In his article Illuminated Incunabula in the Doheny Library in Part I of the catalogue to the sale of the Estelle Doheny Collection (Christie, Manson & Woods International Inc., New York l987) E König points at some small but characteristic differences between the two artistically so near related artists, who have illuminated the Doheny Hieronymus, Epistolare (Mainz 1470). He finds that the first illuminated leaf differs from the remainder of the work. The foliage is denser, its shadows more schematic, its pale colors more abruptly changing than on the succeeding illuminated leaves. Elsewhere in the volumes the foliage is more subtly drawn, with smoother transitions and a much more delveloped sense of spatial dimensions. And yet there is an underlying unity to the two styles. The very accomplished artist, who has in gold and colours illuminated the first decorated leaf with a historiated initial depicting St Jerome in his study and a border on three sides with several figures, may be the now at last identified ´Housebook Master´ Albrecht Dürer the Elder, the creator of the so admired style ´livelier than life´. The other artist seems to be his supposed successor in the atelier, Israhel van Meckenem the Younger. From the fact that this book from the Schöffer printing firm in Mainz is dated 1470, we can learn that the Holper atelier probably had received some part of the first printed leaves some years before, latest c. 1467/68 when Albrecht the Elder left the Holper atelier. Together with my in the previous suggested identification of the Fust Master with Israhel van Meckenem the Elder will our new knowledge probably make it possible to identify with rather good certainty the most important of the different ´Hands´ that have been identified as individuals by E Vaassen in her long article in Archiv für Geschichte des Buchwesens 1973.

E König observes in his article Für Johannes Fust (in Ars Impressoria. Entstehung und Entwicklung des Buchdrucks 1986), that the one in the Doheny Library preserved copy of Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz 1459), illuminated by the Fust Master, weicht durch seinen einfacheren Dekor von den anderen ab … Da der Schmuck … wie ein erster Entwurf für den späteren Standard-Dekor wirkt, könnte dieses Exemplar als erstes von den erhaltenen oder bekannt geworden ist dem “Fust-Meister” anvertraut worden sein. In this copy are, however, five probably illuminated book-initials missing, and there is reason to believe that these may not have been executed by the Fust Master. Quite as in e g the Durandus copy in Dombibliothek, Cologne, it may here be the question of two cooperating artists, of whom the one who has especially richly decorated fol. 1r seems to have been succeeded by the Fust Master.

Even from the by E Vaassen published reproduction in black-and-white of the illumination on fol. 1r, it seems possible to identify the first of the two artists with the one whose characteristic style we met already in the illumination of the mentioned in Salzburg preserved Breviary, that has once belonged to Archbishop G Pálóczy and by me is tentatively identified with Anton Dürer. One may guess that the exchange of illuminators in the workshop took place when Anton Dürer in the first half of the 1460s seems to have been commissioned to decorate the young Maximilian’s schoolbooks, maybe after a sejourn as illuminator in the Holper atelier in Nuremberg.

The first of the two volumes of the by Vaassen into the smallest details studied so-called Giant Bible of Würzburg (Universitätsbibliothek, Würzburg) was obviously stolen at the end of World War II. As it some years later seems to have been offered anonymously in New York, there may be reason to believe that it will one day emerge again on the market. With our now improved possibility to identify the different ´Hands´ that Vaassen has recognized in the preserved volume II, it seems reasonable to suppose, that Albrecht Dürer the Elder may have illuminated essential parts of volume I of the Bible. His work was probably interrupted when he left the Holper atelier. It is possible that he at this moment had already completed the illumination of volume I, and all this maybe without help of any of the artists, seemingly the both Van Meckenems, who have completed the decoration of volume II. If one day recovered, this first volume would then probably present itself as one of Albrecht Dürer the Elder’s masterpieces as illuminator.

