The Secrets of Apollo and Diana

Copyright Dr. Elizabeth Garner All Rights Reserved

Durer did not name this print and from the stance of the man with the bow, it can’t even be claimed to be representing Apollo and Diana. Diana was Apollo’s twin virgin sister, the huntress.

Let’s look at the symbols in the print:

1). The man is standing on the left side of the print with his head turned sideways towards the right; he is naked.  He has long flowing hair and has a laurel wreath on top of his head, which is the symbol of honor first created by Apollo.  His left arm is extended almost completely across the print holding a bow and arrow towards something on the right. His right arm is slightly pulling on the bow string. He wears a drapery sash which is knotted on his right side, it drapes over his right shoulder down his back and at the waist knot the sash divides into two with one end floating in an arc around his front, appearing to cover his genitals but doesn’t, and blowing backwards from behind him on his left side. Apollo carries a quiver of arrows but we can’t see where the quiver string is.  The quiver is a very ornate quiver shaped like some musical instrument and highly decorated with swirls that have the meaningof outgoing or migration and in-coming or returning.  Durer uses these same symbols with the same meaing in Melencolia I.  It means someone is returning to their maker, in otherwords, has died. There appears to be seven arrows in the quiver and Albrechtt he Elder had fathered 7 girl children.

2). He is beardless becaue he’s represented as Apollo; if not he would have been bearded.

The Coseup of Apollo’s genitals Above the drapery which are above the man’s genitals are two half circles, which we first see in The Men’s Bath peeking out from under the cap of the sitting man in the front, Lukas Paumgartner (one half circle).  This is a coded message for Jewishness- half circle representing the cloth circles Jews were forced to wear on their clothing.  Durer uses this half circles to indicate the person is Jewish or crypto-Jewish or somehow related to Jews.

You can see the double circles above the drapery and reading the left testicle as the viewer views it, from right to left, as Hebrew is written, there is an “8, an “X with a slight strike through it,” a very ornate backwards E, and what looks like a trefoil.  This cipher decodes into “My father was an immigrant from Hungary, we are noble Hungarians Jews.” We can not yet tell if the penis is circumcised or not, but most likely is.

1). Apollo’s stance is non-standard-the right leg is in the appropriate position but the left leg and foot is flat on the ground pointed sideways to the right.

2). Behind Apollo is a stag lying on the ground; the stag’s right antler has two prongs, the left antler has 4 prongs.  The right 4 pronged antler represents  Albrecht the Elder and his three other siblings left in Hungary, Ladislas, Catherine, and Johannes. The two pronged left antler is representing Nuremberg, Albrecht and Barbara. The stag appears to be living, the stag muzzle is directly in the middle of the print and the woman is petting his head with her right hand.

3). The woman is apparently a maiden; she wears no headdress and her hair is parted down the middle. She wears a headband with two drops hanging off of it. There is some drapery flowing from behind the right side of her head over her right shoulder.  Her hair ornaments are indicative of Hungarian hair decoration (See the Revelation of Truth called the Four Witches for a deeper explanation). She is naked.  Her left leg extends behind Apollo’s left leg almost touching his right foot.  We can’t see her knee.  She sits on a thick slab of stone. She has small breasts but her stomach seems a little big (possibly pregnanat?). In her left hand she appears to be holding some hay or grass in her lap not necessarily for feeding to the stag.

4). The print is monogrammed but not dated-the monogram is on a flat sheet with a corner curled.

And that’s all we have to go on.  We first look for a Hungarian signifier and find that it is the bow. Here’s the information on Hungarian bows:

Here’s the information on Hungarian bows:

The Hun Bow

The Hun bow is an asymmetric, composite and recurve bow. A recurve bow is one that, in contrast to the simple longbow, has ends that curve outward. It was invented in Central Asia and carried to Europe first by the Huns, a nomadic people that invaded Europe in the 4th century. The advantage of a recurve bow is that the shape curves back on itself. It is this design that gives the bows tremendous power compared to their size.

Its asymmetric shape allowed the bow to be increased in size without restricting its use from the saddle of a horse. The lower part had to be shorter to facilitate movement across the back and neck of the horse, but the upper part was not so constrained and could be longer. The result was a stronger, longer-range bow than those of the Germanic tribes of Europe. Quite simply, the users of the Hun bow could shoot down their enemies before they could use their bows. The asymmetry, however, led to less accuracy, although this was offset to some extent by the fact that the weapon was a composite bow.

The Hungarian Bow

The Hungarian Bow-Composite Reflex Bow

This is an improvement of the Hun bow. It is a symmetric, composite and recurve bow invented in Central Asia. It improved the Hun bow by lengthening its lower part until both halves were of equal size. This symmetry increased both its range and accuracy. If the archer was using the Hungarian bow while mounted, he or she needed to stand up in the saddle, an action that was impossible until the invention of the stirrup.[1]

The Old Magyar bow was made of five materials. Softwood; a glue made from fish air bladders, called halenyv (fish-glue); sinew; horn and bone. The core was shaped to accommodate the grip, two flexible “karok” or “arms”, and two “szarvak” or “horns” at the ends of the bow. Some research indicates that the wood was first bent under steam opposite to the direction in which it would eventually be drawn.

The back of the bow was strengthened by sinew. This was either done by layering the sinew to the softwood core or by gluing in bundles. (Kornél Bakay IN: 3. Régészeti Barangolások Magyarországon. (‘Archaeological Wanderings in Hungary’). ISBN 963 243 109 X). There were also some sinews twisted into thongs and tied around the bending points of the bow, where the basic components joined. There is some argument as to whether these were visible or not, as well as whether there were in fact five different pieces of wood, or only one, that is the wood core itself.

The sinew gave the wood bow a great amount of springiness, allowing it to be drawn further than a self-bow, and also more easily. To balance this, on the belly side, horn was added, most of which was probably from the ancestors of the Hungarian longhorn “gray” cattle. (Interestingly, these animals look almost identical to the famous Indian Brahmin cow.)

The horn added stiffness to the bow, and further, prevented the bow, once it had been fired, from going too far forward, causing “bowstring slap” and thus wasting kinetic energy. This is why Old and Medieval Magyar archers are never shown wearing any arm or hand-protection.

Finally, in the Magyar Hungarian bow, six pieces of bone were added. These were normally 2 to 4 millimeters thick and up to 30 centimeters (circa. one foot) long. They were glued to the wood core at right angles to the sinew and horn layers. Two were used to cover the so-called “horn” of the bow, two for the grip, and two for the other “horn” or end of the bow. The outer-side of these bone pieces was normally smooth, while the side to be glued to the wood is known to have been scratched rough, to help it stick.

