Untitled - Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien Presse

Untitled - Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien Presse

Point of View
The figure of Judith differs from other femmes fatales − unlike ancient myths
(Delilah, Lilith, Sphinx and Medusa), Romantic sorceresses, and modern-day divas
steeped in scandal, Judith is positively connoted. She acts with God, and with her
bloody deed she vanquishes evil; her cold-bloodedness and brutality are combined
with fear and valour. Judith has long functioned as the ideal personification of
beauty, strength and intelligence – see only the countless ideological and political
interpretations of her actions, and the continued popularity of her name for girls.
Lucas Cranach produced one of the best-known Renaissance depictions of
Judith: a fashionably attired young woman presents the still-bleeding head of
Holofernes; with her other hand she clutches the naked sword. Here the picture
is confronted with a painting by Joseph Heintz the Elder: Heintz clearly modelled
his Salome, the demonic daughter of Herodias who asked for the execution of
Saint John the Baptist, on Cranach’s Judith. Consequently Salome and Judith
share pose and attire. Only the sword – obviously relevant for Judith but not for
Salome – allows us to identify them. What caused this strange merger? Alice
Hoppe-Harnoncourt, scholarly assistant at the Collection of Paintings, looks at
this and many other interesting questions in this Point of View. Georg Prast from
our Conservation Studio restored Cranach's painting, and the documentation of
his work is included in both the catalogue and the exhibition.
I would like to thank both authors, as well as all the other colleagues at the
Kunsthistorisches Museum for making this 15th edition of our small exhibition
series possible.
Stefan Weppelmann
Direktor der Gemäldegalerie
3
The Wily Widow
ill. 1: Lucas Cranach the Elder, Judith with the Head of Holofernes, signed,
c. 1525/30, limewood, 87,1 × 58,3 cm (incl. additions), Vienna, KHM, GG 858
4
5
Point of View #15
The Conservator’s Point of View
Alice Hoppe-Harnoncourt
Georg Prast
Signs of Work on the Painting and its Condition
Judith with the Head of Holofernes
by Lucas Cranach the Elder
The support of the panel comprises five planks (limewood, P. Klein 1980).
In the 19th century the panel was thinned to 4–5 mm and cradled (ill. A).
In addition, the edges were trimmed, repeatedly altering the format (see
also p. 20). A photograph from 1912 (ill. 11) documents that additions had
Judith, a character from the Old Testament, is depicted as a monumental half-
made the Vienna Judith between 6 cm and 3.5 cm larger than the painting
length figure. She is standing behind a stone parapet on which she has deposited
is today. Soon afterwards, however, the records show that these additions
the head of the enemy general Holofernes. Her left hand is grasping the dead
were removed again: “die Anstückungen auf allen Seiten wurden ent-
man’s hair, her right hand is clutching the still bloody sword. Judith sports a velvet
fernt” (additions on all sides were removed 1916, Karl Proksch, Restau-
barett embellished with ostrich feathers, her long loose hair frames her face with
rierbuch 1), and “Wiederherstellung des ursprünglichen Formats” (restor­
a single strand falling over her cleavage. Her crimson robe is slashed at both
ation of original format / Galerieakt Z:33/1916–1919). Currently there
shoulder and elbow, revealing a delicately pleated white chemise. Her robe is
are three narrow additions of 1 cm width each that are concealed by the
trimmed with broad bands made of embroidered cloth of gold. The front-laced
frame. In the course of the current restoration intervention we uncovered
bodice is also made of cloth of gold decorated with tiny pearls arranged in a dia-
a number of original contours of paint and ground along the upper and
mond pattern. Around her neck she wears a wide choker embellished with jewels
lower edges of the painting: proof that the painting was only marginally
and pearls, a gold chain with flattened links, and a second necklace comprising
trimmed here. They are missing on both long sides, which suggests an
large circular gold links. Her light-coloured gloves are slit at the joints and over
originally broader panel. Extant remains of wood along the edges of the
her many rings. Lucas Cranach the Elder (c. 1472−1553) presents Judith, a well-
paint and ground indicate that an engaged frame was used during the
known character from the Old Testament, as an elegant lady of the German Re-
painting’s production. Original wood insertions introduced into the sur-
naissance sumptuously attired in court fashion. Directly facing us, she is present-
face of the planks are repairs of smaller damaged areas.
1
ing the severed head of her enemy as proof of her victory over a more powerful
Regarding the painting technique we can observe a conventional color
foe.
This portrait of Judith has been in the Picture Gallery’s collection of German
palette and the use of very binder-rich oil paint in the dark areas. This
Renaissance painting for many centuries. Two years ago, however, the panel
caused pronounced primary craquelures and presumably prompted the
urgently required stabilization, and it has not been on show since. Even before
later larger overpainting. The layer of red lacquer paint in Judith’s sleeves,
the restoration the painting had been carefully analyzed in the course of our
skirt and plumed hat has faded; otherwise the painting’s condition is
on-going project to catalogue German paintings before c. 1540, which provided
good.
valuable insights into Cranach’s workshop practices. It also led to a study of the
2
painting’s history in the Imperial collection, which, in turn, begs a fascinating
question: was Judith regarded as a heroine or as a “femme fatale”, and did this
The Need for a Restoration Intervention
interpretation of her actions and character change over time? We will attempt an
answer by looking at the history of our Judith.
The cradle blocked all movement of the planks, which caused numerous
cracks (ill. B). Older cracks had been glued during an earlier intervention,
and there was a danger that new cracks would develop. Consequently we
decided to consolidate and stabilize the panel. Removing the cradle of
the support was imperative; the horizontal bars were sawed and taken
6
7
off, and the glued vertical bars removed with a chisel. We also closed and
glued the open edges of cracks using a special appliance. After the consoli­
dation of the cracks the thin panel was, as expected, too fragile to remain
without additional stabilization; it also exhibited a marked tendency to
warp. The panel was therefore placed in a wooden support strainer, which
was carefully attuned to the now slightly convex curvature. A special feature of the strainer is that it is equipped with two different flexible spring
systems. One spring system (A) offers adjustable vertical flexibility (the
panel can slightly alter its curvature if required). The second spring system
(B) ensures an individually adjustable tension, linking the wooden supporting frame to the panel. If necessary, this allows lateral movement (ill.
C). A paper-foam board offers mechanical protection and compensates for
the asymmetry that exists between the untreated back of the panel and its
painted obverse.
GG_858 Judith m. d. Haupt d. Holofernes
A.
Lucas Cranach d. Ä.