Another very important manuscript, the Pontificale of Adolph of Nassau (Hofbibliothek, Aschaffenburg), may likewise have been produced in the Holper atelier in Nuremberg. As one of the greatest German manuscripts of the century, also this has with distinguishing eyes been studied by E König: In this manuscript we find the same curious penwork as on the Jerome frontispiece. Many motifs are common to both books, such as the large, fantastic flower in the upper right corner of the Jerome frontispiece, which appears also in the lower border of fol. 7r of the Pontifical … The penwork of the upper margins of the two books, radiating outward from gilt dots, is also very close. As the greatest part of this Pontificale seems to have been decorated by Israhel van Meckenem the Younger, one may guess that it was illuminated at about the same time, c. 1467/68, as Albrecht the Elder left the atelier and before that Israhel the Elder had returned to Nuremberg after the period he is thought to have spent in Mainz as illuminator of incunabula from the Fust-Schöffer printing firm. Adolph II of Nassau was Archbishop of Mainz in the period 1461-75 and was present at the war against Duke Charles the Bold of Burgundy in 1474-75. Adolph’s tent, with his coat of arms, is clearly visible in the center of Albrecht the Elder’s drawing of the Encampment in the Housebook.

The ´Hand´ of Israhel van Meckenem the Younger has been identified in several other illuminated works. He has in the Housebook, where the so characteristic style ´livelier than life´ essentially can be related to Albrecht Dürer the Elder, seemingly contributed with the coat of arms on fol. 2r and with the landscape with figures copied from Master E S on fol. 3r. He may also be responsible for copying and maybe reediting some of the drawings by Dürer the Elder, at a time when some of them probably had been damaged, maybe sometimes even creating himself on the same line. The decoration of the texts to the Planet drawings in the Housebook seems also to have been executed by Israhel the Younger, imitating the style of Albrecht Dürer the Elder. A so-called Meister der Genrezenen, created by D Hess in his dissertation Meister um das ´mittelalterliche Hausbuch´. Studien zur Hausbuchmeisterfrage (1994), may in my opinion, however, be a phantom somewhat less lively than life.

There is reason to believe that Israhel the Younger had left the Nuremberg atelier already around 1470. In Bocholt he is documented from 1480 until his death in 1503. He executed a lot of professional engravings, very often copying other artists’ works. As a skilled master he illuminated e g the so-called Virgil of Pfalzgraf Philip (Biblioteca Apostolica, Vatican, Rome, 1473-74) and the here in the article In Search of the Master of the Medieval Housebook already mentioned Book of Hours (Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin, c. 1481-82), presented by Margaret of Guelders, the widow of Count Palatine Friedrich I of Simmern, in connection with her son Johann I’s marriage in 1481 to Suzanne of Nassau-Saarbrücken. In my above-mentioned article I have doubted that the dedication portrait of Philip of Pfalz together with the author J of Soest in Die Kinder von Limburg should really be an original by the Housebook Master; it would rather be the question of a copy by Israhel. That Van Meckenem the Younger also must have painted portraits seems rather likely, knowing the preserved engraving with his excellent self-portrait together with his wife. Some figures in his engravings have the character of being portraits of family members.

Among the many more or less well-known artists, who during the years without much reason have been suggested to be identical with the Master of the Housebook, is the Mainz artist Erhard Reuwich, known for his realistic woodcuts with representations of places and persons in Bernhard of Breydenbach’s in 1486 published Peregrinatio in Terram Sanctam, a report from a travel to the Holy Land in 1483-84 in which Reuwich took part. There is, however, in this book especially one page, that is different from the other woodcuts and in fact establishes a connection with the circle of artists in Nuremberg. The title-page mit der reichgekleideten venezianischen Dame als Schildhalterin der Wappen der (adeligen) Teilnehmer der Pilgerreise 1483/84 is in vielerlei Hinsicht ein Meisterwerk. Zu dem fast perfekten Holzschnittwerk findet man erst um 1500 Parallelen (catalogue Vom Leben im späten Mittelalter, Amsterdam and Frankfurt am Main 1985) is seemingly a work by Reuwich’s very talented assistant Wilhelm, who in December 1486 together with Meister Erhard von Mainz is known to have installed stained-glass panels in Amtskellerei in Amorbach.

