The History of Art
GA 292
29 October 1917, Dornach
13. The Changes in the Conception of Christ During a Certain Period of Time
Today I want to bring you something about the transformations around the concept of the Christ from various viewpoints but set in a specific period of time. In a certain sense one can speak about the influence of the Mystery of Golgotha in every cultural sphere and in order to elucidate the correct idea of its influence on the earth's evolution it is necessary, where possible, to examine this impact independently from each cultural area.
Within the evolution of art, it is possible to speak about the important changes brought about as a result of the impact of the Mystery of Golgotha in the general progress of humanity. However, these thoughts will not suffice without the awareness which link to, I might call it, intimate artistic changes in the evolution of individual arts.
When we start looking for the starting point of when people in Europe depicted the Christ figure, it is repeatedly shown that the attempt to depict the Christ figure artistically actually only started from the moment when, within historical development, the concept of the Gospels as a literal perception of Christianity experienced a conclusion to a certain extent, a view of the Mass and Gospel traditions through participation in the church thus rejecting some declarations considered questionable at the time. When the foundation of Gospel literature was completed and also the transition was made to a certain degree in the minds of those looking at the content of the Gospels, a desire started in the West to artistically depict scenes and figures found in the Gospels.
This should not be lost sight of. Before the Gospels were concluded and rounded off in the minds of those calling themselves Christians, they limited their imagination to a depiction as a signature which you can see in this slide of the monogram of Christ:
710 Christ monogram
See in the centre the Χ and the Ρ, ie. Chi and Rho, which is simultaneously the angled Cross with the Rho.
Or you see it in a similar form, as you see here:
712 Christ monogram
... or combined with animal figures:
713 Christ monogram with two doves.
... or the changed form, as we have here:
711 Christ monogram:
This is what people limited themselves to during that time, during which the mass of the Gospels became unified and gradually penetrated people's minds. This is the reason why actual pictorial representation of the holy history can only be spoken of as originating from the 2nd or 3rd centuries onwards.
In the course of our local art observations which I have emphasized I want to point out another relationship today by referring to what I've highlighted before. I have stressed that the first representations which were created still obeyed the forms of the old, ancient pagan artistic development.
People simply transposed the pagan artistic expression on to the content of the Christian development. This is very important. One can say that before and up to the 3rd Century nothing had been done in the western cultural development to depict images of the Gospel scenes as such, which had not come as a transfer from pagan art. Here we find figures which we connect to Christian representation as similarly depicted to what we usually see in pagan myths. Today we want to limit our observations to the Christ figure Himself. In this regard we find at the start of the first times the Christ is represented, most frequently of all, the image of the Good Shepherd, in the most varied forms in antiquity, presented in the pre-Christian times. This image—chosen from one out of many representations of “The Good Shepherd”:
714 Mosaic of the Good Shepherd, Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, Ravenna ...
... reminds us of the depiction of David amongst the animals. It reminds us of other Greek images.
If we limit ourselves in particular to the Christ figure in this image, as it still stands, you see an absolutely antique expression. We notice the endeavour in this pictorial representation towards the expression of a mild, noble face, generally found in these olden times, beardless, still with tousled hair, youthful, gracious. These were the endeavours which live in all these images. We already see in this representation of the Christ imagery the pagan imagery imposed on it as the basis because in such images everything is still pagan. Now a question about such a statement is created: what precisely characterizes the paganism in this imagery—I'm speaking from an artistic point of view. So much has been written and spoken about art but the essential vigour, if I may call it that, of the pagan artistic expression has not been stressed. When you—as much as it is possible from what is still available—study Greek imagery you will very gradually find the fact that this Greek imagery, studied realistically in the sense we speak of realism today, did not exist. The forms of the human body were not presented by the Greeks as a direct likeness of a portrait of some model, corresponding in any way at all as a mere copy of the human body as it walks the earth because the Greek simply had an ideal body in mind. This ideal body they had in mind, actually incorporated something quite different from what human eyes could actually see in a model. In order to really understand the most important Greek bodily depictions, the artistic physical forms, one has to refrain from considering what the eyes see in the model and its form; one should remember what I already mentioned in previous years: the Greek depiction is according to the inner feelings experienced within the body. A muscle wasn't merely a direct rendering according to what the eye saw but how it was being experienced, how with inner feeling it cooperated with movement, streamlined with muscle contraction. The rendering in artistic matter carried a feeling which was being experienced within the physical itself.
What single factor made this possible? Indeed, it was only possible as a result of the Greek artist, when connecting his thoughts to the physical nature of a person in the majority of his creative images, he relinquished the individual nature of the person. He refrained from including it. When he looked, he saw only the physical expressed in the human form. Pay attention—he looked at the physical nature of mankind as if it represented the outcome of the entire cosmos, as a total spiritual depiction of the cosmos. When you look at a Zeus figure, at a Pallas Athena figure, an Apollo, an Aphrodite figure, you find the soul within it. However, these souls which are within these physical forms are not individual human souls but they are souls that live as results of the entire cosmos: world souls in a human physical form. One could say that what the Greeks searched for as souls in this realm they saw as absolutely beyond the idea that the human is a result of the universe, but that through their thinking they considered the forces cooperating in the universe as striving to produce the crowning glory of its creative forces, the crown of its creative power as a product resulting in the human organism. How focussed and concentrated the creative cosmic forces were, to bring the human form into existence! In such Greek human organisms are the forms I have been telling you about, and here we also find the concentrated expression as seen in laws creating the entire culture, and also through which the entire Spiritual All rules: the creativity of the cosmos condensed in the human being.
One could say the Greeks configured the body in this way. Indeed it seems extraordinary but much more correct if one thinks of what I want to say now. One imagines that when people are asleep, the soul, therefore the `I' and the astral body are outside the physical body and that the sleeping body is ensouled by universal spirituality, absorbed by this spirituality which belongs to the cosmos and through the spiritual aspect being driven out of the human body it has the result of enabling the individual spirituality during earth evolution to enter into humanity and thus one acquires the Greek inspired shaping of human form in such figures, as I have indicated to you. Not that the Greek had no understanding of individual spirituality but he saw the individual soul qualities as not yet penetrating the human form; the human form was for him still something universal. So it happens, which is extraordinary enough, that the individual soul aspect, the specific human soul aspect in Greek art only appears when the Greek does not represent forms which in Greek art, in their higher development, are regarded as typical. When the Greek presents an Apollo or a Zeus, Pallas Athena or Hera or Aphrodite then something typical is presented; when these are not presented, when Satyr or Faun is depicted, then what is presented is pertaining to the individual human aspect, applicable to every soul which is present when it is awake and which leaves the body when it is asleep.
You see this is the curious thing in pagan art development in its highest configuration in Greece. Specific human soul qualities had not penetrated the art forms when the ideal-type aspects were adopted. By contrast all that was working in the soul, the emotions and impulses permeating the soul with the preference of the Satyr and Faun figures, one could say these reminded one of animals. When the Greek presented the god Apoll, then in the god Apoll lived a super human, a super individual soul as an artistic figure of Apollo. Swinging over to the humanistic we first find, in the Greek depiction of a Mercury-type, the Hermes-type. We can find many—you can study the Hermes-type - inspired by the Faun- and Satyr-type. One could say it was the conviction of Greek art that the human soul had not come sufficiently far in its development that it had its own powers to express itself in the human form, when this human form wanted to come out in its full glory.
If we now go even further back in Greek art history we encounter the oriental art form, to discover the total universal cosmic coming into expression. Thus Greek art was the final flowering of universal cosmic expression, the representation having been attempted in the physical human form. It is extremely important that this is looked at.
One can now say that as the Christ became the redeemer in relation to the rest of the powers of evolution in humanity, so He also became the redeemer in relation to this view of art. Imagine an elevated mind posing a question such as this: how can one idealize a representation in order to reach an expression in contemporary art, an expression of something spiritual, something human, how can one idealize something which earlier was merely represented by using the mentioned deviation of an ideal type, namely a Faun-type, a Satyr-type and so on? How can the problem be solved in connection with the specific human form, how can something be idealised which in ancient times did not want to be idealised but that the divine humanistic be kept in contrast to the all-too-human aspect? This question was never stated on the physical plane yet it is answered in the further development of art. It is basically also being answered in the history of humanity.
It will always be part of extraordinary interesting facts that one man in Greece, who so deeply descended into the Greek life that he through his own destiny, to a certain extent, he prepared the redeemer destiny—Socrates traditionally didn't represent and ideal type of Hellenism but more something of a Satyr or Faun.
It is as if world history itself wanted to create the specific human out of the subhuman.
715 Greek sculpture, 4BC, Socrates, scale down copy (London, British Museum)
Here we see in the continued progress in the shaping of something which had not been achieved in the ideal humanistic form in Greek counter art, in the Satyr- and Faun art, by wanting to achieve a breakthrough as a human form only originating from the cosmos.
The individually human conforms according to spiritual lines and forms obtained only from the cosmos. Oriental forms we must always look for in the cosmic, but western form in the individually human.
So we see, the moment humanity wanted to conquer the pagan, just then the Christ-type entered in order to penetrate the specifically human into the commonly typically cosmic element. Just observe how that penetrates the typical ...
715 Socrates (London, British Museum)
Here we have a
716 Catacomb painting of a Christ depiction (Rome, catacomb of Pontianus)
...out of a somewhat later time of ancient Christian art, complete with an added beard, while many Christ representations in the first centuries were beardless. We see how there is a continual attempt to not only make the cosmic aspect in the figure a reality, but to show how the cosmic element is at war with the individuality, how the one is working against the other. The cosmic element here still carries more weight, but actually it outweighs only as tradition. What had to be overcome in the oriental-Hellenistic still carried the most weight, and would still outweigh it for a long time. Only gradually the penetration of the specific enters as the individually human element into the form. So we see how gradually this happens.
I have to show you the next image as a result:
717 Catacomb painting of Christ amidst his apostles.
Here you see—it belongs to the first centuries—how the endeavour existed to maintain the whole arrangement of lines originating from the cosmos, and so on, but as something entering which is specifically human. As a result of this the strange battle started which had particular importance during these ancient centuries, the old battle of how Christ had to be represented; should He correspond more to the Apollo beauty or should He be represented as an individual human soul? The endeavour was to represent Him as an individual man with a soul. Now here is actually the peculiar thing, you see. Here one accomplishes one of those reversals, as we have encountered in other areas during the last days: to represent the human individualism, simply by pulling up again what earlier had been frowned upon. This was developing in the highest degree within Greek trends while in the west, in Latin circles, the continuation was being developed of something which once had been quite oriental—to depict a certain cosmic figure. This was in a time when the unfolding of art in the west dwindled and one could not be sure about the correct explanation any more.
Thus it happened that the depiction of the Christ-form itself triumphed for the eastern, the oriental and Byzantine type of depiction, while the Christ individuality was not included. However, while artistic evolution was on a downwards path one can say that this type degenerated, He no longer retained the lofty dignity which the East wanted to give Him but He was depicted as becoming, one could say, the downward trend of humanity. He became the kind of representation of humanity's characteristics which enter in a degenerative way. His hair was parted, his beard took on particular forms, his expression became such that people saw: the superhuman-cosmic was now being conquered by the human aspect. However people were not yet in the position to really depict this human element as a kind of ideal-type.
We see this exactly when we allow further Christ images to work on us, for example even this very beautiful mosaic in Ravenna:
718 Mosaic: “Christ with Archangels crowning the Holy Vitalis” (San Vitale in Ravenna) in which we find neither great beauty, nor a cosmic-universal image, but in which we can already see that an attempt was being made to bring in the human element.
Even more clearly we can be impressed by the expressive images in the mosaic of Palermo—the Monreale Dom, in the apse:
719: Mosaic, 12th Century, Christ, and below Him, Our Lady with the Child.
This is an image which evokes the most immensely impressive thoughts through its wonderful craft of mosaic. However, precisely within these images we see the battle of both streams which we have been speaking about. Exactly as a result of this battle, this image is one of the most interesting regarding what we have ahead.
All of this belongs to the general course of humanity's evolution. We see how in a loop line the individual jumps over the abstract cosmic aspect coming from the East, and lets it go over to the West. I say: the abstracted cosmic element transported over to the West! If you want to understand that then you must above all completely enter into the art of being, into a soul nature which was found in Romanism. Imagine how this Romanism worked. You must free yourself from everything which educated people are so inoculated with today because Romanism has conquered the schools; our entire education is Roman based. However we must not forget the actual content of Romanism when we look at the first blossoming which drew its content for two centuries from Greece, right up the blossoming of Romanism under the Julian Empire. Roughly 150 to 200 years before the Mystery of Golgotha and somewhat later se see how Greek imagery, how Greek culture was conquered by fantasy-deprived Romanism, how this fantasy-less Romanism took over Greek content.
Rome became ever bigger in precisely this peculiar insult of which I have spoken, the transference of abstracted cosmic elements on human affairs. In Rome originated that distinctive talent to launch world domination, the talent for world domination which in ancient times—while the slandering they were initiating had not yet happened, or taken over—the peculiarity was the great oriental empire of the 3rd post-Atlantean cultural epoch—that went over to Romanism. World domination was actually the Roman Empire's ideal. To bring the then total cultural world under Roman rule was the Roman Kaiser's ideal. The content from Hellenism to Romanism was prescribed by the desire to represent the individual. Indeed, one finds in Romanism this Greek yearning to represent individualism, even as ugliness, thus letting Latinism conquer the Greek type. Initially there was resistance to do this because the former desire was for the beautiful type and because of this at first it didn't strike them as beautiful but as ugly. It reminds us of the Latin old Faun- and Satyr-types, which are elevated as the highest human quality. Gradually within the Greek being itself came the cosmic Zeus type, the Apollo, the Pallas Athena, Aphrodite in a state of decadence; out of this came something which had formerly only lived in the area of ugliness and now was being striven for in idolised moral beauty.
