The Visual Turn in Early Modern German History
Lee Palmer Wandel, University of Wisconsin-Madison

In the first volume of the _journal of visual culture_ (2002), its
editor in chief interviewed Martin Jay on "That visual turn: The
advent of visual culture":

"JVC: In 'Visual Culture and its Vicissitudes', your contribution to
October's watershed 'Visual Culture Questionnaire' of 1996, you
present yourself as an intellectual historian interested in
discourses about visuality. Here, you suggest that advocates of
visual culture have extended its scope not only beyond the
traditional concerns of art history, but also further than what
W.J.T. Mitchell called the 'rhetoric of images' to include, and I
quote you here, 'all manifestations of optical experience, all
variants of visual practice' (p. 42). In writing this, you claim that
visual culture's democratic impulse, its sense of inclusivity, can
happily and comfortably investigate anything that can 'imprint itself
on the retina', including, you say, non-retinal ingredients such as
the 'optical unconscious' (p. 42).

MJ: By democratization, I simply mean the growing willingness to take
seriously as objects of scholarly inquiry all manifestations of our
visual environment and experience, not only those that were
deliberately created for aesthetic effects or have been reinterpreted
in formalist terms (as was the case with, say, so-called 'primitive'
ethnographic objects by aesthetic modernists). Although images of all
kinds have long served as illustrations of arguments made
discursively, the growth of visual culture as a field has allowed
them to be examined more in their own terms as complex figural
artifacts or the stimulants to visual experiences. Insofar as we live
in a culture whose technological advances abet the production and
dissemination of such images at a hitherto unimagined level, it is
necessary to focus on how they work and what they do, rather than
move past them too quickly to the ideas they represent or the reality
they purport to depict. In so doing, we necessarily have to ask
questions about the viewer as well, thus the value of Benjamin's
notion of the optical unconscious recently resurrected by Rosalind
Krauss, as well as the technological mediations and extensions of
visual experience.[1]

The work of Martin Jay, with its fertile attention to Theodor Adorno,
Walter Benjamin and more recent theorists such as Jacques Lacan and
W.J.T. Mitchell, [2] lies at the center of an increasingly
sophisticated and sensitive body of scholarship, by both historians
and art historians of twentieth-century Germany, exploring "scopic
regimes," "visuality," what Marquard Smith called "a critical
intellectual history of visual culture or a cultural history of
vision."[3] While individual scholars of early modern German-speaking
Europe have taken up one or another of the central terms of debate
among modernists, such as "visual culture" or "the rhetoric of the
image," differing orientations and definitions have guided and framed
their discussion of visual materials and vision.[4]

Most immediately, those formulations, "early modern" and "German-
speaking Europe," reflect not so much a conceptually coherent field
as a more accidental product of the reorganization of departments,
from three or four positions--covering Renaissance, Reformation,
Baroque or Pietism and Enlightenment--into one, "early modern."[5]
For historians of twentieth-century Germany, a self-consciously
defined "nation-state" provides geographic boundaries, and
"modernism" demarcates a community of theorists, both visual and
textual, the unities of which contrast with "early modern's" eclectic
aggregate of styles and ancient sovereignties.[6] Early modern
historians and art historians have taken up international orders,
such as the Jesuits, or communities of discourse that might travel
from court to court, as did Johann Joachim Becher,[7] traversing
political and sometimes even linguistic boundaries. They have
explored Renaissance and court portraiture, Reformation iconoclasm
and Counter-Reformation visual propaganda, Jesuit visual theory and
art, Baroque art, architecture, and theater, and the intersection of
court culture and Rococo. This scholarship has tended to cross
boundaries that were only inscribed in the nineteenth
century--"Germany," "Switzerland," the allocation of Trent to
"Italy"--and has organized itself predominantly in terms which
originate either in art history (Renaissance, Baroque or Rococo) or
in the period itself (Reformation; Jesuit).

