Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Warburg
Author(s): G. Bing
Source: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 28 (1965), pp. 299-313
Published by: The Warburg Institute
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/750675
Accessed: 03-05-2015 23:28 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
By G. Bing*
n setting down his recollections of Aby Warburg,1 a bare six months after
his death, and attempting to bring home to his countrymen the personality
of a scholar whose work he admired and who had been his friend for many
years, Giorgio Pasquali found himself in a curious situation. It seemed to
him strange that, while Warburg's name was familiar to scholarly circles,
next to nothing was known of the man himself and his work. '. .. qui da noi',
he wrote, 'molti anche tra gli universitari si saranno chiesti se quel nome era,
oltre che di un'istituzione, anche di un uomo. Che l'amburghese "biblioteca
Warburg per scienza della cultura" era piu celebre del suo fondatore e direttore . . . La biblioteca Warburg e gik ora la pi' completa tra le raccolte
specializzate di stampati e di materiale iconografico per chi voglia studiare in
genere storia della cultura, ma in particolare storia della cultura del Rinascimento nostro, fiorentino e italiano . .. Che l'uomo Warburg, il grande
ricercatore Warburg, scompaia, scomparisse gi? da vivo, dietro all'istituzione
da lui voluta, 6 conforme alle sue intenzioni: egli ha voluto essere innanzi tutto
un maestro e un organizzatore, ha voluto che certi suoi pensieri scientifici, non
molti forse di numero ma grandi e svolti organicamente, vivessero e fruttificassero sopratutto nelle menti dei suoi discepoli ch'egli fin da principio considerava collaboratori e destinava successori. Nd e caso che, mentr'egli si 6
per lo pid tenuto pago di pubblicare le sue scoperte maggiori in forma straordinariamente succinta e compressa, per lo pii quale resoconto o riassunto di
conferenze, le sue idee, ancora lui vivo, siano state eposte nella loro connessione organica dallo scolaro che gli era da molti anni pii vicino, Fritz Saxl.'
Pasquali's essay will always be among the finest and most perspicacious
tributes paid to Warburg. Certainly, his judgment of Warburg's intentions
may have been awry. No scholarly inquiry can ever pass for completed in
the eyes of the person who undertakes it, and Pasquali himself well understood
how to awaken in his pupils the consciousness that they were the heirs to an
inheritance, and that it was incumbent on them to make the fullest use of it.
Nevertheless, he had put his finger on a peculiarity of Warburg's fate, which
was already apparent then, and has since become more evident. Even his
posthumous fame comes more from hearsay than from a knowledge of his
* This article, prepared by the late Professor Bing to serve as an introduction to the
Italian edition of Warburg's Gesammelte
Schriften (forthcoming from La Nuova Italia,
Florence), is a considerably revised version of
a lecture given at the Courtauld Institute in
1962. The first nine paragraphs, added by
the author in German, have been translated:
otherwise the text is printed as she last saw it.
1 Giorgio Pasquali, 'Ricordo di Aby Warburg', Pegaso, ii, 1930o, pp. 484ff.; reprinted
in id., Vecchiee Nuove Pagine stravaganti di un
Filologo, Florence, 1952. Other personal appreciations: F. Saxl, 'Die Bibliothek Warburg
und ihr Ziel', Vortrdgeder Bibliothek Warburg
299
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
300
G. BING
writings, and he is one of those authors whose fortune it is, in Lessing's words,
to be more often praised than read.
Warburg had himself some experience of both recognition and neglect. In
his personality and his conversation there was an exceptional fascination, but
no-one in his lifetime would have predicted the fame which he now enjoys,
and only a few would have conceded him the right to it. In the years when
the history of art was developing into a recognized academic discipline,
Warburg must have felt that his preaching was falling on deaf ears. He
addressed himself to his task with the zeal of a pioneer, but he was well aware
that he had been able to do no more than 'erect milestones', and his confidence
that others would follow his lead was his only protection against doubt and
indifference. At the end of the First World War the sudden onset of his illness
condemned him to years of solitude. On his recovery, indeed, when Saxl's
activity had created for him a circle of willing scholarly collaborators, he
could feel himself fully understood by those around him, and he earned the
enthusiastic respect of a series of young pupils. But he was never to bring
home the harvest of those last five years of his life.
