Germ2008 Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography in Self-Portraits of...

8/19/2019 Germ2008 Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography in Self-Portraits of Albrecht Dürer

1/20

Martin Germ

Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography

in Self-Portraits of Albrecht Dürer

UDK 75 Nicolas Cusanus 75 Duerer, A. 7.046.3:232.96

The identification with Christ in self-portrayal of Albrecht Dürer is most often based on Dürer’s empathy with Christ’s passionalthough in some cases a more complex idea of christomimesi s can not be excluded. This is most evident in his Self-Portrait ina Fur-Collared Robe (1500, Alte Pinakothek, Munich). The article concentrates on the possible influence of Nicholas of Cusa’sChristology on the iconography of Dürer’sSelf-Portrait of 1500 – a theory much discussed in the last fifty years. The compara-tive analysis of philosophy of Nicholas of Cusa and Dürer’s artistic and written opus brings to light surprisingly close views onbeauty, harmony, ideal proportions, and the importance of mathematics in visual arts. Even more important is the commonnotion of Man and the relationship between Man and God. Cusanus’s teachings on Christ mark a new stage in the history ofChristian humanism: by describing Christ as “homo perfectus” and Man as “alter Deus” the Cusan emphasizes a close relation-ship between Christ and Man, thus paving the way for the revolutionary humanistic notion of Man as (almost) equal to God.The relationship is so intimate that according to the Cusan a man who tries to envisage His true image – vera icon Christi - willfinally see it as a mirror-reflection of his own face. That is precisely the case in Dürer’s Self-Portrait in Munich: Dürer depictshimself as Christ because the real image of God is actually a mirror in which the spectator’s own features are reflected.

Key words: Albrecht Dürer, Self-Portrait, Nicholas of Cusa, Christology, Iconography, Renaissance art

Despite numerous studies in the revolutionary iconography of Dürer’s Christological self-portrai-

ture this issue still remains something of a challenge for the scholars.1 The original synthesis of self-por-

traiture and Christological motif – Dürer was the first European artist to fashion himself after Christ’s

likeness – is multi-layered and comes up in several versions in his opus. Most often it follows a simple

pattern where the painter uses the established iconography of Christ and assimilates it to the desired

form of self-portrait. This process generates an important new message, arising from the identification

of the artist with the chosen iconographic type of Christ.

Perhaps the most straightforward example of this approach is the drawing Self-Portrait as the Manof Sorrows (1522, formerly Kunsthalle, Bremen; fig.1) where Dürer chose to portray himself as the Man of

Sorrows.2 The painter had caught fever during his visit to the Netherlands and had suffered severe pain

– consequently he “identified” with Christ in his suffering.3 He portrayed himself in a modified version

of the traditional iconographic type which at the time of his illness corresponded with his self-image.

The utmost naturalistic approach in the treatment of the figure speaks volumes for Dürer’s feelings. The

relation between Christ’s suffering and his own suffering appears, slightly modified, throughout Dürer’s

Martin Germ University of Ljubljana, Slovenia

[email protected]


2/20

IKON, 1-2008

180

opus and sheds further light on the lost Bremen drawing. Such analogy is recognisable in the drawing

of The Suffering Christ (charcoal, 1503, British Museum, London; fig. 2) which includes an inscription

(besides the prominent Dürer’s monogram) explaining that the drawing had originated at the time of

his illness.4 Another side of the concealed identification is shown in the nude self-portrait from Weimar

(Nude Self-Portrait , pen and brush, c. 1503, Staatliche Kunstsammlung, Weimar; fig. 3) which was done atapproximately the same period. Here Dürer’s emaciated body is marked by a peculiar crease or shadow

in the place where one usually finds Christ’s side wound. Werner Schmidt argues that this is a direct al-

lusion to Christ’s mortal wound.5

Many art historians agree that Dürer’s identification with the suffering Christ should most prob-

ably be interpreted along the premises of the late medieval idea of “Conformitas Christi “, and they quote

Thomas à Kempis and his Imitatio Christi as the most likely source.6 The notion of deliberate following in

the footsteps of Christ through empathy with his Passion was widely spread throughout Germany and

can be found in Cusanus’s work as well. Yet it doesn’t feature prominently in his soteriological doctrine

– which invokes a different understanding of man’s relation to Christ – and consequently can hardly be

considered as substantial influence on Dürer.

Another example where Christological content blends with self-portraiture in Dürer’s opus is theengraving Sudarium of St. Veronica Supported by two Angels (1513, British Museum, London; fig.4). Here

the author’s identification with Christ is shown by the fact that Dürer transfers his own features into

those of the Holy Face. The motif itself is traditional, both in title and execution – two angels holding up

a sudarium with the imprint of Christ’s features in which we now recognize Dürer’s own face. This then

is no longer a classical portrait but a modification of the Christological iconographic type by means of

introduction of author’s own features into the image of Christ.7 Here, as before, the identification with

Christ is indicated through empathy with the suffering, which is evident by the choice of the iconograph-

ic type and follows the leading topos of participation in Christ’s passion. But in this case one should not

fail to consider the idea of chrystomimesis in a wider theological, philosophical and humanistic context

as well. This train of thought is further supported by the most complex blend of Christological iconog-raphy and self-portraiture in Dürer’s opus embodied in his famous Self-Portrait in a Fur-Collared Robe (oil

on lime panel, 1500, Alte Pinakothek, Munich; fig. 5).8

There is no doubt that the panel was meant to be a self-portrait, a fact which is further supported

by the inscription in gold: Albertus Durerus Noricus ipsum me proprijs sic effingebam coloribus aetatis anno

XXVIII . But at the same time it is evident that it is more than a self-portrait9 and that the problem of

Christological iconography in this case seems rather more complicated. We are not dealing with a mere

application or modification of a chosen iconographic type but with a wider context in the understand-

ing of chrystomimesis which unveils a complex relation between the artist’s self-perception and his un-

derstanding of Christ.

The 1500 Christomorphic Self-Portrait from Alte Pinakothek received undivided attention and nu-

merous interpretations as one of the greatest Dürer’s masterpieces.10 It is not the purpose of this paperto summarise them all, I would just like to concentrate on the aspect of possible influence of Nicholas

of Cusa on Dürer, a theory first introduced by Franz Winzinger.11 His argument was resonant and dis-

cussions that followed illuminated the iconography of the Christomorphic Self-Portrait from different

points of view.12 Commentators also pointed to the limitations of Winzinger’s argument, namely that

there is no direct historical proof to support the Cusan’s influence on Dürer. This remains a fact, yet the


3/20

Germ, Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography in Self-Portraits...

181

(possible) non-existence of archival documents in support of the thesis does not necessarily imply that

Dürer could not have been acquainted with some of the key ideas by the Cardinal of Cusa, who at that

time was widely known both in Italy and Germany.13 Even the more sceptical authors accept the pos-

sibility that Dürer could have learned about Cusanus’s teachings through his circle of friends, the lead-

ing German humanists Wilibald Pirkheimer and Conrad Celtis.14

It is a historical fact that the Strasbourgedition of Cusanus’s writings (Opuscula, edited by the Cardinal’s pupil and secretary Peter von Erkelenz

in 1488) received a substantial acclaim of German humanists. This is further supported by the scope of

attention devoted to Cusanus in the 1510 Speculum intellectuale felicitatis humanae, published by Ul-

rich Pinder in Nuremberg.15 And even before that Hartmann Schedel praises Cusanus in his Nuremberg

Chronicle of 1493 as a famous and honoured scholar: “Nicolaus von Cusa, ein Deutscher, ein vortrefflicher

und hochgelehrter Kardinal, wurde zu dieser Zeit gerühmt und gepreisen…” 16 Finally, there also remains

the fact that Cusanus’s godfather Anton Koberger, who owned a printing house in Nuremberg from

1469 on, published a portion of Cardinal’s writings.