Gemäldegalerie
Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien
Malschichtoberfläche: Bearbeitungsmerkmale, Veränderungen, Schäden
Maßstab:
A3/1:3
1,3 cm
1,35 cm
58,25 cm
1,15 cm
1,65 cm
Vorderseite
ill. A: back with cradle and affixed labels prior to the restoration
ill. C: back with new support frame, two spring-systems (A) and (B),
and back protection
Malschichtgrenze
edge of the paint layer
Holzreste Rahmen
remains of the
wooden frame
Brettfugen
Dübel
plank joints
Einsetzung Orig.
Einsetzung sek.
orig. inserts
recent inserts
Anstückungen
Beschneidungen
additions
Frühschwundrisse
Borkenbildung
88,3 cm
88,3 cm
Perlen ergänzt
Perlen übermalt
added pearls
overpainted pearls
Retuschen
retouchings
The restoration of the painting layer consisted mainly of reducing the
thick yellowed and clouded varnish layers, not all of which could be removed. Extensive revisions in border areas were completely removed (ill.
D). In the area of the black background we decided to reduce, rather than
completely remove, the overpainting because here the paint layer is much
reduced due to previous cleanings (ill. E). Finally we added retouchings
in colored base tones and transparent colours, and thin layers of natural
resin to harmonize depp light and lustre.
Übermalungen
overpaintings
Bereibungen
old cracks
in the support
Kratzspuren
Dellen
open cracks
in the support
Blasenbildungen
Hochstellungen
Fehlstellen
Risse
Bildträger Alt
1,15 cm
1,05 cm
Risse
Bildträger offen
1,2 cm
58,4 cm
1,35 cm
ill. B: mapping with signs of handling, alterations and damages
8
ill. D: detail: planar
reworkings on the stone
parapet before removal
ill. E: detail: initial
craquelures and a
reduction of reworkings,
black background
9
Lucas Cranach’s Portraits of Judith:
A Master of Many Different Versions
The painting is not dated but features the winged serpent, the signature used by
the workshop of Lucas Cranach the Elder until 1537. Cranach was a native of
Kronach in Franconia, and we first encounter him around 1500 (Crucifixion of
Christ, c. 1501, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum). In 1505, he became court
painter to Duke Frederick the Wise of Saxony and moved to Wittenberg, where
he worked for the Electors of Saxony for almost half a century until his death. At
Wittenberg, Cranach was a contemporary of Martin Luther and witnessed the
Reformation first-hand. From 1508 his coat-of-arms featured the winged serpent,
which he also used as his signature on his paintings and prints. During the following years Cranach developed his characteristic style and handling, which was
a) Judith, signed and dated
1525, panel, 83,8 × 54,6 cm.
Syracuse (NY), University Art
Collection
b) Judith, signed, after 1526,
limewood, 87,4 × 57,5 cm.
Kassel, Gemäldegalerie
(FR 230H)
c) Judith, signed, before 1537,
panel, 85 × 57,5 cm. Ponce,
Puerto Rico, Museo de Arte
(FR 230F)
d) Judith, signed and dated
1530, beachwood, 74,9 ×
56 cm. Berlin, Jagdschloss
Grunewald (FR 234)
e) Judith, signed and dated
1530, panel, 76,7 × 55,8 cm.
Glasgow Museums
(FR 230D)
f) Judith, signed and dated
1531, panel, 72 × 56 cm.
Berlin, Staatliche Museen on
loan to Aachen (FR 230G)
g) Judith, signed, c. 1530,
limewood, 89,5 × 61,9 cm.
New York, The Metropolitan
Museum of Art (FR 230E)
h) Salome, c. 1530, panel,
87 × 58 cm. Budapest,
Szépmüvészeti Múzeum
(FR 232)
i) Salome, c. 1526/30,
limewood, 73,5 × 54 cm.
Budapest, Szépmüvészeti
Múzeum
suitable and adapted for his growing workshop. From the middle of the 1520s the
workshop’s output increased markedly: once a subject-matter was established
(including many first encountered in Cranach’s early works) it was repeated
again and again with only minor variations. Besides portraits of the Electors of
Saxony and the well-known likenesses of Martin Luther and his wife Katherina,
mythological or biblical stories imbued with a moralizing message played an important role in Cranach’s oeuvre. 3 In addition to these narrative compositions
featuring Aristotle and Phyllis, Samson and Delilah, or David and Bathsheba,
Cranach introduced in the middle of the 1520s portrait-like depictions of female
protagonists like Judith, Salome or Lucretia, 4 drawing on earlier single-figure
compositions featuring Salome that he had produced around 1508. 5 Informed by
examples from northern Italy and portraiture, this composition-formula was
widely copied and disseminated in the 1520s by other German as well as by
Netherlandish artists. 6 Cranach typically does not depict his heroines in classical
garb; instead his Judiths, Salomes and Lucretias sport contemporary court fashion and jewellery.
He produced variations of this successful pictorial formula, too, and many
similar versions have come down to us. This is best illustrated by comparing several examples of almost identical size, some of which are signed as well as dated
(ill. 2): all these versions of Judith were probably produced between 1525 (the
earliest dated work is from 1525) and 1537. Cranach also repeatedly reused the
composition for single-figure depictions of Salome (ill. 2, h and i): here, a platter
with the head of Saint John the Baptist has taken the place of the sword. This
Salome in a green dress is closely related to the female type personified by the
Judith in New York (ill. 2g), while the woman in the painting now in Glasgow (ill.
2e) appears to be a somewhat more delicate type and thus closer to the version
in Berlin-Grunewald (ill. 2d). And our Judith in Vienna has much in common
with her “cousin” in the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart (ill. 3). A closer analysis of these
two portraits will, we hope, illustrate how the workshop may have gone about
producing these variations.
