Aarão de Lacerda

Filho do Dr. Aarão Ferreira de Lacerda, professor da Academia Politécnica e da Faculdade de Ciências do Porto, nasceu a 23 de Fevereiro de 1890 na cidade do Porto. Habilitado, com distinção, com o bacharelato em Direito pela Universidade de Coimbra, abriu um escritório no Porto ao reconhecer a sua predilecção pelas Letras. Ainda enquanto estudante fundou a revista literária “Dionysos” e organizou, em conjunto com outras figuras artísticas do Porto, a primeira exposição de “Modernistas e Humoristas”, em 1915.
De regresso à Universidade de Coimbra, cursou Ciências Histórico-Filosóficas na Faculdade de Letras, tornando-se um dos discípulos predilectos de Joaquim de Vasconcelos, que o chegou a propor para seu sucessor na cadeira de Arqueologia, ideia que não foi possível concretizar devido à sua condição de estudante. Igualmente por recomendação do mestre foi admitido como seu sucessor na Escola de Belas Artes do Porto, regendo provisoriamente a cadeira de História da Arte desde 1918. Neste ano tornou-se um dos fundadores da Sociedade Portuguesa de Antropologia e Etnologia, a par de José Ferreira, Mendes Correia e Luís Viegas.
Em 1921, por morte do Dr. Teixeira de Carvalho, foi convidado pela Faculdade de Letras de Coimbra para assumir a cadeira anexa de Estética e História da Arte (3.ª Secção), convite que declinou após equivalente proposta da 1.ª Faculdade de Letras do Porto; tomou posse deste lugar a 4 de Janeiro de 1922. Já em exercício da carreira académica docente, apresentou-se às provas de licenciatura do curso em Coimbra, conquistando a classificação de 19 valores. Exerceu funções na Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto até ao seu encerramento a 31 de Julho de 1931, onde leccionou, também, as cadeiras de Arqueologia e História Geral de Civilização. Em 19 de Abril de 1926 foi-lhe conferido o grau de Doutor em Letras – Ciências Históricas.
Nos anos seguintes dedicou-se em exclusivo ao ensino na Escola de Belas Artes do Porto, na qualidade de professor efectivo do 8.º Grupo, regendo as cadeiras de História Geral da Arte, Arqueologia Artística Geral e Arqueologia Artística Portuguesa. Por Portaria de 23 de Outubro de 1939, foi nomeado director dessa Escola. Em 1944, aceitou o convite para leccionar a cadeira de Acústica e História da Música no Conservatório de Música do Porto.
Aquando da morte do Prof. Virgílio Correia, em 1945, o Dr. Aarão de Lacerda apresentou-se a provas públicas para provimento da cadeira de Estética e História da Arte na Faculdade de Letras de Coimbra. Obtida a indispensável aprovação, dedicou-se a leccioná-la em regime de exclusividade até ao seu falecimento, ocorrido em 7 de Setembro de 1947, na Curia. (Universidade Digital / Gestão de Informação, 2008)

http://sigarra.up.pt/up/pt/web_base.gera_pagina?P_pagina=1004263

Comentário feito por:

Patricia V Mello Lavall

 

 

Anúncios

Smith, Robert C [hester]

Smith, Robert C[hester]

Date born:  1912

Place Born: Cranford, NJ

Date died:  1975

Place died:

Historian of the Brazilian and Portugese Baroque; professor at School of Fine Arts, University of Pennsylvania, 1956-1975. Smith’s Harvard dissertation, granted in 1936, was likely supervised by the Renaissance art historian and Dean of the architecture school, George Edgell (q.v.). Smith also taught at the University of Illinois and at Sweet Briar College. He was a consultant and lecturer at Colonial Williamsburg. His The Art of Portugal, 1968, won the Athenaeum Literary Award. He studied Portuguese and Brazilian art and architecture as a college student. In 1936 Smith wrote his dissertation on the architect João Frederico Ludovice. He joined Pennsylvania University in 1947. Robert Smith bequeathed his personal archive made up of written documents, photographs and unpublished works to the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. The Robert C. Smith Award was established by the Decorative Arts Society of the Society of Architectural Historians for the most distinguished journal article in the decorative arts. Primarily published articles.