But let us put aside the question of how Dürer may have learned about Cusanus’s work, and con-

centrate rather on the similarity of those ideas which show that Dürer must have been familiar with at

least parts of Cusanus’s teachings, especially his Christology. Winzinger pointed out several parallelsbut, surprisingly, didn’t provide a broader analysis of Cusanus’s work. As the starting point of his thesis

he used an exact formal analysis of the 1500 Self-Portrait . Winzinger successfully proved the hypothesis,

put forward already by Ludwig Justi,17 i. e. that the famous panel isn’t a mere self-depiction of the Nu-

remberg master but also a carefully thought-out construction built on the principles of ideal numerical

proportions and geometric forms. The scheme incorporates the basic forms, the circle, square and equi-

lateral triangle, and is based on the use of a unified measure in the form of inter-pupillary distance. Even

though there are some digressions from perfect symmetry, this proves to be a deliberate move which

gives the face its individuality and likeness without any harm to the original scheme.18

Winzinger outlined briefly the development of the Neo-Platonic concept of beauty with regard to

the motif of Christ’s beauty and mentioned Nicholas of Cusa and his symbolism of geometric forms, butdidn’t touch on Cusanus’s aesthetics and Christology (which are inseparable) at all. Here precisely lies

the weakness of his argument, because in Cusanus’s opus we can find ideas which shed new light on

the complex iconography of the Christomorphic Self-Portrait . In good measure this deficiency was dealt

with by Joseph Leo Koerner who, in his argument, apart from De Docta Ignorantia and the notorious

De Visione Dei , also included Idiota de mente. His excellent study covers much more that just Cusanus’s

influence on Dürer, yet again Koerner doesn’t treat Cusanus’s Christology with due attention and causes

certain critical points in the iconographic analysis of 1500 Panel to go unnoticed. It is of course impos-

sible to discuss within this paper in depth both the Cusan’s Christology and aesthetics, but nevertheless

I would like to outline those points which are instrumental in the understanding of the iconography of

the Christomorphic Self-Portrait .19

One of the key points of the Cusan’s Christology is a new, radically individualised notion of Christ.It is marked by the changed evaluation of man, his free will and his creativity. Nicholas of Cusa stresses

the active role of every individual who – in certain aspects – is almost equal to Christ. Each individual is

completely free to decide to follow Christ, who is the only path towards Redemption. In his teachings

Cusanus surpasses the established belief that it is true faith and following in Christ’s footsteps that make

man more Christ-like in that he also acknowledges the visual component of chrystomimesis, which of


4/20

IKON, 1-2008

182

course is of tantamount importance for visual arts.20 It is also important to note that on the other hand

he tries to illustrate the chosen Christological content with a wide range of metaphors from the world

of visual arts.21 Apart from this he is also capable to think as an artist and doesn’t hesitate to illustrate

even the most demanding theological topics with examples from contemporary painting. His Christol-

ogy and anthropology are both ripe with metaphors of mirror and painted portrait which he uses toillustrate the relation between God and man.

The most famous example of this metaphorisation can be found in De Visione Dei where Cusanus

uses the metaphor of God’s vision based on the vera icon type of Christ. De Visione Dei is the most quot-

ed text in the work of those scholars who assert the Cusan’s influence on Dürer. However, the majority of

them don’t surpass the central idea of The Holy Face. They concentrate on the classic topos of an artist

who through his work associates himself with alter Deus, but they don’t discuss the overall message of

the text nor do they read the text itself within the broader context of Cusanus’s Christological teach-

ings.22

Using the image of vera icon or the “portrait of the All-seeing” Nicholas of Cusa emphasises the

omnivoyant view which follows the beholder. Cusanus sent an image of the Omnivoyant along with his

treatise to the monks at Tegernsee to illustrate his idea. He believed it was the best way to make themsee the divine truth: “Si vos humaniter ad divina vehere contendo similitudine quadam hoc fieri oportet. Sed

inter humana opera non repperi imaginem omnia videntis proposito nostro convenientiorem, ita quod facies

subtili arte pictoria ita se habeat quasi cuncta circumspicat.” 23 (Cusanus shows a considerable knowledge

of contemporary art by enumerating several works of art that have the same quality of omnivoyance).24

Due to the peculiarity of this type of painting a unique relation arises between the painting and its

viewer (or several viewers), between the omnipresent and omnivoyant vision of God and the vision

of each individual viewer. The depiction of this relationship is for Cusanus the beginning of his major

theme of the relation between God and man, the absolute and the individual, etc., which leads to the

pivotal point of his philosophy: coincidentia oppositorum.25 His philosophical conjecture finds its perfect

illustration in an accomplished work of art: the vision that is fixed, yet follows the observer, tropes forco-incidence of stillness and movement – the vision “moves without movement”.26 The painted eye,

however still, seems to “move”, and beholds simultaneously the viewer in the east as well as the one in

the west, beholds all together and each separately. And still, this happens in such a way that every indi-

vidual observer feels as though he is the sole centre of the icon’s gaze.27

The all-encompassing gaze of the icon is a metaphor for God’s vision, which, to Cusanus, repre-

sents the universal essence of all existence, but at the same time endows each individual with a limitless

capability to develop his own individuality. The vision is namely not absolute only within its omnipres-

ence, but also in the sense of endless potentiality of the individual – this vision then, is a sum total of

an infinite number of endlessly different individual visions.28 The notion of God’s vision which encom-

passes all individual visions was developed in Cusanus’s teachings, where Christ is seen as the perfect

human being (homo perfectus) also in the sense that he is the inexhaustible source of any human indi-viduality.29 The absolute vision is eternal and omnipresent, regardless of the fact whether we are aware

of it or not. It becomes actively present for the beholder only in the act of confrontation, i. e. when the

beholder decides to have a look at the image. Cusanus uses this relationship as the starting point for

one of the principal themes both of his philosophy and Christology, namely the question of man’s free

will. This topic was widely discussed in the Renaissance, not only by the philosophers but by many gi-


5/20


183

1. Albrecht Dürer, Self-Portrait as the Man of Sorrows, lead pencil, 1522, formerlyKunsthalle, Bremen


6/20

IKON, 1-2008

184

ants of Renaissance art as well. The question is – needless to say – immanent to any artistic genius, and

therefore ideas found in Leonardo or Dürer don’t come as a surprise. But it should be remembered that

truly great, revolutionary words on human free will had been written some half a century earlier by the

Cardinal of Cusa.30

The Cusan takes human free will for granted.31

The notion of man’s free will arises from the veryfoundations of his philosophical system. It has ontological value and plays an important part in the un-

derstanding of Redemption in Christ. In it coincide the universal (absolute, limitless, infinite…) and the

individual (relative, limited, finite…) – Christ approaches man as equal and any future relationship be-

tween the two is left, according to Cusanus, to man’s free will: “Per me igitur stat non per te Domine…” 32.

The revolutionary understanding of the relationship between the Christian and Christ, as pro-

posed by Cusanus, left an important imprint on the development of Christian humanism and the Ren-

aissance concept of dignitas hominis. Cusanus’s Christology and anthropology are inextriccably inter-

twined because, to him, Christ is God and the perfect human at the same time. In his divine nature he is

God, but as human he is the most perfect embodiment of the human nature – “…in te natura humana

est perfectissima et exemplari suo coniunctissima,” says Cusanus.33 Christ incorporates «summa et perfec-

tissima humanitas … postquam humanitas in summo gradu et omni plenitudine aliter esse non potuit nisiin divina Filii persona». 34 Christ is the «mediator» between God the Father and man in the gnoseological

sense as well. Through him the unfathomable divine essence comes closer to the limitations of human

recognition, i. e. only through Christ can our mind truly think God and find its way to Him.35 Christ is the

revelation of God the Father, completion of the Creation and the most perfect image of His Father.36 At

the same time Christ the mediator reveals himself to every individual in his own way, walks lovingly to-

wards each man, as if his divine love was directed at him only and at nobody else in the world.37

The intimate relationship between Christ and man is the most transparent in words Cusanus puts

into Christ’s mouth: “ ... sis tu tuus et ego ero tuus.” 38 In terms of the iconography of Dürer’s Self-Portrait it

is of special importance to note that Cusanus finds the essence of this relationship in the unique quality

of the Holy Face, of which he says with elation: “O Domine quam admirabilis est facies tua, quam si iuvenusconcipere vellet iuvenilem fingeret et vir virilem et senex senilem. Quis hoc unicum exemplar verissimum et

adaequatissimum omnium facierum ita omnium et singulorum et ita perfectissime cuiuslibet quasi nulius

alterius concipere posest?” 39 Consequently everyone who devotedly seeks the true image of God will

find it only to realise it is the mirror image of himself, i.e. he will behold God in his own image: “Quando

igitur tu Deus meus occuris mihi quasi prima materia formabilis quia respicis formam cuiuslibet et intuentis,

tunc me elevas et videam, quomodo intuens te non dat tibi formam, sed in te intuentur se, quia a te recipit id,

quod est. Et ita id, quod videris ab intuente recipere, hoc donas, quasi sis speculum aeternitatis vivum, quod

est forma formarum. In quod speculum dum quis respicit, videt formam suam in forma formarum, quae est

speculum.” 40

In Cusanus’s metaphor the true image of God – vera icon – is invested with the qualities of a mir-

ror. God’s absolute vision is a place where “see” and “be seen” coincide, and, metaphorically, so do “theseer” and “the seen”. In this consists the precise quality of Dürer’s Self-Portrait . The illusion of the gaze

“stepping out of the frame of the painting” turns the image itself into the “subject beholding the viewer”.