After his death, the conditions of the time helped to keep the figure of
Schriftenwere published at the
Warburg in a kind of twilight. His Gesammelte
which
times
end of 1932, in unpropitious
gravely hindered, if they did not
Less than a year later,
volumes.
of
these
circulation
the
entirely prevent,
the
in
events
of
Warburg Institute, the
under the pressure political
Germany,
had
he
the
work
of
extension
the
for
initiated, had been transferred
foundation
is
his
of
The
to England.
fortuna emphasized by the fact that it was
irony
which
this very emergency
helped to give his name greater currency, in that
to another country, and its incorporation in the
Institute
the
of
the migration
of
London, opened to Warburg's closest collaborators a new era
University
his friends and pupils acclimatized his approach in centres
while
of activity,
outside
of learning
England.
So it may seem that the republication of Warburg's works, in the country
with whose civilization they are first and foremost concerned, and in the
language in which he was almost as much at home as in his own, is no more
than a belated act of historical justice. Nor is such an act inappropriate at a
time when many publishers, not only in Italy, but also in Germany and
America, are seeking to repair the broken links with the last generation but
one by issuing reprints and translations. The scholarly classics of the turn of
the century have come into their own again.
Warburg's case, however, is a little more complex, since the lines of
research which appeal to his authority, some of them unconnected with the
Institute that bears his name, are so many and various. It is time to redefine
his achievement. This was formerly seen as accomplished in the field of
Renaissance studies, but now one hears the terms 'Warburg method' and
'Warburgian studies' uttered with a confidence which is not supported by firsthand knowledge of his work. This mere invocation of Warburg's name will
not suffice. True, it is not the first time that an author has been obscured by the
size of the legacy that he bequeathed to his heirs to be used and augmented.
But those who are not satisfied with judging his stature by the influence
he has exerted must, as he himself always advised, go back to the sources.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
301
These considerations governed the policy of this new edition. When Saxl
wrote his paper of 19222 it had been his aim to demonstrate the coherence
underlying Warburg's diverse and seemingly unconnected articles. In the
Gesammelte
these are grouped according to subjects and supplemented
Schrifften
and
notes based partly on Warburg's marginaliaand partly on
by appendices
the results of subsequent research. The intention was then to bring Warburg's
work up to date so that it should retain its topicality. Today, the situation
calls for a different approach. The emphasis must be on Warburg's own
development as a scholar. To document this clearly, his papers are here
printed in the order in which they were published. Some of the riassunti
mentioned by Pasquali have been omitted but one article of which only an
extract was published in 1932 is here printed in its entirety.3 Nothing has been
added to or corrected in Warburg's text, not even where his presentation and
conclusions have been superseded by later research. What happened to
Burckhardt's Ciceroneas it passed through various editions should serve as a
warning. Even readers who do not accept Burckhardt's opinions prefer to
have his text without a commentary. In the case of Warburg's writings, it
must be left to the reader to examine the details critically. What matters is
that he should be enabled to follow Warburg's explorations in their bold
self-consistency.
To do this we must rid ourselves of certain ideas which can partly be traced
to Warburg's own work. He has not made it easy for us to see him in his own
time. This does not apply only to his chosen field, the history of art. He,
more than any specialist, has drawn on general ideas current in his time and
we must look for the sources of his notions in many fields. Thus we tend to
accept his descriptive analyses of works of art without realizing that they
contain elements of aesthetic doctrines which we thought to have outgrown.
When we read his polemics against the autonomy of artistic developments
and the unconnected spontaneity of artistic creation, or against the overrating
of purely formal criteria for the understanding of works of art, he may seem
to us to be tilting at windmills, until we recall that it was he himself who
stopped their sails turning. Our own more sophisticated conception of the
influence of ancient art is grounded on his refutation of neo-classical dogma.
