DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52444#0101
DRY-POINTS, AND ETCHINGS.
by degrees, but finishing one part after another. The only two known trial
proofs from the “ Hercules ” plate are in the Berlin Cabinet (pure black ink, clean
wiped) and in the Albertina at Vienna. The reproduction here shown, from
the impression in Berlin, was published by the International Chalcographical
Society in its series for 1886, No. 11.
Retberg assigns the plate to 1509; Heller to 1500-06; Hausmann after
the Venetian journey of 1506. The workmanship, however, delicate as it is,
and the monogram point to an earlier date. The plate evidently belongs to
the group formed by Nos. 14 to 17.
This is one of the most enigmatical of the prints which go under Diirer’s
name. It is called also “ The Great Satyr” (to distinguish it from “The Little
Satyr,” or “Satyr’s Family,” No. 37 of this catalogue), “Jealousy,” “The
Effects of Jealousy,” and “The Great Hercules” (to avoid confusion with
“The Great Horse,” No. 39, which seems sometimes to have been called “The
Little Hercules”). The title “Hercules” is given to it by general consent,
because Diirer alludes to one of his plates by that name in his Netherlands
diary. That Springer claims this title for the “ Rape of Amymone ” has already
been stated (No. 16). According to him, the composition represents “ some
love affair of the gods,” the details of which we of to-day are unable to define.
Vasari describes it as “ Diana inflicting punishment on one of her nymphs,
who is flying for shelter to the bosom of a Satyr.” Some modern commen-
tators explain it as an allegory, in which the figure of the man stands as the
personification of cocuage,— is, in fact, a cuckold, marked as such by his helmet
in the shape of a cock (in allusion to the German Hahnrei, a man deceived by
an unfaithful wife) and the horns (in allusion to the German saying “ to put
horns on a man’s head,” which makes of him a Hahnrei). In his debasement
he even defends his own wife, in the embrace of the satyr, against Virtue, who
is about to chastise her. The scurrility of this explanation is sufficient to defeat
it. Allihn, in his attempt to explain Diirer’s compositions from the general
tendency of his age, connects it with the immorality then prevailing. “ Ac-
cordingly,” he says (p. 75), “the action of the allegory would be as follows:
Unchastity, represented by the satyr and the reclining naked woman, ought to
be driven away ; but she is defended by the evil desires of the man. We have
here a curtain-lecture delivered by Diirer to his dissolute contemporaries in the
name of their neglected wives.” The explanation, though more dignified, is
hardly more satisfactory than the one first cited. Diirer probably knew what
he was about when he called his engraving “ Hercules,” and the difficulties it
presents are due no doubt to the confusion of ideas and the lack of knowledge
regarding ancient myths alluded to in the Introduction (p. iv). For the
attempts to reconcile the design with the versions of the story of Hercules,
Nessus, and Dejaneira, as known to us, as well as for the evidence that the
19
by degrees, but finishing one part after another. The only two known trial
proofs from the “ Hercules ” plate are in the Berlin Cabinet (pure black ink, clean
wiped) and in the Albertina at Vienna. The reproduction here shown, from
the impression in Berlin, was published by the International Chalcographical
Society in its series for 1886, No. 11.
Retberg assigns the plate to 1509; Heller to 1500-06; Hausmann after
the Venetian journey of 1506. The workmanship, however, delicate as it is,
and the monogram point to an earlier date. The plate evidently belongs to
the group formed by Nos. 14 to 17.
This is one of the most enigmatical of the prints which go under Diirer’s
name. It is called also “ The Great Satyr” (to distinguish it from “The Little
Satyr,” or “Satyr’s Family,” No. 37 of this catalogue), “Jealousy,” “The
Effects of Jealousy,” and “The Great Hercules” (to avoid confusion with
“The Great Horse,” No. 39, which seems sometimes to have been called “The
Little Hercules”). The title “Hercules” is given to it by general consent,
because Diirer alludes to one of his plates by that name in his Netherlands
diary. That Springer claims this title for the “ Rape of Amymone ” has already
been stated (No. 16). According to him, the composition represents “ some
love affair of the gods,” the details of which we of to-day are unable to define.
Vasari describes it as “ Diana inflicting punishment on one of her nymphs,
who is flying for shelter to the bosom of a Satyr.” Some modern commen-
tators explain it as an allegory, in which the figure of the man stands as the
personification of cocuage,— is, in fact, a cuckold, marked as such by his helmet
in the shape of a cock (in allusion to the German Hahnrei, a man deceived by
an unfaithful wife) and the horns (in allusion to the German saying “ to put
horns on a man’s head,” which makes of him a Hahnrei). In his debasement
he even defends his own wife, in the embrace of the satyr, against Virtue, who
is about to chastise her. The scurrility of this explanation is sufficient to defeat
it. Allihn, in his attempt to explain Diirer’s compositions from the general
tendency of his age, connects it with the immorality then prevailing. “ Ac-
cordingly,” he says (p. 75), “the action of the allegory would be as follows:
Unchastity, represented by the satyr and the reclining naked woman, ought to
be driven away ; but she is defended by the evil desires of the man. We have
here a curtain-lecture delivered by Diirer to his dissolute contemporaries in the
name of their neglected wives.” The explanation, though more dignified, is
hardly more satisfactory than the one first cited. Diirer probably knew what
he was about when he called his engraving “ Hercules,” and the difficulties it
presents are due no doubt to the confusion of ideas and the lack of knowledge
regarding ancient myths alluded to in the Introduction (p. iv). For the
attempts to reconcile the design with the versions of the story of Hercules,
Nessus, and Dejaneira, as known to us, as well as for the evidence that the
19