The viewer thus becomes the “object” of the image, and in this way the categories subject/object merge

metaphorically. Since the panel is a self-portrait as well as the image of Christ, it therefore becomes a

pictorial realisation of Cusanus’s argument that in Christ’s true image every viewer finds a reflection of


7/20


185

2. Albrecht Dürer, The Suffering Christ, charcoal, 1503, British Museum, London


8/20

IKON, 1-2008

186

5. Albrecht Dürer, Self-Portrait in a Fur-Collared Robe, oil onlime panel, 1500, Alte Pinakothek, Munich

4. Albrecht Dürer, Sudarium of St. Veronica Supported by two Angels,engraving, 1513, British Museum, London

3. Albrecht Dürer, Nude Self-Portrait, pen andbrush, c. 1503, Staatliche Kunstsammlung,Weimar


9/20


187

his own face. According to the Cardinal the true image of Christ – vera icon Christi – is bound to be a self-

portrait of the viewer. The final consequence of this argument is that the painter who wishes to capture

Christ’s face necessarily has to paint a self-portrait.

Another aspect significant for the understanding of the iconography of Christomorphic self-por-

traiture is the contemporary concept of beauty. Cusanus and Dürer both link the concept of beautywith their idea of Christ. To Cusanus (as indeed to many theologians before him) the idea of beauty is

self-evidently connected with the understanding of God i. e. Christ, who is the absolute beauty and the

source of every possible sensual recognition of beauty.41 In the framework of this paper it is especially

interesting that Cusanus speculates on beauty in a way a painter would and uses visual metaphors to il-

lustrate his argument. He describes Christ as the only true self-portrait of God, whereas the human spirit

represents the image of Christ. And the more perfect the likeness with Christ, the nobler the human

spirit.42 The description of the Omnivoyant is linked to the theme of Christ’s perfect beauty: “…et omnis

pulchritudo, quae concipi potest, minor est pulchritudine faciei tuae. Omnes facies pulchritudinem habent et

non sunt ipsa pulchritudo. Tua autem facies Domine habet pulchritudinem et hoc habere est esse. Est igitur

ipsa pulchritudo absoluta, quae est forma dans esse omni formae pulchrae.” 43 The notion of Christ’s beauty

finds ample space in De Visione Dei and particularly in De Docta Ignorantia where Cusanus speaks explic-itly of Christ’s beauty and perfection of His body.44

The search for beauty for both Dürer and Cusanus means discovering the divine essence in all

things created. Research and imitation of nature according to Dürer45 lead to greater knowledge of its

beauty and therefore of the beauty of its Creator.46 The same goes for human beauty. Its ideal exemplar

needs to be found in nature – in the manifold beauty of the infinite number of individuals. The original

model was, according to Dürer, set with Adam, and then lost again with his fall, or to be more precise,

dispersed in numberless multitude of human race.47 Perfect human beauty was revived once more only

– in the image of Christ as the new Adam. In Christ the perfection of his spiritual nature merges with the

perfection of his human body. He is the absolute beauty incorporated in human body, an idea evident

also in Dürer’s famous comparison between Christ and Apollo.48

In the 1500 Self-Portrait Dürer’s deep faith in Christ’s perfect beauty is expressed in terms of the

contemporary theories of beauty – he used the canon of ideal proportions, based on the principles of

harmony, and a composition based on the three most perfect geometric figures: the circle, square and

equilateral triangle. The doctrine of harmony, symmetry and numerical proportions which rules over

the aesthetic canon of Renaissance art was developed both in theory and practice by Leon Battista

Alberti who had a decisive influence on the younger generation. (Platonic philosophy undoubtedly

exercised an important influence on his theory, but so did his contemporary Nicholas of Cusa.49) For

Cusanus harmony and number have a distinct ontological role.50 Number, proportion, symmetry, order,

and harmony are all inseparable categories of beauty, which as absolute beauty has its origin in God’s

mind.51 The Neo-Platonic concept of number and harmony, so vividly modernised by Cusanus, is reflect-

ed in Dürer’s work as well. Symmetry and proportion are his basic visual principles and in his writings heexplicitly stresses their importance.52

In the analysis of the ChristomorphicSelf-Portrait the aesthetic component of the elementary geo-

metric forms should be taken into account as well.53 The prominent role of geometric forms in Cusanus’s

philosophy arises from his premise that they are closest to the ideal forms underlying the structure of the

Universe and can therefore help the mind in its effort to grasp the essence of things. His philosophical


10/20

IKON, 1-2008

188

arguments in De Docta Ignorantia are illustrated with the aid of mathematical principles and geometric

forms which thus take on a new symbolic dimension. The circle represents God in his omnipresence. The

square symbolises the world and man, it is a symbolic imago mundi as well as a sign for mundus parvus

(Cusanus’s paraphrase for man). Examples of this kind are numerous and well-known but it is perhaps

noteworthy to underline the role of equilateral triangle which Cusanus uses as a symbol of Christ.54

According to the established tradition the triangle symbolises the Holy Trinity but in Cusanus’s

philosophy this imagery concentrates in particular on the three Godly entities in one, and the relation

between one and many. In the definition of these relations Cusanus foregrounds the specific role of

triangle as “mediator”, i. e. the primary geometric form which generates all other polygons. In this way

it mediates symbolically between one and many, between God and man, or rather God and the entire

Creation.55 This specific function attributed to triangle is in accordance with the role of Christ, “the only

mediator between God and man”. It also points to the double role of Christ’s nature which is, like triangle

in the world of geometry, a link between two worlds: the physical (triangle as the primary geometric

form defines the plane, i. e. transition into the material) and the metaphysical (a point as the abstract,

immaterial symbol of God). The meticulous application of the three primary geometric forms in the

scheme of the 1500 Self-Portrait is by no means accidental and proves that the painter was well awareof their importance.

When Dürer was painting Self-Portrait in a Fur-Collared Robe he was in the midst of an optimistic

period, and he believed that the essence of beauty can be approached best by measure and perfect

proportions. Even though he kept stressing that he didn’t really know what constitutes a measure of

beauty, he never renounced the importance of mathematical knowledge in defining it; a painter can

only reach and capture beauty through mathematics.56 So the Christomorphic Self-Portrait allows us to

observe the exuberant proud optimism of a young artist who believes that he can capture and re-cre-

ate, through usage of mathematical principles, what once used to be “arranged by measure and number

and weight”, and can thus with his artistic endeavour conform himself to the Creator.57 It is worth noting

that the idea of an artist as alter Deus (which was to become a hallmark of Renaissance art) was devel-oped by Cusanus, to whom creative human spirit is an imago viva creatoris.58

However, the topos of the artist as alter Deus needs to be studied from another point of view as

well, namely that of the work of art. In his sermon no. 251 (on the occasion of All Saints’ Day in 1456 at

Brixen) Cusanus uses one of his famous God-painter metaphors in order to explain the relation God

– Christ – man in a most imaginative way. The metaphor represents God the Father painting his self-por-

trait with the aid of a mirror which reflects God’s image. The reflection in the mirror is the image of Christ,

explains Cusanus, and the self-portrait the image of man – viva similitudo Dei – with the unique capacity

to conform to his Exemplar to the greatest possible degree.59 The clearer and the better he conforms to

his Creator, the nobler he becomes. Hence, the accent is not so much on the actual likeness but on the

active principle of man who wants to conform as closely as possible to his Exemplar.60 To underline this

thought Cusanus uses yet another metaphor: about a painter who has painted two self-portraits. Thefirst one is more precise and with better likeness, yet feels dead and without a real spark of life, whereas

the other is less precise but alive and capable of endless conformity to its model. For Cusanus there is no

doubt that the second painting is more perfect because it reflects to a greater degree the true art of the

painter. Both metaphors share a common message: the perfection of self-portrait (i. e. man) depends

on its capacity to conform itself to the painter (i. e. Creator). Consequently man can reach his perfection


11/20


189

only through conformitas: in order to succeed he is bound to conform himself to divine Creator whom

he recognises as the reflection in the mirror i. e. Jesus Christ.61

There is no doubt that the iconography of Dürer’s Christ-like Self-Portrait invites various interpre-

tations. However, the unique act of self-portrayal in the figure of Christ seems best understood against

the background of Cusanus’s Christology. By describing Christ as “homo perfectus” and man as “Deus hu-manatus” or “alter Deus” Cusanus emphasizes the close relationship between Christ and man, thus pav-

ing the way for the revolutionary humanistic notion of man as (almost) equal to God. Christ is therefore

not only the most perfect man, but he also incorporates the entire humanity, the infinite multitude of

human individualities. In his limitless love Christ approaches each man in the way that suits his purpose

best – i. e. by taking the faultless image of the very individual (who in turn resides as exemplar inside

Christ).62 Psychologically, Cusanus links Christ’s love – which is redeeming grace – with man’s self-love.

Man, who according to his nature loves himself, will love Christ that much more if he recognises himself

in Christ’s image.63 This theory may seem almost like an apology for the obviously idealised self-portrait

in which a narcissistic element can hardly go unnoticed.64 However, we should discuss both Cusanus’s

metaphor and Dürer’s Self-Portrait in proper context: the Cardinal’s conjecture serves to underline his

basic premise that man’s ultimate goal is to recognise himself in Christ and perceive Christ within him-self.65 On the other hand Dürer’s self-portraiture, his whole artistic and written opus are without doubt

firm proofs of his creed according to which a painter through his creative process expresses his respect

and thanks to God who had endowed him with the precious talent.66 Though it is impossible to prove

historically that Cusanus was a direct source for Christological iconography of Dürer’s Christomorphic

Self-Portrait , it is nevertheless true that the panel reveals unique understanding of God, very close to the

concept introduced by Nicholas of Cusa.