True, some of his attributions and derivations are in need of correction. But
we must guard against rejecting his arguments together with these erroneous
examples. He was wrong in ascribing Castagno'sjousting shield to Pollaiuolo,
and in deriving the David figure on it from the Pedagogue of the group of
the Niobides, which is much restored and was in any case not found until
1583. But what this illustration was meant to prove was the classical origin
of a seemingly unclassical gesture4-and this can in fact be documented from
the manuscript tradition, which can in turn be shown to have been known to
2 F. Saxl, 'Rinascimento
dell'Antichita',
Repertoriumfir Kunstwissenschaft, xliii, 1922,
pp. 220 ff. A. Warburg, Die Erneuerung der
heidnischen Antike: KulturwissenschaftlicheBeitrdge zur Geschichteder europdischenRenaissance.
Mit einem Anhang unverdffentlichterZusdtze,
Leipzig/Berlin,
1932. Here referred to as
GesammelteSchriften.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
302
G. BING
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
303
Renaissancein Italien und die Kunst, I879; Geschichteder deutschenMalerei, 1890; Kunstlehre
DantesundGiotto'sKunst, 1892.
8 Adolf Michaelis, 1835-1910I, Greifswald,
Titbingen and Strassburg: Der Parthenon,
I871; Catalogueof Ancient Marbles in Great
Britain, 1882; Die archaeologischen
Entdeckungen
des 19. Jahrhunderts,1906.
9 'Warburg'svisit to New Mexico', F. Saxl,
Lectures,1957, pp. 325ff.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
304
G. BING
G. Bing, 'Fritz Saxl, 1890-1948', Introd. from his Friendsin England,Edinburgh, 1957,
to Fritz Saxl: A Volume of Memorial Essays pp. Iff.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
305
presentationof the State as a Work of Art and in the courseof time he was
to modifyprofoundlyBurckhardt'sview of the Developmentof the Individual.
But certain themes to which Burckhardthad drawn attentionbecame Warburg's fields of exploration: Italian festivals,Florentinerelationswith Burgundy, and, of course, the rediscoveryof ClassicalAntiquity. Above all,
Burckhardt'ssober method of gatheringsingle facts from all types of sources
for his pictureof the Italian RenaissanceremainedWarburg'smodel. A trace
of this influence can be seen in Warburg'sadoption of one of Burckhardt's
leading terms: Life. As a descriptiveterm for an object it is ill-definedand
neither of the two men explains what he understoodby it. Its value to
them was that it circumscribedthe historian'stask. It was a reminderthat in
dealing with the past the historianis faced with a reality as burningand as
bewilderingto those who lived throughit as our own is to us. No sphereof
existence must be consideredtoo lowly, too obscure or too ephemeral to
provideevidence. The dead relics which are all there is to go upon must be
read as the remainsof human reactions-reactions, that is, of living men and
women to that changing and evanescentreality. This intimate approachis
part of the charm of Warburg'spresentation. It is also the parting of the
ways betweenhim and the practitionersof the History of Ideas and Geistesgeschichte.Warburgknew that ideas are not born and do not procreateby
parthenogenesis.
It shows a one-sidedjudgment of Warburg'sachievementwhen his first
publishedwork is said to contain in nucemost of his later discoveries. There
is in it much of the beginner'sstumblingthroughan insufficientlycontrolled
mass of evidence." What is true, however,is that throughWarburg'sown
later elaborationsit was to become one of his most influentialstatements. It
startsfrom what then seemed to be an unresolveddiscordbetween the true
characterof mythologicalfiguresand the exaggeratedlinear treatmentgiven
them by Botticelli (P1. 44a) and his contemporaries.Far from being consideredinappropriate,this style was in fact the fifteenthcentury'sanswerto
the attemptto find a genuinelyclassicalform. Nor was this solutionconfined
to the visual arts. The runningor dancing figureswith flutteringgarments
and blowing hair, called Ninfe,which appearedin pictures,were also abundantly describedin contemporarypoems and used as stage properties on
the carriof festivalprocessions.They even made their appearancein Biblical
scenes where they could not be necessaryto the action (P1. 44b). It had
thereforeto be assumed that they served a purely stylistic purpose. This,
accordingto Warburg,was the endeavourto renderbodily motion through
the agitatedlines of thin drapery,as the Ancientshad shown to be possible
(P1.44c). That we, with our more differentiatedknowledgeof classicalart,
now call the style of the model 'late' or even 'decadent'does not alter the fact
that in the fifteenthcenturyit rankedas 'classical'. Thus a clean breakwas
made with the accepted notion of classical calm. The dogma to which
Winckelmann had given currency was deprived of its validity and the question
of what was understood by 'classicism' had to be asked afresh in respect of
any given period.