There is not very much reason to doubt that this assistant was the artist Wilhelm Pleydenwurff, the son of the very qualified Nuremberg painter Hans Pleydenwurff, deceased in 1472. Wilhelm may also be responsible for an excellent stained-glass panel (now in Badisches Landesmuseum, Karlsruhe) that for long has been misinterpreted to show Johann of Dalberg, one of the most gifted intellectuals of his time, Bishop of Worms and chancellor of Count Palatine Philip in Heidelberg. The portrayed on this panel is, however, the probably even more learned intellectual Rudolf Agricola, who died young and unexpectedly in Heidelberg in 1485, a short time after that he had returned sick from a travel to Italy in company with Johann of Dalberg. Agricola was buried dressed as a Franciscan monk of the 3rd grade, and so he may be portrayed here. His features are also known from a late engraving after a now maybe lost painting, sometimes in fact attributed to Master W B.

Another stained-glass panel in the same museum and probably with the same origin from the Dalberg mortuary chapel in St Peter in Hernsheim shows seemingly one at the same time portrayed member of the Dalberg family. It may be Bishop Johann that we see here, calling upon St Andreas for protection, because this panel seems to have been executed by the same artist. There is at least some likeness with a portrait - mentioned to have belonged to the collections at Sigmaringen - of a stern and suspiciously staring intellectual, demonstratingly holding a book with a probably Greek text, which would be likely as a portrait of the aggressive bishop, who died in shame, thought to have been murdered in connection with a visit to a beautiful married woman, whose husband he had sent away on some mission.

A very fine small stained-glass panel of the Virgin and Child on a Crescent Moon (The Cloisters, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York) has often been put in connection with the then still unidentified Housebook Master Albrecht Dürer the Elder. It is, however, more likely that it also here is the question of a work by Wilhelm Pleydenwurff, who certainly knew Dürer the Elder very well and may have been inspired by him. The young Wilhelm was raised in the house of the painter Michael Wolgemut, who after Hans Pleydenwurff’s death married the widow Katarina and took over the well-reputed atelier in Nuremberg. His artistic education after that he had left Wolgemut’s atelier is not known. He was at least present i Nuremberg in 1482, when he was accused for having drawn a weapon. He was then probably fully educated and maybe visiting his home-town as a journeyman.

Wilhelm Pleydenwurff’s whereabouts are not known, until he, as we have now seen, in 1486 was connected to Erhard Reuwich’s atelier in Mainz. I guess that he returned to Nuremberg shortly thereafter, because it seems reasonable to identify him with the very sensible painter, the so-called Master of the Augustinian Altar, from whose work on an altarpiece in Nuremberg there are three paintings preserved in Germanisches Nationalmusem, Nuremberg, one of them dated 1487. It may be a self-portrait that we see in the excellent painting of Saint Lucas painting the Madonna. The appearance of Wilhelm may also be seen in the very sensible painting of an obviously sick and very serious young man in Öffentliche Kunstsammlung, Basel, which by E Buchner in Das deutsche Bildnis der Spätgotik und der frühen Dürerzeit (1953) is described as a stille und schlichte Konterfei eines blassen, kränklich aussehenden Mannes mittleren Alters, das, ungemein zart und fein empfunden, psychologisch fesselt …Es würde mich nicht wundern, wenn sich einmal ein Meister von Rang und Namen als Schöpfer des Bildnisses entpuppen würde.

That Wilhelm Pleydenwurff had attained a high reputation already in young years is obvious from the fact that he is mentioned on the same level as Michael Wolgemut, when the contracts were written for the execution of a great many illustrations in two for the time very important books, produced by the Koberger printing firm in Nuremberg: the Schatzbehalter (1491) and H Schedel’s Weltchronik (1493). Wilhelm is here seemingly responsible for many of the best woodcuts. The fact that he died already in January 1494, probably in his early 30s, may be the reason why he up to now seems to have been rather forgotten, at least not appreciated to his full value. It is known that he was married to Helena and that he had at least one child, a daughter. It has always been thought that he after his return to Nuremberg should have been an assistant in Wolgemut’s atelier. It is, however, possible that he as a married master may have had his own atelier.