10
ill. 2: Compilation of paintings depicting Judith or Salome by Lucas Cranach the Elder
11
ill. 3: Lucas Cranach the Elder, Judith with the Head of Holofernes, signed, c. 1525/30,
limewood, 86,5 × 58,5 cm. Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie, inv.no. 643
ill. 4: Outlines of the IRR of Judith from Staatsgalerie Stuttgart (see ill. 6) in red digitally
superposed on the IRR of Judith from Vienna (see ill. 5).
ill. 5: Infraredflectography (IRR) detail of Lucas Cranach the Elder, Judith with the Head of
Holofernes, Vienna, KHM (image: KHM)
ill. 6: Infraredflectography (IRR) detail of Lucas Cranach the Elder, Judith with the Head of
Holofernes, signed, Stuttgart, Staatsgalerie (image: Cranach Digital Archive)
Executed on limewood, the painting Judith with the Head of Holofernes has been
in the finished painting was marginally altered – see, for example, her right eye,
in the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart since 1847. The panel has survived in its original
which has moved a little up, or her lips, which have moved a little down. In other
format; it is three centimetres wider than the painting in Vienna, which was
areas of the painting, e.g. the position of the necklace or the shape of her cleav-
slightly trimmed at the sides. 7 In both versions the positioning of the figure, her
age, the drawing is much more sketchy. The preliminary sketch for the head of
barett, the shape of her face, and her long hair comprising clearly differentiated
Holofernes and the heroine’s hands is somewhat more detailed but not as precise
strands are almost identical. Among the differences are the more massive choker
as it is for Judith’s face.
and the green dress with a differently-laced bodice. The barett is painted with a
The painting at Stuttgart also has a preparatory drawing executed on the
touch more spirit and lacks the decorative ostrich feathers. There are also a few
ground (ill. 6). 8 Here, the position of the eyebrows, the contours of the face, her
minor alterations or realignments of some of the pictorial elements: in the paint-
cleavage and the contours of the robe along her shoulders were sketched with a
ing now in Stuttgart the sword, Holofernes’ head and the hand clasping his hair
brush; they are more or less identical to the painted version. Note the dark shadow
are given more space, while these elements appear more condensed or cramped
in the area of her parting, presumably an underpainting. Perhaps a different head-
in the version now in Vienna. In the Stuttgart version, the anatomical weakness
gear was initially projected. The underdrawing suggests that her left sleeve was
in the rendering of her shoulders and cleavage is concealed more convincingly by
originally meant to drape across the stone parapet (see ill. 4).
the green dress that now covers her right shoulder and the gold chain with flattened links that extends a little further down her chest.
If we place the true-to-scale underdrawing of the Stuttgart Judith on the IRR
of the painting in Vienna we see that both figure and composition are almost
An analysis using an infrared camera provided insights into the artist’s crea-
identical (ill. 4): in Stuttgart the overlapping left sleeve is merely insinuated, but
tive process before he applied the paint layer. The IRR scan of the version in
it is executed in the version in Vienna. And while the position of her right eye
Vienna (ill. 5) revealed a delicate preliminary drawing for the entire figure featur-
matches the underdrawing in the Vienna painting, in the final version it is placed
ing a variety of brushwork: the contours of the face as well as her eyebrows, the
slightly higher. As noted above, in the Stuttgart picture the green robe covers her
back of her nose, the lips, the eyes and the chin are all carefully delineated, which
right shoulder; in Vienna this was planned but not executed (see ill. 5). All this
suggests that these details were faithfully traced from a template. Their position
shows that the underdrawings of the two versions of Judith are more alike than
12
13
Judith as Allegory: A Wily Woman or a Valiant Heroine?
Her attributes clearly identify the protagonist as Judith, but the depiction tells us
but little about the dramatic story recounted in the Book of Judith in the Old
Testament:
King Nebuchadnezzar of Assyria demanded unconditional subjugation from all
the nations he had vanquished. He planned the destruction of their temples so that
they would worship him alone (Judith 3, 8). If the defeated refused to obey him he
vowed that “their wounded shall fill their ravines and gullies, and the swelling river
shall be filled with their dead.” (Judith 2, 8) The Jewish people were also thus
threatened. Holofernes, the Assyrian king’s faithful general, laid siege to the city of
Bethulia in Judea, cutting off its water and food supplies. In the city lived the young
widow Judith: “She was beautiful in appearance, and was very lovely to behold”
and “no one spoke ill of her, for she feared God with great devotion.” (Judith 8,
7-8). To avert the certain destruction of her city, Judith decided to go with her loyal
maid to the enemy camp where she pretended to be a defector, quickly winning
ill. 7: Lucas Cranach the Elder, Portrait of Three Ladies, possibly the Princesses Sibylla (1515–
1592), Emilia (1516–1591) and Sidonia (1518–1575) of Saxony, c. 1530, limewood, 62 × 89 cm.
Vienna, KHM, GG 877
Holofernes’ trust. When after three days she was invited to attend a banquet, Judith dressed in her finest clothes and put on her jewellery, intent on beguiling the
general with her beauty. In her charming company Holofernes consumed a great
deal of wine and fell asleep as soon as he was alone with her in his tent. Judith saw
her chance, said a prayer and “came close to his bed, took hold of the hair of his
head, and said, ‘Give me strength today, O Lord God of Israel!’ Then she struck his
neck twice with all her might, and cut off his head.” ( Judith 13, 7–8) After the deed
the final paintings. There may have been a template that served as the basis for
was done she quickly left the tent, handing the severed head to her maid who hid
both pictures and that was traced onto the ground. However, the execution of the
it in a linen bag. Without attracting attention the two women crept through the
two preparatory drawings on the ground differs: one features large, clear forms
camp back to Bethulia. The next morning Judith displayed the decapitated head of
executed in broad brushstrokes (Stuttgart), the other delicate, in some areas
Holofernes on the ramparts of her city, causing the now leaderless Assyrians to
searching lines executed in a presumably dry medium (Vienna).
disperse in panic. By defeating the enemy Judith had saved the people of Israel.11
In addition to these observations we note the heroine’s diverging attire. We
Saint Jerome incorporated the story into his Latin translation of the Bible as
must not assume that a young woman sat for the painter twice; he may very well
a deuterocanonical book. Consequently, the Book of Judith has been passed on
have combined different templates to create a new composition. Stylistically and
as part of the Old Testament since early Christianity; the Council of Trent con-
fashionably the Portrait of three ladies (ill. 7) is very close to the early versions
firmed it as a canonical book. However, because the book contains many histor-
of Judith: the green robe of the lady on the right is very similar to the one worn
ical inconsistences Martin Luther decided not to include it in his 1534 German
by the Stuttgart Judith, but the pearl embroidery on her bodice is like the one
translation of the Bible. But he regarded the story as useful and concurrently
worn by the Vienna Judith. We could easily continue these comparisons with
published a version in the Apocrypha.12
many other paintings from this period (see also ill. 2); as we lack incontrovertible
Following Saint Jerome’s biblical text, the Middle Ages regarded the figure of
proof that these three ladies are, in fact, Saxon princesses, scholars have sug-
Judith as a symbol of chastity and humility, and her victory as a triumph over
gested that we may be looking at three genre portraits of fashionably dressed la-
vanity and lust (Holofernes). Popular writings north of the Alps, for example the
dies, or even at a workshop template for different elegant attires.