It was these pieces of bone, which would give archaeologists the clue as to how the Old Magyar bow was constructed. The bow would eventually be covered by a thin material, which presumably varied with time and place. It could be snakeskin, thin leather or bark.

The making of such a bow took a long time – even years – due to the need for “curing” the various materials. The Old Magyars valued their bows, which were important to them not only in warfare, but in supplementing their diet by hunting. This can be seen by how much care was taken of the bow. When unstrung, it was placed in a soft leather container slung from the left side of the archer on a belt, and when strung, it was carried in a hard-leather and metal bow case also on the left side.

The Stance of Apollo:

Apollo was a many sided god and was worshipped for various different qualities and capacities.  He was a very punishing god, and because of this, he is depicted in one way as having a cow and arrows, these having the ability to cause sudden death.

In this print Apollo has a quiver of arrows with seven arrows-one for each of Albrecht the Elder’s daughters. So we know that the woman in the print is one of these daughters who probably died in 1502 also-and died a maiden, or is at least depicted as a maiden, since the daughter is Ursula, born in 1477.  If she died in 1502, she was age 25, so it may be that Ursula had died earlier and Durer had yet to enshrine her. Since we will see below that the bear “girls” of Artemis, the Arktoi, were between the ages of 5-10, it is possible that Ursula had died earlier than 1502 and that THIS was the time for Durer to use his Cipher and enshrine her.  Ursula was a common German and common Hungarian female name-it means she-wolf stemming from the Latin “Ursa” for wolf.

This particular stance of Apollo is the death stance of Apollo and was a known symbol of Apollo wreaking death upon a person or giving tribute to a person who had died.  Since the Apollo has the laurel wreath on his head, we know that the person(s) are dead and that tribute to these people is being paid along with the swirls on the quiver.

The German word for crisis is Krise. The “Chryses” in this case is the CRISIS of Albrecht the Elder’s death and his sister Ursula who could have died of the plague. It meant that Durer would have to move both his mother, Margret, and any other Durer children still left in the Elder’s household eventually, which did occur by 1504 and support all these extra people

The Maiden Artemis/Diana and the Bear-Ursa

Diana/ Artemis was the mythological Greek/Roman huntress. The reasons for worshipping Artemis as bear come from that animal’s qualities. The mother bear is one of the most formidable animals in the forest for her size, strength, agility, and fierce defense of her young. Today the mother bear is still regarded as a fearsome beast for these reasons.

Young Athenian girls between the ages of five and ten were sent to the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron to serve the Goddess for one year. During this time the girls were known as arktoi, or little she-bears. A myth explaining this servitude relates that a bear had formed the habit of regularly visiting the town of Brauron, and the people there fed it, so that over time the bear became tame. A young girl teased the bear, and, in some versions of the myth it killed her, while in other versions it clawed her eyes out. Either way, the girl’s brothers killed the bear, and Artemis was enraged. She demanded that young girls “act the bear” at her sanctuary in atonement for the bear’s death.[4]

The Helvetian (Swiss) tribes worshipped the She-Bear, and their town Berne, was named for her.  The Franks, ancestors of the French, and the settlers of the Bavarian area where Nuremberg is located, were also “people of the Bear,” worshipping the bear goddess as Arduina. As we have seen, Artemis’s name and that of Arduina refer to the bear.  Other such names include Arthur also relates to bear, as does the name Ursula.

This leaves us with the living stag, the fact that Diana/Ursula is holding grass and that she sits upon a thick slab of stone.  The slab of stone represents a gravestone; we find Durer using a stone like this over and over again to represent the death of the person pictured.

And we have already thoroughly described the Hungarian Stag in the Eustachium, which is represented here.

And so we have Durer’s tribute to his father in the year of his father’s death-1502 –and the enshrinement of his sister Ursula, child #9.

........................................................................................

[1]      www.archerysociety.org/ArcheryHist.html

[2]      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo

[3]      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chryseis

[4]      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis

To know more about this story please go through http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com/

Gurlitt-and NOW IT BECOMES ABSURD

Parts of the Gurlitt collection are likely of dubious provenance.

But why were they restored at all to an art dealer who had worked for the Nazis? DW asked two founders of the Holocaust Art Restitution Project.   One side to the story that has largely escaped scrutiny, however, is the role of Allied occupation authorities after World War II. After all, they were nominally responsible for ensuring that art looted by the Nazis was returned to its proper owners in the first place. Rightly or wrongly, the state prosecutor in the city of Augsburg has come under criticism for the length of time between the seizure, which was only made public by a German news magazine at the start of this month, and initial attempts to restore the artworks to their legitimate owners.

But questions should also be asked as to how Germany’s post-war occupiers could have allowed Hildebrand Gurlitt – one of the leading art dealers in the Third Reich – to amass a collection including works by Chagall, Matisse, Picasso, and Dix and then pass that trove on to his son Cornelius.

US soldiers had the tough task of finding the proper owners of looted art

“I’m astonished at how quickly the Allied forces in charge of collection points for plundered art were to return it to whoever claimed it,” Ori Soltes, an art professor at Georgetown University and a co-founder of the Holocaust Art Restitution Project (HARP), told DW. “There was even a case of art being given to a man claiming to represent Yugoslavia who was in fact just a private collector.”   “It seems as though the Monuments Men were not overly careful about who they handed works back to,” Soltes concluded. Thus, it is eminently possible that Hildebrand Gurlitt might not have been the legitimate owner of all the works in his collection. Some of the pieces may have been plundered or acquired by coercion; they may have been works Gurlitt Senior acquired in his position as an official art procurer for the Third Reich; or he may have simply said he owned works which he in fact did not. There’s also the possibility that he legitimately made the purchases in good faith without knowing where the art had come from. In the confusion following World War, almost anything was possible – in part because the global art market played along.

http://www.dw.de/gurlitt-case-takes-allies-global-art-market-to-task/a-17255386

For more details please visit here.

ARE WE ALL CRAZY? Seems the Asians are CRAZY AND MAKE UP whatever they want

Okay all, recently I published some actual accurate information re Asian artists, well accurate being “a listing  by sales” but not provable by actual facts that their art was actually paid for .

HOWEVER, YOYAI KUSAMA’S NAME DOES NOT APPEAR ANYWHERE on these lists as ARTNET news reported before AND YET SHE’S DECLARED THE MOST POPULAR ARTIST IN THE WORLD! DOES THE LEFT ARM KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT ELBOW IS DOING?????? at this nutzy ezine?

YOU BE THE JUDGE AFTER YOU READ THE SILLY STUFF THAT IS SAID ABOUT HER .   OKAY SHE’S 86, is that the criteria?