From the West, in Romanism, quite a different Christ-type was depicted, it was actually depicted as a consequence of the pagan Apollo-type and this is due to the background of Italian humanity in that century and their sculptural inventions because they didn't have an inventiveness of their own, in fact had none at all, because Romanism in essence was without imagination.
We can now continue. You see, we then find fallow centuries, tendencies towards Hellenism but simultaneously decay in Romanism. A time of hope only started in the time Augustine appeared, but now from Greece conquering Christianity. The same thing appears again: Romanism prepares to snatch spiritual world domination, but suitably turns to the begotten content of Greece. The same phenomenon again.
During this period Hieronymus translated the Bible into Latin. Throughout the following centuries everything developed out of Rome, the striving was to make Rome the earthly human central point of world order. In order to inculcate the cosmic element into this social structure of the world it was turned completely abstract; this was the prevailing teaching. Art—in as far as one can speak of art in this way—was on a parallel path up to the 13th Century with suggestions coming time and again from the East, building up whatever wanted to be developed. So we see the then completed period in art form of the image of Christ Jesus Himself brought nothing new because the Greek-Oriental type was transported over to the West. This is essentially what can be seen as expressed by Cimabue.
Now we want again to hold on to the 13th Century form which the Christ-type had taken on:
720a-7 Christ on the Cross by Cimabue.
Here with Cimabue we see something, one might say, which has been flowing into souls during all the previous centuries. You see what lives here which came over from the Orient into Hellenism. We see in the image how earth and heaven are linked, how heaven is as active in its essence as the earth too, is active. Even in the depiction of the crucified Christ we can observe the two streams weaving through one another, as I have been speaking about.
Within the world of art itself artistic creativity could not exist, while positive suggestions towards imagination was still being received out of the East.
The next image I want to show is done by Giotto:
720b-36 Giotto (?) The Crucifixion, Assisi, San Francesco
You nearly see this Giotto painting developing out of the earlier one (720a-7). You can still see the heaven activated by its beings. Still, the complete descent created out of the universality of the world has not taken place and entered into the earthly world. We already see the earthly, which still quite bashfully and shamelessly throbs in the Satyr- and Faun-types, we see rising here, their control spreading, idealizing, enforcing the human being, because what wanted to be expressed here could only show itself when it was permeated by Christ, through and through.
Three things can be distinguished. Firstly those forms which exist in every cosmic soul are found in ancient art. You find then the battle of the human soul in the first depictions of Christian art. We are still in the kind of a battle as we have before us here. The cosmic element is still everywhere—I mean the spiritual cosmic, not the Copernican materialistic cosmic, but the spiritual cosmic—sparkling everywhere, yet at the same time from below the specific human soul is striving to take on the form which the soul gives to the body, wanting it to be revealed. This was the second element I want to present to you where the two battle with one another, where the human-soul opposes the cosmic-soul element. Perhaps this battle is most intensively depicted by Giotto compared to other artists. For this reason it is interesting that this particular battle can always be studied in a Giotto. Giotto strives from this one side quite significantly back to this model. He has a strong naturalistic vein yet in him remains the non-specific, one might say forms originating out of the spiritual world which were not yet so completely mastered by Cimabue. In the following image you see another “crucifixion” of Giotto:
721a-35 Giotto: Crucifixion (Padua, Arena-Chapel)
The previous painting was not even a real Giotto, perhaps originating from someone else. Here we see Giotto in the most genuine sense. See how the heaven is not only implicated but definitely contributes to the image. Notice something entering here, also with the Redeemer's form—and this is our main focus today—something depicting the soul wretchedness in the way the bodies are constituted. Here we already see the human aspect coming in, which one never could see in an Apollo form.
I ask you now to not consider the fact I'm about to reveal as inappropriate. What I want to say, I say reluctantly now and I hope that you will be mistaken if you want to believe the facts are inappropriate. Research orientated at truth results in something extraordinary. When we delve into an image such as this one by Giotto, we see a new element surface in the old tradition, a Greek orientated idealization which could only appear in the Faun and Satyr, a super-imposed idealisation of the human if we look at a Giotto, and then we may essentially put Giotto as an opponent to his master, Cimabue, who was fructified from the Orient. How does something new happen to be introduced here?—Now we arrive at something which is difficult to say: it spread out from an external point, outer territories of Europe which actually had their origin in Central Europe itself, which we have often seen originating from Central Europe: the very new impulse to configure the individual human element within the soul. Very little Roman blood flow for example in the present day Italians, really very little. A great deal has flowed in—refer to historical studies as far as ancient documents allow—much has flowed into Central European blood: from this comes fructification. The naturalistic, soul principle which lived in Giotto was created by the fructification through Romanism, the unimaginative Romanism plus this emanation from Central Europe. Romanism was actually great only in ideas which pre-occupied themselves, the social structure in the sense of abstract cosmology; what one regards as “State” is really a speciality product of Romanism, originating out of the Roman soul. The state which wanted to spread out over everything is a copy of what sprung in the Roman head where it originated.
We now go to the next image, another Giotto:
721b-32 Giotto: Christ on the throne (Rome, St Peters)
Here we see a Christ. I have chosen this image because here Giotto was most inspired to represent the old type of depiction as it came from the East. Only, look at the face, how much individuality he has brought into it! Look at each of these fingers lifted in the right hand, how many individual soul qualities have been brought into it, how in the best sense the spiritual-naturalistic lives in it! Here one gradually enters into the southern art in which the oriental essence is linked, with the cosmic-oriental essence; here enters something we have seen in images of Central Europe, something in its purity, without the cosmological essence, merely out of the human soul itself.
The next image is once again a Giotto:
722a-21 Giotto: The Baptism of Christ. (Padua., Arena Chapel)
Here too you see heaven and earth play into it. Now just look at the Christ figure itself and you will find how Giotto made the effort to allow the soul quality of the divine form to come to expression, not only in the face but in the entire figure, in the main bearing and hand gestures.
Here we have another Giotto, the evening meal:
722b-34 Giotto: Evening meal (Padua, Arena Chapel)
You see Christ on the left side partly coming to expression as the Greek Christ-type yet the effort to express the individuality of soul is also being made. Everywhere this insertion is apparent and so we see this extraordinary thing streaming forth which in the highest sense is artistic, oriental and still in the old Persian cultural impulse dependant on Central Europe, one could say, having a rendezvous with the inartistic, assessed purely on a State structured unimaginative basis.
Another Giotto:
723a-40 Giotto: Journey into Jerusalem (Padua, Arena Chapel)
... which I have chosen again to present the same phenomenon to you. Just by taking these images of Christ in various biblical scenes does one see how Giotto endeavours to bring the individual expression into the soul nature.
723b-33 Giotto: Crowned by Thorns (Padua, Arena chapel)
We want to bring these changes of the Christ depiction itself to you as it took place through these centuries.
Now think of the first tentative efforts we found in the ancient Christian art. Certainly a great deal depends on the material, but that materials were applied, that it was particularly used for these ideas, that is the important aspect which we see here. Now:
724a-31 Giotto: Resurrection (Padua, Arena Chapel)
Everywhere you'll find the confluence of both streams of which I have spoken, confirmed. Perhaps at the same time you'll notice the intensity which works further with the Greek Christ-ideal type, because in the background, one could say, in the sleeping powers of the artists it was present everywhere.
Now we come a little further. I have now chosen an image from the 14th century, by Orcagna depicting Christ as the World Ruler:
725 Andrea Orcagna: the Youngest Court (Florence, St Mary, Novella)
It comes out of the church of Saint Mary Novalla in Florence. Here you clearly see the old type as an endeavour for a complete individualisation, the soul gently appearing.
With this we are already in the 14th century. The various developmental streams of human culture move at different speeds. Up to here we don't only see the influence of the Greek Christ type but we also see some of the inspirational powers found in oriental art. I would like to state a fact and not a criticism: in all these images it does not come to be expressed what the Roman worldwide church domination within its full historical rights had initiated itself since the 9th century. The Greek influence actually existed in art with little influence from central Europe.
Understand, this had to be so, from the second half of the 9th century it went well in Rome. Everyone knew, as I expressed it once, this `Eastern Being' had to be kept back. The western world had to be permeated with it out of the basis of the life of the folk striving towards something higher. Out of this we see a sentiment which I have characterised for you, which I identified with the liberated city culture, this free city culture which has its point of origin from central Europe and spread itself over various other territories. These free city cultures had the urge to express the specifically human soul element. Now in the 9th century Rome understood and thus considered this European impetus and carried it into account.
The specific western form of Catholicism which spread through the institutionalised world churches was by contrast being held back in the Orient, and this Catholicism came to a specific expression in those artists and their art as most wonderfully expressed by Fra Angelico:
724b-65 Fra Angelico: Evening Meal.
Here firstly we see—when we have an understanding for such things—the western Catholic element poured out in art. The differences between the previous (725) and this image (274b-65) as well as the previous Evening Meal (722b-34) and this image (724b-65) are unbelievable, because in these images, as it lives in well loved art, the western catholic sentiment is alive. Look at the forms into which the sacrifice has been brought, woven equally into the composition as a reminder of the Last Supper before the event of Golgotha. You don't only see the Last Supper but you see the continuation of the evening meal within the composition of the catholic sacrifice. Catholic sentiment is poured out over the image of the evening meal and particularly over the figure of the Redeemer. Here, primarily, the Redeemer is shown as a model in art to western priests. In reality He had been there much earlier, in outer reality.
Thus we see the Roman world domination church spread its rule also over art in a totally decisive manner. In addition we can say Giotto created his artistic offering of Francis of Assisi out of a freed individual soul. Here we can see Fra Angelico who paints as well as Messe reads in San Marco in Florence. An aura of Catholicism permeates these images. He isn't an individual sacrifice, but paints the church with it.
No less you see this in the following image of
726a-64 Fra Angelico: Crucifixion
Catholicism paints into the art.
I ask you please to look closely at the next image and see how the being of the Catholic art actually is alive in the Catholic organization, that even in world domination, one could say, the organisational power of the Catholic Church works right into the realm of supernatural beings.
726b-68 Fra Angelico: World domination
We find this now increasing with another friar, of which I want to show you the following image:
727 Friar Bartholemeo: Christ and the Four Evangelists
Here we see the third stage in this interesting process. Look at the interplay of a new freshness as a resurrection out of old Hellenism. This entered now again, the old Greek influence.
So we notice how for a long time the individualized soul concept of the Christ-type, which is of interest to us today, prevailed. Take the entire design as it evolved from the cosmic forces working from the beginning, which are then taken up as the individualised soul through the Greek impulses influencing it ever more, and how through this it became increasingly individualised. How was Christ individualised, my dear friends? Now we see how antiquity so recently intervened just a little but it is already in it. It is again working from the characteristic towards the typically-beautiful. This is notable as being continuous, because this is actually the secret of the Renaissance. These images I want to show you in conclusion are the starting point for the Renaissance artist, we see how the Renaissance artists completely renewed a rise in Hellenism but they didn't enter into that which conquered the form of an individual.
Here you have the Evening Meal of Andrea del Sarto which is in Florence.
728 of Andrea del Sarto: Evening Meal.
Again there are beautiful forms, with still a touch of cosmic consciousness which the Greeks still had, something of the traditions of a cosmic element brought into the forms but purely out of tradition and no longer from direct observation, with direct feelings as found among the Greeks. We discover it here; this is brought further by Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo. We see something developing here which is particular to Leonardo da Vinci, in this image of the baptism by Verrocchio, the teacher of Leonardo.
729a-92 Verrocchio: Baptism of Christ
The same motive done by Masolino during the same time period:
729b-50 Masolino: the Baptism of Christ
Yet again I want to include the image “The Baptism” by Giotto:
722a-21 Giotto: the Baptism of Christ
Look at the Baptism where the battle is still on between the two principles, without the Greek influence, also without the antique Greek impact, without the impact from antiquity, to the new Greek, the Christian impact particularly strong.
Now we bring out the two other images:
729a-92 Verrocchio: Baptism of Christ
729b-50 Masolino: the Baptism of Christ
You see how the Renaissance works. Out of a Verrocchio comes a Leonardo; perhaps Leonardo even worked on these paintings too.
Now I would in closing still show 2 paintings, in which you would be able to see what came over from the North, from Central Europe and how all of this mixed into the others. We have a northern product here, the Man of Sorrows, by Dürer:
730a-303 Dürer: Man of Sorrows
Here we have the endeavour without a cosmic aspect: the human Christ. Where Fra Angelico poured the Catholic aspects over his artistic creations, here we see the formation against world domination, here we see how the human individual wants to depict His Christ. Here a single human being worked on one image. While Fra Angelico painted in the San Marco Church in Florence, the whole Catholic sentiment painted with him. Here a single person worked on his biblical depiction. This became fixed in this particular time. Later the Renaissance came but moved South, mixing with other influences.
I still have another image which depicts a similar kind of thing:
730b-311 Dürer: Christ on the Cross.
These things should show us how through the centuries the Christ image changed. I have demonstrated this with these two images from later centuries. I would like in the further progress of these ideas, if it is possible, to show you how these Christ images develop further. A world history can be written since the Mystery of Golgotha by simply describing the changes in the development of the Christ paintings and images. Everything which in reality contributed to it is expressed clearly. One could continue with this right up to the present.