Speculum Humanae Salvationis, interpreted Judith’s victory over Holofernes as
9
10
Looking at
these paintings of Judith clearly suggests a selection of templates for workshops
the prefiguration of the Virgin Mary’s triumph over Satan. 13
versions. Even if we do not assume that the panel featuring the three female por-
In the early Modern Era, however, the interpretation of Judith began to
traits was such a template, we can assert that the artist must have had access to
change: as soon as the story’s female protagonist was recognized as someone
the same repertoire of forms employed for portrait-like depictions of biblical fe-
acting on her own initiative rather than merely as an instrument of divine provi-
male characters.
dence, her actions were regarded in a more ambivalent light.
14
15
ill. 8: German or Netherlandish, c. 1530,
Judith with the Head of Holofernes, oak
panel, 92,6 × 77,5 cm, Gotha, Stiftung
Schloss Friedenstein, inv.no. SG 713
In the 15th century both artists and writers began to revisit her story. In addition
to the virtuous Judith we now increasingly also encounter her in series depicting
“Weibermacht” (“Power of Women”): stories of wise or powerful men dominated
by mythological or biblical women such as, for example, Eve, Phyllis, Delilah or
Salome; these series were popular both in the decorative arts (to embellish private apartments and luxury artefacts) and in literature.14 Judith now finds herself
among women who use their female charms to embarrass or even kill men su­
perior to them. There are also a number of paintings produced around 1525 that
depict Judith in the nude, personifying her seductive charms that had cost a man
his head. 15
Very interesting in this context is the picture of a nude Judith presumably painted around 1530 (ill. 8): recalling pictures of Salome with the Head of Saint John the
Baptist, Holofernes’ head has been placed on a platter.16 This turns Judith into a
morally dubious seductress, and the depiction of the decapitated Holofernes functions as a drastic warning for men to be aware of their weaknesses.
It is interesting to note that Judith also evolved into an identification figure
for political groups or entities: Donatello’s almost life-size bronze sculpture is
regarded as an early example and personifies the virtues of the republican government of the city of Florence. Not long afterwards the statue became the symbol of her citizens’ successful revolt against “tyrannical” Medici rule. 17 North of
the Alps, too, the biblical figure of virtuous Judith vanquishing a much stronger
pictures showing Judith as a monumental portrait-like elegant lady were general-
enemy provided political and military encouragement: even before the Reforma-
ly regarded as depictions of a virtuous heroine who through her inner strength
tion, Hans Schäufelin had decorated the walls of the “Hall of the Swabian Coven­
had vanquished a powerful tyrant. Although our painting contains no specific
ant” in the town hall at Nördlingen with her story, in what was clearly a political
details that identify the political context or the patron who commissioned it,
statement. 18 A few years later, in 1531, the Protestant German princes formed
Cranach depicted her as a biblical heroine − be it as an encouragement for Chris-
the Schmalkaldic League in opposition to the Emperor, who had remained loyal
tian Europe in the face of the growing Turkish threat, or of Protestants in their
to the Pope, and, presumably to commemorate the event, Cranach the Elder pro-
spiritual battle against Imperial power.
duced two panels with narrative scenes recounting the story of Judith. 19 In both
cases, Judith’s heroic deed functions as an inspiration for the members of a polit-
Judith with Salome in the Imperial Collection
ical alliance.
In his depictions of Judith (ill. 2) Cranach sticks to the biblical story by showing her sumptuously attired and bejewelled. They all exude courtly elegance but
Cranach’s Judith is first recorded in the Inventarium und verzaichnus ihrer
not necessarily erotic frisson. The raised sword in their right hand and the deter-
römischen kaiserlichen Majestät gemäld und conterfähten so in der Neuenburg
mined gaze fixed on the viewer, together with a generally imposing depiction,
zu Wien liegen (Inventory and record of the paintings and portraits of his Imper­
bring to mind heroines that inspire valour – like Cranach’s narrative scenes of
ial Roman Majesty housed in Stallburg Palace in Vienna), which was compiled
Judith produced in 1531 in connection with the founding of the Schmalkaldic
between 1612 and 1619. It lists: “3 stuckh vom Khrainacher, als 3 jungfrauen: no.
League. A number of art historians have suggested that this connection also sup-
2 die Judith, no. 3 Herodis dochter, eine copey” (3 pieces by Cranach, i.e. three
ports the identification of other individual depictions of Judith as allegories of
virgins: no. 2 Judith, no. 3 Herod’s daughter, a copy).22 This tells us that three of
Protestant resistance against the Imperial troops.
However, we now know that
Cranach’s paintings – the Portraits of three ladies (ill. 7), Cranach’s depiction of
Cranach had established the composition by 1525 (ill. 2a). In addition, in one of
Judith (ill. 1) and a copy of Herod’s daughter − were housed together. As the in-
his earlier versions of Judith (ill. 2b) she sports on her barett a medal commemor­
ventory also lists numerous works by Hans von Aachen, Joseph Heintz the Elder
ating King Louis of Hungary, who died in 1526 in the Battle of Mohacs, which
and Bartholomäus Spranger – all court painters to Emperor Rudolf II (1552−1612)
turns her into an allegory of taking a stand against the Ottoman threat rather
− we may assume that they, too, were part of Rudolf’s extensive collections at
than of Protestant defiance of Imperial power. 21 This example illustrates that
Prague Castle. 23 In the inventory of the same galleries written shortly afterwards,
16
20
17
they are described in more detail: “no. 58. Ein original, Judit mit Holoferno kopf
und schwerd vom Kronacher” (an original, Judith with the head of Holofernes
and a sword by Cranach), und no. 59: “Ein dito, ist ein copeia vom Kronacher;
bedeitung: des Herodis tochter mit sanct Johannes haubt in der schissel” (the
same, it is a copy of Cranach; content: Herod’s daughter with the head of Saint
John the Baptist on a platter).24 Cranach’s Judith is not described in detail, but
the fact that she is mentioned in conjunction with a copy depicting Salome en­
ables us to identify the painting.
The copy is obviously Salome with the Head of Saint John the Baptist (ill. 9).
Stylistically the painting can be dated to around 1600; today it is attributed to
Joseph Heintz the Elder.
