Chapter V (2)

[Footnote V-27: The Latin title of this work is “Passio Christi,”
and the explanatory verses are from the pen of Chelidonius. Durer,
in the Journal of his Visit to the Netherlands, twice mentions it
as “die Kleine Passion,” and each time with a distinction which
proves that he did not mean the Passion engraved by him on copper
and probably published in 1512. “Item Sebaldt Fischer hat mir zu
Antorff [Antwerp] abkaufft 16 _kleiner Passion_, pro 4 fl. Mehr 32
grosser Bücher pro 8 fl. Mehr 6 gestochne Passion pro 3
fl.”--“Darnach die drey Bücher unser Frauen Leben, Apocalypsin,
und den grossen Passion, darnach _den klein Passion_, und den
Passion in Kupffer.”--Albrecht Dürers Reisejournal, in Von Murr,
7er Theil, S. 60 and 67. The size of the cuts of the Little
Passion is five inches high by three and seven-eighths wide. Four
impressions from the original blocks are given in Ottley’s
Inquiry, vol. ii. between page 730 and page 731.]

Though it is by no means unlikely that Durer might apply to the Venetian government to prevent the sale of spurious copies of his works within the bounds of their jurisdiction, yet Vasari’s account of his personally visiting that city for the purpose of making a complaint against Marc Antonio, and of the government having forbid the latter to affix Durer’s mark to his engravings in future, is certainly incorrect. The History of the Virgin, the earliest of the two works which were almost entirely copied by Marc Antonio, was not published before 1510, and there is not the slightest evidence of Durer having re-visited Venice after his return to Nuremberg about the latter end of 1506. Bartsch thinks that Vasari’s account of Durer’s complaining to the Venetian government against Marc Antonio is wholly unfounded; not only from the fact of Durer not having visited Venice subsequent to 1506, but from the improbability of his applying to a foreign state to prohibit a stranger from copying his works. Mr. Ottley, however,--after observing that Marc Antonio had affixed Durer’s mark to his copies of the seventeen cuts of the Life of the Virgin and of some other single subjects, but had omitted it in his copies of the cuts of the Little Passion,--thus expresses his opinion with respect to the correctness of this part of Vasari’s account: “That Durer, who enjoyed the especial protection of the Emperor Maximilian, might be enabled through the imperial ambassador at Venice to lay his complaints before the government, and to obtain the prohibition before stated, may I think readily be imagined; and it cannot be denied, that the circumstance of Marc Antonio’s having omitted to affix the mark of Albert to the copies which he afterwards made of the series of the ‘Life of Christ’ is strongly corroborative of the general truth of the story.”[V-28] As two of the cuts in the Little Passion, which Mr. Ottley here calls the “Life of Christ,” are dated 1510, and as, according to Mr. Ottley, Marc Antonio arrived at Rome in the course of that year, it is difficult to conceive how the government of Venice could have the power to prohibit a native of Bologna, living in a state beyond their jurisdiction, from affixing Albert Durer’s mark to such engravings as he might please to copy from the works of that master.

[Footnote V-28: Inquiry into the Origin and Early History of
Engraving, vol. ii. p. 782. The objections to the general truth of
Vasari’s story appear to be much stronger than the presumptions in
its favour. 1. The improbability of Albert Durer having visited
Venice subsequent to 1506; 2. The fact of Marc Antonio’s copies of
the cuts of the Little Passion _not_ containing Albert Durer’s
mark; and 3. The probability of Mark Antonio residing beyond the
jurisdiction of the Venetian government at the time of his
engraving them.]

Among the more remarkable single subjects engraved on wood from Durer’s designs, the following are most frequently referred to: God the Father bearing up into heaven the dead body of Christ, with the date 1511; a Rhinoceros, with the date 1515; a portrait of Ulrich Varnbuler, with the date 1522; a large head of Christ crowned with thorns, without date; and the Siege of a fortified town, with the date 1527. In the first of the above-named cuts, God the Father wears a kind of tiara like that of the Pope, and above the principal figure the Holy Ghost is seen hovering in the form of a dove. On each side of the Deity and the dead Christ are angels holding the cross, the pillar to which Christ was bound when he was scourged, the crown of thorns, the sponge dipped in vinegar, and other emblems of the Passion. At the foot are heads with puffed-out cheeks intended to represent the winds. This cut is engraved in a clearer and more delicate style than most of the other subjects designed by Durer on wood. There are impressions of the Rhinoceros, and the portrait of Varnbuler, printed in chiaro-scuro from three blocks; and there are also other wood-cuts designed by Durer executed in the same manner. The large head of Christ, which is engraved in a coarse though spirited and effective manner, is placed by Bartsch among the doubtful pieces ascribed to Durer; but Mr. Ottley says, “I am unwilling to deny to Durer the credit of this admirable and boldly executed production.”[V-29] The cut representing the siege of a fortified town is twenty-eight inches and three-eighths wide, by eight inches and seven eighths high. It has been engraved on two blocks, and afterwards pasted together. A number of small figures are introduced, and a great extent of country is shown in this cut, which is, however, deficient in effect; and the little figures, though drawn with great spirit, want relief, which causes many of them to appear as if they were riding or walking in the air. The most solid-like part of the subject is the sky; there is no ground for most of the figures to stand on; and those which are in the distance are of the same size as those which are apparently a mile or two nearer the spectator. There is nothing remarkable in the execution, and the design adds nothing to Durer’s reputation.