There are, moreover, certain key distances between early modern and
modern in questions of visuality. In 1976, David Lindberg published
_Theories of Vision: From Al-Kindi to Kepler_, which both documented
more precisely western optics' debts to Islamic science and
delineated with precision a variety of theories of vision, not one of
which achieved exclusivity before Johannes Kepler in the seventeenth
century. Not only does the discussion of "scopic regimes" rest on a
model of the eye that postdates the early modern period, but modern
constructions of "perception" itself rest upon a biological model of
the body which achieved a kind of cultural predominance only towards
the end of the seventeenth century and a model of human psychology
that has been located in the twentieth century.[8]

In 1980, Michael Baxandall published _The Limewood Sculptors of
Renaissance Germany, 1475-1525 : Images and Circumstances_.[9] In
1981, Robert Scribner published _For the Sake of Simple Folk_. In
_The Limewood Sculptors_, Baxandall deepened what was encompassed in
the concept of "the period eye," a notion he had first set forth in
1972[10]--the capacity to discern the skill of the artisan; a visual
appreciation of the physical characteristics of the matter (the
materiality) upon which he (or, in some instances, she) worked; as
well as the "functions," multiple, of images in sixteenth-century
urban, court and religious cultures. This included the ways in which
images were understood to function differently than modern visual
theory, psychology, or cognitive studies might posit. In _For the
Sake of Simple Folk_, Scribner brought together two discrete fields
of research: sixteenth-century printed images (foremost woodcuts,
which increased exponentially in the 1520s and 1530s) and
"propaganda," a term he deployed both to draw upon a rich scholarship
on twentieth-century propaganda (Nazi, Cold War and post-war America)
and to link sixteenth-century graphic images to more modern forms,
such as newspapers, cartoons and even film. Scribner took up what he
called "codes"--referents to narratives outside the frame of the
image. In situating simple woodcuts within a culture of preaching and
linking them to texts, he drew early modern German historians'
attention to the problem of the relationship between text and image,
[11] even as he signaled the particularities of early modern oral and
visual cultures.

The two works mark the beginning of an engagement with "visual
culture" for early modern central Europe. Both took up art forms that
were widespread in the sixteenth century and held little aesthetic or
market value for connoisseurs in the twentieth. Both were attentive
to the conditions of production and the materialities of the art.
Both were acutely sensitive, albeit in very different modes, to
images and their viewers. Both called attention to specificities in
the interplay between design and the viewer's visual education. Both
delineated in careful detail the contexts, visual and verbal, within
which the images would have been viewed and the ways in which those
contexts would have expanded the potential meanings, in the plural,
of the images.

Each offered a substantial counterpoint to the conceptualization of
the period that had shaped how scholars approached visuality for
early modern German-speaking Europe. Max Weber's _Die protestantische
Ethik und der "Geist" des Kapitalismus_ (1904/1922) constructed a
trajectory from the Reformation to "modernity"--a juggernaut of
extraordinary momentum and determination--which bound what happened
in the sixteenth century to categories, relations and phenomena that
defined, according to Weber, the modern age. Most important for our
immediate concerns is Weber's conceptualization of "asketischen
Protestantismus." Weber argued that an "innerweltliche Askese," which
could be traced to medieval monastic asceticism, essentially divided
Protestants from Catholics. "Protestantism," as Weber constructed it,
was the name for a group of human beings who shared, far more than a
set of practices or a statement of theological doctrine, a way of
entering the world, a deep psychological orientation to time and to
matter. Protestantism, as Weber constructed it, turned away from
display and luxury, which, following Weber's construction, became
exclusively Catholic values in the wake of the Reformation.

Weber himself was not interested in art, but in group identities.
Thus, he constructed "Protestantismus" as essentially homogenous over
geographic distance, unifying human beings in a single orientation to
the material world. Many scholars both accepted Weber's
conceptualization of Protestants as homogenous in their "Askese" or
"Ethik," and--following the implications of his conceptualization of
"Protestantismus"--construed the sixteenth century not only as
hostile to many of the kinds of sensuality visual representation may
address, but as essentially verbal, essentially anti-material,
essentially hostile to art as anything other than narrowly didactic
and closely bound to verbal definitions. Secondarily, it might be
added, this scholarship continues to accord Protestantism a cultural
dominance it never had in Europe.

