|Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team|
|Albrecht Dürer has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 old comment
- 2 Removed THX 1138 reference
- 3 germanicizing?
- 4 Same work?
- 5 Removed dubious story
- 6 Umlauts
- 7 Creation date
- 8 Techniques used
- 9 Lutheranism
- 10 Portrait Change?
- 11 Commons images - many not Durer at all
- 12 What you might not have known... (extra tidbits)
- 13 Monty Python's Fliegender Zirkus
- 14 Phonetics
- 15 Vandalism
- 16 Monty Python
- 17 WikiProject Saints
- 18 fencing manual
- 19 Durer's Self Portrait in Film
- 20 Nationality
- 21 TerminArtors external link
- 22 Birth/death place
- 23 Clean up
- 24 Agnes Frey
- 25 Dürer's prints in the Netherlands
- 26 Engraving or Woodcut
- 27 "The Martyrdom of the Ten Thousand" link not mapped correctly
- 28 Frey year of death and cross symbol
- 29 two dates?
- 30 New file File:Albrecht Durer's House at Nuremberg) by William Callow, RWS.jpg
- 31 Gallery
- 32 Philosophia
- 33 File:Durer self-portrait.jpg
- 34 Falsly claimed self-portrait
- 35 Ask
- OK, I've reduced it to 300px with a link to larger. Evercat 01:12, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Removed THX 1138 reference
Durer's self portrait was incorrectly identified as the icon in the movie THX 1138. You can see the differences here: . The portrait in the movie looks more like Hans Memling's painting 'Christ Giving His Blessing' seen here . --CrinklyCrunk 18:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Wouldn't "germanizing" be better than "germanicizing" ?
- No, "Germanicizing" is philologically correct english word structure, because we're talking "Germanic", not "German", as in "Germanic culture".
- "Germanizing" is incorrect, even if it's simpler form seems preferable. To really, really answer your question, Mr/s. Anonymous, which is "better" depends on who is asking the question—would "germanizing" be better for you? Probably, since you don't see anything wrong with it.
- Now I'm going to spin you out by revealing there is an alternative to "Germanicizing" --- "Teutonicizing", a la "Teutonic" culture. Teutonic means Germanic. So is "Teutonicizing" more more accurate than "Germanicizing"? I'm not an english professor and not qualified to say :^) Arbo 20:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
"User Arbo" is correct. Aleph2.0 13:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
"In 1513 and 1514 appeared the three most famous of Dürer's works in copper-engraving, The Knight and Death (or simply The Knight, as he called it, 1513)" would this be the same work that is mentioned in the first chapter, Ritter, Tod und Teufel or is there separate work with only The Knight and Death? -Lokakyy 10:34, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Somene randomly put in ´kill all jews´, cleaning up--Peteranthony 22:18, 4 April 2006
Removed dubious story
I've deleted the section "Albert's Brother" (sic), recounting the staple Sunday school story about Dürer's brother and the Praying Hands. According to one website I've consulted there is "no credible source" for this, and although snopes.com doesn't mention it, it has debunked the other class assembly favourite about Leonardo using the same model for Jesus and Judas in his Last Supper, so I doubt the story has any place in this article other than possibly in a pop culture or trivia section. HAM 14:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
You are correct the story has no veriffiability. But it ought to be included in this article as 'popular legend', as it is so well-known as to be notable in its own right, even if it may not be true. --Doc 16:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- its back again , on this page - see below. best leave it here. Johnbod 02:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
How do you get umlauts (the two dots above a letter) in Microsoft Office Word? Aleph2.0 03:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Nevermind - I just found out how. Aleph2.0 13:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Who knows when the main article was created? It's for the bibliography section of a school project. Aleph2.0 13:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Click on the "history" tab on the top of the page. It will give you an edit-by-edit history of the page. You'll also probably want to click on "Cite this article" in the links to the left. 15:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Could someone "in the know" add wikilinks to articles describing the techniques Dürer used in his printmaking? I am awed by his prints, and would love to learn more about how he did them. -- 15:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Camarthist (talk) 14:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)== Lutheran == He probably was a Lutheran, but it's not entirely clear and he was buried in a Catholic cemetery. I'm not listing him as Catholic, it might be just best to have him in some general Christian category.--T. Anthony 10:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't you mean the cemetery is NOW catholic? I'm pretty sure it would have been Lutheran then. He was plainly very sympathetic to Lutheranism, & Nuremburg went Lutheran in 1525, when he was already pretty ill. Really he was ill by the time it became necessary to label himself. Of course he carried on making saints etc after a keen protestant would have stopped. Johnbod 04:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
-- The subject matter and style of Durer's art becomes sharply more Protestant after the death of Maximilian I in 1519, and his own writings attest to his reverence for Luther's teachings. That he died a "good Lutheran" was attested to by his closest friend, Willibald Pirckheimer. It's less clear whether Durer's conversion to Lutheranism was a sincere spiritual event or one motivated by an interest in preserving his livelihood, but after 1519 (his presumed conversion) his religious subject matter is restricted mainly to Jesus, the Apostles, and the Passion. There are a very few of his drawings from the 1520s that depict the Madonna with various saints, but these were sketches for an altarpiece project that was abandoned the same year Nuremburg adopted Lutheranism (which Durer supported). These drawings probably should not be taken as evidence of Durer's adherence to Catholicism.
