Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T06:51:06.561Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nobody Dares: Freedom, Dissent, Self-Knowing, and Other Possibilities in Sebald Beham's Impossible*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Mitchell B. Merback
Mitchell B. Merback*
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Featuring the image of an athlete tugging at a rooted sapling, Impossible is the most enigmatic of the many small-scale engravings produced by Hans Sebald Beham. Juxtaposed with the adage “Nobody should dare great things that are impossible for him to do,” the image not only challenges the astute viewer to a game of wits: the resulting paradox also unleashes a cascade of ethical questions concerning the boundedness of the will, Christian freedom, human perfectibility, and the paradoxical conditions of self-knowledge. These issues came to the fore in the sixteenth-century debate over free will, which pitted humanists, magisterial, and radical reformers against one another. Beham's documented experience as a religious and political dissident during the 1520s raises the possibility that the print, made later in life, embeds still another allegorical layer: the conflicted situation of the artist in an era of reform and iconoclasm, Renaissance and revolution, hope and disillusionment.

Type
Studies
Information
Renaissance Quarterly , Volume 63 , Issue 4 , Winter 2010 , pp. 1037 - 1105
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Renaissance Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Please see the online version of this article for color illustrations.

This project had its beginnings at the Radcliffe Institute in 2007–08; research and ideas were advanced at the Clark Art Institute; and the article was completed at the American Academy in Berlin. Friends and collegial audiences in Cambridge, MA, New Haven, Williamstown, Berlin, and Dresden generously shared their learning with me. I am indebted to Michael Diers, Jackie Jung, Tom Mitchell, Keith Moxey, and Karl Werckmeister for thought-quickening observations and advice. Special gratitude goes to Steven Ozment, Peter Parshall, Peter Starenko, and Guy Tal for their invaluable criticisms of an earlier draft. Two anonymous readers for RQ contributed great things and caught many errors, otherwise impossible for me to root out on my own. For their unerring professionalism, creativity, and patience during the editing process, I remain indebted to Erika Suffern and Tim Krause. Werner Röcke of Humboldt-Universität in Berlin generously offered his appraisal of the adage and the virtues of alternative translations. Responsibility for all translations rests with me unless otherwise noted.

References

Adams, Alison, and , Harper, Anthony J, eds. The Emblem in Renaissance and Baroque Europe: Tradition and Variety. Selected Papers of the Glasgow International Emblem Conference 13–17 August, 1990. Leiden, 1992.Google Scholar
Allgemeines Künstler-Lexikon. Die bildenden Künstler aller Zeiten und Völker. 65 vols. Munich, 1983–2009.Google Scholar
Baring, Georg. “Hans Denck und Thomas Müntzer in Nürnberg 1524.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 50 (1959): 145–81.Google Scholar
Bauman, Clarence. The Spiritual Legacy of Hans Denck: Interpretation and Translation of Key Texts. Leiden, 1991.Google Scholar
Baxandall, Michael. Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven, 1985.Google Scholar
Belting, Hans. Hieronymus Bosch: Garden of Earthly Delights. Trans. , Flett, Ishbel. Munich, 2005.Google Scholar
