22 
HOLBEIN IN GERMANY. 
[Nature and Art, January 1, 1867. 
rock in tlie background approaches the guard led 
by Judas, but not near enough to disturb the 
feeling of the scene. Christ is the very image of 
agony and prayer. The bones of his clasped hands 
start out, his kneeling form is bent with earnest- 
ness, and his eyes are fixed upon the sign of the 
cross in the heavens above him. 
There is one j^oint here worth observing, before we 
proceed further. The usual symbol of the agony 
is the cup. This was suited to the dark ages, when 
the scriptural figures of speech Avere slavishly 
rendered by the artist. Some of our reader’s will 
scarcely believe that the Holy Ghost, on the day 
of Pentecost, used to be depicted as a dove with 
literal tongues of fire — such tongues as the poor 
artist could devise ; namely, so many red lines 
extending from the open mouth of the dove to the 
heads of the disciples. In those days the cup was 
a recognized symbol ; and it was suspended in the 
air, without any regard to the laws of gravity. 
But when the later painters adopted it, they altered 
its significance by placing it in the hands of the 
angel. This converted it from a cup of bitterness 
iuto a cup of consolation. In such a shape the two 
ideas are quite irreconcilable ; whereas the cross 
conveys them both, in accordance with all the 
traditions and sentiments of Christianity. Holbein 
may have followed some previous example of the 
Agony ; but the fact remains, that he showed a finer 
taste than most painters, whether of Italy or 
elsewhere, when he made the angel floating high 
above Christ, and holding a cross, as a symbol both 
of the death to be undergone and the triumph to 
be achieved. 
Such is Holbein’s great series of the Passion. 
We can hardly agree with Hr. Woltmann in pre- 
ferring another series, which consists of ten pen- 
and-ink drawings, shaded with Indian ink. They 
are more mature, more equally sustained, and 
possibly more original ; though here again the bio- 
grapher has to mention the name of Mantegna. 
Being little more than outlines, they cannot of 
course rival the painted series in point of effect •, 
and we should say that they are also inferior 
in passionate expression. They are masterly 
designs for glass-painting or for tapestry ; but 
their pictorial beauty is decidedly marred by their 
heavy frameworks of Renaissance columns and 
arches, especially in two instances where medallions 
are tastelessly introduced. We need not describe 
them, nor recommend Mechel’s engravings to the 
reader. He has only to enter the British Museum, 
and turn into the King’s library, and on one of the 
screens he will see repetitions of seven of them, all 
from the hand of Holbein himself. 
Hitherto we have met with no very cogent 
argument why Holbein should have necessarily 
studied Leonardo at Milan. The same arguments 
would carry him on to Perugia to study Raphael ; 
and if he reached Perugia, he would not have 
omitted visiting Florence ; a fact that could hardly 
have escaped the notice of his early biographers. 
His treatment of other sacred subjects is very 
Italian, as might be expected : the more marked 
coincidences may sometimes be purely accidental. 
Thus, a Nativity is lighted by a glory proceeding 
from the body of the child. Correggio has a 
painting with a similar effect ; but, as Dr. Wolt- 
mann remarks, Correggio’s Nativity is six years 
later than Holbein’s. The idea may have been 
suggested to both painters by some old illumina- 
tion, or both may have taken it immediately from 
a certain passage in one of the apocryphal gospels. 
We will now conclude the subject with noticing a 
figure, the modelling of which the German critics 
derive directly from Leonardo. It is one of the 
many matters that can not be absolutely settled ; 
but Ave are still waiting with curiosity for the 
opinion of Mr. Wornum. 
The great physiognomist Lavater has declaimed 
against the figure in question with rotund pom- 
posity. He declares that Holbein, in painting 
such a repulsive abomination, has “ discarded all 
taste, forsworn all love, and disowned all humanity.” 
Dr. Waagen retorts by saying that Lavater is a 
mere “ FEsthetiker,” unable to raise himself above 
the prejudices of sentimentalism. Now, Lavater 
is too solemn, no doubt ; still he is not quite 
wrong. Holbein’s Dead Christ must be something 
to be shuddered at. The picture is life-size, and 
said to be wonderfully real. Holbein was essentially 
a realist ; but his extraordinary strength of mind 
and his native instinct for beauty generally kept 
him above vulgarity and apart from all that is 
horrible. It Avas impossible that he should paint a 
sickening work of butchery, such as the old German 
miniaturists made out of the scourging of Christ. 
But Ave think that, for once, he has been untrue 
to the feelings of high art. Even in Mechel’s 
engraving, the Dead Christ is almost too painful. 
It is the corpse of a man Avho has died a violent 
death — every muscle made convulsively distinct, 
the toes cramped, and the fingers distorted — lying 
alone and almost naked, as if he were uncared for, 
under a low vaulting. There is nothing about him 
to remind one of our Saviour, except the marks of 
the spear and the nails. It is evident that he is 
stretched upon a surgeon’s table, though Holbein 
has placed a little drapery upon the board. In 
fact, he had made such an admirable study, that he 
was seduced into making a finished picture of it, 
and adding the inscription, “ Jesus Nazarenus Rex 
Jud. H. H. 1521.” 
We admit that Ave have been very serious this 
month ; but our next and concluding article will 
be much more chatty, and deal Avith the personal 
character of the artist and his friends at Basle. 
We shall only have to give a detailed notice of 
one painting ; but that one is the Madonna, 
painted for burgomaster Meyer, which is said to 
be suggested to every German by the mention of 
the name of Holbein. 