- He is (see below) a Lutheran saint anyway! Johnbod 02:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I think it would be good to have a section called 'Dürer and the Reformation' - how about using some of the argument in this talk section? Plus there's a good case to be made regarding the delayed release of the St Philip engraving, and interesting material on Dürer's confusion of Erasmus and Luther's philosophies. Camarthist (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
-- Seems that someone (yet again) is trying to make the strange claiom that Durer was always Catholic. There is a great deal of evidence to show that Durer though of himself as Lutheran; the only argument for his continued Catholicism is that this evidence is not conclusive. That said, there is no evidence I know of to imply that he defined as non-Lutheran. Evidence of rhis Lutheranism:
- Pirckheimer described him as such posthumously.
- The inscription, encouraging Luther's focus on the Gospel of John, beneath the Four Apostles, given to Nuremberg council after it had become Lutheran.
- His friendship with notable Lutherans (Pirkheimer; Melancthon) and Anabaptists (Sprenger, Hieronymous Andreae).
- The satirical diagram of a 'Monument to a Victor of the Peasant War.'
I was thinking that perhaps we should change the self portrait at the top of the page to his more famous self portrait of 1500. The other portrait doesn't necessarily need to be removed, and perhaps it should go into the section about his marriage, as the earlier self portrait may have been sent home to Nuremberg as a wedding portrait while he was away on his wanderjahr.
- agree; I've just added a ref to it (the engagement one) in the text Johnbod 04:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi. There may be a reason for this - so didn't want to alter it - but just wondering why the self-portrait drawing in the section in Durer's Early life is labelled as 'painted'. Probably just a typo! thanks J —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 09:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Commons images - many not Durer at all
I have added a commons tag, but a good number of the images of paintings there have not been attributed to Durer for about a century, if ever. They need a good sort out.
What you might not have known... (extra tidbits)
Back in the fifteenth century, in a tiny village near Nuremberg, lived a family with eighteen children. Eighteen! In order merely to keep food on the table for this mob, the father and head of the household, a goldsmith by profession, worked almost eighteen hours a day at his trade and any other paying chore he could find in the neighborhood.
Despite their seemingly hopeless condition, two of Albrecht Durer the Elder's children had a dream. They both wanted to pursue their talent for art, but they knew full well that their father would never be financially able to send either of them to Nuremberg to study at the Academy.
After many long discussions at night in their crowded bed, the two boys finally worked out a pact. They would toss a coin. The loser would go down into the nearby mines and, with his earnings, support his brother while he attended the academy. Then, when that brother who won the toss completed his studies, in four years, he would support the other brother at the academy, either with sales of his artwork or, if necessary, also by laboring in the mines.
They tossed a coin on a Sunday morning after church. Albrecht Durer won the toss and went off to Nuremberg.
Albert went down into the dangerous mines and, for the next four years, financed his brother, whose work at the academy was almost an immediate sensation. Albrecht's etchings, his woodcuts, and his oils were far better than those of most of his professors, and by the time he graduated, he was beginning to earn considerable fees for his commissioned works.
When the young artist returned to his village, the Durer family held a festive dinner on their lawn to celebrate Albrecht's triumphant homecoming. After a long and memorable meal, punctuated with music and laughter, Albrecht rose from his honored position at the head of the table to drink a toast to his beloved brother for the years of sacrifice that had enabled Albrecht to fulfill his ambition. His closing words were, "And now, Albert, blessed brother of mine, now it is your turn. Now you can go to Nuremberg to pursue your dream, and I will take care of you."