[Footnote V-29: There is a copy of this head, also engraved on
wood, of the size of the original, but without Durer’s, or any
other mark. Underneath an impression of the copy, in the Print
Room of the British Museum, there is written in a hand which
appears to be at least as old as the year 1550, “Dieser hat
[[HSB]]ehaim gerissen”--“H. S. Behaim drew this.” Hans Sebald
Behaim, a painter and designer on wood, was born at Nuremberg in
1500, and was the pupil of his uncle, also named Behaim, a painter
and engraver of that city. The younger Behaim abandoned the arts
to become a tavern-keeper at Frankfort, where he died in 1550.]

The great patron of wood engraving in the earlier part of the sixteenth century was the Emperor Maximilian I, who,--besides originating the three works, known by the titles of Sir Theurdank, the Wise King, and the Triumphs of Maximilian, which he caused to be illustrated with numerous wood engravings, chiefly from the designs of Hans Burgmair and Hans Schaufflein,--employed Albert Durer to make the designs for two other series of wood engravings, a Triumphal Car and a Triumphal Arch.

The Triumphal _Car_, engraved by Jerome Resch from Durer’s drawings on wood, is frequently confounded with the larger work called the Triumphs of Maximilian, most of the designs of which were made by Hans Burgmair. It is indeed generally asserted that all the designs for the latter work were made by Hans Burgmair; but I think I shall be able to show, in a subsequent notice of that work, that some of the cuts contained in the edition published at Vienna and London in 1796 were, in all probability, designed by Albert Durer. The Triumphal Car consists of eight separate pieces, which, when joined together, form a continuous subject seven feet four inches long; the height of the highest cut--that containing the car--is eighteen inches from the base line to the upper part of the canopy above the Emperor’s head. The Emperor is seen seated in a highly ornamented car, attended by female figures, representing Justice, Truth, Clemency, and other virtues, who hold towards him triumphal wreaths. One of the two wheels which are seen is inscribed “Magnificentia,” and the other “Dignitas;” the driver of the car is Reason,--“Ratio,”--and one of the reins is marked “Nobilitas,” and the other “Potentia.” The car is drawn by six pair of horses splendidly harnessed, and each horse is attended by a female figure. The names of the females at the head of the first pair from the car are “Providentia” and “Moderatio;” of the second, “Alacritas” and “Opportunitas;” of the third, “Velocitas” and “Firmitudo;” of the fourth, “Acrimonia” and “Virilitas;” of the fifth, “Audacia” and “Magnanimitas;” and the attendants on the leaders are “Experientia” and “Solertia.” Above each pair of horses there is a portion of explanatory matter printed in letter-press; and in that above the leading pair is a mandate from the Emperor Maximilian, dated Inspruck, 1518, addressed to Bilibald Pirkheimer, who appears to have suggested the subject; and in the same place is the name of the inventor and designer, Albert Durer.[V-30] The first edition of those cuts appeared at Nuremberg in 1522; and in some copies the text is in German, and in others in Latin. A second edition, with the text in Latin only, was printed at the same place in the following year. A third edition, from the same blocks, was printed at Venice in 1588; and a fourth at Amsterdam in 1609. The execution of this subject is not particularly good, but the action of the horses is generally well represented, and the drawing of some of the female figures attending them is extremely spirited. Guido seems to have availed himself of some of the figures in Durer’s Triumphal Car in his celebrated fresco of the Car of Apollo, preceded by Aurora, and accompanied by the Hours.

[Footnote V-30: In the edition with Latin inscriptions, 1523, are
the words, “Excogitatus et depictus est currus iste Nurembergæ,
impressus vero per Albertum Durer. Anno MDXXIII.” The Latin words
“excogitatus et depictus” are expressed by “gefunden und geordnet”
in the German inscriptions in the edition of 1522. A sketch by
Durer, for the Triumphal Car, is preserved in the Print Room in
the British Museum.]

It is said that the same subject painted by Durer himself is still to be seen on the walls of the Town-hall of Nuremberg; but how far this is correct I am unable to positively say; for I know of no account of the painting written by a person who appears to have been acquainted with the subject engraved on wood. Dr. Dibdin, who visited the Town-hall of Nuremberg in 1818, speaks of what he saw there in a most vague and unsatisfactory manner, as if he did not know the Triumphal Car designed by Durer from the larger work entitled the Triumphs of Maximilian. The notice of the learned bibliographer, who professes to be a great admirer of the works of Albert Durer, is as follows: “The great boast of the collection [in the Town-hall of Nuremberg] are the Triumphs of Maximilian executed by _Albert Durer_,--which, however, have by no means escaped injury.”[V-31] It is from such careless observations as the preceding that erroneous opinions respecting the Triumphal Car and the Triumphs of Maximilian are continued and propagated, and that most persons confound the two works; which is indeed not surprising, seeing that Dr. Dibdin himself, who is considered to be an authority on such matters, has afforded proof that he does not know one from the other. In the same volume that contains the notice of the “Triumphs of Maximilian” in the Town-hall of Nuremberg, Dr. Dibdin says that he saw the “ORIGINAL PAINTINGS” from which the large wood blocks were taken for the well-known work entitled the “_Triumphs of the Emperor Maximilian_,” in large folio, in the Imperial Library at Vienna.[V-32] Such observations are very much in the style of the countryman’s, who had seen _two_ genuine skulls of Oliver Cromwell,--one at Oxford, and another in the British Museum. Though I have not been able to ascertain satisfactorily the subject of Durer’s painting in the Town-hall of Nuremberg, I am inclined to think that it is the Triumphal _Car_ of Maximilian. In a memorandum in the hand-writing of Nollekins, preserved with his copies of Durer’s Triumphal Car and Triumphal Arch of Maximilian, in the Print Room of the British Museum, it is said, though erroneously, that the former is painted in the Town-hall of _Augsburg_ with the figures as large as life.

