Choose objects with for comparison
| CDA ID / Inventory Number | UK_NGL_6539 |
| Persistent Link | https://lucascranach.org/UK_NGL_6539 |
| FR (1978) No. | FR019 |
| Portrait of Johann Friedrich the Magnanimous from Diptych: Two Electors of Saxony | [The National Gallery, revised 2011] |
| Lucas Cranach the Elder | [Koepplin, Exhib. Cat. Basel 1974, 143] [Friedländer, Rosenberg 1979, No. 19] [[The National Gallery, revised 2011] |
| 1509 | [dated] |
| Owner | The National Gallery, London |
| Repository | The National Gallery, London |
| Location | London |
| Reverse of the panel: Allied coats of arms of the dukedoms of Saxony and Mecklenburg.They are head erased Sables, langued Gules, horned Argent, crowned Or. Two Argent a griffin rampant left, armed Or. Three Argent an eagle Gules armed and beaked Or, langued Gules. The wings charged with a trefoil Or. |
| Reference on Page | Catalogue Number | Figure/Plate | |
| Görres 2015 B | 48 | ||
| Dohe 2015 | 46 | Fig. 3 | |
| Bonnet, Görres 2015 | 42-43 | 11 | p. 43 |
| Exhib. Cat. Coburg 2010 | 195 | ||
| Borchert 2010 | 27 | ||
| Martin 2010 | 55 | ||
| Müller 2010 | 62-63 | Fig. 5 | |
| Heydenreich 2007 A | 27, 60, 76-80, 86-88, 98, 149, 169, 106-107, 200-201, 203, 221-222, 339, 394 | ||
| Schade 2007 | 94 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Frankfurt 2007 | 150-152 | 18 | pp. 151, 153 |
| Langmuir 2006 | 114-115 | ||
| Moser 2004 | 34 | ||
| Schade 2003 | 14 | ||
| Cat. London 2001 | 156, 157 | ||
| Cat. London 1999 | 16-19 | ||
| Grimm 1998 | 77 | Fig. 9.19 | |
| Heydenreich 1998 A | 186-187, 197, 198, 199 | Fig. 21.20 | |
| Sandner 1998 A | 56-59 | ||
| Campbell et al. 1997 | |||
| White, Pilc 1995 | 88-89 | ||
| Rebel 1994 | 134-136 | Fig. A75 | |
| Exhib. Cat. Kronach 1994 | 371 | ||
| Schade 1994 B | 13 | ||
| NGL 1992 | 16 | ||
| NGL 1992 | |||
| Dülberg 1990 | 81, 188 | 40 | Figs. 450-453 |
| Friedländer, Rosenberg 1979 | 71 | No. 19 | Fig. 19 |
| Koepplin 1974 A | Fig. 2 | ||
| Exhib. Cat. Basel 1974 | 143, 264, 422, 683 | No. 597 | Pl. 8 |
| The related colouring suggests that the panel paintings were not created independently of one another. It would appear that the father, Johann the Steadfast, attached importance to the fact that this diptych should manifest his affection and his hopes for his son and his future destiny as elector of Saxony. [see Brinkmann, 150] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| Despite differences in the depiction of father and son there are obvious similarities: the green in the background of the father is repeated in the son’s robe and the black in the background of the son is repeated in the robe of Johann the Steadfast. The dark clothing and the relatively smaller depiction of the figure of the father make him appear as it were to withdraw into the background, whereas the green robe and the close-up representation of the son make him stand out against the dark background. [see Baker, Henry 2001, 156], [see Langmuir 2006, 115], [see Brinkmann 2007, 150] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| The child’s head is positioned higher than that of his father, which might indicate that he is smaller and is therefore seated on a stool. [see Langmuir 2006, 114] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| The portrait appears spontaneous, suggesting that Cranach’s portrayal of the boy was specifically for this painting. [see Langmuir 2006, 114] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| Brinkmann interprets the optical discrepancy between the two sitters as a reference to the composition of diptychs in which the Virgin or the Man of Sorrows is venerated by a half-length donor. [see Brinkmann 2007, 150] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| The dagger in his small hands alludes to his transition into adulthood. [see Rebel 1994, 135] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| It is striking that father and son do not look at each other and are at the same time shown from different perspectives. The double portrait of Martin Luther and Katharina von Bora, created in the Cranach workshop in 1526 (Private Collection, Hamburg, FR Nos. 189, 190) is similar in this respect. Luther like Johann the Steadfast is shown as a bust portrait in three-quarter profile on the left. His gaze is fixed on a point beyond the picture plane to the right. The depiction of Katharina von Bora exhibits similarities with Johann Friedrich. One theory which would explain this discrepancy within the diptych is that the woman who is by nature smaller and daintier would manifest greater presence if shown as a half-length figure. As the six year old Johann Friedrich is represented in place of a wife and is in reality considerably smaller than his father he is shown frontally as a half-length figure. In contrast Luther’s wife is shown in three-quarter profile, but it is apparent that both face the viewer. Bünsche and Grimm presume that in the case of the double portrait of Luther and his wife the differences are due to the fact that a portrait of the Reformer already existed. According to Dunkerton et al. a frequently used preparatory sketch served as a template for the painting of Johann the Steadfast, whereas Johann Friedrich was portrayed specifically for this painting. Bünsche and Grimm’s theory that the asymmetrical depiction relies solely on the existence of an archetype of Luther seems absurdin the light of the serial production of paintings of both Luther and his wife. Koepplin proposes the theory for the London diptych that the discrepancy may result from different authorship. However after comparison with other diptychs the aforementioned theory that the weaker one of the pair on the right was depicted as a half-length figure also seems plausible. [Friedländer/Rosenberg 1979, Nos. 189, 190 150], [see Exhib. Cat. Kronach 1994, 352-353], [see Rebel 1994, 134-135], [see Dunkerton et al. 1999, 16] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| Gunnar Heydenreich assumes that both panels were probably constructed within a narrow time frame by the same carpenter as they each consist of three butt-joined planks, varying in width and these widths correspond on both panels. [Gunnar Heydenreich, Examination Report, 1994 (unpublished)] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| This depiction of Johann Friedrich is unique in Cranach’s oeuvre. According to Dunkerton et al. it is not based on a preparatory sketch as it was painted from life. [see Dunkerton et al. 1999, 16] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| Claus Grimm assumes that only the preparatory design for the composition of the portrait of Johann Friedrich is by Cranach. According to Grimm the underdrawing and the painting was executed by an assistant. However this has cannot yet been proved as neither an infrared reflectogram nor examination under the stereomicroscope has revealed an underdrawing. This does not mean that there isn’t one. [see Exhib. Cat. Kronach 1994, 371], [see Heydenreich 2007, 106-107, 339], [see Sandner 1998, 56-59] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| The diptych closes from right to left, which is why the verso of Johann Friedrich shows both coats-of-arms pointing up. When closed together both panels in their respective frames form a small box. [see Koepplin, Exhib. Cat. Basel 1974, Fig. 2], [Dülberg 1990, 188, Fig. 452] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
| Fasert presumes, that the diptych may have been a diplomatic gift, because it shows the future ruler Johann Friedrich and his father. [see Fastert 2007, 143] [Laura Thiepold, cda 2012] |