Christ depictions are researched at the present time: years ago I saw a whole collection of Christ images in an exhibition, the one more hideous than the next! Today the attempt is to make reflections of present events thus reflecting the chaos leading up to events in which we live. If we try—without this tendency I've just spoken about in the creation of Christ figures—if we try to introduce what lies within this form in the spiritual world, shaped initially by our first efforts through painting, as good as it gets with limited material, then it does appear as a further progress on this cultural line of the realities of humanity's unfolding.
RUDOLF STEINER
731 Painting (Plant colours) in the small cupola of the First Goetheanum, Dornach, detail with the central motif, with part of the architraves.
732 Painting (Plant colours) in the small cupola of the First Goetheanum, Dornach, Central Motif: The Representative of Man between Lucifer and Ahriman.
732 Painting (Plant colours) in the small cupola of the First Goetheanum, Dornach, Central Motif: The Representative of Man between Lucifer and Ahriman.
732 Painting (Plant colours) in the small cupola of the First Goetheanum, Dornach, Central Motif: The Representative of Man between Lucifer and Ahriman.
734 Painting in the small cupola of the First Goetheanum, Dornach. Section: Bust of The Representative of Man.
735 Visage of The Representative of Man, pencil sketch.
736 Wood sculptural group: The Representative of Man between Lucifer and Ahriman.
737 Wood sculptural group: Detail: The Representative of Man.
738 Maquette for the wood sculptural group, a Plaster of Paris cast.
739 Wood sculptural group, detail: Head of The Representative of Man, side view.
740 Wood sculptural group, detail: Head of The Representative of Man.
741 Study of the head of The Representative of Man, plasticine.
It is really good in the present time to fructify ourselves with such ideas which can be gained from cultural areas of art, and see a bit of the truth, because in the present time gods will be offered to mankind to be worshipped, while mankind will have no talent for seeing the truth.
In our time (1917) it is possible to say that four fifths of the world should ally itself against a fifth, in a time when so much indifference is accepted, it is time for recorded concepts to be taken out of the history of humanity's evolution and to revise them a little.
13. Altchristliche Malerei und Mosaike. Italienische Meister. Dürer
Wandlungen der Christus-Auffassung in der künstlerischen Darstellung:
Ich möchte Ihnen heute über die Wandlungen der Christus-Auffassung von einem gewissen Gesichtspunkte aus durch einen gewissen Zeitraum hindurch einiges vorbringen. Man kann ja in gewissem Sinne von einem Einfluß des Mysteriums von Golgatha auf jedes menschliche Kulturgebiet sprechen, und man bekommt eine um so richtigere Vorstellung von dem, was in der Erdenentwickelung durch das Mysterium von Golgatha geschehen ist, wenn man, womöglich unabhängig für die einzelnen Kulturgebiete, den Einschlag dieses Impulses von Golgatha betrachtet.
Man kann nun wirklich auch in der Kunstentwickelung davon sprechen, daß im allgemeinen Fortgang der Menschheit das Mysterium von Golgatha eingeschlagen hat, bedeutsame Veränderungen hervorgerufen hat. Aber man wird mit diesen Gedanken nicht zurechtkommen, wenn man nicht sein Augenmerk lenkt auf gewisse, ich möchte sagen Intimitäten der Kunstentwickelung in der Entwickelung der einzelnen Künste.
Wenn wir darüber Nachforschungen anstellen, wann die Menschheit Europas begonnen hat, die Christus-Figur darzustellen, so kommt man immer wieder und wieder darauf, daß der Versuch, die Christus-Gestalt künstlerisch darzustellen, eigentlich erst gemacht worden ist von dem Augenblick in der weltgeschichtlichen Entwickelung angefangen, als die Evangelien- Auffassung, also man kann sagen, als die literarische Auffassung des Christentums einen gewissen Abschluß erfahren hatte, als aus der Evangelien-Masse, aus den Evangelien-Traditionen durch die kirchlichen Maßnahmen ausgeschieden waren gewisse Nachrichten, die man dann als apokryphe betrachtet hat. Als der Grundstock der Evangelien-Literatur fertig war und als auch bis zu einem gewissen Grade übergegangen war in die Gemüter der Menschen dasjenige, was in den Evangelien steht, da begann im Abendlande die Sehnsucht, darzustellen, künstlerisch darzustellen die Szenen und die Gestalten, die sich in den Evangelien finden.
Das ist jedenfalls etwas, was man nicht aus dem Auge verlieren soll. Bevor die Evangelien abgeschlossen und in die Gemüter derjenigen, die sich Christen nannten, in einer gewissen Einheitlichkeit übergegangen waren, beschränkte man sich in der Darstellung auf dasjenige, was durch Signaturen, wie Sie sie hier durch das Lichtbild sehen, zugegen war, auf das Monogramm des Christus:
710° Christus-Monogramm an einem Epitaph, 5.-6. Jh.
Sie sehen in der Mitte das X und das P, also Chi und Rho, was zu gleicher Zeit das schiefe Kreuz ist mit dem Rho.
Oder in einer ähnlichen Form, wie Sie es hier sehen:
712* Christus-Monogramm an einem Sarkophag, 5.-6. Jh.
Oder aber mit irgendwelchen Tierfiguren kombiniert:
713* Christus-Monogramm zwischen Tauben an einem Sarkophag, 5.-6. Jh.
Oder in der veränderten Form, wie wir es hier haben:
711” Christus-Monogramm an einer Basilika-Ruine, 5.-6. Jh.
Das war es, auf das man sich beschränkte in der Zeit, während welcher sich die Stoffmasse der Evangelien vereinheitlichte und allmählich in die Gemüter der Menschen überging, so daß man von eigentlich bildnerischen Darstellungen der heiligen Geschichte erst vom 2., 3. Jahrhundert ab sprechen kann.
Ich habe nun manches im Laufe der hiesigen Kunstbetrachtungen schon hervorgehoben, auf das ich heute in einem anderen Zusammenhang wiederholentlich wieder verweisen muß. Ich habe hervorgehoben, daß die ersten Darstellungen, welche man gegeben hat, sich noch ganz in den Formen der alten, der antiken, der heidnischen Kunstentwickelung bewegten. Man übertrug einfach dasjenige, was das Heidentum an Kunstformen entwickelt hatte, auf den Inhalt der christlichen Entwickelung. Das ist außerordentlich wichtig. Und man kann sagen: Bis zum Beginn des 3. Jahrhunderts war noch nichts fertig in der abendländischen Kulturentwickelung als eine solche Übertragung des Heidnischen, der heidnischen Art, Bildnerisches darzustellen, auf die Szenen des Evangeliums. Wir finden da, daß die Gestalten, an die sich die christlichen Vorstellungen knüpften, ähnlich dargestellt werden, wie man gewohnt war die Gestalten der heidnischen Mythen darzustellen.
Wir werden uns heute beschränken in unserer Betrachtung auf die Gestalt des Christus selbst. Und in dieser Beziehung finden wir in den ersten Zeiten, als man anfing, den Christus darzustellen, am allerhäufigsten das Bild des guten Hirten, das in den mannigfaltigsten Formen im Altertum, in der vorchristlichen Zeit dargestellt war. Dieses Bild -— ausgewählt als eines aus den zahlreichen Darstellungen des «Guten Hirten» —
714 Mausoleum der Galla Placidia, 5. Jh. Der gute Hirte, Mosaik
erinnert Ja sehr an die Gestalt, in welcher David unter den Tieren dargestellt wurde. Es erinnert an andere, griechische Darstellungen. Und wenn wir uns heute eben besonders beschränken auf die Christus-Figur, so hat sie hier auf dem Bilde, wie sie steht, absolut den antiken Ausdruck. Wir sehen das Bestreben, das in dieser bildnerischen Darstellung liegt: ein mildes, ein edles Angesicht zu geben, wie das in diesen älteren Zeiten üblich war, bartlos, mit noch ungescheiteltem Haar, jugendlich, holdselig. Das war das Bestreben, welches in all diesen Darstellungen lebte. Wir sehen gerade in diesen Darstellungen einziehen das Christlich-Bildnerische in das Heidnisch-Bildnerische aus dem Grunde, weil eigentlich auf solchen Bildern noch alles heidnisch-bildnerisch ist.
Nun entsteht gerade gegenüber solchen Darstellungen die Frage: Worinnen liegt denn im Künstlerischen - ich spreche jetzt rein vom künstlerischen Gesichtspunkte aus — das spezifisch Heidnische? Man hat, soviel auch über Kunst geschrieben und gesagt worden ist, diesen eigentlichen Grundnerv des Heidnischen in der Kunstdarstellung, wenn ich den Ausdruck gebrauchen darf, man hat ihn nicht hervorgehoben. Wenn Sie - soviel man das aus dem, was noch vorhanden ist, kann - griechische Gestalten studieren, so werden Sie immer wieder und wiederum bewahrheitet finden, daß diese griechischen Gestalten realistisch in dem Sinne, wie wir heute von realistisch sprechen, nicht waren. Die Formen des menschlichen Organismus waren von den Griechen nicht so dargestellt, wie es einer unmittelbaren Porträtähnlichkeit mit irgendeinem Modell entsprechen würde, wie es überhaupt entsprechen würde einem bloßen Abbilde des menschlichen Leibes, wie er auf der Erde herumwandelt; die Griechen hatten schon einmal einen Idealleib im Sinne. Und in diesem Idealleib, den sie im Sinne hatten, da verkörperten sie eigentlich etwas ganz anderes, als was das menschliche Auge am Modell sehen kann. Man muß}, um die hauptsächlichsten der griechischen Körperformen richtig zu verstehen, der künstlerischen Körperformen, absehen von dem, was das Auge am Modell an Formen sieht, man muß durchaus festhalten an dem, was ich ja im vorigen Jahre hier schon hervorgehoben habe: daß der Grieche eigentlich gestaltete nach dem Innengefühl, das er im Leibe hatte. Er gestaltete einen Muskel nicht nach der Form, wie ihn das Auge sieht, sondern wie er ihn empfand, wie sein inneres Gefühl mitging mit der Beweglichkeit, mit dem Gestrafften, mit dem Anspannen des Muskels. Er drückte aus in der künstlerischen Materie dieses innere Gefühl, das er von seiner Leiblichkeit hatte.
Wodurch war dies allein möglich? — Ja, das war allein dadurch möglich, daß der Grieche, wenn er seine Gedanken auf das Leibliche des Menschen lenkte, bei einer weitaus größten Anzahl seiner bildnerischen Schöpfungen absah von dem Individuell-Seelischen des Menschen. Davon sah er ab. Er sah, indem er den Leib des Menschen gestaltete, eben nur auf das Leibliche. Aber bitte, er sah so auf das Leibliche, daß er dieses Leibliche betrachtete als ein Ergebnis des ganzen Kosmos, auch als ein spirituelles Ergebnis des ganzen Kosmos. Wenn Sie eine Zeus-Gestalt, eine Pallas-Athene-Gestalt, eine ApolloGestalt, eine Aphrodite-Gestalt nehmen, so finden Sie Seele darinnen. Aber diese Seele, die Sie in diesen Gestalten finden, ist nicht die individuelle menschliche Seele, sondern es ist die Seele, die lebt als ein Ergebnis des ganzen Kosmos: Weltseele in der menschlichen Gestalt. Man könnte sagen: Das, was der Grieche da auf diesem Gebiete als Seele betrachtete, suchte er durchaus außerhalb des Menschen als ein Ergebnis des ganzen Weltalls so, daß er sich dachte, wie die Kräfte des Weltalls zusammenwirken, um die Krone ihrer Gestaltungskraft, die Krone ihrer Schöpfermacht hervorzubringen, den menschlichen Organismus. Wie konzentriert die schöpferischen Kräfte des ganzen Weltenalls, so gestaltete der Grieche den menschlichen Organismus. In diesem griechischen Organismus bei solchen Gestalten, wie ich sie aufgezählt habe, da finden wir also den konzentrierten Ausdruck dessen, was gesetzebildend durch die ganze Kultur, aber auch durch das ganze Geistesall waltet: das Schöpferische des Kosmos auf den Menschen konzentriert.
Man möchte sagen: der Grieche gestaltete den Leib in der folgenden Weise. Ja, es sieht sonderbar aus; aber viel richtiger, als man denkt, ist dasjenige, was ich jetzt sagen werde. Man denke sich den Menschen einschlafend, so daß die Seele, also das Ich und der astralische Leib außerhalb des Leibes sind, und jetzt den schlafenden Leib durchseelt von Universal-Seelischem, eingenommen von dem Seelischen, das dem Kosmos angehört, von dem Seelischen, das vertrieben worden ist aus dem menschlichen Leib dadurch, daß das Individuell-Seelische während der Erdenentwickelung in den Menschen hineinfuhr —- dann hat man dasjenige, was den Griechen begeisterte zu der Ausprägung der besonderen Menschenformen bei solchen Gestalten, wie ich sie angeführt habe. Nicht als ob der Grieche kein Verständnis gehabt hätte für das Individuell-Seelische; aber er sah dieses Individuell-Seelische noch nicht durchdringend die menschliche Form; die menschliche Form war ihm noch etwas Universell-Individualistisches. Und so kommt es denn, was merkwürdig genug ist, daß das Individuell-Seelische, das spezifisch Menschlich-Seelische in der griechischen Kunst eigentlich nur dann auftritt, wenn der Grieche jetzt nicht diejenigen Gestalten darstellt, die für die griechische Kunst in ihrer Höhenentwickelung die typischen sind. Wenn der Grieche den Apollon oder den Zeus, die Pallas Athene oder die Hera oder die Aphrodite darstellt, dann stellt er etwas Typisches dar; wenn er nicht diese darstellt, wenn er Satyre und Faune darstellt, dann stellt er dar, was er dem Individuell-Menschlichen zuschreibt, was er jeder Seele zuschreibt, die mit dem Aufwachen in den Leib hineinfährt und mit dem Einschlafen aus dem Leib herausgeht.