As the letter b very often was used instead of p in this part of Germany, there is reason to take into consideration that it may be Wilhelm Pleydenwurff who has signed himself W B on the in the previous mentioned engraved portraits of four persons, by me guessed to be members of the Holper goldsmith family in Nuremberg. It is possible that he had learnt the engraving technique already among the artists in the Holper atelier in Nuremberg, but, more likely, at a sejour as journeyman in M Schongauer’s atelier in Colmar. The quality of the four portraits is rather outstanding. Not only was he the only portrait engraver of the fifteenth century but, unlike other artists of the time, he placed much emphasis on psychological as well as physical realism (A Shestack in Master LCz and Master WB, 1971). On the two of these prints that are signed the artist has between the letters W and B put the representation of a cross with a snake, obviously referring to how Moses in the Old Testament is told to have saved people from the plague of serpents by advicing them to look at a brazen serpent on a pole, which was thought as a parallel to the redemption of man through the Crucifixion.

Since E Buchner in 1927 published an article about the anonymous W B (Münchener Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, N.F. IV) several paintings have been attributed to this very accomplished artist. Already in 1911 F Rieffel attributed to him eight panels of the Sebastian Legend, now in the Diocesan Museum, Mainz (Monatshefte für Kunstwissenschaft, IV), in which the facial types, with hooked noses and bulging eyes, as well as several peculiarities of draftmanship, relate the figures in the Sebastian panels not only to the WB portrait paintings, but also to the four engravings (Shestack).

D Hess has in his in the previous mentioned dissertation made a careful analysis of the group of paintings that during the years have been put in connection with the then still anonymous Master of the Housebook. The arguments that he presents for another artist, or artists, than the Housebook Master seem to be convincing. He has discerned different characteristic hands, partly with the help of infrared reflectography and such a study of underdrawings that had already been made by J P Filedt Kok, published in the catalogues to the exhibitions in Amsterdam and Frankfurt am Main in 1985. Without suggesting any names for the artists, he observes e g resemblances between the stained-glass panels from the Dalberg mortuary chapel in Hernsheim and the very important Speyer Altarpiece, of which three paintings are preserved in Augustinermuseum, Freiburg im Breisgau, and three further paintings in respectively Städelsches Kunstinstitut in Frankfurt am Main, in Gemäldegalerie, Berlin, and in Bodemuseum, Berlin. With our new knowledge it seems reasonable to believe that Wilhelm Pleydenwurff may have been an essential contributor to the big altarpiece.

Attributed to the then not identified Master of the Housebook have also often been the nine panels that constitute the so-called Mainz Life of the Virgin (Mittelrheinisches Landesmuseum, Mainz), seemingly painted in the same workshop as the Speyer Altarpiece. Among these panels there are so many differences that they are normally thought to be by different hands. As the painting Presentation of Christ is dated 1505, this series is interpreted to be later than the Speyer Altarpiece. There is, however, reason to consider if not the work on this big altar may have been interrupted, perhaps more than once, and that the year refers to when it was at last completed and delivered. It has never been observed earlier that in the right part of the Presentation of Christ - often more or less cut off in reproductions - there is a portrait of a man with a very great resemblance to what we from a couple of paintings know about the appearence of the famous artist Martin Schongauer. This supposed Schongauer is represented as very serious and at a rather advanced age, probably between 40 and 50. He is standing in such a background position that is typical for self-portraits, which points at the possibility that the Mainz Life of the Virgin might have been in work in the 1480s in Schongauer’s atelier, possibly at a time when Wilhelm Pleydenwurff worked there as an assistant.

Often attributed to the Master W B, i e in my opinion Wilhelm Pleydenwurff, are the series of pen drawings illustrating several dramatic events in the manuscript Histoire vom Herzog Herpin van Bourges und seinem Sohn Lewe (Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin). The vague date on one of these drawings has been interpreted as 1487. It seems, however, more likely that the date has to be read 1482 and that these illustrations are from a time when Pleydenwurff, maybe occasionally, was present in Nuremberg; one of the represented seems in fact to have resemblance to a c. 10-year-old Albrecht Dürer, then as most boys probably interested in such martial adventures. Attributed to the then unidentified Master W B has also been the portraits of a man and his wife in Städelsches Kunstinstitut in Frankfurt am Main. This very distinguished couple has up to now never been identified. In my opinion it may here be the question of portraits of King Casimir IV of Poland and his queen Elisabeth of Austria, probably painted by Wilhelm Pleydenwurff at one of the couple’s visits in Nuremberg.