25
Judith clearly inspired this composition: note the
slashed and laced crimson dress, the gold bands, the barett embellished with ostrich feathers, her strawberry blond hair falling over her shoulders with a single
strand straying across her cleavage, and, last but not least, her haunting gaze fixed
on the spectator. But instead of faithfully copying his model the artist decided to
bring the sitter’s attire up to date: he omitted the characteristic chains with gold
links, and replaced the choker with a simple pearl necklace. Instead of a cloth-ofgold bodice embellished with a rigid diamond pattern Salome wears a chemise
embroidered with flowers and edged with lace. Instead of Judith’s contrasting
black lacing on bodice and dress, Salome’s reddish-gold lacing creates a more elegant pulled-together look. Salome’s belt comprises glass links from which a fra-
ill. 9: Joseph Heintz the Elder, Salome with the Head of Saint John the Baptist, c. 1600, oak
panel, 86 × 59,5 cm. Vienna, KHM, GG 862
ill. 10: The reverse of Joseph Heintz the Elder, Salome with the Head of Saint John the Baptist
(see ill 9)
grant pomander is suspended. Closer inspection reveals her monochrome hat ornament to be a mounted figurative image, similar in shape and styling to the
pieces of jewellery frequently used to embellish a barett (ill. 12 and 13).26
Both by avoiding contours and by his levigated handling the artist who pro-
already have been installed somewhere in the Schweizerhof part of Hofburg Pal-
duced our Salome softened the appearance of the figure placed before a black
ace. 29 Its new installation was only completed in 1747.30 Immediately afterwards
background. These stylistic idiosyncrasies and the conceit of producing a work in
a new inventory of the paintings in the Schatzkammer – which included both Ju-
the style of the German Renaissance reflect the refined taste prevalent at the
dith and Salome, with their respective numbers and both attributed to Cranach –
court of Rudolf II. We know that the Emperor was keen to acquire a Judith by
was compiled: it lists as no. 88 “Ein stuckh, die herodias mit den haubt Johanes,
Cranach; he wanted to buy her from the burgher in Wroclaw who owned her and
von Lucas Granich” (a piece showing Herodias with the head of Saint John, by
asked the city council for help. When the sale did not go through the city present-
Lucas Cranach), and a little further down as no. 103 “Ein stuckh, worauf die Ju-
ed the Emperor with a Salome with the Head of Saint John the Baptist instead.27
dith mit den haubt Holoferni, von Lucas Granich” (a piece depicting Judith with
No inventories of the imperial painting collection around 1600 have survived so
the head of Holofernes, by Lucas Cranach).31 The back of Salome (ill. 10) is still
we cannot establish with absolute certainty the provenance of Judith with the
inscribed with “no 88”, confirming that they were once in the Schatzkammer. The
Head of Holofernes. But the fact that Cranach’s Judith served as the model for
cradle added in the 19th century destroyed all the older inscriptions on the back
the Salome described here − which perfectly reflects the taste of Rudolf’s court
of our Judith (ill. A). In the course of yet another reorganization of the Imperial
at the turn of the 17 century − supports the contention that the painting was
collections, the director of the Picture Gallery, which had by now been moved
once in Rudolf’s Kunstkammer.
from Stallburg Palace to Upper Belvedere Palace, took over the paintings formerly
th
We do not know what happened to the paintings originally at Prague when
in the Schatzkammer. Shortly afterwards, in 1781, Judith and Salome were includ-
they were moved to Vienna: under Emperor Ferdinand II (1578−1637, ruled from
ed in his new installation of the collection and listed in the first printed catalogue
1619) Vienna once again became the capital of the empire; the imperial palace
as nos. 63 and 64: “Zwey weibliche Bildnisse, beyde das Portrait eines jungen
comprised a treasury (Schatzkammer), located next to the Ballsaal (ballroom).
vornehmen Frauenzimmers, welches der Künstler in dem ersten Gemälde als Ju-
Travellers recorded seeing paintings in the Schatzkammer but did not describe
dith mit Holofernis Kopf und Schwert in der Hand, und in dem andern als Hero-
In the late 1720s the Schatzkammer had to be moved, and may by then
dias, die das Haupt Johannis auf einer Schüssel trägt, vorgestellet hat. In beyden
them.
18
28
19
ill. 11: images taken before the removal of
the additions of 1781: Lucas Cranach the
Younger, Portrait of a Man, 1564 (GG 885);
Lucas Cranach the Elder, Judith with the
Head of Holofernes (GG 858); Joseph Heintz
the Elder Salome with the Head of Saint
John the Baptist (GG 862); all: Vienna,
KHM, Picture Gallery
ist sie mit halb entblößter Brust, einem breiten rothen Federhut auf dem Kopf,
copy (KHM, GG 1588) of Cupid Carving his Bow after Parmigianino (KHM,
und in kostbarer damals üblicher Kleidung mit vielem Schmuck abgebildet.” (two
GG 275) that was already listed as a work by the elder Heintz in the Vienna Inven-
female likenesses, both portraits of an elegant young woman, which the artist in
tory G (1612–1619), an attribution continued in the 1783 catalogue.
the first painting depicted as Judith with the head of Holofernes and clutching a
Despite the attribution of Salome to a younger artist, she remained with Ju-
sword, and in the other as Herodias carrying the head of Saint John the Baptist
dith in the gallery showcasing 16th century German painting at Upper Belvedere
on a platter. In both she is shown with a half-bared breast, a wide red plumed hat
Palace, and initially also in the newly-erected Kunsthistorisches Hofmuseum on
and costly contemporary attire, wearing a great deal of jewellery.)
the Ringsstrasse; from 1896, however, the painting by Heintz the Elder was dis-
32
The attribution to Lucas Cranach the Younger in the 1783 catalogue probably
played together with the other works produced at the court of Rudolf II at the
Only occasionally – for example, now for this Point of
derives from the male portrait associated with them. A portrait of a man, signed
turn of the 17th century.
with a serpent and dated 1564, is listed as no. 62. A source on some necessary
View #15 – can the two paintings exert their charms together, as Rudolf II had
restoration work undertaken in connection with the proposed new installation
presumably intended.
35
tells us that the three paintings were viewed as a unit: “No. 62 Ein männliches
Portrait von Kranach ist angesetzt und auch No. 63. Judith von Kranach seinem
Compagnon gleich gerichtet worden. No. 64 gebuzt und repariert worden.” (no. 62
Judith with Salome: A Metamorphosis?
a male portrait by Cranach has been enlarged, and also no 63. Judith by Cranach
has been adapted to match its companion piece. No 64 has been cleaned and
The Gospels tell of Salome, who was responsible for the death of Saint John the
repaired).33
Baptist: Saint John had criticized King Herod for marrying his own sister-in-law,
Both the formats listed in the 1783 catalogue and old photographs (ill. 11)
Herodias, which aroused the lady’s wrath and made her want to kill the holy
document that the formats of the three panels really were altered and adjusted to
man. During a banquet Herod was so taken by a dance performed by his
match each other; visitors were thus presented with portraits of the same young
step-daughter (the Gospels do not record her name, Salome is a later addition)
woman playing two roles – Judith and Salome.