Sehen Sie, das ist das Eigentümliche der heidnischen Kunstentwickelung in ihrer höchsten Ausgestaltung in Griechenland. Die spezifisch menschliche Seele ist noch nicht in den Kunstformen darinnen, wenn diese Kunstformen den Ideal-Typus annehmen. Dagegen ist dasjenige, was als menschliche Seele wirkt, was an Emotionen, in Impulsionen die menschliche Seele durchzieht, noch in diesen Gestalten, mit Vorliebe den Satyr- und Faun-Gestalten, man könnte sagen mehr ans Tierische erinnernd. Wenn der Grieche den Apoll darstellte, so lebte in dem Apoll eine noch übermenschliche, überindividuelle Seele in der künstlerischen Gestalt des Apollo. Ein Herüberschwenken zum Menschlichen finden wir erst, indem der Grieche darstellt den Merkur, den Hermes-Typus. Den finden wir ja auch sehr viel - Sie können das studieren am Hermes-Typus - an den Faun-, an den Satyr-Iypus angelehnt. Man möchte sagen: Es war Überzeugung der griechischen Kunst, daß die Menschenseele noch nicht so weit ist in ihrer Entwickelung, daß sie ihre eigenen Kräfte im menschlichen Leib darstellen dürfe, wenn dieser Menschenleib in seiner vollen Schönheit herauskommen soll.
Gehen wir nun gar weiter zurück hinter die griechische Kunst, gehen wir in die orientalischen Kunstformen hinein, dann haben wir völlig KosmischUniverselles in den Formen zum Ausdruck kommend, so daß die griechische Kunst schon die letzte Blüte ist dieses Kosmisch-Universalistischen, das man in und durch die menschlichen Formen zu bewältigen versuchte. Es ist außerordentlich bedeutsam, daß man dieses ins Auge faßt.
Nun, man möchte sagen: Wie der Christus ein Erlöser wurde mit Bezug auf die übrige Kräfteentfaltung der Menschheit, so wurde er auch ein Erlöser mit Bezug auf diese Kunstanschauung. Man stelle sich vor, daß ein bedeutender Geist sich die Frage gestellt hätte: Wie kann man hinaufidealisieren so, daß dadurch auch etwas Kunstgemäßes zum Ausdruck kommt, etwas Geistiges zum Ausdruck kommt, etwas Menschliches zum Ausdruck kommt, wie kann man hinaufidealisieren dasjenige, was man früher sich nur getraute darzustellen in den genannten Abweichungen vom Ideal-Typus, im Faun, im Satyr und so weiter? Wie kann erlöst werden das spezifisch Menschliche in bezug auf die Form, wie kann idealisiert werden dasjenige, was man im Altertum nicht hat idealisieren wollen, sondern gerade im Gegensatz zum Göttlich-Menschlichen als das Allzumenschliche hingestellt hat? - So ist diese Frage ja allerdings niemals ausgesprochen worden auf dem physischen Plan. Aber beantwortet wurde sie von der weitergehenden Kunstentwickelung. Sie ist ja im Grunde genommen auch von der Geschichte der Menschheit beantwortet worden.
Es wird immer zu den außerordentlich interessanten Tatsachen gehören, daß derjenige Mann in Griechenland, der so tief in das griechische Leben eingegriffen hat, daß sich in seinem eigenen Schicksal gewissermaßen das Erlöser-Schicksal wie vorbereitete, daß Sokrates traditionell nicht einen IdealTypus des Griechentums darstellt, sondern eher etwas vom Satyr oder Faun.
Es ist, als ob die Weltgeschichte selber das spezifisch Menschliche erst hätte heraufarbeiten wollen aus dem Untermenschlichen.
715* Kopie nach Lysipp (?) Sokrates
Und so sehen wir denn, daß der weitere Fortgang in der Formgestaltung der ist, daß dasjenige, was noch nicht durchbricht an Ideal-Menschlichem in der griechischen Gegenkunst, in der Satyr- und Faun-Kunst, sich zum Durchbruch verhelfen will, indem es ergreifen will dasjenige, was man nur als Menschengestalt hat vom Kosmos erlangen wollen. Das Individuell-Menschliche bricht ein in dasjenige, was nur in Gemäßheit der aus dem Kosmos gewonnenen spirituellen Linien und Formen gestaltet worden war. Die orientalischen Formen müssen wir noch durchaus im Kosmischen suchen; die abendländischen Formen in dem Individuell-Menschlichen.
So sehen wir, daß sich umwandelt in dem Moment, wo man das Heidnische überwinden will, gerade der Christus-Typus so, daß, ich möchte sagen das spezifisch Menschliche in dieses Kosmisch-Typisch-Allgemeine wie hineinfährt. Beobachten Sie nur, wie das nach und nach hineinfährt in das Allgemeine.
Hier haben wir eine Christus-Darstellung
716 Katakombe des Pontianus, Rom, 6. /7. Jh. Christus
aus etwas späteren Zeiten der altchristlichen Kunst, bereits mit einem Bartansatz, während viele Christus-Darstellungen der ersten Jahrhunderte bartlos sind. Aber wir sehen, wie hier durchaus nicht mehr das Bestreben ist, bloß das Kosmische in der Gestalt zu verwirklichen, sondern wie dieses Kosmische kämpft mit dem Individuellen, das sich heraufarbeitet. Das Kosmische überwiegt hier noch, aber es überwiegt eigentlich nur als Tradition. Dasjenige, was man übernommen hatte aus dem Orientalisch-Griechischen, das wiegt noch vor. Und es wiegt noch lange vor. Erst allmählich geschieht dieses Hineinfahren des Spezifischen, des Individuell-Menschlichen in diese Formen. Und so sehen wir, wie das ganz allmählich geschieht.
Ich habe Ihnen hier dann zu zeigen im nächsten Bilde Christus inmitten der Apostel:
717 Katakombe der Domitilla, Rom, 4. Jh. Christus und die Apostel
Da sehen Sie schon - es gehört auch den ersten Jahrhunderten an -, wie das Bestreben besteht, die Linien, die aus dem Kosmos stammen, zwar noch beizubehalten in der ganzen Anordnung und so weiter, aber wie etwas spezifisch Menschliches hineinfährt. Eben dadurch entstand dieser merkwürdige Streit, der ja in diesen alten Jahrhunderten von besonderer Bedeutung ist, dieser alte Streit, wie man den Christus darzustellen habe: ob man ihn darzustellen habe so, daß er mehr der apollinischen Schönheit entspricht, oder ob man ihn individuell-menschlich-seelisch darstellen dürfe. Ihn individuellmenschlich-seelisch darzustellen, das wird das Bestreben. Und das ist jetzt das Eigentümliche, sehen Sie. Da vollzieht sich nämlich einer jener Umschwünge, wie wir ihn kennengelernt haben auf einem anderen Gebiete in den letzten Tagen: das Individuell-Menschliche darzustellen, einfach dasjenige, was man früher verpönt hat, heraufzuholen. Das entwickelt sich gerade im höchsten Maße innerhalb der griechischen Strömung, während sich im Westen, im Lateinertum, die Fortsetzung bildet desjenigen, was einmal so recht östlich war: einen gewissen kosmischen Typus herauszugestalten. Das war in einer Zeit, als allerdings die Kunstentfaltung des Westens zur Neige ging und man nicht mehr recht darstellen konnte.
Und so kam es denn, daß in der Darstellung der Christus-Form selbst der östliche, der orientalische, der byzantinische Typus siegte und daß man den individuellen Christus nicht einführte. Aber weil die Kunstentwickelung dazumal abwärts ging, so kann man sagen, degenerierte dieser Typus; er behielt nicht die erhabene Würde bei, die ihm der Orient geben wollte, sondern er bekam etwas, man möchte sagen das Menschheitliche abwärts Treibendes. So etwas bekam er, was die Eigenschaften des Menschlichen in eine Art von Degeneration hineintrieb. Das Haar wurde gescheitelt, der Bart nahm besondere Formen an, der Gesichtsausdruck wurde so, daß man sah: das Übermenschlich-Kosmische sollte überwunden werden, überwunden gerade durch das Menschliche. Aber man war noch nicht in der Lage, dieses Menschliche wirklich in einer Art Ideal-Typus heraufzugestalten.
Dies sehen wir, wenn wir die weiteren Christus-Bilder auf uns wirken lassen, zum Beispiel selbst dieses sehr schöne Christus-Bild,
718 Ravenna, San Vitale, 6. Jh. Christus mit Erzengeln, Mosaik
in welchem wir allerdings noch große Schönheit, Kosmisch-Universelles finden, in welchem aber schon der Versuch gemacht ist, das Menschliche hineinzubringen.
Noch deutlicher tritt uns das auf einem der ausdruckvollsten Bilder entgegen, auf dem Bilde von Monreale:
719 Monreale, Dom, 12. Jh. Christus in der Apsis
Das ist ein Bild, das durch die wunderbare Wirkungskraft des Mosaiks den denkbar größten Eindruck macht. Aber gerade an diesem Bilde sieht man den Kampf jener beiden Strömungen, von denen ich Ihnen gesprochen habe. Und gerade durch diesen Kampf gehört dieses Bild mit zu dem Interessantesten, was vorhanden ist.
Das alles gehört zusammen mit dem allgemeinen Gang der Menschheitsentwickelung. Wir sehen wie in einer Schleifenlinie das Individuelle hinüberspringen in den Osten, dasjenige, was sich abstrahierendes Kosmisches ist, herübergehen nach dem Westen. Ich sage: sich abstrahierendes Kosmisches herübergehen nach dem Westen! -— Wenn man das verstehen will, so muß man sich allerdings ganz hineinversetzen in diejenige Wesensart, seelische Wesensart, welche im Römertum zu finden ist. Bedenken wir doch, was dieses Römertum war. Man muß sich da frei machen von all dem, was ja gerade dem gebildeten Menschen heute so eingeimpft ist, weil er das Römertum aufnimmt durch die Schule, weil unsere ganze Bildung eigentlich vom Römertum ausgeht. Aber man muß nicht vergessen, daß der eigentliche Inhalt des Römertums, wenn wir die erste große Blütezeit des Römertums betrachten, daß diese erste Blütezeit ihren Inhalt zwei Jahrhunderte lang vom Griechentum hat, bis zur Blüte des Römertums unter dem Julischen Kaiserhause. Also ungefähr 150 bis 200 Jahre vor dem Mysterium von Golgatha und dann noch etwas darnach sehen wir, wie das griechische Bildtum, die griechische Kultur übernommen wird von dem phantasielosen Römertum, wie dieses phantasielose Römertum sich aneignet den griechischen Inhalt. Dasjenige, worinnen Rom immer groß war, das ist gerade durch jene eigentümliche Verschleifung, von der ich gesprochen habe, die Übertragung des abstrahierten Kosmischen auf menschliche Angelegenheiten. In Rom entstand das besondere Talent, Weltherrschaft zu begründen, dieses besondere Talent, Weltherrschaft zu begründen, das in alten Zeiten - als die Verschleifung noch nicht geschehen war, die sich hier bildet, das Übereinandergreifen — die Eigentümlichkeit war der orientalischen großen Reiche der dritten nachatlantischen Kulturepoche, das ging über auf das Römertum. Weltherrschaft war ja das Ideal des Römertums. Die ganze damalige Kulturwelt unter die Herrschaft Roms zu bringen, war das Ideal der römischen Kaiserzeit. Den Inhalt ließ es sich geben, dieses Römertum, vom Griechentum, das fortgeschritten war zu der Sehnsucht, Individuelles zu gestalten. Ja, man empfand innerhalb des Römertums diese griechische Sehnsucht, Individuelles zu gestalten, sogar als Häßlichkeit; so daß das Lateinertum den griechischen Typus zwar übernahm, aber sich erst sträubte, weil es einen schönen Typus wollte und weil dieser ihm zuerst gar nicht als schön vorkam, sondern als häßlich. Es erinnerte sich schon der Lateiner an den alten Faun-und Satyr-Typus, der hier heraufgehoben werden sollte zum Höchst-Menschlichen. Gewissermaßen kam innerhalb des griechischen Wesens selber der kosmische Typus des Zeus, des Apollon, der Pallas Athene, der Aphrodite in die Dekadenz; und herauf lebte sich dasjenige, was früher nur im Gebiete des Häßlichen dargestellt war, zur veredelten moralischen Schönheit, die jetzt angestrebt wird.
Daß im Westen vom Römertum ausgehend sich nicht ein ganz anderer Christus-Typus, gerade eine Fortgestaltung des heidnischen Apollo-Typus ausgebildet hat, das ist nur dem Umstande zuzuschreiben, daß man in Italien zur Zeit dieser Jahrhunderte die bildnerische Erfindung, die Fähigkeit der eigenen bildnerischen Erfindung nicht gehabt hat, sie überhaupt nicht gehabt hat, weil das Römertum eigentlich in seinem Wesen phantasielos ist.
Wir können nun weitergehen. Sehen Sie, wir finden dann brachliegende Jahrhunderte, Aneignung des Griechischen, aber zu gleicher Zeit Verfall im Römertum. Eine Periode der Hoffnung tritt erst wiederum in der Zeit auf, als Augustinus, aber jetzt von Griechenland herüber das Christentum übernehmend, erscheint. Wiederum dieselbe Erscheinung: Das Römertum schickt sich an, die geistliche Weltherrschaft an sich zu reißen, eignet sich aber wiederum an dasjenige, was an Inhalt gezeugt worden ist von Griechenland. Dieselbe Erscheinung.