[Footnote V-31: Bibliographical Tour, vol. iii. p. 438. Edit.
1829.]

[Footnote V-32: Ibid. p. 330.]

The Triumphal _Arch_ of the Emperor Maximilian, engraved on wood from Durer’s designs, consists of ninety-two separate pieces, which, when joined together, form one large composition about ten feet and a half high by nine and a half wide, exclusive of the margins and five folio sheets of explanatory matter by the projector of the design, John Stabius, who styles himself the historiographer and poet of the Emperor, and who says, at the commencement of his description, that this arch was drawn “after the manner of those erected in honour of the Roman emperors at Rome, some of which are destroyed and others still to be seen.” In the arch of Maximilian are three gates or entrances; that in the centre is named the Gate of Honour and Power; that to the left the Gate of Fame; and that to the right the Gate of Nobility.[V-33] Above the middle entrance is what Stabius calls the “grand tower,” surmounted with the imperial crown, and containing an inscription in German to the memory of Maximilian. Above and on each side of the gates or entrances, which are of very small dimensions, are portraits of the Roman emperors from the time of Julius Cæsar to that of Maximilian himself; there are also portraits of his ancestors, and of kings and princes with whom he was allied either by friendship or marriage; shields of arms illustrative of his descent or of the extent of his sovereignty; with representations of his most memorable actions, among which his adventures in the Tyrolean Alps, when hunting the chamois, are not forgotten. Underneath each subject illustrative of his own history are explanatory verses, in the German language, engraved on wood; and the names of the kings and emperors, as well as the inscriptions explanatory of other parts of the subject, are also executed in the same manner. The whole subject is, in fact, a kind of pictorial epitome of the history of the German empire; representing the succession of the Roman emperors, and the more remarkable events of Maximilian’s own reign; with illustrations of his descent, possessions, and alliances.

[Footnote V-33: The two last names are, in the first edition,
pasted over others which appear to have been “The Gate of Honour”
and “The Gate of Relationship, Friendship, and Alliance.” The last
name alludes to the emperor’s possessions as acquired by descent
or marriage, and to his power as strengthened by his friendly
alliances with neighbouring states.]

At the time of Maximilian’s death, which happened in 1519, this great work was not finished; and it is said that Durer himself did not live to see it completed, as one small block remained to be engraved at the period of his death, in 1528. At whatever time the work might be finished, it certainly was commenced at least four years before the Emperor’s death, for the date 1515 occurs in two places at the foot of the subject. Though Durer’s mark is not to be found on any one of the cuts, there can be little doubt of his having furnished the designs for the whole. In the ninth volume of Von Murr’s Journal it is stated that Durer received a hundred guilders a year from the Emperor,--probably on account of this large work; and in the same volume there is a letter of Durer’s addressed to a friend, requesting him to apply to the emperor on account of arrears due to him. In this letter he says that he has made many drawings besides the “_Tryumps_”[V-34] for the emperor; and as he also thrice mentions Stabius, the inventor of the Triumphal Arch, there can be little doubt but that this was the work to which he alludes.

[Footnote V-34: “Item wist auch das Ich K. Mt. ausserhalb des
Tryumps sonst viel mancherley Fisyrung gemacht hab.”--“You must
also know that I have made many other drawings for the emperor
besides those of the Triumph.” The date of this letter is not
given, but Durer informs his friend that he had been already three
years employed for the emperor, and that if he had not exerted
himself the beautiful “work” would not have been so soon
completed. If this is to be understood of the Triumphal Arch, it
would seem that the designs at least were all finished before the
emperor’s death.--Von Murr, Journal, 9er Theil, S. 4.]

As a work of art the best single subjects of the Triumphal Arch will not bear a comparison with the best cuts in Durer’s Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, or Christ’s Passion; and there are several in which no trace of his effective style of drawing on wood is to be found. Most of the subjects illustrative of the emperor’s battles and adventures are in particular meagre in point of drawing, and deficient in effect. The whole composition indeed appears like the result of continued application without much display of talent. The powers of Durer had been evidently constrained to work out the conceptions of the historiographer and poet, Stabius; and as the subjects were not the suggestions of the artist’s own feelings, it cannot be a matter of surprise that we should find in them so few traces of his genius. The engraving of the cuts is clear, but not generally effective; and the execution of the whole, both figures and letters, would occupy a single wood engraver not less than four years; even allowing him to engrave more rapidly on pear-tree than a modern wood engraver does on box; and supposing him to be a master of his profession.

From his varied talents and the excellence which he displayed in every branch of art that he attempted, Albert Durer is entitled to rank with the most extraordinary men of his age. As a painter he may be considered as the father of the German school; while for his fidelity in copying nature and the beauty of his colours he may bear a comparison with most of the Italian artists of his own age. As an engraver on copper he greatly excelled all who preceded him; and it is highly questionable if any artist since his time, except Rembrandt, has painted so many good pictures and engraved so many good copper-plates. But besides excelling as an engraver on copper after the manner in which the art had been previously practised, giving to his subjects a breadth of light and a depth of shade which is not to be found in the productions of the earlier masters, he further improved the art by the invention of etching,[V-35] which enables the artist to work with greater freedom and to give a variety and an effect to his subjects, more especially landscapes, which are utterly unattainable by means of the graver alone.