Bietenholz, Peter G. “How Sebastian Franck Taught Erasmus to Speak with His Radical Voice.” Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance 62.2 (2000): 233–48.Google Scholar
Bolte, Johannes, and , Tieck, Ludwig. “Niemand und Jemand: Ein englisches Drama aus Shakespeare's Zeit, übersetzt von Ludwig Tieck.” Jahrbuch der deutschen Shakespeare Gesellschaft 29–30 (1894): 4–91.Google Scholar
Borchert, Till-Holger. “A Shifting Critical Fortune.” In Tilman Riemenschneider: Master Sculptor of the Late Middle Ages, ed. , Chapuis, Julien, 119–42. Washington, DC, 1999.Google Scholar
Bushart, Bruno. “Jörg Ratgeb.” Zeitschrift für Württenmbergische Landesgeschichte 33 (1974): 272–78.Google Scholar
Byrne, Janet S. Renaissance Ornament Prints and Drawings. New York, 1981.Google Scholar
Caldwell, Dorigen. The Sixteenth-Century Italian Impresa in Theory and Practice. Brooklyn, 2004.Google Scholar
Calmann, Gerta. “The Picture of Nobody.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 23.1–2 (1960): 60–104.10.2307/750581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camille, Michael. “‘When Adam Delved’: Laboring on the Land in English Medieval Art,” in Agriculture in the Middle Ages: Technology, Practice, and Representation, ed. , Sweeny, Del, 247–76. Philadelphia, 1995.Google Scholar
Christensen, Carl C. Art and the Reformation in Germany. Athens, OH, 1979.Google Scholar
Colie, Rosalie L. Paradoxia Epidemica: The Renaissance Tradition of Paradox. Princeton, 1966.Google Scholar
Crockett, Bryan. The Play of Paradox: Stage and Sermon in Renaissance England. Philadelphia, 1995.10.9783/9781512805499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, Peter M., ed. Andreas Alciatus: Index Emblematicus, vol. 2: Emblems in Translation. Toronto, 1985.10.3138/9781442676138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, Peter M., and , Callahan, Virginia W, eds. Andreas Alciatus: Index Emblematicus, 1: The Latin Emblems Indexes and Lists. Toronto, 1985.Google Scholar
Denck, Hans. “Whether God is the Cause of Evil.” In Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers (1957), 88–111.Google Scholar
Drysdall, Denis L. “The Emblem According to the Italian Impresa Theorists.” In The Emblem in Renaissance and Baroque Europe: Tradition and Variety. Selected Papers of the Glasgow International Emblem Conference 13–17 August 1990, ed. , Adams, Alison and , Harper, Anthony J, 22–32. Leiden, 1992.Google Scholar
Eire, Carlos M. N. War Against the Idols: The Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin. Cambridge, 1986.10.1017/CBO9780511528835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emison, Patricia. “The Little Masters, Italy, and Rome.” In The World in Miniature: Engravings by the German Little Masters, ed. , Goddard, Stephen, 30–39. Lawrence, KS, 1988.Google Scholar
Emison, Patricia. “Prolegomenon to the Study of Italian Renaissance Prints.” Word & Image 11.1 (1995): 1–15.10.1080/02666286.1995.10435893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erasmus, Desiderius. “On Free Will.” In Erasmus-Luther(2004), 3–94.Google Scholar
Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will. Ed. and trans. Winter, Ernst F. New York, 2004.Google Scholar
Evans, G. R. Problems of Authority in the Reformation Debates. Cambridge, 1992.10.1017/CBO9780511598135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farber, Lisa de la Mare. “Jerg Ratgeb and the Herrenberg Altarpiece.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 1990.Google Scholar
Febvre, Lucien. The Problem of Unbelief in the Sixteenth Century: The Religion of Rabelais. Trans. , Gottlieb, Beatrice. Cambridge, MA, 1982.Google Scholar
