Choose objects with for comparison
| CDA ID / Inventory Number | AT_KHM_GG6905 |
| Persistent Link | https://lucascranach.org/AT_KHM_GG6905 |
| FR (1978) No. | FR001 |
| The Crucifixion of Christ, the so-called Schottenkreuzigung | [CDA 2010] |
| Lucas Cranach the Elder | [Kunsthistorisches Museum, revised 2010] |
| 1501 | [Karl Schütz, 2005] |
| about 1500 | [Sandner 1998 B, 84][Heydenreich 1998 A, 185][Friedländer, Rosenberg 1979, No. 1] |
| Hide content... |
| Owner | Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna |
| Repository | Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna |
| Location | Vienna |
| Reference on Page | Catalogue Number | Figure/Plate | |
| Bonnet, Görres 2015 | 14-15 | 2 | p. 15 |
| Exhib. Cat. Frankfurt 2014 | 92-93 | 33 | p. 93 |
| Kunz 2010 | 82 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Brussels 2010 | 103-104 | 5 | |
| Heydenreich 2007 B | 35 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Frankfurt 2007 | 116-117 | 2 | p. 117 |
| Heydenreich 2007 A | 47 | Figs. 16, 17 | |
| Seipel et al. 2007 | 182 | with Fig. | |
| Stadlober 2006 | 155-164 | Fig. 25 | |
| Lechner 2005 | 29 | Fig. 23 | |
| Schölzel 2005 | 197 Fn. 5 | ||
| Wegmann 2003 | |||
| Heiser 2002 | 25-27, 34, 39, 42, 54, Fns. 214, 257; 88-89, Fn. 559; 93, 108, 111, 134 | Figs. 9, 79, 110, 111 | |
| Bierende 2002 | 16-24, 38-84, 84-108 | Figs. 1, 13, 34 | |
| Anzelewsky 1999 | 125, 128, 132-133 | Fig. 4 | |
| Heydenreich 1998 A | 185, 196 | ||
| Stadlober 1998 | 420, 421 | Fig. p. 467 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Eisenach 1998 | 96, 97, 103 | No. 11.1 | Figs. 11.1a-e |
| Sandner 1998 B | 84-85, 88, 90 | ||
| Schawe 1998 | 165 | ||
| Deroo 1996 | 20-21 | with Fig. | |
| Grimm 1994 | 18, 19 | 110 | Fig. A1 |
| Büttner 1994 | 24 | Fig. 1 | |
| Hörsch 1994 | 96 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Kronach 1994 | 294, 295, 328, 371 | 110 | Fig. p. 295, Fig. p. 18 |
| Sandner, Ritschel 1994 | 186-189 | Fig. A123 | |
| Klein 1994 A | 195 | Tab. 1 | |
| Reiter 1994 | 42, Fn. 20 | ||
| Schütz 1991 | 92 | ||
| Locicnik 1990 | 26, 134, Fn. 16, 138-140, 176, 177-182, 183, 187-188, 193, 200, 203, 205 | Figs. 79, 82 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Berlin 1988 | 328 | ||
| Schindler 1987 | 21 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Paris 1984 | 27 | ||
| Stadlober 1982 | 151, 152 (Bd. 1) | Plate XXXV (Bd. 2) | |
| Schindler 1981 | 69 | ||
| Friedländer, Rosenberg 1979 | 13, 15, 66 | No. 1 | Fig. 1 |
| Klauner 1978 | 78-80 | Fig. 37 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Basel 1974 | 120, 124, 170, 443, 488 | ||
| Schade 1974 | 15, 16 | Plate 1 | |
| Cat. Vienna 1973 | 48 | Plate 130 | |
| Koepplin 1973 A | 40, fns. 101, 102 | ||
| Benesch 1972 C | 344-345 | Fig. 40 | |
| Benesch 1972 D | 259-260 | Fig. 40 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Vienna 1972 | No. 1 | Fig. 3 | |
| Benesch 1972 A | 5 | Fig. 40 | |
| Benesch 1972 B | 35-37, 42-44, 48-51 | Fig. 40 | |
| Osten, Vey 1969 | 132, 133 | ||
| Cat. Vienna 1968 | XXI | No. 202 | |
| Talbot 1967 | 72-76 | Fig. 5 | |
| Perger 1966 | 71, 74 | ||
| Benesch 1966 | 64 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Linz 1965 | No. 25 | ||
| Stange 1964 | 52, 138 | No. 1 | Fig. 59 |
| Cat. Vienna 1963 | 35-36 | No. 103 | |
| Ruhmer 1963 | 7, 85 | Fig. 3 | |
| Oberhammer 1959 | Plate 20 | ||
| Jahn 1953 A | 24-25, 26 | Fig. 14 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Graz 1953 | No. 23 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Oslo 1952 | 10 | No. 36 | |