[Footnote V-35: In the process of etching the plate is first
covered with a resinous composition--called etching ground--on
which the lines intended to be _etched_, or bit into the plate,
are drawn through to the surface of the metal by means of a small
pointed tool called an etching needle, or an etching point. When
the drawing of the subject upon the etching ground is finished,
the plate is surrounded with a slightly raised border, or “wall,”
as it is technically termed, formed of rosin, bee’s-wax, and lard;
and, a corrosive liquid being poured upon the plate, the lines are
“bit” into the copper or steel. When the engraver thinks that the
lines are corroded to a sufficient depth, he pours off the liquid,
cleans the plate by means of turpentine, and proceeds to finish
his work with the graver and dry-point. According to the practice
of modern engravers, where several _tints_ are required, as is
most frequently the case, the process of “biting-in” is repeated;
the corrosive liquid being again poured on the plate to corrode
deeper the stronger lines, while the more delicate are “stopped
out,”--that is, covered with a kind of varnish that soon hardens,
to preserve them from further corrosion. Most of our best
engravers now use a diamond point in etching. _Nitrous_ acid is
used for “biting-in” on copper in the proportion of one part acid
to four parts water, and the mixture is considered to be better
after it has been once or twice used. Before using the acid it is
advisable to take the stopper out of the bottle for twenty-four
hours in order to allow a portion of the strength to evaporate.
During the process of biting-in a large copper-plate the fumes
which arise are so powerful as frequently to cause an unpleasant
stricture in the throat, and sometimes to bring on a spitting of
blood when they have been incautiously inhaled by the engraver. At
such times it is usual for the engraver to have near him some
powerful essence, generally hartshorn, in order to counteract the
effects of the noxious vapour. For biting-in on steel, _nitric_
acid is used in the proportion of thirty drops to half a pint of
distilled water; and the mixture is never used for more than one
plate.--When a _copper_-plate is sufficiently bit-in, it is only
necessary to wash it with a little water previous to removing the
etching ground with turpentine; but, besides this, with a _steel_
plate it is further necessary to set it on one of its edges
against a wall or other support, and to blow it with a pair of
small bellows till every particle of moisture in the lines is
perfectly evaporated. The plate is then rubbed with oil, otherwise
the lines would rust from the action of the atmosphere and the
plate be consequently spoiled. Previous to a steel plate being
laid aside for any length of time it ought to be warmed, and the
engraved surface rubbed carefully over with virgin wax so that it
may be completely covered, and every line filled. A piece of thick
paper the size of the plate, laid over the wax while it is yet
adhesive, will prove an additional safeguard. For this information
respecting the process of biting-in, the writer is indebted to an
eminent engraver, Mr. J. T. Wilmore.]

There are two subjects by Albert Durer, dated 1512, which Bartsch thinks were etched upon plates of iron, but which Mr. Ottley considers to have been executed upon plates of a softer metal than copper, with the dry-point. There are, however, two undoubted etchings by Durer with the date 1515; two others executed in the same manner are dated 1516; and a fifth, a landscape with a large cannon in the fore-ground to the left, is dated 1518. There is another undoubted etching by Durer, representing naked figures in a bath; but it contains neither his mark nor a date. The three pieces which Mr. Ottley thinks were not etched, but executed on some soft kind of metal with the dry-point, are: 1. The figure of Christ, seen in front, standing, clothed with a mantle, having his hands tied together, and on his head a crown of thorns; date 1512. 2. St. Jerome seated amongst rocks, praying to a crucifix, with a book open before him, and a lion below to the left; date 1512. 3. The Virgin, seated with the infant Christ in her lap, and seen in front, with St. Joseph behind her on the left, and on the right three other figures; without mark or date.--One of the more common of Durer’s undoubted etchings is that of a man mounted on a unicorn, and carrying off a naked woman, with the date 1516.

Albert Durer not only excelled as a painter, an engraver on copper, and a designer on wood, but he also executed several pieces of sculpture with surprising delicacy and natural expression of character. An admirable specimen of his skill in this department of art is preserved in the British Museum, to which institution it was bequeathed by the late R. Payne Knight, Esq., by whom it was purchased at Brussels for five hundred guineas upwards of forty years ago. This most exquisite piece of sculpture is of small dimensions, being only seven and three quarter inches high, by five and a half wide. It is executed in hone-stone, of a cream colour, and is all of one piece, with the exception of a dog and one or two books in front. The subject is the naming of John the Baptist.[V-36] In front, to the right, is an old man with a tablet inscribed with Hebrew characters; another old man is seen immediately behind him, further to the right; and a younger man,--said to be intended by the artist for a portrait of himself,--appears entering the door of the apartment. An old woman with the child in her arms is seated near the figure with the tablet; St. Elizabeth is perceived lying in bed, on the more distant side of which a female attendant is standing, and on the other, nearer to the spectator, an elderly man is seen kneeling. It is supposed that the latter figure is intended for Zacharias, and that the artist had represented him in the act of making signs to Elizabeth with his hands. The figures in the fore-ground are executed in high relief, and the character and expression of the heads have perhaps never been surpassed in any work of sculpture executed on the same scale. Durer’s mark is perceived on a tablet at the foot of the bed, with the date 1510. This curious specimen of Durer’s talents as a sculptor is carefully preserved in a frame with a glass before it, and is in most perfect condition, with the exception of the hands of Zacharias and of Elizabeth, some of the fingers of which are broken off.

[Footnote V-36: The account of the naming of John the Baptist will
be found in St. Luke’s Gospel, chap. i. verse 59-64.]

