DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28460#0313
282 Early German and Flemish Woodcuts.—Part II.
The interpretation of this subject has hardly been attempted in any catalogue of
Diirer’s worhs. Some details are obscure, but the reference given by Dr. F. v. Bezold1
to Boetliius2 explains the main conception of Philosopby, and interprets the ladder on
her dress. Philosophy appears to Boethius as “ mulier reverendi admodum vullus.”
After describing her eyes and stature, and the fabric of her dress, he adds, “Haium
[so. vestium] in extremo margine tt, in supremo vero 8 legebatur intextum. Atque
inter utrasqne literas, in scalarum modum, gradus quidam insigniti videbantur, quibus
ab inferiore ad superius elementum esset ascensus.” (“Elementum” here means a
letter of the alphabet.) Lastly, he describes the attributes of Philosopliy as we see
them in tlie woodcut: “ Et dextra quidem eius libellos, sceptrum vero sinistra gerel at.”
In the frontispiece to Keisch’s “Margarita Philosophica,” Strassburg, 1504,3 a ladder
with actual rungs is depicted on Philosophy’s dress, but the rungs, as in the original
text of Boethius, are not expressiy interpreted. Philosophy, according to Dr. v. Bezold,4
appears precisely as described by Boethius in Marsiiius Ficinus (“ Buch des Lebens,”
Strassburg, 1515, sig. b iij r. Diirer, or rather Celtis, by whom, doubllets, every
symbolical detail was determined,5 has not drawn the rungs of the ladder, but has
interpreted tliem definitely as the seven liberal arts which composed the Trivium
(grammar, logic, rhetoric) and Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music)
of medimval education. This is perhaps an extension of St. Thomas’s interpretation of
the rungs of the ladder as grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic. The chief difficulty in the
interpretation of the ladder is caused by the substitution of $ for n. The letters -n-
ancl 8 are interpreted by Murmelius, tLe commentator on the “De Consolatione ” in
the 1570 edition, as irpctKTLKT] and Sewp-pTiKr), the two divisions of philosophy adopted
by Boethius himself in his “Dialogus I in Porphyrium.”6 It is hard to explain <L
It can hardly be ^iAoaocpia, for philosophy is the sum of the whole scheme, and
not merely the starting-point;7 nor i’lAoAoyla, on whom, in Martianus Capella, Ihe
seven liberal arts atteud as bridesmaids, for philology is rather an equivalent of the
liberal arts, or at least of a part of them (the Trivium), than the starting-point frorn
which the student ascends, stepping up from art to art. It is vain, in the absence of
any written evidence, to speculate on Celtis’s intentions, but we can hardly suppose
tliat he made a blunder in writing <f> for n, as the anonymous designer of the title-
page to the “ Margarita Philosophica” (1504) wrote T for 0 at the other end of
the scale.
The three books in Pliilosopliy’s hand may allude to one of the current triple divi-
sions of philosophy, either tlie “ Philosophia triceps [naturalis, rationalis, moralis]
humanarum rerum ” of the frontispiece to Beisch, or the more comprehensive classifi-
cation, “ Philosophia naturalis, moralis, divina,” illustrated in the same woodcut. The
sceptre in Pliilosophy’s 1. hand is generally taken as an ailusion to politics. In the
quatrain at the bottom of the print, the first line applies to the region of tlie four
elements, “ mundus elementaris,” including all which lies beneath the sphere of the
moon, the lowest division of the“mundus ethercus” ; the second line needs no explana-
1 “ Konrad Celtis, der deutsche Erzhumanist,” in Sybel’s Historische Zeitschrift,
1883, N.F. xiii, 1, 193. On Diirer’s Philosophy, see especiaily pp. 29-31. See also
Dr. Paul Weber’s “ Beitrage zu Diirer’s Welfanschauung,” 1900, p. 79.
2 “De Consolatione Philosophise,” Lib. i, prosa prima (Opera, Basileae, 1570, p. 908).
3 Beproduced by Weber, op. cit. p. 58. The iadder has nr between the third and
fourth (from the bottom) of tlie eight ruugs wliich appear, and t at the top.
4 Op. cit. p. 30, note 1.
5 A copy by Scliedel of Celtis’s original scheme for tlie woodcut is preseived in Cod.
Lat. 434 of the Munich Library. See Naumann’s Archiv, ii, 254-260. The sclume,
wliich is much less elaborate than the woodcut as carried out, is reproducecl on p. 258.
It has not n.
6 Opera, 1570, p. 2.
7 Dr. v. Bezold, however (ibid. note 2), interprets <*> ancl © as Philosophy and Theo-
logy, ancl supports his viewby a quotation from the Platonist Ficino: “ [Piato] veram
inquit philosophiam esse ascensum ab his, quae fiuunt et oriuntur et oocidunt, ad ea,
quae vera sunt et semper cadem perseverant. Tot ergo philosophia partes tt facultafes
ministras habet, quot gradibus ab infimis acl superna conscenditur ” (Marsilius Ficinus,
Opera, Basilem, 1561, i, 761). The words “ tot . . . conscenditur ’’ apply admirably to the
liberal arts as stages in an ascending scale ; but the arts are spoken of as “ parts ” and
“ministering faculties ” of tlie whole concept, Philosopliy, while the starting-point is
the worlcl of phenomena, the summit the world of ideas. The interpretation of $ and 0
wliich this passage suggests is not so much <t>L\ocrocp'ia and QeoAoyia as <ku<m and 0eos.
The interpretation of this subject has hardly been attempted in any catalogue of
Diirer’s worhs. Some details are obscure, but the reference given by Dr. F. v. Bezold1
to Boetliius2 explains the main conception of Philosopby, and interprets the ladder on
her dress. Philosophy appears to Boethius as “ mulier reverendi admodum vullus.”
After describing her eyes and stature, and the fabric of her dress, he adds, “Haium
[so. vestium] in extremo margine tt, in supremo vero 8 legebatur intextum. Atque
inter utrasqne literas, in scalarum modum, gradus quidam insigniti videbantur, quibus
ab inferiore ad superius elementum esset ascensus.” (“Elementum” here means a
letter of the alphabet.) Lastly, he describes the attributes of Philosopliy as we see
them in tlie woodcut: “ Et dextra quidem eius libellos, sceptrum vero sinistra gerel at.”
In the frontispiece to Keisch’s “Margarita Philosophica,” Strassburg, 1504,3 a ladder
with actual rungs is depicted on Philosophy’s dress, but the rungs, as in the original
text of Boethius, are not expressiy interpreted. Philosophy, according to Dr. v. Bezold,4
appears precisely as described by Boethius in Marsiiius Ficinus (“ Buch des Lebens,”
Strassburg, 1515, sig. b iij r. Diirer, or rather Celtis, by whom, doubllets, every
symbolical detail was determined,5 has not drawn the rungs of the ladder, but has
interpreted tliem definitely as the seven liberal arts which composed the Trivium
(grammar, logic, rhetoric) and Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, music)
of medimval education. This is perhaps an extension of St. Thomas’s interpretation of
the rungs of the ladder as grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic. The chief difficulty in the
interpretation of the ladder is caused by the substitution of $ for n. The letters -n-
ancl 8 are interpreted by Murmelius, tLe commentator on the “De Consolatione ” in
the 1570 edition, as irpctKTLKT] and Sewp-pTiKr), the two divisions of philosophy adopted
by Boethius himself in his “Dialogus I in Porphyrium.”6 It is hard to explain <L
It can hardly be ^iAoaocpia, for philosophy is the sum of the whole scheme, and
not merely the starting-point;7 nor i’lAoAoyla, on whom, in Martianus Capella, Ihe
seven liberal arts atteud as bridesmaids, for philology is rather an equivalent of the
liberal arts, or at least of a part of them (the Trivium), than the starting-point frorn
which the student ascends, stepping up from art to art. It is vain, in the absence of
any written evidence, to speculate on Celtis’s intentions, but we can hardly suppose
tliat he made a blunder in writing <f> for n, as the anonymous designer of the title-
page to the “ Margarita Philosophica” (1504) wrote T for 0 at the other end of
the scale.
The three books in Pliilosopliy’s hand may allude to one of the current triple divi-
sions of philosophy, either tlie “ Philosophia triceps [naturalis, rationalis, moralis]
humanarum rerum ” of the frontispiece to Beisch, or the more comprehensive classifi-
cation, “ Philosophia naturalis, moralis, divina,” illustrated in the same woodcut. The
sceptre in Pliilosophy’s 1. hand is generally taken as an ailusion to politics. In the
quatrain at the bottom of the print, the first line applies to the region of tlie four
elements, “ mundus elementaris,” including all which lies beneath the sphere of the
moon, the lowest division of the“mundus ethercus” ; the second line needs no explana-
1 “ Konrad Celtis, der deutsche Erzhumanist,” in Sybel’s Historische Zeitschrift,
1883, N.F. xiii, 1, 193. On Diirer’s Philosophy, see especiaily pp. 29-31. See also
Dr. Paul Weber’s “ Beitrage zu Diirer’s Welfanschauung,” 1900, p. 79.
2 “De Consolatione Philosophise,” Lib. i, prosa prima (Opera, Basileae, 1570, p. 908).
3 Beproduced by Weber, op. cit. p. 58. The iadder has nr between the third and
fourth (from the bottom) of tlie eight ruugs wliich appear, and t at the top.
4 Op. cit. p. 30, note 1.
5 A copy by Scliedel of Celtis’s original scheme for tlie woodcut is preseived in Cod.
Lat. 434 of the Munich Library. See Naumann’s Archiv, ii, 254-260. The sclume,
wliich is much less elaborate than the woodcut as carried out, is reproducecl on p. 258.
It has not n.
6 Opera, 1570, p. 2.
7 Dr. v. Bezold, however (ibid. note 2), interprets <*> ancl © as Philosophy and Theo-
logy, ancl supports his viewby a quotation from the Platonist Ficino: “ [Piato] veram
inquit philosophiam esse ascensum ab his, quae fiuunt et oriuntur et oocidunt, ad ea,
quae vera sunt et semper cadem perseverant. Tot ergo philosophia partes tt facultafes
ministras habet, quot gradibus ab infimis acl superna conscenditur ” (Marsilius Ficinus,
Opera, Basilem, 1561, i, 761). The words “ tot . . . conscenditur ’’ apply admirably to the
liberal arts as stages in an ascending scale ; but the arts are spoken of as “ parts ” and
“ministering faculties ” of tlie whole concept, Philosopliy, while the starting-point is
the worlcl of phenomena, the summit the world of ideas. The interpretation of $ and 0
wliich this passage suggests is not so much <t>L\ocrocp'ia and QeoAoyia as <ku<m and 0eos.