11
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
G. BING
306
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
--X;.,
1.
-.!,-,
-1
,,.....,,p,. ?*_K
.1
,,- ,- - .?-II..,
I: , I:; 11. ? .:,.1 -1 1]:?
1-1
1.1.I'll.
W.
:- mk
??_.
,?i??
.,,,.",
,.,
?_
?..,.....,,
...
m
-.,_..--,.-,-,,,-_
?-,_,_,---,_,_
"?
,. ?i
-.''
*1
I_
.
.,......
I ...,..,..,...... I ?::::4.---,,.
-IIs
..,
, ;*,.T
.
,
?
..
I
I
..?
.m
I
?11
??
I
...
I-" i ,.- , ?!"
.1
.%.
?:?:
, 1 I-.
?,
.
1,
.-:, 1.11
??
.
I'll,
,f
%
...
.1
,
;...
.,',
,.?,"I
:
",
I
.
...
_e.
:
."
.
1
.:..::':.
..:.
..??
?m
?
,,,,
.:.,z.
,
?
:W
.
I
.
1
?
..,
I
.......
I
.
,
...
:
.."
.
,
?:_
,
.
?..,
,.,,?....
..?.!,
?
,
N
7
1
Ix
.,,I,
.",
I
.
..
......
.
?,?
.
,
,.;.
..
.....
...
.
.1
?
.
.
..'..
?
1
.
.
:
:
1?
,
1:
:?
':
.,
,
:.:::
.:,
...
?
.;k
..
:.?,.::?
,"
:?,:?
?
I
?4
?
1.
.:?,,::
::1
,,-?.:?
'
.
I
..........
-,:
....
?.
:::?.::
I
,?
.
.,
-,?
?
"
.::#
:1.:?,?
......
.1
"
?
..?Z.
'....
I
.
....".
..
.......
?.,
?
I
.1
I
"
?]:?,
-?
1.
?
?
l-,..I
?
,?
-,
,
,
..
,::
.
,.,.*
.
::::
?
..
:
"m
.
:,?
,...11?1,
......
_. -g. ....
.?.
?:,.?....
:.?
.I
?...._
,i .:...
, ,?1. ..........
,.. .1I;*&
.?;?
,.,..._,-.,..
. .??:;?;,,
W
I?,??",
?
.P.
!,
.I.,
II?I?
??.?i:::
.,,.. ..
!? ::..
".
-,.. ?R
., ,?
I..
...
.....::
I,??
.......1.IN
?. 1:
-.,-?i?l
.,.
,.I. ..?:??ii,
???
.I .., ,.....
?:
R
o..
_:,
,
I
?%
..
i,._1
.,.. . ;.?,.
.1
.
,.,???,
.,?
?
I
AM
im
?:?i,
.
A
.W
,
:??i?.??:.,n?
...
?
I
Jll
:.::::..,
%
.
,?-.
:
_
??
......
I
_
I..
.
.
_
I
I
.
?
?
?...
?
??iiF?:?,
..:?::_.:?
;,,
,>.?.i
?..,
.?
?,
?
,
I
I
',
A
,*
??
....
??
I
,
?o-?i?:??i
.1
?&-??l
.
,
..
?.,_,..
?
.
_,,
If,
.?
-.0'.
140
F
?
,
:
,
..
..
?.
??
,
,
?,..z
.
:-a
.41.0
I
I
,?
.
.
.
dilm
,
.4-.?
. I::::
- ,-15?
,
f.-X
?,&..
M
.o
11
I~ ---11-11.1-xft-N
?rl
;??.?
- ,.Ie,,I,?
i:],?3?,,..,,,
??,?,b
..- --,",
-I1,I-%
5?.,?
- -11,
1,
:,
:?z.:?qm
-.,.?.
.-?.&_
?,?1;
::?:*?.,NM?..
?.
-..-,i?:]
"
...
..1
.?
- , : I_?,_
i?
I IN
...
;?:.
, I:A.:%::U
.,..
IA-f,.
??:::::
.: ,-.,II11 I I I...
1,,
.::
..-..?
71
.