Painted in the same style is a portrait (Schloss Rohoncz, Lugano) of a man with a necklace resembling that on the mentioned portrait of the supposed Elisabeth of Austria. The text on this portrait, 1487.DIE.24.MENSZ.APRIL., has probably been somewhat changed, because 24 April 1483 was the date when the group of which Erhard Reuwich was a part started on their travel to Palestine. In the report published by Breydenbach in 1486 the woodcuts are mentioned to have been executed by Reuwich, but may, as I have tried to show, partly be the work of Pleydenwurff. As E Buchner refers in Das deutsche Bildnis der Spätgotik und der frühen Dürerzeit (1953) there is auf den seitlichen Rahmenleisten links das Wappen von Jerusalem, rechts das Zeichen des Zypernordens angebraht …Auf dem Reif des Siegelrings (rechter Daumen) ist ein römisches R gemalt. It may here be the question of a kind of portrait that many wanted of themselves before a long and difficult travel, and it seems to show Reuwich, painted by Pleydenwurff before that his master started on his pilgrimage to Palestine.

Although Albrecht Dürer the Elder may no longer be connected with the Speyer Altarpiece or with the Mainz Life of the Virgin series, nor with some other often suggested paintings in related style, he may yet have been at least a painter of portraits. I feel e g rather sure that it is Dürer the Elder that has portrayed Alexander Mornauer, the town clerk of Landshut, holding a partly readable letter with the text Dem ehrsamen vnd weisen alle(x)ander Mornawer …schrei(b)/tzu lantzhut mei(?n getr)ouwen günner (National Gallery, London). The attribution might be confirmed by comparing this text with that on Dürer the Elder’s here before mentioned letter in Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, in this way maybe establishing a with great certainty identified painting that might be used when trying to attribute other painted works to him. Mornauer is represented in a style near related to early Netherlandish painting, gazing firmly at the spectator; most details are painted with extraordinary realism. Thought to have been painted by the Master of the Mornauer Portrait has also been a portrait of Archduke Sigmund of Austria-Tirol (Alte Pinakothek, Munich), an attribution that may be strengthened by the fact that Alexander Mornauer’s brother Achaz was Sigmund’s chancellor.

Very often attributed to the Housebook Master, i e Albrecht Dürer the Elder, has been the outstanding double portrait of a princely bridal couple that in the history of art is famous as Liebespaar (Schlossmuseum, Gotha). It is, as have J P Filedt Kok and D Hess now shown, painted in a style that is clearly different from that of the paintings in the circle of the Speyer Altarpiece. The attribution to Dürer the Elder is based on many resemblances among this artist’s drypoints. Some time earlier the artist portrayed the same couple on a silver-point drawing (Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin). Here the couple is shown only as engaged, because the young man is standing to the left of his future bride. Das stehende Liebespaar ist ebenso lebendig und natürlich dargestellet wie das auf einer Gartenbank sitzende ´Liebespaar´ des Kaltnadelstichs… Das freundliche Gesicht des Jünglings mit den langen Lockenhaar erinnert an den jungen Philipp den aufrichtigen…, das Mädchen gleicht in Gesichtszügen und Haartracht der Frau des Gothaer ´Liebespaares´…, gekleidet ist sie ganz ähnlich wie die Frau in den Stich (catalogue to the exhibitions in Amsterdam and Frankfurt am Main 1985).