| Exhib. Cat. London 1949 | No. 42 | Fig. 8 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Stockholm 1948 | 62 | No. 169 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Copenhagen 1948 | 32 | No. 43 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Amsterdam 1947 | 19 | No. 39 | |
| Posse 1943 | 7, 49 | Pl. 1 | |
| Posse 1942 | 7, 49 | Pl. 1 | |
| Lilienfein 1942 | 11 | Fig. 6 | |
| Möhle 1940 | 117 | Fig. p. 117 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Vienna 1939 | No. 180 | ||
| Wolters 1938 | 120, 121 | Figs. 68, 70 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Munich 1938 | No. 388 | ||
| Baldass 1938 | 136 | ||
| Cat. Vienna 1938 | 43 | No. 1825 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Berlin 1937 | 5 | No. 1 | |
| Burke 1936 | 32 | ||
| Leporini 1935 A | 45 | ||
| P. 1935 | 3 | ||
| P. 1934 B | 10 | with Fig. | |
| Friedländer, Rosenberg 1932 | 3, 7 | 1 | |
| Buschbeck 1931 A | 43 | Fig. 3 | |
| Benesch 1928 A | 92-93, 94, 101 | Fig. 138 | |
| Baldass 1928 | 76, 77, 80 | ||
| Benesch 1928 C | |||
| Glaser 1923 | 18-24 | Fig. p. 19 | |
| Baldass 1922 B | 80 | ||
| Ankwicz Kleehoven 1922 | 59-60 | ||
| Frimmel 1917 | 104-105 | ||
| Riggenbach 1907 | 25 | ||
| Fischer 1907 | 71 | ||
| Voss H. 1907 | 97 | ||
| Dörnhöffer 1904 | 175-198 | ||
| Frimmel 1896 B | 4 | ||
| The painting depicts a many figured crucifixion set in a rocky landscape, the cross in the centre of the painting is made from crude logs, roughly worked, the figure of Christ is covered in blood and exhibits extensive wounds (stigmata). He is flanked to the left and right by the two thieves, both have also been crucified on crosses made using crude logs. The assistant figures at the bottom of the cross are divided into two groups, to the left the weeping women and the Virgin with St John, on the far left a peasant figure, to the right a group of three conspicuously dressed men on horseback: one with a moustache wearing a large white turban, and a white undergarment covered by a sleeveless yellow coat with a wide red collar and fastened with laces. The horseman to the right is wearing a cone shaped hat, with a broad rim folded up on one side, a black coat with a fur collar and long, loose-hanging sleeves. The expressive style of the figures equates to the depiction of the landscape with rocky cliffs and tousled and bare trees. The depiction of the Crucifixion differs in format but above all in type from earlier and contemporary late gothic painted versions, as it is not part of a cycle but rather an altarpiece. This raises the question of its original function, possibly as small retable, devotional or private image[1]. The painting, formerly in the collection of the Viennese Scottish Foundation, had until 1904 been attributed to Lucas van Leyden, and was identified by Friedrich Dörnhöffer as one of the earliest known works by Lucas Cranach and dated to 1500.[2] It was thus positioned on the pinnacle of Cranach's early work, which since the mid 19th century has gradually been identified as stylistically belonging together and by one artist.[3] It was above all the exhibition in Dresden in 1899, which played a key role in this research.[4] At the same time it was realized that this stylistically coherent body of work - partially panel paintings of on the one hand Christian subject matter on the other hand portraits of Viennese humanists and partially woodcuts which radically differ from the late gothic works by other contemporary artists and indeed his own later works - was produced during Cranach's stay in Vienna.