Shortly after Whitsuntide, 1520, Durer set out from Nuremberg, accompanied by his wife and her servant Susanna, on a visit to the Netherlands; and as he took with him several copies of his principal works, engravings on copper as well as on wood, and painted and drew a number of portraits during his residence there, the journey appears to have been taken as much with a view to business as pleasure. He kept a journal from the time of his leaving Nuremberg till the period of his reaching Cologne on his return, and from this curious record of the artist’s travels the following particulars of his visit to the Netherlands have been obtained.[V-37]

[Footnote V-37: Durer’s Journal of his Travels is given by Von
Murr, 7er Theil, S. 55-98. The title which the Editor has prefixed
to it is, “Reisejournal Albrecht Dürer’s von seiner
Niederländischen Reise, 1520 und 1521. E. Bibliotheca Ebneriana.”
In the same volume, Von Murr gives some specimens of Durer’s
poetry. The first couplet which he made in 1509 is as follows:

“Du aller Engel Spiegel und Erlöser der Welt,
Deine grosse Marter sey für mein Sünd ein Widergelt.”

Thou mirror of all Angels and Redeemer of mankind,
Through thy martyrdom, for all my sins may I a ransom find.

This couplet being ridiculed by Bilibald Pirkheimer, who said that
rhyming verses ought not to consist of more than eight syllables,
Durer wrote several others in a shorter measure, but with no
better success; for he says at the conclusion, that they did not
please the learned counsellor. With Durer’s rhymes there is an
epistle in verse from his friend Lazarus Sprengel, written to
dissuade him from attempting to become a poet. Durer’s verses want
“the right butter-woman’s trot to market,” and are sadly deficient
in rhythm when compared with the more regular clink of his
friend’s.]

Durer proceeded from Nuremberg direct to Bamberg, where he presented to the bishop a painting of the Virgin, with a copy of the Apocalypse and the Life of the Virgin engraved on wood. The bishop invited Durer to his table, and gave him a letter exempting his goods from toll, with three others which were, most likely, letters of recommendation to persons of influence in the Netherlands.[V-38] From Bamberg, Durer proceeded by way of Eltman, Sweinfurth, and Frankfort to Mentz, and from the latter city down the Rhine to Cologne. In this part of his journey he seems to have met with little which he deemed worthy of remark: at Sweinfurth Dr. Rebart made him a present of some wine; at Mentz, Peter Goldsmith’s landlady presented him with two flasks of the same liquor; and when Veit Varnbuler invited him to dinner there, the tavern-keeper would not receive any payment, but insisted on being Durer’s host himself. At Lohnstein, on the Rhine, between Boppart and Coblentz, the toll-collector, who was well acquainted with Durer’s wife, presented him with a can of wine, and expressed himself extremely glad to see him.

[Footnote V-38: Subsequently, Durer mentions having delivered to
the Margrave John, at Brussels, a letter of recommendation
[Fürderbrief] from the Bishop of Bamberg.]

From Cologne, Durer proceeded direct to Antwerp, where he took up his abode in the house of “Jobst Planckfelt;” and on the evening of his arrival[V-39] he was invited to a splendid supper by Bernard Stecher, an agent of the Fuggers, the celebrated family of merchants of Nuremberg, and the most wealthy in Germany. On St. Oswald’s day, Sunday, 5th August, the Painters’ Company of Antwerp invited Durer, with his wife and her maid,[V-40] to a grand entertainment in their hall, which was ornamented in a splendid manner, and all the vessels on the table were of silver. The wives of the painters were also present; and when Durer was conducted to his seat at the table “all the company stood up on each side, as if some great lord had been making his entrance.” Several honourable persons, who had also been invited, bowed to him; and all expressed their respect and their wishes to afford him pleasure. While he was at table the messenger of the magistrates of Antwerp made his appearance, and presented him in their name with four flaggons of wine, saying, that the magistrates thus testified their respect and their good-will towards him. Durer, as in duty bound, returned thanks, and tendered to the magisterial body his humble service. After this little affair was despatched, entered Peter the city carpenter _in propria persona_, and presented Durer with two more flaggons of wine, and complimented him with the offer of his services. After the party had enjoyed themselves cheerfully till late in the night, they attended Durer to his lodgings with torches in a most honourable manner, expressing their good-will towards him, and their readiness to assist him in whatever manner he might choose.--Shortly after this grand Fellowship-feast, Durer was entertained by Quintin Matsys,--frequently called the Blacksmith of Antwerp,--whose celebrated picture of the Misers is now in the Royal Collection at Windsor.

[Footnote V-39: As Durer was at Cologne about the 26th July, it is
probable that he would arrive at Antwerp about the last day of
that month.]

[Footnote V-40: The maid, Susanna, seems to have been rather a
“humble friend” than a menial servant; for she is mentioned in
another part of the Journal as being entertained with Durer’s wife
at the house of “Tomasin Florianus,” whom Durer describes as
“_Romanus_, von Luca bürtig.”]

On the Sunday after the Assumption,[V-41] Durer witnessed a grand procession in honour of the Virgin, and the account which he has given of it presents so curious a picture of the old religious pageantries that it appears worthy of being translated without abridgement. “On the Sunday after the Assumption of our Lady,” says the artist, “I saw the grand procession from our Lady’s church at Antwerp, where all the inhabitants of the city assembled, gentry as well as trades-people, each, according to his rank, gayly dressed. Every class and fellowship was distinguished by its proper badge; and large and valuable crosses were borne before several of the crafts. There were also silver trumpets of the old Frankish fashion; with German drums and fifes playing loudly. I also saw in the street, marching after each other in rank, at a certain distance, the Goldsmiths, the Painters, the Masons, the Embroiderers, the Statuaries, the Cabinet-makers, the Carpenters, the Sailors, the Fishermen, the Butchers, the Curriers, the Weavers, the Bakers, the Tailors, the Shoemakers, and all kinds of craftsmen with labourers engaged in producing the necessaries of life. In the same manner came the Shopkeepers and Merchants with their assistants. After these came the Shooters, with firelocks, bows, and cross-bows, some on horseback and some on foot; and after them came the City Guard. These were followed by persons of the higher classes and the magistrates, all dressed in their proper habits; and after them came a gallant troop arrayed in a noble and splendid manner. In this procession were a number of females of a religious order who subsist by means of their labour, all clothed in white from head to foot, and forming a very pleasing sight. After them came a number of gallant persons and the canons of our Lady’s church, with all the clergy and scholars, followed by a grand display of characters. Twenty men carried the Virgin and Christ, most richly adorned, to the honour of God. In this part of the procession were a number of delightful things, represented in a splendid manner. There were several waggons in which were representations of ships and fortifications. Then came a troop of characters from the Prophets in regular order, followed by others from the New Testament, such as the Annunciation, the Wise Men of the East, riding on great camels and other wonderful animals, and the Flight into Egypt, all very skilfully appointed. Then came a great dragon, and St. Margaret, with the image of the Virgin at her girdle, exceedingly beautiful; and last St. George and his squire. In this troop rode a number of boys and girls very handsomely arrayed in various costumes, representing so many saints. This procession, from beginning to end, was upwards of two hours in passing our house; and there were so many things to be seen, that I could never describe them all even in a book.”[V-42]

