DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52444#0042
INTRODUCTION.
allowed, however, that the compositions of those of the plates in ques-
tion which showed the influence of the antique or of Italy were based
on studies or drawings by Diirer, as the spirit which they breathe
is entirely foreign to Wolgemut. Colvin and Harck adopted Thausing’s
conclusions, and Springer also declared Diirer’s engravings to be copies,—
with this difference, however, that he substituted Jacopo de’ Barbari
(known as Jacob Walch in Germany, as already stated, whence the W)
for Wolgemut as the author of those compositions which, like the
“ Hercules,” betray the influence of Italian art. The question cannot be
discussed here in detail. Those interested in it may consult the authors
named, as advocates of the copyist theory, while on the other side Lehrs
must be heard. (See List of Books for titles.) The argument of the
writer last named, that Wenzel von Olmiitz is the author of the W prints,
and that they are copies from Diirer, would seem to be conclusive, the
most convincing fact being this, that nearly all of the copies of the same
subjects, by still other engravers, can be shown to be based upon Diirer’s
versions, and not upon W’s.
V. Did Durer Invent Etching?
The claim that Diirer invented etching is another of those disturbing
elements needlessly introduced into the history of his life and work,
alluded to at the beginning of the preceding paragraph. Thausing’s
attempt to substantiate this claim,— not, indeed, a new one,— would
hardly need to be considered, if the authority enjoyed by his in so many
ways admirable book had not led other writers on Diirer to follow him
unquestioningly. Harzen, in his excellent essay on the invention of
etching (in Naumann’s “ Archiv,” 1859), has, indeed, settled the question
conclusively; but Thausing brushes him aside contemptuously, and even
states positively that he is wrong in ascribing the invention of the art to
the armorers, who used etching for the decoration of arms and armor
xxiv
allowed, however, that the compositions of those of the plates in ques-
tion which showed the influence of the antique or of Italy were based
on studies or drawings by Diirer, as the spirit which they breathe
is entirely foreign to Wolgemut. Colvin and Harck adopted Thausing’s
conclusions, and Springer also declared Diirer’s engravings to be copies,—
with this difference, however, that he substituted Jacopo de’ Barbari
(known as Jacob Walch in Germany, as already stated, whence the W)
for Wolgemut as the author of those compositions which, like the
“ Hercules,” betray the influence of Italian art. The question cannot be
discussed here in detail. Those interested in it may consult the authors
named, as advocates of the copyist theory, while on the other side Lehrs
must be heard. (See List of Books for titles.) The argument of the
writer last named, that Wenzel von Olmiitz is the author of the W prints,
and that they are copies from Diirer, would seem to be conclusive, the
most convincing fact being this, that nearly all of the copies of the same
subjects, by still other engravers, can be shown to be based upon Diirer’s
versions, and not upon W’s.
V. Did Durer Invent Etching?
The claim that Diirer invented etching is another of those disturbing
elements needlessly introduced into the history of his life and work,
alluded to at the beginning of the preceding paragraph. Thausing’s
attempt to substantiate this claim,— not, indeed, a new one,— would
hardly need to be considered, if the authority enjoyed by his in so many
ways admirable book had not led other writers on Diirer to follow him
unquestioningly. Harzen, in his excellent essay on the invention of
etching (in Naumann’s “ Archiv,” 1859), has, indeed, settled the question
conclusively; but Thausing brushes him aside contemptuously, and even
states positively that he is wrong in ascribing the invention of the art to
the armorers, who used etching for the decoration of arms and armor
xxiv