The identification of this bridal couple has been very much discussed, although the bridegroom seemingly is the same young man that we see on the in the previous discussed dedication portrait of Count Palatine Philip of Pfalz, dated 1480. The coat of arms in the upper part of the Liebespaar, thought to have been painted at the same time as the portraits, is however not that of Philip. It has therefore been guessed that this mysterious coat of arms might belong to some member of the families Hanau-Lichtenberg, Hanau-Münzenberg or Eppenstein; latest it is thought to be that of a Count Philip of Hanau-Münzenberg (1449-1500), who in 1468 married Countess Adriane of Nassau (1449-1477). D Hess has in his in the previous mentioned dissertation (1994), in a true tradition of Housebook researchers, tried hard to find arguments for the impossible idea that what we see should be Philip of Hanau-Münzenberg, who after the death of his wife in 1477 should have had himself portrayed together with his mistress during several years, Margarete Weisskircher, pretending that the extraordinarily princely dressed bride on this painting should be a lady that was not even of noble birth. To his help he has had the rather long text on the painting:

In his in 1996 published book Das Gothaer Liebespaar. Ein ungleiches Paar im Gewand höfischer Minne, D Hess suggests a translation of the text to modern German:

interpreting it as referring to guessed circumstances in the life of Philip of Hanau-Münzenberg and Margarete Weisskircher, e g that it should be the question of a Minnegabe Philipps: Zeugnis einer letzten Blüte ritterlicher Kultur, before Philip in 1484 went on pilgrimage to Palestine.

Of more interest for the identification of this princely couple is the knowledge that there existed near connections between Philip of Pfalz in Heidelberg and Philip of Hanau-Münzenberg. Philipp weilte regelmässig in Heidelberg und unternahm mit dem Pfalzgrafen 1491 gar eine Lustreise zum Herzog von Lothringen. Neben engen persönlichen Bindungen pflegete Philipp von Hanau aber offenbar auch künstlerische Kontakte zu Heidelberg… (D. Hess). As already mentioned the man on the silver-point drawing in Berlin and on Liebespaar is very like the dedication portrait 1480 of Count Palatine Philip of Pfalz, who in 1468 was engaged to Duchess Margarete of Bavaria-Landshut, a couple married erst zu Fastnacht 1474. The only reason to doubt that it is this extravagant and rich couple that we see portrayed also as Liebespaar is, as mentioned, the so unusually added single coat of arms. There is in fact much more reason to doubt that this coat of arms should have been painted originally on this double portrait. Der materielle Befund hinsichtlich dieses Wappens ist nicht eindeutig. Da es relativ grob gemalt ist, und die darin verwendeten Farben ein anderes Craquelé als die Inkarnate aufweisen, stellt sich die Frage, ob das Wappen erst nachträglich hinzufefügt worden sein könnte, writes D Hess, and continues: Im Röntgenbild erscheint das Wappen unten links und oben rechts etwas grösser und stärker ausbauchend. Dennoch handelt es sich beim heute sichtbaren Umriss wahrscheinlich um den ursprünglichen, da nichts darauf hindeutet, dass die schwarze Hintergrundfarbe, die die Kanten sauber beschneidet, im Bereich des Wappens übermalt worden ist.

There is in my opinion an obvious need for a renewed scientific investigation of Liebespaar, which maybe will show that not only the coat of arms but also the black background are later additions, probably after that the court of Heidelberg had been broken up and the painting in this connection had arrived at the court of Hanau. A later owner may then have guessed that the Philip (of Pfalz) and Margarete (of Bavaria-Landshut) on this double portrait in fact should show the likenamed Philip of Hanau-Münzenberg and Margarete Weisskircher. This owner seems to have found reason to add a black background together with the Hanau coat of arms, maybe also the text. I guess that a new

investigation would find that there below the black background will be found the same type of painted background that we see now on the restored portrait of Alexander Mornauer in National Gallery, London.

As town clerk of Landshut Mornauer may have been the one who arranged that Albrecht Dürer the Elder was commissioned to portray the rich Duke Ludwig of Bavaria-Landshut’s only surviving daughter Margarete together with Philip of Pfalz at two different occasions, both as engaged in 1468 and later as a married couple in connection with the great festivities that were arranged in 1474 at Philip’s residence in Amberg. There is reason to suppose that Dürer the Elder may also have portrayed Margarete’s brother Georg of Bavaria-Landshut together with his consort the Polish princess Hedwig in connection with this couple’s famous wedding festivities in 1475, because it may be a later, rather altered copy of such a double portrait (Anhaltische Gemäldegalerie, Dessau), that E Buchner (in Das deutsche Bildnis der Spätgotik und der frühen Dürerzeit, 1953) attributed to the Master of the Landauer Altar and guessed should show a couple Lorenz and Christina Tucher, later misinterpreted again by P Strieder (Tafelmalerei in Nürnberg 1350-1550, 1993) to show Berthold V. Tucher and Christine Schmidtmayer.

