-

152. Alexander Colin (cast by Hans Lendenst- dance, 1530s, Cleveland Museum of Art, Purreich), Tomb of Maximilian I, detail—Justice, chase from the J. H. Wade Fund, 71.104

1568-70, Innsbruck, Hofkirche 171. Nuremberg Artist, Deszgn for a Fountain, c. 153. Alexander Colin (cast by Ludovico del Duca), 1530, drawing, Erlangen, UniversitatsbibliTomb of Maximilian I, detail—Emperor Maxt- othek

milian I, 1584, Innsbruck, Hofkirche 172. Augsburg Artist, Fortuna, c. 1520-25, Ber154. View of the Choir, K6nigsberg Cathedral lin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie 155. Cornelis Floris, Epztaph of Dorothea of Den- 173. Wenzel Jamnitzer and Johann Gregor van der

mark, 1549-52, K6nigsberg Cathedral Schardt, Spring (Flores), 1570-75, Vienna, 156. Cornelis Floris, Tomb of Albrecht von Brandenburg- Kunsthistorisches Museum Ansbach, 1508-70, Konigsberg Cathedral 174. Wenzel Jamnitzer and Johann Gregor van der

157. Willem van den Blocke, Tomb of Georg Schardt, Summer (Ceres), 1570-75, Vienna, Friedrich von Brandenburg-Ansbach and Eliz- Kunsthistorisches Museum abeth, 1578-81, Konigsberg Cathedral 175. Wenzel Jamnitzer and Johann Gregor van der 158. Netherlandish Artist(?), Tomb of Edo Wiemken Schardt, Fall (Bacchus), 1570-75, Vienna,

the Younger, early 1560s, Jever, Stadtkirche Kunsthistorisches Museum , 159. Netherlandish Artist(?), Tomb of Edo Wiemken 176. Wenzel Jamnitzer and Johann Gregor van der

the Younger, detail, early 1560s, Jever, Stadt- Schardt, Wznier (Vulcan), 1570-75, Vienna,

kirche Kunsthistorisches Museum

160. Albrecht Altdorfer, Trzamphal Arch of Maxt- 177. Augsburg Artist, Female Spigot Decoration,

milian I, detail—Treasury at Wiener Neustadt, 1550s, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie XV

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

178. Peter Flotner, Deszgn for a Wall Decoration, c. Apollo Fountain, 1532, Nuremberg, Stadt-

1540, drawing, Berlin, SMBPK, Kupfer- museum Fembohaus

stichkabinett, KdZ 1263 196. Peter Fl6tner (cast by Pankraz Labenwolf), 179. Friedrich Sustris, Design for a Grotto Fountain, Apollo Fountain, detail, 1532, Nuremberg,

c. 1569, drawing, Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie Stadtmuseum Fembohaus 180. Friedrich Sustris, Carlo Pallago, and Others, 197. Peter Flotner, Deszgn for the Apollo Fountain,

Interior of the Library of the Fugger House, c. 1531, drawing, formerly in the Collection of

1570, Augsburg the Grand Duke of Weimar

181. Lucas Kilian, Augustus Fountain (original ar- 198. Design for an Acteon Fountain, 1570s, draw-

rangement of Hubert Gerhard’s Fountain, ing, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 1590), 1598, engraving, Augsburg, Stad- 199. Design for a Fountain, c. 1550, drawing,

tische Kunstsammlungen Berlin, SMBPK, Kupferstichkabinett, KdZ 182. Peter Schro, Market Fountain, 1526, Mainz 5515 183. Hans Daucher(?), Neptune Fountain, 1536— 200. Severin Brachmann, Maximilian I and Maria

37, Augsburg, Jakobsplatz in a Garden House, 1560, Vienna, Kunsthis184. Nuremberg Artist (cast by Pankraz Laben- torisches Museum wolf), Geese Bearer Fountain, c. 1540, Nurem- 201. Francesco Terzio and Hans Peisser (cast by

berg, originally in the Obstmarkt Thomas Jarosch), Szuging Fountain, 1563-71, 185. Hans Peisser(?) (cast by Pankraz Labenwolf), Prague, Belvedere courtyard Putto Fountain, 1549-57, Nuremberg, Court- 202. Matthaus Merian, View of the Neugebdude,

yard of the City Hall 1649, engraving

186. Hans Peisser(?) (cast by Pankraz Labenwolf), 203. Design for a Fountain with a Water Bearer, c.

Putto Fountain, detail, 1549-57, Nurem- 1570, drawing, Innsbruck, Tiroler Landes-

berg, Courtyard of the City Hall museum Ferdinandeum

187. Hans Peisser(?), Model for the Putto, 1549-50, 204. View of the Fountain of the Animals at Schloss

Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmu- Hessen, 1648, engraving in J. Royer, Be-

seum schreibung des gantzen Fuiirstlichen Garten zu

188. Hans Peisser(?), Fountain of the Planet Deities, Hessen (Halberstadt), Wolfenbittel, Herzog

1530s8(?), Linz, Landhaus August Bibliothek

189. Hans Peisser(?), Fountain of the Planet Detties, 205. Augsburg Artist (cast by the workshop of

detail, 1530s(?), Linz, Landhaus Marx Labenwolf the Younger and Hans Rei190. Johannes Schunnemann (cast by Benedikt singer), Fountain of the Animals, detail—Horse, Wurzelbauer), Fountain of the Virtues, 1583- 1570s, Braunschweig, Herzog Anton Ulrich-

89, Nuremberg, adjacent to the Lorenzkir- Museum

, che 206. Augsburg Artist (cast by the workshop of 191. Johannes Schiinnemann (cast by Benedikt Marx Labenwolf the Younger and Hans ReiWurzelbauer), Fountain of the Virtues, detail, singer), Fountain of the Animals, detail—Bull,

renzkirche Museum

1583- 89, Nuremberg, adjacent to the Lo- 1570s, Braunschweig, Herzog Anton Ulrich-

192. Albrecht Altdorfer, Rest on the Flight into 207. Matthaus Merian, View of the Lustzarten at Egypt, 1510, painting, Berlin, SMBPK, Ge- Stuttgart, 1621, engraving, Wolfenbiittel, Her-

maldegalerie zog August Bibliothek

193. Loy Hering, Garden of Love, c. 1525, Berlin, 208. Augsburg Artist (cast by the workshop of

SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie Marx Labenwolf the Younger and Hans Rei-

194. Victor Kayser, Susanna and the Elders, c. singer), Judgment of Paris Fountain, detail—

1530, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie Paris, 1570-75, Stuttgart, Wurttember195. Peter Fl6tner (cast by Pankraz Labenwolf), gisches Landesmuseum xvi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

209. Augsburg Artist (cast by the workshop of 225. Alexander Colin, Caritas, Ottheinrichsbau, Marx Labenwolf the Younger and Hans Ret- 1558-59, Heidelberg Schloss singer), Fountain of the Dancing Bears, detail— 226. Thomas Hering, Judgment of Paris, c. 1535,

Fiddle Playing Monkey, 1573, Stuttgart, Wiurt- Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie

tembergisches Landesmuseum 227. Paul Juvenel the Elder, Interior of the Great 210. Wolf Jakob Stromer, Neptune Fountain, Hall of the Nuremberg Rathaus, c. 1614, paint-

1582, drawing in Baumeisterbuch I, fol. ing, Nuremberg, Germanisches Nattonal186, Burg Griinsberg bei Nurnberg, Eigen- museum tum der von Stromer’schen Kulturgut- 228. Hermann Vischer the Younger and work-

Stiftung shop, Lunette with Nuremberg’s Arms, 1515-17 211. Lienhard Schacht (cast by Georg Labenwolf), and 1536—40, and Hans Vischer, Frieze with Neptune Fountain, detail—Minerva, 1576-83, Nude Figures, 1536—40, Annecy, Chateau de

Stockholm, Nationalmuseum Montrottier, Musée Léon Mares

212. Peter Fl6tner and Georg Pencz, Hirschvogel 229. Detail of 228 House, 1534, Nuremberg, Interior View. 230. Hermann Vischer the Younger and work-

Photo taken 1934-35 shop, Lunette with Nuremberg’s Arms, 1515-17

213. Interior View of the Italian Hall, c. 1540- and 1536—40, Annecy, Chateau de Montrot-

43, Landshut, Stadtresidenz tier, Musée Léon Mares

214. Thomas Hering, Planetary Deities, 1541, 231. Hermann Vischer the Younger, Sketch of a

Landshut, Stadtresidenz, Italian Hall Roman Palace, c. 1515, drawing, Paris, Musée 215. Thomas Hering, Hercules and the Hydra, c. du Louvre 1540-43, Landshut, Stadtresidenz, Italian 232. Wilhelm Vernukken(?), Porch, 1569-71,

Hall Cologne, City Hall

216. Thomas Hering, Hercules and Antaeus, c. 233. Georg Schroter, Porch, c. 1573, Wittenberg,

1540-43, Landshut, Stadtresidenz, Italian City Hall

Hall 234. Albert von Soest, Council Chamber Doorway

217. Martin Hering, Dedication Plaque, 1535- with Last Judgment Relief, 1568, Lineburg,

40, Griinau, Jagdschloss City Hall

218. Christoph I Walther and assistants, Street and 235. Hans Daucher, Madonna and Child with An-

Court Facades of the Georgenbau, 1530-35, gels, 1520, Augsburg, Maximilianmuseum

Dresden, Schloss, engraving, 1680 236. Hans Daucher, Judgment of Paris, 1522, 219. Christoph I Walther and assistants, Remains Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum of the Court Facade Portal of the Georgenbau, 237. Peter Vischer the Younger, Judgment of Paris,

1530-35, Dresden, Schloss c. 1512, drawing in Pankraz Bernhaupt

220. Hans Walther, Old Testament Battle Reliefs, (called Schwenter), Apologia poetarum, Berlin,

1552, Porch of the Moritzbau, Dresden Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz,

Schloss ms. lat. fol. 335, folio 74 recto)

221. Ulrich Kreuz, Michel Mauth, and others, 238. Peter Vischer the Younger, Orpheus Losing EuStaircase of the Johann-Friedrichs-Bau, 1533- rydice at the Gates of Hades, c. 1516, plaquette,

38, Torgau, Schloss Hartenfels Washington, National Gallery of Art, Sam222. Stephan Hermsdorff, “Beautiful Oriel,” 1544, uel H. Kress Collection

Torgau, Schloss Hartenfels 239. Peter Vischer the Younger, Orpheus Losing Eu223. Alexander Colin and assistants, Oftheznrichs- rydice at the Gates of Hades, 1514, drawing,

bau, 1558-59, Heidelberg Schloss Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum 224. Alexander Colin and assistants, Doorway of 240. Peter Vischer the Younger, Orpheus and Eury-

the Ottheinrichsbau, 1558-59, Heidelberg dice, c. 1516, plaquette, Hamburg, Museum Schloss fur Kuunst und Gewerbe XVII

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

241. Georg Pencz, Portrait of a 27-Year-Old Man Museum, University of California, Morgen-

(Jorg Vischer?), 1547, painting, Dublin, Na- roth Collection

tional Gallery of Ireland 263. Peter Flotner, Sense of Touch: Venus and Amor, 242. Peter Vischer the Younger, Inkpot, c. 1516, 1540-46, plaquette, Santa Barbara, Univer-

Oxford, Ashmolean Museum sity Art Museum, University of California, 243. Peter Vischer the Younger, Inkpot, 1525, Morgenroth Collection Oxford, Ashmolean Museum 264. Nuremberg(?) artist, Grieving Warrior, 15308244. Hans Schwarz, Death and the Maiden, c. early 1540s, Berlin, SMBPK, Kunstgewer1520, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie bemuseum 245. Hans Schwarz, Entombment, 1516, Berlin, 265. Hans Peisser, Justice, c. 1550, Munich,

SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie Bayerisches Nationalmuseum

246. Hans Wydyz the Elder, Adam and Eve, 1505- 266. Master H.G. (Hans Jamnitzer), Fishers and

10, Basel, Historitsches Museum Hunters under Jupiter, 1572, Munich, Baye247. Ludwig Krug, Adam and Eve, 1515 (recast risches Nationalmuseum 1518), plaquette, Cleveland Museum of Art 267. Peter Flétner, Medal Commemorating the

248. Ludwig Krug, Adam and Eve, c. 1524, New Castle Fortifications in Nuremberg, Munich, Bayerisches Nationalmuseum 1538, Nuremberg, Germanisches National249. Albrecht Durer, Adam and Eve, 1504, engrav- museum ing, Nuremberg, Germanisches National- 268. Peter Flotner, Deszgn for an Ornamental Chair,

museum after 1535, drawing, Berlin, SMBPK, Kup-

250. Master I.P., Adam and Eve, mid 1520s, ferstichkabinett, KdZ 390 Gotha, Schloss Friedenstein 269. Wenzel Jamnitzer, Mother Earth (or Merkel) 251. Peter Flotner, Adam, c. 1525, Vienna, Kunst- Table Decoration, 1549, Amsterdam, Riyjks-

historisches Museum museum

252. Augsburg artist, Adam and Eve, 1540s, 270. Nuremberg artist, Model for Mother Earth, by

Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 1549, Berlin, SMBPK, Kunstgewerbemu253. Hans Asslinger, Judgment of Paris, 1550, seum Munich, Bayerisches Nationalmuseum 271. Christoph II Walther, Deszgn for the Positiv,

254. Sebastian Loscher, Justice, 1536, Berlin, 1583, drawing, Dresden, Staatliche Kunst-

SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie sammlungen, Historisches Museum

255. Jorg Vischer, Inkpot with the Figure of Van- 272. Christoph II Walther, Posztzv, 1583-84, for-

itas, 1547, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturenga- merly Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlun-

lerie gen, Historisches Museum

256. Christoph Weiditz or circle of, Venus, 1540— 273. Peter Dell the Elder, Deadly Sins, 1540s,

50, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmu257. Johann Gregor van der Schardt, Mercury, seum 1575-81, Stockholm, Nationalmuseum — 274. Peter Dell the Elder, Gluttony and Lust, 258. Giambologna, Mercury, c. 1587(?), Vienna, 1540s, Nuremberg, Germanisches National-

Kunsthistorisches Museum museum

259. Nuremberg artist, A//egory of Fertility, 1570s 275. Hans Leinberger, Tod/lezn (Death), late 15 10s,

(or later), Providence, Rhode Island School of Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum —dis-

Design played Innsbruck, Schloss Ambras, Kunst-

260. Thomas Hering, Rhea Silvia, c. 1535-40, kammer

London, Victoria and Albert Museum 276. Master I.P. (or circle), Mannequin, 1525-30, 261. Peter Flotner, Five Virtues, c. 1540-46, Lon- Hamburg, Museum ftir Kunst und Gewerbe

don, Victoria and Albert Museum 277. Jacopo Strada et al., Antiquarium, 1568-72 262. Peter Flotner, Ate and the Litae, 1535-40, (altered 1586-87), Munich, Residenz plaquette, Santa Barbara, University Art 278. Hans Burgkmair, Maxzmiltan I on Horseback, XVili

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

c. 1508-09, drawing, Vienna, Graphische 296. Hans Schenck, Hams Klur, 1546, model(?),

Sammlung Albertina Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie

279. Gregor Erhart (copy after), Horse, c. 1560— 297. Hans Asslinger, Albrecht V of Bavaria, 1558,

70, Cleveland Museum of Art, John L. Sev- Munich, Staatliche Munzsammlung

erance Fund, 52.108 298. Hans Daucher, Philipp, Count Palatine, 1522, 280. Adriano Fiorentino (Adrianus de Maestri), model(?), Berchtesgaden, Schlossmuseum Friedrich the Wise, 1498, Dresden, Staatliche 299. Hans Daucher, Ottheznrich, Count Palatine,

Kunstsammlungen 1522, model(?), Berchtesgaden, Schlossmu-

281. Peter Vischer the Younger, Hermann Vischer, seum 1507, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Cabi- 300. Hans Daucher, Charles V on Horseback, 1522,

net des Médailles Innsbruck, Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinan-

282. Peter Vischer the Younger, Self-Portrait, deum

1509, Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Cabi- 301. Hans Daucher, AJ/legory with Albrecht Diirer,

net des Médailles 1522, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie

283. Hans Schwarz, Georg of Saxony, 1518, and 302. Augsburg(?) sculptor, Friendship Temple of Ott-

Konrad Peutinger, 1517, Vienna, Kunsthisto- heinrich, c. 1534, Schloss Neuenstein

risches Museum 303. Loy Hering, Philipp, Bishop of Freising and

284. Hans Schwarz, Albrecht von Brandenburg, Count Palatine, 1524, Nuremberg, German-

1518, drawing, Berlin, SMBPK, Kupfer- isches Nationalmuseum

stichkabinett, KdZ 6010 304. Friedrich Hagenauer, Philipp, Bishop of Fret285. Hans Schwarz, Albrecht von Brandenburg, sing and Count Palatine, c. 1526, Berlin, 1518, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie 286. Hans Schwarz, Hans Burgkmair, 1518, Mu- 305. Hans Kels the Younger, Game Board of Ferdt-

nich, Staatliche Muinzsammlung nand I, 1537, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Mu287. Hans Schwarz, Albrecht Durer, 1520, model, seum Braunschweig, Herzog Anton-Ulrich Mu- 306. Peter Dell the Elder, Georg Knauer, 1537,

seum Cleveland Museum of Art, Purchase from the

288. Hans Schwarz, Albrecht Diirer, 1520, Nurem- J. H. Wade Fund, 27.427 berg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum 307. Hans Schenck, Tzedemann Giese, c. 1525-30, 289. Hans Schwarz, Five Pfinzing Brothers, 1519, Berlin, Jagdschloss Grunewald Santa Barbara, University Art Museum, 308. Master of Wolfgang Thenn, Portrait of a MerUniversity of California, Morgenroth Collec- chant, Cc. 1530, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturen-

tion galerie

seum werbe

290. Melchior Baier, Pfinzing Bowl, 1534-36, 309. Master M.V.A., Werner Rolefinck, 1548,

Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmu- Hamburg, Museum fiir Kunst und Ge291. Matthes Gebel, Sebald and Anna Beham, 310. Hans van der Mul, Julius Echter von Mespel-

1540, model, Berlin, SMBPK, Miinzsamm- brunn, Prince-Bishop of Wurzburg, 1576,

lung Wurzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum der

292. Friedrich Hagenauer, Sebastian Liegsalz, 1527, Universitat Wurzburg model, Munich, Bayerisches Nationalmu- 311. Matthes Gebel(?), Bust of a Man (Friedrich I,

seum Elector Palatine{?}), c. 1530, Munich, Baye-

293. Friedrich Hagenauer, Raymund Fugger, 1527, risches Nationalmuseum Munich, Staatliche Munzsammlung 312. Master M.P. (Melchior Baier{?]}), Bust of a 294. Hans Reinhart, Charles V, 1537, Nurem- Man, 1527, Basel, Historisches Museum berg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum 313. Dietrich Schro, Otthenrich, Elector Palatine, c. 295. Christoph Weiditz, Charles de Solier, 15308, 1556, Paris, Musée du Louvre) model, London, Victoriaand Albert Museum 314. Johann Gregor van der Schardt, Bust of Wil-

xix

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

libald Imhoff, 1570, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulp- derik II, King of Denmark, 1578, Hillergd,

turengalerie Frederiksborg Museum

315. Johann Gregor van der Schardt, Bust of Anna 317. Johann Gregor van der Schardt, Portrait of a

Harsdorffer, 1579-80, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulp- Man (Paulus Praun{?}), 1580, Nuremberg,

turengalerie Germanisches Nationalmuseum

316. Johann Gregor van der Schardt, Bust of Fre-

XX

PREFACE

A PROJECT aspossible complexwithout as this the would never Lentz, Luber, Tania String, Susan Webhave been considerable sterKatie have patiently tolerated myand fascination with assistance of many individuals and institutions. My German art. Their good humor and friendship have greatest debt is to Sandy, my wife, and to my chil- meant a lot. Jane Hutchison and Larry Silver have

dren, Spencer, Abigail, and Harlan who have kindly read much of my manuscript and pointed helped in innumerable ways. Not only have I Out passages needing improvement. Thomas Dadragged them from Austin to Munich on two occa- Costa Kaufmann, Cynthia Lawrence, Corine Schleif, sions, but I have subjected them to more museums, Alison Stewart, and Charles Talbot have all helped

churches, and castles than any normal person in different ways. Tom and Heidi Kaufmann should be forced to endure. My daughter's plea for proved to be insightful travel companions during “No more churches today” stills rings in my mind. numerous weekend trips through Bavaria. Tom enAs a result, my children now know their saints far couraged my new found appreciation for rococo better than most of my fellow art historians. I also churches and all of those angels. I also wish to appreciate the good natured support from my par- acknowledge the help of Christian Theuerkauff ents, Paul and Chipps Smith, my brother, Douglas (Berlin); Wolfgang Frhr. von Stromer (Burg Grins-

Smith, and my in-laws, Robert and Ruth Am- berg); Elke Kilian and Heinrich Magirius (Dresbrose. Iam particularly indebted to the Alexander den); Bernhard Heitmann (Hamburg); Ingrid All-

von Humboldt-Stiftung in Bonn. Through their mendinger, Peter and Dorothea Diemer, H. W. largess, I have been able to enjoy three long and Lubbeke, Alfred Schadler, Ingrid Szeiklies- Weber, quite stimulating periods of sustained research in Peter Vignau-Wilberg, Peter Volk, and the staff of Germany. Thanks go to Lucie Pohlmann, my cur- the Zentralinstitut fur Kunstgeschichte (Munich); rent Humboldt advisor. At an early stage of this Hermann Maué, Matthias Mende, Klaus Pechstein endeavor I received a grant-in-aid from the Ameri- (Nuremberg); Peter Reindl (Oldenburg); Heinrich can Council of Learned Societies. The College of Geissler and Claus Zoege von Manteuffel (ScuttFine Arts and the University Research Institute of gart); Wolfgang Schmid (Trier); Tillman Kossatz the University of Texas at Austin have awarded me (Wurzburg); and the dozens of other curators, several grants including two research leaves. I am scholars, and archive professionals who have provery grateful to David Deming, my chair, and Jon vided me with photographs and other necessary Whitmore, my dean, for their on-going help. Dur- material. Over the years, Christian Theuerkauff ing my stays in Munich I have been affiliated with and my colleagues in Nuremberg have been rethe Zentralinstitut fur Kunstgeschichte. Jorg Ras- markably tolerant of my repeated research requests. mussen, Willibald Sauerlander, and Wolf Tegethoff After the completion of my text, I received Wolf-

have been wonderfully supportive hosts. gang Schmid’s new book, Ko/ner Renaissancekultur: Over the years I have benefited from the ideas, Im Spiegel der aufzeichnungen des Hermann Weinsberg advice, and positive criticism of many colleagues. I (1518-1597) (Cologne, 1991). This superbly edited wish to thank John Clarke, Charles Edwards, Ter- account of one Cologne citizen’s comments on this

ence Grieder, Linda Henderson, Joan Holladay, period and, occasionally, its art is highly recomSigrid Knudsen, and Brenda Preyer at the Univer- mended. Finally, I wish to thank Elizabeth Powers, sity of Texas. Susan Lindfors patiently typed photo Timothy Wardell, and the other editors at Prince-

permission letters. Jana C. Wilson skillfully pro- ton University Press for their faith in this rather duced the map of Germany and three plans used in large endeavor.

this book. At one stage, Lois Rankin ably served as St. Ambrose Day. 1992 my research assistant. Among my students, Lamar Baldham (Kreis Ebersberg) XX1

BLANK PAGE

GERMAN SCULPTURE OF THE LATER RENAISSANCE

i}| sty A j ; ‘ : , ¢ * . gaa - % : f

‘ cd * * Schleswig . |)im. }- _._ Bordesholm , | ; | Danzig (Gdansk) | “a Liibeck * ¢ i \ . * * (yisire j POME THE Emden ) e Sch i ‘ : chwerir i):;ijD iERLANDS¢g Oldenburg * \ q P “— cera : 7 4 RUSSIA Bremen | 4. ‘ * uncburg . Cad 4 yf >4 LOWER 5 Stetrin (Sreczecin) Z\ J DENMAR : 2 nBDY-~+-" NS Sy Py _

*

;i Varel lever* *“. .Hamburg Ratreburg ° © Wismar MECKLENBURG - “/} RIA

Ne © Celle%,‘ . * Berlin od WESTPE ' + STPHALIA \ Kleve gs . Kaikar * Miner Lemgo” % Weal ©®*Jerbat “,©:‘Witeenberg PO! ANI A‘}j° 7*antes Gostar ‘~.) Dertmoand *Halberstadt Paderborn ee ¢ bo SAXONY \ BR7 »Ps hy“ous Z SRANDENBURG * Ohnabriick * Hannove Frankt *

Stadthagen wrver a74 arta. d. Oder “&; ofPs* © Biickeburg raunschwe ey Magdeburg

wine cal I Hildeshe Ht Waltenbire!l

é . * Essen : ‘ = ' orgtau : 1 .

:i RHINE :Kempen i * Newest bisleben * = 4 “ F; | LOWER Ny UPPER ‘ * Hann. Minden ; ‘Mee SAXONY *e.~| ee t*iat 4 ° ne as } * ferseburg 1 Ss iBe «\ Coleone si THURINGIA . f ILESIA Aach FeritglatMeigen Leipeig \> 5ologne vibes farburg © * *Naumburg * : 11

: rifle ~ Awfun . . X- .| ,a a ©(hope Trrer. a*~.. 2 E » Dresden «f 4 4ESSE ? rt b %H brturt © * Weimar Freiberg;© ne Pitna *at Ly =» «7s Breslau (Wroclaw) » 8 (,otha © wT |a\7 t eg * Chemnity ° \“"

wf van i; /wit kan * i al a ie i11 *MIDDLE Reppard * Ramhild Plauen * eo? ~~ Annaberg-Bachholy * é cr, K oor” PEL IEE P| (a : {ii a ‘ , )Sie t ha | soee Me oe a " i "TE af oy | Side 4 . a . ah .te pa, ¥af, pie ay ‘ap [yes , “ : s ‘Pyet ha 4 or

=" i, tef ‘ali ‘Hii Psms ‘ y*>» aaTha \ Bes yeaten fa7)*.,4 fA» Ge | ‘ae : 48p eaiW? : BgAC ye } iyiean 4I: WO 2S on a ek I A a | mn, ine Bis Sammy” Tce: Ea 9 Sweet cic % 'j uk te »% gu) ae jae Be ined OO rere re Ab i i, % A ih ee 4 ‘ — © C- : ON We eee © OR east af —— ee ani Bas a) Ata

i Yo a “— 4. ar a 5 i, ~> , |Ke oe3‘4 i Ge ) Co mm, ee=aliam ee$42 - ae)/-070) _ ranI me Y, > =e

“ ;Y+ eae fpSiSter/ heh yh ies. tee 8j if % a Whe * j ous ot : awre _/ saree teaNESE sepia SmT ‘ : ~~“ —

slBPs RPI Ta SeSa i we “aem, Vat a!) \cmg SL PPS ~\ "FS i,ae\ aig Peper -Soa a8\

a ES Gl ae Ee ee | | SS gad i en ok omen

Dishgren cc. bewigsan derceracerceelmicacionem.aia.nhdaicac. Me (ticiouis. fiuagoga Raciipoucisis.acder.deo-fecramohyte.im aainem bencafl’

Oo gyprort: Sufi robe ei foley op felipe Fre sepeeppeorg

ay Mi ote poh.