?g , I'll
.
-ia
:?
-..
,?,
...
??I
t?-?,
_?_?
- ,?.?-.?,?
_?
I...
,??,-_
01
I~-_-?.
'.
.
,I,:.
,
z ..IS
?,,
I ,"1?
..%?:.
....r..,._
.11
, .1
_?
,..i
I
,
.
?
....
,,.*,
'-.;
,
_
....
90?
.I,_
.
U.
"
,
K,
1;
??
,
-?
5,1
;?,,-.::
:
??:?,?]-;:?..??.
K.
...
I
-??v
.1
I
?.,,
...
.;
:
?_...._
/:
I..
?.
Nf?
g
??
,___?,__
2
'-.r,,-W.?
?
'?
;?
's
p.?,
i
?
"
_,.
.
%,:..
"g.,
I- I ,zl:?.
-.--",.:
..
?
I
_?
i?s.
,
e -...
:
I
I
,??,
V
..
...
?
i:::: 11
?..
10'.....
:
..-A,,?
?w
"I
_
1.
,
I
I
,
I
I
li?
.
I
,
,
..?
.
W
,
_?,W
w?.s:,
I
I
"
....
.,?.,?...?....?.????.,,,.,?;?:..
.,
i?...?;
.
?
., ,
-,:,'
.?
?2?i??;.M
..,lzl.:l,0-,M
,,?N
.I.M.
. , -?. .* : : ,?ij??i,
-- - ,- ? -? ? - - . ?.
:iI.... , -:*??,:,
I ,1-I. 1 .1 , ..;I ? ., I -, .1.
I X..X. ?. "-I :. - ` . , . , . 1 ?,.I. , . I I
- ?.
?;
.1
.? i
:?,
? I I ?, .: 1, 1, '.
.1
"I
I..
,?;
?...
,.
-,
al
:-!
:,?l
!,:?
.1 X_
.....
:,-.,....l..
? :. : .,_
k:.
'O,
M ,?*
-%
"
.:"
,. ? .i .:,?
.? ?.
.l
"',
-,
?-,
?,
,-?.
.,?-
,/'
1. .
I I.
..?
::C
:." ?
,-
li,.?: i?w
U
h
"'.
,.
&
, ?, W
1:1_
? ?f .k.
--,- ,,%IeO
.IV ,
??::?:?:??,
..,
-,
i?-
g,?
:0
.-,
ml
,"
., I .I i.p .
. .
I 1.
...
:.:::
:::.?.
-...
IM
...
?.11--...
.
.....
-_,"
:_, :':,._?
?i?...
,,.",i?,?.
.1?.:?N',I-0:
k?:
??
,?i:?,?:j?
.11
-??,:
- .
, .--.,.?"
.-4
,-iq
-?"--.,,
?,_4?.1?
_...
?.:,?
?.
1,
?:I ? I
I
II "-....1.
:,
I
.
?
?
::.
:....::
?
......
I
..
..
. .........I.,
-,
N..
-..,!?.
.....
.,.,.,q.
.. .... ...
:??!::
.. ?,,,
..
.1
,dX:iIl
.:.I.,
:,
,.,?
...?:::.
.....
WI..
?::?.j::::?!.-?:
:??
".:I
?,
,.
?,
.,-
Y.'
;:
;N.
:io.
4:?.
.: ,
W.
.;
?a_
.,
'.
?:
,?
,;?
?,%
,&
",
_:.,
?,
.,
:.,l
,.?i
?;:
.,y .?
., .-%-,w-z?.-?
? "?- .1 ., I 1? ., I I .
?:. - I I , I
I*
?.
?l
.x
:.
?.
-m
., ,:?,.?:.? ?
:,Y-
"
1,
IN
%,?*
.,-
1.
,j
1?
.:,
".rf
?,
`
,_4
,w
%::::,
14
?xi? *:,.:,I:?
?; I - IIIIV
1, I I..:?,
??
,II? I -,:,,,.l:.
,.?9"'.;
.??11.., ..?.:....
??
..-I .
,,;?
.11
I,.,,/,
?_.
,(t "I -1.. lxlf!i??.
, ??
7?,,_,",
V
?Il?
..
? ,
1".
I I...
1,:?? ,?