The artist Yayoi Kusama has been crowned as the most popular artist in the world according to a survey of museum attendance in 2014. OH IT’S MUSEUM ATTENDANCE! NOW THERE’S INTERNET INFO AT IT’S FINEST!

Besides rejoicing in the marvelous fact that the biggest artist in the world is, in fact, a woman , Kusama’s super powers do not come as a surprise, as the Japanese artist has been long known for drawing large masses to her brilliant exhibitions. REALLY? KNOWN AS QUEEN OF POLKA DOTS?

In fact, the recent South American leg of her traveling retrospective “Infinite Obsession,” which toured across Brazilian cities such Rio de Janeiro, Brasilia, and São Paulo, and then continued to Mexico, was attended by millions of visitors.

THINK ABOUT WHAT  DO THE ZILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN THESE EXTREMELY POVERTY STRICKEN CITIES HAVE ANYTHING BETTER TO DO?

The demand for tickets to her show at the Museo Tamayo in Mexico City earlier this year was so great that the museum had to stay open for 36 hours straight during the last two days
But the 86-year old artist is not only a success with the crowds; she also has a red-hot market, which has been boosted even further by her popular worldwide retrospectives

HERE’S HER APPEAL”

She has global appeal, because, honestly, what’s not to like? Her work is easily understood, cute, inoffensive, and a palpable signifier of intellectual and financial currency.

CUTSEY?  INOFFENSIVE?  AND WHAT IN HELL DOES A SIGNIFIER OF INLETELLCTUAL AND FINANCIAL CURRENCY MEAN?  SHE GOT A CURRENCY MINT MACHINE IN HER BASEMENT?

CAN I GO THROW UP NOW?

https://news.artnet.com/market/why-are-yayoi-kusamas-works-selling-like-hotcakes-1702

For more details please visit here http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

A goat at the Botanic Garden in Albuquerque, New Mexico, has been impressing visitors with its painting ability.

Zookeeper Kristin Wright has been teaching four-year-old Bodie to paint for several months. The goat uses its mouth to hold a paintbrush and moves its head close to the canvas to create the colorful abstract compositions. The animal’s skills have earned it the nickname Vincent van Goat.

A visitor’s comment was “It was unbelievable. I couldn’t believe that goat was sitting there painting and it was good. It was pretty with all the pictures. It was different colors.”

Zoo manager Lynn Tupa proudly added, “To see a goat actually hold a paint brush in his mouth and paint, and he has some accuracy with it, and some talent, yeah, that’s unique.”

Tupa went on to explain that teaching the animals activities such as painting is more than just a crowd-pleasing gimmick. “Getting them to use their brains and to figure things out keeps them happier and healthier,” she said.

When asked how much she would be prepared to pay for one of Bodie’s paintings, She joked, “It depends on the size and the subject. If he was painting one of the sheep maybe a couple thousand.”

Bodie sells its paintings at the New Mexico BioPark Society for $40 each

https://news.artnet.com/in-brief/painting-goat-new-mexico-288065?utm_campaign=artnetnews&utm_source=041515daily&utm_medium=ema

For more details please visit here

Why Ronald Lauder Is Right About Nazi-Looted Art in Museums

 

LISHED IN 2014 BUT NOTHING HAS CHANGED, IN FACT THE SITUATION HAS GOTTEN WORSE,  IT’S AS PERTINENT TODAY, AS ANY LOOTING BY TERRORISTS AND ART THIEVES ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD

In his article titled “Lauder Editorial on Stolen Art and Museums Fails the Glass House Test,” Nicholas O’Donnell attempts to respond to Ronald S. Lauder’s editorial published in the Wall Street Journal on June 30, 2014, titled “Time to Evict Nazi-Looted Art From Museums.”

O’Donnell attempts to find legal shortcomings in Lauder’s editorial, which simply expresses the need for art museums to act responsibly by returning Nazi-looted artwork instead of raising technical defenses and mere pretexts to deny the rights of the claimants.

In his article, O’Donnell refers to the ongoing case brought by Léone Meyer against the University of Oklahoma, among other defendants, to obtain the restitution of La bergère rentrant des moutons (Shepherdess Bringing in Sheep) (Camille Pissarro, 1886), currently on permanent display at the Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art in Norman, Oklahoma.

Although O’Donnell—counsel to David Findlay, Jr. Gallery, a defendant no longer involved in the case—recognizes that the recent court decision is limited to whether the Oklahoma defendants could be sued in New York, he repeatedly brings up a 1953 Swiss court decision involving Camille Pissarro’s La Bergère as grounds for why Léone Meyer’s claim should fail, and why Mr. Lauder’s argument is baseless.

O’Donnell’s argument fails the common sense test. First, no one disputes that the Nazis stole La Bergère from Léone Meyer’s family.

Second, the 1953 Swiss court decision was not decided based on a late claim, as O’Donnell argues, but was decided against Léone Meyer’s father because he could not prove the “bad faith” of the art dealer who acquired La Bergère after it crossed the Swiss border from France.

Third, prior Swiss decisions involving looted art have long been held as doubtful or baseless in several US jurisdictions. Even the Swiss government itself recognized in 1998 that the deck was stacked against claimants who wanted to file art restitution claims in Switzerland after World War II. New York courts have determined that “Swiss law places significant hurdles to the recovery of stolen art, and almost ‘insurmountable’ obstacles to the recovery of artwork stolen by the Nazis from Jews and others during World War II and the years preceding it.”

Finally, O’Donnell misses the point of Mr. Lauder’s editorial. As French government officials have recently stated in a public forum dedicated to France’s efforts to track and restitute looted art, the time for “clean museums” has come. Hiding behind technicalities and procedural loopholes to delay basic justice, i.e., restitution of looted property, is not morally appropriate, even less so when public institutions are involved.

Ronald Lauder is right. It is time for museums to do the responsible thing. It is time for museums to “clean” their collections of any tainted artwork by returning Nazi-looted artwork.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/why-ronald-lauder-is-right-about-nazi-looted-art-in-museums

For more details please visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

What’s the Secrets in a Name?

Did Albrecht Dürer name his prints?

What are the names by which Dürer’s graphic prints are titled?  We can only really know the true meaning of any Dürer print by the title he himself gave it or if the subject matter is obvious on its face (e.g. a print about The Crucifixion).

Dürer produced 334 graphic prints on paper (105 engravings, three dry points, six etchings and 222 woodcuts). We can only be certain of the names of thirteen of all these prints from entries Dürer made in his Diary of his Netherlands Journey (1519). Many of these 13 names have not been respected by historians and are frequently now known by other titles, as labeled by the expert of the day. Thus the probability of the accuracy of these new titles is low, but more importantly, the inaccuracy of the interpretations of the subject matter is high.