Fraenger, Wilhelm. “Jörg Ratgeb, ein Maler und Märtyrer des Bauernkrieges.” Castrum Peregrini 29 (1956): 5–25.Google Scholar
Fraenger, Wilhelm. Jörg Ratgeb. Ein Maler und Märtyrer aus dem Bauernkrieg. Dresden, 1972.Google Scholar
Franck, Sebastian. Paradoxa. Ed. , Wollgast, Siegfried. Berlin, 1966.Google Scholar
Franck, Sebastian. 280 Paradoxes or Wondrous Sayings. Trans. , Furcha, Edward J. Lewistown, NY, 1986.Google Scholar
Fricke, Hannes. “Niemand wird lesen, was ich hier schreibe.” Über den Niemand in der Literatur. Göttingen, 1998.Google Scholar
Goddard, Stephen, ed. The World in Miniature: Engravings by the German Little Masters, 1500–1550. Lawrence, KS, 1988.Google Scholar
Grimm, Jacob, and , Grimm, Wilhelm, ed. “Das tapfere Schneiderlein.” In Kinder- und Hausmärchen, 1:77–85. Berlin, 1812–15.Google Scholar
Hayden-Roy, Priscilla. “Hermeneutica gloriae vs. hermeneutica crucis: Sebastian Franck and Martin Luther on the Clarity of Scripture.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 81 (1990): 50–68.Google Scholar
Henkel, Arthur, and , Schöne, Albrecht, eds. Emblemata. Handbuch zur Sinnbildkunst des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts: Tauschenausgabe. Stuttgart, 1996.Google Scholar
Hof, Ulrich Im. “Niklaus Manuel und die reformatorische Götzenzerstörung.” Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte 37.4 (1980): 297–300.Google Scholar
Horace, . The Epistles of Horace. Trans. , Ferry, David. New York, 2001.Google Scholar
Hubmaier, Balthasar. “On Free Will.” In Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers (1957), 112–35.Google Scholar
Hutten, Ulrich von. Outis Nemo. Augsburg: Johann Miller, 1518.Google Scholar
Kilpatrick, David P. “Paradoxes of the German Small Engraving in the Reformation.” PhD dissertation, Yale University, 2002.Google Scholar
Koerner, Joseph Leo. The Reformation of the Image. Chicago, 2004.Google Scholar
Kohlhaussen, Heinrich. “Bildertische.” Anzeiger des Germanischen Nationalmuseums (1936–39): 12–45.Google Scholar
Kolb, Robert. Bound Choice, Election, and Wittenberg Theological Method: From Martin Luther to the Formula of Concord. Grand Rapids, 2005.Google Scholar
Kolde, Theodor. “Zum Prozess des Johann Denk und der ‘drei gottlosen Maler’ von Nürnberg.” In , Brieger, Theodor , et al.., Kirchengeschichtliche Studien. Hermann Reuter zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet, 228–50. Leipzig, 1888.Google Scholar
Landau, David. Catalogo completo dell'opera grafica di Georg Pencz. Milan, 1978.Google Scholar
Landau, David, and , Parshall, Peter. The Renaissance Print, 1470–1550. New Haven, 1994.Google Scholar
Löcher, Kurt. Barthel Beham: Ein Maler aus dem Dürerkreis. Munich, 1999.Google Scholar
Luther, Martin. Luther's Works, vol. 1: Lectures on Genesis, Chapters 1–5. Ed. , Pelikan, Jaroslav. Saint Louis, 1958.Google Scholar
Luther, Martin. “On the Bondage of the Will.” In Erasmus-Luther (2004), 97–138.Google Scholar
Malloch, A. E. “The Techniques and Function of the Renaissance Paradox.” Studies in Philology 53.2 (1956): 191–203.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas. Germany and the Germans. Washington, DC, 1945.Google Scholar
Martin, John. “Inventing Sincerity, Refashioning Prudence: The Discovery of the Individual in Renaissance Europe.” American Historical Review 102.5 (1997): 1309–42.10.2307/2171065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurer, Wilhelm. “Melancthons Anteil am Streit zwischen Luther und Erasmus.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 49.1–2 (1958): 89–115.Google Scholar
McClusky, Colleen. “Medieval Theories of Free Will.” In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/freewi-m.htm (accessed 4 March 2009).Google Scholar
