DOI Artikel:
Krasny, Piotr: Lutherus honorandus, non adorandus?: reflexions on the development of Martin Luther's iconography after reading the book: Martin Luther, Monument, Ketzer, Mensch
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.38234#0138
137
ySdjftaiifF b«a4ïwftli?«ne tbitr
l£?n welft bcFltyScmitfïtcbîsjf<t»ct
ïxr lisiiffriit mittifbiirdj &k|clja|f
tfmrotrcbńt/borUwfftyiniMcb
Larm be (îecFrbnü wilffce »ctmr
2tcjmt>umcbaübim3tgriincbUmr
t7tttttc«äcby»f£WF/'«ufftni{bt|éi4
Поп bób« beriłd) bangt am «niij
Coribt Mfen wolfffarnwgaMjt lau ff« r»
3fi Wie TPtmrcrn bcrfcbafft FauftVn
b«t fcWffiin bat№ vylgtfetflo»
(Ю it öatbw« «tm/wtnymaewfltn
fcUbittrofanjńwótfftn rco:Sm
Vitgemjjc nit.fe<te l'tc fdttb<fcbo:fn
yrbWR/bic (itfoltm weybcn
CaiifFniińtfbtytaiiffbicyfrebTbin
Hefurt/tvv.ùvgFrbiircbfdlftbcUr«
î>a* mit «Kin Ь<из kiümmtKfcrt
0о «bfibcbmjMffmfdjabcn
îDomtobi<<Ibii|Toib(yti|lbdab(R
Łmrcbl4f<l>o(f .(JiibjlvnbCarbiniU
ì)ouon Tohßfagtlbjifbwl
ПстотЬ id)y»«bi3/lnr«nnb fcfctób
0olw rt«bFe jlin monet lob.
13. The Roman Wolves, woodcut, 1521
thrown to hell or as dwelling in the infernal regions. Par-
ticularly malicious in this regard is a painting by Egbert
Heemskerck the Younger (1634-1704), which depicts
Luther entering hell, mounted on a grotesque skeleton-
-monster, at the head of a throng of his followers [Fig. 14].
The main reason for this upside-down triumph is indi-
cated by a daemon hovering in the air with a book of Lu-
ther’s heretic teachings.56 However, such works must be
considered marginal in Luthers iconography, because af-
ter his death Catholics fairly quickly adopted a damna-
tio memoriae strategy towards his images57, an attitude,
incidentally, recommended by Paleotti as the most suit-
able way of handling heretics, and one that had been prac-
tised already in the first centuries of Church’s history.58 It
maybe therefore assumed that in the re-Catholicised areas
they destroyed mainly images that celebrated the German
heretic59 and did not intend to replace them with such that
56 The painting, dated to c. 1700, is currently on show in the exhibi-
tion Luther und. die Deutschen (4 May - 5 November 2017) held in
Wartburg Castle at Eisenach. See Luther in der Hölle. Spottbild der
Gegenreformation, Wartburg Stiftung in Eisenach.
57 M. Sronèk, De sacris imaginibus. Patroni, malm a obrazy pfed-
bëlohorské Prahy, Prague, 2013, pp. 57-70.
58 G. Paleotti, Discorso, pp. 158-159 (as in note 53).
59 Such measures had been taken in Tirol and the vicinity of Regens-
burg, among others. See R.W. Scribner, ‘Incombustible Luther’,
pp. 61-62 (as in note 3).
criticised him, as these would have inevitably perpetuated
Luther’s ‘disgraceful’ memory.
The title of Treu’s article suggests that Luther’s histori-
cal iconography is a bit jumbled, which may result from
the fact that it is not easy to decide whether Luther’s cel-
ebratory likenesses should be considered sacred images of
a ‘man of God’ or lay portraits of an outstanding individu-
al.60 Nor are we sure whether they were intended only to
preserve the memory of Luther who consistently main-
tained that such was the only acceptable function of im-
ages in a Christian community.61 Yet, substantial evidence
suggests that certain representations of the ‘new prophet’
were supposed to entice a sort of reverence for him, which
sometimes verged on the ‘papist idolatry’, so severely criti-
cised by Luther.62 Aware of these tensions, Treu has con-
structed a cogent preliminary classification of Luther’s
representations. Obviously, it still has to be supplemented
with new groups of images and particular iconographie
formulas should be illustrated with new examples, a task
I have undertaken in the present paper. But the general
60 M. Treu, ‘Luther zwischen Kunst’, pp. 407,447-448 (as in note 9).
61 M. Luther, Against the Prophets, paragraphs 70-75 (as in note
27); See also S. Michalski, Reformation and the Visual Arts. The
Protestant Image Question in Western and Eastern Europe, Lon-
don and New York, 1993, pp. 41-42.