ADAM AND EVA

Let’s look at a few examples.

One of Dürer’s most famous prints flashed in front of millions of TV viewers during the opening credits of Desperate Housewives. That print Dürer called Adam und Eva, which you see here:

That is the only name by which this print should be known. Instead, scholars most often refer to this composition as The Fall of Man, imposing an enormous amount of religious, mostly Christian, connotation upon it. That interpretation will never reveal the true secrets of this print.

If we analyze the landscape in which Dürer placed the two figures, it really does not even seem to represent the Garden of Eden. The action takes place in a very dark place and Eva is feeding the forbidden fruit to the snake. This doesn’t follow the storyline of the Jewish Torah or the Christian Old Testament, for the snake never eats the forbidden fruit.  So why does the snake eat it here?

Who were Adam and Eva?  Adam was the first man and Eva was the second woman (Lilith having been the first) of both bibles, so if we adhere to interpreting this composition as being about a first man and a second woman, we ultimately arrive at the truth.

THE RIDER (DER REUTER, wrongly known as Knight, Death, and the Devil)

Another print whose real title has been totally ignored can be seen here.

Dürer’s title for this print was the Der Reuter, which means “the Rider.” However, it appears that sometime around 1867-1875, this composition was labeled with the title, Knight, Death, and the Devil, a name that has stuck ever since.

While the man riding the horse is dressed in armor and is most likely at least of the social status of a knight or higher, Dürer would have called this print Der Landsnecht, the German word for knight, if he was truly representing just a knight.

But he didn’t.  He specifically indicates that this armored figure is “riding” solo by the title.  His title selection doesn’t even give an inclination as to who the other figures are in the composition or why they are there unless the figures have something to with with a lone rider.

Neither are the other two figures actually depictions of “Death” or of the “Devil.” The figure known as “Death” on the left holding the hourglass is a very fleshy figure wearing a crown with slithering creatures, who happens to be missing a nose. The figure on the right has only one horn and holds a weapon of war, a pike, which is not how devils were depicted in medieval times.

When we interpret this print using its real name, The Rider (a sole rider), we then realize that we are looking at an armored Rider of some social rank of at least a knight, but probably higher (we find that out because of the noseless figure), riding by a crowned noseless figure (a king), and a figure that looks like a pig with one horn holding a weapon of war.

SEA MONSTER

Let’s look at a third example. The  1498 print you see here:

Dürer titled this print the Meerhwunder, the “Sea Monster” and thus we have to interpret this print about something that was known as the sea monster in the Renaissance.  That creature was the dolphin, and while the dolphin is a smooth-skinned sea mammal, it was depicted with scales in medieval times, like this:

And we have to stick to an interpretation that this print is about someone or something that was a “monster” of the “sea.”   Most historians interpret this print in light of the Greek and Roman revivalism that was occurring in the Renaissance.  Yet no scholar has yet successfully interpreted the meaning of this image utilizing all the symbols in this composition.

AND THEN THERE WERE THREE

Through the use of very skilled optical techniques and devious placement of the figures, we find that Dürer actually depicted three figures in this composition: the man with the horns and beard, the naked woman wearing a Milanese headdress, and the scaly Sea Monster. That allows us to understand that what is really happening is the sea-monster dolphin carries the naked Milanese woman whom the bearded man is attempting to rescue.

Thus we are being told a story about some personage associated with a dolphin, a rescuing man associated with horns on his head, who rescued some “naked” woman and is also associated with some Milanese woman.

The other 10 prints for which we have names from Dürer’s Diary follow the same pattern. They all have clues within the composition that tell us Dürer’s true meaning, which got lost when scholars re-titled the images. For all the remaining images for which we really don’t know the names, we have to abandon the “retitles” if we are to find all the secrets that Dürer left us.

I will speak in depth about the clues in the above prints in future publications, as well as many others. But in the meantime, I have given you the major clues about these three prints in case you would like to do some Dürer sleuthing on your own.

BUY THE BOOK!  CRIMES IN THE ART: THE SECRET CIPHER OF ALBRECHT DÜRER

www.amazon.com/Crimes-Art-Secret-Cipher-Albrecht-ebook/dp/B00FNWKYMO

For more details please visit here

Secrets of the Duerers’ Prodigal Son

We do not really know the title of this print because Dürer did not assign this title; it is the opinion of a past historian.

This penitent motif of the Prodigal Son was new for the Renaissance and it was not known to be a money maker for artist/printers.  Before this rendition, the proven motifs that sold well were scenes of the man reveling or in compromising situations.  Dürer took a radical economic risk with this image before he was famous, and unusual move for a young merchant who could not yet support a workshop with apprentices.

While this image is explicitly depicting a scene about the Prodigal Son among the Swine, it appears that the composition has a disguised alternative meaning about one history- changing vote made by the Nuremberg City Council in 1496 (the local government, controlled by 46 Nuremberg families known as the Patricians). The Nuremberg Jews, legal property of the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian, who was their protector, were not completely subject to the Nuremberg City Council’s authority. The Patricians had been lobbying with Maximilian for years to expel the Jews, ready to fill their economic functions (banking and cattle trading). Suddenly in 1496, Maximilian agreed to this exodus but refrained from actually signing the writ of expulsion until 1498.  When the Jews were ultimately expelled in 1499, these Patricians took over their real estate and businesses.

The pigs appear to be Hungarian boars, known for their ferocity.  Five large pigs and five small pigs are depicted.  The organization of the City Council was very convoluted, but the top five positions of the City Council were selected by five “Electors”, also Council members, once a year.  It appears the five small pigs represent the Electors of the City Council and the five large pigs represent those they elected to the top positions.  In 1496, the ten men responsible for the expulsion of the Nuremberg Jews were the five Electors (small pigs) Niclas Grolandt, Ulrich Gruntherr, Peter Nützel, Gabriel Müffel, and Hans Tetzel the Elder, who elected (large pigs) Paulus Volkamer, Gabriel Nützel, Ortlöff Stromeyer, Anthoni Tücher, and Hieronymous Schürstab.

Scholars have posited two theories as to whom the kneeling man represents. He is considered to be either a self portrait of Dürer or to be an “Italian” because of the moustache and the shape of the nose. If it’s a self-portrait, the question is raised as to why Dürer would have considered himself someone who needed to beg forgiveness for being among these “swine” and depicted himself as such. If this is an “Italian,” this could be a veiled reference to a member of the City Council, whose surname meant “the Italian,” Jacob Welser.  In medieval German, “wels” was the word for “Italian,” so Welser meant “the Italian.”  The Welsers were an extremely wealthy and powerful Augsburg German dynasty, who sent Jacob Welser to establish their businesses in Nuremberg  in 1493.  Because of Welser’s wealth, the City Council had no choice but to induct him into the City Council in 1494, where his presence as a controlling interloper was much resented by the native Patricians.  Welser was involved in the vote for Jewish expulsion in 1496.