Michalski, Serguisz. The Reformation and the Visual Arts: The Protestant Image Question in Western and Eastern Europe. London, 1993.10.4324/9780203414255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moxey, Keith. “The Beham Brothers and the Death of the Artist.” Register of the Spencer Museum of Art 6.6 (1989a): 25–29.Google Scholar
Moxey, Keith. Peasants, Warriors and Wives: Studies in the Popular Imagery of Reformation Nuremberg. Chicago, 1989b.Google Scholar
Müller, Jan-Dirk, ed. Sebastian Franck (1499–1542). Wiesbaden, 1993.Google Scholar
Müller, Jürgen. Das Paradox als Bildform: Studien zur Ikonologie Pieter Bruegels d. Ä. Munich, 1999.Google Scholar
Nestingen, James Arne. “Luther in Front of the Text: The Genesis Commentary.” Word & World 14.2 (1994): 186–94.Google Scholar
Oberman, Heiko A. Luther: Man Between God and the Devil. Trans. , Walliser-Schwarzbart, Eileen. New Haven, 1989.Google Scholar
Ozment, Steven E. Mysticism and Dissent: Religious Ideology and Social Protest in the Sixteenth Century. New Haven, 1973.Google Scholar
Ozment, Steven E. “Sebastian Franck: Critic of the New Scholastics.” In Profiles of Radical Reformers (1982), 226–33.Google Scholar
Pächt, Otto. The Practice of Art History: Reflections on Method. Trans. , Britt, David. London, 1999.Google Scholar
Packull, Werner O. “Hans Denck: Fugitive from Dogmatism.” In Profiles of Radical Reformers(1982), 62–71.Google Scholar
Parshall, Peter. “The Print Collection of Ferdinand, Archduke of Tyrol.” Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien 78, N.F. Bd. 42 (1982): 139–84.Google Scholar
Parshall, Peter. “Art and the Theater of Knowledge: The Origins of Print Collecting in Northern Europe.” Harvard University Art Museums Bulletin 2.3 (1994): 7–36.Google Scholar
Parshall, Peter. “Hans Holbein's Pictures of Death.” In Hans Holbein: Paintings, Prints, and Reception, ed. , Roskill, Mark and , Hand, John Oliver, 83–95. Washington, 2001.Google Scholar
Pauli, Gustav. Hans Sebald Beham. Ein Kritisches Verzeichniss seiner Kupferstiche, Radierungen und Holzschnitte. Strassburg, 1901.Google Scholar
Payne, John B. “Erasmus on Romans 9:6–24.” In The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. , Steinmetz, David C, 119–35. Durham, NC, 1990.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, Gerhard, ed. Quellen zur Nürnberger Reformationsgeschichte. Nuremberg, 1968.Google Scholar
Profiles of Radical Reformers: Biographical Sketches from Thomas Müntzer to Paracelsus. Ed. Goertz, Hans-Jürgen and , Klaassen, Walter. Kitchener, Ontario, 1982.Google Scholar
Rheinheimer, Martin. “Village By-Laws from Humptrup.” http://web.sdu.dk/mrh/humptrup.htm (accessed 27 December 2009).Google Scholar
Röhrich, Lutz, ed. Lexikon der sprichwörtlichen Redensarten. 2 vols. Freiburg, 1973.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Bret. “The Problem with Looking at Pieter Bruegel's Elck.” Art History 26.2 (2003): 143–73.10.1111/j.0141-6790.2003.02602009.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Röttinger, Heinrich. Die Holzschnitte des Georg Pencz. Leipzig, 1914.Google Scholar
Rummel, Erika. The Confessionalization of Humanism in Reformation Germany. Oxford, 2000.Google Scholar
Russell, Paul A. Lay Theology in the Reformation: Popular Pamphleteers in Southwest Germany 1521–1525. Cambridge, 1986.Google Scholar
Schnitzler, Norbert. Ikonoklasmus — Bildersturm. Theologischer Bilderstreit und ikonoklastisches Handeln während des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts. Munich, 1996.Google Scholar
Schuster, Peter-Klaus. “Niemand folgt Christus nach.” Anzeiger des Germanischen Nationalmuseums(1981): 28–43.Google Scholar