.,...,.0.
.I"
...".....
,...::.77
??
I
"
.I
....:,,
,
?
.
A
!??
il.
I
:
1;
,.11
?,?
I
I...
1.
..
I
?_.
-.
-,
:..,I.?_.:XoN,
I
- I A?-P I?..
?I :%,
'::?,,?:.
m
1-1
A..?,
......
,S ?]:;..zr
.11
I 11
..,??
.1
1.
...I1.
I. .11.
?;
?;:::?:,;,k
?1,
I..
I?-.h..?,,,
.,. -?`?!
, ?,.:
.1.
I%`
I
I
I
:.rt,
1,
1,,11
11
?
,?,?:
I
a
".
.
11
-g
?
I
?
?
...
?
!i
".
I
.....
V,
9
I
?;".,?
::?I
.....
.i?ii??Zii??i?:_%:....:
-, .N
, -_?
?;:??
I,:?f?..
,,;M;
...
?.?i?,?
.....j::,
,j:...
,?.......:i:?
...?,.
?P.
-,?
?.W
?.,
.-....
...
?i. I
1.I , ... ,- ........
K
........
?:.
10
-I-Iffl
_....,.....
K.I
II~
. .V
. ..:?,
?:.
....
...P..-,-1
,540
......
...?-%
NI1,
:??-rx-?.`?.?, :
.3
:. -
!:,
,:
-,
"
_W,
/.
.?
0:1!?! 4,
* F
:.?
:-
,?
?.
.:
?:
.? :.,?:.
?: . ,
F
.1
I.
,?
li?-g
W:
-,
-?,: I
,.
?;
I, I.
;v
.1?.:?
Ie
'.
71,
iO
,1 t
?_
,.
&
?.,
0K.
? -!,.
,-%:. ,'.: .
I.-, ?.,
!. :.4.A.:*., .,
:X
?.-g`?
:,. K,.
I .
.-
?l
?, a?.:l
.s& :? :ilk
?,
.?:
i -.
?X:
a
.*
.V
:.,
"
,_ 1
?,-. ,
'RE.'m ?
.'Nl
i i
rl.
.b
,.'
_?
'
!:.
,.
,:? ,
,?l
,1.
I ,I
, , -1 . ?
._
z?,-. ?- ?
"
t? ,
.?,
?,g%?i,
il - lw
&,
.'?:,
,?
I,
I?.Wn,
l i
?i:
:?iml?i ?,
:,
',.:
:?
?RN
i?
`?.
.:
,.l
?,-
-,:
-.,
?.,
,l_,. l-_l-,m,
".
.,
%:
?,
,.
,_ .? -,
.?
:
I,.:
ft
:;%
. : :..:
...: ? I
.0i:,?
???i:
,?... .1 .1,1W
I
...,
. . ?.
??:
P
.:??.,..:??,?
,T
'i?
: ,I?,:?
.:...
?,??
.:.11.
..,..:
??
??.
?:?
?::
.,,:
.. .?.
.11,11,,?i
_.??,?I \ ..,-,I ,l, ?...??:
* , ?,?
*m:?.
.,
.
:
?
.
:
?::?,l
,
I....
'.
,
.
R,
--%,::
.r
11,
.
..
.
?.*..
.., .. .,.. ,?
,.....
?:?;
-?v:?:
1?.,?..
...;::. ,, .....,
- I??.,
:%.
4.
,
-..,
1.
,..-,..
I,.- ....
.1. .05?::
.0..,._le,5
. .,,?,.
,. l:
.?.
??
I?...?.
..?.
...._,,,
1?. ,.
??i....
_.,,__
"?. "I
.,-I'.-.\K',
.:t?
:?
. A
.?. .??:?n?
.,.
,"...:....
...1 , :?.
??_.-i?i
"
..K.
?I..K?.?_
."
.,
_.
.
..'S,?"S
.-_
?
?
?
-?.,..,?P
...
:,?,,
,?
.*?V
a
A
i.
?
I
I
"
.
'. , k II,;
II-.A, ?;
t
_i
e..,
I.1?2,1
N,
_, x?_?.,a.:i?::
,..... 11
-11
,.-,....
...
1
,
.1 -Am- ??11,,!?i_--l
,
.??,.,".I...:..