Home Country:  United States

Sources:  Bazin, Germain. Histoire de l’histoire de l’art: de Vasari à nos jours. Paris: Albin Michel, 1986, pp. 451-452; Sala, Dalton, and Tamen, Pedro, et al. Robert C. Smith, 1912-1975: A investigação na História de Arte/ Research in History of Art. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 2000, especially, Wohl, Helmut. “Robert Chester Smith and the History of Art in the United States.” pp. 16-29 and Russell-Wood, A. J. R. “Robert Chester Smith: investigador e historiador”/Robert Chester Smith: Research Scholar and Historian.” pp. 30-65.

Bibliography: [dissertation:] João Frederico Ludovice, arquitecto de Mafra. Harvard, 1936; A talha em Portugal. Lisbon, 1962; Frei José de Santo Antonio Ferreira Vilaça escultor beneditino do seculo XVIII. Gulbenkian Foundation, 1972; “Baroque and Rococo Braga: Documenting Eighteenth-Century Architecture and Sculpture in Northern Portugal.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 1971, pp. 214 of 214-220.

Disponível em:

http://www.dictionaryofarthistorians.org/smithr.htm

Exposição: Minas Território da Arte

Wölfflin, Heinrich

https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Heinrich_W%C3%B6lfflin_D%C3%BChrkoop.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wölfflin, Heinrich

Date born: June 21, 1864

Place born:  Wintherthur, Switzerland

Date died:  July 19, 1945

Place died:  Zürich, Switzerland

Widely influential professor of art history, major exponent of formalist methodology.  Wölfflin was the son of a Swiss classics scholar Eduard von Wölfflin (1831-1908) and Bertha Troll-Greuter (Wölfflin) (1839-1911).  He initially studied philosophy at the university in Basel under Johannes Volkelt (1848-1930), but the lectures of cultural historian Jakob Burckhardt developed in him an enthusiasm for art history. Wölfflin continued study in philosophy at Berlin under the eminent Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911), whose work exerted a strong influence on Wölfflin his whole life. He moved to Munich, where his father had an appointment, continuing to study philosophy and art history. In Munich, Wölfflin wrote his dissertation, Prolegomena zu einer Psychologie der Architektur in 1886, under Heinrich Brunn. Even in this early period in his life, Wölfflin’s interest focused on the principles for analyzing works of art as much as the art itself.  The two years after his dissertation were spent in Italy, resulting in his habilitationschrift and first book, Renaissance und Barock (1888).  Wölfflin returned to Munich to lecture (as a Privatdozent) at the University of Munich. In 1893 he returned to Basel to succeed his mentor, Burckhardt. It was during this time that he wrote Klassische Kunst (1898) which was to become one of his most popular books.  In 1901 Wölfflin was called to the prestigious University of Berlin to become Ordinarius professor of the University, succeeding the popular Hermann Grimm.  Wölfflin’s lectures exceeded Grimm’s in popularity, commanding the largest auditoriums available and reviewed in newspapers. He ran an art history institute in Berlin lead by the talented art historian/polymath Wilhelm Waetzoldt. Students to his lectures in Berlin included Ernst Gombrich (who was impressed with Wölfflin’s delivery style but not methodology). Wölfflin authored his only monograph on an individual artist, Die Kunst Albrecht Dürers (1905) during this time, partially to appease critics that this non-German art historian was teaching in Berlin.  He met and became engaged to Adele Auguste (“Ada”) Bruhn (1885-1951), daughter of a wealthy factory owner and dancer. [Bruhn later broke the engagement in 1913 to marry the Bauhaus architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (1886-1969)]. The contrast of Berlin to the other universities where Wölfflin had taught, particularly the conservative climate of Imperial Prussia–and particularly Wilhelm II’s antagonism for modern art and “non-Germans”–eventually caused Wölfflin to resign his chair in 1910, along with Nationalgalerie art director Hugo von Tsudi.  Wölfflin returned to Munich 1912, suceeding Berthold Riehl, revising his lecturing method to a Geheimrat (conversational) style as he termed it. Rudolf Wittkower, who attended these in Munich, described Wölfflin as an aloof teacher who delegated even his graduate seminars to assistants.  Others who heard his courses included the theorist Walter Benjamin. Max Raphaël had his dissertation famously declined by Wölfflin because of its modern subject matter and social-history methodology. By 1924 the nationalism that was to increasingly envelope Germany compelled Wölfflin to return to his native Switzerland.  He accepted a position at the University of Zürich, his Munich position filled by Adolph Goldschmidt.  The Zürich years were marked by the publications of two works.   Italien und das deutsche Formgefühl (Italy and the German Conception of Form) (1931) is a significant reworking of his Principles of Art History, rethinking art production in terms of the then prevalent notions of nationality.  The second, Gedanken zur Kunstgeschichte (Thoughts on Art History) (1941), selected essays, were collected as war consumed most of Europe.  Wölfflin supervised an amazing number of dissertations. His many students included Jakob Rosenberg, Frida Schottmüller, Hermann Beenken, Kurt Martin, Justus Bier, Ludwig Volkmann, August Liebmann Mayer, Grete Ring, and Albert Brinckmann among others; he supervised the habilitation of Paul Frankl. Neither Wölfflin nor any of his siblings married.