1 Christological iconography in Dürer’s self-portraiture has been discussed, albeit briefly, by most of Dürer scholars,

although the matter still calls for an in-depth and thorough analysis. Among recent contributions cf.: F. ANZELEWSKY,

Albrecht Dürer. Das malerische Werk , Neuausgabe. Berlin, 1991; J. L. KOERNER, The Moment of Self-Portraiture in Ger-

man Renaissance Art , Chicago/London, 1993 ; Cf. also G. DIDI-HUBERMAN, L’autre miroir. Autoportrait et mélancolie

christique selon Albrecht Dürer , in: Il ritratto e la memoria. Materiali, II. (eds. A. Gentili/P. Morel/C. Cieri Via), Rome, 1993,

p. 207-240; G. WOLF, Schleier und Spiegel. Traditionen des Christusbildes und die Bildkonzepte der Renaissance, Munich,

2002.

2 The drawing is usually cited as Self-Portrait as the Man of Sorrows or Man of Sorrows; there is no doubt, however, it is a

self-portrait.

3 Probably malaria; Cf. E. REBEL, Albrecht Dürer. Maler und Humanist , Munich. 1999, p. 476; A. F. EICHLER, Albrecht Dürer

(1471–1528), Köln, 1999, p. 120.4 The drawing bears an inscription that reads: “ Dis 2 angsicht hab ich uch erl[furcht?] gemacht in meinem kranckheit.”

Koerner links this drawing explicitly with the question of Christological self-portraiture (also because of the promi-

netly positioned monogram under the head of the suffering Christ), KOERNER, op. cit., p. 220.

5 W. SCHMIDT , Die Seitenwunde Christi aufs Dürers Weimeier Selbstbildnis, in: Von Macht der Bilder. Beiträge des C.I.H.A.-

Kolloquiums “Kunst und Reformation” (ed E. Ullmann), Leipzig. 1983, p. 216-223.

6 Cf. REBEL, op. cit., p. 148-168; K. H. JÜRGENS, Neue Forschungen zu dem Münchener Selbstbildnis des Jahres 1500 von


12/20

IKON, 1-2008

190

Albrecht Dürer , Kunsthistorisches Jahrbuch Graz, 19/20 (1983/84), p. 180. The influence of Thomas à Kempis’s Imitatio

Christi on Dürer is best evident in two drawings in British Museum, the first depicting Christ bearing the cross, and the

other a man in a contemporary German attire (Lazar Spengler?) who in a Christ-like manner carries a cross and thus

follows Christ’s example; Cf. KOERNER, op. cit., p. 76; REBEL, op. cit., p. 327-328. The imagery of Kempis’sImitatio Christi

permeates Dürer’s written legacy as well. He often writes about modelling after Christ and life in Christ – in his own

words: “noch Christo zleben”; Cf. H. RUPPRICH, Dürer: Schriftlicher Nachlass, Berlin, 1956/69, I, p. 137.7 Cf. i. a: J. K. ROWLANDS, The Graphic Work of Albrecht Dürer: An Exhibition of his Prints and Drawings in Commemmora-

tion of the Quincentenary of his Birth, exh. cat., British Museum. London, 1971, p. 181; G. BARTRUM, Albrecht Dürer and

his Legacy. The Graphic Work of a Renaissance Artist , Princeton, 2002, p. 82.

8 Jürgens points to the relation between the 1512 print and the 1500 ChristomorphicSelf-Portrait ; Cf. JÜRGENS, op. cit.

(Part 3), Kunsthistorisches Jahrbuch Graz, 21 (1985), p. 159.

9 Moritz Thausing, a Viennese art historian, was the first to notice Dürer’s likeness to Christ; Cf. M. THAUSING, Dürer.

Geschichte s. Lebens u. s. Kunst , vol. I-II. Leipzig, 18842, vol. II, p. 107.

10 For most recent studies cf: Ch. D. CUTTLER, Undercurrents in Dürer’s 1500 “Self-Portrait”, Pantheon, 50 (1992), p. 24-27;

KOERNER, op. cit.; R. PREIMESBERGER, “…proprijs sic effingebam coloribus…”. Zu Dürers Selbstbildnis von 1500, in: The

Holy Face and the Paradox of Representation (eds. H. Kessler/ G. Wolf), Bologna, 1998, p. 279-300; E. FILIPPI, Dal

rispecchiamento alla riflessione. Cusano e Venezia nell’evoluzione della teoria artistica di Albrecht Dürer , in: Venezia

Cinquecento, X, 21 (2002), p. 25-53.11 F. WINZINGER, Dürers Münchener Selbstbildnis, in: Zeitschrift für Kunstwissenschaft, 8, 1954, p. 43-64. Eberhard

Hempel also discussed Cusanus’s influence on Dürer a year earlier: E. HEMPEL, Nikolaus von Kues in seinen Bezie-

hungen zur bildenden Kunst , in: Berichte über die Verhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu

Leipzig, Phil.-hist. Klasse 100, 3, Berlin 1953, p. 38-41.

12 Dürer scholars predominantly quote two interpretations of the 1500 panel: the first by Panofsky who argues the

influence of Thomas à Kempis’s Imitatio Christi (E. PANOFSKY, The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer , Princeton, 1955, p. 43;

cf. also: R. H. BAINTON, Dürer and Luther as the Man of Sorrows, in: Art Bulletin, 29, 1947, p. 269-272; D. de CHAPEAU-

ROUGE, Theomorphe Porträts der Neuzeit , in: Vierteljahrschr. f. Literaturwiss, 42, 1968, p. 262-302; E. REBEL, op. cit., p.

167), and the second by Winzinger who stresses the influence of Cusanus (N. HEROLD,“Bild der Wahrheit – Wahrheit

des Bildes. Zur Deutung des Blicks aus dem Bild in der Cusanischen Schrift De visione Dei , in: Wahrheit und Begründ-

ung ( eds. V. Gerhard and N. Herold), Würzburg, 1985, p. 79-81; G. WOLF, Toccar con gli occhi, Zu Konstellationen und

Konzeptionen von Bild und Wirklichkeit in späten Quattrocento, in: Kunstlerischen Austausch, Akten des XXVIII Kon-gresses für Kunstgeschichte, 1992, vol. II, Berlin 1993, p. 444-445; E. FILIPPI, op. cit. Among other theories we should

mention the one by Daniel Hess who acknowledges Cusanus’s influence yet finds an even stronger one in the

franciscan monk Fridolin Stephan and his booklet Schatzbehalter (Nuremberg, 1491), and develops an interpretation

of Dürer as the new Appelles. (D. HESS,Dürers Selbstbildnis von 1500. “Alter Deus” oder Neuer Apelles? , in: Mitteilun-

gen des Vereins für Geschichte des Stadt Nürnberg, 77, 1990, p. 63-90). Fedja Anzelewsky, one of the leading Dürer

scholars finds Cusanus a probable influence but mentions Marsilio Ficino and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola as

equally important sources (F. ANZELEWSKY, Das Selbstbildnis von 1500, in: Dürer-Studien, Berlin 1983, p. 90-100).

13 Nicholas of Cusa was much more than just the leading theologian and philosopher of his time. As a close collabora-

tor of three popes – Eugene IV (1431-1447), Nicholas V (1447-1455) and Pius II (1458-1464) he travelled widely across

Europe on many diplomatic missions. He was a good acquaintance of the greatest humanists of the 15 th century:

Ambrogio Traversari, Franceso Filelfo and Poggio Bracciolini. He corresponded with Lorenzo Valla and intervened on

his behalf with the Pope Nicholas V. He kept in contact with many other illustrious names of that time. Bernhard vonWaging, the prior of St. Quirinus monastery by Tegernsee, praised the Cardinal’s writings as early as mid-15th century

and Cusanus himself writes of abundant fruit that his teachings bear in Italy. Well before the end of the 15 th century

his work reverberated outside Italy as well: in 1488 the majority of his writings was published in Strasbourg, and in

1514 Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples published his entire opus (Nicolai Cusae Cardinalis Opera, Parisiis 1514). Bibliography

dealing with Cusanus’s contacts with the Renaissance humanists and his influence on Renaissance culture is extreme-

ly voluminous and can be found on the website of the Cusanus Institute at the University of Trier: www.uni-trier.

de/~cusanus/Bibliographie/cusanus-bibliographie.html


13/20


191

14 They were both thoroughly acquainted with Cusanus’s work. Celtis especially was instrumental in popularisation

of the Cusan in humanist circles. (When, in the jubilee year 1500, he published a monumental edition of his col-

lected works, Celtis published Cusanus’sDe non aliud along with his own Carmen Seculare!) Cf: D. WUTTKE, Dürer

und Celtis. Von der Bedeutung des Jahres 1500 für den deutschen Humanismus: “Jahrhundertfeier als symbolische Form” ,

in: The Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 10, 1980, p. 73-129. See also: H. RUPPRICH,Dürer und Pirckhe-

imer. Geschichte einer Freundschaft , in: Albrecht Dürers Umwelt (Nürnberger Forschungen, 15), Nuremberg, 1971;J. BIAŁOSTOCKI, Dürer and Humanists, in: Bulletin of Society for Renaissance Studies 4, no. 2 (1986/87), p. 16-29; E.