[Footnote V-41: The Assumption of the Virgin is celebrated in the
Roman Catholic Church on the 15th August.]

[Footnote V-42: Albrecht Dürer’s Reisejournal, in Von Murr, 7er
Theil, S. 63-65.]

Though Durer chiefly resided at Antwerp during his stay in the Netherlands, he did not entirely confine himself to that city, but occasionally visited other places. On the 2nd of September 1520, he left Antwerp for Brussels, proceeding by way of Malines and Vilvorde. When at Brussels, he saw a number of valuable curiosities which had been sent to the Emperor from Mexico, among which he enumerates a golden sun, a fathom broad, and a silver moon of the same size, with weapons, armour, and dresses, and various other admirable things of great beauty and cost. He says that their value was estimated at a hundred thousand guilders; and that he never saw any thing that pleased him so much in his life. Durer was evidently fond of seeing sights; he speaks with delight of the fountains, the labyrinths, and the parks in the neighbourhood of the Royal Palace, which he says were like Paradise; and among the wonders which he saw at Brussels, he notices a large fish-bone which was almost a fathom in circumference and weighed fifteen “centner;”[V-43] a great bed that would hold fifty men; and a stone which fell from the sky in a thunder-storm in presence of the Count of Nassau. He also mentions having seen at Antwerp the bones of a giant who had been eighteen feet high. Durer and his wife seem to have had a taste for zoology: Herr Lazarus Von Ravenspurg complimented him with a monkey; and “Signor Roderigo,” a Portuguese, presented his ill-tempered spouse with a green parrot.

[Footnote V-43: This “gross Fischpein” was probably part of the
back-bone of a whale.]

When at Brussels, Durer painted the portrait of the celebrated Erasmus, from whom, previous to leaving Antwerp, he had received as a present a Spanish mantle and three portraits. He remained about a week at Brussels, during which time he drew or painted seven portraits; and in his Journal he makes the following memorandum: “Item, six persons whose likenesses I have taken at Brussels, have not given me anything.” Among those portraits was that of Bernard Van Orley, an eminent Flemish painter who had studied under Raffaele, and who at that time held the office of painter to the Archduchess Margaret, regent of the Netherlands, and aunt of the Emperor Charles V. When at Brussels, Durer bought for a stiver[V-44] two copies of the “Eulenspiegel,” a celebrated engraving by Lucas Van Leyden, now of very great rarity.

[Footnote V-44: The stiver was the twenty-fourth part of a guilder
or florin of gold, which was equal to about nine shillings English
money of the present time; the stiver would therefore be equal to
about four pence half-penny. About the same time, Durer sold a
copy of his Christ’s Passion, probably the large one, for twelve
stivers, and an impression of his copper-plate of Adam and Eve for
four stivers. Shortly after his first arrival at Antwerp, he sold
sixteen copies of the Little Passion for four guilders or florins;
and thirty-two copies of his larger works,--probably the
Apocalypse, the History of the Virgin, and the Great Passion,--for
eight florins, being at the rate of sixteen stivers for each copy.
He also sold six copies of the Passion engraved on copper at the
same price. He gave to his host a painting of the Virgin on
canvass to sell for two Rhenish florins. The sum that he received
for each portrait in pencil [the German is mit Kohlen, which is
literally charcoal], when the parties _did_ pay, appears to have
been a florin.]

After remaining at Antwerp till the latter end of September, Durer proceeded to Aix-la-Chapelle, where, on the 23rd of October, he witnessed the coronation of the Emperor Charles V. He afterwards proceeded to Cologne, where, on the Sunday after All Saints’ day, he saw a grand banquet and dance given by the emperor, from whom, on the Monday after Martinmas day, he received the appointment of court-painter to his Imperial Majesty. When at Cologne, Durer bought a copy of the “Condemnation of that good man, Martin Luther, for a white-penny.” This Condemnation was probably a copy of the bull of excommunication issued against Luther by Pope Leo X. on 20th June 1520. In a day or two after receiving his appointment, Durer left Cologne and proceeded down the Rhine, and visited Nimeguen. He then went to Bois-le-duc, where he was entertained by Arnold de Beer, a painter of considerable reputation in his day, and treated with great respect by the goldsmiths of the place. On the Thursday after the Presentation of the Virgin,[V-45]--21st November,--Durer again arrived at Antwerp. “In the seven weeks and upwards that I was absent,” he writes in his Journal, “my wife and her maid spent seven gold crowns. The first had her pocket cut off in St. Mary’s church on St. Mary’s day; there were two guilders in it.”