Influence: In his own time Wölfflin was considered one of the greatest of art historians.  The anonymous review of the English edition of Klassische Kunst (1903) in the Athenaeum, written by the British art historian Roger Fry, shows the enthusiasm with which his books were received.  Bernard Berenson mused in the second edition to his Drawings of the Florentine Painters (1938), “would that our studies had more Wölfflins!”  Wölfflin’s books, in contrast to the academic art-historical tomes of the time, were short and pithy, accounting for their popularity.  Many of the students who received their Ph.D.’s under him went on to become the most eminent art historians of twentieth-century and ranged widely in the methodology they employed in their own work. Some of his Ph.D. students developed methodologies divergent from Wölfflin’s in their professional life:  Frederick Antal, Ernst Heidrich, Frankl, Alfred Stange, Richard Krautheimer and Fritz Saxl; other students, such as Volkmann and Rosenberg, retained the master’s methodology to the end.  In the latter 20th century the prominence of social-history approaches to art as well as iconographic and post-structuralism relegated Wölfflin as a target for all that was wrong with current art history.  Much of the criticism was well-founded;  Wölfflin himself had worried that his formalism would be practiced by less talented art historians, with disastrous results.  Wölfflin’s own writing, however, reflects an appreciation of historical circumstance and social context and less the “crassly formal” stylistic art histories which followed him. His profile was so significant during his lifetime that he saw books written about his research (Böckelmann, 1938).

Methodology:  Wölfflin began his art career by focusing on the psychology of artistic appreciation and never really strayed from this essential view.   His dissertation on the psychological aspects to architectural appreciation is a synthesis of the major intellectual influences in his life: Burckhardt’s broad view of what constitutes an historical document, a psychological approach to historical hermeneutics Geisteswissenschaften of Dilthey and the visual comparison technique of Giovanni Morelli, to name but three.  As a systematizer, he looked for a framework integrating empirical, psychological and visual elements. Art was a visual language, an independent mode of knowledge.  Even art historians who differed greatly in their methodology, such as Erwin Panofsky adopted a hermeneutic framework as Wölfflin conspicuously did to hang their analysis.  Wölfflin’s most significant contribution to art-historical methodology may be in his side-by-side comparison technique of images.  Throughout his writings, he used comparison to demonstrate polarities in art.  This technique remains a mainstay of art history classroom pedagogy.  LS