The most recent, and widely influential, refinement of Weber's
narrative of modernity appeared in 1990, when Hans Belting, an
historian of medieval art, published _Bild und Kult: Eine Geschichte
des Bildes vor dem Zeitalter der Kunst_ [12] In it, Belting posited a
radical division between the medieval period, in which images
functioned iconically (as the focus of devotion and meditation) and a
modernity in which images are construed as aesthetic objects. Most
importantly for early modernists, he located the caesura in the
period of the Reformation. Belting's particular construction of the
narrative of modernity has been taken up by Joseph Koerner and
Christopher Wood. Wood, who translated Belting's _Ende der
Kunstgeschichte_ (1983), located the origins of modern landscape
painting--with its particular situation of the viewer and its
construction of nature--in Albrecht Altdorfer's oeuvre.[13] In _The
Moment of Self-Portraiture in German Renaissance Art_, which appeared
the same year as Wood's book on Altdorfer (1993), Koerner sought to
locate the origins of modern self-consciousness in Albrecht Dürer's
most famous self portrait. He took up more directly and explicitly
Belting's notion of an "end" to a particular relationship between
viewer and image in _The Reformation of the Image_ (2004).[14]

Like Weber, Belting and Koerner locate the "origins" of modernity in
the sixteenth century; following Weber, they construe "Protestantism"
as homogenous; iconoclasm as seamlessly expressive of a group unified
by a single orientation to art and material culture.[15] For them,
there can be no "visual turn" in the sixteenth century: Protestantism
sought to destroy the power of images, to borrow David Freedberg's
term,[16] both through the elimination of the complex images of late
medieval Christianity and through the verbalization of the world.[17]

Even as Belting and Koerner reaffirmed Weber's characterization of
the sixteenth century, that characterization has been quietly under
assault for the past twenty years, as a number of scholars, deploying
a range of different analytic concepts and methods, have piece by
piece built evidence of the complexity of visuality in the early
modern period . A handful of scholars have begun to explore both the
materials and the complex visuality that we might call "Protestant
visual culture."[18] Baxandall's and Scribner's work each suggested
connections that, as scholars take them up, traverse the boundaries
Weber's characterization of Protestantism had assumed. Baxandall's
work and Svetlana Alpers' work[19] have linked "visual" and "culture"
in ways that have proven especially fruitful--the "period eye," the
attention to the function of images, to workshop, and to the
materialities of an image in an age when color signaled social place
as well as religious connotations.[20] Rembrandt, that famously
Protestant artist, as Alpers argued, was acutely sensitive to the
materialities of his medium. So, too, Keith Moxey and Michael Ann
Holly have brought key terms of the visual turn among modernists to
bear on early modern objects and styles, exploring "representation"
and its dialectic with social relationships,[21] and the interplay of
the construction of style and the complex visuality of images.[22]

In closing, let me point towards areas where research on early modern
German-speaking Europe is transforming our understanding of
"visuality," "vision," "representation" and the very nature of
"visual culture." Perhaps the oldest of these scholarly conversations
takes up the relationship of texts and images. Some of the work has
differentiated modes of "literacy" that do not correspond to the
models employed for the modern world: work on emblem books, for
example, has intimated how deeply layered visual literacy was,[23]
while others have explored some of the ways the most sophisticated of
textual scholars shaped printed and painted images, not only
"illustrations," but "representations" and "depictions" of complex
ideas.[24] So, too, work on painted texts addresses directly the ways
in which the modern boundary is constructed.

One of the most exhilarating areas of current investigation is Jesuit
art, which consistently traverses modern national boundaries.[25]
Scholars working on the Society of Jesus are investigating the
interplay of "meditative practices"--ways the Jesuits sought to
engage not only the intellection, but the imagination and the psyche
of individual viewers and listeners--with an extraordinary
attentiveness to design, visualization and its cognitive
potentialities.[26] Jeffrey Chipp Smith's _Sensuous Worship: Jesuits
and the Art of the Early Catholic Reformation_ (2002) in Germany
brings the sensitivities and the analytic insights of that
scholarship to bear on German objects and architecture. Work on
Jesuit art reveals more fully and in greater detail differences
between the early modern and the modern, both in models of
perception--in the plural--and in conceptualizations of "art" and its
relationship to human cognition, choice and action. For Jesuits,
"embodiment" was not a single phenomenon, but intimated a complex
range of modes of access.