REBEL, op. cit., p. 125-144; S. MEIER-OESER, Die Cusanus-Rezeption im deutschen Renaissancehumanismus, in: Nicolaus

Cusanus zwischen Deutschland und Italien. Beiträge eines deutsch-italienischen Symposions in der Villa Vigoni vom

28.3.-1.4. 2001 (ed M. Thurner), Berlin, 2002, p. 617-632.

15 Cf. K. H. KANDLER, Nikolaus von Kues: Denker zwischen Mittelalter und Neuzeit , Göttingen, 1995, p. 122.

16 Cf. H. GESTRICH, Nikolaus von Kues 1401-1464, Der grosse Denker an der Schwelle des Mittelalters zur Neuzeit , Mainz,

1990, p. 99.

17 L. JUSTI, Konstruierte Figuren und Köpfe unter der Werken Albrecht Dürers, Leipzig, 1902, p. 49

18 Such construction has a recognisable iconographic background consisting of three basic motifs: the medieval

aesthetic canon of harmonic proportions as the conditio sine qua non, the notion of Christ’s perfect beauty and the

symbolism of the circle, square and equilateral triangle linked to the Christological iconography. Winzinger stresses

though that the scheme isn’t Dürer’s invention since it had already been well known in the Netherlandish paintingof the 15th century. One comes across a practically identical scheme in the work of Jan van Eyck (1438, Christ , Gemäl-

degalerie Berlin).

19 The primary source for Cusanus’s Christology remains Rudolf Haubst’sDie Christologie des Nikolaus von Kues,

Freiburg 1956. For newer contributions on the Cusan’s anthropology and humanism cf. also: P. M. WATTS, Nicolaus

Cusanus: A Fifteenth-Century Vision of Man, Studies in the History of Christian Thought , 30, Leiden, 1982; K. BORMANN,

Nikolaus von Kues: “Der Mensch als zweiter Gott” , Trier, 1999; H. SCHWAETZER, “Sei du das, was du willst”. Die christozen-

trische Antrophologie der Freiheit in Sermo CCXXXIX des Nikolaus von Kues, in: Trier Theologische Zeischrift, 110, 2001,

p. 319-332; idem, Viva imago Dei. Überlegungen zum Ursprung eines anthropologischen Grundprinzips bei Nicolaus Cu-

sanus, in: Spiegel und Porträt. Zur Bedeutung zweier zentraler Bilder im Werk des Nikolaus von Kues (eds. I. Bocken

and H. Schwaetzer), Maastricht, 2005, p. 113-132; K. REINHARDT, Jesus Christus. Herz der cusanischen Theologie, in:

Mitteilungen und Forschungsbeiträge der Cusanus-Gesellschaft 28, 2003, p. 165-187.

20 Cusanus uses the term christiformitas or christiformis 83 times! To him it expresses man’s capability to become vivasimilitudo Dei by following Christ. In De docta ignorantia he says, for example: “Magna est fidei vis, quae hominem

Christiformem efficit…” De docta ignorantia, III, p. 500. There is, however, a significant difference between Cusanus’s

understanding of Christ-likeness (christifomitas) and conformitas Christi as understood by Franciscan mysticism (as

well as the one presented in Kempis’s Imitatio Christi ) – in his metaphors Cusanus develops a clear notion of a visual

likeness whereas the Franciscans and Thomas à Kempis speak only of a spiritual conformity to Christ (especially

through identification with the Passion) without any visual connotations whatsoever.

21 The method of visual metaphors based on Platonic philosophy is that much more self-evident in Cusanus because

he allocates the sight the most excellent position of all senses and links it most directly with the spirit and the

intellect. He often uses the term intellectual vision (visio intellectualis) as the highest level of cognition. This kind of

vision (in which man recognises himself as the image of God) is, according to Cusanus, the essence of man. I t should

be added that in this context Cusanus understands the intellectual vision, the contemplation of God, as the most

perfect affiliation with God (filiatio) which is at the same time likeness (similitudo) and deification (deificatio): “Egoautem, ut in summa dicam, non aliud filiationem dei quam deificationem, quae et theosis graece dicitur aestimandum

iudico. Theosim vero tu ipse nosti ultimitatem perfectionis existere, quae et notitia dei et verbi seu visio intuitiva vocitatur.”

De filiatione dei , p. 610. The ultimate goal of a man’s life is to become aware of the fact that our spirit functions as an

image of God’s mind: “Quietatur igitur studium vitae et perfectionis atquae omnis motus intellectus, quando se comperit

in ea regione esse, ubi est magister omnium operum operabilium, scilicet filius Dei, verbum illud, per quod caeli formati

sunt et omnis creatura, et se similem illi .” Op. cit. p. 616. Cf. i. a: K. KREMER, Grösse und Grenzen der menschlichen Ver-

nunft (intellectus) nach Cusanus, in: Nicholas of Cusa. A medieval Thinker for the Modern Age (ed. K. Yamaki), Rich-


14/20

IKON, 1-2008

192

mond, Surrey 2002, p. 11. Needless to add that sight to Dürer, too, is the noblest of senses; interestingly enough, in

one of his notes Dürer uses almost the same mirror metaphor as Cusanus (cf. RUPPRICH, II, p. 112-113).

22 To understand Cusanus’s Christology it is of key importance to be familiar with his masterpieceDe docta ignorantia

(in particular book three, entirely dedicated to Christ), the dialogueDe posest , treatises De filiatione Dei , De ludo

globi , De aequalitate, De venatione sapientiae, Idiota de mente, De pace fidei and some of his sermons. Of course, bits

and pieces of his Christological teachings are spread all over his work. Topically related metaphors of portrait and/ormirror from De visione Dei feature also in Idiota de mente (p. 592) in sermons (Sermo CCLI ) and letters (Letter to Alber-

gati); cf. notes no. 60 and 61.

23 “If I strive to convey you by human means unto divine things, then I must do this through a likeness. Now, among human

works I have not found an image more suitable to our purpose than the image of someone omnivoyant, so that his face,

through subtle pictorial artistry, is such that it seems to behold everything around it .” De visione Dei, Praefatio, p. 94. (All

quotations and pagination are from the bilingual edition of Cusanus’s writings: Nikolaus von Kues, Philosophisch-the-

ologische Schriften (ed. L. Gabriel), Wien 1964. For English quotations the translation by Jasper Hopkins was consulted:

J. HOPKINS, Complete Philosophical And Theological Treatises Of Nicholas Of Cusa, The Arthur J. Banning Press, Minne-

apolis, Minn. 2001.)

24 “Harum etsi multae reperiantur optime pictae uti illa sagittariae in foro Nurembergensi et Bruxellis Rogeri maximi pictoris

in pretiossisima tabula, quae in praetorio habetur et Confluentiae in capella mea Veronicae et Brixinae in castro angeli

arma ecclesiae tenentis et multae aliae undique. Ne tamen deficiatis in praxi, quae sensibilem talem exigit figuram, quamhabere potui caritati vestrae mitto tabellam figuram cuncta videntis tenentem, quam iconam Dei apello.” De visione Dei,

Praefatio, p. 94-96.

25 For interpretation of De visione Dei cf: W. BEIERWALTES: Visio absoluta: Reflexion als Grundzug des göttlichen Prinzips

bei Cusanus, in: Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse, 1, 1978; idem.,

Visio facialis: Sehen in Angesicht. Zur Coincidenz des endlichen und unendlichen Blick bei Cusanus, in: Sitzungsberichte

der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.- hist. Klasse 1, München 1988; M. de CERTEAU,Nicholas de Cues:

Le secret d’un regard , in: Traverses, 30/31 (1984), p. 70-85. For recent contributions dealing with the metaphor of

God’s vision, theology of the image, and reverberations in painting cf: S. TRITZ, Ad imaginem et similitudinem. Bildthe-

ologie, Malereitheorie und Kunstpraxis zur Zeit des Nikolaus von Kues, in: Spiegel und Porträt. Zur Bedeutung zweier

zentraler Bilder im Werk des Nikolaus von Kues (eds. I. Bocken and H. Schwaetzer), Maastricht, 2005, p. 197-130.