62 See S.G. Soavizzi, Arte, pp. 53-54 (as in note 7); S. Michalski,
Reformation and the Visual Arts, pp. 68-70 (as in note 61).
ySdjftaiifF b«a4ïwftli?«ne tbitr
l£?n welft bcFltyScmitfïtcbîsjf<t»ct
ïxr lisiiffriit mittifbiirdj &k|clja|f
tfmrotrcbńt/borUwfftyiniMcb
Larm be (îecFrbnü wilffce »ctmr
2tcjmt>umcbaübim3tgriincbUmr
t7tttttc«äcby»f£WF/'«ufftni{bt|éi4
Поп bób« beriłd) bangt am «niij
Coribt Mfen wolfffarnwgaMjt lau ff« r»
3fi Wie TPtmrcrn bcrfcbafft FauftVn
b«t fcWffiin bat№ vylgtfetflo»
(Ю it öatbw« «tm/wtnymaewfltn
fcUbittrofanjńwótfftn rco:Sm
Vitgemjjc nit.fe<te l'tc fdttb<fcbo:fn
yrbWR/bic (itfoltm weybcn
CaiifFniińtfbtytaiiffbicyfrebTbin
Hefurt/tvv.ùvgFrbiircbfdlftbcUr«
î>a* mit «Kin Ь<из kiümmtKfcrt
0о «bfibcbmjMffmfdjabcn
îDomtobi<<Ibii|Toib(yti|lbdab(R
Łmrcbl4f<l>o(f .(JiibjlvnbCarbiniU
ì)ouon Tohßfagtlbjifbwl
ПстотЬ id)y»«bi3/lnr«nnb fcfctób
0olw rt«bFe jlin monet lob.
13. The Roman Wolves, woodcut, 1521
thrown to hell or as dwelling in the infernal regions. Par-
ticularly malicious in this regard is a painting by Egbert
Heemskerck the Younger (1634-1704), which depicts
Luther entering hell, mounted on a grotesque skeleton-
-monster, at the head of a throng of his followers [Fig. 14].
The main reason for this upside-down triumph is indi-
cated by a daemon hovering in the air with a book of Lu-
ther’s heretic teachings.56 However, such works must be
considered marginal in Luthers iconography, because af-
ter his death Catholics fairly quickly adopted a damna-
tio memoriae strategy towards his images57, an attitude,
incidentally, recommended by Paleotti as the most suit-
able way of handling heretics, and one that had been prac-
tised already in the first centuries of Church’s history.58 It
maybe therefore assumed that in the re-Catholicised areas
they destroyed mainly images that celebrated the German
heretic59 and did not intend to replace them with such that
56 The painting, dated to c. 1700, is currently on show in the exhibi-
tion Luther und. die Deutschen (4 May - 5 November 2017) held in
Wartburg Castle at Eisenach. See Luther in der Hölle. Spottbild der
Gegenreformation, Wartburg Stiftung in Eisenach.
57 M. Sronèk, De sacris imaginibus. Patroni, malm a obrazy pfed-
bëlohorské Prahy, Prague, 2013, pp. 57-70.
58 G. Paleotti, Discorso, pp. 158-159 (as in note 53).
59 Such measures had been taken in Tirol and the vicinity of Regens-
burg, among others. See R.W. Scribner, ‘Incombustible Luther’,
pp. 61-62 (as in note 3).
criticised him, as these would have inevitably perpetuated
Luther’s ‘disgraceful’ memory.
The title of Treu’s article suggests that Luther’s histori-
cal iconography is a bit jumbled, which may result from
the fact that it is not easy to decide whether Luther’s cel-
ebratory likenesses should be considered sacred images of
a ‘man of God’ or lay portraits of an outstanding individu-
al.60 Nor are we sure whether they were intended only to
preserve the memory of Luther who consistently main-
tained that such was the only acceptable function of im-
ages in a Christian community.61 Yet, substantial evidence
suggests that certain representations of the ‘new prophet’
were supposed to entice a sort of reverence for him, which
sometimes verged on the ‘papist idolatry’, so severely criti-
cised by Luther.62 Aware of these tensions, Treu has con-
structed a cogent preliminary classification of Luther’s
representations. Obviously, it still has to be supplemented
with new groups of images and particular iconographie
formulas should be illustrated with new examples, a task
I have undertaken in the present paper. But the general
60 M. Treu, ‘Luther zwischen Kunst’, pp. 407,447-448 (as in note 9).
61 M. Luther, Against the Prophets, paragraphs 70-75 (as in note
27); See also S. Michalski, Reformation and the Visual Arts. The
Protestant Image Question in Western and Eastern Europe, Lon-
don and New York, 1993, pp. 41-42.
62 See S.G. Soavizzi, Arte, pp. 53-54 (as in note 7); S. Michalski,
Reformation and the Visual Arts, pp. 68-70 (as in note 61).