Also another double portrait is of interest in connection with Liebespaar. It is the portrait of a distinguished standing bridal couple (Ohio Museum of Art, Cleveland), that E Buchner in his mentioned book dates to c. 1460-70 and guesses to have been painted by an artist from Ulm. It may here in fact be the question of a portrait of Philip of Pfalz’s uncle Count Palatine Friedrich of Pfalz with the English Order of the Garter on his left leg and with his right arm around Klara Thott, the so-called un-equal lady that he lived together with for many years and whom he married in 1471. One may guess that it was this probably well-known double portrait that misguided the new owner of the portrait of Philip of Pfalz and Margarete of Bavaria-Landshut to believe that also this double portrait should show an un-equal couple. Friedrich, called der Siegreiche because he was intelligent enough to make war only against inferior adversaries, may have been painted by Hans Pleydenwurff, who is known among else for his portrait of Count Georg of Löwenstein, Domherr in Bamberg, deceased in 1464 as the last of his family. The children of Friedrich of Pfalz and Klara Thott called themselves Löwenstein.

Liebespaar is, quite as Jan van Eyck’s well-known double portrait of Duke Arnold of Guelders and a lady who may be Margaret van Eyck (earlier long misinterpreted to show ´an Arnolfini´ and his wife), painted in such a big size that it may have been meant to be shown for a public audiance. It was originally planned that both Philip of Pfalz and Margarete of Bayern-Landshut should have married other chosen consorts. Margarete was first engaged to Duke Eberhard im Bart of Württemberg (then in 1474 married to Barbara of Mantua). As a child Philip of Pfalz was in 1456 engaged to Ottilie, the awaited future heiress of the nearby Katzenellenbogen, which might have been a great addition to Pfalz. But the proud young man refused later to marry this countess, because he wanted to marry a princess. The chosen bride was Margarete of Bavaria-Landshut, to whom Philip was engaged in 1468. His uncle Friedrich tried yet during some years, however in vain, to arrange an even more favourable marriage, to Mary, the heiress of Burgundy, Charles the Bold’s daughter.

There is in fact one circumstance in the lives of Philip and Margarete that may have inspired to the unusual text on the painting. At this time the lives in at least princely families were strongly regulated, no doubt discriminating women very much. In 1493, when Margarete had already given birth to 14 children, there is reported to have arouse a violent quarrel between the two, at which Philip accused Margarete for not having behaved correctly. Der Kurfürst äusserte zu seiner Gemahlin, er wisse wohl, wie sie sich zu Burghausen, da sie noch daselbst gewohnt, also in ihren Mädchenjahren, sodann zu Landshut gelegentlich Georgs Hochzeit und später wiederum zu Burghausen und Landshut, als sie dort zu Besuch gewesen, endlich zu Germersheim ... aufgeführt habe, writes M Buchner (Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 1911). Margarete applied to her brother Georg of Bavaria-Landshut for help, and courtiers were sent to Heidelberg for negotiations, also as regards not fulfilled financial agreements.