+ als “> F . {haeits, ee ‘ 4 theo i degen es Soares, *: NK Ke , presley ag

3. Michael Ostendorfer, Pilgrimage to the Church of the Beautiful Virgin in Regensburg,

¢. 1§20, woodcut, Veste Coburg 34

’OF OLE LOE |.i ee— ... :}|§ae Oea.me ee ee A Le ee 2s. Vee ee — ae ee ee oo F,”mrtrtCOrtCi“‘i iw” | .Ce [_ 2 | 3:rr r,rrsr—“s*w”C;sCC”SCRSCOe — Laie . 2ee|aGe ale,tO oe oe 4 ee a _aME a eee 7oF,,,mrm,mr,,rt~—. fF i. = |... #}» }§©”».—..=.CC ....... ,rt—~—“‘“‘“CO—COCOCOCOCOCiCSSSCSiésiCid ee hl ,trt—“‘“‘“s:iCésSSCS Gi——rrr—“‘“‘“‘(‘(‘(‘(‘i‘(aaDhm”*”;:‘( ae VG ee CMOS, a nasser ye ee)mDmDhmhmhmmhmUmC olentoeenitel sag OeC ee ee = oes ......ce— —eepo #So.. 2rrr oe rrtr—“R. Ce OO os Ltee OeOe a ee—_— ee oe Bu Se a, . — r—“_r—O~s”s—~”™—CO~™~—~*~—“‘“C“‘“‘“‘SNCNSCNCSC“C ‘CCW SO a LL ertstr*i... =... (pl _eee ee eT a |BN :6Cc con oga|.bea-Pe oe og eel zf/ ao C.. -ma -— aSAS. 2a ic lla| er ees a.oF ,,rtrC—F”rr——— ee t:=~—“‘(‘(‘C COE SOou. le ae re=webs Keo SF a ~~ “2 “ See a of S oe | 4 « ra —..9... .—,h.-rrrr— eo|ee= a Leooeer le“SS - |. oN ... ..rr—eest—e—“‘ * * ; ne “ - 7 , 4

eXitip. rCn. ; a | (V| respecInKt Virg 3 jumble : This piou | > ct quick CCAM 18 of relics. ! tl ely I4 ana II meters.

“te

—_

; D no \€ po. “RE |2s| a¢g ae iat7 dod. , Ef C Ly aa * |oO J( re j / a at = _ te" a fj | | 2 =i hes hy ( = aud. 2wa 7 TI . sn ey. 'J=AX _ -as| 7ER . a Ny, Key ae a hes | es a

A Aes- aey aya AS / a4re *Nel! | _>:‘ tL°4 :: .;; — a: Lae A =‘ "if7 :. de . i Le Ae a oe = i f 4 - as as se - f . = ~ ca oe a as, em ae a es : : _ 0

, . iei 7- -. A \ 7 JSous we Lvo 7 sar W Si ra a th Wy 8 yy Si e co E ,_ |S-o |Fo - a - oe_y aWie a i ~@> a Q 7n| | nt ; 7 ; O st | ay_-We a L , yyLL LD 7 Ze a ih i} we p2) cr a Bole on. th at

|L -|L ny bo. va :*yt Tee Swy a. ||=so :it‘Ss 7ar),Cdch -.ef/.te.,ie-|rie :-L3aa :..he : IBalu _Asx:aay e*A~ SS | j:SSI 77, J a tuali OF| Sa e. :ate ys . Ss «te 2My. .L tore ante n S ee ee ' A | ae > Pa o rei | cab cfr ,|;_uof _ ae 49 ye a a| gb :Uji} S8° «.ee oF 2a oe —— Ie =oa 4|| 2 a ‘| a ; = | = , P_ te :ims o. a Gj Nie y \s ae ical _al ed Fi Ke r NS oo on ne | : elt A aie ~% e. I al“ |£ .oO : | _ atl i ns : ‘ Bes se = 7 q _— ‘ cei A oO |Wie a E |\ _us - iisade ° imaa: ee-, |os:(at 47‘olY e| 4 7| st y -u > Hi.o| \yaeet Za fe —_ a i, | — oS S ae . ve : iy _. ~ ame _ 7 : ce oe & vs — BS - /

~ , we Ve Ls 2 > a oe — es - a pe yy

u _.

" ta _ i aie —s ie " na _ | —

H —_ A , uf - we es = _ " -li10 ie -oe _SuM @ yae a— Sa,—aa -a. el gam! a, ig ee _oo -p — .C so3ai gone nia h1ek — _ ? fc 52 _ “3 3V ay ;

. ch mii

CHAPTER ONE

mussioned expensive silver reliquaries from leading In 1509 Lucas Cranach the Elder published the German goldsmiths, including Paulus Miullner, Wittenberger Hetltumsbuch, a booklet with 123 woodthe Krug family, and Melchior Baier of Nurem- cut illustrations of the relics of Friedrich the Wise, berg, as well as others from Augsburg and the elector of Saxony, that were housed in the SchlossRhineland. Once again, it was the image, the out- kirche in Wittenberg.?’ This compendium served ward artistic appearance, that defined the identity as a pictorial inventory of the collection and as a of the contents for the viewer. Some were over- documentary record for a larger public audience. whelming both for their material expense and their The illustrations include portraits of the donor and physical scale. The reliquary statue of St. Moritz, his brother, Johann the Steadfast, a schematic view clad in silver armor, was over life-size.**? This par- of the Schlosskirche, and the individual reliquaries. ticular statue, which contained seven particles of The contents of each reliquary is provided. For 1n-

the Theban military saint who was one of the stance, housed within a gilt-silver statuette of St. church’s co-patrons, stood beneath a special bald- Catherine are 36 holy fragments of her body, her achin placed prominently before the high altar in tomb, and even three of Mount Sinai.?° This quanthe choir. Other reliquaries were set on the altars of tifying presumably advertises the potency of the their respective saints during feast days. For in- specific reliquary. Yet it is the artist who magically stance, the cardinal commissioned the silver reliqu- has coalesced these disparate fragments into an aes-

ary bust of St. Ursula, containing 28 holy parti- thetically pleasing statuette of the virgin saint cacles.24 On the 21st of October the bust was carried pable of sustaining the viewer's attention. The in procession to the St. Barbara Altar in the south opening text provides a bit of history and a survey aisle of the Neue Stift. Services were then per- of the highlights of the 5,005 relic collection. ? It formed there to honor Ursula to whom the altar was also exhorts “all pious christian people” to study the

secondarily dedicated. illustrations “in order to better their lives and inThe motives of Albrecht von Brandenburg, crease their happiness.”°° A clear listing of the inwhose relief portrait adorns the base of the St. Ur- dulgences that total 1,443 years is provided as sula reliquary, were primarily pious though reli- inducement for visiting the Schlosskirche when the gion and politics were inseparable during these relics were displayed.*! early years of the Reformation. Like most other The collection of relics was not limited to the Christians of the period, the cardinal was exceed- great ecclesiastical and secular princes. For iningly concerned with his personal salvation. The stance, in Nuremberg individuals including NikoCatholic doctrine of good deeds held that salvation laus Muffel, the highest civic official and superindepended largely upon the works performed during tendent of the Klara-Kloster, used 2,000 florins of one’s lifetime. The more charitable gifts given to city money in 1469 to acquire relics for the citizens’ the church, including the establishment of masses spiritual benefit.2* Nuremberg was also the guardor the endowing of an altar, the more likely would ian of the imperial collection of holy relics and be the individual’s chances of celestial bliss. This regalia, which were shown in the Hauptmarkt anexchange of temporal for heavenly goods was a fully nually on the feast of the Holy Lance, the second accepted practice prior to the Reformation and ulti- Friday after Easter. °°

mately accounted for a high percentage of the A woodcut of the Heiltumsstuhl or display artistic gifts made to churches.? Furthermore, one tower shows the devout pressing forward to get could shorten the time spent in purgatory by close to the relics. (fig. 7) Heavily armed soldiers amassing church-sanctioned indulgences, such as stand ready to protect the relics if the crowd gets the roughly four years awarded for reciting the unruly because of its fervor. Above, the city counprayer associated with Wolf Traut’s Man of Sorrows- cillors hold long candles while church dignitaries Mater Dolorosa woodcut. (fig. 2) Through his dona- hold the relics for all to see. The cleric at the left tions, his veneration of the saints whose relics were reads a description of each relic to the faithful while

in his collection, and his other deeds, Albrecht using his staff to point out, from left to right, the von Brandenburg claimed an indulgence equaling splinter from the manger, the arm bone of St.

39,245,120 years of penance. 7° Anne, the tooth of John the Baptist, a piece of John 16

PRE-REFORMATION GERMANY

2 hae of Se Ueh and Ai For Sim PE FIA EE eres ne fs bshop of Angsburg anda nephew

ee Ol" I" 2s a i, Ti Ss. ee truding baldachin on the south side of this Benedic-

I ge ie Ve ~ L i) oe the iconoclastic sacking of the abbey in 1537 (fig. GRR i SCC~t*é#»-«CErrhharrt- based hhis design on the conventional

Tr digi ;

TR AS a ae y | gloves, and other vestments on the forms of those

events of Simpertus life were most likely repre

eR Mae er Nace ee een ele sented in the altarpiece. At least three motives can 7. Display Tower of the Holy Relics, 1487, woodcut, be discerned for the creation of Simpertus’s tomb. published in Nuremberg by Peter Vischer, Nurem- First, the memory of the newly canonized saint is berg, Bayerisches Staatsarchiv, Reichsstadt Nurn- honored. Second, the tomb celebrates the venerable

berg Handschriften, nr. 399a antiquity of the bishopric of Augsburg since it was founded nearly 70oo years earlier. Friedrich von

the Evangelist’s garment, and links of the chains Zollern could proudly point to a long and illusthat once bound Sts. Peter, Paul, and John the trious lineage. And third, a holy shrine would, and Evangelist. Each of the onlookers gathered below in this case did, attract pilgrims, thereby bringing who recited the appropriate prayers was granted an economic benefits to the city and diocese. >?

indulgence of 37 years and 275 days. Shortly thereafter, on 19 August 1499, Heinrich III Gross von Trockau, bishop of Bamberg, com-

RELIGIOUS PIETY and civic or episcopal pride missioned Tilmann Riemenschneider to carve a were bound inextricably together. I wish to consider new tomb for Emperor Heinrich II (d. 1024; can-

four contemporary sculptural projects, in Augs- onized 1147) and Empress Kunigunde (d. 1033; burg, Bamberg, Nuremberg, and Eichstatt.>4 canonized in 1200).?° (fig. 9) The bishop and caEach celebrates a patron saint who was being newly thedral deacon hoped, quite unrealistically, that honored by the erection of an elaborate shrine. Asa the double tomb would be finished by 9 March group these exemplify the strong rivalries that ex- 1500, in time for the ceremony marking the teristed between neighboring towns. In 1491 the centenary of Kunigunde’s canonization. The choice bones of St. Simpertus (d. c. 807; canonized 1468) of Riemenschneider of Wurzburg indicates the were rediscovered in Augsburg.?? Amid a lavish bishop's resolve to hire the finest available sculptor; ceremony, attended by the future emperor Maxi- the city of Bamberg lacked a master of equal talent. milian I (r. 1493—1519), the dukes of Bavaria, the In 1499 Riemenschneider was a logical alternative

count of Wurttemberg, and numerous other lay since in this year he had just completed the imand clerical officials, the holy relics were translated posing tomb of Bishop Rudolf von Scherenberg 17

: ; “— Vo 7 7a A foe : 4d ce oo c oe A

se a | fENC _ . o oy |S A VA Je —. ee 7 ari 7 oe at - _ ):oF' i7. | ie, y A i o _ . 7 . 3 oe c = oO i an \ 4 _ | a i Lo a oF . : a a 7 moe ¢a --——— aae aiWe ee oe ue reia: e m i .sfx ae[oe Peal. ~Bee a ake -aaN aa

oa esa| oS AN -| | a:tl a * f s | | | )k,_asae Aoi ONY 4rg:| % a|-PagPa oo >tifa ,ral - -a2. Jae = me =_* ~ . f a} { | ¥_-.| aa A, eis yghi,ytj e€ | : se ype |-yeAhi. \ Ws4, aS P| - S | _ ,7yr | y la

LEFr :: 3| : 3 :yiooo = [ vpSTa > r Zi, a a LiE >@

3 m ASX i a segs hg ‘ | | | : @ 4 aaiOS 7 sSS a bss ne lei If & ereeid I 1e | rsLW IN ic‘3* _y (aN Po ave nriBier. arly liv 1€thSIoO re Ne | e th :bus8: . (_"Ay ed ; to ty er p r“A CW S$ th . ve ye: es eo iw ( Fc : | vue : 4 , a 7 |+ —_NS a oe > a> tus 1 ‘y Pse Nes : :C tk: n: S:~,.H| 7 eo re) _ —_— o . ce it e . if gZ » JU S g I ch’ tc -: :.!A_\sa aa4 |. _o: = a_il ai..__-ae sp(Py achoelud — :° :3ted2 ,oul7 |1| aa% _ cmt Looo ndi inrl

/ a a : Tan . A * . 7 | wo . AP it 0 a . . . . i. — r my > tu al nil as —_ 7

.USeum MS elE _ sal 3 ; , , | | Afr9a?5EF ; _: Lg 7 =—" —Fa=7. Fg oe) |. :| : ) oO Sc .aN : _ a. oe —- a ye a8 4 ay 4 f :

Cc a . oe Saas : a ae _. . : — _ a a! ~ ‘ :

inW 1UueichFo a :b __a /|, :aak Au IH 4 _ :a 7 a; 7;4 aa ~ La | | | 7 | a a ao a a 43)t — '1| [A ae a f pt):10 cath sche , ot m— .-|fa ie *YT. i:| o"i. | | | . _ _ : / : _. _ 5 rrrt~—~s=—COisSSONSCi*s a 4 me oe ce ne oe . | oe7inn 7 __7— i|

.. . - |. 7. HS YC Oe . vw

Le. re a - oo a eee ee | a eo _ 5

-—eT.|—..—( iJ -— —. .._-— .. : _ r=" 2|— —yeah Fee Wel ye. i..... oe -#@# —r—“—OsS—SsS— SS eo Co — SS ieoo iy CC oo ions oe UL 8 | ;]747»Fstrti‘=‘CORRTCR OP —. ook. ice a Ce sitesartmnbes ae y ce oe ower oF eo ee oe|.eePO eee ee BR an OREN ee oO Cl a Ai ee -=aee.= Se = .Lae a aeee SeEN OO a Poel geUS s_
... ee CS ee = ae — 2. A ee | ler rrsis«si‘c eo . -_ ai Po ees vom at oe . is le _. eS _ . tl 2 ‘ee ;fs. a—oe ae ee : : =~ ~=—srs |. -— . a 2. _. . Lo 8 ee eas : / = >. 2 .. Lf i 2 a -.. i -_} ...#3§&.&. 72+7&7+]+ oo .. ae ee eCa 2. ~7a7—a| =~:>—— ....}~~ SC = _#.. = sot Ss s _2 a.eee 1 6 rrr cooo as ee nak =. te is— —rr——r—.—CrC Pr. ao ee =... — — -. a|... -_—. . ~oe . oa oO | ee SeSe.oS a [Fo .2. Cr” ef ee ee Fee ee eo i| elm we >... _— r—trti‘_—s ge ae 6yfld Re hmUmUmmrlC i.BS 7. =ee _— =eo o-2 Pee f. Se NaN 4 oe |. _ ae o oe so — Se ,.|. rt a . Ss — fF. 2 oe wae it errr 2... te-aa — a.ia>.ee = ——r—— a 7oe «le i.=. Fege —Lf| >OeFFve . a7eer 2 |4

Dain. ee ae. ao | -— |...to | —. oe-.. ee Poo CO 2 2..Ly-.To— Se Se LM, a—r———CO—O"EE a Lo 7.“it 2)ee aGe:ef Fe Me 7° , 7 Le aw : ey — CC _ S | hE oo >... .. Ce 2=—re——sSmh =r — — 1 -o = Mae | ie ae ge. 4. ee — _— Ue (_ k 2 oe a > fs. 8 8&eo |=. SUL aeoF oo ..fe ( oe aes — Sp a oe ee ae) _eo ee Oe .— ee0SSNe i -.rt—OESC en be — =. a Cs i on AT eS oo _ i 8 Ae oe oo es Re ee ee oe Le = ey . —. oe = | oe | — ,. 2. Cl ee oO — Co ed oo oe ae he i oe, oe = ee oe 8 CO a . —-— = 4 | ~~. ol oo > i 7 ee | oo ae ee oe 12 ae :‘oe Sai.gee > aOe |— .@. 2 we od aOe: | pee ieag a. ae os et _ oo _ a

7a78. ick) _.. .Le ss |... Fe _==—_R no|...-_= ke oe oe — 2ras |.a|. ee #32~2&=z*”»~.-. 2= .——rti‘_sSsS2Se i— Le ‘ae 7l.rtrt~—S a..—r—™ CO Ui EE 9. C ..Ne i...-— — eG A — .— — ~ Poe ve eo .,.hrrmr -_ —— a|2— As

ao ae >Bo + fe— 2.=. ee 7— ee CF) ee | Ue i-= i -— ”—“‘=RQCOC re sis — So So —Co iaa. ee Les ee pete aoe =—=—se ioy-— ...7SoG ee eo .—snoCOCn Ca¥ 2ee .|.ee |.ee~ — oo ee ee OS oSiee -—Uhr _. .ee ”r—“—CiO—COCOCOOCOC — rlrt—s—*=*F Fe -... -—. .oe -— |.lr= —7a— wien ig sf3 i

(ol: oo | —ae, i ##— 6.. eeoe nem, (eeMin . Co|... ee :eea — i eeasa oc a a ee2. EFrt—‘—s—se.—“FPKBDFDnuUDUUCW — SS a ge ok oe a. |.

se — ae — : : . — i | . .rr— i Ce : 7 ae ee i i eee : = = = ae 2 SS -— oo on oo =. oe i a... es . iss — . oe a a TOS eee ... .. -_— oe ee | a ee Oe ne oo Se eo oe ales Ree . oe: — a oe ae ~—— . ..i : :: __ =— - -: oo ee. — eee -— as |ee| ai ae. a —rrr——CSC rss rl i

_ So A). lg _ i... _,_ .Le a-ce - —ON ne es es aeoe Cae. Ne oo ree oe oa| oe a BS... Cs rr _ §...... ae, a . -— . _— : oo : a s—S oe 7; Lo ss / _ . oo ee ee ee ne: -— eGo fe —. —...... i=—seseNSsés. A +e Lv 2 eR O St . SS Was laid eee + ie re || .2[oo 9_A,oe ibe The | Or ncnd >. oywoe Sa F oar 7aGo leerie ..— — ae Z7 en_me et bSe ‘fs |m cfoO 0:: eh @ . Ao (4 ri eo a CL J | : ! r_ 7 | — oo pes’ asa.go leg te oo _ / ~ . er Be oF = — uc oe i ih ae woiAted / AO bes SS od a > ae .t of fp ee ge wh Seve ral : 1X Was pi k a .=Tae "of ge ee SUA, hiod cyhrou ra ing! aWY 7Va 4icyAe 7es| Pi 4ooens ee eae .Next, HA Er 4la ::xc, arist’s vcse; : : TH Noe AN hi .es the stz Carry! igs Uf tes Ze eataedee & .FE Ne .ithe ;i G os ae DN CREA as Sao thin shrou TYIng ai : | |aye |ay|iili]|f |Y“Cire , int it fa Yyo wie hetit ind [placed .+ i| statue |ine /. 1ST, _ Oof dChri h 18 t :a : 0= wi7 Neve. \\ ve ae aeeA consist ,bee Was COVET sla foe avi we He ie sour. ‘edb

BAiFHie | oy ooi 1. reA . | NS i 7 |xia oo group _ oF | ITh 1 nN e andOved * hi iA Pip | : a po ychr 'g Qn il Al ao ol a ro Co A oe i “a Va oS — a : . e ento b gr al) | a Pll fi ne | _ 2 aS oobac.k ;. €wee

a i i I i oe lund feabea 2 We in | N che cu

aa | a } i a ae 2 Po. Ue i latin i OST boy LS 8 _ p inted Vv 1e . wall mav .

may a aeoe a , Pa ote US oneNn Ca st * @ Fave ee 4Wet Ht _aeila LaA SS \ Ae| Se—ie a. |a7a olzsch || ee ceh 1*aS u er

: Th i a se oe . i. a yy, ro oo * em e r 98 * e oh ; oo. oS . eg . oe Cooe i eege _ ;_. My nn a . me : a s -Sear ‘ey a ey a: ce HN aii:ait_Ht| |4chat will Ee : ae 4 aN | iets [... 7 ¥ 7 a - a 4 i i : | i He 7 e | i * the candl Zens and the * "

7Gil | a oF — _ . | ie | ny oed b od h ; Co iw a 7 . 7 | a i oe ci h y ot . as = ya ede Ne (c ; : a 2. . A: | Lis (er “ ta cn C e town cr S thr Ou gh u risen, ee i) -. oo. . 3 Oy eee oe Po >: -. . ' . ; oe fe NBS A Ga) i ee he A yp ay | declared roup of child e church and a Me eo ee | > ae iN “ ei! Chri rer i ‘i. . x

EA sinless’ i EA ie lee ee st had be en. Inde« ‘ be 4 mT ape Jes eo, ie a , . 1 eee ae L shr oud * y the e fk eGselh_pa 2 - ys OnhAscensi _ [_ a [LEB y —ai ail ae fou i . after | a aeth er.all . n th on ? 40

ve |cus — ie a. |. 2 i -— a. » c — _ 7 i. eek,” i 8 . : | ger We ow fo vaul p, usin rist Ww :Aa Boe _ . — — (oF ee a . y h wes eee Ag. thr e church. ?? , throu gh 5: :e a age ne : am; eones bow ws Bin oh isHO aa Ce) ned |upon resurrected Chri

,m,ee ee ‘vas er os oe Palmes fal 1474, drawi nt of Ola i Pa : ag, Ulm erl sea we cotentin hee eames qeir Ww io ful

. Mattaus Bobli Re og * sculptu il to eh it snne pressive potenti ven vos tial onl When ah ! , Museum in expressive: | “al ont ved th , drawing, U ves, yform cl ‘ poe e a year eets orwh ch hurche renes on

: ‘ough the stre hes on

CHAPTER ONE

Palm Sunday. Other normally static carvings as- the clergy. These objects, far from being mere sumed a temporary kinesthetic character within the pieces of stone, wood, or paper, were invested with context of these celebrations. In every instance, the a power that transcended the material. These were sculptures were active agents. These works were the figurative embodiments of heaven, a means to not merely seen but they interacted directly with the spiritual salvation that potentially awaited all

their audiences. It is little wonder that many of the devout Christians. By about 1520 a saturation viewers failed to distinguish between the work of point had been reached in many areas of Germany. art and what it represented. Statues in particular The stage was set for Martin Luther, Andreas von were invested with a life that inspired some and Karlstadt, Ulrich Zwingl, and, later, Jean Calvin, terrified others, a point that we shall return to in among many others, who began questioning the

the next chapter. Catholic church, its customs, and especially the This intimate interaction of the individual and traditional functions of religious art. Not sur-

image characterizes religious practice on the eve of prisingly, the intense personal dialogue with Christ the Reformation. The physical experience of seeing and his saints through these intermediary physical Christ hoisted heavenwards or of meditating on the images was challenged and by many violently remysteries of the Virgin while praying before Stoss’s jected. Nevertheless, the underlying role of art in Angelic Salutation permeated all facets of lay spiritu- the service of the church never totally disappeared. ality. And as the accounts such as that of Heinrich Many of the practices sketched above survived or von Pflummern of Biberach demonstrate, images were actively revived later in the sixteenth-century. also had a powerful and positive effect upon many in

30

CHAPTER TWO

Art or Idol:? (5 My heart since childhood has been brought up in the veneration of images, and a harmful fear has entered me which I gladly would rid myself of, and cannot. . . . When one pulls someone by the hair, then one notices how firmly his hair is rooted. If I had not heard the spirit of God crying out against the idols, and not read His Word, I would have thought thus: “I do not love images.” “I do not fear images.” But now I know how I stand in this matter in relation to God and the images, and how firmly and deeply images are seated in my heart.