All heads turned in eager expectation to the far end of the table where Albert sat, tears streaming down his pale face, shaking his lowered head from side to side while he sobbed and repeated, over and over, "No ...no ...no ...no."
Finally, Albert rose and wiped the tears from his cheeks. He glanced down the long table at the faces he loved, and then, holding his hands close to his right cheek, he said softly, "No, brother. I cannot go to Nuremberg. It is too late for me. Look ... look what four years in the mines have done to my hands! The bones in every finger have been smashed at least once, and lately I have been suffering from arthritis so badly in my right hand that I cannot even hold a glass to return your toast, much less make delicate lines on parchment or canvas with a pen or a brush. No, brother ... for me it is too late."
By now, Albrecht Durer's hundreds of masterful portraits, pen and silver-point sketches, watercolors, charcoals, woodcuts, and copper engravings hang in every great museum in the world, but the odds are great that you, like most people, are familiar with only one of Albrecht Durer's works. More than merely being familiar with it, you very well may have a reproduction hanging in your home or office.
One day, to pay homage to Albert for all that he had sacrificed, Albrecht Durer painstakingly drew his brother's abused hands with palms together and thin fingers stretched skyward. He called his powerful drawing simply "Hands," but the entire world almost immediately opened their hearts to his great masterpiece and renamed his tribute of love "The Praying Hands."
- Load of old nonsense, i'm afraid. Durer came from a prosperous and well-connected family in Nuremberg itself & (as the article says if you bother to read it) was apprenticed to the top local painter at 15 (a close neighbour of his parents), probably with no fee needed. No village, no academy, no professors. He did the praying hands as a study for an altarpiece many years later, when he was about 37. Are the hands in such a bad condition anyway?
Johnbod 02:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Monty Python's Fliegender Zirkus
I doubt it is worthy of mentioning in the article, but a large part of Monty Python's first all-German episode of Flying Circus (Monty Python's Fliegender Zirkus) consists of an attempted biography of Albrecht Durer that is constantly plagued by mistakes. - AlKing464 13:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'll admit, I was going to come here and ask why there was no mention of Durer's car hire service. --Smart Mark Greene (talk) 04:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that! - was it with the Brit cast? I never heard of it Johnbod 19:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the original cast performs the show in German with English subtitles. Throught the episode they go back to "the life and times of Albrecht Durer" where the program is interupted by a censor because of its inappropriate content (sillyness). ~Z
Albrecht Dürer's name is not pronounced "ale-brake-t dür-uh" It's more pronounced like "ull-brecht dür-air" The "Al" in "Albrecht" is like the "ull" in "gullible" Unfortunately there is no equivalent for the "ch" but it's certainly not pronounced as "k". It is more like a simple breath. Comanche1 15:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)Comanche
- Can anyone find an IAS version? Johnbod 15:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone explain why this article is the target of such an unrelenting torrent of puerile vandalism? Poor Dürer seems to be competing with George Bush for `top vandalism victim' on my watchlist, yet unlike Bush's case, I cannot imagine what the poor fellow did to merit such torment. Rosenkreuz 18:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
He's just very famous - Raphael is about as bad, though Rembrandt seems luckier. I don't watch Michelangelo or Van Gogh (or George Bush) fortunately. Johnbod 03:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, let's guess. Like Bush, this article has lots of weasel words. It's completely complimentary. That sounds like Bush supporters, doesn't it? The images seem to be taken without permission. From the Louvre. Whose site doesn't seem to mention copying their property. Teenagers who have been through about 1 year of college art courses know who he is. Naturally, they have an opinion which must be heard. What about this doesn't suggest vandalism from self-satisfied quasi-artistos? 184.108.40.206 10:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I have added a 'Mentioned in the works on Monty Python' info box at the bottom of the article. Just in case someone thinks this is just more vandalism, IT ISN'T. I am compiling a list of references that Monty Python made (artists, philosophers, historic events, places etc) in their sketches, films, books etc here List of things referred to in the works of Monty Python and I want to cross reference each entry with this infobox. Being clever Oxbridge types, the list is going to be very long and erudite when finished. Durer is the first infobox I've added.Johnalexwood 02:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Just noticed the post, 3 above - what a coincidence! One of the things on which Monty Python's humour is based is to treat lightly or frivolously a subject which is nornally considered formal or traditional. They are not poking fun at it necessarily, they are rather poking fun at people's attitude towards it. Here's an excerpt from the relevant script:
Announcer: Albecht Durer, 1471-1530, the Nuremberg painter who captivated Europe with his sharp eye, his mastery of line and texture, his car hire service. .