Another exciting current conversation explores what Ernst Gombrich
called the "conquest of reality."[27] In a collection of articles
published in 1993, Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann sketched some of the
aspects of the question: the emergence of conventions of
representation which consciously sought a mimesis of nature; the
privileging of data received through the eye (from accounts of
indigenous plants and animals encountered in the Americas to the
observations recorded in rooms in Europe of dissections and
"experiments"); the engagement of individual artists in
experimentation and the observation of nature.[28] Lorraine Daston
and Katherine Park have taken up "wonder" to explore the interplay of
observation, the construction of systems of taxonomy and visual
representation and "illustration."[29] This work calls into question
a long-standing paradigm, arising in the narrative of the triumph of
science, in which images were taken to be the "illustration" of
"empirical knowledge," a kind of transparent depiction of a stable
and discrete reality.[30]

The recent engagement with maps, beginning with David Harley and
David Woodward's History of Cartography project, has itself enabled
scholars to investigate the ways in which maps construct vision.
Insofar as mapmakers were native to or worked within German-speaking
Europe, that scholarship belongs.[31] Maps are a good place to close
a consideration of "the visual turn" in "early modern" German-
speaking Europe. They make visible not only the extent of the unknown
world, but a comparison of maps from different times also makes
visible where lines have been subsequently inscribed, where lines did
not necessarily exist, and how deeply differently early modern
Europeans "visualized" the world.

Notes

[1]. _Journal of Visual Culture_ 1 (2002): pp. 87-88.

[2]. "Whatever the pictorial turn is, then, it should be clear that
it is not a return to naive mimesis, copy or correspondence theories
of representation, or a renewed metaphysics of pictorial 'presence':
it is rather a postlinguistic, postsemiotic rediscovery of the
picture as a complex interplay between visuality, apparatus,
institutions, discourse, bodies, and figurality. It is the
realization that spectatorship (the look, the gaze, the glance, the
practices of observation, surveillance, and visual pleasure) may be
as deep a problem as various forms of reading (decipherment,
decoding, interpretation, etc.) and that visual experience or "visual
literacy" might not be fully explicable on the model of textuality."
Mitchell, _Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual
Representation_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995), p. 16.

[3]. Each of these terms is itself contested. See Jessica Evans and
Stuart Hall, eds., _Visual Culture: The Reader (London: SAGE
publications, 1999) or Julia Thomas, ed., _Reading Images_
(Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2000) for introductions to the play of these
terms.

[4]. Contributors to anthologies and fora on "visual culture" and
"vision" are mostly modernists. See, for example, Teresa Brennan and
Martin Jay, eds., _Vision in Context: Historical and Contemporary
Perspectives on Sight_ (New York and London: Routledge, 1996);
Nicholas Mirzoeff, ed., _The Visual Culture Reader. 2nd edition_ (New
York and London: Routledge, 2002. The "Visual Culture
Questionnaire" (_October_ 77 (1996): pp. 25-70) brought together some
of the most influential art historians of early modern Europe who
have engaged explicitly in their work with questions at the center of
the visual turn--Svetlana Alpers, Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, Keith
Moxey--but (for reasons I turn to below) among early modernists, the
kind of discipline-crossing that has characterized the study of
twentieth-century Germany has led far fewer _historians_ of early
modern German-speaking Europe to take up visual materials.

[5]. See, for example, Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann's discussion of the
utility of the term "Central Europe" to describe a culturally
coherent geographic area, in _Court, Cloister, and City : The Art and
Culture of Central Europe, 1450-1800_ (Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1995), Introduction.

[6]. In the Introduction to his _Art and Architecture in Central
Europe, 1550-1620: An Annotated Bibliography (Boston: G.K. Hall and
Co., 1988) Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann called attention to the impact of
"nationalism and historicism" on the study of art created after "the
Renaissance" and before Romanticism, underlining the cohesive power
of style for the two periods that frame the"early modern." In his
organization of the literature, he underlined the absence of any
comparably cohesive style, as well as the ways in which far smaller
regions, as well as cities, formed the basis for analytic divisions.

[7]. Pamela Smith, _The Business of Alchemy: Science and Culture in
the Holy Roman Empire_ (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).

[8]. See, for example, the work of Roy Porter, most recently, _Flesh
in the Age of Reason_ (London and New York: Allen Lane, 2003).

[9]. On Baxandall's influence, see Allan Langdale, "Aspects of the
Critical Reception and Intellectual History of Baxandall's Concept of
the Period Eye," _Art History_ 21(1998): pp. 479-497. For a close
exploration of Baxandall's method and concepts, see Malcolm Baker,
"Limewood, Chiromancy and Narratives of Making. Writing about the
Materials and Processes of Sculpture," _Art History_ 21(1998): pp.
498-530.