A NDREAS BODENSTEIN VON KARLSTADT between the leading reformers, and the actual inciwrote these words about the power of images dents of iconoclasm in selected cities.? It must be in his pamphlet Von abtuhung der Bylder Vnd das noted at the outset that the local dynamics of the Keyn Betdler vnther den Christen seyn sollen (About the Reformation and the confessional loyalties varied

Abolishing of Images and How Christians Should Not greatly from region to region and from town to Be Begging) published in Wittenberg on 27 January town. Catholicism often prevailed and with it came 1522.' Karlstadt’s treatise proved to be one of the a reaffirmation in the traditional faith in images. opening salvos in what would soon be a raging As discussed in Chapter One, artistic representabattle over the correct role of religious art. In the tions of holy figures were inextricably woven into

course of the next two decades the unity of the the fabric of daily life. Johann Geiler von KaiChristian church was rent apart as Lutheranism sersberg told his audience that when passing by a and then various other Protestant denominations picture or statue of the Virgin one should pray for emerged to challenge the authority of Rome. The her intercession with God or at least bow before the Catholic church, its clergy, and its practices were image.® The Augustinian monk Gottschalk Hollen subjected to often violent debate. While the indi- provided the standard Catholic justifications in his vidual reformers differed in their personal responses Summa Praeceptorinm, first published in Cologne in

to the traditional use of art in the service of the 1481.4 He stressed that images are essential to relichurch, their collective criticisms of idolatry and gious life in order that we may embrace a knowlimage abuse forever transformed the history of art edge of things unknown; that we may be animated in German-speaking lands. For many artists depen- toward doing the same thing; that through the dent upon religious commissions, the Reformation image we may remember; and that we may venerate meant financial and professional ruin. For others it him whose image it is. Sts. Gregory the Great, provided the impetus to develop new secular forms Bernard of Clairvaux, and Bonaventura, whose of art. The iconoclasm 1n many towns, especially writings had helped form the basis for Catholic those in southwestern Germany and Switzerland, doctrine on religious art in service of the church, resulted in the nearly complete loss of medieval art each recognized the pedagogical usefulness of and, more critically, the artistic models for training images.? The usefulness of images for reaching future generations of painters and sculptors. In this a broader audience was succinctly stated in a section, I wish to examine the general character of fifteenth-century Augsburg religious manual. Its Protestant criticisms of art, the basic distinctions author writes, “In order that matter should be 31

CHAPTER TWO

fruitful to all, it is exposed to the eyes of all, as I am not so foolish as to ask stone images, much through letters serving the educated only, as painted up in colors; they would but hinder through images, serving the educated and unedu- the worship of me, since by the stupid and

cated simultaneously. ”° dull those figures are worshiped instead of the The inherent power of these religious statues and saints themselves. And it would come about paintings is also tied to late medieval theories of with me exactly as it does with the saints— vision.’ Until the early seventeenth-century when they are thrown out of doors by their substi-

Johann Kepler explained the physics of sight as tutes. 1° being based upon light, it was believed that the eye

was a passive receiver and that the image was the In 1515 Hans Holbein the Younger penned two active agent of sight. A sculpture was more than a illustrations in Oswald Myconius’s copy of the In mere record of a saint; it reflected his or her invisi- Prazse of Folly showing a fool praying before a paintble or unseen holy essence. Although the statue was ing of St. Christopher and women kneeling before a

but a single object, it cast out “species” or rays statue of the Virgin and Child.!! Holbein, like capable of generating “infinite images of itself” to- Erasmus, chided those Christians who held fast to wards its viewers. Having examined the statue, their superstitious belief in images. Erasmus, howeach worshipper then carries away a memory or ever, still retained a deep appreciation for the power mental image of it that can be recalled at any later of art to evoke spiritual thoughts. In his De sarczentime or place. Thus a statue has the power to repli- dia ecclesiae concordia of 1533, he described sculpture cate itself infinitely and to be the conduit between and painting within the church as “a kind of silent the divine and the individual. This theory of vision poetry” that often approximates the emotional state begins to explain the powerful hold that religious of man far better than words. !7

representations, and sculpture in particular, had In contrast to Erasmus’s ambivalence towards over the devout. The desire to rid one’s heart of such images, Karlstadt, a professor at the University of

images, as expressed earlier by Karlstadt, would Wittenberg, admitted to their influence but conresult eventually in the vehement iconoclastic ca- demned these objects as symptomatic of the cor-

tharsis of the Reformation. ruption of faith by the Catholic church. His Von

The debate over images was not simply between abtuhung der Bylder of 1522 was the first compreCatholics and Protestants. Some Catholics argued hensive discussion of the issue of image abuse. !° that Christians should eschew crutches such as The treatise’s publication also followed only three statues and paintings. These were identified as ma- days after the Wittenberg city council’s decree callterial impediments hindering a more spiritual dia- ing for the removal of unnecessary altar and images logue between the individual and God. Thomas a from the local parish church. The ruling of 24 JanuKempis, in his Imiztatio Christi, advised his readers ary 1522 allowed only three unadorned altars to “to wean your heart from the love of visible things, remain.!4 Karlstadt’s argument was based upon and attend rather to things invisible.”® This re- three fundamental theses: 1. “That we have images liance upon the intellect rather than the eye to com- in churches and houses of God is wrong and conprehend the word of God was a common refrain trary to the first commandment: ‘Thou shalt not

among Catholic and Protestant critics. have strange gods’”; 2. “That carved and painted Erasmus, among other forceful Catholic voices of idols are standing on the altars is even more perthe period, worried that too many Christians mis- nicious and devilish”; and 3. “Therefore, it is good, understood the fine line between the appropriate necessary, praiseworthy, and godly that we abolish use of images and idolatry.? This occurs when a them, and give to the Scripture its proper right and statue or a painting becomes the object of worship judgment.” !° Karlstadt and most other Protestant rather than simply a representation of an idea or a reformers anchored their complaints about images physical reminder of the holiness of a particular on God’s commandment to Moses: “Thou shalt saint. In his I” Prazse of Folly, Erasmus has Folly have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make denouncing images since it would distract the wor- unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any-

ship of her: thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth 32

ART OR IDOL?

beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. will or not, when I hear of Christ, an image of Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve a man hanging on a cross takes form in my them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God. heart, just as the reflection of my face natu... Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, rally appears in the water when I look into it. neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold” (Ex- If it is not a sin but good to have the image of odus 20:3—5, 23). Using this and other scriptural Christ in my heart, why should it be a sin to justifications, Karlstadt condemned the Catholic have it in my eyes? This is especially true since church’s reliance upon images as idolatry, a corrup- the heart is more important than the eyes.?° tion of God’s interdiction, and a physical obstacle

to the Christian’s true understanding of God Nevertheless, Luther tolerated only paintings through the word alone. To restore the word of God and, toa considerably lesser degree, sculptures that

all churches must be purified. During the first week illustrated appropriate themes based upon the of February, an impatient crowd tore down and Bible, specifically the life of Christ, the sacraments burned most of the sculptures and paintings in the of communion and baptism, the word of God, and

Wittenberg parish church. !° the acts of the apostles.*! Undue veneration of the Martin Luther’s attitudes about art were more Virgin Mary and the saints at the expense of Christ complex and underwent significant evolution dur- was forbidden.?2 In conjunction with the Cranach ing the course of his career. When he returned to workshop in Wittenberg, new Lutheran imagery Wittenberg in March 1522 following his enforced gradually took form, as will be discussed below. Yet stay at Wartburg Castle, he condemned mob vio- the variety of evangelical themes and the quantity lence and began to articulate his own positions on of their art were always severely restricted by prethe use of religious art. In his Church Postals of 1522 Reformation standards.

he wrote By contrast with the ultimately moderate Luae theran response to religious art, Ulrich Zwingli and

See, that is the proper worship, for which a other Swiss-Rhinish preachers, including Leo Jud, person needs no bells, no churches, no vessels Heinrich Bullinger, and Martin Bucer, demanded OF OFnamMents, no lights or candles, NO Ofsans its total abolition.2* As the debate over images in

or singing, no paintings or images, no panels the city of Ziirich intensified in 1523, the council OF altars. . . .For these are all human tnven- organized a disputation on the topic on the 26th of tions and ornaments, which God does not October. 24 Invitations were sent to all of the promheed, and which obscure the correct worship, inent Catholic officials, including the bishops of

with their glitter. °’ Basel, Chur, and Constance, as well as the faculty of Luther continued to criticize the misuse of im- the university of Basel and to the reformers. Alages but he more strenuously denounced Karlstadt though the Catholics largely boycotted the debate, as a false prophet in such treatises as Against the Zwingli, Jud, and other reformers were afforded Heavenly Prophets in the Matter of Images and Sacra- the formal opportunity to present their views. ments (1525). '8 Likewise, he berated the concept of Zwingli, as others had before him, stressed God’s good deeds by which donations of art were made for commandment against idols, though he carried it spiritual gain.!9 Possibly through his extensive further by saying that all images both the visible contact with the painter Lucas Cranach the Elder, and the invisible ones carried in our thoughts must Luther gradually softened his attack on art and be banished.*°? Furthermore, images and especially came to appreciate the positive didactic role that art those of saints distract the Christian from Christ

could play. He wrote himself. “Christ alone was given us as a model for living, and not the saints; for the head must lead us,

Of this Iam certain, that God desires to have and not the members.”2° The saints themselves his works heard and read, especially the pas- needed only Christ not idols. Concerning claims sion of our Lord. But it is impossible for me to that an image of St. Martin helping the begger hear and bear it in mind without forming would encourage charitable acts by the viewer, mental images of it in my heart. For whether I Zwingli retorted 33

CHAPTER TWO

We cannot learn it from walls (i.e.—art), but ation of idols. Calvin’s writings had a tremendous must learn it only from the merciful direction impact upon the reform movements in France, of God, from his own Word. We find here that Switzerland, England, and the Low Countries.°>° images lead us only to outward stupidity and Later, Calvinism became firmly rooted in parts of cannot make the heart believing. Thus we see Germany, notably in the Palatinate and, from indeed outwardly what the saints have done; 1613, in Brandenburg. Calvin blamed idolatry on

but the belief from which all things must man’s inherent corruption caused by the fall of happen cannot be conveyed to us by images. *’ Adam and Eve. “Every one of us is, even from his mother’s womb, a master craftsman of idols.”>*4 In 1525 in his Answer to Valentin Compar, Human nature is such that we desire to create imZwingli made an important distinction about ages of the immaterial (God), and once the image 1s when a work of art is an idol. He noted that the formed humans cannot resist idolizing it.°° Grossmunster in Zurich formerly had two images Calvin blamed the early Catholic church for the of Charlemagne, the church’s legendary founder. Christian reliance on images. He wrote in the InThe painting of Charlemagne kneeling with a ventory of Relics (1543)

model of the building was removed because it was . . a

in the church and could thus be idolized. The statue But the first vice, and as it Were, beginning

of Charlemagne, on the other hand, was left un- of the evil, was, that when Christ ought to touched since its placement high on the Charles have been sought in his Word, sacraments, tower precluded its misuse.28 He warned, how- and spiritual graces, the world, after its cusever, that “as soon as anyone goes astray also with tom, delighted in his garments, vests, and idolatry, then that, too, will be taken away.” Fur- swaddling-clothes; and thus overlooking the

ce ° ”) ' { { 3 > is, it consumed no daily diet of candles, incense -y: thermore, the tower statue had no “appetite”; that principal matter, followed only its accessory.

y 0 eee? Furthermore, he denied the validity of the miracles

and money to support the benefice of anclaimed officiating ; } performed ; ors that the Catholic church were

priest.*? cost maintaining altars and theirthat ; God per. . byThe itsexpressed holyofrelics. He acknowledged decorations, in terms of consumption, ~ on . formed miracles through Christpatience and the apostles, alarmed many critics. Zwingli had little . but these were temporary gifts of healing from God with -critics who -urged that images be kept for ; Yet anes in order to spread Christianity.*’ bones those who were weak in spirit. Heand advocated ac; . and ~~ ae other relics were useless often of questionable tion.°° The Zurich city council soon os ag origins.°°initiated In the Inventorypoliof Relics,- Calvin offers_his; cies that it hoped would resolve the dilemma ; _ - readers an amusing critique of the wonderous multhough local opposition stiff.?! ; he asks, could : tiplication ofwas saintly remains.ree How, Underlying all of the rhetoric on images churches claim towas possessthe relics of the Archangel

fundamental tenet that these objects were impedi; ae Michael? Typical is his section on St. Sebastian. ments to a true understanding_— of God and thus ; Calvin writes

were obstacles to salvation. By purifying the churches the reformers believed Christians would This saint, from the wonderful power his rerefocus their attention on the word of God rather mains possessed of curing the plague, was put than on supposed miracles or on human deeds or into requisition and more sought after than works. For Karlstadt and Zwingli, among others, many of his brother saints, and no doubt this the ridding of religious art was almost a sacred popularity was the cause of his body being duty. Iconoclasm as a testimony of faith was ridi- quadrupled. One body is in the church of St.

culed by the more moderate Luther. * Lawrence at Rome; a second ts at Soissons; the The debate over religious art would rage through- third at Piligny, near Nantes, and the fourth

out the sixteenth-century. More scholarly argu- at his birth-place near Narbonne. Besides ments were expressed by Jean Calvin, a young these, he has two heads at St. Peter’s at Rome, French theologian based in Geneva, who explored and at the Dominican church at Toulouse. the moral and psychological reasons for man’s cre- The heads are, however, empty, if we are to 34

ART OR IDOL?

believe the Franciscan monks of Angers, as apart or burned. Some were placed into stocks, they pretend to possess the saint’s brains. The hung, tortured, and mutilated like common crim1Dominicans of Angers possess one of his arms, nals; decapitation, blinding, and the severing of another is at St. Sernin, at Toulouse, a third at limbs were frequent occurrences.4? Other sculpCase Dieu in Auvergne, anda fourth at Mont- tures were mocked by taking them to bathhouses brisson. We will pass over the small frag- and taverns. Ifa statue impolitely refused to drink, ments of his body, which may be seen in so a dousing with beer followed. Instances of defecamany churches. They did not rest satisfied tion into the mouth of Christ or urination on a with this multiplication of his body and sepa- saintly carving were not infrequent. Attackers were rate limbs, but they converted into relics the further emboldened when the holy images did not

arrows with which he was killed.>? fight back or defend themselves. In a letter describing the iconoclasm in Basel in February 1529, Indeed Calvin argues that the Catholic church’s Erasmus observed, “I am greatly surprised that the foundation upon saints and their intercession was images performed no miracle to save themselves; false. He reminds us that the devil was also capable formerly the saints worked frequent prodigies for of creating bogus miracles to deceive mankind. much smaller offenses.”*4 A crowd in Basel carried Calvin demanded the removal of church art, relics, the great crucifix from the cathedral to the market and all unnecessary paraphernalia. The Calvinist in a mock procession. Someone then addressed the inspired iconoclasm in the Low Countries in 1566 statue, “If you are God, help yourself; if you are

and 1567 proved to be chillingly thorough.*?° man, then bleed.”*° This verbal and physical abuse of art prompted

Nuremberg artist Erhard Sch6n and poet Hans

Iconoclasm Sachs to create an illustrated broadsheet entitled Complaint of the Poor Persecuted Gods and Church Im-

Reform rhetoric begat iconoclasm.*! The theologi- ages in about 1530.*° (fig. 18) The text is written cal debates in Wittenberg, Ziirich, and a host of from the point of view of the statues and paintings other towns were soon translated by the reformers that are being destroyed. Besides complaining into direct actions against church art. For nearly a about their present sorry state, the images blame quarter century, beginning in 1522 with the de- men, who now deride them, for being their crestruction of sculptures and paintings in the Au- ators.47 Sch6n’s woodcut illustrates a group of men gustinian cloister church in Wittenberg, virtually calmly stripping a church of its decoration. On the every German-speaking town faced a decision left a man holds a statue of the Virgin and Child; about the continued use or the removal of religious opposite St. Peter faces his demise. The statues are art. Their responses were varied. Often political then carried outside the church to the awaiting tensions or deep-seated resentments over clerical bonfire. Meanwhile, at the upper right the rich power fueled violent actions. In others, firm gov- man points out the splinter in his brother’s eye ernmental control prevented radical elements from while being blind to the beam in his own. Schon prevailing. Zurich suffered almost total destruction and Sachs have used this biblical parable (Luke of its religious art, while Cologne’s patrimony sur- 6:41—2 and Matthew 7:3) to lambast man’s inher-

vived intact. ent hypocrisy, specifically his refusal to see where Karlstadt’s expressed fear of images was widely the true fault for idolatry lies. shared.42 Religious images were so engrained in In Wittenberg the destruction of art in the Authe lives and rituals of pre-Reformation society, so gustinian cloister chapel and the repeated sermons

linked with one’s relationship with the Catholic against idols delivered by Karlstadt and Gabriel church, that for many iconoclasm meant libera- Zwilling prompted the city council on 24 January tion. It represented a purging of the church’s power 1522 to decree that all images should be removed over life and spirit. The fervor formerly spent ador- from the parish church, that all new fundraising ing a saint was now used for exorcising this fear of campaigns for church building should cease, and images. Throughout Germany statues were hacked that an inventory of liturgical vessels be made. *? 35

CHAPTER TWO

ET| Y=\WA N. Y ss 2ce enXX 4“ESO — EB '5)Ae SSS A pon es sa Srp ve ee ; a ie y : 3 5( SN (EW B\ya€4 WY AL. ASE CVV ea Sedit 40) WEZea 3 Wis En NY =A IB of S85 WY See Oe A A a 8 Fs We Ese = Yi x) ” git Heoe alliSH A \\Se> LY Wi |KR ax Ne ‘EAA f= (= ao J¢\3 yANH oi a ae 5 hs 22. Sc Ns SAY ~—— =

obs At a V |4S Nad

i A\\ j/ [| Ss : \VANES SAC 1 \\a3 Wien we _1 NAAT eee . ¥ ati « ae=‘SSE conn Uw tea Se 18. Erhard Schén, Complaint of the Poor Persecuted Gods and Church Images, c. 1530, woodcut, Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum

Unfortunately, the council set no firm date by bertine Saxony. St. Katharinen in Buchholz was which these actions must be carried out. A couple “purified” in 1523, while Duke Georg of Saxony, an of weeks later an impatient crowd took control of ardent Catholic, was able to suppress the iconoclasthe parish church and systematically removed and tic sentiments in Annaberg.?! Nonetheless, the de-

destroyed the sculptures and paintings. bate between Catholics, Lutherans, and followers Although Luther returned to Wittenberg soon of Karlstadt continued throughout Saxony and the afterwards and immediately began to preach and adjacent territories. Sometimes a minor incident write against the unlawful destruction of art, inci- was enough to unleash terrible destruction. On 15 dents continued to persist. Later in 1522 he trav- August 1524, the feast day of the Assumption of elled through parts of Saxony and Thuringia speak- the Virgin, the Franciscan monks in Magdeburg ing against Karlstadt. When he climbed the pulpit were celebrating midday service when a group of in Kahla he found scattered about it the remains of a hecklers pelted them with stones and eggs. When smashed crucifix, a signal of local opposition to his the monks returned the volley, the angry crowd more moderate views.4? With a few exceptions, responded by sacking their church before moving further destruction was minimized in electoral or on to St. Nikolaus, the Pauliner church, and the Ernestine Saxony by Friedrich the Wise, the Catho- cathedral .° lic protector of Luther, and his brother Johann the Zurich provided the model for many other ProtSteadfast, a Protestant, who viewed such unruliness estant cities which subsequently cleansed their as a threat to political order. Zwickau, the second churches.?* Having disputed the issue in 1523 and largest town in Ernestine Saxony, experienced rela- 1524, the council finally ruled that the religious tively little artistic damage to the Marienkirche, its statues, paintings, and other liturgical objects great parish church, due to pressure from the elec- must be removed. Between 20 June and 2 July tors and the council’s desire to maintain tight civic 1524 a group of officials that included Zwingli,

control.°° During the last years of his reign, guild representatives, and several craftsmen sysFriedrich the Wise, however, was not always suc- tematically stripped the churches. The doors were cessful. For instance, an interesting contrast in re- locked to prevent disruptions. Liturgical vessels sponses occurred in nearby Buchholz and Anna- and lamps were melted down. Mural paintings berg. Though separated by only a few kilometers were chipped off and the walls were then whiteand today forming a single city, Buchholz was part washed. The choir stalls, like the wooden statues of Ernestine Saxony and Annaberg belonged to Al- and paintings, were burned. Their thoroughness 36

ART OR IDOL?

was complete. For 13 days this group progressed in 1524. Further north, Frankfurt am Main followed an orderly fashion from church to church. Zwingli suit in 1533.°° announced “In Ziirich we have churches which In Swabia, Ulm and Biberach experienced a relaare positively luminous; the walls are beautiful tively thorough purification in 1531.°! Just one of

white!”>4 the 52 altars in the Ulm Munster survived and then Zwingli’s more radical advocacy of iconoclasm only because of its removal by the family that had gained a strong following in other Swiss and south- donated it.©? Three years later the city council was western German towns. Periodic incidents of im- faced with continued Catholic use of images. On age destruction or abuse are recorded throughout Maundy Thursday, a group of Catholics knelt and the later 1520s. Shortly after the Bern disputation placed candles before the Olberg that still stood in of 1528, the council ordered the removal of church the marketplace before the Minster. ©? (fig. 17) To

art; however, on 27 and 28 January unruly mobs prevent a recurrence the council quickly ordered sacked the cathedral.°> On the second day of the the removal of all the figures leaving only the stone rioting Zwingli preached in the church and said tabernacle with its prophet statues. There you have the altars and idols of the

temple! . . . Now there is no more debatin ;

whether we should have these idols or not. Let Three Case Studies Forth let ee ahs hith whet men the lene The religious and political situations differed from images of God, all the unimaginable wealth row. £0 Town. Not mur risingly, there were wy which was once spent on these foolish idols. few incidents of 1conoclasm in the great archepisco-

There are still many weak and quarrelsome pal cries of Cologne and Mainz where staunchly people who complain about the removal of the Catholic goverment P revailed. Yet within their idols, even though it is clearly evident that archdioceses meny episcopal seats; in cluding Hilthere is nothing holy about them, and that deshetm and Osnabriick ro name Just twos and they break and crack like any other piece of large trading cities either embraced Protestantism wood or stone. Here lies one without its head! or, as in the cases of Erfurt and Augsburg, arrived at Here another without its arms! If this abuse a balance ° { power between the Catholic and Proteshad done any harm to the saints who are near rane P arties.° ; wish to examine briefly the reliGod, and if they had the power which is as- gious scenarios in three of the most powerful Gercribed to them, do you think you would have man CHES: Nuremberg, Augsburg, and Munster. been able to behead and cripple them as you The first city embraced Protestantism, the second

did? . . . Now, then, recognize the freedom reached an uneasy confessional accord, and the which Christ has given you, stand fast in it, third confronted an Anabaptist kingdom. In every and, as Paul says in Galatians (5:1), ‘be not case, however, the cities’ sculptors and other artists entangled again with the yoke of bondage.’>© were adversely affected. Zwinglian-inspired iconoclasm quickly spread.?’

In 1528 St. Gall, Constance, and the abbey at Pe- NUREMBERG tershausen succumbed; numerous incidents also oc- In 1525 Nuremberg was the first of the great impe-

curred in Basel.°? The following year Basel and rial free cities to adopt Lutheranism.°° The city Schaffhausen emptied their churches. Erasmus la- council reached its decision after twelve days of mented to his friend Willibald Pirckheimer of heated debate between Catholic and Protestant Nuremberg that neither the financial value nor the theologians. Prior to the coming of the Reformaartistic merits of an object were sufficient to save tion, Nuremberg possessed the two imposing it.°? Strasbourg, which made a political alliance parish churches of St. Sebald and St. Lorenz plus with the Swiss cities on 5 January 1530, ordered its 15 additional religious establishments, including churches stripped of their art though altarpieces monasteries within its walls for the Augustinian, had been removed in select churches as early as Benedictine, Carthusian, Dominican, Franciscan, 37

CHAPTER TWO

and Teutonic orders. In spite of this sizeable Catho- compared with Stoss’s preparatory drawing, now in

lic community, the patrician city council acted Cracow, the changes especially to the superstrucfirmly to maintain order once it declared its Prot- ture, which no longer exists, and the wings are estant faith. The number of anti-clerical incidents obvious.’! Did the damage occur while the altarand attacks against art works were held to a mini- piece was still in Nuremberg or perhaps during its mum though Caritas Pirckheimer, the prioress of transport to Bamberg? These losses could just as the Franciscan convent of St. Klara, complained of easily have happened during the intervening centurowdiness and the damage of several church win- ries in Bamberg. The former Carmelite altar, nevdows by vandals.©” Most of the local monasteries, ertheless, is largely intact. Its fate mirrors the pebeginning with the Augustinians, sold their prop- riod’s rapid reassessment of religious art. What was erty and art objects to the city by the end of 1525. once desired, in this case an altarpiece, fell from Monasteries were forbidden to accept new mem- favor in Nuremberg. Yet because it was deemed

bers. In fact, most of the monks and nuns left private property, the altarpiece was not destroyed Nuremberg. Since many of the nuns in particular in spite of the suppression of the Carmelite church. were sisters and daughters of local patricians, con- Furthermore, what was unwelcome in one Protesvents like St. Klara remained open until the death tant town was still valued in its Catholic neighor transfer of its last members.°® Liturgical items bor. were sold to Catholic princes, such as Cardinal Al- The issue of property rights was of great imporbrecht von Brandenburg, or were melted down. tance in Nuremberg. Since its parish churches had Altars donated to these monasteries were usually been decorated by the local patrician families, the

returned to their owners. Perhaps the most cele- city council held that these artistic objects bebrated instance is Veit Stoss’s monumental Mary longed solely to the donors and their heirs. BeAltar today in Bamberg Cathedral.©? (fig. 19) In tween 1525 and 1542 several altars were removed 1520 Dr. Andreas Stoss, Veit’s son and the newly by the citizens.’* Fortunately, most of the artistic appointed prior of the Carmelite monastery in patrimonies of these churches survive. In the case of Nuremberg, commissioned the new unpainted Veit Stoss’s Angelic Salutation, given by the powerwooden altar glorifying the Virgin Mary for his ful Tucher family, a novel compromise was reached. church. ’° The work was completed within three (fig. 15) The rosary subject matter was deemed years as specified in the surviving contract; how- objectionable, but rather than removing the sculpever, the monastery’s dire financial situation pre- tural ensemble it was instead covered permanently vented final payment to the sculptor. In 1525, An- with its Lenten sheet. The hooded Angelic Salutadreas Stoss, as a leader of Nuremberg’s Catholics tion is visible in Graff’s view of the interior of St. and a vociferous opponent of Protestantism, was Lorenz of 1685. (fig. 13) Similarly, Kraft’s huge forced from the city. Two years later Veit Stoss was sacrament house was no longer used in the Pro-

still seeking payment. The remaining monks testant communion service, yet the Imhoff family balked claiming that their former prior—not the continued to provide for its maintenance for several monastery—had commissioned the altarpiece and, centuries afterwards.’° (fig. 14) The shrine of St. moreover, that they could not pay even if they Sebald in the Sebalduskirche, which was considered wished to do so since their property had been seized a civic monument, was also left untouched though by the city. Veit Stoss died in 1533 and Andreas his feast day was deleted to prevent undue veneraStoss ended his career as the chaplain of the bishop tion.’4 (fig. 10) Thus property rights and strong of Bamberg; however, the story of the altarpiece civic authority prevailed over anyone who advocontinued beyond both of their lives. In 1543, the cated the cleansing of the local churches. Nuremcity of Nuremberg finally returned the altarpiece to berg’s course of actions provided the model for DinAndreas’ heirs. The family soon thereafter sold it to kelsbiihl, Rothenburg, Nordlingen, Weissenburg,

the Obere Pfarrkirche in Bamberg where it re- and the other small free imperial cities in Franmained until 1933 when it was loaned permanently conia, as well as Lubeck and a few other Hanseatic

to Bamberg Cathedral. When the altarpiece 1s towns. /° 38

I I III I aaa ART OR IDOL?