[5] Friedländer (1932)[6] was the first to attempt a chronology of the early works created in Vienna. He put the Crucifixion in first position before two woodcuts, which also depict the crucifixion, one of which bears the date 1502. According to Friedländer the drawing in the panel seems more tentative and more undecided than that of the woodcut from 1502 and may be of an earlier date. Art historical research has attempted to explain Cranach's artistic origin and the style of his early work. To this purpose reference has been made on the one hand to Albrecht Dürer's woodcut cycles from before 1500, especially the Apokalypse[7] and on the other hand to local artists in Franken, Bavaria and Austria, like the old Bavarian painter Jan Polack[8], whose paintings show similarly distorted and horrible head types and the Bamberg Master of the Hersbruck Panels[9]. Works of art from the artist's immediate vicinity were also influential like a stone sculpture of St John the Baptist from 1498 by the otherwise unknown Hans Hart(lin) on the fasade of Kronach's town church[10], Pacher's pupil Marx Reichlich and finally the altarpieces by JörgBreu d. Ä, a contemporary painter from Augsburg, working in Austria[11] Crucial therefore is, amongst others, the question of where Cranach worked before his stay from 1501/1502 in Vienna. As early as 1899 Flechsig[12] assumed that Cranach must have spent time in Budapest on the grounds of a strangely clothed horseman, which he thought to be Hungarian, in one of the early woodcuts of the crucifixion. The Hungarian looking clothing of the horseman in the Viennese Crucifixion was an additional reason. A document appeared to support this theory. It was assumed that Lucas Cranach may have been related to the Kronacher family who can be traced both in Ofen and Vienna.[13] Johannes Kirchhaimer, 1458 and 61 Dean of the medical faculty at the University of Vienna was with respect to the conflict of 1462/63 between King Friedrich III and his brother the Archduke Albrecht one of Albrecht's leading followers. For this reason he had to leave Viennaduring the reign of Friedrich III and settle in Ofen. There one of his daughters married Albrecht Kronacher, citizen of Ofen, about whom nothing further is known. Albrecht's son, Ulrich Kronacher, returned to Vienna and reclaimed his mother's house; from 1511 he is mentioned as citizen and house owner/landlord in Vienna. Anzelewsky questions this line of argumentation.[14] It is impossible to draw conclusions from the mere concurrence of names and the eastern European costume in both the crucifixion woodcuts and the crucifixion panel are polish and not Hungarian. Anzelewsky draws a comparison with the clothes of the soldier in the depiction of the battle of Orsza (Warsaw, NationalMuseum) [15] by an unknown artist (recently attributed to Hans Krell[16]), the minatures in the Behaim-Codex, and similar costumes in the Adoration of the Magi (Berlin, Gemäldegalerie) by Hans Süß von Kulmbach and which was probably painted in Krakau. Anzelewsky concludes that before Cranach went to Vienna he must have been in Krakau between 1498 and 1502. Incidentally, similar to Vienna and later Wittenberg, Krakau was a princely residence with a university, which probably offered the artist good prospects. In contrast with the stagnant mannerist style, which had been passed down in the artisan tradition of the late gothic through generations of workshops and their apprentices, the young Cranach's new individual style was suited/appropriate for the quick blossoming Viennese Humanism around 1500.