Home Country:  Switzerland/Germany

Sources:  [literature on Wölfflin is legion; specifically, see] Borenius, Tancred. Burlington Magazine 84 (June 1944): 133; Strich, Fritz. Zu Heinrich Wölfflins Gedächtnis, Rede an der Basler Feier seines zehnten Todestages. Berlin:  Francke, 1956 [recommended]; Rehm, Walter.  Heinrich Wölfflin als Literarhistoriker.  Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften/Beck, 1960; “Heinrich Wölfflins Basler Jahre und die Anfange der modernen Kunstwissenschaft.” Gestalten und Probleme aus der Geschichte der Universität Basel.  Rektoratsprogram for the year 1960.  Basel: 1960: 79-97; Kleinbauer, W. Eugene. Modern Perspectives in Western Art History: An Anthology of 20th-Century Writings on the Visual Arts. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971, pp. 7, 27-9 n. 58-62;  Ganter, Joseph. “Der Unterricht in Kunstgeschichte an der Universität Basel.”  In Jahrbuch 1972/73 Schweiz. Instituts für Kunstwissenschaft.  Zürich, 1976: 25-31; German Essays on Art History.  Gert Schiff, ed.  New York: Continuum, 1988, pp. xxxvi-xxxviii, 282;  Lurz, Meinhold. Heinrich Wölfflin:  Biographie einer Kunsttheorie. Heidelberger Kunstgeschichtliche Abhandlungen, Neue Folge, Band 14. Worms: Werner’sche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1981; [unpublished dissertation:] Hart, Joan Goldhammer. Heinrich Wölfflin: An Intellectual Biography. University of California, Berkeley, 1981 [recommended]; Podro, Michael.  The Critical Historians of Art.  New Haven:  Yale University Press, 1982, pp. 98-151;  Brown, Marshall. “The Classic Is the Baroque: On the Principle of Wölfflin’s Art History.” Critical Inquiry 9 no. 2 (December 1982): 379-404; Hart, Joan. “Reinterpreting Wölfflin: Neo-Kantianism and Hermeneutics.” Art Journal (1982): 292-300; Warnke, Martin. “On Heinrich Wölfflin”, Representations no. 27, 1989, pp. 172-87; Podro, Michael. “Wölfflin, Heinrich.”  The Dictionary of Art 33: 297-298;  Metzler Kunsthistoriker Lexikon: zweihundert Porträts deutschsprachiger Autoren aus vier Jahrhunderten. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1999, pp. 483-8; (mentioned) Jennifer Montagu and Joseph Connors.  “Rudolf Wittkower 1901-1971.”  Introduction to Art and Architecture in Italy:  1600-1750. 6th edition, volume 1, Painting in Italy.  Pelican History of Art. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999,  pp. ix; Schwartz, Frederic J. “Cathedrals and Shoes: Concepts of Style in Wölfflin and Adorno.” New German Critique 76 (1999): 3-48; Hart, Joan.  Encyclopedia of Aesthetics 4: 472-6; [obituaries:] Born, Wolfgang. “Tribute [obituary].”  College Art Journal 5 (November 1945): 44-7.

Historic Methodolgical Discussions: Böckelmann, Walter. Die Grundbegriffe der Kunstbetrachtung bei Wölfflin und Dvorák. Dresden: Druck und Verlag Buchdruckerei der Wilhelm und Bertha v. Baensch Stiftung, 1938; Antal, Frederick. “Remarks on the Method of Art History.” Burlington Magazine 91 (February 1949): ; Hauser, Arnold. The Philosophy of Art History. Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1963, pp. 119-147ff.;

Bibliography: [dissertation:] Prolegomena zu einer Psychologie der Architektur. Munich, 1886; [habilitation:]  Renaissance und Barock. Eine Untersuchen über Wesen und Entstehung der Barockstil in Italien. Munich, 1888, published, Munich: T. Ackermann, 1888, English, Renaissance and Baroque. London: Collins, 1964; Die klassische Kunst. Minuch: F. Bruckmann, 1899, English, Classic Art: An Introduction to the Italian Renaissance. New York: Phaidon, 1952, [first appearing as lecture, Prussian Academy, Dec. 7, 1911: “Das Problem des Stils in der bildenden Kunst.” Sitzungsberichte der Kgl. Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaft. (Jahrgang 1912): 572-78];  Die Kunst Albrecht Dürers. Munich: F. Bruckmann, 1905; Kunstgeschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Das Problem der Stilentwicklung in der neuren Kunst. Munich: F. Bruchmann, 1915, English, Principles of Art. New York: Dover, 1932; Italien und das deutsche Formgefühl. Munich: F. Bruckmann, 1931, English, The Sense of Form in Art: An Introduction to the Italian Renaissance. New York: 1958;  “‘Kunstgeschichtliche Grundbegriff.’ Eine Revision.” Logos: Internatinale Zeitschrift für Philosophie der Kultur 22 (1933): 210-18, republished in Gedanken zur Kunstgeschichte, (below) [note these important revisions of his Principles (1915) which, according to W. Eugene Kleinbauer, scholars have ignored (KMP, 27 n. 58)], Gedanken zur Kunstgeschichte: Gedrucktes und Ungedrucktes. Basel: Schwabe, 1941; Kleine Schriften [1886-1933]. Edited by Joseph Ganter. Basel: 1946;  Jacob Burckhardt und Heinrich Wölfflin: Briefwechsel und andere Dokumente ihrer Begegnung, 1882-1897. Edited by Joseph Ganter. Basel: 1948;  Heinrich Wölfflin, 1864-1945: Autobiographie, Tagebücher und Briefe. Edited by Joseph Ganter. Basel: Schwabe & Co., 1982.