ES .——r—r—L_.Lh— For the Anabaptists, mained Catholic. Under the direction of preacher iconoclasm represented a deliberate break with the Bernhard Rothmann, Miinster welcomed Jan Mat- immediate past. The debate over idolatry was never thys, Jan van Leiden, and other Anabaptists. as important for the Anabaptists as it had been for Within months this group of Anabaptists gained the Lutherans or Zwinglians. total power, and on 24 February 1534 they declared Bishop von Waldeck’s long siege of Minster, Miinster to be the new Jerusalem, the center of an illustrated in Erhard Sch6n’s contemporary woodOld Testament-style theocracy. All non-believers, cut, succeeded when the city fell to his armies on Catholic and Protestant alike, were banished im- the night of 24 June 1535.9° (fig. 20) The Anabapmediately. Munster’s population losses, though se- tists were annihilated in the ensuing massacre. vere, were replenished by an influx of other Ana- Catholic control over the city was reinstated baptists from across northern Europe. At its peak in though former Catholic and Protestant residents 1534 Munster had between 7,000 and 8,000 Ana- alike gradually returned to their native city. The baptists within its walls. On the 24th and 25th of bishop and the cathedral chapter undertook the February, mobs sacked the cathedral and the other renovation of the church but their staggering war churches as well as clerical residences. An estimated debts restricted the pace of the renewal.?’ The first

group of 500 stripped the Mauritzkirche. works to be renewed or remade were sculptures that Iconoclasm in Munster included the requisite had either a liturgical or a symbolic function. Jopurging of statues and paintings; however, the hann Brabender, Miinster’s leading post-Anabaptist AI

bei ee Le rrr CHAPTER TWO

Dee a NO ss oe IMU ‘ i} \ MO weiss || An me.fai (go> | Ge -— #3». cy ao Nt JASr—s—OsCi“‘i SSC ee Ee ON Maee PBeg TSSAaie’. sicy Ree Rdes)| a, Lies\ =OF Ff Fees eo.i.i| La

Bey WAS . SA SS me INP iad CSE TTT STITT TA EN dn tl MO erg

7SE Nahe NIaon Mae ue\Sa OO ree ESN Sse Nee Oe tN Be] 1) \A SS emer 11Rr PN LL ssl eeee NE a fe Cetin, ceefe ee CO Seles teANS SY) SUUREET SS SSA Serbo SS er Re18 Me astMira, NeLhe Po ee oe ee Che ee SS ee eA ll oo re ee Ae |Vy Deel TN . EES it~ eae es ae ees ao ee Ne oe Are Oe oo Se em eee, oe a i ee eeoN ee

eg > 2 See ee Oe RO A | rE a ne Aa eaea eee ogeaee bo Ak. a weee ve i DQiea eee aeraOS Neye ONSea” maucara SU CONE) oN

|VW Va; i. oe eh ‘ky os eS worl ee. ee ——ee — eee SS aie e. GR 6 eT NN oC SE, eeSe)aaee E eo {== : i aN te ee — eS OR TV, uietia ae GN Anes To NI a a, ut Dy nik Ss ag ee eer Ly ashing 7 RZ A He wee

PAY Bet a Brat, ee | eed a > Oe rN ny! 7) ee I Se feaeeeHae Ae aE ee Nec ee We SO oe Agee 7aee NA TLC AERORR Ry Gc me(ake Ln ahr OULIG Mow) OY fl I gk ee oeGe ee ka eer Oe ae nr aAX a Ne

LWA te EE ayae heeevga tie, ; Wrstetry ETS ee |teWe A ua || | ee ADO De Nee Ne eeee(heel voaJes De aNi aNhet MED eeWs ee )Oe eeeatOO ee eS I IAP Vo > (Ne —OE ola Wee Use Sie ee Nal Se Ee SAL NIN Sd eee eta Nad AAAS) am AEE gf URI Rae la cee SERN Ler i ate oh Ao ts Fe 9/7///)|\J VALS cunt SE SS RRO ICG U Dh a RAR ary ee Se Te 8 oa wee Beate. 1/1 TTT)

URAC NEner OD Eew/e 8 | ce (2s Se Ae LUIS \ cSa ye ge;oi owyyesse i 4VYOR OG ean Boe: ogPANS = ee geswa oe Sees = aed a A See ee ee Se ge

Des SY Kp fae ae rs OO GOS GO te Re OO Ze ae

KN ee ee wtOUDt—“R Te& Be, aeee EASee 3 Lora ples) |Vie |ee iNe: Ks EE Sa LE | fw ee lO © ee Be FS eeSe eeAS ee oe. Ns ee A Ss. ee ae. ee RS ea gees COG oS |yee a 111) SA PF eee eM Ok =, ee Cy Se ea ee ee ee ey Le ee Pe ee 2 7 oe 8 oe ee eS Oe OF eee 8 5a Dvedar S ca oe | SRY WUD!CUN : : ee A ok ee Sn Sincere ONda| A a ieae re ee Poy 3ay \ JfAS, A -iWON ODHL Oe ee O—ees 2 DLC ae

a Lie eS RN" Qe Gi. Spe Ne Ea eee |||| 141 \NS CSE Vy He bel!) pee eer aS a7>iaeee ee |,—ti—“‘“=EUO CU ea ee) ZZOO aee) Oe OOO ee eee 1 Ay HOSS i MD ge tra as yall oe 2 2 a 8 amie: i eal ea a de Vee lean | | ZAKS? S| De ee 8 Ol OO Ae CO ff RS ee fof; ON qo Gey ht FON SE OEE WEL Wi a SiGe GAZA So \ yor = OAK fans ise } Ne Hi Nie SNA ASHE HE thititiidees | || | Lee fe | ae Zoggs) OSS OM Pees. ROA yl “yj AN; Taaawecea CMG MD WE Serre AA) aN | Seo oe i]

ZZ. ch MED: ||| as/eS SS ee ee ee aDES Fe Ne 2 WW 2 Mt Ne aes ee ess ee GN oo ee eeect (oS ee OE eeae ee ee enyy ee, es Cl)ee et 2) een 7NS EA otFCO | Re Cally TT eeEO” oe. A 20. Erhard Schon, Svege of Minster, c. 1535, woodcut, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Museum of Art

sculptor, likely carved the sandstone figures on the instance, in about 1540 the heirs of Deacon Thenew 13.3 meter-tall sacrament house of 1536 and, odor von Schade (d. 1521) commissioned the new more clearly, the new trumeau statue of St. Paul Renaissance-style epitaph to take the place of its for the inner Paradise portal.?® (fig. 21) Both re- shattered precedessor in the cathedral cloister. !°° placed works damaged by the Anabaptists. The (fig. 22) The anonymous author of the Anabaptist energetic and over life-size figure of Paul with his ordinance of 1535 singled out this epitaph in his long sword stands proudly. It signals their renewed listing of intentionally damaged objects.!°*4 Von faith in Paul, the cathedral’s patron saint, and their Schade was the only individual mentioned by name strong reaffirmation of Catholic episcopal power. ?? in this account which would suggest that he either Wooden choir stalls were in place by 1539. Bra- had angered the emerging reform movement or, bender contributed at least 21 statues of Christ, more likely, he personified the Catholic hierarchy

* * oye ; ; oe J. ; « . . . * ; 4 FEO . . . = om . OC ° * eee . ewe . a

apostles, and saints that adorned the new choir that the Anabaptists so despised. The deacon, screen erected between 1542 and 1547/49. !°° Bra- prominently identified by his arms and the inscrip-

bender next carved the sandstone Prime Altar with tion tablet, kneels before a baptism scene. AIits crucifixion relief that was placed in the crossing though the subject of the original epitaph is un-

in fi f tkofon. A fewewyears knov he n front the1°! screen. yearslater laterthe thecathecathe nown, theinclusion inclusionofofaabaptism baptismthat that is is bei being

° * . * ” . , ® ; ‘on 4 * *

dral chapter ordered a replica of the silver-plated sanctioned by God above may be a Catholic comcross with its wooden corpus figure that originally mentary on the true meaning of a Christian baphad been donated by Bishop Friedrich (1152-68) tism rather than the Anabaptist’s heretical interbut was destroyed by the Anabaptists. !°2 This new pretation. Sts. John the Evangelist an eodore carving was placed above the center of the choir flank the deacon reaffirming the intercessory role of

: paptists. 102 Thi : sts he E d Theodore

screen. saints.

In addition to the numerous church sculptures It took much of the next-century to restore the

Johann Brabender also produced several new epi- cathedral to its pre-Anabaptist splendor. The disastaphs to replace those destroyed in 1534-35. For ter at Munster would subsequently provide oppor42

AR

DOL;

iii el a . 3 ee .. és r = . rr |. _— ee CS a oe || -—..,.—r——C_C_.. ._ = ~~— & |a—ee . . oo Ce ,rrts~—i _oo aiaet .Ai i-| Ee Oe = oe | a a — i. = - i... § . _ > 2}

ea eeea 2ee ee,=... aCo r—rtr— soe a | 2... Le oe Sy a| ll2 hhh ee es. Oe ee3§=— _a_-_— gLo i. oe -—a-— a2 —Ve |.2© 7 #2#} DL.: SF =~ a > Ch rr -eF.. a ee oe. ge a ee ]. . = fg So . 2. ~~ > 4. CC 1 . |. ... 2 ag _ ... ee |ee . | =... 2 soe — = cS | |. [oe Pe ag a Pe i De ae fl a ee eR — Le = » =. op ss el — Pee Sk ee PMs Sees et. eae re-,L se Fe 2 Be ge Oe oe eeLL = oe ce#9oO2dee Ce Lo a— —— Mead a- = a {So. i . #* |we —CO es. aCU £ee“.aeal — 3oo ' 2| *. | Ff re -— oe |=)FO Le i ._—=s«C«dsa a ( (ise; . =. ry, Le wo eg.,a#&»»| Ue a a ee . AA. = , .. . Oe # #}.|§°» +§° rrr ei Ti = =. _-C—O > —Crr—“‘“‘REEEUCOC 2G. . . So Ol rl rr — Ve J |. tC ce oe oe a Cer tN! é Ama 3 | um a ; ¢ . eeqe f/f — Fa =. -—hLmUrr——“ ‘s™Ct*sSCtS Coe fF .. 2 Cl r—“—iO—OO—sCS—Ssieber’s : 1S ininitial ? lan Vv itC C1| ln| . 172 converted it 1 ‘fi 9 ompiteted age woodcut, wason C around y

“ol °, wh era DULIGINg hiatus and amgdifi aniel Hopfe hing (B. 21) pearans H '§ initt is altar, which was d 1 , ? | | a a n- 2th Onl

* * yo | urrection t the ape “back and Res : fiwi | and :ki|| . xX OTS. Feith Crucinxion ne encouragement and ial b1

ance of th | . moO e eran pe U &.S hive-tier aesign be | ves fig. 2 1 begins with the reclinl in | a O pt d, ; . i | fone 1 alie trul d to tne arktKkircne

ng jec and the rioly inship followed b Christ’ ion. ** “OOuc on bet n 7. i y frist $ under discuss L2

nl 4 * " ;

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, C. 1520-1555

-. Eee ee —=—e ; ; " ; =ti(A i,“gs at Ne bf Q fy VA . a we , ie .00 : e re i | re i se e AS ii yy i S 4 , TT 4a i | | fo > aA =o = Va / J a ze WwW t 7 - be og y . > ia | oat _. . Tt hy 2 a h a i n € _ W

.|G 7 _af= isa==iXy/ =Ss _ Le _*oO ve \. iath7naw | ie eatai “ed 16 a ey | oh im pti Ss } Ze ra~-lta| b¢ G m- Joh ive a4 | a =~ = py ay | a 7 a 7 a | 7 a 00 rd ] S i nN ' a = \S ; 7, y y Lt as _ i 7 to S Ss O e B Ae ni1pt ia: |tben ~, yg yf a) | a is | oO of ja . Oo i. 7 ee 3 a = “a 7 VJ an ral K > Ww tz in d a S t h

\ SSohxcCJa “yf A/a. ‘4 qd)- es a 4a L| |iaw| gLL. d iS irc 0 he alluld g— mk at -=_— e USEC ff re ( ) 4ndheS_— sia Z im |> DLae a oe:oe Oa, --a-7|LC |_ - :a e |g_ a fi nN av ftCe “ese DpI:*O 8 _,j i.ie >— 7: -.rjaA i ~7sebyoe .we «ro >}Se:1ded :ne :% \:7 ist’ ne ee Fak ie at.Cc ari :& i“ae 7 $f|_AS . i.aai-= S ]pat aa“oiCc él oe ’|. /-.Ae .isDe “|’Ag J—— =. te :.Cr47|qeth Cc Tt .e1 CA’

adlval |7_|Soat ae) ee et.Ate it ,Iats |a-yeh 0 .m eCc . rn rth ril ri1st V7 \ aA| ©. a‘%e aJA oe Be) -__7wo: in .a ye : |hy. —— ant _a__ aBs: iesaiA tA _4MY tun |1a ay [ds ear bes Ne ] a rer in , op | ||a— ijne} beane 3ae ea ebaiu:i4|i 0rhi e a| oar if. 4ifFos ter fi O7:M— no hin a_ade eep. me he nedi Sel C ri ; 1kt‘=/ck‘A ,: fo fall Avi|| . _rni asane 2 - —_ wel ne a seat —

LOS Pe Le ia S20

\ Vas) 2G We ea Ne hy eo KE BA a OLA | Ne @ ek \GSEA MAY ee PONS 272, are i; OP Y ee ae ge aeOe Cee .— Eo pee ek Vee a re MO aa a i, ee oe ee Gig a ZX Voeen ante ee ues ey Wo eee Ne, ee Eid Bem Loe Vee ee ee eres CC, NE eec. ea me ge eo [Goce 8 CO ae oo NAG 2 gine Sh A ee ee evel

P * Fs * *

seeee Ffi)rr‘ Sp& ROA ERoA ON(Oe yn NS ee mgs aisha. ee a eTPD : teasho am |i Sey eeee te ee eeee at i 40. Erhart Altdorfer, Title Page, 1533, woodcut, De Biblie vth der vthlegginge Doctoris Martini Luthers . . . (Lubeck: Ludwig Dietz), Wolfenbuttel, Herzog August Bibliothek, Sign. Bibel-S, 2° 107

~* 3«* **; *>od** ; ca . sg *id ..*®

At first glance it is obvious that Dell has borrowed gant costumes, with minute attention to the folds both Leinberger’s composition and something of in the case of John the Evangelist, and twisting his powerfully emotional style. Yet Dell has trans- poses convey a refinement rarely found in Leinformed Leinberger’s rather compressed scene into berger’s art. Like his other small sculptures, the an elegant house altar mixing free and relief figures. Crucifixion was intended for an affluent, sophisti-

* * * ~~ vg * * * = Es « . S « ¥ * * a . * ; oe .

Dell distances Christ both from the commotion cated patron.

below and from the flanking thieves. This permits Dell’s talents gained him a position as the court an undisturbed view of the sacrificial Christ. With- sculptor to Heinrich the Pious, Duke of Saxony in out losing his model's narrative animation, as evi- Freiberg, from about 1528 until late 1533 or early denced by the soldier mocking the fainted Virgin, 1534 when he was again recorded in Wurzburg.*® Dell has adeptly elongated his figures. Their ele- During these years Dell created at least four attrac-

* € $«; **: * . *a . ** * **. ce % .As ,. * 5ue 62

nS 9 a,

ee ee

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, C. 1520-1

: —————ee———————e A A ORI a mn Rs Ul Cas iho nan : wae . . 7 . S L

j; Ve aaLa3ee[_> O_o .” ,eer™ 2s reiii)

ay \) FC; AM aNoea, iefsFea

ae - + A “) 4 4 ( -

: | .~ i“ oe ii, a .Zomi (Ll | CS S 4UN1LK heWe «< aai me aee ia BP CLs SSD Se :oraa ay ee he, ee Se Oe eel ON ee,ee Gg ee ee fe ee ee | ell a re a Ge Vo Ve 1 eeSes Ree

2 neti‘ Se oe 8 86f.lCOUd Yl ll fe Oe ’ =a. B “RBI ee: lt

|=leee ee INe aee a- aeeooUN ee eC ee feeINS NN //_a Sil fo7.4 ee oe a .Ce fe a ee Ps Aa ee A ea Oe EB Ce Ae eent ak oe > nice i. _ | Vi . oF : : a .

ee

ee ep J) | on AN. d6hCUCUG le Che

a ll OE 4 _. . ~ #— =. X~X—_—_—'_—ss~_~«._.__...... ...._....... 41. Peter Dell the Elder, Crucifixion, 1525-30, Berlin, SMBPK, Skulpturengalerie

tive lindenwood reliefs that help document Hein- scape details. The righthand soldier holding the rich’s growing Lutheran sympathies. Although hand of the child astride a stick derives directly Katharina, his wife, embraced Protestantism as from Leinberger’s Munich relief. In sharp contrast early as 1524, Heinrich’s conversion was more with the Berlin Crucifixion, the carving in this and

* * ** ie. % . .i % = 43*=. **~ = , . we * , re C7 .a he

Cc 2 . :¥i©»;.*«*._

gradual. In 1528 Dell made the Cracifixzon now in the other Dresden sculptures is very shallow.

Dresden (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Grunes If the iconographic program of the Crucifixion

wo 49 Th | inl f follox Jepictt hat of th

Gewolbe).4? The scene is strongly reminiscent 0 ollows contemporary depictions, that of the ReswrDell’s Berlin Crucifixion though the horizontal for- rection, monogrammed and dated 1529, does not.?° mat of this large (39 x 50.5 cm) relief permits the (fig. 43) In the center, Christ rises triumphantly artist to expand his composition to include more upwards in a radiant cloud filled with angels as the

. * “3, * 3 5 a * : » * * *

figures, such as the rearing horse or the soldiers soldiers guarding his tomb look on helplessly. gambling for Christ’s garments, and more land- Christ stands upon the defeated Satan signifying his

CHAPTER THREE

Ee eT ne Satnthe Burice, und the horde ot rhers she

Nee Ve IS Eve, John the Baptist, and the horde of others who vill a | Be aS |: through Christ’s resurrection are now freed from Nee eM” a ad limbo. One of Luther’s central tenets stressed that Le , 7 Ly Ve Oye4 the individual’s hope for eternal life was based on

yi ee a pO => ay Christ’s own resurrection.®? Beneath the feet of Ny j 7% en Ma Adam and Eve is a final tablet inscribed “TV DNE ey 4 | Nf Pde IN SANGUE TESTAMENTVM (DVAIST) VIN

A/a Z| lYW, =e

ae N oy eee a ULL I i: Dell’s carving reveals Luther’s influence in two wees) Se VOT EVO * ways. First, the theme was particularly important

Pa eee) |) Za ae to Luther. He placed great significance upon the ae was o. ce | H feated sin, death, the devil, jail” and hell while liberat(RF CINDY ing from this “Egyptian all believers who Se. SA ji) i could now join God in heaven.°?* And second, Dell NAY |) ie i] | incorporated numerous biblical texts into his comhae A ee «= epon scripture, the word of God, as the true guide fo Nese WZ 2" wae ' Descent into Limbo since by this action Christ de-

a coe SS for Christians. The practice of combining text and

42. Hans Leinberger, Crucifixion, 1516, Munich, image would become one of the defining charac-

Bayerisches Nationalmuseum teristics of Lutheran art from the 1530s onwards. It

was intended to enrich the mind as well as the eyes

thus mollifying Protestant critics of religious art who condemned the physical allure of earlier Cath-

power to overcome death. From his mouth comes olic church art. The power of the visual image thus

the words: “attolite po ... as principes vestras is joined with the authority of scripture. Although psal. 23,” (“Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye this union of text and image may have been initilift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory ated by Lucas Cranach the Elder, Luther’s close shall come in, Psalm 24:7”).°! With his right hand friend, Dell was among the earliest and most crehe points to the inscription tablet held by an angel. ative practitioners.°+ He was the first true sculptor This reads “Cristus expolians principatus et potes- of Lutheran themes.

tates traduxit, fide ter pala triumphans illos in se The third Dresden relief presents Law and Gosipso colo 2” (“And having spoiled principalities and pel, an allegory of the Old and New Testaments. ??

powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumph- (fig. 44) This Lutheran subject, alluded to in our ing over them in it, Colossians 2:15”), Paul’s coun- discussion of the Lubeck pulpit, was first developed

sel concerning complete union with Christ. His by Cranach in about 1529.?° Dell probably learned banner bears the text “OHA.IIEGOSURE SVREC- of it through his patron Heinrich the Pious who CIETVITA” (“I am the resurrection and the life,” maintained close contacts with Wittenberg and John 11:25), the word’s that Christ spoke to Martha who in 1528 or 1529 sat for the portrait by Cra-

while resurrecting Lazarus. nach, or a member of his workshop, that is now in The Resurrection relief includes two further Kassel (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen).?’ In the scenes. Within the left-hand grotto stands an angel center stands a tree to set up the antithesis between by the open tomb signifying that Christ has indeed the Old and the New Laws. On the left or barren

risen. The twin towers of hell appear on the right. side of the tree are scenes of the Temptation of Lucifer, crowned and with a scepter in the upper Adam and Eve, the Brazen Serpent, and Moses Re64

| oe ic

mn os . RELIGIOUS SCUL ~ ULPTURE, C. 1520-1555

|... ee Oe ot Nerree sss iii arenes '—LrrO—EB —— —pene ne — Lr ere eee —— ooo | ae . a sis . ol2. Renate - . rnc .ee — oo oesRe eo -. lee— SS :2 LZ — = Se — oe cere eeoe ee LC Ur :So a oe ee See oe cee es eeeee a oe 2a ee oe .

4ooa«| ee Ce ee ee _ ee srt—e co 7| NS ee Oe cea ‘ C oo ie, ce ee ee eeae a ce __Se A =... aee onsesemrrn ston natatnge 2ee iee lr — —. eess -—..... ..ay -°—PR — ee . : cee oe ee — ee oC Se Se —*™ |. oo r—“i*sOCiCisSC LUC . ee _ oo. — ao SL! — . — rrr—“‘Os—OCOCOOCSO .—rrrrr”—“—‘“‘ 7-.— i|-7 be . — . oS Sa ee Le — _ Le ’ Til 1h} LYS (| if ee > || .bie — :a ee | .._ i. 2. 1 VU \ i ..lrlrtrtw~COCSSC _. 8 a |oe +... -=-— i... = a0 .. CN ..,hLUmUmUrCO™ i |. oe A y sg eae — 7 | Fe cae 2 _. . ae fo (oe y i ee —-—. ee oe a . _ . Coe. ee . Ga | 24a pk a oo 2 CC i. |. aie a SOU rere, oe =. CG ee ee ee He .™ ee ee a(7 rrFr—— ©=—r—“——S—— ‘s 2F2nP ee 27aoe ae Yo aGe | a|aao | -— §.. | |2 2... oe |... To ee - |.ee oe ee a. se et i. ..oy a|.| Ge .ile ae ee ae a. Se ee ee es. ee sD — Ne 4oea:SAY. iaeo L rf) ee Oe © iCe eeSe - 2ie iDe ae sei es ot SEE a r,rrr—e— pe ba SS oo aGe 7ae aa|r7 ae of oof a — 8 -.—~—t—e .—CO |... a Ue 7 oo! Ce .ffa|~~ -Te a ee i —-.,,rlrr——SC — |. ee ee a rt rrr Ce ee feaE he in ‘tw a eee . _/ =... . >. 4 .rrt—“‘—OCOOCOOCOCOCOC~CS — .Uhm — Oe oe eee Mano Bk 2g en ee ee oo Ry . a Ae i Co 7 — — . — a aeAeee Ye eee es =ca.=eeSa =7. —r—“i—O—OO—~—~—~—OO—O is.ees, ee ok ae aerr ea eg ea eeoF os .— |, ._ _rr.7| Oe ae See — eeee oe Se a ce TEN ul ory eae— aaNR aLe oo eei.rr SO |.|To a.aoe aiiee.a_ 7aeeaee Bl }.}.}§=. .os rr si—“‘itsS aerrtstsi—S—~— 4Baio eeaSOe =2PN hd _. .. . Le — |. — Fs — a _ Se Ce oo. a . le ee ee ES eo ae Do Lt) TT a eee es oO So fF. i . ee SF ee — a \ _— a ae ee — 6 Cl Ff oS -— Ff ot eS LC — |. Ce yt 4 Tr. a i. a... . . 8°. 7 LCL Ll |a+| PP ioe .-.. .. — . .._a... be -. .rei.-Sa .=a ate rrrr— aa... -— Chr ris 1aa ae -_ li ay oS Nel Lig ee ae ac OU UCU oe

all cpic youa . ara .14 . De onc : Sl gn e : Or} a SO . th t . ,a : “ 5 * . + 7 “ 9. For : quick] urce . iah r knev includi , it is fe populari in ures \ is Pr Bi inst kly gai is u : w abc ubeck ng Erh Jund On ityar frewe small “otes re fo tant reli Li uding E ou nce th exact pi and be Behold, «

iblesGerm i ance. it i rained ncertal sculpt out hi Erhart Altd several Om a scale pl or privat eliefs si

" we vs t

| 33.59 g I hei and relat

°%

Alth an Bibl Altdorfer’s ti al Luther ities | plus their vi te use. T since the

andestablish ough Delreturned e of 1533.° titletopage ir visual heir tively re %e 3°? (fig the precluded In 1534 D teir use f danc textual

mon s educcessful as to Wuurzbure , 40) the ‘i ~ ell finihis Orf agelar com ] ument i nonog ished audi plex-

uedg these ghout thi arvi 534agai 2(G Alle Pro for Pr producin this olic Catholi ingary funer 45) Onc ermanisc gory of Fai . otesta bish ) Once ‘isches Nati ith,estant nowreli i ief,

* * 4 .“, .~~ ad.y_

diffic woode opric»hne gests the ational win N ultynt7patro ns.©° n doctri thatsain complex! aimus u-

or & for C parentl : els . theologi collabc he p g.

both instance, i atholic y had lit intoab ologian. Y orated cl rogram s$

iirzb of Bi 1d-15 Luthera compositi ul work as tra ith a L ,admini for 1althenand ynrad vthe sleted caref isp, C erized gma ther merly Ad/ on Bibra i ‘y efully execute clean carvi ed by c Berli evory of fhof ra in femal ecute rvin itsitsClear int . in. wi é Re e detai and i (fig. 11 stering th » » with edemptio in f.personificati etails.hu Sea myr1 ikelih ament itbenefa ofcrors L clad voya able c yf the a liits ship hisitsCe muni¢ leave logo porar oul who ic Jer indwh ala pilgri ire. shiSi usalem ndthe in fla grimage ofThe SNP the world, ere Chri in sea’ life,62 § d lames rist search of , death stand ‘chfof h he

he devil. ThePp u of ship i pon ipantly is made *

sil cenianaciitanpi “ eo ee OES Seb By) RRNA pa 9? ee 9 = —— thn onmteotnp ian ee cabaitiamaniiiemmeatinne: — ee foe He Ae a ~~ , Sete — om oe

‘ier,alc : tens hejo/&oe _. aLile aew rtSake] oe’ : naan es =:oe ’ Bid ; :sila *— oethee). %OE =ue “EW oehe =Ree . .———— \Rw) Ra) Sais n>”ee Wi fon foTd) waht: (Sie Bie ot 'oe .yan WORT Ce es eae See op ey esi Se. (S°>a 3‘ wa.’ aa)ieVeh

{ , oe ae j a ~~, \ b ill % 4 esi nt : “ it a re eS aa eal - \* yi i ; yr. hy < % * % 4 § 4 ye 2 ~ >. i om |

|| sZS arn er” OA roe heels oe Tes * Oe)CS - oC. ESB eeeACRIN. She DS Oh ASse a eraitl | |) ie fe set SR ES PL RY poe SS ; enn) rr nw ER es “a~Se ae! 1| aBisse ia BEF a hides i saRiam 1) » at Fane | 2S eae ' , eee ae, § \\ FG “Shar . a) eae Fe Pecaniass BENSON A em CO Om .yer. ; Bsenti ), ee: ony a peeEPS aT ce Be oe Re ee . y ‘ee ai TT < a ae vot A Me . /: 'ar‘tae Soars fpeta‘tom A a" Eis aoe. { ys et en eeSee: . een ee _ wtPraS aaa ee NS sf ' oo5i Reeieten Ea oe ot * i ee| i , gts ; | ar CSR > — “=> a ale ‘sim et ‘ i« mi . ) € => — eo >64they G Yee eg© Heures Ste Q iip oe. )6|6N AMA Sees ce = iy: gaa: vey... ‘S) RSs As | wt ~) : @< Yat oao "y 2) PPO? SS Bement a > f 3 ed e Fi Z , A. «th rae: “ome a bet ot > ted | is eo ee sonTN ae yfNYSE (at? > :Select , _ _ | ON eed ee Oy” Testament Deutzsch or September Bible, Luther’s trans-

| Sy aeea, mee6lation was published Lotther the We that ‘CAG ow . , .by. 3Melchior +4 7 —— ides, ID SAGriee Younger in Wittenberg in 1522.7° Luther collab-

47.