26 “Etsi figendo obtutum in iconam ambulabit de occasu ad orientem comperiet continue visum iconae secum pergere, etsi

de oriente revertetur ad occasum similiter eum non deseret. Et admirabitur quomodo immobiliter movebatur neque po-terit imaginatio capere, quod cum aliquo alio sibi contrario moto obviante similiter moveatur .” De visione Dei, Praefatio,

p. 96.

27 “Et dum attenderit, quomodo visus ille nullum deserit videt, quod ita diligenter curam agit cuiuslibet quasi de solo eo, qui

experitur se videri et nullo alio curet adeo quod etiam concipi nequeat per unum quem respicit quod curam alterius agat .”

Ibid., I, p. 98.

28 Cusanus uses the metaphor as exposition for one of his most convincing treatises on human individuality and

humanistic understanding of dignitas hominis. Cf: Ch. HUMMEL, Nicolaus Cusanus. Das Individualitätsprinzip in seiner

Philosophie, Stuttgart, 1961.

29 Cusanus discusses this in different treatises. The most consise presentation can be found inDe beryllo: “Videre

igitur poteris per beryllum principium modo saepe dicto, et quam divinae sint omnes species ex substantiali seu perfecta

aeternae rationis similitudine, ac quamodo in ipsis creator intellectus se manifestat, quodque ipsa species sit verbum seu

intento ditas omnis individui .” De beryllo, XXXV, p. 80. Cf. also: «Induit igitur in Christo humana natura immortilitatem,qui et primitiae dormientum. Non est autem nisi una indivisibilis humanita et omnium hominum specifica essentia, per

quam omnes particulares homines sunt homines inter se numeraliter distincti, ita ut eadem etiam humanitas sit Christi et

omnium hominum, distincione numerali individuorum inconfusa remanente.» De docta ignorantia, III, p. 473.

30 As the most important philosophical source for the question of human free will in Renaissance humanism art

historians most frequently quote Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, although Nicholas of Cusa had already made an

in-depth analysis of the phenomenon at least forty years before the count of Mirandola. Their views, however, are in

many points so similar that some of the more sceptical scholars speak of “co-incidence” of ideas (cf : H. SCHWAETZER,


15/20


193

“Semen universale”. Die Antrophologie bei Nikolaus von Kues und G. Pico della Mirandola, in: Nicolaus Cusanus zwischen

Deutschland und Italien. Beiträge eines deutsch-italienischen Symposions in der Villa Vigoni vom 28.3.-1.4. 2001.

(ed. M. Thurner), Berlin, 2002, p. 555-574). Many scholars, on the other hand, are in favour of the theory that Miran-

dola was familiar with the Cusan’s work. Cf. i. a.: K. FLASCH, Nikolaus von Kues und Pico della Mirandola, in: Mitteilun-

gen und Forschungsbeiträge der Cusanus-Gesellschaft, 14 (1980), p. 113-120; H. REINHARDT,Freiheit zu Gott. Der

Grundgedanke des Systematikers Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463–1496), Weinheim, 1989.31 “Quisque enim homo liberum habet arbitrium, velle scilicet nolle, cognoscens virtutem et vitium, quid honestum, quid

inhonestum, quid iustum, quid iniustum, quid laudabile, quid vituperabile, quid gloriosum, quid scandalosum. Et quod

bonum eligi debeat et malum sperni, habens intra se regem et iudicem horum…» De ludo globi , I, p. 278-280. Cf. also:

«Mens enim humana, quae est imago mentis absolutae, humaniter libera omnibus rebus in suo conceptu terminos

ponit… sicut vult, et quidquid facere proponit, intra se prius determinavit, et est omnium operum suorum terminus.» De

docta ignorantia, I, p. 128.

32 Cf. the whole sentence: “O Domine, suavitas omnis dulcedinis posuisti in libertate mea, ut sim, si voluero mei ipsius. Hinc

nisi sim mei ipsius tu non es meus. Necessitares enim libertatem, cum tu non possis esse meus nisi et ego sim mei ipsius et

quia hoc posuisti in libertate mea, non me necessitas, sed expectas, ut ego eligam mei ipsius esse. Per me igitur stat non

per te Domine, qui non contrahis bonitatem tuam maximam, sed largissime effundis in omnes capaces.” De visione Dei,

VII, p. 120. For the understanding of free will cf. chapter IV as well. In the philosophical sense this is unification which

means transgression of all contradictions; in the religious sense it means the full acceptance of God’s limitless grace:“Dedisti mihi, Domine, esse et id ipsum tale, quod se potest gratiae et bonitatis tuae continue magis capax reddere. Et

haec vis, quam a te habeo, in qua virtutis omnipotentiae tuae vivam imaginem teneo, est libera voluntas, per quam pos-

sum aut ampliare aut restingere capacitatem gratiae tuae.” Ibid., IV, p. 104-106.

33 “ … because in You the human nature is most perfect and is most closely conjoined to its Exemplar.” De visione Dei , XX, p.

188.

34 “…the supreme and most perfect humanity, … for the humanity could not have existed in the supreme degree and in

complete fullness otherwise than in the divine person of the Son.” De docta ignorantia III, p. 446. See also: “Talia quidem et

alibi plura perhibentur sanctorum de eo testimonia, quoniam ipse Deus et homo; in quo ipsa humanitas in ipsa divinitate

Verbo unita est, ut non in se, sed in ipso subsisteret, postquam humanitas in summo gradu et omni plenitudine aliter esse

non potuit nisi in divini Filii persona… Et ita in Iesu, qui sic est aequalitas omnia essendi, tamquam in Filio in divinis, qui est

media persona, Pater aeternus et sanctus Spiritus exixtunt, et onia ut in Verbo, et omnis creatura in ipsa humanitate summa

et perfectissima universaliter omnia creabilia complicanti, ut sit omnis plenitudo ipsum inhabitans.” De docta ignorantia,III, p. 446.

35 «…non posse te patrem intelligere nisi in filio tuo, qui est intelligibilis mediator, et quod te intelligere est tibi uniri .» De

visione Dei , XIX, p. 182.

36 «Neque adhuc Domine Deus sine Iesu filio tuo, quem prae consortibus suis nixisti qui Christus est, complementum operis

tui perfecises. In cuius intellectu quiescit perfectio creabilis naturae, nam est ultima et perfectissima immultiplicabilis

Dei similitudo. Et intellectuales sunt illo spiritu mediante similitudines. Et quanto perfectiores, tanto huic similiores.» De

visione Dei , XXV, p. 216.

37 «Nequaquam Domine me concipere sinis quacumque imaginatione, quod tu Domine aliud a me plus me diligas, cum me

solum visus tuus non deserat .» De visione Dei , IV, p. 104.

38 «Et quamodo dabis tu te mihi si non paritet dederis mihi caelum et terram et omnia, quae in eis sunt? Immo quamodo

dabis tu te mihi si etiam me ipsum non dederis mihi? Et cum sic in silentio contemplationis quiesco tu Domine intra prae-

cordia mea respondes dicens: sis tu tuus et ego ero tuus.» De visione Dei, VII, p. 120. It is interesting to note the Cusan’sthought that the most human part of man participates in the greatest measure possible in the divine nature.“ …in

ipsa suprema humanitatis tuae natura divinitatem ipsam supreme participas…” De coniecturis, II, p. 198. Man is there-

fore closest to Christ precisely in his humanity.

39 “O Lord, how admirable is Your Face! If a youth wished to conceive it, he would envision it as youthful; if an adult [wished

to conceive it, he would envision it as] adult; and someone elderly [would envision it as] elderly. Who could conceive of this

unique, most true, and most adequate Exemplar of all faces? – the Exemplar of each and every face and, yet, so perfectly the

Exemplar of each that, as it were, it is not the Exemplar of any other.” De visione Dei, VI, p. 114.


16/20

IKON, 1-2008

194

40 “Therefore, my God, when You seem to me as if You were formable prime matter, because You receive the form of each one

who looks unto You, You elevate me, so that I discern the following: viz., that the one who looks unto You does not bestow

form upon You; rather, he beholds himself in You, because he receives from You that which he is. And so, that which You

seem to receive from the one who looks unto You – this You bestow, as if You were a living Mirror-of-eternity, which is the

Form of forms. When someone looks into this Mirror, he sees his own form in the Form of forms, which the Mirror is.” De

visione Dei, XV, p. 160. Cf. also a similar thought from De venatione sapientiae: “Unde, cum cognitio sit assimilatio, reperitomnia in se ipso ut in speculo vivio vita intellectuali. Qui in se ipsum respiciens cuncta in seipso assimilata videt. Et haec

assimilatio est imago viva creatoris et omnium. Cum autem sit viva et intellectualis Dei imago, qui Deus non est aliud ab

aliquo, ideo cum in se intrat et sciat se talem esse imaginem, quale est suum exemplar in se speculatur .» De venatione sa-

pientiae, XVII, p. 78.