.1, ?
,?
m 11
al.
$.
, - ,.
. ?,
.m
,.
.1 ,
?::;:,%
?-__,I,.`-?.?
.....
I
7i??:i.,;.?
,-?I
.?
..
.-I. . . -
?w
-.
,.
.?
"',
,'i
, ,
:,
., .:
?;
_m*
i.,
;: ?.
,.*? _,?
.-,
. .?
?k,
',
I.
.?
,:1 _?.:
.2, Z,
,?.
1.6
,.
I-,
,.?
I!,`5-1'?,k
: :,*
K?
.:
.x?:p,i`-,.?i%,
,.
-Q
`-? _
%:. ?,l.1i.
, .1? ,.: ?:
.
,?
>.
? , .- . :
.-?:;]
/., !'
:_.,
,_ .Z_.65?,.
S."l
1.
?il
1',-A
i? :
i?. :?i_
-1 U I ?
-.,
2-INEIR
-:y " .l
.i
,.
- .?,
,"
?, .-?
-?:, ?,-
I..
_,
-_..?:_,._?:?ij:
.I ?I.
.,?,
.:-:::,
-,??
IT
. -. : .?, . : -. I .* ?., - ?.?-11 ,?I - .I'." ,,I I 1I? .- 1. .1 -, ?-.,% 1-;.T ,,m. . cM . - ?. ? ..- I . I- 1._ ,I I.-1I, -,. ,.I1 .*-,
:
.1
?.1.- ...
1
1,
.?
1.
I
?,.
II .
??
:
"::::n?:
.:..:
.
.
::?.
. xx:-::??,,
?,
I?;
"I
- ,..?ft ,. ...
..x
......
:j?::f
,,
:
.?
?"
.,
K:.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
"I
45
Rum
....
qwI
4W
Photo: B6hm
b-Lamentation
of the Magdalen. Titian,
Entombment. Venice, Accademia (detail)
(P. 310)
Photo: Alinari
c-March.
d-Lament
for Adonis. Mantua, Palazzo
Ducale, Sarcophagus (detail) (p. 310o)
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
A. M. WARBURG
307
objects as tools of daily life and must therefore necessarily give some indication
of the particular occasions and the personal intentions which they had served.
This is a test which, in Warburg's opinion, must also be applicable to monumental art. If the portraits in Sta Trinith could have been classed as donors'
portraits it would have been simple. But the fact that the sitters had themselves represented standing and moving about in the confident height of their
full stature called for a more particular explanation. Such an explanation
was suggested by the life-size votive figures of wax which contemporary custom
allowed to be hung up in the churches.13 Their extreme truth to life, down
to the real clothes in which they were draped, allowed the grateful recipients
of some divine favour to feel that they were approaching the source of grace
in person. The same feeling impelled Lorenzo and his companions to have
their likenesses painted in the margin of a sacred scene. But instead of obtruding their crude effigies in the round they observed a more discreet distance:
they approached the holy persons only through the medium of painted
semblances.
The run of this argument bears some resemblance to Warburg's treatment
of the Ninfa. It meant that Ghirlandajo's naturalistic style, as well as Botticelli's classicism, had to be assessed on its own terms. As soon as an artistic
manifestation is considered in the light of its individual setting, criteria of
style lose their fixed meaning. In both cases Warburg arrived at this conclusion by trying to delimit the area open to visual representation. As a
measure of visible qualities his 'greater or lesser distance' of the portraits is as
good a term as the 'movement' of the Ninfa. This is not the place to go fully
into the sources of Warburg's frame of reference. Only two names may be
mentioned. One is Gottfried Semper, a towering figure in the art theory of
the late nineteenth century, who had analysed ornament in terms of its power
to convey movement. The second is Adolf von Hildebrand, like Warburg a
devotee of Florence, who had written on the stylistic effects resulting from a
widening or lessening of the imaginary space between a work of art and the
spectator.14
Ibid., p. 99.
I86I-63. Adolf von Hildebrand, I847-1921 ;
14Gottfried
Semper, I803-79; architect, sculptor: Das Problem der Form in der bildenden
chief works in Dresden, Ziurichand Vienna: Kunst, 1893, etc.