. ae orated closelyCrucifixion, with Cranach, and presumably Hans Reinhart, 1536 oo. | , _it was : the reformer who decided that only the Book of the

Apocalypse would be illustrated.”! The numerous later versions, including the Liibeck Bible of 1533,

69

| THRE | E ye woo dcuts

CHAPTER sither Cranach’s late roduce ei 2, by the inued to rep d: fter them. Furthermore, isual propaganda ™ Of varlants arte continue literature and visu he Antichrist ome n vith tB| aby ey E5308 ted the p OP > whore of hase commonly lic church with of the Leipzig

- —l equa Luthera eWw wit :_ “ed } the ih the Catholic « aftermath of -bald

de poe Ria a- _an72 4 oO. in theinrich m issioned c In 1540, com LES

pw 4 . =o ee 4 Lt i *

PeFak eet Va pays DukeiseHeinrich eeTht Stelon. ynvention, aborate Pro alleg was inAs 5% ae: Wt: eu, RN "; conv two elabotestant Reinhart wa or FW ltt SS hy WS q Beham to dev in all likelihood, d the reverse of ee Ae) 8 : f. A Ge ce | i 4 g Bg: . Ca v4 Fe. WA { Yves Svat Aa wy ? Lae S\N f faith that, in he obverse an ich died in tN ee} an BAY 0 d to make into the ely, Heinrich SPL ZeSiren ayVikas Aee>Ves i“ (a Pe Na\4 ten 3 for ars Rima) Mt INAS >> AN ded to | ortunately, VSG. iN:ae( Hd) Nag SRS) eh iids | Me)“Pay | her-medal.” wasTrznzty, completed. sated Ving aALL ie |4Se |Le eis Beak i Foye before | Un ul, the fig | oe ENG if Re a a ee Yt ' anotne fore the project wa Trinity, crea ii oii f Fei| | Saag | a . o _ ;2 ia a s Ny , 2 me ae ; Ttae | %ee ageree eo af LS ,Hes 5 4 I ~ edal, . « was vy son ani AViRees , 's: Ifinest m rich’s

TERED Oe. cas >i.) ae » Moree cnn, Menetne to. © YAN ce vebjomgthe orlargest Moria and penny. com: \RE WuVreere fees Wg Re ey1B Si Noes ay Moritzpfenr 1 t,rechnicaily the raised cros

ae How, Use Gy j cm., this is the | edals. In fact, the medal

af IhP2. eaewe Yeg/Aplex PECo yy f Reinhart’s ly anda joined to t \\\\e bt:Any ae eeSO RSA t separately andmj ictly Protestan N\A? ... aye” YY oe, , ef Rae) > Sh be cas g 1S not strict. > of

VANS wy |Bg Sab i).RG Ge aRather ie OF L2p “ing ity litica Pp ee Wi gonBex »~i A ¥ No Ot roper. ThePM it reflects Moritz’ po ishis office Moritz 2° ae it ref off os on ee ta me ag OS dal.Up assuming Bt. of Caththe Sella | the mid-154 his father’s suppre yet he also

a?%_F

lypse, obverse, 15: carrie ithin the duchy ion that set him

Hans Reinhart, ne olic church w moderate position embers of the

aa Staatliche Minzsam adopted a ann Friedrich and the sd Charles V, the

nhc veen Johann , one side an inhart’s medal ~ Ikaldic League on her. 7? Reinhart’s Schmal eror, on the1otche of their WALCIC er.comm . mon

Catholic emp d as a statement he subject of the

poe‘stian can be in faith. P Luther ons addresand is ideas are sum E his j| 2§

Bali Trinity on h first article of fait less. the Gnaden

ee oy. , ~ Seis : : arized In the J 76 Never the cs " he t Re in-

ysSHAR Sy @ EES—_ um ion of of. mmonly Trinityinhtha Ae Bee ie. | ces oTRIAS Confess e of1530. race form pre

|

Fae 5 m4 CH un’ . ke ALAS gMy iy) Cant ~ sty h / or th r ae an be fou nd CO fc Pr oTestant Ate eae Wy Niemploye pes aand angen P aa Clypec! :a Fi. cas ee ay hare lacks any spec apparition

DIN: Cob Stet any ation art ing this heavenly ER

Sofa a ESL" 4 4 eos et We am sc * a 4 Reform Surtr ounding C ; n “PROPT 14 €8) ESUy NY ye ‘4 oe |Ne »' inscr ‘ations. inscriptio -~ RES Oe ay cs 4 eet.FAy associations. is the veer EVM ESAIAE ip yp OF: es EG @ AI, A) of the Trini VLI MET PERCVSS f my people was AG ates Ne ;8“Gy ¢ Tao DB ) BI VS POP |«sressions of my iSt’s Kd Nels eMaR | vi CC MA SCEL topeo Christ ARiRak ay VA Sa SER ASE ys URE Whtransgres for the ion llusion

ayikOy ELSay Was Wek Bs yet: by’53. os 3”), an isalldoinated Dix PeeLSC ak x ls al aone WU, NiaifLie icken, Isaiah he reverse MR ONS sa ani hg NS gee ora | i he stricken, Il mankind. The held aloft by two

NT" Yes Leone Oy a:103) rifice blet helc ives eay R :*Mee By, Say p, K282 1G Pe: ; yySy \Na vie va, p gf Vi ve 7 for 2sacrifice e 7all a | emankit inscr Ip f the In derive POihWane weSehh Dy, Vey aS 4% . Iption ta {Trity

Oe pi WY ee alt chad Nike, | es at byEethe the natu | Since > Creed eeeAWad ee Sh) was} wed) Oi «=ar:ee -_— he,ian text on 77’7 the w ‘ ‘ ‘es my ye WE weg i ‘ Whee ey angels. The Creed. Si “rans, Ag ( @ Va | iff aan Ay), ‘Fi eae angel anasian Cre ; d Lutherans,1€ NS ft ) ALY) IRpSchy 7 tae ml): a Mf ste (F the Athan holics an “hristian

Wa Yo Mat G/F P,, Game Pie NAP from oth Cath Christ 8AY hs MG 5 yee tg ©oritz a8. =. fas * aebveRein . in ; arm 5 . 7 1 j] aApocalypse, serv Coat inhart Leipzig sm, re ow4 :=~of é.~ M Reinhart,

N PAWN Aa re es ig VA then accepted by ee of their eae side and that

: e : y 49 he Mi 7 8}ich, 5) Staatliche

», reverse, 153 the

6. Hans ‘ linzsammlung O

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, C. 1520-1555

, a v, (ps aN. ae =CF ~SDSS “i GeNN .. SABA ES CRD. MorrSeSNe .. Fee IDIAS OAC AN ease a eensleAi eg os Sein a YeAfA RTA CIS ron cotter as —4% a

AST a7 ee Peo Ni rat is ae” NS hor | a ea ee ibenassi hep iee as] a PSC, 3G SN fe EO NS Ree . ( es [-j, OR 2s AONETR @NGUESE RT LVS. © a! [2]. tae eee fe. ye CAR ED RR Pe ae. at — eeete" as 7S aaa WS a = aee | Cire ta OAS COTY) ge ON, ris Us IF gS ee ee PN: NY NCESes Rates SINE e ee”ee IO See! Qa OS Se

a in at BA OHIO NYS — so 2 —— age | > LENO Wg retin Ai AS Nf Ge si ce ed Sr ie ee ‘ etlt/a i? OS ag, GB ee RIN ROSEY QS /A =mde iG ‘ey oy ea z , a NN uw) et ey SSN ONAN fr Oe ere SS rere Oo A “a Mn ah | en OSU ERS ON EA TIMS ory NON

ee) ON ame (J ~ RS abe Ni J ae beige Ps REDEEM SAN UH oats i

50. Hans Reinhart, Trinity (Moritzpfennig), 1544, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum

January 1544 are contained in the remaining 1581. The majority of his religious medals, exclud-

inscription. ing reissues, date between 1536 and 1544. A comThese religious medals were cast in multiple memorative portrait of Luther was issued in

copies, though the original edition was certainly 1547.°! In spite of his temporary success, Reinhart never more than a few dozen. Since the majority of increasingly turned away from medal production of Reinhart’s religious medals were made of silver, the any kind. In 1540 he began experiencing troubles audience was affluent. Most likely these medals with Leipzig’s goldsmith guild who claimed that he

were commissioned by princes such as Johann should be subject to their regulations since he Friedrich, Heinrich the Pious, and Moritz, and worked in silver. Reinhart had to serve a five year then were given to their lay and clerical political apprenticeship under goldsmith Georg Treutler, allies.’ The Trinity medallions were too large to and it was the city council not the guild that finally wear and were, therefore, kept in chests or cabi- approved his three masterpieces in 1547. Given the nets. The Munich example of the Apoca/ypse is fitted relative dearth of later medals, Reinhart must have with a ring at the top permitting it to hang from a earned his living primarily as a goldsmith and seal

chain or pin. (figs. 48 and 49) When worn, the cutter. 82 medal became a statement of the individual’s faith and his confessional affiliation in the same way that FROM THIS BRIEF EXAMINATION Of these four

sporting a portrait medal of Johann Friedrich or artists, who were among the most successful of the Cardinal Albrecht von Brandenburg would have period, we find that the Reformation and the Cathindicated the person’s political allegiance.’? (fig. olic reaction to it had a debilitating effect upon the 46) Religious medals enjoyed tremendous popu- course of German sculpture. Loy Hering enjoyed larity later in the sixteenth and early in the seven- constant patronage yet the variety of his commisteenth centuries especially as the centennials of sions was remarkably limited. His late oeuvre conmajor Lutheran events were commemorated.®° sisted almost exclusively of epitaphs and tombs. Reinhart’s works represent the nascency of this This was an era of few great religious commissions

phenomenon. even in staunchy Catholic lands. Though attracReinhart remained active until his death in tive, the Holy Grave carved by a middle Rhinish 71

CHAPTER THREE

sculptor in 1531 for the Liebfrauenkirche in Trier the last Catholic campaign until late in the sixor the marble A/tar of Abbess Wandula von Schaum- teenth century. Neuburg and especially Torgau berg (Regensburg, Cathedral Treasury) of 1535—40 would provide the foundation for an ever-growing are more noteworthy because of their dates rather corpus of Lutheran sculptural ensembles. Given the than their artistic merits.°> Faced with changing rhetoric about images in the 1520s, it is ironic that attitudes about church art and witha sharp drop in the Protestants, not the Catholics, emerged as the the laity’s capital support, sculptors were forced to primary patrons of religious sculpture from the develop new types of carvings. In addition to his 1540s until the 1570s. funerary monuments, Peter Dell devised smallscale reliefs that were intended for personal devotional purposes. He was the first master who repeatedly translated Lutheran iconographic pro- The stories of the Neue Stift and its creator Algrams into skillfully cut lindenwood reliefs that brecht von Brandenburg are intimately bound towere at Once spiritually and aesthetically edifying. gether. Albrecht (1490-1545) was Germany’s Dell’s refinement appealed to his princely and clert- highest ranking Catholic official and one of the cal patrons. Dreyer was not so fortunate since he greatest Renaissance art patrons. (fig. 46) As the found fewer opportunities in Lutheran Lubeck. His second son of Johann Cicero, elector of Brandenpowerful figures and rather rough cutting tech- burg, Albrecht rose rapidly to power. In 1513, at

. THE NEUE STIFT AT HALLE

nique were ideal for the Libeck pulpit but less age 23, he was named archbishop of Magdeburg suited to small-scale carvings. For approximately a and bishop of Halberstadt. In the following year decade, Hans Reinhart pioneered the religious Albrecht added the titles of archbishop and elector medal for his Saxon clients; however, he too turned of Mainz plus the attached office of archchancellor from sculpture in order to support his family. In of the Holy Roman Empire. Finally in 1518 Pope general, the artistic situation for sculptors of reli- Leo X elevated him to cardinal.®*+ These offices, gious art would dramatically improve but not until however, did not come cheaply as Albrecht bor-

much later in the sixteenth century. rowed heavily from the Fuggers and other Augsburg bankers to finance his appointments. The infamous sale of indulgences that Albrecht sponsored

Complex Church Programs to repay his debts provoked stinging criticism from many Catholics and nascent Protestants alike. In With the lack of active lay patronage during the another era or even in a slightly earlier decade Al-

period from the mid-1520s until 1555, it fell to the brecht, the enlightened and humanistically inleading ecclesiastical and secular princes to sponsor clined prince, might have been universally adthe few significant sculptural projects. Not sur- mired. Yet as the leading German Catholic cleric prisingly, the resulting sculptural programs care- during the formative years of the Reformation, AIfully reflected the confessional attitudes of their brecht personified the church and its abuse of donors. I wish now to look at Cardinal Albrecht power. As such he was the target of considerable von Brandenburg’s foundation of the Neue Stift vitriolic commentary. Martin Luther dertsively in Halle and at the palace chapels that Otthein- dubbed him the “idol of Halle,” a reference to his rich, Count Palatine, and Johann Friedrich, Elector collection of relics and his adherence to Catholic of Saxony, built at Neuburg an der Donau and devotional practices. Torgau. While these churches provide clear models Albrecht founded the Neue Stift at Halle at this for discussing the distinctions between Catholic critical moment when the Catholic church was beand Protestant decorative campaigns, these are also ing assailed as never before. In fact, he was the only the only major religious cycles of this era. Halle ecclesiastical prince to commission a significant aroffers a reaffirmation of Catholic beliefs in the power tistic project during the 1520s and 1530s. While I of saints and the efficacy of art; Neuburg and Torgau doubt that the Neue Stift was planned initially as a

represent coherent attempts to develop a specifi- specific response to the concurrent rise of Protescally Lutheran form of church art. Halle would be tantism, it came to signify a reaffirmation of the 72

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, C. 1520-1555

authority of the Catholic church and its traditional cated on the plan.®° Sculptures, paintings, relicustoms. As such the Neue Stift is a fascinating quaries, tapestries, and other objects filled the enartistic and cultural monument. If its program and tire interior of the church. Collectively these items its decorations had survived intact, the Neue Stift glorified Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the commuwould be among Europe’s most celebrated churches. nity of saints. Like St. Peter’s in Rome or the Ste. Albrecht’s ties with Halle began on 21 May Chapelle in Paris, the Neue Stift housed important 1514 when he made his inaugural entry into the holy relics; 21,484 fragments are catalogued. Alcity. Like Ernst von Wettin (Saxony), his prede- brecht perceived the church as a Christian pancessor as archbishop of Magdeburg, Albrecht chose theon. Each of the 15 altars lining the south and Halle as his primary residence. Against the city north aisles had a dual function.®’ First, the paintwalls Ernst had erected the Moritzburg, a fortified ings, mostly after Cranach’s designs, recounted palace named for the patron saint of Magdeburg. sequentially Christ’s passion from the Entry into Later in 1514 Albrecht elevated the Magdalen- Jerusalem to the Resurrection and Descent into enkapelle in the Moritzburg to a Stiftskirche or Limbo. One could proceed from station to station collegiate church. This chapel soon proved too during holy week and re-enact Christ’s sacrifice for small for his burgeoning collection of art and holy mankind. Albrecht’s personal breviary exclusive to relics so shortly after his investiture as cardinal Al- the Neue Stift, dating to 1532 and today in Bambrecht began to consider new locations for the Stifts- berg (Staatsbibliothek, Msc. Lit. 119), confirms kirche. On 13 April 1519 Pope Leo X approved the the dedications and prayers for each altar.8° Second, transfer to Albrecht of the Dominican cloister near each altar was dedicated to several different saints.

the Moritzburg. In 1520 this church was redesig- For instance, the St. Augustine altar honored Aunated as the Neue Stift, dedicated to Sts. Moritz gustine and the three other Latin church fathers and Mary Magdalene. For Albrecht this new church plus Sts. Ignatius of Antioch, Nicolas, Anastasia, presented an unparalleled opportunity. Under the Aldegundis, Agathe, Dorothy, Cecile, Orttilie, and Dominicans its decoration had been sparse, and Gertrud.®? On their respective feast days, their their few altarpieces moved with them across town. relics, housed in sumptuous silver shrines, would The cardinal now commanded a sizeable building, be processed through the church to this altar for in measuring 69 meters in length, with no artistic specific veneration. Although few of the reliquaries program.®° (Plan of Neue Stift at Halle; fig. 51) survive today, 350 are illustrated in the Hallesches Between 1519 and the mid-1530s Albrecht com- Heiltumsbuch now in Aschaffenburg (Hofbibliomissioned at least 23 altarpieces, dozens of new thek, ms. 14).?° These miniatures, completed in reliquaries, and several important sculptural pro- 1526, record what was the most celebrated collecgrams. As the project evolved, Albrecht also desig- tion of relics in the German lands. In some cases nated the choir as his future burial site. In order to plausible attributions to specific goldsmiths or, at transform this unadorned church into a Catholic least, to particular cities can be made. The bust of paradigm, Albrecht imported talented craftsmen St. Ursula with its profile relief portrait of Albrecht from throughout his lands, including his master on its base suggests a design by Cranach or one of mason and his court sculptor, Bastian Binder and his followers.?! (fig. 6) If the Protestants quesPeter Schro, from Mainz. Binder embellished tioned the power of saints especially as intercessors the exterior of this simple hall church by adding on mankind’s behalf, Albrecht’s response was a milrounded gables to the perimeter of the roof. Schro itant reaffirmation of their centrality to Catholic carved the series of apostle statues in the nave. Mat- faith. thias Griinewald, the cardinal’s court painter from The choir’s program illustrates both Albrecht’s 1516 to about 1526, contributed at least one major regard for Christian saints and his specific role altar; other pictures were made by Lucas Cranach, within the church.?? On the primary east-west axis Albrecht Direr, Hans Baldung Grien, and Simon were three major monuments: the reliquary of St.

Franck of Aschaffenburg. Moritz, the high altar, and Albrecht’s tomb and

The program of the Neue Stift was complex. epitaphs. (fig. 5) Albrecht ordered the reliquary Some of the essential sculptural features are indi- statue of St. Moritz in the early 1520s.?? Moritz 73

CHAPTER THREE

,f

AAAS G Halle, Neue Stift (later Cathedral)

race

i NY, [ A Display Chest with Relics = aN B—D Albrecht von Brandenburg’s Tomb, Aeia., “LE JS . 4Altar Epitaphs, and Baldachin I< 7 E. High with Reliquary Shrines and gh Altar with Reliquary Shrines an ill NAME the Portrait Busts of Albrecht von

LY eA Sells \ \ / - - \ / G Silver Statue of St. Moritz

i y \¢ e I Brandenburg and Charles V

\ ’ 5 ’ | J H_ Choir Screen

' /\ILZEN IY \ » Puli . OQ —_—_—_—_——=——

— : = I R U : | Evangelist

| ; | eSNN | ; /| \, 51 SuAndew St. Peter 2SeChrist ea /\IE~ Pau , 7 a 7 5 St. James Major 6 St. John the

oN S

/ \h oN a /\ 7 St.James Minor 8 St. Bartholomew

)T)e

| J=: {UI}: S

iM NY VY 9 St. Philip 10 St. Thomas /\ ON /\ 11 St. Simon 12 St. Matthias \/ NY \/ 13 St. Matthew 14 St. Jude

/\ ON /\ 15 St. Mary 16 St. Moritz == Magdalene

\ / NY \ / 17 (St. Ursula) ? 18 St. Erasmus

JNU NI L

e.@ | - Ny

7. = =e /|\s @ | — a C Plan of the Neue Stift (later Cathedral) at

Halle during the Reign of Cardinal Albrecht von Brandenburg

74

as. fs 7 \ t ee i ~~ | Z , q i‘aksarap ' rt

——€ 4 my # a a© j Ee Lan oeree “— ai: > - 4 & ep

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, C. 1§20-15§5§§

:. .= ea to a PE) a.i sq 4 é ';aRi -Ree 9 . aiaoe IR.‘4' 3; oe ame%

. 3« .H:OE2SeRe2ae. aayA—= 4a/2°| |4kh :, ay & |

"atags; £ice‘ .éa éOM es Es pS00: i -SN SeSER t Piime "" “4 Si 4 fe aesid ::

We i| i 7 2 a; « \ Cc , 2 Es a) =. ee Be. a , 3 2 2 e fe. a . aeSs . ;:es =nS | i i @ be = oS ha oY .y ; _' Te | 4- oe =. F cA ~ : “eS -— | . * -.. i. Pa | = , : kl ae a : oa Po 4 iz: eo -oo a| |.=aa sPoe abe(ee @ Ste & &ss oe«+. ee .* A Bi = aa ie .Ve’ . llU . 4 & * 2 eae ‘ oh . oh ——Si Poe 4 |aeos:egPosition: ,ae ts5 ot) Lew he r i & i | a oe wy -e | iq pick i ee = " ie 1s Le) " gt ra : e c i, 4 | a _ 5 " \a 7. & — i eS f :,/f ‘a: 3 ' . i iy ot Fees eH : . 4 ii i¥ 7 be ae ee ‘':9":;7ee mi " f ee. ) ia ; a” 4: “.5lClC-— ae oo _ _. = a aee;ol a.a .a _— aoy — . oe | L. Wee i _. — oo .. ey ee Ce ee 2. .oO a oO Co 2_-— ae : Se pk 2a2CC oC as c— a |.fie_—. oe=.oe 2oo — ——s—s oo — pe wer ni poe —— a . oo ft oo oon |_. _a .— i _Seyy. 8 a f>, oO—| ee

.|

eee 2..SF ol — —a ee — _ ec 2 oe eo -. 7 _ee a | / -LL FF oS .— : .. ss UU oe oe ool) ae ——>a -| _ : Se Po ee_a2) ai —— ue2 — oe >. eeee — cS 3) — :: ne—o us ) SF 7 | | ,co=oe _. ss— Ss tS. So aJ oo i osoo —-_ :—

,|.

oeh re soS (Cathedral) —Seif: Fulpit, 15 puz,6,H eee ee oo : : = — =
The choice of the nearby Griinau from about 1535 to 1542.!?°? (fig. epitaph design reflected Martin Tucher’s religious. 217) The project was conceived during the last 84

oe | iCeee. aekaae ae ~ — _ rr So RELIGIOUS | T , C.SCULP 1520-1555

C ao oo ,—9_. é.CC os et” So ee|ey oe -.) sepieniity apoe .Lo 2CCeet=D 2.aoo i_-C .r——— .— oS .#& ~~. oeae7 2ae es [2s posure aero -, ...oe—r— es.. ..ee ‘mae — eo a#~~Cl ee) .| Oe, J oe ee i. -— SF Se rr—C oe (ee ow oe ye eee 8 ee |. |... —— eas! (On. -oeiy 8feoo | le..| ee2 ee — yZo gs ESOr. Ge fo -ico-. _of Pee —Se _ oe Sei.a ee 2 ee)oe RONDE: 7 ee . a. 2_|3 A=. 7. . ee . — — — _a: icy mr ay (8. CF ae ee — > -. oo =e roe 2. 2 — -— 2, a. oo eo. ._ oo 7, _ oo i a oa ae -— -.>Se ae -otee | ian =te CO hh oo _Aa & oe 72 \ lS Fee oe a ee — =. — i-g€e fv of A wee a =. . . 2 a we O 6 al a :a _ fos | | al | oo — _ . |. _ ta We a .=. —r—“——O—ssS le. wo Ss 2 ee _.ee -= Fo aerree-..eS FINO wre a_ Ce oe. le a7Nim as — oS a.iOO |ee _ee>ca— .— ae hd SA eee — =Se #&2~272 ~27]7] ee> oe.ee oe ae Oe a J gy [— . hrs ise (Tf | ts g foe if ~S —_ 8 a 2 oo st 1. _ _ a oo ee so ee EO Oe Uaaesobe sna nae sete citletosmyttap ae es i Oe i oo . sla.: i> ia, ; |faaye| 2._.oF 2 —_. oo 2 GQ on a7 Co os oe oo _ . ae- ia Co ee :oo yeS ee ee 7 aSS i.oeci 3a&.2-—. _oe:|.ee"i 7Leeosaee . ;oe es ee oo FF | 5 — Ng 2 a .a a_so . _ ee : CC ee eS ne ay eae oe oun re Ce ee ee oy aS 2 a — = 8 2 a ——t—‘“—‘C e= a SS Me tte oo). 2 — oe — CC a eo 2 | oe —_ —

a [Cr 2 2g te GR SG as = |of car ee ee te, oe oe fF 7. _ve— o a 2~=——re—eeON 2[2 - |. —LULU s [| ~~a. >. 2. 2@CL Se 7tCbie ..tp Lr ee ee -— 2|. #— FF C0ee Bent Sia ee |ts2oo oe See —= == = CS CO a (te = oefae ey a5we Lfae a— i CeaCC 78_| Bes ee Ss =a — A i.Co _One =|.ae | oe. =.eeoe -ue ~~ DD — .o a ee Ce Yo (2G —— —eS a — Le ff FS 22 _ 2 | wo) ae Bes iaee ek |. oe | ae -— 8 ee ——— > oe a.i A aii We sa ra Te es Se ot ee ee 7 ee se| SF if we — 4 oo _ re . or CS 8 ee Co Lye 8oa.oS = oe rl— ie ee . Ce. —— Gere rt) Te ae ae eyve — §ask «ss ~—OCdC. —eo 22 oo Ss . |Se2 a|LC of oo _ 4 PE 2s san 1 Aw I a We ee OG CC i | oo. a oe | — fe tl = . Oe ee oo if: aa ae a Co a ee ee Po llr ee DDa aa 2oeeeooeea oe |.ee a. . Cob OFios ee oe 2—oe oe a2 oe eo ol i3 SD eoccncunnl | a ee i. ig 8 ce -— eee oeBe oo = —— Te | — | ee 2 ee ee eee i_-8>7— ee a.o 2. ~~~ De% a pe—— — Vyee . 1 so 4 ¥ oe Se oe oe So 0 eea_Slot oe|_2, co So oe a |. _ - 2. ~—r—“‘_e™O—OSOSCs fC oe Be 0) acinar -