41 Cf. just one of the instances: «Nam si dico ex pulchritudine creaturarum Deum pulchrum et scio quod Deus est ita pulcher,

quod pulchritudo, quae est omne id, quod esse potest, scio nihil pulchri totius mundi deficere Deo, ac quod omnis quae po-

test creari pulchritudo, non est nisi quaedam similitudo improportionalis ad illam, quae actu est omnis essendi possibilitas

pulchritudinis, quae non potest esse aliter quam est, cum sit id, quod esse potest.» Trialogus de possest , p. 280. For a clearer

notion of the relation God – beauty – beautiful cf. the excerpt from the sermon:“…pulchritudo et pulchrum idem sunt

in deo, nam pulchritudo in deo est prima et summa: ex ea emanat natura pulchritudinis in omnibus pulchris quae est forma

pulchrorum, facit enim omnia pulchra sicut albedo alba…” Tota pulchra, Editio Parisiis, fol. 139v. Here Cusanus refers to

the medieval tradition according to which the biblical interpreters used the psalmist’s words “You are the most excel-lent of men” (Ps 44, 3) as the foretelling of the coming of Christ.

42 « … nam est (sc. Christi) ultima et perfectissima immultiplicabilis Dei similitudo. Et non potest esse nisi una suprema talis.

Omnes autem alii spiritus intellectuales sunt illo spirito mediante similitudines. Et quanto perfectores, tanto huic similior .»

De visione Dei , XXV, p. 216.

43 “… and all beauty that can be conceived is less than the beauty of Your Face. All faces have beauty; but they are not beauty

itself. But Your Face, O Lord, has beauty, and this having is being. Hence, Your Face is Absolute Beauty, which is the Form that

gives being to every beautiful form.” De visione Dei , VI, p. 114.

44 “Iesus noster, in quo omnes thesauri scientiae et sapientiae, etiam dum in mundo apparuit, absconditi fuerunt quasi lux in

tenebris, ad hunc finem eminentissime intellectualis naturae corpus aptissimum atque perfectissimum, ut etiam a sanctis-

simis testibus suae conversationis fertur, creditur habuisse.” De docta ignorantia, III, 5, p. 450

45 Cf. e. g.: “Dann warhaftig steckt die kunst in der natur, wer sie heraus kan reyssenn, der hat sie.” RUPPRICH, III, p. 195.

46 In Dürer’s words : “So, je mehrer der natur vnnd dem lebnn gemess gepracht, je mer der volkumeheitt zu augen ettwosder gotthait gleich werden geachtet .” RUPPRICH, II, p. 135.

47 Cf.: “Einmall hat der schopfer dye menschen gemacht, wie sie müssen sein, vnd jch halt, das die recht wolgestalt vnd hüb-

schheit vnder dem haüffen aller menschen begriffen sey.” RUPPRICH, III, p. 272.

48 “Dan zw gleicher weis, wy sy dy schönsten gestalt eines menschen haben zu gemessen jrem ab got Abblo, also wollen wyr

dy selb mos prawchen zu Crysto dem herren, der der schönste aller welt ist.” RUPPRICH, II, p. 104.

49 For Cusanus’s influence on Alberti cf: G. SANTINELLO, Niccolò Cusano e Leon Battista Alberti: pensieri sul bello e sull

arte, in: Leon Battista Alberti, Una visione estetica del mondo e della vita, Florence, 1962 ; K. FLASCH, Niccolò Cusano

e Leon Battista Alberti , in: Leon Battista Alberti e il Quattrocento. Studi in onore di C. Grayson e E. Gombrich. Atti del

Convegno internazionale, Mantua, 29.–31. ottobre 1998, (ed. L. Chiavoni), Florence, 2001, p. 371-376; M. GERM, Leon

Battista Alberti, Santa Maria Novella in Florence, and Nicolaus Cusanus, in: Umeni/Art, XLIX/2001, p. 11-18.

50 Every harmony can be expressed numerically – it is based on numerical proportions. So the basis of every harmony

is number: “…numerus est subiectum proportionis, non enim potest esse proportio sine numero.” Idiota de mente, VI, p.524. More on this theme in other works, notably in De docta ignorantia: “Numerus ergo omnia proportionabilia inclu-

dit.” Moreover, number isn’t just the basis for every harmony and proportion, it is the primary formative principle of

the whole Creation: “Sublato enim numero cessant rerum discretio, ordo, proportio, harmonia atque ipsa entium plu-

ralitas” . De docta ignorantia I, 5, p. 208. In number the ontological principle is joined by formative and gnoseological

principles since number represents the ideal paradigm of creation. As Exemplar it is in God’s mind, it is the bearer

of order, symmetry and beauty in Creation, and also the most perfect gnoseological principle:”Sic irreprehensibiliter

posse dici conicio primum rerum exemplar in animo conditoris numerum esse. Hoc ostendit delectatio et pulchritudo,


17/20


195

quae omnibus rebus inest, quae in proportione consistit, proportio vero in numero; hinc numerus praecipuum vestigium

ducens in sapientiam.” Idiota de mente, VI, p. 528.

51 «Sicut enim in unitate est omnis numerus complicite et in numero omnis proportio et medietas, in proportione omnis

harmonia et ordo et concordantia et ideo omnis pulchritudo quae in ordine et proportione atque concordantia relucet. Ita

cum dicimus deum unum hoc unum est ipsa supersubstantialis unitas quae et pulchritudo in se omnia pulchra compli-

cans.» Tota pulchra, fol. 140v

52 “ ...das dy mass in allen dingen, sittlichen vnd natürlichen, das pest sey, weliche dan auch pey demm aller hochsten anges-

ehen ist, das er alle geschöpf in zal, gewicht vnd mass beschaffen hab.” RUPPRICH, II, p. 127. This viewpoint features in

different works not only in the famous Vier Bücher von menschlicher Proportion. Dürer stresses at the same time that

arithmetics and geometry as basis for the study of proportions are fundamental in the art of painting:“Ist keine, dy

der mass mer vnd in manigfältiger weg vnd gestalt notdürfftig ist als dy kunst der malerey, di nit alain begert der geome-

trei vnd arithmetika vrsprung aller mass…” (loc. cit.)

53 Their role had been undisputed even earlier on, as seen in Plato’s Philebus: “… for these (i.e. geometric forms) I affirm

to be not only relatively beautiful, like other things, but they are eternally and absolutely beautiful …” Philebus (transl.

Benjamin Jowett, e-book, Project Gutenberg). Geometry gained a new role in Renaissance philosophy and art history,

and Cusanuns provided its most profound philosophical-theological application.

54 The symbolism of geometric forms in Cusanus’s work is much more complex and should be seen in a wider frame-

work than the one of this paper. For a complete picture it should be treated in a specific context of individual philo-sophical explication. For a better insight see De Docta Ignorantia. Cf. e. g.: W. BREIDERT, Mathematik und symbolische

Erkenntnis bei Nikolaus von Kues, in: Mitteilungen und Forschungsbeiträge der Cusanus-Gesellschaft 12 (1977), p.

116-126; K. YAMAKI, Die Bedeutung geometrischer Symbole für das Denken des Nicolaus Cusanus. Eine Untersuchung

am Beispiel der Metamorphose seinre auffasung vom Kreis, in: Das Mathematikverständnis des Nikolaus von Kues,

Mathematische, Naturwissenschaftliche und Philosophisch-theologische Dimensionen, Akten der Tagung im

Schwäbischen Tagungs und Bildungszentrum Kloster Irsee. In: Mitteilungen und Forschungsbeiträge der Cusanus-

Gesellschaft 29 (2005).

55 «Omnis enim figura polygonia pro simplicissimo elemento habet triangularem, et illa est minima figura polygonia, qua

minor esse nequit… Sicut igitur se habet unum in numeris, ita triangulus in figuris polygoniis. Sicut igitur omnis numerus

resolvitur ad unitatem, ita polygoniae ad triangulum.” De docta ignorantia, I, p. 262.

56 Cf. e. g.: “Dann die luegen ist in unser erkantnes, vnd steckt die finsteruns so hart in uns, das auch vnser nach dappen felt.

Welcher aber durch die Geometria sein ding beweyst vnd die gruendlichen warheyt anzeygt, dem sol alle welt glauben.” RUPPRICH, III, p. 293. More in RUPPRICH, II, p. 100-127. Dürer even says that mathematics is of crucial importance to

painters and visual arts because one can only master this craft with the use of mathematics and geometry: “Ist keine,

dy der mass mer vnd jn manigfeltiger weg vnd gestalt notturfftig ist als dy kunst der maleray, dy mit alain begert der

geometrie vnd arithmetica, ursprung aller mass…” Ibid., p. 127.

57 “Dan werden wir durch kunst der gottlichen gepildnis destmer vergleicht .” RUPPRICH, II, p. 129. An artist is through his

artistic endeavour similar to God, “gleichformig geschopf noch got” , because within himself he has a limitless power

of creation: “…ein guter maler ist jnwendig voller vigur. Vnd obs müglich wer, daz er ewig lebte, so het er aus den jnneren

ideen, do van Plato schreibt albey etwas news durch die werck aus tzwgissen.” RUPPRICH, III, p. 291.