Es ist uns unbekannt, welchen Erfolg die nieder-bayerische Gesandtschaft am Heidelberger Hofe hatte. Auf die Dauer blieben jedenfalls die guten beziehungen zwischen den beiden verwandten Höfen nicht gestört (M Buchner). The probably more intelligent Margarete seems to have mastered the situation and Philip to have continued, as one of the last, with his participating in still somewhat glorious tournaments and with his other great interest: musical arrangements at the court. If the text on the painting should refer to the obviously very severe quarrel, it must be the question of an addition painted nearly two decades after that the young couple was portrayed, maybe even added in memory of the two, telling that although Margarete had behaved un-byllich, her jealous consort had yet accepted her, and she on her part had respected the man to whom she had presented the Schnürlein we see on the painting. This rich couple may have used several different dresses, which might explain why a preserved description from the wedding festivities does not seem to correspond fully to what we see on the painting. Am Sonntag, bei der kirchlichen Vermählung trug der Bräutigam ein mit Silber, die Braut ein mit Gold durchwirktes Kleid, am Tag darauf, bei der kirchlichen Einsegnung, Philipp einen mit Perlen besäten Rock, Margarete drei mit Gold durchwirkte Röcke und drei ebensolche Schauben. At least Margarete’s headdress seems to correspond to the description, which tells that gerühmt wird namentlich ihr Haarband, das einer niederen Krone geglichen habe, sowie ihr sonstiger Schmuck.

Fully occupied with analyses of all the many problems around the thought œuvre of the Housebook Master Albrecht Dürer the Elder, interpreters seem never to have given themselves time to consider if not some of the drypoints might be the work of another artist. All the known 91 prints have normally been considered to constitute a unitary group, forgetting the fact that an artist creating on the high level we see in most of the prints must have reached his top quality nearer to his 20s than at the end of a long career. This lack of practical insight in how early a genius normally is rather fully ´educated´ is probably the main reason to the so-called Housebook Master’s long anonymity. At least since M Lehrs’s Kritischer Katalog it has been observed that a supposed latter part of the drypoints shows a clearly raise in artistic quality, interpreting it as the result of one in older years improved artistic standard.

One may suppose that Dürer the Elder’s swollen hands have become more and more an obstacle to him when engraving. His extraordinarily talented son was, however, already in very young years rapidly growing in mastership, now and then maybe offering his father a helping hand with the engraving. The differences between the two become rather visible when comparing Dürer the Elder’s sensible pen drawing of A Young Man and the Death with the ´perfect´ engraving of the same motif in a harder style resembling that of Dürer the Younger, two wonderful proofs of highest artistic quality that from the same Van Leyden collection have arrived in Rijksprentenkabinet in Amsterdam, both probably among several other works sold by Dürer the Younger during his travel to the Netherlands in the 1520s. Also e g the masterly print Aristoteles and Phyllis (bought to the Rijksprentenkabinet from the same Van Leyden collection), which is reproduced on the cover of the catalogues to the exhibitions in Amsterdam and Frankfurt am Main in 1985, is among works that have the character of being the result of a cooperation between father and son. The two artists’ different temperaments and styles become even more evident when comparing Dürer the Elder’s drypoint the Holy Family by a Rose Bush (Rijksprentenkabinet) with his son’s the Holy Family with a Butterfly (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York). Dürer the Younger’s early engraving is an improved, extremely realistic variant, surely very saleable. Yet, as a sensible piece of art it does not match the father’s poetic drypoint.

It has been guessed that the drawing on fol. 24v in the Housebook of a so-called Obscene Garden of Love should have been copied by the Housebook Master after Master E S. One thing seems, however, to be sure: Albrecht Dürer the Elder was quite too proud to copy any other artist, not even himself. It may here be the question of a rather late addition, arranged by Eitelfriedrich II of Zollern, who probably is the man we see on the following fol. 25r, in company with a lady, probably his wife Magdalene, who is pointing at the small river beside them in which the obviously poisoned water from the mining work in the rock has caused the death of two birds. It is on the following fol. 25v that we find the supposed signature that I have interpreted as EF, meaning Eitelfriedrich.

A further artist seems to have delivered the lively mining panorama on fol. 35r, probably as late that he has been able to add a paraphrase of the walking couple on fol. 25r. This instructive picture with a lot of people at a primitive mining, as well as the drawings of mining procedures, might be the work of the extremely productive artist Jörg Kölderer, who was very much favoured by Emperor Maximilian. Kölderer is mentioned for the first time in 1493, he was a court painter from 1494, and from 1518 until 1540 Hofbaumeister. Very resembling the drawing of the mining panorama are among else Kölderer’s contributions to Maximilian’s so-called Fischereibuch (1504, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna).

Copyright © 2001-2007 Knut Andersson. All rights reserved.