AN ——G Oe ae . 1. Fg : So — 2 ~— @@ =—eE [oe Oe Oe ke vere

se -— . ey Fe 2.el2——— .reo ee oe Se og ..i : /UC eeee an8ye ee 27 Soe oe ee —ND =—.. eehLUU ee ..~. a: AS _ a/otot oo _Lo — -— SL oo oo oe Po oe oy ee es ee |:oe ow of oY 2 6h _ ses -— 0;Ce 2..i. = rre—e—C—=S es Co A -.. oo a i. _ P 2 |. _ 2 al Wi . a oC ae |. oo — — ae oeoo. (8 oo ee |— .eavo Lo a-_ fo2oe 77._Le a8&=. oe ace aae fia ys) 4G re aN ‘= =. =f _.a--aoo oe ee ae se =oF oO. aSEo ee De Se 7. a ey.eA .:|eh, Fee Oe. ae see Ce Soo oe 24 oe — -. ee 2 oo |. — = re =—rs—C i 8 ee i 2 eee Hibliees — S Ft ok oo > i. ae ll fe oC of — lcPF) 2 So = oo 2 eee os ee eo ee Ce [oe 3 Wee ee Veen — a Ce 2ny oo 7Se ee se-— et- Ne ae. Ce a2 a=. of ae ..| hae og ae oo hie -—CS |eG CC aSoe =F ee— a2to2... .22yb -— ooae —Ce 22oe Ae ae fiCe Oe arr—=F ea_ . i..ee 7— — Ve ig eg eH 2aefoes :: FF eC : 8 a oo . I . =e ee | A a _ oe a F . | — oo. 1. isa|oePag 42_yi a. =. -Poe .yy7— ck a -— ee oo . 7... Fa aoo| 8_7. — ~~. — ro Fo Gg Lo ieLy BO ffa5_a CC oo _2..(7z. Lo LL Cf . —_

DD oo ee avo CE .Poi3— Cee rreeeeAe .ee =— 7 7| -pee : oo on aLo | ee ||.oe iLbe =Sr 2. — ee oe FF Cee oe ee _22. Ce Ce ao a)_Ct oe — [oo CC ae .oo , Ff #2 oo as ll ll -CC ~~ ~=——emese SS ee ee eke a 1 Zo 8 . _— — = oe _ . rs _ . 7 CC — a — ee ee . gee A a. . oe so le. a -_ 8L86a. eo DeDe Loo.a2 oC ee .. oe oe oF oo Leycn) x a ae_ee = Cl fufF -| ee2oooe — . ff Z_°

CHAPTER THREE

rs eS £6 eer Ra KRY See

eee a et A ge

ert. 8 WE ee 6 aNMo Ye ee a Ve oe. foee ,,hrmrC

er 9 OU ee RN Vamemtte. a 4 Cr —F"Enrns 2 > /. ae a| ele

: 2... i. i... = J. _— -. —

SS fe oe — OL ee Eee

: | LL a ee ee ae ee oo kd —rtrti‘“_OCO—~O—OO—”—”——CCC es _ Le ce a. > oS hh ~=—reres—es—eO—madé=e

—— i trttrwOD s§$E$E$R$NN Wg WeFSOWi( wst—~””OCOCOOCOCOC —t—“‘(‘a‘i‘ |llceeULC eer i lO, ) €o\ Bh Luther stated repeatedly in his inaugural sermon CC ri ee ests—“‘OOOOCSOisC‘C‘C«iésSEN#;C . Pe i a | . «— **& : Ve SS a \ co nsecr at In g the chapel on 5 cto er I 544 5 C e

Do ee ee a oe A , | i

21 ., #4. Be word of God is the true essence of Protestant wor-

EE i —™ ,

| | bee Se OSES porte te 71) mayS.ULULU™UCCU be such that nothing else may ever happen tn it UC ||)Lt Oepeel ae except that our dear Lord himself may. speak to us > ##. . .2828€©«§«—— CEC td l.LULULULULllhlrti—“‘(‘CO#OCOiOiOiCO#OCdizdCiCiCNiCiC(C(iCw: i d d ] f k

re eee cugee scapraise.” yr and praise.” /33 Schroter Sin Schréthe h le ee ee emamammaman through prayer and !?? Simon Sp ee Fier, » Stif pi O rk

-—-) be fsNC re ,.DUlUC GSO V2 ORil ttSee :KD CyarrDp AN \ P= CQO HL to SS On ser sae Vj A a, 7 6ie: Cun SS H ill | Ih oe: ul : a! Pr

o\ \fPor Pa Pee ee

Te \\ —) O = oe Vet, xX oy. 3 ¥ in 4 SES Bopypoo! x oy NN Sn 7, SQ ln LT \o $s J, y ~ “Th 9 in St iW S SX ih Yo” el, £OS L i SY as i S YEKD log ' A Pulpit LS WS L iT NS IIS x B Altar ~~ 4 w ra | C Chapel QS LT? ry >Lyoe[y>~~ wa a, {?? yi, Re. = if

ONS yd

D Chapel Tower so

E Chapel Portal

F Beautiful Oriel G Palace Entrance H _ — Johann-Friedrichs-Bau and Great Staircase

| Hausmannsturm Torgau, Schloss Hartenfels

Plan of Schloss Hartenfels at Torgau during the Reign of Elector Johann Friedrich of Saxony

88

* a ™ q‘ ‘\ “ iffete ag Hy \@ j _ .;™ 5SENS bat ee oe Hie ; e | i .ee ee E — re ¢ 4 _ . oe a. ig : , FG ; en ov gle « ; . | “ ymsISaSCULPTURE, JRE, C C. .HN aes ses Re sis

al * din ea, ath: " ¥ pe ™ és *

Vea abal acerf: tick ectirgh out? 1grad ‘adu rou G ghet astoc al ar p y bnative alt refl gan er fated

WwW :tee ’Cc th atth SthLy :roduci 1Sially ‘f on ica nt gh ar uld “Cas ehan ‘al ,‘her (rs S of _B ffand .-alth pread s andintri i aster rich ‘CtiVve t nor -T erm: out e forIpted . ha the ive was as f; in and a: enth ny 1iS eL cul Cgl0 ng icat avi Ate oft uth alt el or fa te: 1e ¢onal CuW/. ar C fi Sly ninNn ta Ca ’l

archityandfra lof e.AderC threristien 1e y th Trt nal seve Th ce ind Apex } arly dk th Xere lV tr ift u 1S pu “

‘ e- lief: ‘Stant J7fam O . eent pect y Sf m

100 tectu init1ece learpt 1e tcon1Ip srtsDtln tain he : ral oth two and am | y in fo ur

RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, 1555-1580

scenes: the Brazen Serpent, the Adoration of the nerary monument in the German lands. These and Shepherds, Christ on the Cross, and the Descent of other projects sponsored or encouraged by August the Holy Spirit. Statuettes of John the Baptist and created a stable market for sculptors 1n Saxony.

Moses stand in the flanking niches. These examples, coupled with August’s rising Completing the altar 1s a Last Supper 1n the pre- stature among evangelical princes, would inspire della. This theme was central to the evolving canon an ever growing number of elaborate sculptural al-

of evangelical art. In 1530 Luther wrote tars and pulpits both within and beyond the ElecWhoever is inclined to put pictures on the torate of Saxony. For example, August’s sculptor

;the . Hans Walther enjoyed the sort of constant financial altar to havethat Lord’s Supper of Christ . ; ought ; support his counterparts from the 1530s and

_ in « .golden 1540sletters: lacked. Ingracious 1556-57 hemerciproduced the new it “The and _ . . . pulpit in the Frauenkirche in Dresden that Hent-

painted, with these two verses written around

ful Lord has instituted a remembrance oftheHis . _ .in. .the believes identical with pulpit wonderful. schel works.” Thenisthey would stand be; . a: Gottesackerkirche (now Kreuzkirche) in Bischofs-

fore our eyes for our toOfcontemplate i. . . werda, east ofheart Dresden.” much greater signifi-

them, and even our in reading, would , ; ; |eyes, cance is the monumental stone Last Supper Altar

. . designated . that Hansfor created between 1572 and. 1579 the is the administration ofDresden the . reducedfor Kreuzkirche in that. in form has

have to thank and praise God. Since the altar

Sacrament, one could not find a bettersince paint..5 . been in the Stadtkirche in Schandau 1927.7® ing for it. Other pictures of God or Christ can . (fig. 68) Count Anton von Oldenburg and Debe painted somewhere else. 7 Imenhorst, a Lutheran ally, endowed the altar as a

Christoph II Walther of Dresden, Hans’ slightly memorial to his son who died in Dresden in 1570. younger cousin, had included the Last Supper tn Elector August acted as the intermediary for this the predella of his large sandstone altar of 1564 in project and, doubtlessly, selected the sculptor.?? the Stadtkirche in Penig and Hans employed it for The original appearance of the altar is best seen in the main scene of the imposing altar that he began the pen and wash sketch attributed to Hans that ts in 1572 for the Kreuzkirche in Dresden. 7? (fig. 68) now in Leipzig (Museum der bildenden Kunste). >? The subject also appears on the large painted and (fig. 69) The altar’s present dimensions of 9 by 6.5 carved altar that August commissioned in 1574 for meters are considerably reduced from its initial size the chapel of Schloss Freudenstein in Freiberg.?4 since the architectural base with the flanking arches

Here Heinrich Goeding’s painting dominates the have been removed. A Lutheran altar of this scale center while Georg Fleischer the Elder’s wooden whether painted or sculpted was unprecedented. portrait statues of August and his wife Anna kneel August’s Dresden palace chapel altar measured only

before God in the apex of the frame. roughly the size of the corpus or central relief. The Last Supper Altar, like the Dresden portal, THE STRONG REAFFIRMATION Of Lutheran church signaled the Albertine willingness to use sculpture

sculpture in Saxony from the mid-1550s is due to communicate the triumphant Lutheran mesprimarily to the patronage of Elector August. In sage. And in this instance, 1t is articulated with 1555, contemporary with the Dresden portal and brilliant clarity. Moving upwards from the altar chapel decorations, August ordered Hans Walther where the actual communion was celebrated, Walto carve the new sandstone baptismal font for the ther offers the Passover Meal in the predella as the Jakobikirche in Freiberg.*? Ornamenting the font Old Testament counterpart to the central Last Supare two reliefs depicting the Israelites Crossing the per. Christ’s symbolic sacrifice next becomes a Red Sea and the Drowning of Pharoah’s Troops, physical one in the Crucifixion. The resurrected plus the arms of August and his wife Anna. In the Christ crowns the apex of the altar. The unity of the same year August initiated plans for erecting a Trinity in death and in eternal life is signified by the

tomb for his brother Moritz in Freiberg Cathe- Holy Spirit and the half-length figure of God set dral.2° (fig. 140) This huge shrine, completed be- between the crucified and resurrected Christ. The tween 1559 and 1563, would be the grandest fu- four evangelists, each holding their gospels, emIOI

P

*-

is ~

|.: e :™ 3 :. ae iy2toe °ont aa:ie > wg A. i : } 2 | “| =" |

gee 7 - ei» @ , > ; as tm. |oe bh,i..nee : an i .‘, i; . 4 Gl i: 1] ‘\Awe EB44 “A 6 Sf f: teme ay asf on ae te ~ iD :,° fe ae re ik ae i ht OO : ie bali | j + q if i - a «3 & oss i Fe ‘ ai Ns » aoa -., —— ' F oN é é : ‘ ¥ i Pay, Nie Bi ein se ~iiemene_ oar «oo aa. :' er}oy 2. :‘ a-:oll Bg mg ¢et: i‘cee onaoeaee. ae Le ae ae" oo 4‘a i “a ona 'tia xm a| “owe ger,icoeemmeaaal ee }here Gr po emCu , OH nyot ;aoe oeree, | #mas SES: . i: des = . »i ": aaAf!sehie LL ben Bel” CU;LN} 1 &% iy 4 | Tee ay: ew iEee eG ae OT! ee ome on‘ities, \ :‘; god etvin StefyFa Te| 7] 34:Pi"i lpn el :5aWe pi A Ps "' 57fsii::nang ‘cre ’ Fi crete? Pla aBi.|; >t .e :ee _—. ~ ns

} | evptatinsige | Bit “} | | the RP Lome) CU 2 &

i fa Ll” Cee ee TE ol , : or

j ees re iee arn i}line, 2 oe .*“OO —./om! yenCo Fla) .3.ee ae PCAs. OO,sa*gee —bm. b Mica == ‘mm ha ye “hy eiagi tO‘,ree|J... aa! ee & '*ae

re er ae " :_sii i©>... wd ¥‘ '}yMe e,. a oe B =co OG SSi Fe :~ ~‘ i) Se . |itgay * om binee. sasaed ° sii . ‘.. i vt(ivum 2 Pad 4ae%llr5 Ox aa 7 al ( Aee« al 4 we . : >coke iG ‘ ael. RN . is Le i ngae ‘ ;ON i : ‘ :MT 1“™ & 4’ 4, és, nn VV eeLe uf‘tia Z vo 1 Ce (EE tae4oo ,7

Ka | ie] an ae ae‘ io ar ; ae +oe aone wae tk ‘ qeen: Ba % } Mme 7we ’ ais.ar 3ie4=.| & ee — — oe a| aa— - (2) aDCU -.eoa.oe geo . oa 7) _ *. ia74a BOs

- - 7. o. = a ee i a Cs : . a = * — so ey fe

_gee| ees Fo 8 Sf = YA | oe aoa as |oea _ACs ohheea_|-| ~C eS So 4 de Le i hoy SoFs So2OO . .aee —-ee |..._-—— — ,io Seioe tlieeeee ot. 7a a-:8ee Lo ee =r — | . . -. _ rl 8 a — = y _ 0 or | oo

—_ie,oe—— rrrtrs~s—~SC sSsrsSisCi -— —. _Ce -. =—h ; |So . Ro = ee— ee.— . .. ;~~ | Ee . Oo —a Ff —r— -,§| 2=sdscwsz Pues fs Pe sea ae Co Fe VW feAN es PB 87 —...-. cas oe .oe . ee. 2aD ale gE Se oe = 7 — a _-C=sC«diwa = ee a a. 4-.7ee . | ae ae € ee a Cie aL AY es. eo . —— o _ ee . | ri Rl | oe Ce _ re a... a Te — oo coi cncmmmemmnnato oaioa. ; a. ne “ay oe& Sten ..a... o_. aOD i a7ae : oe ee | | en aat -CC ¢flaooe 8 a*oe a , ae _—_ — _. 3 : C 7 . fe . a : oF i. -..ieC ee aA >ee se_.:MG a| eo. . \ber eo a.:te .te—— | oeof a— ee :Yo eee oe oS fe :Ce aos _jk. a7oo —— ee : I|a-¢a: if/ oe DARL ~. .2 cao (ag :ew eC ae _ll. ==_—sSCflh_—=dstrse .-2 eeCs ee L re. ee : oe | es — i(ee a ee i y ly yi — a Fe oo. se , 1 ia : 2. 8 — =ee2) ..i Vavarad Sees Ulm — .Ly —..._Lo a JaaLs Et : i ee eee./ >erie a oo 2 |a| L Dp LULU ialaterat ”,hmrrr—“—— 6h oF PE ee 0 axvawe Oh ee ve oe oe Ca ee Cae 2 : A ee lr Re eiea.E a — .. . oe oC" ’ ALM Ad FF Leones ell Ai i mee ns 2... ' ' : _ bo . . .. 7i| t_rs erosOo oe‘i CU 4-rrCwe L&Se. .eree commmmen a ee aa oO. ae | 7.,aoe eae 1a_Se Pane ;2S i‘aDeeg =f ra S .— Tos |i a: he ns es ae 7 ~=—r—s—™ : 2128 Aded re ||, aS ai. ta So ‘oe »8aNE ih:Sr leslfecogce: 20.Se enCoen aman aes— 4 c . nee eee Se 4 ee, > : g | ee woe | 2 CC (2g / 2 er, ~ ee ss 7 C F | ai... a «= sealaiOO, suum . Le oa a: ": eee |ee >... ee“< > ol. 2i... 2“a : _: :;| ia 7 | _ i | _ 8 oo | 8 a oo. a =| a — . ° a. «=. see og7—— oe ee oe ae 2 ee ee a ee Pe 6 ee Cee 2 ae : Ue oe = 2. a Le ee ee —— 4 . a i ee -., |. — : i. rr Ce 7. SS al |. 4 ==_=oe =~=—EhemesesesSe ao.C |. _ >..‘8. > DD . _ a. | oo 4 > DO oa yO e || aeee a _—a :

_:i— Yo i"iSe : se .aeo - ,rr—C — :r———ee —=ss .aste 4oe .-eee Santee _ee =4.||.ii] _ay a|= . 4— ee | —— — ~~ — ut I _ 2 ee ee — . : : ( a Pi i | ft t. oo Fe — tsi — eu | oe * a. He SS _ ee | il ee2—a— FF |. OO” rr ae CF Fee ; : : og 7] 2 oS — 3S Gee ee 2 Ds oe a ee VEO ee ee PO a Bee nes iso a iy ON FO ee ee te ee . a | aL q @ | a ——rr——. o eee a | _ a . .. Diccucneen en 2. rr —r——“‘“_‘CCOC(*C = a x i 4 iy at

4 ) ss . } | « | : Ici ee ee_—a Saane »L|_U fihy. itt . ee ##### i se - +qq =($(—_——_ ao.

; Men; pel, de Vos and Others, Chapel, Ileior Vi C P: _ : Interior View, 1565—70, Celle ; , Palace

in in I,¢émaster ionODV1I0OUS _C qaster inAntwerp Ant Iae becoming a 1 u n : =! . e $12 oratVOS 18 | vnce project 2?! ariier monuy;4ny raction O | V was lis u n Th Per suc : ‘ 1cONOClAastic a.rt| ie |. -. , Orgau, Was ¢ u eo een a | : | uring the 1560s and 1 sa | : oo 5708 a gro UL in tne tater I 6os 1c l ) S especially of ia a pupne _ | »aftde pecially ofoffered Northold German repfsh WwW Cak. Weile D Ww |towns n snes im nnanp Ipi £ cial security and the Fr | hhe21 agtists Ww ote. : l WOO F| ; or. : pportunity to opt paint at least d | « local carpenters nificance for L l ith Antwerp in the midst of its icc . , sos and 15708 a - ne numb

et Ni . / ; | | “ ; requentl h | ) urpenters yee

.

u ts with nev

pictures in a coherent cycle ance than nat te Sct pto

;! at nave e l | .. .artswe 8 7 ' 3 in ten tne |;

So far the e masons thanVv firstsent ratethe be. n ofmost the of sculptural ofrather the third - . seul .projects

civteench contum ~ > these C numents represent th aterh-oft — evertheless, monu xyY nth centu é ‘Xam ~ Nn m O um nHey ittle yy NObHILeS. Frotestant burgl , his eds , OF What W re initiate : | | occharsh WwW Ww JUureners ( .h | ° oe. |too pulpits. who ntinu neha displaying muchPoscharsky, art Vv “of evangelical ‘u rotestant |

7 h O pulpits, observe |

heir“u¢Thence “ches | most comprehensive smevan | | preher study of : ved to pe one exception: Ww w con ,.theran " , FO . ts, observed that over Wie evangelical churches, n ni tia : . is ; ulpit. , In ether Luabout 15¢ :whethe 40 Calv lV gn dedaceLu :He inist, tneor pulpit from which the2 min h ;The |i cnition de i”

it’ : the }|.7 h. gs 901Nt with

“cor pore the : |ave been thereplaced official itl preached word of God PArec she “of Afte 1595. Afr hed ced the high the vlear che . . £ ers nerans by tne Peace of A * asasworsnip fe | m | Vv wh ckitanishir erbal skirmishin ; e pulpits yearsllitary ofanmilt é

ee ee . ee Pe, oo Se — ee |lrSe — CHAPTER FOUR

(2|a2 eehl:— -— -_je |. oe inn i: rrtt””s”™t—“‘_eeeSSs a —t—“‘_OOOLCLr a =r > = ppg" RAIN , (ae

af | f=. ; _ Bae es 8 -_A ))——6hlhlUuee « Se 6 eee

= ivinrinspir | 9° ATAETIUIS) "| 1 PCTINAMAD | |* A)

lrmrmrt~—™OCOQORONC Gea ©" Fe —rst—_e_O—SS r—“—COOCSS’ a. a Lrr—™— a S—r—‘—“‘O‘“”C”dwrzCzszCNCCS®iéeéUC;C«CéeEC Gt illic el

: j irr i —Crt—“‘—‘O‘‘RRNONCiCisiésésais‘“C(‘((’yR.COUOUCCOCOCOUOCOCOCOCUCUC§STUCC _ ~~ | y .. |

MC? Se rt™~— : : -. = —.—riEee ae SD, |fom ee -'ZME ton me’ 3a ae |:hy an 4% ee sie oo, eer sy en Z —_ eG) i EL ~ by meee Pe 0 Dm 2 yr a x oe = tia oe oe ee 7 oe 2 one tien women 2 88 ne

= aoe |(. ._2. oo7.

, aus «| Waar San 3“Dy oppslhed Fe oeoe —— peTorHe eg 7 —. gh usmle a

Te see ae| SS DRS PUGEAADMINIS TE —— _-ee | SELES eee Ele he dns BAR [AOI =os7 pe pote SDUGBAADMINIS T RAI! ,*is.:abad - af, he .) ee ee £and ws ‘slit ‘LS tessa per sacl amo af| "imS Pina \Glee) °Fi 4Gee Sf) Soar ues ee 1“ F Eee aat cd~a ‘ Pr gilt WR Ss avin eo ve of Bae * 4 ae ae ene Site ee * Be ei ES ‘y ca, ed ft aa == iP tig ee etm. , .: oo . oa eS fe 76a. aae ise) = ot >¢OE 7/aNea~%-it.gee |,ao SF ~) :ie:Jc= — etae yeae as . aes re hb atae cer Si Ns Pa Fee tot 2ge «Se ae WE ay ce ro?

ae CB Se. ieee =i 2S oe 7 ee osc we a ke. ead ecsieeeoe ae. ‘ aes } bea ain parvined ey erheg vie oe e.\‘ ss #Eian :ok aa n/t J. «vai ey | oe oe ites a :age ”a}ae ; “g *~~ Py jeiRat Pee " via Miesy - St *eyes EF 24| :i.apene oe cos Wi... Bo Siea S esd Estat e® : bas age ut &“se re es

.aby,-a%...2,"nae io aola.LAGS ,A‘weed | ag ~—Eiaome, EoVY, mn ” wa Fe. Se in es, TR yer hy i fae t ee da oe i | — o_o ve ...... hae , @ ® "epee! hy _ < yee ~' 1). >. a—_— onl Ie 9a 7 Ge. /

ltar that b sressed the church’ ; ri ‘al gai , ié 1€*| dutifully *@fills»i ne 7 * hurch th adually added ; iral de RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, I —1580

altar that better expressed the church’s more confi- to secure the spiritual and social gains associated dent spirit. When comparing the two altarpieces, with church donations. Mair’s figures seem static and strangely lifeless. St. Ulrich and Afra was not the only Augsburg Each statue or group of statues dutifully fills its church that gradually added new sculptural decoraassigned niche; everything is clearly and appro- tions. The Dominikanerkirche, which had not been priately arranged. Nevertheless, the Mary Altar ts sacked in 1537 due to the strong pressure of the devoid of the fervent spiritualism that characterizes Fuggers and other leading Catholic patricians, rethe best pre-Reformation altars. Admittedly, Mair ceived several modest commissions. Antwerp sculpmight have been compelled to copy certain features tor Willem van den Broecke (Guilielmus Paluof the original altarpiece destroyed by the icono-

* “a *% * ji » 1ial he Ld sere |w ia,*, ** * * * *we|**®

|,

cessor to Hans Leinberger or Veit Stoss. He emu- eer —=ER.LhUmrmrmr”C~C~—™C™C~C~COCONS lated the emotionalism inherent in their finest —rr——r—=—“ rw CCl ;RDUDUmUm™mCMCOCOCOCOCOC

. ‘oo : * « a ew = rT —r—“iOOCOCOCOCOCONCisC;C

studied older altars for both the structure of the —.-—D—hr,r—C OCC ee: Ry >.,rt—“——OOOC—C—CN

* c ee. 4. Mae oe | —rti—“‘“_—S—..LC—NT_C.ss.. use bold, overstated .gestures to animate the telling OS SO OS —

of the holy story. He offers a brilliant realization of i ge OO

he C | . ion : ee . “4 be 9 fe‘wo « fpr =. SAe= , eS _ gs t—

. a _ . - ~. x. | =—sesee

the Counter- Refor mations ¢ heat VHUM SACVHIM, which ee pon > £0 ee fe —

out much of the seventeenth and eighteenth centu- Vn; ny po een NS é : Wwith egler, D val > one > af] experiences ag ¢ “OATTUOabccreative —. Ss -. 2.35) = ~=——serse ries. Dor-| .2. —. Pe | =.

rowing of the best features of late Gothic and early a Com, le Renaissance art which are then combined with the i Nua i Aas - < zeal OF the resurgent German Warmolte Couren. >. we (SIR

Although Mait’s altar was moved from its origi . v> i atl

nal location, it remained tremendously popular Sr astC( CO 4 rr re Oe

Romanus Kistler, writing in 1712 on the occasion Pp. waa

of the monastery’s 700th anniversary, observed a we (4 . Fag re , rve =——.——C(C i's 4)that BeOS

a : yrs la ~. |ii &.F 5 2: = em oe a large number of votive pictures hung on the walls Ye" eee TLL

adjacent tO the altar in acknowle g ment of the mir- | Cl oe te FThmUhrhUhCUCCO r.—sis * Edof the* nave.°? * %Although a most of the im”

of the Fugger family to assume responsibility for ag tt—i(‘i‘“‘tlesi‘ét:CCC

the andGerhard, re-decoration of of fiveChristoph of the side 8Fugger, ,: : :maintenance vt : : 7 ubert Altar de! ail of Prophet, 1581-84, formerly in Augsburg

ing artistic Commissions postdate 1580, it demon- Dominikanerkirche, now London, Victoria and Alstrates how the wealthy laity were once again eager bert Museum