Subject’s name: Heinrich Wölfflin

Erwin Panofsky – Dictionary of Art Historians

 

 

 

 

Panofsky, Erwin, known as “Pan”

Date born:  March 30, 1892

Place Born:  Hanover, Germany

Date died:  March 14, 1968

Place died:  Princeton, New Jersey

Warburg Institute and Institute for Advanced Study art historian;  major exponent of iconography to American scholars.  Panofsky was the son of Arnold Panofsky (d. 1914) and Caecilie Solling (Panofsky), wealthy Jews whose fortune came from Silesian mining.  He was raised in Berlin, receiving his Abitur in 1910 at the Joachimsthalsche Gymnasium.  He spent the years 1910-1914 studying philosophy, philology and art history in Jura, Berlin (where he heard lectures of the art historian Margarete Bieber, who was filling in for Georg Loeschcke), and in Munich. While taking courses at Freiburg Universität, a slightly older student, Kurt Badt, took Panofsky to hear a lecture by the founder of the art history department, Wilhelm Vöge.  Panofsky was at once enamored and wrote his dissertation under Vöge in 1914. His topic, Dürer’s artistic theory (Dürers Kunsttheorie: vornehmlich in ihrem Verhaltnis zur Kunsttheorie der Italiener) was published the following year in Berlin as Die Theoretische Kunstlehre Albrecht Dürers.  Because of horse-riding accident, he was exempt from military service during World War I.  Instead, he attended the seminars of the medievalist Adolph Goldschmidt in Berlin.  He married Dorothea “Dora” Mosse (1885-1965), also an art historian from a wealthy family, in 1916.  In 1920 his habilitation was accepted in Hamburg on the topic of Michelangelo, the manuscript only rediscovered in 2012.  His habilitation in hand, Panofsky was called to chair the art history department of the newly established University of Hamburg in 1920.  His first graduate student was Edgar Wind.  The decade of the 1920s was one of brilliant writing.  In Hamburg, Panofsky formed part of a group of cultural intellectuals.  He developed an intimate intellectual circle with Fritz Saxl with whom he published a 1923 monograph on Dürer’s Melencholia I, Aby Warburg, and the philosopher and art theorist Ernst Cassier, centered around Warburg’s Institute (see Warburg entry). Panofsky, a “young, witty, acerbic, conceited genius” according to one student, William Hecksher, developed an immediate student following.  Two early papers, “Der Begriff des Kunstwollens,” (1920) and “Über das Verhaltnis der Kunstgeschichte zur Kunsttheorie,” (1925) demonstrate Panofsky’s theoretical heritage to Cassirer and Aloïs Riegl.  In 1924, his book Idea was published, a discussion of the ideas of the intellect vis-à-vis the imitations of the world of perception. His overt intelligence won him the first full professor of art history at Hamburg (ordentlicher Professor) in 1926.  In 1927 he published Perspektive als symbolische Form, a dazzling blend of personal theoretics and wide-ranging knowledge of Renaissance art and thought, built around Cassirer’s neo-Kantian theories of “symbolic forms.” In the academic year 1931-1932, Panofsky paid a visit to the United States representing Warburg’s think tank, the Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg and teaching at New York University.  The Nazis’ assumption of power in Germany forced Jews out of academic positions;  Panofsky returned to Germany in the summer of 1933 to supervise oral examinations and dissertations for his remaining students before permanently emigrated to the United States in 1934. He published his most famous article, an analysis of the Arnolfini portrait by Jan van Eyck, in the Burlington Magazine the same year.  After a year teacing at New York University, Panofsky became the first permanent professor of the School of Historical Studies of the newly founded Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ, a private research center near Princeton University created so that Jewish scholars (primarily) could work near the University, but not as faculty.  Panofsky’s move from Hamburg to the United States coincided with a methodological transformation.  In Panofsky’s early career, he experimented with various approaches to his subject.  By the time he had settled in Princeton, he had arrived at the “conviction that the methodological problems with which he had once grappled had been successfully resolved.” (Moxey, p. 93).  In 1939 Panofsky published Studies in Iconology: Humanist Themes in the Art of the Renaissance, book which, among other essays, argued for the distinction between iconology and iconography. His 1943 book on Albrecht Dürer, combined many of his published ideas on the artist together with a sharp intuitive eye to Dürer’s prints. Panofsky next issued a primary-source document and commentary on the Abbot Suger and the founding of the Gothic style, Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St.