Das war ja zu gleicher Zeit diejenige Periode, in der Hieronymus die Bibel übersetzte ins Lateinische. In den folgenden Jahrhunderten entwickelte sich eigentlich alles so von Rom aus, daß das Bestreben ging, Rom zum Mittelpunkte der irdisch-menschlichen Weltordnung zu machen. Diese soziale Struktur der Welt einzuprägen, das Kosmische, aber jetzt ganz verabstrahiert, das war dasjenige, was sich da ausbildete. Und in der Kunst ging das - soweit man von Kunst in der damaligen Zeit sprechen konnte - bis ins 13. Jahrhundert hinein parallel damit, daß man immer wieder und wiederum von den Anregungen, die vom Osten herüberkamen, das aufbaute, was man eben aufbauen wollte. Und so sehen wir, daß dann abgeschlossen wird diese Periode mit Kunstformen auch in bezug auf den bildnerischen Ausdruck des Christus Jesus selber, die durchaus nichts Neues gebracht haben, sondern den griechisch-orientalischen Typus nach dem Westen herübergeholt haben. Dies ist ja im wesentlichen dasjenige, was wir bei Cimabue zum Ausdruck gebracht sehen.
Nun wollen wir gerade im 13. Jahrhundert wiederum festhalten die Gestalt, die der Christus-Typus angenommen hat:
720a Giovanni Cimabue Die Kreuzigung
Sie sehen hier bei Cimabue etwas, was sich, ich möchte sagen Ihnen die ganzen vorigen Jahrhunderte sogleich in die Seele fahren läßt. Sie sehen, wie dasjenige, was vom Orient herübergenommen worden ist in das Griechische, wie das da noch lebt. Wir sehen ja, wie auf dem Bilde die Erde mit dem Himmel verbunden ist, wie der Himmel tätig ist ebenso in seinem Wesen, wie die Erde tätig ist. Wir sehen aber selbst bei dem gekreuzigten Christus durchaus jene zwei Strömungen noch ineinandergehend, von denen ich Ihnen gesprochen habe.
Das ist an Kunst hineingestellt in eine Welt, die selbst nicht kunstschöpferisch sein kann, die die positiven Anregungen für die Phantasie aus dem Osten her doch empfängt.
Das nächste Bild, das wir zeigen werden, ist schon von Giotto:
720b Giotto Die Kreuzigung
Sie sehen förmlich dieses Giotto-Bild aus dem früheren (720a, 7) herauswachsen. Sie sehen noch immer den Himmel mitwirkend in seinen Wesenheiten. Noch immer ist nicht völlig herabgestiegen dasjenige, was aus dem Universalistischen der Welt herausgestaltet werden sollte ins Irdische. Aber wir sehen schon das Irdische, das noch ganz verschämt und schamvoll im griechischen Satyr- und Faun-Typus pulsiert, das sehen wir heraufsteigen, seine Herrschaft ausbreiten, sich idealisieren, das Menschliche geltend machen. Denn das, was da herauswollte, durfte sich erst dann zeigen der Welt, als es durchchristet war.
Man könnte sagen: Dreierlei läßt sich unterscheiden. Erstens jene Formen, in denen kosmische Seelenhaftigkeit lebt, sie finden wir in der alten Kunst. Sie finden wir dann im Kampfe mit dem Menschlich-Seelenhaften in dem ersten Auftreten der christlichen Kunst. Sie sehen wir noch immer im Kampfe in solcher Gestaltung, wie wir sie da vor uns haben. Das Kosmische ist überall noch - ich meine das Spirituell-Kosmische, nicht das Kopernikanisch-Materiell-Kosmische, sondern das Spirituell-Kosmische -, überall durchschimmernd, aber zu gleicher Zeit von unten auf das spezifisch Menschlich-Seelenhafte hinstrebend; dasjenige, was von der Seele aus dem Körper seine Form gibt, das will sich nach oben bringen. Das wäre also das zweite, was ich hervorzuheben hätte, wo die beiden im Kampfe miteinander sind, wo das Menschlich-Seelische dem Kosmisch-Seelischen gegenübertritt. Und vielleicht bei keinem Künstler sehen wir diesen Kampf in einer so intensiven Weise als gerade bei Giotto. Daher ist es immerhin interessant, sich gerade bei Giotto diesen Kampf anzusehen. Giotto strebt von der einen Seite her schon ganz wesentlich nach dem Modell hin. Er hat eine starke naturalistische Ader in sich. Aber in ihm liegen noch die allgemeinen, ich möchte sagen aus der geistigen Welt empfangenen Formen, die noch völlig dem Cimabue eigen waren. Das nächste Bild. Da sehen Sie eine andere «Kreuzigung» von Giotto:
72la Giotto Die Kreuzigung
Das vorhergehende Bild war nicht einmal ein echter Giotto, vielleicht sogar von einem anderen herrührend. Hier sehen Sie in echtester Weise Giotto. Hier sehen Sie noch beibehalten den Himmel, durchaus noch mitwirkend. Aber Sie sehen schon hineingefahren dasjenige, was nun auch in die Erlöser-Gestalt — und die interessiert uns ja hauptsächlich heute — etwas vom Leidenszug der Seele hineinbringt, in die Art, wie der Körper gebaut ist. Da sehen wir schon Menschliches hineinkommen, was man bei einer ApolloGestalt noch durchaus nicht sieht.
Ich bitte, mir das Sachliche, das ich jetzt sagen werde, nicht übelzunehmen. Dasjenige, was ich jetzt sage, sage ich ja ungern in dieser Zeit, aber es hieße Sie verkennen, wenn ich durchaus glauben wollte, daß Sie mir das Sachliche ganz übelnehmen. Wahrheitsgemäße Forschung ergibt nämlich etwas ganz Besonderes. Wenn wir in einem solchen Bilde, wie es das Giottosche ist, hineinfahren sehen in die alten Traditionen ein neues Element, ein Idealisieren desjenigen, was die Griechen nur unidealisiert im Faun, im Satyr haben zum Ausdruck bringen können, ein Heraufidealisieren des Menschlichen, wenn wir das bei Giotto wahrnehmen, so dürfen wir gerade Giotto so wesentlich in Gegensatz stellen zu seinem Lehrer und Meister Cimabue, der sein Römertum befruchtet hat noch immer vom Orient herüber. Wie kommt nun etwas ganz Neues hier in die Sache hinein? -— Da kommt eben das, was, wie gesagt, jetzt schwer zu sagen ist: Es breitet sich aus über die äußeren Punkte, die äußeren Territorien Europas dasjenige, was eigentlich in Mitteleuropa seinen Ursprung hat, was wir ja schon oft in Mitteleuropa entspringend gesehen haben - der Impuls, der neue Impuls, das Individuell-Menschliche seelisch zu gestalten. Es fließt wenig altes Römerblut zum Beispiel in den heutigen Italienern, wahrhaftig recht wenig. Da ist vieles, vieles hineingeflossen - man studiere nur die Geschichte, soweit sie sich studieren läßt nach äußerlichen Urkunden -, da ist vieles hineingeflossen, was mitteleuropäisches Blut war: Daher kam die Befruchtung. Dasjenige, was in Giotto lebt als naturalistisches Prinzip, seelisch-naturalistisches Prinzip, das ist entstanden durch Befruchtung des Römertums, des phantasielosen Römertums mit dem, was von Mitteleuropa ausgeströmt ist. Das Römertum ist eigentlich groß nur in den Ideen, die sich damit beschäftigen, die soziale Struktur im Sinne einer abstrahierten Kosmologie zu gestalten; dasjenige, was man eigentlich «Staat» nennen kann, das ist im Speziellen wirklich römisches Produkt, ist aus römischer Geistigkeit heraus gestaltet. Der Staat, der sich ausbreiten will - überall, wo er entsteht, ist er eine Kopie desjenigen, was aus dem Römerkopf als dessen Ureigenstes entspringen mußte.
Wir gehen zum nächsten Bild, das wiederum ein Giotto ist:
721b Giotto Christus thronend
Wir sehen hier einen Christus. Ich habe ihn ausgewählt aus dem Grunde, weil in diesem Bilde Giotto wohl am meisten dafür begeistert ist, den alten Typus herüberzunehmen vom Orient. Allein, sehen Sie sich dieses Gesicht an, wieviel er Individuelles hineingebracht hat! Sehen Sie sich jeden Finger an der aufgehobenen Rechten, wieviel er in diesem Bilde Individuell-Seelisches hineingebracht hat, wieviel da im besten Sinne Spirituell-Naturalistisches darinnen lebt! Da tritt allmählich dasjenige ein in die südliche Kunst, was sich eben verbindet mit dem orientalischen Wesen, mit dem kosmologisch-orientalischen Wesen; dasjenige tritt ein, was sich in Mitteleuropa selbst — wir haben die Bilder gesehen - in seiner Reinheit gibt, ohne das kosmologische Wesen, bloß aus dem Menschlich-Seelischen heraus.
Das nächste Bild ist wiederum ein Giotto:
7223 Giotto Die Taufe Christi
Auch hier sehen Sie noch hereinspielen den Himmel in die Erde. Aber wenn Sie gerade die Christus-Gestalt selbst ins Auge fassen: Sie werden finden, wie Giotto sich bemüht, das Seelische in der göttlichen Gestalt zum Ausdruck zu bringen, nicht nur in dem Antlitz, in der ganzen Gestalt, in der Haupthaltung und Handgebärde.
Hier haben wir, wiederum von Giotto, ein Abendmahl:
722b Giotto Das Abendmahl
Sie sehen den Christus links darauf, zum Teil durchaus der Schatten des griechischen Christus-Typus zum Ausdruck kommend, dennoch aber der Versuch, auch da das Seelisch-Individuelle heraufzuheben. Überall sehen wir diesen Einschlag, und so sehen wir das Merkwürdige, daß sich Strömungen, die im eminentesten Sinne künstlerisch sind, die orientalischen und die noch von dem alten persischen Kulturimpulse abhängigen mitteleuropäischen, ich möchte sagen ein Rendezvous geben auf einem eigentlich unkünstlerischen, bloß für staatliche Strukturen veranlagten phantasielosen Boden.
Noch ein Giotto, «Einzug in Jerusalem»,
723a Giotto Der Einzug in Jerusalem
was ich wiederum gewählt habe, um Ihnen dasselbe Phänomen vor Augen zu führen. Gerade wenn man den Christus in diesen verschiedenen biblischen Szenen ins Auge faßt, so sieht man, wie Giotto bemüht ist, das Seelische individuell zum Ausdruck zu bringen.
723b Giotto Die Dornenkrönung und Verspottung Christi
Wir wollten eben diese Wandlungen der Christus-Gestalt selbst Ihnen heute bringen durch diese Jahrhunderte.
Nun gedenken Sie der ersten tastenden Versuche, die wir in der alten christlichen Kunst gefunden haben. Gewiß, es ist vieles abhängig von dem Material, aber daß man das Material verwendet hat, daß man es gerade für diese Ideen brauchbar gemacht hat, das ist auch das Bezeichnende, das man da sieht. - Nun eine «Auferstehung» von Giotto:
724a Giotto Noli me tangere
Überall werden Sie bewahrheitet finden das, was ich zu dem Zusammenfluß dieser beiden Strömungen ausgesprochen habe. Aber zugleich sehen Sie die Intensität, mit der das griechische Christus-Ideal weiterwirkt, denn als Hintergrund, möchte ich sagen, in den schaffenden Kräften des Künstlers ist es ja doch noch überall vorhanden.
Nun kommen wir etwas weiter. Ich habe nun ein Bild ausgewählt aus dem 14. Jahrhundert von Orcagna, das Ihnen den «Christus als den Weltenrichter» darstellt:
725 Andrea Orcagna Das Jüngste Gericht
Es ist aus der Kirche Santa Maria Novella in Florenz. Und hier sehen Sie bei noch deutlichem Festhalten des alten Typus eine vollständige Individualisierung angestrebt, zart Seelisches hervortretend.
Wir stehen damit schon im 14. Jahrhundert. Die verschiedenen Entwickelungsströmungen der menschlichen Kultur bewegen sich mit verschiedenen Geschwindigkeiten. Wir sehen bis hier hereinspielen immer noch nicht nur den griechischen Christus-Typus, sondern wir sehen hereinspielen auch etwas von den Begeisterungskräften, die in der orientalischen Kunst sind. Ich möchte sagen: In all diesen Bildern kommt noch nicht zum Ausdruck, was in der römischen Weltherrschaftskirche, und zwar mit vollem historischem Rechte - das ist ja keine Kritik, die ich sage, sondern es sind nur Tatsachen, die ich anführe -, aus dem römischen Weltherrschaftsrechte heraus schon seit dem 9. Jahrhundert sich angebahnt hat. Griechentum lebt eigentlich noch in der Kunst, vermischt mit wenig Mitteleuropäischem.