I15

CHAPTER FOUR

danus) carved a series of alabaster reliefs for one or, the financial assistance of von Eltz, ordered a glomore likely, two projects for the church.®* Four rious new sandstone pulpit.®’ (figs. 79 and 80) The typological scenes (Crucifixton-Sacrifice of Abraham, sculptor of this signed and dated (1570 and 1572) Last Supper-Offering of Melchizedek), dated 1560, one monument is Hans Ruprecht Hoffmann, the first of bearing the arms of the May and Rembold families the great sculptors who would enrich German art of Augsburg, hung originally ina red marble frame during the late sixteenth century. Between his aron the fifth column of the nave. A second, higher rival in Trier in 1568 and his death in 1616, the quality Crucifixion relief of 1562 also was made for prolific Hoffmann would fill the diocese’s churches this church. These reliefs are export products. Van with pulpits, altars, tombs, and epitaphs. den Broecke is documented throughout this period The pulpit’s program reflects von Eltz’s pastoral in Antwerp, so trips to Augsburg in 1562 or to concerns. On the basket are five deeply cut reliefs Schwerin in 1563, where other carvings were deliv- showing the Works of Mercy: visiting the sick,

ered to the Schlosskirche, are unlikely. In January clothing the naked, receiving strangers, giving 1581 the heirs of Christoph Fugger (d. 1579) com- drink to the thirsty, and providing food to the hunmissioned Paulus Mair, the master of the Mary Al- gry. A much smaller scene of burying the dead ts on tar, to make a frame and several sketches for a new the socle below. Two large reliefs adorning the extealtar destined for the sixth column of the nave.®°? rior of the staircase represent the Last Judgment The bronze Resurrection, prophets, and other ele- and, to the right, the Sermon on the Mount. It was

ments of this once grand altar went, however, to during the sermon (Matthew 5—7) that Christ ofHubert Gerhard and Carlo Pallago, two young fered his most complete statement about human masters only recently arrived in Augsburg who relations and man’s association with God. The text would soon reinvigorate the city’s sculptural tradi- of the prayer Our Father (Matthew 6:9—13) was tion. (fig. 78) While this particular project was not first spoken on this occasion. The Trier pulpit links completed until 1584, it again illustrates the grad- these lessons with Christ’s account of the Last Judgual renewal of interest in religious sculpture and the ment (Matthew 25:31-—46), which reads in part:

rebcautifcation of Augsburgs Catholic churches, When the Son of man shall come in his glory

BeSPUrE ° " , and all the holy angels with him, then shall he

, . . fi ; hepherd sit upon the throne of his glory: And before

TRIER him shall be gathered all nations; and he shall

While Trier had not suffered the violent upheavals spares them one from another, as a shepher

. ; and divideth his sheep from the goats: And he of Augsburg, the the city archbishopric also expe, but . ar shall set sheep on his right hand, the

rienced a ,revival in the the left. aftermath of thethe Council of goats on Then shall King say unto Trent. On 7 April 1567 Jakob von Eltz was elected oeofge them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed the new archbishop andinherit elector of Trier.°° In con-prepared ;. Father, the kingdom for trast ae withmy his three predecessors, von Eltz had been . you from the foundation of the world: For I

; . . interest was an in hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was unusual correct doctrine and how it .I was . . . . thirsty, and ye gave me drink: a could be communicated to; stranger, his flock. During his ; and yefollowing took me in: Naked, and ye formal .investiture January a ; -me: . , ; clothedinme: I was1569, sick, and ye visited I a priest for seventeen years. As a result, he had an

two-year political dispute with the city of Trier, was in prison. and ye came unto me (31—36) von Eltz publicly embraced the Tridentine decrees. P y 3PT SN

At his first synod on 19 April he sought to institute Christ next asked whether each soul truly perthe reforms of Trent by ordering a visitation of the formed these acts of charity. The just would go to Trier diocese, which lasted from the summer of heaven while the selfish would find only “everlast-

1569 into 1570. ing punishment.” Through its images and the ac-

Jakob von Eltz (1567-81) fostered an assertive companying biblical inscriptions, Hoffmann’s Catholicism that encouraged the visual arts. In pulpit succinctly explains Christ's teachings to the 1569 or 1570, the cathedral chapter, probably with congregation passing before it. 116

. .afi . _ we oeOSs —— -P RELIGIOUS SCULPTURE, 1555-1580

call e ws, | ~im }ce ceBt >&8: all Wi cs¥3

cots P .< «4 : Pd ey * agen ‘i ™~ 5. >s ie ‘ awu &Ae , ise i sa: , eya.Pa-_a— al Livi ‘calles i:% =x -— it, éA fl8’*erg 4“g ee*>| _Caer &are wera tp 3a14ti vpreset Gg AO Gi, a Ny a ba — % tue ee eae ait 4 Ga 9 ££ ’ ‘ a . 4 aig 4 Es pn = be ~~ + a

wn“’Vie aoloe a3ee be ia‘ie| es ‘PtONE bo ms ay Wh 7a J Cc id ae ge ie a ee 3 , ein ‘83a Sot wil of oe i ie eee : =| > eS Ns ~~ we PS 77" (\ care 7 — be :we = Re m Rae*# ihes 3 Se ete § : be ae = * in, it a ot a ‘ iy, : fera RN»Nar MONON © ewe one Bias :: iae i het | aeedola: aA,Ieof a%BY a3 :ies holt ee ae aieRR * ge, ‘ ©-asxi 7~heli’ soa i,eee a :7 atA FY ® 7 .|)pee hefe: ' = aks Ti rh— ape S *t i .ite4FENee aw ae ' :: esi. is ee £ bea 5) 3sella % 4¥ —_ ame . Lae ee . 7 e é . a He . ia bn ey a | | oe —) = oh Sage Sy de ‘Ofte “Gy 4g Mn. _——" ~ Si ‘ oe iteTsf71 =e. |, Sata Sh cal Re5 ameremrocmcemrse 5 An Pr-palioe feo ft:rewee te hohe ye ak|fae meee iaEe em aee Fgee é ine i Gaul “Fil: yo.=—_ teres éa ys xay aeae rn ame jeg “C30 :aes >Eis>Avee :ahae rea de: gc: ~* i be Fe Ae ‘ {i:ae e-:i0oe mt: arsfscaiieotls 7ie'' CO a2sg Bt - 4 = mane i . r.

he % Yn Pie 3 os& % sists oe pees Swe NUNES GasFE Si ms por ‘oo : a. is 4 : —_— Taye atey setuid aiaceee j Ke: Re omiinin.!

eEeV7=—m— LoS % ope ct RIM ng MR : ——< Cees OT:oui pees 7 Cate 2 wer” . oe heceonsvennscicootercepeecmecson Minagasioson i ae : = mre OE os me. ow :-

; ‘ Pe kage. ; «8 Sinan atet Eawa "Ss—: ee en hie | i a oi seamen ##. «= — ee . Keer 1 Fi tFrc.2Y ..—J & (war. i .., 7!) 3 : : : ; if i ta ° | camel . . oe — a = shy Sell us 4 ae eebe bs ia 4ae a ay dy ";7% x| 7rae 28iEee i2. 5 .8 a|e43 ~~ ~& eeWW: ;ior Sed . ‘. go geWie citi oe OMe ee; oT eit —™ :SS© ek ee we ' pm ~~ a ee H : y F , s T %. : aw a a ae ee oe ‘ “= Pr | ae lita a— | -|zAne igeerescwr egg eewnns ss &‘ || =v i rbiti aa wis ET aealg OE Pee ey J o oy. PO . __ ‘ is church, which he personifies. Worner shows that he : ~~ ee ee is a superior carver than his Augsburg colleague a : op Vals ee Si Be ge : . V1 | trapposto of the bodies and the twisting draperies

— = SRM ne =e are skillfully rendered. If the quality of his work has pee. BS 2... | er a 2 been underappreciated, it is only because of its subES fl : Ey rae, Garr Fi Mielich’s high altar in Ingolstadt is consciously ees | pa aN | aC SEs archaic. Like Mair’s Mary A/tar in Augsburg, MieCos cue | | ‘a 4 oy | oe popular in the era prior to the advent of the Refor-

—>————E— a —— = past much as Albrecht V hoped in this post-

or = _— -—~ Tridentine era to return Bavaria to the state of vy ’ lave poe ay eek ke pees D> a Catholic orthodoxy that it had enjoyed many dec-

— eae Me eee ats \ ie ades earl ier. Mielich’s hu ge and complex altarpiece

ne en nee tee tn functions as a grand pictorial statement of Catholic —- iii McC: NNR a fication of the university and civic communities . a = = who shared the Liebfrauenminster, Ingolstadt’s

— cea oon emer sete tee faith, doctrinal propaga nda intended for the edi-

| | ( | largest parish church.

| : | | a The Silver Chapel that Ferdinand II, archduke of 86. Anton Ort and Konrad Gottlieb, Silver Altar, Tirol and son of Emperor Ferdinand, built on to the

1577-78, Innsbruck, Hofkirche Hofkirche in Innsbruck in 1577-78 is, by con-

trast, an intimate setting. '?! Nevertheless, it too is

a product of the renewal of Catholic piety that swept through the southern German and Austrian

the power of saintly intercession, John the Baptist, lands in the aftermath of the Council of Trent. opposite, directs his gaze outwards towards the Dedicated to the Virgin Mary, the chapel serves as viewer. Surrounding Mielich’s painting of the arch- the mausoleum for Ferdinand (d. 1595), his wife angel Michael, which is set immediately below, are Philippine Welser (d. 1580), and their family. reclining angels holding a palm branch and a scale. Much of the chapel’s original decoration survives. Just beneath the frame of this painting are two The single altarpiece dates to 1577—78 though it expressively carved groups of figures rising out of was not placed until after the expansion of the chathe ground. On the left, the saved souls look pi- pel in 1587. (fig. 86) In keeping with Ferdinand’s ously heavenwards; opposite, the damned theat- fascination with precious natural materials, court rically attempt to shield themselves from their im- goldsmith Anton Ort’s reliefs are chased silver and pending torment. To the respective sides stand tall carpenter Konrad Gottlieb’s frame is fabricated statues of St. Peter and Death with the Devil. The from ebony wood and three tusks of ivory purmajestic and self-assured Peter contrasts vividly chased in Venice. The chapel’s name derives from with the dark, horrific characters of the Death and the altar’s silvery appearance. 125

CHAPTER FOUR

The Innsbruck altar celebrates the earthly and north. !*4 Catholic patrons never stopped commisdivine natures of the Virgin Mary. It is precisely the sioning sculpture for their churches and chapels

type of devotional image that so infuriated Prot- though prior to about 1570 the number of new estant reformers a half century earlier. A large silver works was quite modest. !*? The Council of Trent relief of the standing Virgin is placed in the center; and, particularly, the regional programs of reform

two angels appear to crown her as the queen of that ensued did have a definite influence upon the heaven. Egg and others have noted that the statue future of church sculpture. The emerging Catholic of the Virgin ts either intentionally old-fashion tn militancy, spurred by the leaders of the Congrestyle or Ort reused another artist’s figure that dates gatio Germanica and by the Jesuits, replaced de-

to about 1550 or earlier.'?? Arranged on all four cades of malaise and retrenchment. Art, whose sides of Mary are smaller reliefs depicting the Trin- benefits were reaffirmed at Trent, emerged as a po-

ity and sixteen allegorical objects, such as the tent weapon for combating the Protestants and for closed garden (hortus conclusus), the tower of David, articulating Catholic doctrine. From Augsburg to

and the mystic rose, to which the Virgin ts com- Trier to Wurzburg to Ingolstadt a few significant pared in Catholic prayers. Since the altar was origi- sculptural projects were ordered. The archaic apnally a triptych, similar reliefs likely adorned the pearance of some of these altarpieces intentionally wings. Did Peter Canisius, the peripatetic Jesuit, offered worshippers a comforting association with suggest the theme to the archduke? The program is art from the pre-Reformation period. Art provided based upon the litany of Loreto, a series of de- a critical spiritual and historical link to this earlier votional prayers that Canisius popularized with era of great piety when the Catholic church reigned

his Letania Loretana, published in Dillingen in unopposed in the German lands. This “new 1558.!*3 Between 1571 and 1577, the year the Gothic” influence would persist well into the sevenaltar was begun, Canisius served as Ferdinand’s teenth century. Hans Degler’s three altars (1604-7) court preacher in Innsbruck. Completing the de- for St. Ulrich and Afra in Augsburg, the Zurn sign are four apostles in the predella; the reliefs of family’s sculptures (1611-31) in Uberlingen, or the remaining eight once decorated the wings. In Bartholomaus Steinle’s High Altar (1609—13) at contrast with the very public nature of the impos- Stams are, in truth, the heirs of Leinberger, Rieing Ingolstadt altarpiece, the Silver Altar is pri- menschneider, and Stoss.

vate. Its quiet design invites the single worshipper In this and the previous chapter, I have atto honor Christ’s mother as he or she slowly recites tempted to chart what transpired during the the 49 titles of the litany. The altar functions as a tumultuous years from about 1520 until 1580. didactic aid, a visual prompter for the archduke and German art experienced a catharsis. Damned as

any other visitors to the chapel. idolatrous, religious sculpture only slowly was reembraced as pedagogically useful and, later in the DURING THE YEARS from 1555 to about 1580 Catholic lands, as a celebratory expression of faith. religious sculpture in the German-speaking lands Many careers were stunted as commissions were went through dramatic changes. In the aftermath never abundant. Other masters specialized instead of the Peace of Augsburg, there was a confessional in the production of funerary monuments or in one institutionalization, a stability that over the years of the emerging types of collectible sculpture. By

gradually prompted Lutheran towns from Fran- 1580 the atmosphere was again ripe for a reconia to the Baltic to welcome art back into their surgence of religious sculpture in both Protestant

churches. New pulpits and, to a lesser degree, and Catholic contexts. During the ensuing fifty carved altarpieces appear with increasing frequency years, until the devastation of the Thirty Years War from the mid-1550s. Under Elector August of Sax- chillingly embraced most of the German-speaking ony, Dresden replaces Wittenberg and Torgau as lands, sculpture would again flourish and its artists

the leading Protestant center though an eclectic would rival Europe’s best.

artistic populism sprouts up further to the 126

CHAPTER FIVE

In Memoriam: e@

Epitaph d Simple Tomb Whoever prepares no memorial for himself during his lifetime has none after his death and is forgotten along with the sound of the bell that tolls his passing. Thus the money I spend for the perpetuation of my memory is not lost; in fact, in sucha matter to be sparing of money Is to suppress my future memory. !

Te WORDS voiced Maximilian by the Weisskunig (white A have, banner, king), Emperor I’s allegorical Nomarble shield stone hangsthey here,never no helmet, counterpart, express the attitude shared by the ma- No coat-of-arms in lordly manner jority of his contemporaries. The sixteenth century And no inscription writ on stone. ? WEHESSEE Gear able proliferation OF Bremone Even with the advent of the Reformation’s wither-

it d kabl liferati f ial oy.

monuments in ,the German-speaking . . in. ing effect upon religious sculpture,lands.? the churches

Where elaborate tombs and epitaphsafter had alargely . oh: to , , Protestant towns continued, brief hiatus, been limited ,to nobility with andoften clergy in the past, ,carv. S, the be ornamented elaborate memorial now these groups were increasingly joined by the i, - .patrician ; ings. A significant number ofidentical important tombs, wealthy class that harbored asp1. in. . such asand that ofeternal Elector Ottheinrich formerly rations of earthly fame salvation. . , . Heidelberg, have been destroyed, yet the majority Of all; of categories of sculpture, monuments survive. Ifmemorials— thisbycorpus modwhether epitaphs or tombs—were far how thereveals most ol, . , _ , est diversity, it also demonstrates conservative prevalent. Many clerics and patricians who never i. . . , the majority of the patrons and artists were since a

commissioned worksuch of as artthose would spend . 4. . . , few another basic designs, in which the. indi-

- predominate.

freely when ordering their own or tombs. so, epitaphs vidual either stands; alone or kneels before the cross, This prompted Sebastian Brant, writing in The Ship . 4

of Fools,Atotypical, ridiculeifthose who ordered ostentatious , combs rather grand, example of this; .formula is Peter Dell the Elder’s Epitaph of Konrad von

"Twas naught but folly, great, untold, Bibra (d. 1544) in Wurzburg cathedral.° (fig. 119) For men to squander so much gold The prince-bishop prays at the foot of a small cruciOn graves wherein naught else is thrown fix; a summary landscape defines the setting as Cal-

But sacks of ash and rotting bone, vary. The emphasis is upon von Bibra with his sinAnd waste much money bare of sense gular devotion to Christ. Absent are the Virgin,

To build for worms a residence, _ John the Evangelist, and the other protagonists Not thinking where the soul may be who customarily were included a few decades ear-

Which lives for all eternity. lier. Completing the monument are the coats of Souls need no costly cenotaph, arms and, below, an inscription plaque. Hundreds 127

CHAPTER FIVE

of comparable monuments exist that merely substi- majority were ordered posthumously by the estate tute a noble, a cleric, or a wealthy individual in of or by a relative of the deceased; others were pre-

place of von Bibra. pared during the individual’s lifetime. Like most My focus below will be upon highly innovative tombs, these epitaphs normally consist of a relimemorials rather than such workman-like monu- gious or allegorical scene, a display of the coats of ments. These sculptures fall, albeit unevenly, into arms, and an inscription tablet, often added years two general categories. In Chapter Five, we shall later, with information concerning the death date examine the simple monument: the epitaph or and a prayer for the deceased’s soul. Epitaphs intomb that exists independent of other objects. This creasingly came to serve as the individual’s primary encompasses the majority of German memorials. or only memorial since their placement on the walls Occasionally, as in the case of Peter Vischer the of a church offered far greater publicity or personal Younger’s epitaphs of Albrecht von Brandernburg recognition than an often distant tomb. Not suror Friedrich the Wise, the setting became more prisingly, epitaphs became ever more elaborate and

elaborate subsequent to the completion of the expensive. Most tombs and epitaphs were carved work. The second category consists of memorials from local stone though Salzburg marble, Solnthat were intended from their inception to belong hofen limestone, found near Eichstatt, and Mosan toa series, such as the episcopal cycles in Wurzburg alabaster were imported. Rarer were brass or bronze or Mainz cathedrals. Here the general form of the epitaphs and tombplates. The finest of these were memorial or the attire of the individual portrayed cast by the Vischer family workshop in Nuremberg

often had to match or, at least, refer back to the whose clients resided as far away as the Hanseatic older monuments tn the series. Each new work towns of the Baltic and distant Poland. In fact, the honored both the specific person and the collective geographic diversity of their patrons was unprecememory of the respective clerical or noble group. dented in Renaissance Europe. While Donatello or These will be discussed in Chapter Six as will sev- Michelangelo could boast of their works adorning eral complex tombs, including the shrines of Max1- a handful of Italian towns, neither enjoyed the milian I and Moritz of Saxony. These are sepulchres Vischers’ international patronage. The success of of unusual scale and intricacy that often required a the Vischers was unmatched by their German r1large or specially built architectural setting. The vals, most of whom ran small local foundries recategorical distinctions, made mainly for reasons of stricted to the production of simple armorial or clarity, do not apply to the artists. For instance, a inscription plaques. master such as Alexander Colin, who completed For most stone sculptors, memorials represented the mausoleum of Emperor Maximilian I, was their primary source of income. In the case of Loy equally adept at producing individual epitaphs for Hering, certainly the most financially successful Innsbruck’s artists and courtiers. Likewise, Loy sculptor of the 1520s through the 1540s, 109 of the Hering applied roughly the same epitaph design for 133 works that Reind| attributes to him are either

single monuments and episcopal series. tombs or epitaphs.® This pattern holds true for There were two basic forms of memorials: ept- most other stone sculptors. After several years at taphs and tombs. Traditionally, tombs were the the Saxon court of Heinrich the Pious, Peter Dell most common type of commemorative sculpture; the Elder returned to Wurzburg in 1533 or early however, as burial laws increasingly required inter- 1534. Recognizing that the market for religious ment in cemeteries outside city walls, epitaphs rap- sculptures had largely disappeared in the Wiurzidly gained in popularity.© Epitaphs, often known burg diocese, he specialized thereafter almost exas ex-votos 1n other countries, are monuments clusively in the production of stone memorials, erected at a church as a remembrance of an individ- such as the epitaph of Konrad von Bibra.? (fig. 119) ual or of a family.’ It is independent of a tomb and He could count upon a constant demand for tombs bears no strict funerary function. Occasionally, an and epitaphs. Dell’s son, Peter the Younger, who

epitaph will be set on a wall with the tomb imme- became a master in Wurzburg in 1551 and died diately below in the floor. The two forms of memo- there around 1600, followed his father’s example. rials are otherwise very similar in conception. The His workshop could offer potential clients four ba128

EPITAPHS AND SIMPLE TOMBS

sic models: a life-size carving of the donor or donors father, Peter the Elder, who merely cast the wooden

kneeling before either a crucifix or a Holy Trinity; models supplied by other sculptors, Peter the smaller epitaphs in which the kneeling donor(s) 1s Younger was a designer and a carver. He devised his on the same figure scale as the crucified Christ; a own compositions and cut his own models, which life-size standing depiction of the donor; and, fi- were then cast by other members of the workshop. nally, an inscription tablet ornamented at top by Strongly influenced by his stay in North Italy, per-

angels or death genie with a skull and an hour haps in the Paduan workshop of Andrea Riccio, glass.'0 These models must have appealed to con- sometime between 1512 and 1514, Peter the temporary patrons since Peter the Younger’s monu- Younger delighted in the inventive potential of his ments can be found throughout lower Franconia. art. Although this is manifest most clearly in his Although the Dells enjoyed considerable popu- small brasses, this attitude also affected his memolarity, their tombs and epitaphs were not always rial sculpture. (figs. 237-240, 242 and 243)

particularly innovative. The innovativeness of the Epztaph of Dr. Anton

This is a complaint that can be made about the Kress can best be placed in perspective by first lookmajority of German sculptors who were satisfied to ing at a nearly contemporary monument at the repeat older conventional models. Their works, Lorenzkirche. In 1504 Kress was appointed provost however visually appealing, will not be considered of this wealthy parish church. Upon returning to

here. Instead I wish to address the simple memo- his native Nuremberg from Siena, where he rerials of another group of masters—the Vischer fam- ceived his doctorate in canon and civil law, Kress

ily, Loy Hering, Hans Schenck, Hans Bildhauer, would have admired the imposing epitaph that and Cornelis Floris of Antwerp. Whether refining cloth merchant Kunz Horn and Barbara Krell, his older designs or devising radically new ones, these wife, had erected in 1502 on the exterior western artists established new creative standards. Most of wall of the sacristy. '* (fig. 88) The epitaph faced their ideas were quickly embraced by their fellow the small cemetery that then occupied this site. sculptors. Others, especially the highly mannered Between 1511 and 1513, presumably in consultaworks of Hans Schenck, proved too idiosyncratic to tion with Kress, the couple would further enrich generate a notable following. Yet the success of the cemetery precinct by building and decorating Schenck’s audacious artistic vision should not be the Annenkapelle a few meters south of the eptjudged simply by the limited number of copies that taph. Horn and his wife desired a showy memorial. he inspired. He was one of the rare German sculp- Its size, measuring 3.3 by 2.4 meters, and color tors who truly valued novelty, the zzventio so cher- guaranteed that the epitaph would be noticed by

ished in Italy. other parishioners. Rather than selecting the dull red sandstone quarried around Nuremberg, Horn purchased the highly polished red marble slab in

The Vischer Family the vicinty of Salzburg. The use of Salzburg stone north of Munich and Landshut is rather unusual In the choir of the Lorenzkirche in Nuremberg because of the shipping expenses, which must have hangs the small brass Epztaph of Dr. Anton Kress, been considerable in this instance because of the provost of the church who died at age 35 in 1513.!! dimensions of the slab. The epitaph was likely (fig. 87) This work exemplifies the shift occurring carved in Salzburg by Hans Valkenauer. '+ Horn’s in German sculpture in the mid-1510s and 1520s choice of artist and material may be linked to his as Gothic forms yield to a new, more humanistic extensive trading activities in Austria. vision. Based upon style and a technical analysis of Dominating the composition is the powerful figthe material, the artist is identifiable as Peter Vis- ure of Christ, seated and staring directly towards cher the Younger. '!* Here and in other epitaphs, he the viewer. He holds the staff, book, and orb, symcreatively transformed older memorial formulas. bolizing his authority over mankind. Christ is surFor example, his figural epitaphs display a greater rounded by smaller angels who open the cloth canemphasis upon the particular character or features opy or carry the sword and lily of judgment. Kunz of the patron than is customarily found. Unlike his Horn and Barbara Krell are the minute couple 129

,Pe |—_ Ml OOP acy ae ae Yr a _. | ee had , . 7 4 = = Sead —y wisi ' . ~~ a | Ln Co wy simi F ‘ 4 , ‘ asi sik eg é ‘ o § a +5) ut a *; Ga Steam ge - = ee eo Nae A “37 3 —

ey © Nace SN wie ee Oo Be. tt = ‘'LLe ite 4 a a < ‘ Pe , ‘ wt “ eis on ' . i, ae bene k|ay ‘'-4 ees e} at +e 7 . sy if * a %. * we oe. 1 not Co >* as “J we , ; Oe yt : . | ‘ ey a ce ‘| Le y . - : ~.