Der Stil in dentechnischen
undtektonischen
Kiinsten,
13
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
G. BING
308
Ibid., p. 184.
18 Ibid., p. 86.
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
309
his finger on the point where the realistic Flemish style was about to give
way to the idealizing classicism of the High Renaissance.
This was the occasion for one of Warburg's most fruitful observations on
the historical level. He had not only given a convincing explanation of the
clash of the two styles in Florentine painting, but, by the same token, had
succeeded in putting into perspective the puzzling masquerade of classical
gods, kings, heroes and sages in Burgundian dress with their names inscribed
next to them to be recognized. This mode of presentation is far from deserving
the epithet 'naive' so often applied to it. Warburg coined for it the paradoxical expression 'antichith alla franzese', and saw in it a most powerful bar
on the road to the purer sources of classical art. But this disparagingjudgment
also implied the recognition that classical antiquity was not simply there to
be rediscovered. No less than from the debris that covered the monuments,
it had to be dug up from the layers that had settled on it by the agency of
its transmission. Ludwig Traube,19in Warburg's words 'the Grand Master of
our Order', had demonstrated this principle in his own field of palaeography.
He had taken scribal mistakes as indications of the periods and countries by
way of which classical texts have reached us. Now classical imagery, with its
Burgundian interlude, appeared on the same plane. It demonstrated the real
value of the classical tradition as a point of observation. The historical moment
can be viewed with a double pair of lenses: one focused on the face which it
actually presents, the other trained on the routes by which knowledge of the
past has been acquired. The story that every age tells, deliberately or by
implication, of its own remoter antiquity, sheds a reflected light in both
directions.
It had been in his handling of the Ninfa that Warburg first developed his
mannerism of lifting a figure from its formal context. Whether he realized it
or not, he had the sanction of the fifteenth century for it. It corresponded to
a habit of visual selection by which classical marbles were seen as a succession
of isolated figures (P1. 45a), thus throwing the postures into high relief, fit to
be copied or re-used.20 Though there is no suggestion in Warburg's discussion
of Duirer'sOrpheus21that the artist had drawn on such a model for his main
figure (which is in any case not likely because the whole composition is based
on a Greek invention) Warburg sensed in it an overriding concern with
gesture. The frequent use of similar highly emphatic gestures in a wide range
of Renaissance works of art led him to class them together in a group for which
he coined the word 'Pathos formulae'. They brought home to him what role
the recurrent classical motifs held in the process of image-making. His term
for them implies that he thought of them as conventions like the Ninfa, but
with a wider spread than any individual figure-however often used-could
have. It also implies that they were held together by a common expressive
purpose rather than formal similarity. What is made visible by them is not
a quality of the external world like movement, distance or space, but a state
19
Ludwig Traube,
I86I-1907,
Munich;
1888; 0
Roma Nobilis, 1891i; Textgeschichteder Regula
20 B.
Degenhardt and A. Schmitt, 'Gentile
da Fabriano in Rom und die Anfiange des
Antikenstudiums',
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
310o
G. BING
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
3"I
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
G. BING
3 x2
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A. M. WARBURG
313
Reformers, in Warburg's eyes fighters for the freedom of conscience, had fallen
into their snares. Warburg's answer was that we have been saddled with an
ambiguous inheritance. Classical antiquity itself had been caught in the
pendulum between an Olympian and a demonic view of the world. The
astrological images had helped to build up an ordered universe fit to be
contemplated from afar, but on the other hand they had descended from their
places in the sky to become the tyrants of our daily lives. In Warburg's words,
they had been the means of widening the space between man and the world
and at the same time of destroying it.
Warburg had used the same terminology of withdrawal and approach in
his readings of Lorenzo's portrait, in contrasting the idealizing with the realistic
style, and in defining the effects of grisaille painting. He leaves us in no doubt
that his sympathies were in every case on the side of the distanced view. In
the ambiguity of the astrological images he now discovers that there are two
ways open to man of dealing with the natural world, by abstraction or by
union. The decision between them can never be final. Warburg sounds a
note of profound compassion when, seeing the substance of each man's personal task reflected in the course of history, he writes: 'Athens must ever
again be rescued from Alexandria.'
21
This content downloaded from 190.17.206.151 on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:28:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions