Citation link:
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/duerer_society1898/0015
XX.
Unknown Artist. Portrait of Charles V* at the age of 18*
Reproduction from the unique impression in the Dresden Cabinet. (14^ x y^in.)
This woodcut has on insufficient grounds been attributed to Durer. It is the earliest and
best of three woodcuts which were made from the same design. This version, with the date
15^18, is only known to exist in the single impression at Dresden from which our reproduction was
made, and it is not described in any of the standard books on Durer’s works. The second
version is signed at the end of the text: “Jost de Negker zu Augspurg, up 9,’’and was therefore
cut, or at least published, by the famous wood-engraver who had taken the leading part in all the
splendid works commissioned by Maximilian I. In this woodcut, which ends in a round arch above,
the face looks older; the cheeks are less rounded, the chin longer. An impression of this cut, on
vellum, handsomely coloured and gilt, but unfortunately mutilated, is in the British Museum. It is
very rare. The text gives Charles the title, “ King of the Romans,” and the cut must therefore
have appeared after 28th June, 15" 19, the date of the election, for Maximilian’s efforts in 1717 to
secure the title, and with it the succession, to his grandson, were unsuccessful, and Charles could
not bear this title till he was elected to the Empire. In fact he only bore it by courtesy till he
was crowned King of the Romans at Aachen, on 23rd October, 1720. He was not crowned
Emperor till ipo, when the ceremony took place at Bologna instead of Rome. The third version
of the cut, of which quite late impressions were taken, is also dated 1719. It describes Charles
as King of Spain, but places the double eagle and imperial crown over his head. It is a close
copy, as far as the figure itself is concerned, from Jost de Negker’s cut, but is less artistic in
execution. It has no architectural frame. To this inferior version the monogram of Durer was
fraudulently added at a late date.
The question, to whom the original drawing can be attributed, is a very difficult one.
Thausing, in his life of Durer (Engl. Transl. IL, 178), says that the woodcut (i.e., the version dated
1719, described above as the third), was made from a sketch by Durer in 1719, intended in the
first instance for a medal ordered by the Town Council of Nuremberg. But if Baader (Beitrage, IL,
39) is to be trusted, the whole transaction took place in 1720. At any rate the date 1718 on the
Dresden cut, made, be it observed, from the same drawing as the other, is enough alone to dispose
of Thausing’s story. That Durer made a sketch of Charles V., and that a woodcut (not now to
be recognised) was actually made from it before 4th June, 1720, is true; but the latter cannot
have been this woodcut, or the former the sketch from which it was made.
The text states that the portrait was drawn from life in 1718. In that year Charles was still
in Spain; in fact he remained there till 22nd May, 1720, when he first visited England, then stayed
in the Netherlands till he travelled to Aachen for his coronation in October. It would seem,
therefore, that the portrait must have been originally taken by some artist attached to the Spanish
12
Unknown Artist. Portrait of Charles V* at the age of 18*
Reproduction from the unique impression in the Dresden Cabinet. (14^ x y^in.)
This woodcut has on insufficient grounds been attributed to Durer. It is the earliest and
best of three woodcuts which were made from the same design. This version, with the date
15^18, is only known to exist in the single impression at Dresden from which our reproduction was
made, and it is not described in any of the standard books on Durer’s works. The second
version is signed at the end of the text: “Jost de Negker zu Augspurg, up 9,’’and was therefore
cut, or at least published, by the famous wood-engraver who had taken the leading part in all the
splendid works commissioned by Maximilian I. In this woodcut, which ends in a round arch above,
the face looks older; the cheeks are less rounded, the chin longer. An impression of this cut, on
vellum, handsomely coloured and gilt, but unfortunately mutilated, is in the British Museum. It is
very rare. The text gives Charles the title, “ King of the Romans,” and the cut must therefore
have appeared after 28th June, 15" 19, the date of the election, for Maximilian’s efforts in 1717 to
secure the title, and with it the succession, to his grandson, were unsuccessful, and Charles could
not bear this title till he was elected to the Empire. In fact he only bore it by courtesy till he
was crowned King of the Romans at Aachen, on 23rd October, 1720. He was not crowned
Emperor till ipo, when the ceremony took place at Bologna instead of Rome. The third version
of the cut, of which quite late impressions were taken, is also dated 1719. It describes Charles
as King of Spain, but places the double eagle and imperial crown over his head. It is a close
copy, as far as the figure itself is concerned, from Jost de Negker’s cut, but is less artistic in
execution. It has no architectural frame. To this inferior version the monogram of Durer was
fraudulently added at a late date.
The question, to whom the original drawing can be attributed, is a very difficult one.
Thausing, in his life of Durer (Engl. Transl. IL, 178), says that the woodcut (i.e., the version dated
1719, described above as the third), was made from a sketch by Durer in 1719, intended in the
first instance for a medal ordered by the Town Council of Nuremberg. But if Baader (Beitrage, IL,
39) is to be trusted, the whole transaction took place in 1720. At any rate the date 1718 on the
Dresden cut, made, be it observed, from the same drawing as the other, is enough alone to dispose
of Thausing’s story. That Durer made a sketch of Charles V., and that a woodcut (not now to
be recognised) was actually made from it before 4th June, 1720, is true; but the latter cannot
have been this woodcut, or the former the sketch from which it was made.
The text states that the portrait was drawn from life in 1718. In that year Charles was still
in Spain; in fact he remained there till 22nd May, 1720, when he first visited England, then stayed
in the Netherlands till he travelled to Aachen for his coronation in October. It would seem,
therefore, that the portrait must have been originally taken by some artist attached to the Spanish
12