&a :te! “im P , iWd, . % *oSFae @“se ‘ - j&A> Pr ppm ad = ro " v-ge od: a; a—4 ‘ ae:¢ So R l-.F¥:"fA . oe cPaose

eI: , an” uda ,|oe Jae j jq‘ _r *Nee ~(ene .ee “ oe 4eowy a y% ‘‘Hy >aS °2. eewie ae ry aecl'Fy 4a| :Hee dlwe ”: oe j¢eo % ‘err as ,Tm "= ”Ty ;,pe Ae aw mg ‘“te = *7‘. oe aal£e|“ae fff. 4pee ™ e : Vigx ee wf DP a” ii3a? a Po MOTT TP sie0Se : oo " : :, :eo-mnt F‘ .->a‘ 4a’** ‘.’?Fee pn d > V5 bow ; ‘im. ¢ ~

4 y p \ lg. ae : 4 & & mar ie ‘ Sew A ' joe 4 :o‘ffm= : ae ee Th So . \ [\ = Se °a ‘bsTS, ra bast * sai ‘ a ge " ’ e . = ek ~ “Ue at \ , Me / ” A ey el ‘ es % i = i: HN Ads 7 r ee ee Tip ie, ot a) 7 4 FP Ae ; Pd oy a Foe ; * em, | , m , : # “or. fee ne oy ‘ Hi/pa w ' iy, a\ Ve. \ne ’ eae Sae” :pier -—Te ~3We (fe das Sy tehn) ay, fe ae ,j a- *"~e bee ls, . ieae ; i 4*FO Piling ton igo : ae oygy ; Wh a.iwic.g Be *= . ;“did ‘4wd \ ‘a ". Pir) A| ae

+h fa (i? i pig as :“a=|1if ‘(es ;Fa— “% / wa * sate ~ _. — ee )* ssTee. , as rr, .oo "} Am *.‘ib\a.\* —— ow" *ei Fa. : ca f,en j fe i ae >afihee 4— tae § -£€ ie vai " wo, ee 4 oo 1M , i= T “4 \ i= mm 3 "a4 ax “™ 3on “a 1si ek Ge... “Sh Ps : Peeves, J fo ~ fi ale eo eae ‘ea ic *, ‘ ~~ f \ e if ee ~_ oF ) ore w M4 whe pe >> “i 2 ork ’ ” ie ce nett owe] mone rs.Gap xy*. eee) «7“re, omweed > ae 4peo Anos ilies 7 aelclUlC ~~ = ie ee eee, tae) | ( Se YY oyPad R i "a : : rey gh sadly “_ i %, a"es. a“ hans 4. :itn .% “ea aie Nee > oe , a. uv Da”) | bane fe, : Bae’ OE ee Taal sag ne _ 3s . a7ae gSe4i,3~ a *re~Bact *,si ¢‘ P. a :#i Pa Meee owe * " m 3 B Ay wot 4!>. ¢oe f, "?i -q‘»* or mee oa ©. ek ‘ > al q ay _ = | =ne — ” a >» ' oe m oN Ps a bs ” inte ote — 7 =, 4 we i. Fs “ma ‘ 7 j in a LJ ¥ “ Vee “y h, eS Sf “ ‘,. J i ma ges 2g “~ ai re : e “ +

m £a Hi *a ‘or odA‘oa ce , 4ngBa ‘LY “ "is>Si >, ao? Ne ees 4. ny] cS ‘i SD on P ee 7)a Tihs. oo >:ae . -i aa = bp ;‘qe “> bs fs") i i\ — .woe “ee Rhon cat's ee . -ee >> ~~,

‘ * * Fs“=, ”wae jesae"ai _"4ie- “9: ‘—— ¥, ‘a, all . a: re. Dh, “Willan: - af pee 3 ete

acter '/! SF eal ie ” * e *, a;ers Te se \% ee, a i eee ee » : ' i a “ ee ea ak nl Oe = ee “ a ‘ * ennai : . ‘ bs]

Shaky 5 ial ¥ pear _ amo,‘ih,‘_— 5 a « _ ** a Big a ~_ ’ Tes oe | _ i= =mela) oe—iyee_— : ” = + — ~, > ;, \ | 4 ae ,

Si iil. or cS " uf «. rom NY (g‘ty, :mt _" wy : iis i e hick — , | ak ‘ i r 7 m4 ‘ ~ ee 7 il Neg . ‘% \| : ne 2 a 4 ‘ * . | — ee ge. . ~ 3 by ‘ > a SJ) ho oie ehage lilies ati... * ‘aed ; Ty hie,fa ayms «1 * * 47” AN oe: - ‘conf weed ~ wh aUe Bg Bi " ae ee ee sd ie aa be, ie, * a : Di nf be Sa me poet, 4 \ ” \ ~~ a | ad

ee fee ‘ i ( f ‘ ten je Ss oe | oe aA aee.‘— ‘Sinan :— : t iqa lig aa ‘i,; :Ta oe aN amiy et ba” i Se ee v~oo-

aes ee me, “Y . . fo ee ‘ ; i ‘ ae - aa m=

I‘

° on)

EPITAPHS AND SIMPLE TOMBS

kneeling expectantly before Christ’s throne. Their tles, dating to about 1380, that line the eastern coats of arms and the repeatedly inscribed word part of the nave and the choir. Scheurl observed that “SALVS” or salvation adorn the frame. Eternal re- Paul was the provost’s favorite saint and, with ward and, of course, earthly recognition are the Peter, was the founder of the Roman Catholic couple’s goals. Valckenauer’s design may well have church.!? Paul, now presented as the thirteenth been prepared by a Nuremberg artist, given its apostle, is situated directly facing the older statue similarity to other local painted epitaphs. The prac- of Christ. Above Paul is a stone baldachin ornatice of setting the diminutive donors at the bottom mented with a wooden statuette of Anthony, of the scene was also quite popular in Nuremberg. Kress’s name saint. Thus the epitaph completes this In fact, the couple would later appear kneeling be- three-part artistic ensemble that includes, in deneath much larger saint figures in their Holy Kin- scending order, sculptures of St. Anthony, St. Paul,

ship Altar that Wolf Traut painted for the An- and the provost. nenkapelle in 1515.'° The couple paid for and Peter Vischer the Younger’s design is an impresreceived an impressive stone epitaph that within sive mix of old and new elements. For example, their lifetime honored their piety; Horn would not stained-glass representations of Lorenz Tucher, the die until 1517 and his wife six years later. In terms first provost of the Lorenzkirche from 1477 to of its style and design, the memorial is perfectly 1496, show him dressed in his clerical robes and characteristic of the period’s finest epitaphs. kneeling in prayer before a bench or, less certainly, In spite of their physical and temporal prox- an altar ornamented with a book. 7° The rear wall is imities, the Horn-Krell and Kress epitaphs reveal decorated with a brocade textile suspended from a significantly different artistic and intellectual con- rod much as one sees in the Kress epitaph. One of ceptions. Unlike the couple who are dwarfed by the the immediate models for the epitaph was Jakob complex grouping of Christ and the angels, Anton Elsner’s donor miniature (folio 3) in the Kress Missal Kress is the sole focus of our attention as he kneels in which the provost kneels holding his new manubefore an altar ornamented with a simple crucifix. script. (fig. 89) He directs his gaze at the vision of His eyes gaze intently upon the manuscript tn his the Holy Trinity enthroned in the facing miniature

hands. This is certainly the richly illuminated mis- on folio 2 verso. Nevertheless, the sculptor transal that Kress presented to the Lorenzkirche shortly scends all of these prototypes. For instance, his defibefore his death. '© The provost is alone, absorbed nition of a coherent space is far superior. Vischer’s

eternally in his reading. Vischer has created a chapel is set within an Italianate arch with perfect image for the humanist Kress. He is at grotesque-filled pilasters. The coffered barrel vault once devout and learned. He embodies the well- is rendered in a careful one-point perspective educated scholar piously dedicated to his office, scheme; it terminates 1n a shell niche radiating out here signified by his dress, specifically the fur al- from the head of Christ. The shell pattern as well as muce over his shoulders. Vischer has incorporated the repeating ovals on the outside of the rounded the Kress family arms into the decoration of the arch might have Italian sources though I suspect altar. In short, Vischer presents the viewer with a that Vischer was inspired specifically by the painted very personal portrait of Kress. In many ways it is Epitaph of Lorenz Tucher in the Sebalduskirche that the sculptural equivalent to the laudatory biogra- Durer designed and Hans von Kulmbach executed phy of the provost that Dr. Christoph Scheurl wrote in 1511—13.7! The spatial complexity of Vischer’s

in 1515.!7 scene is enhanced by careful foreshortening of the

The location of the epitaph has a very personal altar and crucifix before Kress. The artist’s use of character too. As noted in Scheurl’s Vita, the me- Space is impressive. He positions Kress back morial is situated on a pier adjacent to the high altar slightly from the altar so that the gap between the and directly beneath the statue of St. Paul. Before two 1s apparent. Kress holds his prayer book above his death Kress had commissioned another sculp- the altar, which permits the natural light that entor, probably Veit Wirsberger, to carve the life-size ters the church from the south or, here, left side to stone St. Paul for this particular spot. !8 The statue illuminate the text and cast a strong shadow down augments the series of Christ and the Twelve Apos- upon the cloth-covered surface below. Such small 131

on i . _ ‘ ‘ 7 . : 7... . i## iH. .. i... _ : _ 3 4 oe en a

CHAPTER FIVE

aaa rlrti“‘“—Ciéti™sO™O—O—OCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCistititisiti‘“( . i eS el. —r—r—C nou “r—“‘“‘COOOOCOWCWC;sCOiCOCPFe ana to Snape tnan itUC1s to_ 4 Carve ok oC. P| I .< Ne a € awoo . WwW wiC 1

oo eee a 2. ll oo . . * * « ' ; i eee ees — . | rss r ae es. ; * a

oo a...aN _ = Se . = 1ts : ee ooCcFearact —af} ee1coy“ aval . , Ayee. .sec a rrr—,—“(—t——C" Si‘ ees—~— LO , Oe pa dl I LAT Le Bi ata 8. ee PP a | a yi 5Poti. i 7EP ca«|FBC a i* iy age Ff ae ae ay: eeee | ~~ 2~, i. ie er er ‘ in or 2) er eee a e's ee a Pee Ben ae Oy a%ee Mg. ae ee ee ea ok Foe ere ued heoe aeo aa sreensoineiauanas Php eaewe ~ 5; ey Pee eZot Jk iLL Oe is 4Ee H :ae ait, \[—O=4 eae go"Wy he SS Peete el OM esie@ . ON .xéMes et aes4”ye ——— A\ gee. yt | 2 aefoe. Neor.egFSam: Weenemas. ee " —sence baa te: PEPSI FEaa ANI Fe NN cea ° ee ae!qBie ¢&FefaSeven ya \eae sei Se Py Me, Se ime OO. ae ee we m 3 a * oe a 2 2 Ba apiece NOS ORE Wie |= ee. ce ae ae

b ; 4 en ey - we + wd a c a ’ : = ont _ © i use 2 ae el ~~ °faSaa t 3[ >: © GNIS os pa ‘4 jeFe*| voettiali fi Beek i. a ee °o -" i i&aea Gea x atee ee v ae Sa” » a fe” a . if Ty GC CTS aaa ak * mS, _ . oe ae a % ae Ae ray = WONON a smn, 2 oh cee tenet . — Ricote |i. 5 ==| eB ”: ag | ke OO ‘~~ aeanneal Tr ee ee ane ae eo : veoeCe | qihaeLe eat ya =. he, hy, Wi a BA, IRceeainmaaemats iis |w ae ie SNS (ios [fa ira ae Lo ore i' >I i, ve BolBa: «ae ee ‘ a Ce oes: Ea oo i ‘ Ae ; & ay & ‘5 4 oS HE ek Sc SO ee ee ak, sire +o Be ce Be ANNs oh ee ie, Bx Geel: tt

¢ - a ae dl ee ee ee oy a ee + ml men) Salt iat Uae. was : NOUNS ese SCRUGGS: Sie BO een se aa Fs.

oeRe — AIR i’ ; ascee A m: |Ss : alia 4 SES a ae ~ iyon. .Pe ee ea ee—a ee eeei ioee3 c }

aiml5=i Bs:. ‘(Si =e 4 fat. } a Se Bon... Bio Re enee ee UN ae vlna au . ae ee ae ee i a oan @ ete — ‘ oe me ae . +. ‘ ee ee . 2 ; ie eeSO oe ee ..eali a2 a” —oevs.: ~~? we!

: = 2% SS “Seay: a AowSU arnNEE BSS aSOTa AAWS casas toeaeguanine aes ro Cc es. SORA pag p BSS EM AS NENT ea oT ee Ce eRe CM Te soc eT

“ iSeh eb Ab hee ee L:= oF aeoe SA4aehig ee eee ee. ee a 4Pe a ene es 4

es . a y i a _ ee A Pp 7 T E R F

aoe7- aoF oeS| 7 oS .|.. oe wes oees_ cee a eo . aaeg oe es . ee 2 to | -. -_ _ FF oO 2 _ —— _a oeOEE 7— _PE ro iootC | aoe a— 2 oe._>SS.6.—Bs — ee me FI wefoe eeFO 2- Ag oS 28— iCo ol oo Teeoo.._ ee— es Be Ue oe ey ae :a -— a.cn oO esaee be — pen eeaen A _ 7 , 7 oe — — _ee|egeee aee Oe oe o —_ | 4 Ce ie: Pad ae a 2 a. eo oyoe CO oe oo ot eeon ae ee oo aoa 2 ce | aK og ea — ee a oe oN afc oo ile a.oe —oe eee: 2 Lo 7aaeae ef — £ i £_ es |a 2 Looofoo or} _ CF pecoremmenent 1 a a Buu {+ . + ef — _ a NG «6 : of} eS 2oe-oO tenth ve | fd a ~ 2 8 7 SS a -£a —4ie> a— ae - og 4 2 aaa a Se_. .a- .Ff y Soe oD : [Po sk—LC oe Loe . Lb | |. ff i A we i. ee Cc . | _ PARA iee2i 2 .Le. —aoe CC oooo - ;a|anges [_.. — ‘_ oooo . |.8-CG . |.8-eo ee _-: i> _ae| oo = ayeo CS tjff_ oe ) 2_FF ea _ . TT | — | . . _. S ij ee _ lf 2 i_ ,a:.—_eeS tt Se . hoe ee _ ce iat al 3 _ _ | te a. i 4CD |,_. |. 7 _ 3 _) Ve . _ _ a ees, eo _ . . . _ _ 2 . _ 27 7 . OTN ar — 2 A ee _ | | a ee oy oe ff — oo A oy) 7-—2a-ite _ Tela i oe oo hy , ape = _ _:_2.—__.i = _ Lo _Doe a 77oo |. — oo “Go _.eC __.- _. C2|.Pi ee oo _i.—Se

aa: .|. oo .oo 7.YF . gsfe=fe—\ aA\i7 . - _| : iLe a x : @ ee 2 \ HE p 1 _ -— |. _ —. | Co . 8 : cf 7 f a — — S a a _ s. _ _ (ee oe, cf — .oe8_ee . : oF a eo — Oe—..xte-(TC mee i —a Ce _: aLee —eeFe oSoFeeoecoi _a oo. oe ee 2 ee — ae ol eee a __ -ve — -— oo en Ae ae Go

.a _2_2a|oeoo _aeaeoe_oe—:—ee-_. oo aee. _eeoe _osEeA-Oefa. -aeRo Re aFO eette Be ie: a oO ee —| fe oo .ey fF 22 (Uae eS Co Ae =2 2 i. eo oe, —aoe a, a__— oS ee4S gg _oeoo 7Ce a.aa— aoe o|eeaaeebat .2aeeaoe a4 ee7 kk -_a— 2. ee oo) _aoy— ~~ |. Tee — i.eeoC ao | .a3aeeoo. Vist |.oeegCo |oea-ce

a— a ate>ay : ON _ 2@ve: a- .oeBo—LD L |aSL | ibe os Y aN — os | _ |- a. . _ff;

ee Ce ae ee he ee ee | BS ee oe eS Ee oY ce ao oe ee —_ eee a ee ee i Oe: ie tog — - Se Le RONG es

0. Hoe, -aSSy ee ee a. \ie INS *ooa._ ooi aae 7, |T-s oo /*.— Nf- oe | LA Z—| yr. SeiE LChee be Cine i |._ioe oo.ot- ft ah 2oe=eoge-— 8 LL Ss a6hlfNY Lo oo ee ae i oy Re oo 2 oe eS ae oa 2200 Ok ge OF 2 SO ee _ . ee oe are ro ey a Sey eee oe . oe a

| ala ao a |oeo .2.oy UNS — ae 7ol _a..Ze ae aro aoe ae-> oo aoe | eaSo . co.oo oe io— “A —“7 \ 3 oes lmro |e oo i eu er 2aiA ee| 2 ae—_ hh2 oo ae. i a: | -.Cie -._jl|a.ee ave aee ‘1a aiao aa_-oo oo _Po oo. oei =|es “a oo ys 7hg -oe.— _. oe. :|ree _. ey tC) Vad Le oe — er ee . “LE i :| .ae a La oo Aerie Nec 6 |. i, — a. 3a 7_. oe = oS i ne A I (i sa oe _ 7 : 7 oo 4G Bre Ge ‘| oe i 2 . Ay : | as 7 Ai tf a Ae | ee We i.. — 7 SS oo _7.oS_ .ee —- 77... 0— 2 a- aCo 2 im oo i a4om oe oe = ' 2_ ai:| ai — =. ae| ‘oo _. ¢a, . ._Pee =2 (ESB oe Dea) |=oere ‘oeeSof hi eea8 |oooe os Ae we 1a|a.vo|_ifoe Aes NS of b _ ee oo 8. ee { oa i —_ & ee Ce 21s Bo. ones Ss no| = aa. a4 CO od ae eea. ia ae< os a are ._po oe _=. Boa ie Nee oe ooee a7cea| a “it oo . Hoa a eg re eae es oo oe — See Ly | ae oo _ . a i oe ae . po | a _ fo ae oe ee Cl oO aae Z | _ _ yy F eo _ a. | oo — eG i) oa — AG _ oo — foe 7 we te | . as. 0 e f oo . 7 8 ) fy wo — Pete Et PL BSE a _ Ae . _ A ee — |. a 7 4 fo Fe go oo Th ey : ee SS it 6s i 4. ey) oo bel. oe pei aah nt i :| LU WO-,ine Bhie -— |: Pa — ouroaes . oe ca27a/ | os i| we Lee =se i.ay rie _co i oF o[_ i yw, eo . oF - 7 Laie _— .eh ooie | wae aE leFF oe eien4 ||.ae a tseeFF |. |. Sf - Py TE gan MRA ay 7

a.A __| __.(oe atae net 4. a oo aeLf || OAL. Loy | i | aoe8S|a Adee 8 3«(CUE sO ae —ig-ae. oe ays ae.Ve cc) Oe .aeAl_. (oo a y_os7:_oe _~a| a*_ee — acS aone _es a. es Ce >> -2ia ao2ee @ es a.oo | oid’ a -ola_aoe.-oe oo. oe We sr 8Mg ou ig 7 aeae a oe ie :|ay LeaaB7i bei 7 i a ae 7 AV = Jan? \ oo We rey Pea 2: — _| icy | 484 oe ftboaoe o aooooe ape —s—4f _ aeos—-.. La. i. oe ee8—|os LL, _)aeSF :a42 oe nae eooe : oe _ 2ee ae Oi a8 no - ae —>oe oe Re . a pe) s pee oe _at oedP 2ae ag:_ eee te 7s ~~ | oe - _ 3 4 Be ue a . oa oo ee oe ae oO oy Your eee ee ae a PG 2 be f i so5 Ce oS

ty oo |.. -_._. Ae — oe sl |es — -. oe 2. os 7Fee4G ae |— of Ce ieoeve ae -Ye — eyDok oeyD | Lies [aip: _pa _ 2ee eiOo Hl _a. LC =Aer oe.Ae ve2] os __2Po yrek .aLS og ee — a oC al oe _. le Ck. Lim ‘ _ lef ; | 4 a . eS aaor— =— =i |oe7:aoa iL “a oo ee MG, oO .— —.2 :— -a. res oe 7ae oe yee __so goes |. oe ieea-oe ayoSSS i. :Ve — oe OO -oe|. a ao 2— Co. ——_. °ceoe _— 2aa _LA ee teof — fos 2 :7 D7 Bee ee— Os —aoS aa we eess aeid aLO ce— _. ae . :Se a-.2i“£4. -— aoo Vv oo aoO ye eee oo ” . oe ae oe 1, So — Seeger 7. _ _ oo a. a 8 7 he et oo a ot ny oe) Ce ae _ oe yo — _ 2 ae oo oo 8. a 3 _ Sigs / ie oo. 7 8 CC i to C 4 Le 7 oo aeLe abe— net AC oF ae _< oe ya 4— — OR eer Ce Waa 2tees Hecee |itis : ART a ee Le ae PPS oe I=— aie a_a i ak oo _ my ae |. 2 a Thang | — ACN Neetee mes BR ne onepesmncion . | gg a 1 _ oe a — 2S fe boi e pisiniorese bees: : ' ; oh sancti | 2 oe aaOC a : ..i od! nat afo -.. .. —2a8oo coe oeceST fra SA eae Sate ‘aea2) _on . ae . .ee— |.7ee fo. . oe) — . 2. oo a cates aaa ae” ea A |oe @e ae| — oo

Poo. aia oa a oe ) a _ . | S i. é a so — a. 2Bea) Ady os3oe 2 5DUE ae- eoee= bee mo—._oc _:Ws _in 2= é ee i oe eS .— . -2 - .a_oe _ee oooa 4| 7A : a ¢ ee | a iffat2ore De eS_ _Y_7 oeee_2eee 7ii 7.___. -. -ce Foe 7. a— oe Dloo-.oD _oo_..5Le_aae=2 eeaee ee aft_|i _nak ._.oe CL i.Le 2 os 8aooLn Z. "4 __oy hee oe —Fe ee

xmS ee i.tnxHe :Co - ba) _. 2 |—-— ioO oooe u si i .=Co _ oe _ :ee 2:aeeaeepe eg eebee oy 47 S| a4eo a(07. oo C~~ oe eee eeeeSank. =Mes a aZ a _aSee _a _sf - ee oe.. _) C4 maps oo. - :-oe) ae

aAs ~~ 7oe Gsao c ko vy ne Led. iOffic — athed ee Fs Rei ep meagre ee_7 — oe ter A.| oo con han afora .2. : 2Lo ee4ifMae 7 Ce Le YAY, 2Oe Se aAPriceric ny hans © -|.ae .8..foes ae 2es2a — . _8 Cr Trit F, 2aaoe Line ed eeoe oS a.oo af a Sa Le.eeel ee.Aaege ee ams oe ee eo a 7— oe ee er:is ae -ss ie ie a _— a Mee ae —. — _ Per S60 _ oe cS Pic _ es eae aeee . aL oo a.ieek _ . -a fs. ooog bab Vic, “Avie Co. -_ _eeoD,ae . ..|ZzLe fi le _eeaSeaot ALIS a oo S _a aee aseoO kD _aiee : Hues 2i2ee _2ikeeg oe ogm3Se/ :ae:/! ee=— oe ge ie e ae Ce e Qe saute , — oe oo _a i: .esa _eeoo feeeca foeefe aee.ee Poe og. aEB 8.

* 1c meee . 2e_ oo aertt oo eae .ase _ ee oo Lele 7rawl .) ‘— oe a2a oo a1Ae aaoe aeess:os -aA _oeoy aPree , _ee 722 _.._a— oo. _ae -oe .aeya te eee Sue LL 2|Se 2.BR oy oe * np oO . oe 8 © toe a oo 1Wittenb oo _ ee Lv 2 fe a _ «— So . oy pF i ee ,’aHESS aar — TS i 6. rg I V1 BSes . 277 oe fe rhaOY e Sc

S . e » Schlosski . L axon inche i . cou hein W1 . A ‘ourt pai » Wittenb with d ter, li berg, C ings y provi 30 r aw . 3 1 e ] 4 3 . I 7 . ace, 40 of th vided a e life-si all desi scul ; “y . very hi -size fi esign ptor gh rel re of Fri riedri e igh . gu and Fri hala ief, stand riedricl rich’ sentle (d hat itw wit ren arti . famili 1464 au S tO nim in . were ’wi and reat y Sive tri in I iliar t3ENS (d. 1486 ]m that 1 hin ant > ered 1 rties 404), .asandele ’ * |otto. Ww ped b impressi n ‘e -If oan riun 9 a wi -I 4] T amed gels a riedri th the ‘TB .cto The plaq suppo . pre rich 1eSe O m ue | r O the W1 O rial1 SC ra rnst’ Se e . emori e« inscri ting JAUCE numen rofS aony. isa Vi rich’ ‘nsts ton idhg P S of Sax ormal 1 fe with hiIbe ch’s epi“St abpl. P.since eter tC / . Cc . ~ * * e Wwe | [Th image 1S pita ; ate. eE er e »edri y. |Like ingul thel ;eature ars tobes erefor ge ofsgFr ae is fiu disti evert and Me rasp C b.gure .alt the uished bli ess, rFrito |monu Ss rep h th u , Fried at at ; S : y its me a sO | rich re physi nts aearlier . formu used . ofce hi pres word off , Friedri ‘echt vc of A INYS1ve ce 1S t ; e nce. H ers at von O .1Ccbinh1thetnre ealiant t sta om ne SS rsFri immedi , .el: ierinth e fun shifti ESE res: pi ebmandi ainto cc renthed ied th iate erar ng of hi rotecti In ral: ep‘stenka Fu ect y ; nis b ve §» ile :uried Friedri ral p enin oay 1Ke rede gest gO 1r the hi eeat ytne r. .4 The a138 * oO _ V: elle in M ligk t* th Cc it (d-.. e1ss en impe :fene ne Ni hrobe Ss and ) 142 8h ~ ndain 1} the gli , :Ca IT en = Caric veme surf: .;sional it nt 1 A S IC-~‘off ny *m eO*' io S$ Oo . : -~ edrich’ relief iace tron ent befo er heigh 1

{ pain ithe; 7° The li € Over ed the

=

Cem thee rt ly%. |=. *

S place is furth 8 three di en-

EPITAPHS AND SIMPLE TOMBS

> =r e eas that lies directly in front of the main altar. It repre——— se ———— | sents Friedrich’s electoral coat of arms and lists his * 2 seen. | titles. While all of these features might have been

i? separate commissions, the resulting ensemble, in

/ : a _ — oh | place by about 1527, honored Friedrich, his piety, — 4 oe ee Johann the Steadfast (d. 1532), Friedrich’s brother

: - , -Y ss, oe and successor, has a similar monument situated ==—_~;] - as , directly opposite on the south wall of the choir.*°

tne His kneeling stone statue, also made in 1519~20,

“a PY hd isa pendant to his brother's. Immediately adjacent 7= hang Hans Vischer’s Epitaph Elector Johann {/ 1 another bronze plaque with aoflong laudatory textand by

_ | Wisi. | i. eo Melanchthon. And directly before the altar lies Joa . is / gee = hann’s engraved tombplate with his arms and titles. . i « ae, virtually a mirror image of Friedrich’s though the

td f he i) = con ; aho Hy , ars

“2 ws 4 ee a el there exist minor distinctions in the architectural

Z >). =e : Vischer workshop transformed two simple epitaphs «ss —S «a into a glorious grouping celebrating Wettin power oe _t— ee i3i...= #3} aooice :oeee a= Ce ai a| ssp rroeieooeee -oes

—rt—“‘“‘_O™OSOCOCOCOCOCOCC*™C~C*C*C*C~C~C~C~C~C~C~*:*~:~:C:;:~:*:*”«:~C:~:~”r~—~:~:”:~C~C~—~—C~—~—~C~C~C~—C”:~—*—“‘#R_CONSCCCONOCNCCNSNSNSRNRNRNSCLLC.._—Uiee éoe ;Pha i>~;# & *, eat / gel Oe —e re. ; 3 Oe : ics, We a Peay . a Roaea ou Dandy, om eo : : ‘ al es + ee “mag f 2% . oa“

« % | RE, => bs ¥ pilav "4‘cng . ¥ e a * ‘ . ' oe)

: “ an rd Py PF ll ; .% * ee 4 Lar ey : au . oes a s ® = ad

, f_if =”) iLs Fe) #wil 3s gf as% ss iLcur 4 ss / oy;£a. 97 jf3J| -~ mSpee ihe = ee * q*7 ‘ oe 1 ae SF ‘S |:RAW Pye = Ee OS oat. . one Ne. |:.s”Ae iPsee ah ae *i SER > Se Ss ;2 Ae,so aESR 1rey) e) 7x a ~gee “».‘Sa *= J.sages “o