DOI Heft:
Nr. 1
DOI Artikel:Steinborn, Bożena: The triumph of David in the Silesian Museum: another copy of Lucas van Leyden's Work
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.18817#0019
6. Lucas van Leyden (?), the Triumph of David, The Hague, C.J. Reijerse collection
(after Hoogewerff)
A certain ambiguity in the person of David who nonę the less had committed crimes, con-
demned him to be represented as a double character by the authors of Holy Wrid and this du-
plicity went through the whole his history down the European intellectual tradition. In the
prologue to Speculum humanae sahationis David does not prefigurate Christ but Satan.16 The
same occurs in secular art: David was the ideał of a ruler and at the same time the symbol
of rebellion and victory over the ruling power.17 The great popularity of David's theme in
the Neatherlands in the 16th century may be explained by the Netherlander's struggle for
independence and religious reform. One may be authorized to express such a view by the
opinion of Reau who interprets representations of the Triumph of David as an expression of
the young, ardent Protestantism opposing papacy.18 It seems however that in order to un-
derstand this motif in such a univocal and narrow way one should find support in reliable
literary sources. In the present state of investigations such interpretation can be only quoted.
It seems anyway certain, that in the Renaissance way of presenting the Triumph of David the
typological importance had been already neglected. The idea of a famous deed which bestowed
nobility upon an unknown man, and a certain democratic feature involved, must have been
very attractive to the artists of the sixteenth century.
16. L. Rśau, op. cin, p. 254.
17. Ch. Tolnay, Werk und Wellbild des Michelangelo, Ziirich, 1949, pp. 12-16,
18. L. Reau, op. cii. p. 260.
13
(after Hoogewerff)
A certain ambiguity in the person of David who nonę the less had committed crimes, con-
demned him to be represented as a double character by the authors of Holy Wrid and this du-
plicity went through the whole his history down the European intellectual tradition. In the
prologue to Speculum humanae sahationis David does not prefigurate Christ but Satan.16 The
same occurs in secular art: David was the ideał of a ruler and at the same time the symbol
of rebellion and victory over the ruling power.17 The great popularity of David's theme in
the Neatherlands in the 16th century may be explained by the Netherlander's struggle for
independence and religious reform. One may be authorized to express such a view by the
opinion of Reau who interprets representations of the Triumph of David as an expression of
the young, ardent Protestantism opposing papacy.18 It seems however that in order to un-
derstand this motif in such a univocal and narrow way one should find support in reliable
literary sources. In the present state of investigations such interpretation can be only quoted.
It seems anyway certain, that in the Renaissance way of presenting the Triumph of David the
typological importance had been already neglected. The idea of a famous deed which bestowed
nobility upon an unknown man, and a certain democratic feature involved, must have been
very attractive to the artists of the sixteenth century.
16. L. Rśau, op. cin, p. 254.
17. Ch. Tolnay, Werk und Wellbild des Michelangelo, Ziirich, 1949, pp. 12-16,
18. L. Reau, op. cii. p. 260.
13