58 To Cusanus artistic creation is an expression of human spirit: “…hominis intellectus in suis variis ar tibus et ex variis

artium productis, in se unus et invisibilis manens, variae se visibiliter manifestat”. Compendium, VIII, p. 710. The ability to

create is the quality which, according to his belief, conforms man to the Creator.“…hominem esse secundum Deum.

Nam sicut Deus est creator entium realium et naturalium formarum, ita homo rationalium entium et formarum artifi-cialium, quae non sunt nisi sui intellectus similitudines, sicut creaturae Dei divini intellectus similitudines.” De beryllo, VI,

p. 8. Cf. V. RÜFNER, Homo secundus Deus. Eine geistgeschichlitliche Studie zum menschlichen Schöpfertum, in: Philoso-

phisches Jahrbuch 63 (1955), p. 248-291. For Dürer’s understanding of artist as alter Deus cf. also the passage where

he speaks of honours bestowed upon artists in the old times: “Dann sy [the kings of old] haben die fürtrefflichen

künstler reich gemacht vnd wirdig gehalten. Dan sy bedawcht, daz dy hochverstendigen ein geleichheit zu gott hetten, als

man [bei Moses] schrieben fint .” RUPPRICH, II, p. 109.

59 For a detailed explanation of the metaphor cf: I. MANDRELLA, Gott als Porträtmaler in Sermo CCLI , in: Spiegel und


18/20


19/20


197

Martin Germ

Kristologija Nikole Kuzanskog i kristološka ikonografija u autoportretima Albrechta Dürera

Revolucionarna ikonografija autoportretiranja u liku Krista u opusu Albrechta Dürera slijedi, čini se, jedno-stavan uzorak: Dürer koristi tradicionalni prikaz Krista i blago ga transformira zamjenjujući lik Krista svojim likom.Time slika izražava potpuno novu poruku u kojoj se tradicionalno značenje odabranog kristološkog motiva mije-ša sa stvarnom predodžbom umjetnika o samome sebi. Primjer toga jest izgubljeni rad Autoportret kao čovjek boli (crtež ugljenom olovkom na papiru, 1522., nekada u Kunsthalleu, Bremen). Slikar, koji je u danima svoje bolestiosjećao jaku bol, poistovjetio se s Kristom i prikazao samog sebe kao čovjeka boli.

Dürerova bi grafika Veronikin rubac koji nose dva anđela (1513., British Museum, London) mogla predstav-ljati još jedan način miješanja kristološkog sadržaja s autoportretom. Tradicionalni se ikonografski motiv samoneznatno mijenja na način da se obilježja Kristova lica preoblikuju kako bi ono sličilo Dürerovu. Ne možemogovoriti o autoportretu u doslovnom smislu riječi – prizor još uvijek prikazuje Veronikin rubac – no umjesto tra-dicionalnog prikaza Krista pojavljuje se njegova nova vizija koja nalikuje na Dürera. Čini se da je poistovjećivanjes Kristovom mukom moglo biti glavnim razlogom zbog kojeg je Dürer transformirao Kristove značajke u vlastite,

iako se ne smije isključiti niti mnogo kompleksnija ideja Christomimesisa . Ovakvo razmišljanje dodatno podupirei najkompleksnija mješavina kristološke ikonografije i autoportreta u Dürerovu opusu, utjelovljena u njegovu Autoportretu u krznu (ulje na lipovini, 1500., Alte Pinakothek, München).

Dürerov se Autoportret iz Münchena interpretirao na različite načine, no autor se ove studije koncentri-rao na mogući utjecaj kristologije Nikole Kuzanskog na Dürera. Dugo dokazivana teza o vezi između poznatog Autoportreta i kuzanske filozofije bila je predmetom mnogih rasprava u posljednjih pedeset godina. No, malo jenovog rečeno nakon pionirske analize Franza Winzingera ( Albrecht Dürers Munchner Selbsbildnis, Zeitschrift furKunstwissenschaft, 1954.), u kojoj on tvrdi da bi se djelo Kuzanskoga, De docta ignorantia, trebalo uzeti u obzirkao izvor kompleksne ikonografije Dürerova Autoportreta. Autori kasnijih studija najčešće su upućivali na drugodjelo Nikole Kuzanskog, De visione Dei , i njegovu poznatu metaforu portreta svevidećeg Boga. Nema sumnje da

je navedeni tekst od presudne važnosti u potrazi za paralelama između učenja Kuzanskog i ikonografije Dürerova Autoportreta iz Münchena. Međutim, problem je u tome što povjesničari umjetnosti najčešće ne zalaze dalje od

samo površnih usporedbi Kuzanskovih metafora i Dürerova Autoportreta, čime ne uspijevaju namaknuti dovoljnočvrste dokaze kako bi podržali tezu.U potrazi za elementima koji bi otkrili uvjerljive veze s ikonografijom Dürerova Autoportreta u krznu, treba

uzeti u obzir De visione Dei u kontekstu cjelokupnog opusa Nikole Kuzanskog, s posebnim naglaskom na njegovojkristologiji i ideji ljepote. Nikola Kuzanski i Dürer dijele mišljenja o mnogim važnim temama: ne samo o ljepoti,skladu i idealnim proporcijama već i o važnosti matematičkih i geometrijskih likova u likovnim umjetnostima.Čini se još važnijom zajednička humanistička ideja o Čovjeku, umjetniku te vezi između Čovjeka i Boga. Kuzanskaučenja o Kristu obilježavaju novu fazu u povijesti kršćanskog humanizma: opisujući Krista kao „homo perfectus“, aČovjeka kao „Deus humanatus“ ili „alter Deus“, Kuzanski naglašava blisku vezu između Krista i Čovjeka te time utireput revolucionarnoj humanističkoj ideji o Čovjeku kao (gotovo) jednakom Bogu. Isus Krist nije samo Bog i Čovjek,on je „summa et perfectissima humanitas“, dok je, s druge strane, Čovjek „imago viva Dei “. Veza je tako bliska da će(prema Kuzanskom) čovjek prave vjere vidjeti Božju sliku kao odraz vlastitog lica kad pokuša zamisliti Njegovu

pravu sliku (vera icon Christi ). Upravo se o tome radi u Dürerovu Autoportretu u krznu: Dürer prikazuje sebe kao Kri-sta jer je prava slika Božja zapravo ogledalo u kojem se vlastita obilježja promatrača odražavaju „quasi in speculumaeternitatis vivum“.

Nema sumnje da ikonografija Dürerova kristolikog Autoportreta navodi na različite interpretacije. Među-tim, čini se da je jedinstveni čin autoportretiranja u liku Krista najbolje razumljiv u kontekstu kuzanske kristologi-

je. Krist je ne samo najsavršeniji čovjek već on također utjelovljuje i cjelokupno čovječanstvo i beskonačnu mno-žinu ljudskih individualnosti. Krist u svojoj neograničenoj ljubavi pristupa svakom čovjeku na način koji najboljeodgovara njegovoj svrsi – na primjer, preuzimajući sliku bez mane samog pojedinca (koji zauzvrat postoji u Kristu


20/20

IKON, 1-2008

198

kao primjerak). Psihološki gledajući, Kuzanski povezuje Kristovu ljubav – koja je milost iskupljenja – s čovjekovimsamoljubljem. Čovjek, koji u skladu s vlastitom naravi voli samoga sebe, voljet će Krista utoliko više ako prepoznasebe u Njegovu liku. Ova se teorija čini gotovo kao isprika za očigledno idealizirani autoportret. Međutim, o ku-zanskoj metafori i Dürerovu Autoportretu trebalo bi se raspravljati u odgovarajućem kontekstu: kardinalovo naga-đanje služi kako bi podcrtalo njegovu osnovnu premisu, po kojoj je čovjekov krajnji cilj prepoznati samog sebe u

Kristu i uvidjeti Krista u samome sebi. S druge strane, Dürerovo autoportretiranje, njegov cjelokupan umjetnički ipisani opus bez sumnje su čvrsti dokazi njegova uvjerenja prema kojemu slikar kroz svoj kreativni proces izražavasvoje poštovanje i zahvalnost Bogu koji ga je obdario dragocjenim talentom. Iako je nemoguće povijesno doka-zati da je Kuzanski bio direktan izvor za kristološku ikonografiju Dürerova kristolikog Autoportreta, ipak je istinada slika otkriva jedinstveno razumijevanje Boga, vrlo blisko konceptu koji je predstavio Nikola Kuzanski.

Prijevod s engleskog: Diana Predrag

Primljeno/Received: 19.09.2007.

Izvorni znanstveni rad

Germ2008 Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography in Self-Portraits of...

Documents

Transcript of Germ2008 Christology of Nicholas of Cusa and Christological Iconography in Self-Portraits of...