Zitierlink:
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/duerer_society1902/0006
PAINTINGS.
i.
DURER. Portrait of Michel Wolgemut. 1516.
Photogravure by Messrs, Bruckmann from the oil painting on panel (ni by loi in.) in the Alte
Pinakothek, Munich (No. 243).
had risen.”
HE head of the aged painter is swathed in black silk, and he wears a black coat with a fur
collar, showing a little of his white shirt at the opening. On the green ground is
painted an inscription which may be translated as follows:—“Albrecht Diirer took this
likeness of his teacher Michel Wolgemut in the year 1516, and he was 82 years of age,
and lived till the year 1519; then he departed on St. Andrew’s day early before the sun
Lower down, near the left shoulder, are the date 1516 (originally 1506) and Diirer’s
monogram.
There can be no two opinions about the genuineness and fine quality of the portrait, which is
in an admirable state of preservation; but many critics are sceptical as to the genuineness, in whole or
in part, of the inscription and date. Those who are interested in the matter will find a full discussion
of all the points in an article by Karl Voll in the Allgemeine Zeitung, Munich, November 20th, 1897,
Beilage 263. The official catalogue takes the view that the first part of the inscription was painted,
presumably by Diirer himself, when the picture was finished in 1516, and that the rest, in larger
characters, was added on the sitter’s death, three years later. Dr. Voll believes that the whole was
composed at once, but he does not admit that either the style of the inscription or the character
of the letters is Diirer’s own. He supposes that the information was added in 1519, or thereabouts,
by some other well-informed person, after the picture had left Diirer’s hands. We know from
Neudorffer that Wolgemut died in 1519, but the exact date and the painter’s age are not known
from any other source. Dr. Voll doubts, on insufficient grounds, as it appears to me, the correctness
of the date given to the painting, though he admits with Thausing (Diirer, 2. Aufl. II. 133) that there
is still greater difficulty in accepting the date 1506, which originally stood in place of 1516, seeing
that Diirer spent the whole of 1506 at Venice. He believes that the painting is still earlier, and that
it originally bore no date or inscription, but merely the genuine monogram.
The drawing in the Albertina (photographed by Braun, No. 565), so highly praised by
Thausing, must certainly be condemned as a forgery. It is nothing but a copy from the picture, and
the draughtsmanship is quite unworthy of Diirer. The copyist has drawn the neck exactly so far as it
is visible in the picture and no further, while he gives no indication of the collar and coat which
determine the outline. He has also omitted the hair which projects below the ear and travestied the
formation of the ear itself. Dr. Voll points out that, whereas the draughtsman has used blue Venetian
paper, with intent to deceive, he has done the drawing, not with silver-point or chalk, but with lead
pencil, which was not in use till long after Diirer’s time.
11A
DURER. Portrait of himself at the age of twenty-six. 1498.
Photogravure by Messrs. Ad. Braun et de, from the oil painting on panel (20 by 16 in.),
in the Prado Gallery^ Madrid (No. 1316).
The portrait bears the inscription “ 1498 / Das malt Ich nach meiner gestalt / Ich was sex
vnd zwenzig Jor alt / Albrecht Diirer ” in Gothic letters, with the monogram under the last line.
The picture must have been painted early in 1498, since Diirer completed his twenty-seventh year on
May 21 st in that year. Thausing describes it as follows: “His costume is even more gay and
3
i.
DURER. Portrait of Michel Wolgemut. 1516.
Photogravure by Messrs, Bruckmann from the oil painting on panel (ni by loi in.) in the Alte
Pinakothek, Munich (No. 243).
had risen.”
HE head of the aged painter is swathed in black silk, and he wears a black coat with a fur
collar, showing a little of his white shirt at the opening. On the green ground is
painted an inscription which may be translated as follows:—“Albrecht Diirer took this
likeness of his teacher Michel Wolgemut in the year 1516, and he was 82 years of age,
and lived till the year 1519; then he departed on St. Andrew’s day early before the sun
Lower down, near the left shoulder, are the date 1516 (originally 1506) and Diirer’s
monogram.
There can be no two opinions about the genuineness and fine quality of the portrait, which is
in an admirable state of preservation; but many critics are sceptical as to the genuineness, in whole or
in part, of the inscription and date. Those who are interested in the matter will find a full discussion
of all the points in an article by Karl Voll in the Allgemeine Zeitung, Munich, November 20th, 1897,
Beilage 263. The official catalogue takes the view that the first part of the inscription was painted,
presumably by Diirer himself, when the picture was finished in 1516, and that the rest, in larger
characters, was added on the sitter’s death, three years later. Dr. Voll believes that the whole was
composed at once, but he does not admit that either the style of the inscription or the character
of the letters is Diirer’s own. He supposes that the information was added in 1519, or thereabouts,
by some other well-informed person, after the picture had left Diirer’s hands. We know from
Neudorffer that Wolgemut died in 1519, but the exact date and the painter’s age are not known
from any other source. Dr. Voll doubts, on insufficient grounds, as it appears to me, the correctness
of the date given to the painting, though he admits with Thausing (Diirer, 2. Aufl. II. 133) that there
is still greater difficulty in accepting the date 1506, which originally stood in place of 1516, seeing
that Diirer spent the whole of 1506 at Venice. He believes that the painting is still earlier, and that
it originally bore no date or inscription, but merely the genuine monogram.
The drawing in the Albertina (photographed by Braun, No. 565), so highly praised by
Thausing, must certainly be condemned as a forgery. It is nothing but a copy from the picture, and
the draughtsmanship is quite unworthy of Diirer. The copyist has drawn the neck exactly so far as it
is visible in the picture and no further, while he gives no indication of the collar and coat which
determine the outline. He has also omitted the hair which projects below the ear and travestied the
formation of the ear itself. Dr. Voll points out that, whereas the draughtsman has used blue Venetian
paper, with intent to deceive, he has done the drawing, not with silver-point or chalk, but with lead
pencil, which was not in use till long after Diirer’s time.
11A
DURER. Portrait of himself at the age of twenty-six. 1498.
Photogravure by Messrs. Ad. Braun et de, from the oil painting on panel (20 by 16 in.),
in the Prado Gallery^ Madrid (No. 1316).
The portrait bears the inscription “ 1498 / Das malt Ich nach meiner gestalt / Ich was sex
vnd zwenzig Jor alt / Albrecht Diirer ” in Gothic letters, with the monogram under the last line.
The picture must have been painted early in 1498, since Diirer completed his twenty-seventh year on
May 21 st in that year. Thausing describes it as follows: “His costume is even more gay and
3