(Cut to a man behind a desk, played by John Cleese.) <Picture>
Man behind desk: We apologize for the inaccuracies that have crept into this portrait of Albrecht Durer. Durer NEVER operated a car hire service. Thank you. (Cut back to a drawing.)
Announcer: Durer drew his inspiration from his birthplace, Nuremberg. Portraits. Landscapes. The detail of nature. Social themes. Religious themes. But always present his fascination with the grotesque. To find out more about Durer the man as opposed to Durer the insect. . . (cut back to the man at desk.)
Man behind desk: Watch it! (Cut to more drawings.)
- This is a Userbox. It isn't appropriate to place on an article. Angela. 18:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Correct, but for one happy moment I thought you had removed the artist infobox. Oh well! Johnbod 19:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Dürer was added to the saints wikiproject on the basis of his commemortation on the calendars of the two largest Lutheran churches. Dürer is commemorated on APril 16, along with Matthias Grünewald and Lucas Cranach, on the calendar of bothEvangelical Lutheran Worship and the Lutheran Service Book. There is no process of canonization in the Lutheran church. -- Pastordavid 21:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
You should add something to the article on this then, otherwise it looks very puzzling - the legacy section would be the natural place. I must say it seems suprising - see discussions above it; it is far from clear that he can really be described as a Lutheran. Johnbod 21:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- John Carter added a line about it in the legacy section on Feb 15 with this edit. I have modified the sentence some, in hopes of adding clarity. -- Pastordavid 22:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- ok thanks, I'd missed that. please do similar if you are going to do the other two. Johnbod 23:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
If anyone is interested, someone added an ext link to a 6.5MB file which crashed my Internet when i tried to cancel the download. So I've moved it here. Good luck!
Johnbod 04:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Durer's Self Portrait in Film
Should it be mentioned that his self-portrait was used (albeit facially edited) in Bram Stoker's Dracula? The picture can be clearly seen as Harker comments on it whilst he is staying with the Count. The portrait is almost certianly Durer, but with Gary Oldman's face edited in to show a "remarkable likeness", as Harker comments.
- Nicolaus Copernicus (February 19, 1473 – May 24, 1543) was the first European astronomer to formulate a modern heliocentric model of the solar system.
- is what that article says, after enormous talk page discussion, mostly centring on the national status, if any, of the place where he was born. There is no equivalent issue with Dürer, who is certainly German. Johnbod 13:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
I have included the following external link to this page: „Albrecht Durer's paintings on TerminArtors”. The linked page displays 465 categorized paintings of the master (as of Oct 10, 2007). TerminArtors is a community based paintings gallery. Abenhakan 21:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Germany should be replaced with Holy Roman Empire. There was no country called Germany at the time Dürer lived. Check Germany if you like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- The term was very common as a geographical and ethnic term. Johnbod (talk) 12:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm redoing large parts of the article, keeping the basic structure but taking out the opinion based material and adding more academic content and wiki-links. Camarthist (talk) 16:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I can't see any real improvement, and in terms of wikistyle (and normal style) , spelling and linking, it is certainly a step backwards. You are not adding any inline citations, which current standards now demand. What "opinion-based" material are you removing? The previous version was very largely based on Bartrum's recent and scholarly work; the only work you seem to mention is Panofsky of 50+ years ago. Frankly I think you should build up more experience on other articles before tackling such an important one. Johnbod (talk) 18:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- After a further look, I have reverted the lot, rather regretfully. It's all just too sloppy, and overall not an improvement - examples:
- "the work on the project began while Dürer was apprentice was apprenticed to Michael Wolgemut in 1486, who is attributed with their creation." - No he is not "attributed", the contract for the work survives - see Nuremberg Chronicle
- The notes and references were all messed up & not done properly.
- "Dürer reported that he learned much about the new developments in perspective and proportion from de Barbari" see where these links go, compared to those of the old/current version.
... and so on.
By all means re-add some of the additional information. By current standards this article is well under-cited, but you added no references at all. Please do this if re-adding. Johnbod (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Apologies, I shouldn't have published the article in a prototype stage.
By opinion based I mean the connoisseurial content such as
- "with a highly detailed landscape background and beautiful animals"
- "which shows his subtlety while using the burin in the texturing of flesh surfaces"
- "The decorations show a lighter, more fanciful side to Dürer's art"
as well as cutting down the number of 'iconic', 'best' and 'famous' works - about half of all Dürer's works could be put under those categories by someone.