-Denis, in 1946.  Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism appeared in 1951, a book about Parisian architectural relationships with the principles of a scholastic summa. His 1947-1948 Charles Eliot Norton lectures at Harvard appeared as the 2-volume monograph on northern Renaissance art, Early Netherlandish Painting, in 1953.  It was a detailed iconographical study demonstrating how works of visual realism could incorporate elaborate Christian symbolism convincingly.  Among the book’s many revelations was the discovery that the famous Arnolfini double portrait by Jan van Eyck was a wedding document.  Rensselaer Lee, chair of the Department of Art and Archaeology at Princeton University from 1956, convinced Panofsky to begin teaching regularly at the University as well.  Panofsky’s work at the Institute for Advanced Study attracted other art historians to study with him.  These included Heckscher in 1936, Louis Grodecki in 1951, Jan van Gelder, 1953, and Léon “Bob” Delaissé in 1959. He presented Gottesman lectures at Uppsala University which appeared in 1960 as the book Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art. The lectures posed the (now) generally accepted notion that smaller “renaissances” (re-births) of the classical happened periodically in medieval art and literature before the major one in Italy.  He retired from the Institute emeritus in 1963 and was succeeded by Millard Meiss.  Panofsky was immediately appointed Samuel Morse Professor of Fine Arts at New York University.  His lectures there resulted in the 1964 book Tomb Sculpture.  His wife, Dora, died in 1965 and the 73-year-old Panofsky married the 36-year-old art historian Gerda Soergel [Sörgel] (b.1929) the following year. Two years later he suffered a series of heart attacks and died.  Panofsky’s posthumous literary output continued for twenty years.  Gerda Panofsky-Soergel continued to update his Abbot Suger book. The six Wrightsman lectures he delivered at the Metropolitan Museum of Art were issued as Problems in Titian, Mostly Iconographic in 1969. His collected essays appeared in 1995.  A son, Wolfgang Panofsky (1919-2007), was a Manhattan-Project physicist and Nobel-Prize winner.  Panofsky’s many students, in addition to Heckscher and Wind, included Hugo Buchthal, Edgar Breitenbach, Ingeborg Fraenckel Auerbach, H. W. Janson, Lotte Brand Philip Foerster, Ursula Hoff, Robert A. Koch, and Walter W. Horn.  His papers are housed at the Archives of American Art, Washington, DC. In 2012, his habilitation, thought to have been lost was discoverd at the Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte in files of the founding director, Ludwig H. Heydenreich

Though Panofsky is considered the “ur-iconologist,” his methodology was diverse and is difficult to summarize.  Primarily a scholar of medieval and northern Renaissance art, he is most frequently associated with the concept of iconography, matching the subject-matter of works of art to a symbolic syntax of meaning drawn from literature and other art works.  His work broadened into a theory of iconology; what Germain Bazin characterized as “the work of art as a ‘symptom’” (Bazin 217). However, Panofsky was a broad thinker (in the tradition of Cassirer) whose work evolved over a period of time. Another acknowledged debt was to Riegl, the Austrian art historian who espoused the notion of Kunstwollen.  Panofsky’s notion of perspective as a metaphor in Renaissance art occupied his thinking for an extended period (and resulted in at least one full book).  He contended that theories of proportion were generally too elaborate to be applied uniformly to actual works of art.  Panofsky’s iconology did not preclude a sensitivity for formal considerations or style. The conceptual framework of any period, he wrote, is always subservient to the underlying the style of the art.  His use of iconology as the principle tool of art analysis brought him critics.  In 1946, van Gelder criticized Panofsky’s iconology as putting too much emphasis on the symbolic content of the work of art, neglecting its formal aspects and the work as a unity of form and content.  Otto Pächt, the Vienna art historian, pointed out in a celebrated book review in 1956 using the case of the van Eyck Arnolfini and his Wife painting, that iconology would elucidate this important work very little. Indeed, Panofsky’s conclusions on this double portrait were essentially overturned in 1998 by Lorne Campbell. Panofsky himself had mixed feelings about the success of his method (Cassidy). A scholar who rejoiced in learning and his own mastery, he wrote at times to his medievalist colleagues in Latin (Hourihan). LS