Sider, Robert D. “Credo quia absurdam?” Classical World 73 (1980): 417–19. http://www.tertullian.org/articles/sider_credo.htm (accessed 27 January 2009).10.2307/4349233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Elliott M. The Myth of Sisyphus: Renaissance Theories of Human Perfectibility. Madison, NJ, 2007.Google Scholar
Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers: Documents Illustrative of the Radical Reformation. Ed and trans. Williams, George Hunston. Philadelphia, 1957.Google Scholar
Stayer, James M. The German Peasants' War and Anabaptist Community of Goods. Montreal, 1991.Google Scholar
Stewart, Alison G. Before Bruegel: Sebald Beham and the Origins of Peasant Festival Imagery. Aldershot, 2008.Google Scholar
Tertullian, . Tertullian: De Carne Christi: Tertullian's Treatise on the Incarnation. 1956. http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_carn/evans_carn_00index.htm (accessed 13 August 2010).Google Scholar
Thieme, Ulrich, and , Becker, Felix, eds. Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. 37 vols. Leipzig, 1909.Google Scholar
Timann, Ursula. “Zum Lebenslauf von Georg Pencz.” Anzeiger des Germanisches Nationalmuseums (1990): 97–112.Google Scholar
Valla, Lorenzo. “On Free Will to Garsia, Bishop of Lerida.” Trans. , Trinkhaus, Charles Edward. In The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, ed. , Cassirer, Ernst, , Kristeller, Paul Oskar, and , Randall, John Herman., 155–82. Chicago, 1948.Google Scholar
Van Mander, Karel. The Lives of the Illustrious Netherlandish and German Painters, from the First Edition of the Schilder-boeck (1603–1604). 6 vols. Ed. , Miedema, Hessel. Doornspijk, 1994–99.Google Scholar
Vasari, Giorgio. The Lives of the Painters, Sculptors and Architects. 4 vols. Ed. , Gaunt, William. Trans. , Hinds, A. B. London, 1963.Google Scholar
Vogler, Günther. Nürnberg, 1524–1525: Studien zur Geschichte der reformatorischen und sozialen Bewegungen in der Reichstadt. Berlin, 1982.Google Scholar
Waldmann, Emil. Die Nürnberger Kleinmeister. Leipzig, 1910.Google Scholar
Walker, D. P. “Esoteric Symbolism.” In Poetry and Poetics from Ancient Greece to the Renaissance: Studies in Honor of James Hutton, ed. , Kirkwood, G. M, 218–32. Ithaca, 1974.Google Scholar
Wandel, Lee Palmer. “The Body of Christ at Marburg, 1529.” In Image and Imagination of the Religious Self in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. , Falkenburg, Reindert, , Melion, Walter S, and , Richardson, Todd M, 195–213. Turnhout, 2007.10.1484/M.PROTEUS-EB.3.908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wengert, Timothy J. Human Freedom, Christian Righteousness: Philip Melancthon's Exegetical Dispute with Erasmus of Rotterdam. New York, 1998.Google Scholar
Zschelletzschky, Herbert. “Drei Sozialsatiren der ‘gottlosen Maler’ von Nürnberg.” Deutsches Jahrbuch für Volkskunde 7 (1961): 46–74.Google Scholar
Zschelletzschky, Herbert. “‘Ihr Herz war auf der Seite der Bauern . . .’: Künstlerschicksale und Künstlerschaffen zur Bauernkriegszeit.” In Der Bauer im Klassenkampf: Studien zur Geschichte des deutschen Bauernkriegs und der bäuerlichen Klassenkämpfe im Spätfeudalismus, ed. , Heitz, Gerhard , et al.., 333–75. Berlin, 1975a.Google Scholar
Zschelletzschky, Herbert. Die ‘Drei gottlosen Maler’ von Nürnberg: Sebald Beham, Barthel Beham und Georg Pencz. Historische Grundlagen und ikonologische Probleme ihrer Graphik zu Reformations- und Bauernkriegszeit. Leipzig, 1975b.Google Scholar
Zupnick, Irving L. “The Meaning of Bruegel's ‘Nobody’ and ‘Everyman.’” Gazette des Beaux-Arts 67 (1966): 258–70.Google Scholar