that he promised to fulfil any wish she made. To please her mother, Salome asked
The stylistic differences between Judith and Solome were only recognized much
for the head of Saint John. Although Herod did not approve of the saint’s execu-
later. In the 1816 inventory Salome was attributed to an “anonymous artist”, but by
tion he felt he had no choice but to keep his promise. The executioner performed
1824 “Herodias, after Lucas Cranach” was listed as a work by Joseph Heintz the
his grisly task and presented Salome with John’s severed head on a platter (Marc
Elder. 34 This attribution may have been based on a new familiarity with the faithful
6:17– 29 and Matthew 14:3 –12)
20
21
moral connotations; the by now highly sexualized view of the figure of Judith was
also informed by Friedrich Hebbel’s play written in 1840, which for Freud, too,
personified the character’s real intentions: although her victory over Holofernes
was disguised as a patriotic deed Judith’s true motif was sexual, and his decapitation certainly not heroic.38 It seems that it was no longer possible for a woman to
be a heroine acting on her political convictions, not even symbolically.
Today, we are free to view the biblical figure of Judith from unconventional
vantage points: in 2013 the comic artist Lewis Trondheim (born in 1964) drew a
female guitarist who used her instrument to decapitate the man sprawled at her
feet (ill. 14) – with blood, much like in Cranach’s painting, still dripping from its
headstock. 39 He dedicated the work to the singer Judith Holofernes (her self-chosen stage name), who, in a fitting tribute to our valiant Judith, is the lead singer
of the band “Wir sind Helden” (We are Heroes).
ill. 12: Venus and Cupid, cameo, last third of the 16th century, chalcedony, setting gold, enamel,
pendant pearl, 2,1 × 1,6 cm. Vienna, KHM, Kunstkammer, inv.no. Ansa XII 122
ill. 13: detail of the hat ornament in Joseph Heintz the Elder, Salome with the Head of Saint
John the Baptist (see ill. 9)
When Cranach painted his portrait of Judith she was regarded primarily as a
model of virtue. An early exception is the Judith dated around 1530 (ill. 8) who
presents the head of Holofernes on a platter, clearly an allusion to the death of
Saint John the Baptist, which was a direct result of Salome’s erotic dance: the
artist is not praising Judith’s heroic victory but offers a warning of the dangers of
succumbing to female charms.36 Here references to two wily female characters
seem to have been conflated into a single composition; around 1600 Cranach’s
Judith once more served as the model for a Salome. The clearly intended resemblance between the two women suggests that Judith’s virtuous allegorical role
changed by being presented together with the undoubtedly cunning Salome. 37
Unlike her template Judith, the Salome produced by Heintz the Elder wears a
piece of jewellery on her barett that can be identified as a depiction of Venus and
Cupid (ill. 13). It has much in common with Cranach’s pictures of Venus and Cupid, most of which feature an inscription exhorting the spectator to beware of the
god of love’s painful arrows. Did Rudolf’s court artist deliberately add the hat ornament? Once the spectator regards Salome and Judith as a pair, he is confronted
with the terrible fate of two men who fell foul of the seductive charms of a cunning woman: Holofernes, who was a victim of his own carnal desires, and Saint
John, who paid for King Herod’s weakness with his life. It seems that by the turn
of the 17th century the chaste heroic Judith that Cranach had invented around
1525 had morphed into a cunning man-eater. Daniela Hammer-Tugendhat has
shown that in the late 20th century the figure of Judith continued to have negative
22
ill. 14: Lewis Trondheim,
Judith and Holofernes,
pencil on paper, 2013
23
1 Wherever possible we have included the numbers of the Cranach paintings discussed here as listed
in the catalogue raisonné published by Max Friedländer and Jakob Rosenberg, The Paintings of
Lucas Cranach, New York 1978 (abbrev. FR 1978). Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv.no. GG
858, limewood, 85,9 × 55,7 cm (without additions), see FR 1978, 230A.
2 The technological analyses of the research project (financed by the FWF) were carried out by Ute
Tüchler and Monika Strolz; 2007–2012 the project was headed by Karl Schütz, in 2013 he was
succeeded by Guido Messling.
3 The “Cranach Digital Archive”, a project headed by Professor Gunnar Heydenreich, see its website
www.lucascranach.org, offers a scholarly survey of the entire oeuvre of the Cranach dynasty including bibliography, archivalia and biographical information.
4 Veronique Bücken, Heroinen und Femmes Fatales im Werk von Lucas Cranach, in: Die Welt des Lucas
Cranach, ed. by Guido Messling, exhib.cat. Bozar, Brussels, 2010/11, pp. 54–65. For Weibermacht
(Power of Women) subjects in works by Cranach see Dieter Koepplin in: Dieter Koepplin & Tilman Falk
(eds.), Lukas Cranach. Gemälde, Zeichnungen, Druckgraphik, exhib.cat. Basle 1974, pp. 562–585.
5 Salome with the Head of Saint John the Baptist, oak panel, 61 × 49,5 cm, Lisbon, Museu Nacional
de Arte Antiga, inv. 739 (FR 1978, 33).
6 Koepplin (see FN 4), p. 420, with references to works by Pencz and Ostendorfer; Anna Coliva &
Bernard Aikema (eds.), Cranach: l’altro rinascimento, exhib.cat. Rome, Galleria Borghese, 2010, p.
232 with references to Venetian works. A recently discovered Netherlandish example was last discussed by Maryan Ainsworth & Abbie Vandivere, Judith with the Head of Holofernes: Jan Cornelisz
Vermeyen’s Earliest Signed Painting, JHNA 6:2 (Summer 2014), DOI: 10.5092/jhna.2014.6.2.2; online http://www.jhna.org/index.php/past-issues/vol-62-2014/300-judith-with-the-head-of-holofernes
(last accessed on January 28, 2016).
7 We would like to thank Elsbeth Wiemann for the detailed information (documentation by the restorer Bärbel Seebich from 1990/91) on the painting in the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart. The painting in
the KHM was analyzed in 2008 by Monika Strolz for the project Katalog der deutschen Gemälde
im KHM bis ca. 1540 (see FN 2).
8 Gunnar Heydenreich (Cranach Digital Archive, www.lucascranach.org) kindly provided the IRR,
with the permission of the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart. In 1990/90 the underdrawing visible with the
naked eye was traced on a transparent foil (see FN 7).
9 Heinrich Zimmermann, Zur Ikonographie von Damenbildnissen des älteren und jüngeren Lucas
Cranach, in: Pantheon 27, 1968, pp. 283–293, pp. 284–286.