[10]. _Painting and Experience in Fifteenth-Century Italy: A Primer
in the Social History of Pictorial Style. 2nd edition_ (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1988).

[11]. Beginning with the widely influential collection of articles,
_The Language of Images_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
1974), W.J.T. Mitchell has explored this question in depth for the
modern period for over thirty years. See his _Iconology: Image, Text,
Ideology_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1986); and most
recently, _Picture Theory_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
1994).

[12]. _Bild und Kult_ is in its sixth edition, to give some measure
of its influence (Munich: Beck, 2004).

[13]. _Albrecht Altdorfer and the Origins of Landscape_ (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1993).

[14]. _The Moment of Self-Portraiture in German Renaissance Art_
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); _The Reformation of the
Image_ (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2004).  For a brief sketch of
Koerner and Wood's relationship to the field of Northern Renaissance
art, see Larry Silver, "Arts and Minds: Scholarship on Early Modern
Art History (Northern Europe)," _Renaissance Quarterly_ 59 (2006):
pp. 355-356.

[15]. In so doing, they override work that has explicitly
differentiated both the motives of individual iconoclasts and the
responses of various ecclesiastical, civil, royal or imperial
authorities to those acts of violence. See most recently, Peter
Blickle, ed., _Der Macht und Ohnmacht der Bilder. Historische
Zeitschrift, Beiheft 33_ (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2002).

[16]. David Freedberg, _The Power of Images: Studies in the History
and Theory of Response_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
1989).

[17]. Weber's parallel emphasis on aurality and orality, which has
long been set in opposition to visuality, may help to explain the
paucity of studies of the gaze, in particular, the gendered and
gendering gaze, for which, again, there is a substantial and
important body of work on the twentieth century as well as the
Renaissance.

[18]. See, foremost, Christiane Andersson and Charles Talbot, eds.,
_From a Mighty Fortress: Prints, Drawings, and Books in the Age of
Luther, 1485-1546_ (Detroit: The Detroit Institute of Arts, 1983);
Martin Scharfe, _Evangelische Andachtsbilder_ (Stuttgart: Verlag
Müller and Gräff, 1968); Jeffrey Chipps Smith, _German Sculpture in
the Later Renaissance, c. 1520-1580: Art in an Age of Uncertainty_
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994); Scribner, _For the
Sake of Simple Folk_ and "Incombustable Luther: The Image of the
Reformer in Early Modern Germany," _Past and Present_ 110 (1986): pp.
38-68. One of the most interesting eddies of early modern scholarship
was the East German engagement with the question of the relationship
among the Reformation, the bourgeoisie and art. See the collection of
representative articles, Ernst Ullmann, ed., _Kunst und Reformation_
(Leipzig: e.A. Seemann Verlag, 1982). Most recently, Ingrid Schulze
has done a close analysis of Cranach's work for its theological
content, thereby illuminating deep connections between painting and
the central tenets of Luther's theology: _Lucas Cranach d.J. und die
protestantische Bildkunst in Sachsen und Thüringen: Frömmigekeit,
Theologie, Fürstenreformation_ (Jena: quartus-verlag, 2004).
Schulze's work is the most recent study of Cranach and the most
attentive to the interplay of materiality, theology and visuality.
So, too, beyond German-speaking Europe, there is a small but growing
attention: Paul Corby Finney, ed., _Seeing Beyond the Word: Visual
Arts and the Calvinist Tradition_ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999)
marks the beginning of a recent engagement with the visuality and
visual dimensions of Reformed piety.

[19]. Alpers, _The Art of Describing: Dutch Art in the Seventeenth
Century_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1983), and
_Rembrandt's Enterprise: The Studio and the Market_ (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1988).

[20]. See, for example, Andrew Morrall, _Jörg Breu the Elder: Art,
Culture and Belief in Reformation Augsburg_ (Aldershot: Ashgate,
2001), which is part of the series, "Histories of Vision"; Barbara
Dienst, _Der Kosmos des Peter Flötner: Eine Bildwelt der Renaissance
in Deutschland_ (Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2002); or the
catalogue to the exhibition in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum
Nürnberg, Hermann Maué, Thomas Eser, Sven Hauschke and Jana
Stolzenberger, eds., _Quasi Centrum Europae: Europa kauft in
Nürnberg_ (Nuremberg: Verlag des Germanischen Nationalmuseums, 2002).