[Footnote V-45: In Von Murr the words are “Am Donnerstage nach
Marien Himmelfahrt,”--On the Thursday after the _Assumption_ of
the Virgin. But this is evidently incorrect, the feast of the
Assumption being kept on 15th August. The “Marien Opferung”--the
Presentation of the Virgin--which is commemorated on 21st
November, is evidently meant.]

On the 3rd of December, Durer left Antwerp on a short journey through Zealand, proceeding by way of Bergen-op-Zoom. In the Abbey at Middleburg he saw the great picture of the Descent from the Cross by Mabeuse; of which he remarks that “it is better painted than drawn.” When he was about to land at Armuyden, a small town on the island of Walcheren, the rope broke, and a violent wind arising, the boat which he was in was driven out to sea. Some persons, however, at length came to their assistance, and brought all the passengers safely ashore. On the Friday after St. Lucia’s day he again returned to Antwerp, after having been absent about twelve days.

On Shrove Tuesday, 1521, the company of goldsmiths invited Durer and his wife to a dinner, at which he was treated with great honour; and as this was an early meal, he was enabled at night to attend a grand banquet to which he was invited by one of the chief magistrates of Antwerp. On the Monday after his entertainment by the goldsmiths he was invited to another grand banquet which lasted two hours, and where he won, at some kind of game, two guilders of Bernard of Castile. Both at this and at the magistrates’ banquet there was masquerading. At another entertainment given by Master Peter the Secretary, Durer and Erasmus were present. He was not idle at this period of festivity, but drew several portraits in pencil. He also made a drawing for “Tomasin,” and a painting of St. Jerome for Roderigo of Portugal, who appears to have been one of the most liberal of all Durer’s Antwerp friends. Besides the little green parrot which he gave his wife, he also presented Durer with one for himself; he also gave him a small cask of comfits, with various other sweetmeats, and specimens of the sugar-cane. He also made him a present of cocoa-nuts and of several other things; and shortly before the painting was finished, Signor Roderigo gave him two large pieces of Portuguese gold coin, each of which was worth ten ducats.

On the Saturday after Easter, Durer visited Bruges, where he saw in St. James’s church some beautiful paintings by Hubert Van Eyck and Hugo Vander Goes; and in the Painters’ chapel, and in other churches, he saw several by John Van Eyck; he also mentions having seen, in St. Mary’s church, an image of the Virgin in alabaster by Michael Angelo. The guild of painters invited him to a grand banquet in their hall. Two of the magistrates, Jacob and Peter Mostaert, presented him with twelve flaggons of wine; and on the conclusion of the entertainment, all the company, amounting to sixty persons, accompanied him with torches to his lodgings. He next visited Ghent, where the company of painters also treated him with great respect. He there saw, in St. John’s church, the celebrated picture of the Elders worshipping the Lamb, from the Revelations, painted by John Van Eyck for Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy. Durer thus expresses his opinion of it: “This is a well conceived and capital picture; the figures of Eve, the Virgin, and God the Father, are, in particular, extremely good.” After being about a week absent, he again returned to Antwerp, where he was shortly after seized with an intermitting fever, which was accompanied with a violent head-ache and great sense of weariness. This illness, however, does not seem to have lasted very long; his fever commenced in the third week after Easter, and on Rogation Sunday he attended the marriage feast of “Meister Joachim,”--probably Joachim Patenier, a landscape painter whom Durer mentions in an earlier part of his Journal.

Durer was a man of strong religious feelings; and when Luther began to preach in opposition to the church of Rome, he warmly espoused his cause. The following passages from his Journal sufficiently demonstrate the interest which he felt in the success of the great champion of the Reformation. Luther on his return from Worms, where he had attended the Diet under a safe-conduct granted by the Emperor Charles V, was waylaid, on 4th May 1521, by a party of armed men, who caused him to descend from the light waggon in which he was travelling, and to follow them into an adjacent wood. His brother James, who was in the waggon with him, made his escape on the first appearance of the horsemen. Luther having been secured, the driver and others who were in the waggon were allowed to pursue their journey without further hindrance. This secret apprehension of Luther was, in reality, contrived by his friend and supporter, Frederick, Elector of Saxony,[V-46] in order to withdraw him for a time from the apprehended violence of his enemies, whose hatred towards him had been more than ever inflamed by the bold and undisguised statement of his opinions at Worms. Luther’s friends, being totally ignorant of the elector’s design, generally supposed that the safe-conduct had been disregarded by those whose duty it was to respect it, and that he had been betrayed and delivered into the hands of his enemies. Durer, on hearing of Luther’s apprehension, writes in his Journal as follows.

[Footnote V-46: Luther’s safe-conduct from Worms to Wittenberg was
limited to twenty-one days, at the expiration of which he was
declared to be under the ban of the empire, or, in other words, an
outlaw, to whom no prince or free city of Germany was to afford a
refuge. Luther, previous to leaving Worms, was informed of the
elector’s intention of secretly apprehending him on the road and
conveying him to a place of safety. After getting into the wood,
Luther was mounted on horseback, and conveyed to Wartburg,
a castle belonging to the elector, where he continued to live
disguised as a knight--Junker Jörge--till March 1522. Luther was
accustomed to call the castle of Wartburg his Patmos.]