 

The double wheel and the rooster in the middle of the print, and nailed-down snake tail below the harrow at the left side of the composition are insignia from the arms of, respectively, the Nuremberg families of Volkamer, Rummel, and Münzer. Paulus Volkamer was the “President (the Losunger in German)“,  of the City Council in 1496. Hieronymous Münzer (whose insignia shows up in other Dürer prints) was first elected to the City Council in 1493. Hans Frey, a Rummel relative and Dürer’s father-in-law, was first elected to the City Council in 1496. Dürer appears to want to single out these men’s role in the vote of expulsion particularly. The hind quarters of a bull at the left of the image seems to be Dürer’s derisive commentary on this political event.

The landscape is a depiction of a particular Nuremberg farm called Himpfelshof, located west of the city walls. We will never know exactly why Dürer chose to depict this farm, but the area west of the Nuremberg city walls was populated by Jews.

A turnip is depicted in the lower center of the image.  This root vegetable was a common Hungarian emblem, suggesting an association yet to be understood.  It was also a common symbol of contempt, possibly indicating a personal comment.

For more details please  visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

THE GALLOGLASS by Durer-Do you belong to a Warrior Clan? OR BETTER?

IT’S TAKEN A WHILE TO CRACK THIS MYSTERIOUS DRAWING, MUCH RESEARCH WAS REQUIRED TO LEARN ABOUT GALLOGLASS AND WHO WAS THE KING WHO OWNED IRELAND IN 1521?

THE SEARCH HAS BEEN SO FASCINATING AND SO DIFFICULT, IT’S TIME FOR ALL YOU SCOTS, IRISH, ENGLISH, IBERIANS, GERMANS, BASICALLY ALL OF EUROPEANS INCLUDING EASTERN EUROPEANS, AND THEIR DESCENDANTS,  TO LEARN HOW IMPORTANT THIS SKETCH OF GALLOWGLASS, KERNS, AND SOLDIERS BECOMES IN REVEALING THE TRUTH OF WHO YOU ARE!

SO WE START AT THE BEGINNING, FOR THIS IS SO CONVOLUTED, YOU’LL BE LOST  UNLESS WE START AT THE BEGINNING, AND IT’S  SUCH FUN!

For nearly 100 years after the arrival of the Normans in 1169AD the old world of Gaelic Ireland was in retreat. The Normans brought to Ireland superior weapons, the long sword, lance, Welsh crossbows, and iron helmets, and chain mail protecting much of the body. This was in contrast to the native Irish with their axes and short swords and dressed in linen tunics. To halt the Norman onslaught the remaining independent Irish Chieftains needed a new weapon and they found it in the mercenary warriors from the Western Isles of Scotland. These Gallowglass or ‘foreign Gaels’ had served as elite warriors in the Western Isles of Scotland for over 100 years prior to their arrival in Ireland.

The first 160 Gallowglass, who appear to have been from Clan MacDoughall arrived in Ireland in 1259AD as part of Dougall MacSorley’s (King of the Hebrides) daughters dowry in her marriage to Aedh O’Connor, the then King of Connaught. The Gallowglass fought like the Normans protected in mail coats and iron helmets,

But they were notable with their characteristic two handed axes and Claymores (a large 2 handed sword). This trickle of warriors became a flood as many mercenary Gallowglass Clans either sought new lords after backing the losing side in the Scottish wars of Independence or just somewhere to ply their trade, and given the battle against the encroaching Normans or the constant inter-Clan warfare there was always a demand for the services  in Ireland.

Many Clans like the McCabe’s and MacSweeney’s transplanted completely to Ireland.  The MacSweeney’s vacated their homeland around Castle Swin on the Argyll peninsula in Scotland for life in the service of the O’Donnell’s in Donegal. Others remained seasonal travellers appearing in the spring and summer offering their services to the highest bidder (everybody appears to have decided that making war in autumn and winter in Ireland was a bad idea). While others like the MacDonald’s/MacDonnell’s’ and MacNeill’s established territories in County Antrim in the northeast of Ireland to complement their lands in Scotland (the MacNeill’s appear to have been the new occupants of Swin Castle vacated by the MacSweeney’s). County Antrim provided the shortest crossing point between Scotland and Ireland and the presence of Scottish Clans there may have been an attempt to monopolise this lucrative trade.

What is certain is that the tide had turned, the Norman Conquest had lost momentum, and the Irish Chiefs with the aide of their new weapon rolled back the Normans.

14th and 15th Centuries a stalemate developed, with Ireland divided into spheres of influence as reflected in the medieval ethnicity map of Ireland. There was a mini Gaelic revival and although not all the Normans adopted Gaelic ways and customs, the habit of hiring Gallowglass was adopted by all, including the English authorities who’s rule was restricted to the area known as ‘The Pale.’ Some of the Gallowglass Clans had by this time become independent establishing their own territories.

But who were these warriors who effectively changed the course of Irish history, and how can you tell if you are descended from them?

Clues as to the origins of the Gallowglass can be found in the surname of the first to arrive; the MacDoughall’s, who’s surname translates as ‘son of the dark foreigner.’ This indicates that they were descendants of Vikings (foreigners) who settled in the western highlands and Islands of Scotland, who had intermarried with the Gaels they found there and adopted their Gaelic language and customs, but had still retained the fearlessness and fighting prowess of their Viking forebears. So if you know what to look for you can reveal whether you are directly descended from these fearless Norse-Gaels. I ONLY INCLUDED THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE IT MAY STILL BE TRUE, HOWEVER EXTREMELY RECENT DNA STUDIES OF WHO EXACTLY POPULATED BRITAIN HAVE SHOW THAT THEIR IS ALMOST NO VIKING DNA INFLUENCE IN BRITAIN.  Apparently the Vikings struck, and looted and moved on. We don’t know yet whether the Viking intermingling with the Galloglass clans is valid.

Firstly one can examine surnames, history records the most notable Gallowglass were from the Clans of McCabe, MacDonald/McDonnell, MacDougall/McDowell, MacRory, MacSheehy, MacSweeney, and McCoy. But this was a trade that continued for over 400 years and many Scots Clans got in on the act, so how does one identify other Clans and surnames associated with Gallowglass? Luckily these Scots-Gallowglass can be readily distinguished from the later Scottish settlers that flooded Ireland as part of the Plantation of Ulster in the 16^th and 17^th Century. This is simply because these later arrivals were Protestant and spoke English, in contrast to the Catholic faith and Gaelic language of the native Gaels and earlier Gallowglass. Religious and language differences meant that these two people rarely mixed which was reflected 300 years later in the 1911 census that showed that Planter surnames could readily be identified based on their 88% Protestant religious affiliation. So if you have a Scottish surname and recent Irish ancestry, and that surname demonstrated a protestant religious affiliation significantly less than 88% in 1911, then your ancestors may well have been Gallowglass.