[21]. Keith Moxey, _Peasants, Warriors and Wives: Popular Imagery in
the Reformation_ (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1989).

[22]. Michael Ann Holly, _Past Looking: Historical Imagination and
the Rhetoric of the Image_ (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996),
and Norman Bryson, Michael Ann Holly, and Keith Moxey, eds.,
"Wölfflin and the Imagining of the Baroque," in _Visual Culture:
Images and Interpretations_ ed. Bryson, Holly and Moxey (Hanover and
London: Wesleyan University Press, 1994), pp. 347-364, which explores
the historicity of constructions of past styles.

[23]. John Manning, The Emblem (London: Reaktion Books, 2002).

[24]. Sylvaine Hänsel, _Der Spanische Humanist Benito Arias Montano
(1527-1598) und die Kunst_ (Münster: Aschendorff, 1991). Montano,
like most humanists of his day, traveled extensively, working in the
Netherlands for many years, and overseeing the publication of works
that were disseminated across the Empire.

[25]. See, for example, the important collections of articles, John
O'Malley, S.J., Gauvin Alexander Bailey, Steven J. Harris and T.
Frank Kennedy, S.J., eds., _The Jesuits: Cultures, Sciences, and the
Arts, 1540-1773_ (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000), and
John O'Malley, S.J., Gauvin Alexander Bailey, Steven J. Harris, and
T. Frank Kennedy, S.J., eds., _The Jesuits II: Cultures, Sciences,
and the Arts, 1540-1773_ (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006).

[26]. See especially Ursula König-Nordhoff, _Ignatius von Loyola:
Studien zur Entwicklung einer neuen Heiligen-Ikonographie im Rahmen
einer Kanonisationskampagne um 1600_ (Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag,
1982); and Walter Melion's introductory study "The Art of Vision in
Jerome Nadal's Adnotationes et Meditationes in Evangelia," to Jerome
Nadal, _Annotations and Meditations on the Gospels, Volume I: The
Infancy Narratives_, transl. Frederick A. Homman, S.J. (Philadelphia:
Saint Joseph's University Press, 2003), pp. 1-96.

[27]. Quoted in Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann, "The Mastery of Nature:
Paradigms and Problems," _The Mastery of Nature: Aspects of Art,
Science, and Humanism in the Renaissance_ (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1993), p. 3.

[28]. Kaufmann, _The Mastery of Nature_.

[29]. _Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150-1750_ (New York: Zone
Books, 1998). This work, like most of the work on "wonder" or
"science," is by no means restricted to German-speaking Europe, but
ranges, from Florentine to English authors. David Freedberg, for
instance, focuses on Prince Federico Cesi, while linking Cesi to
scholars across Europe, in _The Eye of the Linx: Galileo, His
Friends, and the Beginnings of Modern Natural History_ (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 2002).

[30]. For a particularly close study of the interplay of observation
and representation, see Eileen Reeves, _Painting the Heavens: Art and
Science in the Age of Galileo_ (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1997). For an exploration of the relationship between allegory
and science, see Arwed Arnulf, "Das Titelbild der Tabulae Rudolphiane
des Johannes Kepler. Zu Entwurf, Ausführung, dichterischer
Erläuterung und Vorbildern einer Wissenschaftsallegorie,"
_Zeitschrift des deutschen Vereins für Kunstwissenschaft_ 54/55
(2000-2001): pp. 176-198. See also Martin Kemp, _The Science of Art:
Optical Themes in Western Art from Brunelleschi to Seurat_ (New Haven
and London: Yale University Press, 1990); Pamela O. Long, "Objects of
Art/Objects of Nature: Visual Representation and the Investigation of
Nature," and Mark A. Meadow, "Hans Jacob Fugger and the Origins of
the Wunderkammer," both in _Merchants and Marvels: Commerce, Science,
and Art in Early Modern Europe _(New York and London: Routledge,
2002), pp. 63-82 and 182-200, respectively.

[31]. Denis Cosgrove, Apollo's Eye: A Cartographic Genealogy of the
Earth in the Western Imagination (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 2001).

Humanities & Social
Sciences Online

Copyright © 1995-2006 - Contact Us
RSS | Validate: XHTML | CSS