- As for references, it should be pointed out that Bartrum is heavily reliant on Panofsky, and nearly all the references to Bartrum in the article might just as well be to Panofsky's monograph. Finally, I just don't think it's necessary to have a reference for facts such as when he returned to Venice or when his mother died, about which there is no controversy. Camarthist (talk) 09:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- References at the end of a paragraph mean (here anyway) the whole paragraph comes from Bartrum (something else the re-write distorts). You will see that at GA/FA level one reference per paragraph is considered a minimum. I doubt if she used Panofsky much for biographical information - her bibliography lists the main biographical works, old and new: Hutchison (1990) and Fleschig (1928-31, 3 vols), which is no doubt where Panofsky got much of his biographical information. Obviously most of the basic biographical information will be found in any source and is never disputed. Equally the "opinions" are usually Bartrum's (and usually everyone else's as well). It is certainly important to distinguish between the most and least successful works in the case of a very large output such as that of Durer, not all of it wholly successful. Johnbod (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- "The nature of his relationship with his wife is unclear, but it would not seem to have been a love match, and his portraits of her lack warmth."
I've removed this statement until something more sophisticated can be added. The literature regarding the nature of Dürer's marriage is quite misogynistic, and any entry needs to fall back on the documentary evidence of the letters to Pirckheimer; at the very least, such statements should be in quotation marks and directly attributed.Camarthist (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Dürer's prints in the Netherlands
- "This provides rare information of the monetary value placed on old master prints at this time. Unlike paintings, their sale was very rarely documented."
I've deleted this for two reasons. Firstly, they can't be 'old master prints' when Dürer's still alive. Secondly, the sale of prints is not that badly documented. Dürer's diary is really interesting because it's Dürer's. Camarthist (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
- The sentence is in the present tense; old master prints is what they are called now. The sale of top-qulity prints at this time certainly is very badly documented compared to the relative wealth of evidence as to paintings - every work on prints says so, and refers to Durer's information - see Landau/Parshall for example. Johnbod (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Point taken: a Landau citation will do me fine. I've made the display text 'prints' so as to move away from potential anachronisms but still keep a link to 'old master prints', however strange that term is.Camarthist (talk) 19:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Engraving or Woodcut
"The Martyrdom of the Ten Thousand" link not mapped correctly
Frey year of death and cross symbol
Two dates, 1537 and 1539, appear in this article as dates of death for Agnes Frey. That is, provided I am interpreting the "cross" symbol next to 1539 to indicate date of death: is this a WP convention for indicating dates of death? Anyone know which date is correct and how it should be indicated? thanks, Doctormatt (talk) 01:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Recently the file File:Albrecht Durer's House at Nuremberg) by William Callow, RWS.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 12:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. It could not doubt be improved - we need better images of the difficult to reproduce prints, but the use of galleries for major artists is no longer at all controversial. Johnbod (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm curious why Durer's woodcut Philosophia isn't mentioned in the article. I was under the impression it's a somewhat well known piece, but perhaps it's not. Just wondering if it deserves to be added. Iohannes (talk) 02:32, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- Are you thinking of Melencolia I? I think you are Johnbod (talk) 02:34, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
- No, it's this one - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:D%C3%BCrer,_Philosophia.png Iohannes (talk) 02:49, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
I have a question.... on the bottom of this image there are two numbers - 382 and 972. Are those supposed to be there? Part of the painting? Added later? Should be removed? – JBarta (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- They look like painted catalogue or inventory numbers, which were very commonly added like this in the old days. If they get round to giving the painting a thorough clean they will probably remove them. Johnbod (talk) 19:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- When you say giving the painting a thorough cleaning, you mean the actual physical painting, right? And if I were to remove them from the digital image, that would be acceptable? Maybe even desirable? – JBarta (talk) 01:17, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Falsly claimed self-portrait
The so called "first painted self-portrait of Dürer" is in fact a painting by Dürers pupil Bernard van Orley. You don't really got the eyes for paintings, do you? Hint: Colors, shadows, facial expression, they tell everything. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:29, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Who's 'You don't really got the eyes for paintings'? This is a collaborative effort. If you provide reliable sources to support your claim then other editors will review it. JNW (talk) 00:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Some of the gallery pictures have a quite striking colour, might benefit from a better display of the artist works.
Others are not there that are quite good or better .