Home Country:  Germany/ United States

Sources: [the literature on Panofsky is legion.  In particular, see:]  [review of Panofsky book] Pächt, Otto.  “Panofsky’s ‘Early Netherlandish Painting’-I.” The Burlington Magazine 98, no. 637 (April 1956): 110-116; [regarding Panofsky’s years with Vöge:] Panofsky, Erwin. “Vorwort.” in,  Bildhauer des Mittelalters: Gesammelte Studien von Wilhelm Vöge. Berlin: Gebrüder Mann, 1958. pp. ix-xxxii, English, Hassold, Ernest. “Wilhelm Vöge:  A Biographical Memoir.”  Art Journal 28 no. 1 (Fall 1968): 27-37;  A Commerative Gathering for Erwin Panofsky at the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University in Association with the Institute for Advanced Study, March 21, 1968; Heckscher, William. Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University 28 (1969): 8;  Kleinbauer, W. Eugene.  Modern Perspectives in Western Art History:  An Anthology of 20th-Century Writings on the Visual Arts.  New York:  Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971, pp. 4, 18, 55-6, 61-2, 70 cited, 100-101, 51 n. 104, 62 n. 142;  Dilly, Heinrich.  Kunstgeschichte als Institution:  Studien zur Geschichte einer Diziplin.  Frankfurt am Main:  Suhrkamp, 1979, pp. 13-19;   Podro, Michael. The Critical Historians of Art. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982, pp. 178-208;  Kleinbauer, W. Eugene.  Research Guide to the History of Western Art.  Sources of Information in the Humanities, no. 2.  Chicago:  American Library Association, 1982, pp. 66-7, 73; Holly, Michael Ann. Panofsky and the Foundations of Art History. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1984; Wölfflin, Heinrich. Heinrich Wölfflin, 1864-1945: Autobiographie, Tagebücher und Briefe. Joseph Ganter, ed. 2nd ed. Basel: Schwabe & Co., 1984, p. 493, 501; Heckscher, William S.  “Reminiscences of Lotte Brand Philip.”  Tribute to Lotte Brand Philip:  Art Historian and Detective.  New York:  Abaris Books, 1985, p. 9, mentioned;   Bazin, Germain.  Histoire de l’histoire de l’art; de Vasari à nos jours.  Paris: Albin Michel, 1986, pp. 216-225, 540;  German Essays on Art History. Gert Schiff, ed. New York: Continuum, 1988, pp. lxi-lxv, 280;  Cassierer, Panofsky, and Warburg:  Symbol, Art and History.  New Haven:  Yale University Press, 1989; Cassady, Brenden, ed. Iconography at the Crossroads: Papers from the Colloquium Sponsored by the Index of Christian Art, Princeton University, 23-24 March 1990. Princeton, NJ: Index of Christian Art, Princeton University, 1993; Landauer, Carl. “Erwin Panofsky and the Renascence of the Renaissance.” Renaissance Quarterly 47 (Summer 1994): 255-281; Heckscher, William.  “A Memoir of Erwin Panofsky,” in Panofsky, Erwin.  Three Essays on Style.  Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995; Wendland, Ulrike. Biographisches Handbuch deutschsprachiger Kunsthistoriker im Exil: Leben und Werk der unter dem Nationalsozialismus verfolgten und vertriebenen Wissenschaftler. Munich: Saur, 1999, vol. 2, pp. 484-497;  Metzler Kunsthistoriker Lexikon: zweihundert Porträts deutschsprachiger Autoren aus vier Jahrhunderten. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1999, pp. 294-99;  Moxey, Keith.  “Perspective, Panofsky and the Philosophy of History.”  Chapter IV of The Practice of Persuasion:  Paradox and Power in Art History.  Ithica, NY:  Cornell University Press, 2000, pp. 90-102;   Wuttke, Dieter.  “Einleitung: Erwin Panofskys Leben und Werke (1892 bis 1968).” Erwin Panofsky Korrespondez. vol. 1 Wiesband: Harrassowitz, 2001, pp. ix-xxxi; Hourihan, Colum. “They Stand on His Shoulders: Morey, Iconography and the Index of Christian Art.” in Hourihan, Colum, ed. Insights and Interpretations: Studies in Celebration of the Eighty-fifth Anniversary of the Index of Christian Art. Princeton, NJ: Index of Christian Art/Princeton University Press, 2002, p. 11; [obituaries:] “Erwin Panofsky, Versatile Art Historian and Princeton Institute Scholar, Dies.” New York Times March 16, 1968, p. 32;  Wormald, Francis. “Prof Erwin Panofsky, Historian of art.”  Times (London) April 2, 1968, p. 10.