WHAT’S IN YOUR DNA? WAIT FOR THE SHOCK!

But this surname and historical approach is flawed, leaving one with statistical probabilities. For conclusive proof one must explore commercial ancestral DNA testing. The ancestral DNA test that can establish your Gallowglass-warrior credentials is the Y-DNA37 test. This test looks at the Y chromosome which is passed from father to son through the generations. What you get with the results of that test are the names of people with whom you share a common male ancestor. Typically one will match many individuals with many different surnames, but how can one share a common ancestor with people with different surnames? The answer is quite simple; when one’s direct male ancestor first took his surname approximately 1000 years ago, his neighbours some of whom he shared ancestry with, crucially picked other surnames.

AND HERE’S SOMETHING TO BLOW YOUR MIND BEYOND BELIEF.

HERE’S WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED AS DEFINITE JEWISH HAPLOID GROUPS, WHICH INCLUDES Y-Dna37 testing. YOU’RE ALL JEWISH IF YOU ARE GALLOGLASS and apparently from the lineage of KING DAVID OR FROM THE PRIESTLY CALSS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN DESCENDED FROM AARON, MOSES BROTHER!

Y-DNA67 HVR2 R1b1a2 J 0(PRIESTLY CLASS ISRAEL)
Phillip W Kearse
Y-DNA37 HVR2 FF R1b1a2 J 1(PRIESTLY CLASS ISRAEL)
John Caro
Y-DNA37 R1b1a2 0(LINEAGE OF KING DAVID)
Mr. Hopkins Davis Stanley
Y-DNA67 HVR1 R1b1a2a1a1b4 H 1(KINGS OF MANN AND ISLES)
James Patrick Gunn
Y-DNA37 HVR1 R1b1a2 H 1
Alon Barak
Y-DNA37 HVR2 R1b1a2 HV 0 *************RABBI IN ISRAEL NOW)

HOW DID THAT HAPPEN?

MORE TO COME!

BUY THE BOOK

 For more details please visit here

Master Forger Wolfgang Beltracchi Saw His Painting in Albertina Museum

The notorious German art forger, Wolfgang Beltracchi has claimed on a German talk show that he “recently” saw one of his paintings hanging in Vienna’s Albertina Museum. Beltracchi made the claim on the ZDF show Markus Lanz.

He was recently released on probation after serving three years of a six-year prison sentence for creating 14 fake artworks purported to have been painted by the likes of Max Ernst and Heinrich Campendonk.

Last year Beltracchi made a similar claim on the Austrian TV show Talk im Hangar-7, suggesting that one of his fakes may be among the Albertina’s collection, without divulging which work it was. At the time it was speculated that the fake may have been Max Pechstein’s paintingLying Female Act with Cat (1909), from the collection of expressionist expert Hermann Gerlinger. The painting was part of a 2007 exhibition at the museum.

Salzburger Nachrichten reported that in response to Beltracchi’s latest claim, the director of the Albertina Museum, Klaus Albrecht Schröder, told the Austrian radio station ORF-Radio Ö3 that he intends to get in touch with the forger to ascertain whether he was talking about the painting featured in the 2007 exhibition or a different artwork.

“I will make contact and ask if it is the painting from the Gerlinger collection or a different artwork,” he said. “Of course we want to know. I said at the beginning that the prosecution made a grave mistake not to use the case to discover all of the fakes.”

https://news.artnet.com/in-brief/master-forger-wolfgang-beltracchi-claims-he-saw-his-painting-in-albertina-museum-26

For more details please visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

BEYOND HILARIOUS! PORN HAY BALES IN AUSTRALIA!

WELL FOLKS APPARENTLY AS SPRING IS SPRINGING, THE HORMONES ARE RUNNING AND THERE’S SO MUCH RIDICULOUS STORIES ABOUT PORN ART, THE WHOLE WEEK MIGHT GET DEDICATED TO IT.   IT’S CRACKING ME UP!  THIS IS FROM ARTNEWS, DO THEY HAVE ANYTHING BETTER TO DO BUT TRY TO SELL YOU ART ONLINE, MAKE YOU FEEL LIKE A BOOBY NOT GOING TO THEIR ART SHOWS? AND NOT KEEPING UP WITH DEEP INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING SUCH AS THIS?

AND FOR YOUR PLEASURE:

An Australian farmer is defying police demands that he remove a supposedly pornographic hay bale sculpture.

Bruce Cook, who lives near Kerang, Victoria, was instructed to nix the sculpture, “depicting a bull serving a cow,” which has been deemed offensive and pornographic by some locals and officials, according to.

Cook tells the paper he has received “massive public support,” adding that he erected the sculpture on Good Friday as “a bit of fun.”

After a passerby reported the sculpture to the authorities, Cook received a call from the police telling him he had to take it down or face charges of publishing pornographic images. “I couldn’t believe it,” Cook said. “How could anyone be offended by something that happens out in the paddocks for real every day of the week? It’s just nature.”

Cook said he “told the copper to piss off.”

The Weekly Times is now polling readers, asking, “Is the hay bale structure offensive?” The paper says according to its poll, 96 percent agree the sculpture is not offensive.

Dozens have stopped to admire the sculpture, and Cook says he plans to illuminate it at night. He said that while most people have been supportive, he has received a threat or two from people who say they’re going to burn it or knock it over.

Cook says he believes there is a petition circulating to support the work, as well as a Facebook page: “We say the hay stays.”

Added Cook: “We live in a farming community and of course animal breeding is all around us but this is really just a smutty joke.”

ART AT IT’S BEST!

For more details please visit here

HILARIOUS! JAPAN ARRESTING FEMALE ARTIST who dares to claim her VAGINA!

WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? AREN’T THE JAPANESE FAMOUS FOR THEIR EROTIC ART?  OH, THAT’S THE PROBLEM, IT HAS TO BE A DOMINANT MALE WITH A SUBSERVIENT FEMALE, AS SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JUST DEFINED MARRIAGE IN THE USA HISTORICALLY. OMG, A JAPANESE WOMAN CLAIMS HER OWN VAGINA TO DO WITH WHAT SHE WANTS!

IT’S ALL OVER A KAYAK!  WOW, A FIT WOMAN ARTIST! READ ON FOR THE ABSURDITY! ANOTHER OF ARTNEWS DEEP INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING.