[17] In fact Cranach was in close relations with the main representatives. He made woodcuts for the printer Johannes Winterburger who had been in Vienna since 1493,[18] for Johannes Fuchsmagen he drew monthly depictions after a Filocalus manuscript from late antiquity[19] and he painted a depiction of St Jerome in the desert in 1502[20], which was formerly thought to have been commissioned by Johannes Cuspinian. A drawing of the sculpture 'The Youth of Magdalensberg' which had been discovered in 1502 indicates, just as the copies of manuscripts from late antiquity, the antiquarian interest s of a learned client.[21] Around 1502 he painted portraits of both the humanist Cuspinian and his wife Anna Putsch,[22] in 1503 he painted a further portrait pair of a humanist (in the past wrongly held to be a portrait of the lawyer Stephan Reuss, several times dean of the faculty of law and 1504 rector of the university.) and his wife in a landscape, which equals in appearance and artistic quality the Cuspinian portrait pair.[23] It has been accepted to begin the Danube school with Cranach's early work. However this term cannot contribute to the explanation of the stylistic phenomenon and its genesis, as has frequently been critically remarked in more recent times.[24] Indisputable is however the fact that the works of art created in Vienna between 1501 and 1503/04 by Cranach are the first manifestation of this new style, which was a few years later embodied in the work of Altdorfer.[Karl Schütz 2005, translated by Smith, cda] [1]Heiser 2002, 88ff. [2] Dörnhöffer 1904, 175 [3] Bierende 2002, 16 and 21 [4] Deutsche Kunst-Ausstellung Dresden 1899, Abteilung Cranach-Ausstellung, K. Woermann, Dresden 1899; Heiser 2002, 29ff. [5] Mentioned by Schuchardt in 1851. [6] Friedländer 1932 (1979), 13. [7] First of all by Friedländer, in: Sitzungsberichte der Kunstgeschichtlichen Gesellschaft zu Berlin 7, 1899, 31-34; Friedländer 1932 (1979), 16; Bierende 2002, 16. [8] Glaser 1921, 17ff.; Bierende 2002, 33ff. [9] Stange 1964, 33. [10] Rosenberg, quoted in [AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, 109 [11] Winzinger, in: [AK St. Florian 1965] Wutzel, 21; Koepplin, in: [AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, 109 [12] E. Flechsig, Die Lösung der Pseudogrünewald-Frage (written for the opening of the Cranach Exhibition in Dresden), Kunstchronik NF 10, 1898/99, 357 [13] Perger 1966, 70ff [14] Anzelewsky 1999, 125ff. [15] Exhibiton cat. Thesauri Poloniae. Schatzkammer Polen, Zur Geschichte der polnischen Sammlungen, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 2002, Cat. No. III.6 [16] D. Koepplin, Neue Werke von Lukas Cranach und ein altes Bild einer polnischen Schlacht - von Hans Krell ?, Basel 2003 [17]K. Schütz, Lucas Cranach d. Ältere und die Malerei in Wien um 1500, in: [AK Wiener Neustadt 2000] Koppensteiner 2000, 123; Heiser 2002, 56ff [18] [AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, No. 50 [19] [AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, No. 69 [20] Vienna, Gemäldegalerie des Kunsthistorischen Museums (Friedländer-Rosenberg)1932, No. 4; [AK Wien 1972] Schütz 1972, Cat. No. 2; Koepplin, in: [AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, 121 [21] Koepplin, in: Exhibition cat. Basel 1974, 131 [22] Winterthur, Sammlung Oskar Reinhart, Museum Am Römerholz (Heiser 2002, 57) [23] Nürnberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseums bzw. Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Gemäldegalerie ([AK Basel 1974] Koepplin 1974, Nr. 88, 89; Kurt Löcher, Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg, Die Gemälde des 16. Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart 1997, 123ff.) [24] P. Vaisse, Überlegungen zum Thema Donauschule, in: exhibition cat. Altdorfer und der fantastische Realismus in der deutschen Kunst, Paris 1984, 149ff.;Locicnik 1990, 170ff.; Heiser 2002, 34ff.; Bierende 2002, 24ff. (Dr. Karl Schütz, 01.01.2005) |