Verstanden, daß das so sein müsse, das hat man von der zweiten Hälfte des 9. Jahrhunderts von Rom aus sehr gut. Man hat gewußt: Es muß zurückgestaut werden, wie ich mich einmal ausgedrückt habe, das östliche Wesen. Es muß durchdrungen werden das Abendland mit dem, was [sich] wie aus dem Grunde des abendländischen Volkslebens selbst zur Höhe arbeiten will. Wir sehen da heraufkommen eine Gesinnung, die ich Ihnen damit charakterisiert habe, daß ich es als freies Städtetum charakterisiert habe, dieses freie Städteturn, das von Mitteleuropa seinen Ausgangspunkt genommen hat und sich über die verschiedenen anderen Territorien verbreitet hat. Dieses freie Städteturn hatte den Drang, in sich das spezifisch Menschlich-Seelische zum Ausdruck zu bringen. Jetzt, im 9. Jahrhundert, verstand man in Rom, daß man Rechnung zu tragen hat diesem europäischen Impulse und trug ihm Rechnung. Dasjenige, was aber nun durch die Institutionen der Weltenkirche ging, was die spezifisch westliche Form des Katholizismus ausmachte im Gegensatze zu dem, was nach dem Orient zurückgestaut war, das kam eigentlich erst spezifisch zum Ausdruck in demjenigen Künstler, der die Kunst, die Malerei so recht katholisch machte, in dem wunderbaren Fra Angelico:
724b Fra Angelico Das Abendmahl
Hier erst sehen wir, wenn wir Verständnis für solche Dinge haben, das westlich-katholische Element über die Kunst ausgegossen. Der Unterschied zwischen dem vorigen (725) und diesem Bilde (724b, 65), auch zwischen dem vorigen Abendmahl (722b, 34) und diesem Bilde (724b, 65) - er ist ein ungeheurer. Denn in diesem Bilde lebt, ebenso wie darinnen eine liebenswürdige Kunst lebt, so lebt in diesem Bilde eine westkatholische Gesinnung. Sie sehen die Formen, zu denen es das Meßßopfer gebracht hat, ebensogut in diese Komposition des Bildes hineingeheimnißt wie die Erinnerung an das Abendmahl vor Golgatha. Sie sehen nicht nur das Abendmahl vor Golgatha, Sie sehen die Fortwirkung dieses Abendmahles in dem katholischen Meßopfer in der Komposition dieses Bildes darinnen. Katholisches Fühlen des Abendmahles ist über dieses Bild, vor allen Dingen über die Gestalt des Erlösers ausgegossen. Hier erst wird der Erlöser das Vorbild des abendländischen Priesters in der Kunst. In Wirklichkeit ist er es ja schon früher, in der äußeren Wirklichkeit.
Wir sehen also jetzt die römische Weltherrschaftskirche ihre Herrschaft auch über die Kunst in ganz entschiedener Weise ausbreiten. Wir können von Giotto noch sagen, daß er aus einer freien individuellen Seele heraus das künstlerische Opfer dem Franz von Assisi gebracht hat. Hier sehen wir in Fra Angelico denjenigen, der ebenso malt wie er Messe liest in San Marco in Florenz. Es geht die Aura des Katholizismus durch diese Bilder. Es ist nicht mehr das individuelle Opfer, sondern es malt die Kirche mit.
Nicht minder sehen Sie das bei dem nächsten Bild von Fra Angelico,
726a Fra Angelico Die Kreuzigung
einer Kreuzigung. Das Katholische malt mit in der Kunst.
Ich bitte, sich nur einmal recht genau das nächste Bild anzusehen, wo Sie sehen können, wie wirklich das Wesen der katholischen Kunst, dieses katholische Organisieren so lebt, daß selbst im Weltgericht, ich möchte sagen die Kräfte der katholischen Kirche bis in das Reich der überirdischen Wesen hin ein organisierend wirken.
726b Fra Angelico Das Jüngste Gericht, Mittelteil
Dies finden wir nunmehr sich steigernd bei einem anderen Frater, von dem ich Ihnen das folgende Bild zeigen möchte:
727 Fra Bartolommeo Christus und die vier Evangelisten
Aber hier sehen wir nun, ich möchte sagen das dritte Stadium des interessanten Prozesses. Hier sehen wir hineinspielen ein neues Auffrischen, jetzt durch das wiedererstandene alte Griechentum. Das fährt nun wiederum hinein, das alte Griechentum.
Und so sehen wir, wie eine Zeitlang der von dem individualisierend Seelischen ergriffene Christus-Typus, der uns ja heute vorzugsweise interessiert, wie der gewaltet hat. Nehmen Sie die ganze Gestaltung, wie er geworden ist von dem, in dem kosmische Kräfte walten im Anfange, der dann das Individuell-Seelische aufgenommen, gerade durch den griechischen Impuls immer mehr umgestaltet hat, wie er immer mehr individualisiert und individualisiert worden ist. Wie ist dieser Christus individualisiert, meine lieben Freunde? Jetzt sehen wir, wie neuerdings eingreift, einfließt die Antike, hier noch ganz wenig, aber sie ist schon darinnen. Es ist schon wiederum ein Herausarbeiten aus dem Charakteristischen in das Typisch-Schöne hinein. Und das können Sie fortgehend bemerken. Denn das ist eigentlich das Geheimnis der Renaissance. Indem diese Bilder, die ich Ihnen jetzt noch zuletzt zeige, der Ausgangspunkt wurden für die Renaissance-Künstler, sehen wir eben in den RenaissanceKünstlern das Griechentum vollständig erneuert wieder heraufkommen; aber nicht hineinkommen in das, was erobert war durch die Gestaltung des Individuellen.
Hier haben Sie ein Abendmahl von Andrea del Sarto,
728 Andrea del Sarto Das Abendmahl
das in Florenz ist. Wiederum schöne Gestalten; also etwas noch das Bewußtsein des Kosmischen, das der Grieche noch hatte, etwas von den Traditionen des Kosmischen wiederum in die Gestalten hineinbringend; nur aus der Tradition heraus, nicht mehr aus der unmittelbaren Anschauung, dem unmittelbaren Erfühlen, wie das beim Griechen war. Das finden wir dann hier; das gestaltet sich aus und wird zu Raffael, Lionardo da Vinci, Michelangelo. Sie sehen es werden, das, was dann bei Lionardo da Vinci besonders geworden ist, in diesem Bilde, eine Taufe Christi von Verrocchio, dem Lehrer des Lionardo:
729a Verrocchio/Lionardo Die Taufe Christi
Das gleiche Motiv noch bei Masolino aus derselben Zeit:
729b Masolino Die Taufe Christi
Jetzt wollen wir noch einmal einschieben das Bild «Die Taufe» von Giotto:
722a Giotto Die Taufe Christi
Sehen Sie sich diese Taufe an, wo Sie noch den Kampf der beiden Prinzipien haben, ohne den griechischen Einschlag, also ohne den altgriechischen, ohne den antiken Einschlag, den neuen griechischen, den christlichen Einschlag ganz besonders stark haben.
Und jetzt führen wir noch einmal die zwei anderen Bilder vor:
729a WVerrocchio/Lionardo Die Taufe Christi
729b Masolino Die Taufe Christi
Sie sehen, wie Renaissance wirkt. Und aus Verrocchio wird dann Lionardo; vielleicht hat sogar Lionardo an diesem Bilde schon mitgearbeitet.
Jetzt möchte ich Ihnen zum Schlusse nur noch zwei Bilder zeigen, an denen Sie sehen können, was von Norden, von Mitteleuropa herüberkommend eben sich mit all dem anderen, das ich Ihnen gezeigt habe, vermischt hat. Hier haben wir ein rein nordisches Produkt, den Schmerzensmann, den Christus von Dürer:
730a Albrecht Dürer Der Schmerzensmann, Kupferstich-Passion
Hier haben wir das Bestreben ohne allen kosmischen Einschlag: den Menschen in dem Christus.
Hat Fra Angelico ausgegossen über sein künstlerisches Schaffen das Katholische - hier sehen wir die Aufbäumung gegen die Weltherrschaft; hier sehen wir dasjenige, was aus der menschlichen Individualität heraus seinen Christus gestalten will. Hier arbeitet an einem Bilde nur ein einzelner Mensch. Als Fra Angelico in der San Marco-Kirche in Florenz malte, malte die ganze katholische Gesinnung mit. Hier arbeitet ein einziger Mensch aus seiner biblischen Vorstellung heraus. Das ist hier geblieben in dieser Zeit. Später kam die Renaissance ja herauf; aber nach Süden ist es gezogen, was sich mit den anderen Strömungen vermischt hat.
Ich habe dann noch ein anderes Bild, «Christus am Kreuz» von Dürer,
730b Albrecht Dürer Christus am Kreuz, Kleine Holzschnitt-Passion
das Ihnen dasselbe darstellen soll.
Diese Dinge sollten uns zeigen, wie durch Jahrhunderte hindurch die Christus-Gestalt sich gewandelt hat. Ich habe aus den späteren Jahrhunderten nur eben diese zwei Bilder vorgeführt. Ich möchte im weiteren Fortlaufe dieser Betrachtungen, wenn sie möglich sein werden, Ihnen noch zeigen, wie sich die Christus-Bilder weiterentwickeln. Denn man könnte auch eine Weltgeschichte schreiben seit dem Mysterium von Golgatha, indem man nur den Wandel der Abbildungen, die man von Christus machte, beschriebe. Alles dasjenige, was sich in Wirklichkeit zugetragen hat, drückt sich darin aus, drückt sich wirklich darin aus. Und man könnte auch bis in die Gegenwart gehen.
Christus-Darstellungen, die in der Gegenwart versucht worden sind - ich habe ja vor Jahren sogar eine ganze Kollektion von Christussen in einer Ausstellung gesehen, eines der Bilder war scheußlicher als das andere! Was in der Gegenwart versucht wird, auch das ist ein Abbild desjenigen, was in der Gegenwart geschieht, was in der Gegenwart zu jenem Chaos geführt hat, in dem wir darinnen leben. Und wenn hier versucht wird — ohne gerade aus der Absicht, wie ich neulich ausgeführt habe, eine Christus-Figur zu schaffen -, wiederum hineinzutragen dasjenige, was in diesen Gestalten liegt, in die geistige Welt, plastisch, in Anfängen, in ersten Versuchen — malerisch, so gut es geht mit unseren beschränkten Mitteln, so liegt das eben doch auch in der Fortentwickelung derjenigen Kulturlinie, die in den Realitäten der Menschheitsentfaltung gegeben ist.
Rudolf Steiner Malerei (Pflanzenfarben) in der kleinen Kuppel des ersten Goetheanum, Dornach
731” Ausschnitt mit dem Mittelmotiv, mit Teil des Architravs
732* Mittelmotiv: Der Menschheitsrepräsentant zwischen Luzifer und Ahriman
733* Der Menschheitsrepräsentant zwischen Luzifer und Ahriman, Entwurf für die kleine Kuppel des ersten Goetheanum in Pastell
734* Der Menschheitsrepräsentant, Brustbild
735* Antlitz des Menschheitsrepräsentanten, Bleistift-Skizze Rudolf Steiner, Plastische Holzgruppe
736* Der Menschheitsrepräsentant zwischen Luzifer und Ahriman 737* Der Menschheitsrepräsentant
738” Modell für die plastische Holzgruppe, Gipsabguß
739* Kopf des Menschheitsrepräsentanten, Seitenansicht
740* Kopf des Menschheitsrepräsentanten
741* Studie zum Kopf des Menschheitsrepräsentanten, Plastilin
Und es ist gut, in der Gegenwart sich recht, recht sehr auch zu befruchten mit solchen Ideen, die man von dem Kulturgebiete der Kunst gewinnen kann, auch da sich zu bemühen, ein wenig auf die Wahrheit zu sehen. Denn es werden in der Gegenwart manche Götzen angebetet, welche nur dadurch angebetet werden, daß man kein Talent hat, die Wahrheit wirklich zu schauen.
In dieser Zeit (1917), in der es möglich ist zu sagen, daß sich verbünden sollen vier Fünftel der Welt gegen ein Fünftel, in der Zeit, in der so etwas mit jener Gleichgültigkeit hingenommen wird, mit der es hingenommen wird, in der Zeit ist gar mancher Anlaß, die Begriffe, die man aufgenommen hat aus dem historischen Werden der Menschheit, ein wenig zu revidieren.
13. Early Christian Paintings and Mosaics. Italian Masters. Dürer
Changes in the conception of Christ in artistic representation:
Today I would like to say a few words about the changes in the conception of Christ from a certain point of view over a certain period of time. In a certain sense, one can speak of an influence of the Mystery of Golgotha on every area of human culture, and one gains an even more accurate picture of what has happened in the evolution of the earth through the Mystery of Golgotha when one considers the impact of this impulse from Golgotha, as far as possible independently for the individual areas of culture.
One can truly say that in the development of art, too, the mystery of Golgotha has had a significant impact on the general progress of humanity and has brought about important changes. But one will not be able to come to terms with these thoughts unless one directs one's attention to certain, I would say, intimacies of the development of art in the development of the individual arts.
If we investigate when the people of Europe began to depict the figure of Christ, we come back again and again to the fact that the attempt to depict the figure of Christ artistically was actually only made from the moment in world history when the Gospel conception, that is, the literary conception of Christianity, had reached a certain conclusion, when certain messages had been eliminated from the mass of Gospels, from Gospel traditions, certain pieces of information emerged that were then considered apocryphal. When the foundation of Gospel literature was complete and what was written in the Gospels had, to a certain extent, entered the minds of people, a longing began in the West to depict, artistically depict, the scenes and figures found in the Gospels.
In any case, this is something that should not be overlooked. Before the Gospels were completed and had become established in the minds of those who called themselves Christians with a certain degree of uniformity, depictions were limited to what was present in signatures, as you can see here in the photograph, to the monogram of Christ:
710° Christ monogram on an epitaph, 5th-6th century.
In the middle you can see the X and the P, i.e. Chi and Rho, which at the same time is the slanted cross with the Rho.
Or in a similar form, as you can see here:
712* Christ monogram on a sarcophagus, 5th-6th century.
Or combined with animal figures:
713* Christ monogram between doves on a sarcophagus, 5th-6th century.