Japanese artist Megumi Igarashi, who operates under the artistic moniker Rokude Nashiko (translation: “reprobate child”), was indicted last week on charges that she distributed “obscene” data in the form of a computer code that would allow other people to use a 3D printer to make their own copy of a kayak based on her vagina.

Igarashi has been has been arrested twice this year for the project—the first time in July for attempting to raise funds online to construct the kayak, and the second time in December for allegedly distributing the code to numerous people. In the aftermath of her first arrest, she was freed from prison after an online petition that drew more than 21,000 signatures.

JAPANESE LAW FORBIDS DEPICTION OF GENITALIA?  THEN WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH THEIR PAST ART “TREASURES?”

Japanese obscenity laws forbid the depiction of genitalia, which instead must appear censored or pixelated in film and photography. Despite this, Japan has a booming pornography industry, a strange dichotomy that Igarashi’s artwork and subsequent legal troubles have highlighted on the world stage.

HAVE WE ARRIVED AT THE ULTIMATE ABSURDITY,  OBSCENE COMPUTER DATA?

The artist will plead not guilty to the charges, but if convicted could face up to two years behind bars and a fine equivalent to $20,755.

“I cannot agree with the police’s decision to label the data as obscene,” Igarashi said in a July press conference. “To me, my vagina is like my arms and legs. It’s nothing obscene.”

For more details please visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

PRICELESS Roman MOSIACS in Turkey botched on restoration

Restoration work on a series of Roman mosaics in Turkey dating from the 2nd century to the 6th century has gone horribly wrong thanks to a botched repair job at the Hatay Archaeological Museum in the southern city of Antakya.

. “Valuable pieces from the Roman period have been ruined, they have become caricatures of their former selves.”

Before and after photos taken by Daskapan show the extent of the damage. Some of the mosaic stones have been replaced with stones of different shapes and colors. Consequently, the facial expressions now appear awry and skewed.

At least ten artworks in the country’s second largest mosaic museum were affected.

Following the emergence of the scandal the Turkish Culture Ministry suspended all restoration work at the museum, and Mustafa Bozdemir, deputy director of the Culture Ministry’s Heritage and Museums department, announced an investigation into the damage.

Meanwhile, Daskapan expressed concern over the extent of the scandal “The new museum currently exhibits around 65 percent of its inventory,” he said, fearing that valuable panels in the museum’s storage may also have been affected.

https://news.artnet.com/in-brief/botched-repair-roman-mosaics-turkey-294514?utm_campaign=artnetnews&utm_source=050615daily&utm_medium=

For more details please visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com

HIARIOUS! GEYSER ART in Iceland becomes a world wide problem

The Danish-Chilean artist Marco Evaristti was arrested in Iceland after local landowners accused him of vandalism for dyeing the Strokkur geyser pink.

WOW, THERE’S A LOT OF VANDALISM, POURING RED FOOD COLORING INTO  212+ DEGREE HOT WATER, NOT EASY, I’VE BEEN THERE.

The artist poured red fruit-based food coloring into the famous hot springs located 70 miles northeast of Reykjavik, causing the geyser to erupt in plumes of bright pink water and steam.

BOTH OF THESE ARGUMENTS ARE ABSURD

Speaking on behalf of the local landowners, Garðar Eiríks­son said “This is not art. I am deeply sorry that a visitor to our country comes up with such an idea. I have very few words to describe my disgust at these actions.”

HE PAINTS DIRECTLY ON NATURE?  HOW ARROGANT CAN HE BE?  DO YOU GET WHY MOTHER EARTH IS SO PISSED OFF?  OOPS I THINK WE ARE GETTING BACK TO TEH JAPANESES’ PROBLEM WITH RUNNING A HEALTHY PORN MEGALOPOLIS BUT BEING HORRIFED ABOUT A JAPANESE WOMAN CLAIMING SHE HAS CONTROL OVER HER VAGINA, IN THE NAME OF ART.

“Nature belongs to no one,” Evaristti insisted. “I do what I do because I’m a painter, a landscape painter who doesn’t use a canvas, I paint directly on nature.”

“I believe in freedom of speech and I believe nature doesn’t belong to certain people, but to everyone,” he argued, adding, “I love mother nature. If I love a woman I give her a diamond ring. That’s why I decorate nature, because I love it.

Unfortunately for Evaristti, Icelandic authorities did not agree with his point of view. The stunt landed the Copenhagen-based artist behind bars for two weeks.

The extant of this guy’s artistic talents is running around the world pouring food coloring into natural waters, which, btw could be carcinogenic?  Did ANYone ask whether the red CHEMICALS were on the bad list or not? I can’t wait for the moron who  who’s going to leave a comment, HOW DARE I HAVE AN OPINION ?  because, truthfully, I think Christos and all this ilk of supposed artists are buffoons, getting your tax $ from Government grants, Coloring the water as ART.  IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT, DON’T BOTHER TO COMMENT, THIS WHOLE THING IS BEYOND STUPID.

This is the fifth time the artist has dyed natural waters, having performed a similar installation at a frozen waterfall in Norway last year.

Iceland cut its arts funding in half last year, causing widespread condemnation from the small country’s artistic community.

https://news.artnet.com/in-brief/marco-evaristti-pink-geyser-iceland-292

For more details please visit here

NOT HILARIOUS! VERY BAD restorations at Assissi

Fourteenth-century frescoes in the Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi have been damaged by over-ambitious restorations. Experts claim the frescoes have been significantly compromised; segments that have fallen victim to over-enthusiastic work now stand in stark contrast to the untouched areas.

Unique in their range and quality, the murals were created by numerous late medieval painters from the Roman and Tuscan schools, and include Giotto frescoes as well as works by Simone Martini, Pietro Lorenzetti, and possibly Pietro Cavallini. The frescoes are considered instrumental for understanding developments in Italian art history.

The Directorate General for Fine Arts of the Ministry for Cultural Heritage, led by architect Francesco Scoppola, was alarmed that changes have been made at the Basilica of Saint Francis in Assisi, and ordered an inspection.

Bruno Zanardi, a restorer and lecturer at the University of Urbino, Italy, said he noticed considerable changes in the chapel: “I saw the site in 2011, and got the impression it was a good job, executed by someone I thought was a capable and expert restorer. But when I went back to the basilica a couple of months ago with my students, I had a very different impression,” Zanardi said.

Frescoes at one end of the transept in the Chapel of St. Nicholas, where restoration is already concluded, are heavily compromised. A fresco by Giotto depicting the Madonna fainting at the cross has lost its light and shade contrasts and its colors are dulled.