10 Tanja Holste, Die Porträtkunst Lucas Cranachs d. Ä. PhD, Christian-Albrecht-Universität, Kiel 2004,
p. 125; Ernst Rebel, Lucas Cranachs Porträtkunst. Personendarstellungen zwischen Vitalität und Formel, in: Claus Grimm & Johannes Erichsen & Evamaria Brockhoff (eds.), Lucas Cranach. Ein Ma­lerUnternehmer aus Franken, exhib.cat. Festung Rosenburg, Kronach, und Museum der Bildenden Künste, Leipzig, Regensburg 1994 (Veröffentlichungen zur Bayerischen Geschichte und Kultur, 26), pp.
131–138, p. 136; most recently in Karl Schütz & Christof Metzger & Christiane Lange (eds.), Dürer,
Cranach, Holbein. Die Entdeckung des Menschen. Das deutsche Porträt um 1500, exhib.cat. Kunst­
historisches Museum Vienna, Kunsthalle der Hypo-Kulturstiftung Munich, 2011, cat.no. 69.
11 Quoted after: http://www.ccel.org/wwsb/Judith (last accessed in February 2016).
12Henrike Lähnemann, Hystoria Judith. Deutsche Judithdichtungen vom 12. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert
(Scrinium Friburgense, 20), Berlin 2006, pp. 16–32, 300–310; Bettina Uppenkamp, Judith und
Holofernes in der italienischen Malerei des Barock, Berlin 2004, pp. 20–25; Adelheid Straten, Das Judith-Thema in Deutschland im 16. Jahrhundert. Studien zur Ikonographie, Munich 1983, pp. 10–11.
13 Lähnemann (see FN 12), pp. 419–424; Uppenkamp 2004 (see FN 12), pp. 34–41.
14 Lähnemann (see FN 12), pp. 297, 416–419. Bücken (see FN 4); Daniela Hammer-Tugendhat, Judith
und ihre Schwestern. Konstanz und Veränderung von Weiblichkeitsbildern, in: Anette Kuhn & Bea
Lundt & Evelyn Korsch (eds.), Lustgarten und Dämonenpein. Konzepte von Weiblichkeit in Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit, Dortmund 1997, pp. 343–385.
15 Hans Baldung Grien, Judith mit dem Haupt des Holofernes, 1525, 208 × 74 cm, Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, inv.no. Gm 1093. Straten (see FN 12), cat.no. 4.
16 Bettina Uppenkamp, Judith – Zur Aktualität einer biblischen Heldin im 16. Jahrhundert, in: Simona Schellenberger & André Thieme & Dirk Welich (eds.), Eine STARKE FRAUENgeschichte – 500
Jahre Reformation. Begleitband zur Sonderausstellung auf Schloss Rochlitz im Auftrag der Staat­
lichen Schlösser, Burgen und Gärten Sachsen GmbH, 2014, pp. 71–77, p. 77.
17Donatello, Judith und Holofernes, bronze, 1453–57, Florence, Palazzo Vecchio. Uppenkamp 2004
(see FN 12), pp. 43–54.
18 Hans Schäufelin, Die siegreiche Verteidigung der Stadt Bethulia gegen Holofernes, 1515, oil on plaster,
221 × 427 cm, Nördlingen, Rathaus-Stube des Schwäbischen Bundes. Christof Metzger, Hans Schäufelin als Maler, Berlin 2002 (Denkmäler deutscher Kunst), pp. 146–155, 347–355, ill. 258, cat.no. 34.
19 Judith at the Table of Holofernes und The Death of Holofernes, 1531, Stiftung Schloss Friedenstein,
Schlossmuseum Gotha, Sammlungen der Herzog von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha’schen Stiftung für
Kunst und Wissenschaft, inv.nos. 720/674 and 721/675 (FR 1978, 214 and 215). Werner Schade,
Das unbekannte Selbstbildnis Cranachs, in: Dezennium – Zwanzig Jahre VEB Verlag der Kunst
Dresden, 1972, pp. 368–375, pp. 374–375.
20 Schade 1972 (see FN 19), p. 374–375; Helmut Börsch-Supan, Cranachs ‚Judith‘ in der Sammlung
des Jagdschlosses Grunewald, in: exhib.cat. Basle 1974 (see FN 4), pp. 413–418, pp. 417–418, and
Dieter Koepplin, ibid., p. 580.
21 Anja Schneckenburger-Broschek, Altdeutsche Malerei. Die Tafelbilder und Altäre des 14. bis 16.
24
Jahrhunderts in der Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister und im Hessischen Landesmuseum Kassel (Bestandskataloge der Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister Kassel), Kassel 1997, p. 74.
22Wiener Inventar G, quoted after W. Köhler in: Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des
Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 26, 1906/07, reg.no. 19446. The original inventory is now at Wolfenbüttel, Herzog-August-Bibliothek, Cod. Guelf. 370 Novi.
23 Alphons Lhotsky, Festschrift des Kunsthistorischen Museums in Wien. 1891–1941. Zweiter Teil: Die
Geschichte der Sammlungen. Erste Hälfte: von den Anfängen bis zum Todes Kaiser Karls VI. 1740,
2 vols., Vienna 1941–1945, vol. 2, Part One, pp. 307–308; Gudrun Swoboda, Die Wege der Bilder.
Eine Geschichte der kaiserlichen Gemäldesammlungen von 1600–1800, Vienna 2008, pp. 31–32.
24 Wiener Inventar H, quoted afer W. Köhler (see FN 22), reg.no. 19448. This inventory is also now at
Wolfenbüttel.
25 Jürgen Zimmer, Joseph Heintz der Ältere als Maler, Weissenhorn 1971, cat.no. A41, confirms the
attribution for stylistic reasons. The dendrochronological analysis of one of the planks of the support has shown that the oak originated in southern Germany and may have been used for the
painting in 1602; see Peter Klein’s report of February 17, 2016.
26 I would like to thank Paulus Rainer, curator of the Kunstkammer of the Kunsthistorisches Museum,
for his comments on the jewellery and its function.
27 Alwin Schultz, Über die Herkunft des jetzt in der k.k. Gallerie des Belvedere befindlichen Gemäldes
von Lucas Cranach dem Älteren, darstellend Herodias mit dem Haupte Johannes des Täufers, in:
Mittheilungen der k.k. Central-Commission 12, 1867, pp. L–LI.
The Salome (ill. 2i) now at Budapest was formerly in the Imperial collection.