Or in the modified form, as we have here:
711” Christ monogram on a basilica ruin, 5th-6th century.
This was the extent of what was available during the period in which the substance of the Gospels became standardized and gradually entered the minds of the people, so that it is only from the 2nd and 3rd centuries onwards that we can speak of actual pictorial representations of sacred history.
I have already emphasized a number of things in the course of my observations on art here, to which I must refer again today in a different context. I have emphasized that the first representations that were given still moved entirely within the forms of ancient, pagan art development. What paganism had developed in terms of art forms was simply transferred to the content of Christian development. This is extremely important. And one can say: Until the beginning of the 3rd century, nothing had yet been completed in Western cultural development as such a transfer of the pagan, the pagan way of representing the visual arts to the scenes of the Gospel. We find there that the figures to which Christian ideas were attached are represented in a similar way to how the figures of pagan myths were usually represented.
Today we will limit our consideration to the figure of Christ himself. And in this regard, we find that in the early days, when people began to depict Christ, the most common image was that of the good shepherd, which was depicted in a wide variety of forms in ancient times, in the pre-Christian era. This image — selected as one of the numerous depictions of the “Good Shepherd” —
714 Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, 5th century. The Good Shepherd, mosaic
is very reminiscent of the figure in which David was depicted among the animals. It is reminiscent of other Greek depictions. And if we limit ourselves today to the figure of Christ, it has here in the picture, as it stands, an absolutely ancient expression. We see the endeavor that lies in this pictorial representation: to give a mild, noble face, as was customary in those older times, beardless, with hair still unparted, youthful, graceful. That was the aspiration that lived in all these depictions. We see Christian art entering into pagan art in these depictions precisely because everything in such pictures is still pagan art.
Now, precisely in relation to such depictions, the question arises: What is it in the artistic – I am speaking now purely from an artistic point of view – that is specifically pagan? As much as has been written and said about art, this actual nerve center of the pagan in artistic representation, if I may use the expression, has not been emphasized. If you study Greek figures, as far as this is possible from what still exists, you will find again and again that these Greek figures were not realistic in the sense in which we speak of realism today. The forms of the human organism were not depicted by the Greeks in such a way as to correspond to an immediate portrait-like resemblance to any model, as it would correspond to a mere representation of the human body as it walks around on earth; the Greeks already had an ideal body in mind. And in this ideal body that they had in mind, they actually embodied something completely different from what the human eye can see in the model. In order to understand the main Greek body forms correctly, the artistic body forms, one must disregard what the eye sees in the model in terms of form; one must hold fast to what I already emphasized here last year: that the Greeks actually designed according to the inner feeling they had in their bodies. They did not design a muscle according to the form that the eye sees, but according to how they felt it, how their inner feeling went along with the mobility, the tightening, the tensing of the muscle. They expressed this inner feeling that they had of their physicality in the artistic material.
How was this possible? — Yes, it was possible solely because the Greeks, when they directed their thoughts to the physicality of human beings, disregarded the individual soul of human beings in the vast majority of their artistic creations. They disregarded it. When they shaped the human body, they looked only at the physical. But please note that he viewed the physical in such a way that he regarded it as a result of the entire cosmos, also as a spiritual result of the entire cosmos. If you take a figure of Zeus, a figure of Pallas Athena, a figure of Apollo, a figure of Aphrodite, you will find soul within them. But this soul that you find in these figures is not the individual human soul, but rather the soul that lives as a result of the entire cosmos: the world soul in human form. One could say that what the Greeks regarded as soul in this area, they sought entirely outside of human beings as a result of the entire universe, so that they imagined how the forces of the universe work together to produce the crown of their creative power, the crown of their creative power, the human organism. The Greeks shaped the human organism as a concentrated expression of the creative forces of the entire universe. In this Greek organism, in the forms I have listed, we find the concentrated expression of what governs the entire culture, but also the entire spiritual world: the creative power of the cosmos concentrated in human beings.
One might say: the Greeks shaped the body in the following way. Yes, it looks strange, but what I am about to say is much more correct than one might think. Imagine a person falling asleep, so that the soul, that is, the ego and the astral body, are outside the body, and now the sleeping body is imbued with universal , filled with the soul that belongs to the cosmos, with the soul that has been driven out of the human body by the individual soul entering into humans during the development of the earth — then you have what inspired the Greeks to give shape to the special human forms in such figures as I have mentioned. It is not that the Greeks had no understanding of the individual soul; but they did not yet see this individual soul permeating the human form; for them, the human form was still something universal and individualistic. And so it happens, strangely enough, that the individual soul, the specifically human soul, actually only appears in Greek art when the Greeks do not depict those figures that are typical of Greek art in its highest development. When the Greeks depict Apollo or Zeus, Pallas Athena or Hera or Aphrodite, they are depicting something typical; when they do not depict these, when they depict satyrs and fauns, they depict what they attribute to the individual human being, what they attribute to every soul that enters the body when it awakens and leaves the body when it falls asleep.
You see, this is what is peculiar about the development of pagan art in its highest form in Greece. The specifically human soul is not yet present in the art forms when these art forms take on the ideal type. On the other hand, what acts as the human soul, what pervades the human soul in emotions and impulses, is still present in these figures, with a preference for satyr and faun figures, which one could say are more reminiscent of animals. When the Greeks depicted Apollo, a superhuman, supra-individual soul lived in the artistic form of Apollo. We only find a shift towards the human when the Greeks depict Mercury, the Hermes type. We find this very often – you can study this in the Hermes type – based on the faun and satyr types. One might say that it was the conviction of Greek art that the human soul is not yet so far advanced in its development that it can represent its own powers in the human body if this human body is to emerge in its full beauty.
If we go back even further than Greek art, if we go into Oriental art forms, then we have something completely cosmic and universal expressed in the forms, so that Greek art is already the last flowering of this cosmic universalism that people tried to master in and through human forms. It is extremely important to take this into account.
Now, one might say: just as Christ became a savior in relation to the remaining development of humanity's powers, so he also became a savior in relation to this view of art. Imagine that an important spirit had asked himself the question: How can one idealize in such a way that something artistic is expressed, something spiritual is expressed, something human is expressed? How can one idealize that which one previously dared to represent only in the aforementioned deviations from the ideal type, in the faun, in the satyr, and so on? How can the specifically human be redeemed in relation to form, how can that which in ancient times was not wanted to be idealized, but rather presented as the all-too-human in contrast to the divine-human, be idealized? — Of course, this question was never actually asked on the physical plane. But it has been answered by the further development of art. It has also been answered, in essence, by the history of humanity.
It will always be one of the most interesting facts that the man in Greece who had such a profound influence on Greek life, whose own fate was, in a sense, prepared for the fate of a savior, that Socrates traditionally does not represent an ideal type of Greekness, but rather something of a satyr or faun.
It is as if world history itself first wanted to bring out the specifically human from the subhuman.
715* Copy after Lysippus (?) Socrates
And so we see that the further progression in the form of design is that what has not yet broken through as the ideal human in Greek counter-art, in satyr and faun art, wants to help itself to a breakthrough by grasping what one could only obtain from the cosmos in human form. The individual human breaks into that which had been shaped only in accordance with the spiritual lines and forms obtained from the cosmos. We must still seek the Oriental forms in the cosmic; the Western forms in the individual human.
So we see that at the moment when one wants to overcome paganism, the Christ type transforms in such a way that, I would say, the specifically human enters into this cosmic-typical-general. Just observe how it gradually enters into the general.
Here we have a representation of Christ
716 Catacomb of Pontianus, Rome, 6th/7th century Christ
from somewhat later periods of early Christian art, already with a beard, while many representations of Christ from the first centuries are beardless. But we see how the endeavor here is no longer merely to realize the cosmic in the figure, but how this cosmic struggles with the individual, which is working its way up. The cosmic still predominates here, but it actually predominates only as tradition. That which had been adopted from the Oriental-Greek still prevails. And it continues to prevail for a long time. Only gradually does the specific, the individual-human, enter into these forms. And so we see how this happens very gradually.
In the next picture, I will show you Christ in the midst of the apostles:
717 Catacomb of Domitilla, Rome, 4th century. Christ and the apostles
There you can already see – and this also belongs to the first centuries – how there is an endeavor to retain the lines that originate from the cosmos in the overall arrangement and so on, but how something specifically human is introduced. This is precisely what gave rise to that remarkable dispute, which was of particular significance in those ancient centuries, that old dispute about how Christ should be depicted: whether he should be depicted in a way that corresponds more to Apollonian beauty, or whether he should be depicted as an individual human being with a soul. The endeavor is to depict him as an individual human being with a soul. And that is what is peculiar about it, you see. For here one of those reversals is taking place which we have become familiar with in another field in recent days: to portray the individual human being, simply to bring out what was previously frowned upon. This is developing to the highest degree within the Greek tradition, while in the West, in Latin culture, there is a continuation of what was once so very Eastern: the development of a certain cosmic type. This was at a time when the artistic development of the West was coming to an end and it was no longer really possible to portray anything.
And so it came about that in the representation of the Christ form itself, the Eastern, the Oriental, the Byzantine type prevailed, and the individual Christ was not introduced. But because the development of art was declining at that time, one can say that this type degenerated; it did not retain the sublime dignity that the Orient wanted to give it, but instead acquired something that one might call a downward drive toward humanity. It acquired something that drove the characteristics of humanity into a kind of degeneration. The hair was parted, the beard took on special forms, the facial expression became such that one could see: the superhuman-cosmic was to be overcome, overcome precisely by the human. But one was not yet in a position to really shape this human into a kind of ideal type.
We see this when we let the other images of Christ sink in, for example, even this very beautiful image of Christ,
718 Ravenna, San Vitale, 6th century. Christ with archangels, mosaic
in which we still find great beauty, something cosmic and universal, but in which an attempt has already been made to introduce the human element.
This becomes even clearer in one of the most expressive images, the image of Monreale:
719 Monreale, Cathedral, 12th century. Christ in the apse
This is an image that makes the greatest possible impression through the wonderful effect of the mosaic. But it is precisely in this image that one can see the struggle between the two currents I have spoken to you about. And it is precisely because of this struggle that this image is one of the most interesting that exists.
All this is part of the general course of human development. We see how, in a looping line, the individual jumps over to the East, while that which is abstract cosmic passes over to the West. I say: the abstract cosmic passes over to the West! — If one wants to understand this, one must, of course, put oneself completely into the nature, the spiritual nature, that is to be found in Roman culture. Let us consider what this Roman culture was. One must free oneself from everything that is so ingrained in educated people today, because they learn about Roman culture in school, because our entire education is actually based on Roman culture. But we must not forget that the actual content of Roman culture, if we consider its first great heyday, was derived from Greek culture for two centuries, until the flowering of Roman culture under the Julian imperial house. So about 150 to 200 years before the Mystery of Golgotha, and then a little after that, we see how Greek imagery, Greek culture, is taken over by unimaginative Roman culture, how this unimaginative Roman culture appropriates Greek content. What Rome was always great at was precisely that peculiar blending I spoke of, the transfer of the abstract cosmic to human affairs. In Rome, the special talent for establishing world domination arose, this special talent for establishing world domination, which in ancient times — when the blending that is forming here, the overlapping, had not yet taken place — was the peculiarity of the great Oriental empires of the third post-Atlantean cultural epoch, and which was transferred to Roman culture. World domination was, after all, the ideal of Roman culture. Bringing the entire cultural world of that time under the rule of Rome was the ideal of the Roman Empire. This Roman culture was able to draw its content from Greek culture, which had advanced to the longing to shape the individual. Indeed, within Roman civilization, this Greek longing to create individuality was even perceived as ugliness, so that Latin civilization adopted the Greek type, but initially resisted it because it wanted a beautiful type and because this type did not initially appear beautiful to it, but rather ugly. The Latins already remembered the ancient faun and satyr type, which was to be elevated here to the highest human level. In a sense, within the Greek essence itself, the cosmic type of Zeus, Apollo, Pallas Athena, and Aphrodite fell into decadence; and what had previously been represented only in the realm of ugliness rose to the refined moral beauty that is now sought after.
The fact that a completely different type of Christ, precisely a continuation of the pagan Apollo type, did not develop in the West starting from Roman culture can only be attributed to the fact that Italy did not have the artistic inventiveness, the capacity for its own artistic invention, during those centuries, did not have it at all, because Roman culture is essentially unimaginative.
We can now move on. You see, we then find centuries of stagnation, the appropriation of Greek culture, but at the same time the decline of Roman culture. A period of hope only reappears in the time when Augustine appears, but now adopting Christianity from Greece. Again, the same phenomenon: Roman culture sets out to seize spiritual world domination, but again appropriates what has been created in terms of content by Greece. The same phenomenon.
This was also the period in which Jerome translated the Bible into Latin. In the following centuries, everything developed from Rome in such a way that the aim was to make Rome the center of the earthly human world order. Imprinting this social structure of the world, the cosmic, but now completely abstracted, was what developed there. And in art—insofar as one could speak of art at that time—this continued into the 13th century, parallel to the fact that, again and again, the inspiration that came from the East was used to build what one wanted to build. And so we see that this period came to a close with art forms, including in relation to the pictorial expression of Christ Jesus himself, that brought nothing new at all, but rather brought the Greek-Oriental type over to the West. This is essentially what we see expressed in Cimabue.
Now, in the 13th century, we want to take another look at the form that the Christ type has taken:
720a Giovanni Cimabue The Crucifixion
Here in Cimabue you see something that, I would say, immediately touches the soul of all the previous centuries. You see how that which was taken from the Orient into Greek culture still lives on there. We see how, in the picture, the earth is connected to the heavens, how the heavens are active in their essence just as the earth is active. But even in the crucified Christ, we still see those two currents intertwining, of which I have spoken to you.