Martini’s figures of saints appear flattened, while some details of the decor have been obliterated. The Virgin Mary at the center of the triptych in the Chapel of St. Nicholas has completely (and allegedly irreversibly) lost its top coat.

However, Sergio Fusetti, lead restorer at the Basilica of Saint Francis in Assisi, claims that the allegations reported in the Italian press are completely unfounded. “The problem doesn’t exist. We carry out regular checks and maintenance, taking off the hard dust that’s been deposited on the frescoes. We have never done anything without the authorization from the superintendency, which is the culture ministry in the territory,” he  said.

Fusetti has overseen the restoration work since 1997, when the basilica was hit during an earthquake. “I was the last restorer there after the earthquake. I risked my life,” he said.

At the end of an assiduous restoration process following the earthquake, art experts were afforded a moment of celebration in 2012 when Giotto’s signature was discovered on one of the frescoes.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/appalling-restoration-destroys-giotto-frescoes-at-the-basilica-of-saint-francis-in-assisi-261811

For more details please visit here

THE SEX SLUT OF NUREMBERG-for Mother’s Day

The first hint that I had that there were sexual stories in Albrecht Dürer’s prints came from the discovery of the embedded code that I found in the print known called by other art historians The Promenade or the Young Couple Threatened by Death, although we have no actual idea what Dürer called this print.

THE FIRST HIDDEN CODED MESSAGE FOUND

This motif about illicit love was one of the most popular in the Renaissance and often depicted by artists. A bachelor is secretly trysting with a married woman far away from peering eyes. Here’s what one of the German museums, the Staatliche Kunsthalle, in Karlsruhe, Germany says about this type of composition: (http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/d/Dürer/2/13/1/020.html)

“As the gallant gazes at his companion adoringly, he points ahead to the path. The ostrich feather he is wearing in his hat is a sign of his bachelor status. Behind the tree, unnoticed by the lovers, Death is holding up an hourglass. The picture can be interpreted as a moralizing metaphor for the transitoriness of love and sensuality.

[But] The figure of death does not necessarily indicate a warning to lovers, as this was not customary in the fifteenth century..”

DOES DEATH TRIUMPH?

This was a great guess by previous art historians at what this composition meant for 500+ years, not knowing that a coded message was embedded in the neckline.  But when I found the coded message, I knew everyone was wrong about the real meaning of this print.  It wasn’t customary at the time to have a motif of Death warning the “bad” lovers.  People wouldn’t buy this print if they were constantly reminded that their bad behavior would end in death.  Why would anyone spend good money for that?  No, there was a much better message in this print. One that would make everyone want to buy this print.

Let’s take a close look.

 

The headdress worn by the woman does signify that she is married, and the man’s clothing,

(the cap with ostrich plume, the tights, the cape, and the man’s shoes) was typical of unmarried men.  Thus we definitely have a depiction of a married woman trysting with a bachelor.

This headdress has been clearly identified as a Nuremberg headdress, indicating the woman is from Nuremberg. Everyone who looked at this print would know that.

SCANDAL IN FASHION

Durer’s drawings of a typical Nuremberg woman’s dress vs. a typical woman’s Venetian dress (commonly thought to be a drawing of a prostitute)

The top part of the woman’s dress is Italian in fashion, while the bottom is from Nuremberg.  The City of Nuremberg regulated clothing in every social class and according to Nuremberg law, this dress would have been understood as illegal and scandalous by customers. How did Dürer get away with selling a print of a totally scandalous dress without getting arrested by the government?

It appears that Dürer depicted a clearly illegal dress to draw attention to his embedded message.

What you see is the following letters smaller than the neckline as such:  “ O N,  then a heraldic “rosette”on the left of the diadem (brooch) on the neckline, then on the right of the diadem “O R I C A 9,” spelling the words “o! Norica 9”

NORICA, which is the Latin feminine form of Noricum, means “from Hungary,”  not “from Nuremberg” as previous art historians claimed. Noricum was the ancient Roman name given to the area from which Dürer’s father emigrated.  It thus appears that Dürer was indicating a Hungarian woman caught in illicit love.

The key to the code is the rosette on the left of the diadem, which emblematically indicates Sigismund Stromeyer “zur goldenen Rose (Golden Rose),” a designation of unknown origin attached to one “line” of the Stromeyer families (of which there were three). The Stromeyer family was one of the richest, oldest, and most politically powerful families of the Nuremberg.

THE MEDIEVAL “ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT”

What “if” Albrecht Dürer was selling scandal sheets about the rich and famous?  What if Albrecht Dürer was the forerunner of “People” magazine and “Entertainment Tonight”?

Let’s take a look.

One of the most famous scandals of Nuremberg in this time was the cuckolding of the Patrician Johannes Pirkheimer by Sigismund Stromeyer zur goldenen Rose, with Barbara Löffelholz, of Hungarian descent, Pirkheimer’s betrothed.

FORCED MARRIAGE

While Johannes was out of the country, studying law in Italy, Barbara broke her betrothal to him, and married Sigismund Stromeyer zur goldenen Rose, because Sigismund was a better catch.  Johannes, hearing of this disgrace, hurried back to Nuremberg, sued in the diocesan court presided over by the Bishop of Bamberg for custody of Barbara Löffelholz, and won his case.

He married Barbara on April 19, 1466, where he immediately bore her away to Eichstatt, sixty miles away from Nuremberg. Johannes never allowed her to return to Nuremberg because of the scandal.

MOMMY DEAREST

The Pirkheimer family remained in  Eichstatt, where Barbara bore 6 daughters, dying in childbirth with the seventh child, the only son,Willibald Pirkheimer, whom legend claims to have been Dürer’s best friend as well as an important patron. After his wife’s death, Johannes returned to Nuremberg and joined a monastery. The six daughters all became nuns in Nuremberg.

WHAT A DEAL!

Since the vacant Pirkheimer house, prime real estate near the City Marketplace was a good place for a goldsmith to operate, it was rented by Dürer’s father in 1466-1467. Dürer was, in fact, born in the Pirkheimer House and lived there until age six, when his father was finally able to purchase a homestead for the family.  Thus, Dürer was intimately aware of this scandal and appears to have capitalized on it.

 

For some reason Albrecht Dürer was really angry at Willibald Pirkheimer to have enshrined his mother as the sex slut of Nuremberg and to take such a risk in doing this!

We will investigate why in future articles

                                     BUY THE BOOK!  CRIMES IN THE ART: THE SECRET CIPHER OF ALBRECHT DÜRER

www.amazon.com/Crimes-Art-Secret-Cipher-Albrecht-ebook/dp/B00FNWKYMO

For more details please visit at http://www.albrechtdurerblog.com