“On the Friday after Whitsuntide, 1521, I heard a report at Antwerp, that Martin Luther had been treacherously seized; for the herald of the Emperor Charles, who attended him with a safe-conduct, and to whose protection he was committed, on arriving at a lonely place near Eisenach, said he durst proceed no further, and rode away. Immediately ten horsemen made their appearance, and carried off the godly man thus betrayed into their hands. He was indeed a man enlightened by the Holy Ghost, and a follower of the true Christian faith. Whether he be yet living, or whether his enemies have put him to death, I know not; yet certainly what he has suffered has been for the sake of truth, and because he has reprehended the abuses of unchristian papacy, which strives to fetter Christian liberty with the incumbrance of human ordinances, that we may be robbed of the price of our blood and sweat, and shamefully plundered by idlers, while the sick and needy perish through hunger. Above all, it is especially distressing to me to think that God may yet allow us to remain under the blind doctrine which those men called ‘the fathers’ have imagined and set forth, whereby the precious word is either in many places falsely expounded or not at all observed.”[V-47]

[Footnote V-47: Durer, though an advocate of Luther, does not seem
to have withdrawn himself from the communion of the Church of
Rome. In his Journal, in 1521, he enters a sum of ten stivers
given to his confessor, and, subsequently, eight stivers given to
a monk who visited his wife when she was sick. The passage in
which the last item occurs is curious, and seems to prove that
female practitioners were then accustomed both to dispense and
administer medical preparations at Antwerp. “Meine Frau ward
krank,--der Apothekerinn für Klystiren gegeben 14 Stüber; dem
Mönch, der sie besuchte, 8 Stüber.”--Von Murr, Journal, 7er Theil,
S. 93.]

After indulging in sundry pious invocations and reflections to the extent of two or three pages, Durer thus proceeds to lament the supposed death of Luther, and to invoke Erasmus to put his hand to the work from which he believed that Luther had been removed. “And is Luther dead? Who henceforth will so clearly explain to us the Gospel? Alas! what might he not have written for us in ten or twenty years? Aid me, all pious Christians, to bewail this man of heavenly mind, and to pray that God may send us another as divinely enlightened. Where, O Erasmus, wilt thou remain? Behold, now, how the tyranny of might and the power of darkness prevail. Hear, thou champion of Christ! Ride forward, defend the truth, and deserve the martyr’s crown, for thou art already an old man.[V-48] I have heard from thy own mouth that thou hast allotted to thyself two years yet of labour in which thou mightst still be able to produce something good; employ these well for the benefit of the Gospel and the true Christian faith: let then thy voice be heard, and so shall not the see of Rome, the gates of Hell, as Christ saith, prevail against thee. And though, like thy master, thou shouldst bear the scorn of the liars, and even die a short time earlier than thou otherwise mightst, yet wilt thou therefore pass earlier from death unto eternal life and be glorified through Christ. If thou drinkest of the cup of which he drank, so wilt thou reign with him and pronounce judgment on those who have acted unrighteously.”[V-49]

[Footnote V-48: This inducement for Erasmus to stand forth as a
candidate for the honour of martyrdom is, in the original, as
simple in expression as it is novel in conception: “Du bist doch
sonst ein altes Menniken.” Literally: For thou art already an old
_mannikin_. Erasmus, however, was not a spirit to be charmed to
enter such a circle by such an invocation. As he said of himself,
“his gift did not lie that way,” and he had as little taste for
martyrdom as he had for fish.--In one or two other passages in
Durer’s Journal there is an allusion to the diminutive stature of
Erasmus.]

[Footnote V-49: Von Murr, Journal, 7er Theil, S. 88-93. In volume
X, p. 41, Von Murr gives from Peucer, the son-in-law of
Melancthon, the following anecdote: “Melancthon, when at
Nuremberg, on church and university affairs, was much in the
society of Pirkheimer; and Albert Durer, the painter, an
intelligent man, whose least merit, as Melancthon used to say, was
his art, was frequently one of the party. Between Pirkheimer and
Durer there were frequent disputes respecting the recent
[religious] contest, in which Durer, as he was a man of strong
mind, vigorously opposed Pirkheimer, and refuted his arguments as
if he had come prepared for the discussion. Pirkheimer growing
warm, for he was very irritable and much plagued with the gout,
would sometimes exclaim “Not so:--these things cannot be
_painted_.”--“And the arguments which you allege,” Durer would
reply, “can neither be correctly expressed nor
comprehended.”--Whatever might have been the particular points in
dispute between the two friends, Pirkheimer, as well as Durer, was
a supporter of the doctrines of Luther.”]

About this time a large wood-cut, of which the following is a reduced copy, was published; and though the satire which it contains will apply equally to any monk who may be supposed to be an instrument of the devil, it was probably directed against Luther in particular, as a teacher of false doctrine through the inspiration of the father of lies. In the cut the arch-enemy, as a bag-piper, is seen blowing into the ear of a monk, whose head forms the “bag,” and by skilful fingering causing the nose, elongated in the form of a “chanter,” to discourse sweet music. The preaching friars of former times were no less celebrated for their nasal melody than the “saints” in the days of Cromwell. A serious portrait of Luther, probably engraved or drawn on wood by Hans Baldung Grün, a pupil of Durer, was also published in 1521. It is printed in a quarto tract, entitled, “Acta et Res gestæ D. Martini Lutheri in Comitiis Principum Vuormaciæ, Anno MDXXI,” and also in a tract, written by Luther himself in answer to Jerome Emser, without date, but probably printed at Wittenberg about 1523. In this portrait, which bears considerable resemblance to the head forming the bag of Satan’s pipe, Luther appears as if meditating on a passage that he has just read in a volume which he holds open; his head is surrounded with rays of glory; and the Holy Ghost, in the form of a dove, appears as if about to settle on his shaven crown. In an impression now before me, some one, apparently a contemporary, who thought that Luther’s inspiration was derived from another source, has with pen and ink transformed the dove into one of those unclean things between bat and serpent, which are supposed to be appropriate to the regions of darkness, and which are generally to be seen in paintings and engravings of the temptation of St. Anthony.