This is placed in art in a world that cannot itself be creative in art, but which nevertheless receives positive stimuli for the imagination from the East.
The next picture we will show is already by Giotto:
720b Giotto The Crucifixion
You can literally see this Giotto painting growing out of the earlier one (720a, 7). You can still see heaven participating in its beings. That which was to be formed out of the universalistic nature of the world into the earthly has not yet completely descended. But we already see the earthly, which still pulsates quite bashfully and shamefully in the Greek satyr and faun types, we see it rising, spreading its dominion, idealizing itself, asserting the human. For that which wanted to come out was only allowed to show itself to the world when it had been Christianized.
One could say that three things can be distinguished. First, those forms in which cosmic soulfulness lives; we find them in ancient art. We then find them in struggle with the human-soulful in the first appearance of Christian art. We still see them in struggle in such a form as we have before us here. The cosmic is still everywhere — I mean the spiritual-cosmic, not the Copernican-material-cosmic, but the spiritual-cosmic — shining through everywhere, but at the same time striving upward from below toward the specifically human soul; that which gives form to the body from the soul wants to rise upwards. So that would be the second thing I would like to emphasize, where the two are in conflict with each other, where the human soul confronts the cosmic soul. And perhaps in no other artist do we see this struggle in such an intense way as in Giotto. It is therefore interesting to look at this struggle in Giotto's work. On the one hand, Giotto strives essentially toward the model. He has a strong naturalistic streak in him. But within him still lie the general forms, I would say received from the spiritual world, which were still completely characteristic of Cimabue. The next picture. Here you see another “Crucifixion” by Giotto:
72la Giotto The Crucifixion
The previous painting was not even a genuine Giotto, perhaps even originating from someone else. Here you see Giotto in his most authentic form. Here you can still see the sky, still very much present. But you can already see what has now been incorporated into the figure of the Redeemer—and that is what interests us most today—something of the suffering of the soul, in the way the body is constructed. Here we can already see something human coming in, which is not at all visible in an Apollo figure.
Please do not take offense at what I am about to say. I am reluctant to say this at this time, but it would be a mistake to think that you would take offense at what I am about to say. Truthful research reveals something very special. When we see in a painting such as Giotto's a new element entering into the old traditions, an idealization of what the Greeks were only able to express in a non-idealized form in the faun and the satyr, an idealization of the human, if we perceive this in Giotto, then we may contrast Giotto so significantly with his teacher and master Cimabue, whose Romanism was still fertilized by the Orient. How does something completely new come into play here? — Here comes what, as I said, is now difficult to say: what actually has its origin in Central Europe, what we have often seen springing from Central Europe — the impulse, the new impulse to shape the individual human being spiritually — is spreading across the outer points, the outer territories of Europe. There is little ancient Roman blood flowing in today's Italians, for example, very little indeed. Much, much more has flowed into them — one need only study history, insofar as it can be studied from external documents — much more has flowed into them that was Central European blood: that is where the fertilization came from. That which lives in Giotto as a naturalistic principle, a spiritual-naturalistic principle, arose through the fertilization of Romanism, of unimaginative Romanism, with that which flowed out of Central Europe. Roman culture is actually only great in the ideas that deal with shaping the social structure in the sense of an abstract cosmology; what can actually be called a “state” is, in particular, a truly Roman product, shaped out of Roman spirituality. The state that wants to spread—wherever it arises, it is a copy of what had to spring from the Roman mind as its very essence.
We move on to the next picture, which is again by Giotto:
721b Giotto Christ Enthroned
Here we see Christ. I have chosen this painting because in it Giotto is most enthusiastic about adopting the ancient type from the Orient. But look at this face, how much individuality he has brought to it! Look at each finger of the raised right hand, how much individual soulfulness he has brought into this picture, how much spiritual naturalism lives in it in the best sense! Gradually, something enters Southern art that is connected with the Oriental essence, with the cosmological-Oriental essence; something enters that exists in Central Europe itself—we have seen the paintings—in its purity, without the cosmological essence, merely out of the human soul.
The next painting is again by Giotto:
7223 Giotto The Baptism of Christ
Here, too, you can still see heaven playing into earth. But if you focus your gaze on the figure of Christ himself, you will see how Giotto strives to express the soul in the divine form, not only in the face, but in the whole figure, in the posture of the head and the gesture of the hands.
Here we have, again by Giotto, a Last Supper:
722b Giotto The Last Supper
You see Christ on the left, partly expressing the shadow of the Greek Christ type, but nevertheless attempting to bring out the spiritual and individual. We see this influence everywhere, and so we see the strange phenomenon that currents that are eminently artistic, the Oriental and the Central European, which are still dependent on the old Persian cultural impulse, come together, I would say, on a rendezvous on a ground that is actually unartistic, merely suited to state structures and lacking in imagination.
Another Giotto, “Entry into Jerusalem,”
723a Giotto The Entry into Jerusalem
which I have chosen to show you the same phenomenon. When you look at Christ in these different biblical scenes, you can see how Giotto strives to express the spiritual in an individual way.
723b Giotto The Crowning with Thorns and Mocking of Christ
We wanted to show you these transformations of the figure of Christ himself through the centuries.
Now remember the first tentative attempts we found in ancient Christian art. Certainly, much depends on the material, but the fact that the material was used, that it was made suitable for these ideas, is also significant. Now, a “Resurrection” by Giotto:
724a Giotto Noli me tangere
Everywhere you will find confirmation of what I have said about the confluence of these two currents. But at the same time you will see the intensity with which the Greek ideal of Christ continues to have an effect, for as a background, I would say, it is still present everywhere in the creative powers of the artist.
Now let us move on a little further. I have chosen a 14th-century painting by Orcagna that depicts “Christ as the Judge of the World”:
725 Andrea Orcagna The Last Judgment
It is from the Church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence. And here you can see a clear adherence to the old type, but with a striving for complete individualization, with a delicate spirituality coming to the fore.
We are now in the 14th century. The various currents of development in human culture move at different speeds. Up to this point, we still see not only the Greek Christ type at work, but also something of the enthusiastic forces that are present in Oriental art. I would like to say that all these images do not yet express what has been developing since the 9th century in the Roman Church, which ruled the world, and with full historical right – I am not saying this as a criticism, but only stating facts. Greek culture actually still lives on in art, mixed with a little Central European influence.
From the second half of the 9th century onwards, Rome understood very well that this had to be the case. They knew that, as I once put it, the Eastern essence had to be held back. The West must be permeated with what wants to work its way up from the very foundations of Western folk life. We see emerging a mindset that I have characterized as free city culture, this free city culture that originated in Central Europe and spread to various other territories. This free city culture had the urge to express the specifically human soul within itself. Now, in the 9th century, Rome understood that it had to take this European impulse into account, and it did so. However, what now passed through the institutions of the universal church, what constituted the specifically Western form of Catholicism in contrast to what had been held back in the Orient, was actually only specifically expressed in the artist who made art, painting, so truly Catholic, in the wonderful Fra Angelico:
724b Fra Angelico The Last Supper
Here, if we have an understanding of such things, we see the Western Catholic element poured out over art. The difference between the previous image (725) and this one (724b, 65), and also between the previous Last Supper (722b, 34) and this image (724b, 65), is enormous. For in this picture, just as a charming art lives within it, so a Western Catholic sentiment lives in this picture. You see the forms to which the sacrifice of the Mass has led, just as well hidden in this composition of the picture as the memory of the Last Supper before Golgotha. You see not only the Last Supper before Golgotha, you see the continuing effect of this Last Supper in the Catholic Mass in the composition of this painting. The Catholic feeling of the Last Supper is poured out over this painting, above all over the figure of the Savior. Only here does the Savior become the model of the Western priest in art. In reality, he already was this earlier, in external reality.
We now see the Roman Church, with its global dominion, extending its rule over art in a very decisive manner. We can still say of Giotto that he made his artistic sacrifice to Francis of Assisi out of a free individual soul. Here we see in Fra Angelico someone who paints just as he reads Mass in San Marco in Florence. The aura of Catholicism pervades these paintings. It is no longer an individual sacrifice, but the Church itself that paints.
You see this no less in the next painting by Fra Angelico,
726a Fra Angelico The Crucifixion
a crucifixion. Catholicism is painted into the art.
I ask you to take a close look at the next picture, where you can see how the essence of Catholic art, this Catholic organization, is so alive that even in the Last Judgment, I would say that the forces of the Catholic Church have an organizing effect even in the realm of supernatural beings.
726b Fra Angelico The Last Judgment, middle section
We now find this intensifying in the work of another friar, from whom I would like to show you the following picture:
727 Fra Bartolommeo Christ and the Four Evangelists
But here we now see, I would say, the third stage of this interesting process. Here we see a new refreshment coming into play, now through the resurrected ancient Greek culture. The ancient Greek culture is now coming back in.
And so we see how, for a time, the Christ type, seized by the individualizing soul, which is of particular interest to us today, how it prevailed. Consider the whole formation of how he became from the one in whom cosmic forces ruled in the beginning, who then took up the individual soul and, precisely through the Greek impulse, transformed it more and more, how he became more and more individualized and individualized. How is this Christ individualized, my dear friends? Now we see how antiquity is intervening, flowing in, still very little here, but it is already there. It is already a working out of the characteristic into the typical beauty. And you can see this happening continuously. For that is actually the secret of the Renaissance. As these pictures, which I am now showing you last, became the starting point for the Renaissance artists, we see in the Renaissance artists the complete renewal of Greek culture; but not entering into what had been conquered by the formation of the individual.
Here you have a Last Supper by Andrea del Sarto,
728 Andrea del Sarto The Last Supper
which is in Florence. Again, beautiful figures; so something of the consciousness of the cosmic that the Greeks still had, bringing something of the traditions of the cosmic back into the figures; only from tradition, no longer from direct observation, from direct feeling, as was the case with the Greeks. We find that here; it develops and becomes Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo. You can see what became special in Leonardo da Vinci in this painting, a baptism of Christ by Verrocchio, Leonardo's teacher:
729a Verrocchio/Leonardo The Baptism of Christ
The same motif in Masolino from the same period:
729b Masolino The Baptism of Christ
Now let us insert once again the painting “The Baptism” by Giotto:
722a Giotto The Baptism of Christ
Look at this baptism, where you still have the struggle between the two principles, without the Greek influence, that is, without the ancient Greek influence, without the ancient influence, the new Greek, Christian influence is particularly strong.
And now let's look at the other two paintings again:
729a WVerrocchio/Lionardo The Baptism of Christ
729b Masolino The Baptism of Christ
You can see how the Renaissance works. And Verrocchio then becomes Lionardo; perhaps Lionardo even collaborated on this painting.
Now, to conclude, I would like to show you just two more pictures in which you can see what came over from the north, from Central Europe, and mixed with everything else I have shown you. Here we have a purely Nordic product, the Man of Sorrows, the Christ by Dürer:
730a Albrecht Dürer The Man of Sorrows, Copperplate Passion
Here we have the striving without any cosmic impact: the human being in Christ.
Fra Angelico poured Catholicism into his artistic work – here we see the rebellion against world domination; here we see that which wants to shape its Christ out of human individuality. Here, only one individual is working on a picture. When Fra Angelico painted in the San Marco Church in Florence, the whole Catholic sentiment painted with him. Here, a single individual is working out of his biblical conception. That is what remained here at that time. Later, the Renaissance emerged, but it moved south, where it mixed with other currents.
I have another image, “Christ on the Cross” by Dürer,
730b Albrecht Dürer Christ on the Cross, Small Woodcut Passion
which is intended to show you the same thing.
These things should show us how the figure of Christ has changed over the centuries. I have presented only these two images from later centuries. In the further course of these reflections, if possible, I would like to show you how the images of Christ continue to develop. For one could also write a world history since the mystery of Golgotha by describing only the change in the images made of Christ. Everything that actually happened is expressed in them, is truly expressed in them. And one could also go up to the present day.
Depictions of Christ that have been attempted in the present day – years ago I even saw a whole collection of Christs in an exhibition, each picture more hideous than the last! What is being attempted in the present day is also a reflection of what is happening in the present, of what has led to the chaos in which we live today. And when attempts are made here — without the intention, as I explained recently, of creating a Christ figure — to bring what lies in these figures into the spiritual world, plastically, in the beginnings, in the first attempts — pictorially, as best we can with our limited means, this is also part of the further development of the cultural line that is given in the realities of human evolution.
Rudolf Steiner painting (plant colors) in the small dome of the first Goetheanum, Dornach
731” Detail with the central motif, with part of the architrave
732* Central motif: The representative of humanity between Lucifer and Ahriman
733* The representative of humanity between Lucifer and Ahriman, pastel sketch for the small dome of the first Goetheanum
734* The representative of humanity, bust portrait
735* Face of the representative of humanity, pencil sketch by Rudolf Steiner, sculptural wooden group
736* The representative of humanity between Lucifer and Ahriman 737* The representative of humanity
738” Model for the sculptural wood group, plaster cast
739* Head of the representative of humanity, side view
740* Head of the representative of humanity
741* Study for the head of the representative of humanity, plasticine
And it is good, in the present, to really, really enrich oneself with such ideas that can be gained from the cultural sphere of art, and also to strive to see a little of the truth. For in the present, many idols are worshipped, which are worshipped only because one has no talent to really see the truth.
In this time (1917), when it is possible to say that four-fifths of the world should ally themselves against one-fifth, in a time when such a thing is accepted with the indifference with which it is accepted, in such a time there is every reason to revise a little the concepts that have been taken from the historical development of humanity.