Bibliography: [correspondence:]  Wuttke, Dieter, ed.  Erwin Panofsky: Korrespondenz 1910 bis 1968, eine kommentierte Auswahl in fünf Bänden.  5 vols. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2001- ; [dissertation:] Dürers Kunsttheorie: vornehmlich in ihrem Verhaltnis zur Kunsttheorie der Italiener. Freiburg, 1914; [habilitation:] Die Gestaltungsprincipien Michelangelos, besonders in ihrem Verhältnis zu denen Raffaels. Hamburg, 1920, published, De Gruyter, 2014; “Der Begriff der Kunstwollens.” Zeitschrift für Ästhetik und allgemeine Kunstwissenschaft 14 (1920): 321-29;  and Saxl, Fritz. Dürer’s “Melancholia I”: Eine quellen- und typengeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Leipzig and Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1923;   Die deutsche Plastik des elften bis dreizehnten Jahrhunderts. 2 vols. Munich: K. Wolff, 1924;  Idea:  Ein Beitrag zur Begriffsgeschichte der alteren Kunsttheorie Leipzig/Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1924;  “Die Perspektive als symbolische Form.” Vorträge der Bibliothek Warburg, 1925/25: 258-330, published separately, Die Perspektive als symbolische Form. Leipzig and Berlin: B. G. Teubner, 1927, English, Perspective as Symbolic Form. New York: Zone Books, 1991;   Hercules am Scheidewege und andere antike Bildstoffe in der neueren Kunst. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1930 [his first iconographical study]; and Saxl, Fritz. “Classical Mythology in Medieval Art.” Metropolitan Museum Studies 4 (1932-33): 228-80;  “Jan van Eyck’s Arnolfini Portrait.” Burlington Magazine 64 (1934): 117-27; Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance. New York: Oxford University Press, 1939; [abstract of a paper delivered] “Traffic Accidents in the Relation between Texts and Pictures.” College Art Journal 1 (1942): 69;   Albrecht Dürer. 2 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1943;  “Renaissance and Renascences.” Kenyon Review 6 (1944): 201-36; Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St.-Denis and its Art Treasures.  Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1946;  Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism. Latrobe, PA: Archabbey Press, 1951;  Early Netherlandish Painting: Its Origins and Character. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953;  Meaning in the Visual Arts. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1955;  The Iconography of Correggio’s Camera di San Paolo. London, 1961;  Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art. 2 vols. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1960; “The Ideological Antecedents of the Rolls-Royce Radiator.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 107 (1963): 273-88;  Tomb Sculpture: Four Lectures on Its Changing Aspects from Ancient Egypt to Bernini. Edited by Horst W. Janson. New York: Abrams, 1964; and Saxl, Fritz. Saturn and Melancholy: Studies in the History of Natural Philosophy, Religion and Art. Edited for publication by Raymond Klibansky. London: Nelson, 1964; Problems in Titian, Mostly Iconographic. New York: New York University Press, 1969.

Erwin Panofsky – Dictionary of Art Historians.