28The oldest extant travelogue, which has only survived in manuscript form, was produced by an
anonymous traveller in 1677, published by Luschin von Ebengreuth, Die ältesten Beschreibungen
der kaiserlichen Schatzkammer zu Wien, in: Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 20, 1899, pp. CXC-CXCVI, Regest 18307. He was followed by Eduard
Brown’s travels through the Low Countries, Germany etc.; in 1668/69 Brown was in Vienna: Edward Brown, M.D., Auf genehm gehaltenes Gutachten und Veranlassung der Kön. Engell. Medicinischen Gesellschafft in Londen Durch Niederland/Teutschland/Hungarn/Serbien […] gethane
ganz sonderbare Reisen […], Nuremberg 1686, pp. 247–253.
29 Lhotsky (see FN 23), vol. 2, Part One, pp. 398–399.
30 Lhotsky (see FN 23), vol. 2, Part Two, pp. 415–416.
31 “Specification, wasz sich vor bilder nach dem no. sowoll die histori als auch von wasz vor einen
maitre solche verfertiget worden, bei neier einrichtung der kais. königl. schatzcammer befinden, so
geschechen anno 1747 et 1748” (specifications about the paintings according to their numbers,
both their histories and which master painted them, in the newly installed imperial Schatzkammer,
in A.D. 1747 and 1748), quoted after H. Zimmermann, Reg. 6243, in: Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 10, 1889, pp. CCXLIII-CCXLVI.
32 Christian von Mechel, Verzeichnis der Gemälde der kaiserlich königlichen Bilder Gallerie in Wien
[…], Vienna 1783. For the most recent discussion of Mechel’s new installation of the gallery and his
catalogue see: Nora Fischer, Kunst nach Ordnung, Auswahl und System. Transformationen der
kaiserlichen Gemäldegalerie in Wien im späten 18. Jahrhundert, in: Gudrun Swoboda (ed.), Die
kaiserliche Gemäldegalerie in Wien und die Anfänge des öffentlichen Kunstmuseums, vol. 1: Die
Kaiserliche Galerie im Wiener Belvedere (1776–1837), Vienna 2013, pp. 23–89.
33 “Verzeichnis jener Gemälde der k.k. bildergalerie, welche bey Anlaß ihrer neuen Einrichtung […]
sind gebutzt und repariert, auch zum Theil wegen vorher geschehener Verstümmelung und Weg­
schneidung sind ergänzt, oder in ihre wahre Größe gebracht worden […]” (inventory of those
paintings in the imperial picture gallery that were cleaned and repaired, some of which also required
additions to replace earlier mutilations or trimmings, or returned to their original size, for the new
installation...), quoted after Swoboda (see FN 32), pp. 286–291. The original document is now at the
State Archive in Brünn, Kaunitz Family Archive, box 460, inv.no. 4619.
34 These inventories are preserved in the archive of the Kunsthistorisches Museum’s Picture Gallery.
For more in the inventories and the changes to the paintings displayed in the Second Floor Gallery
at Belvedere Palace in the early 19th century see: Alice Hoppe-Harnoncourt, Eine ungewöhnliche
Einrichtung wird zum fixen Bestandteil der kunsthistorischen Ordnung. Die Malereischule der
‚Alten deutschen Meister‘ von 1781 bis 1837, in: Swoboda (see FN 32), pp. 91–114, pp. 100–103.
35 Albrecht Krafft, Verzeichniss der kais. kön. Gemälde-Gallerie im Belvedere zu Wien, Vienna 1837,
pp. 200–201, no. 42; see also Führer durch die Gemäldegalerie. I. Theil. Gemälde alter Meister.
Kunsthistorisches Museum des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, Vienna 1892, no. 1477 and no. 1479 ;
and the reprint of 1896, no. 1458 and no. 1524. On the new installation during the 1830s see
Hoppe-Harnoncourt (see FN. 34), pp. 105–107.
36 See Uppenkamp (see FN 12).
37Börsch-Supan (see FN 20, p. 416) suggests that paintings by Cranach depicting a single Judith
should be read as Protestant icons. The addition of Salome would have detracted from their religious-political message. Uppenkamp (see FN 12, p. 7) points out that during the Counter-Reformation Judith functioned as a widely disseminated prefiguration of the Virgin Mary. This suggests to me
that religio-political reasons did not require her to be conflated with Salome.
38 Hammer-Tugendhat (see FN 14), p. 344.
39 See www.judith-holofernes.de. On the dedication of the comic in 2013: Arte programme “Durch die
Nacht mit Judith Holofernes und Lewis Trondheim” , published on September 24, 2013 (last accessed
on youtube on February 2, 2016). Her latest solo album is called “Ein leichtes Schwert” (a light sword).
25
Illustration and copyright credits
ill. 2: compilation by the author, images 2 a, b, c, d, e, f, g taken from: Simona Schellenberger &
André Thieme & Dirk Welich (eds.), Eine STARKE FRAUENgeschichte-500 Jahre Reformation.
Begleitband zur Sonderausstellung auf Schloss Rochlitz im Auftrag der Staatlichen Schlösser, Burgen und Gärten Sachsen GmbH, 2014, pp. 74–75, ills. 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. ill. 2 h: taken from:
Anna Coliva & Bernard Aikema (eds.), Cranach. L’altro rinascimento, exhib.cat. Rome, Galleria
Borghese, 2010, ill. cat.. 30. ill. 2 i: taken from: Guido Messling (ed.), Die Welt des Lucas Cranach,
exhib.cat. Brussels, Bozar, 2010/11, ill.cat. 115
ill. 3: © bpk – Bildagentur für Kunst, Kultur und Geschichte
ill. 5: © Cranach Digital Archive and Staatsgalerie Stuttgart
ill. 8: © Stiftung Schloss Friedenstein, Gotha
ill. 14: © Lewis Trondheim, taken from: www.judith-holofernes.de
ill. 4: Digital image edited by G. Prast und A. Hoppe-Harnoncourt.
ill. B-E: Georg Prast, KHM, Wien
the rest: © KHM, Vienna
Acknowledgements
Monika Strolz, Ute Tüchler, Michael Eder, Gunnar Heydenreich, Elsbeth Wiemann,
Paulus Rainer, Katja Schmitz-von Ledebur, Wencke Deiters and Thomas Hoppe
About this publication
Published by: Kunsthistorisches Museum, Sabine Haag and Stefan Weppelmann
Texts: Alice Hoppe-Harnoncourt, Georg Prast
Coordination: Guido Messling
Translation: Agnes Stillfried
Editing: Karin Zeleny
Art Director: Stefan Zeisler
Graphic design: Johanna Kopp
Photographs: Andreas Uldrich
Photo Editing: Tom Ritter
Printed by: Druckerei Walla, Vienna
ISBN: 978-3-99020-112-1
© 2016 KHM-Museumsverband. All rights reserved
26