Étiquette : cusanus
De klassieke technische beheersing van Karel Vereycken
Op 24 maart 2026 heeft Lode Goukens hetvolgende geschreven in een artikel op de website van ‘t Pallieterke:
‘De Vlaamse kunstschilder en etser Karel Vereycken leeft en werkt in Frankrijk. Op 1 mei toonde hij zijn nieuwste etsen. Eén heel grote in het bijzonder van het interieur van een klooster met een monnik. Dit uitzonderlijke werkstuk – waar hij vier staten van maakte – illustreert zijn bijzondere interesse voor klassieke meesters.’
Lees verder in het pdf hieronder.

The Cenacle of Meaux and Christian Humanism in the Renaissance

“Everything that happens daily in this country stems from a government that calls itself ‘Christian.’ For weeks, not only Jews but also thousands of faithful Catholics in Germany—and I think throughout the world—have been waiting and hoping that the Church of Christ [the Roman Catholic Church] will raise its voice to put an end to this abuse of Christ’s name. Is not this idolatry of race and state power, hammered into the masses daily by radio, a blatant heresy? Is not all of this in total contradiction with the attitude of our Lord and Savior, who, even on the cross, prayed for those who persecuted him?” 1
This quote is similar in many ways to what many Christians feel today in the face of the abuse of « religion » to justify rapacious and bloody wars presented as « just wars, » especially by prominent members of the Trump Administration, notably its Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth.
History tragically repeats itself, for this quote is not new. It comes from a letter sent to the Pope in 1933 by Edith Stein, a philosopher of Jewish origin who became a Carmelite nun, when German Catholics, a minority in this Protestant country, signed a Concordat with Hitler. The common enemy to be fought was now Bolshevism. In exchange for their silence in the face of Nazi barbarity, Hitler offered them his gracious protection.
In France, at the same time, big business, Europeanists before their time, were proclaiming: « Better Hitler than the Popular Front! »
Our good fortune today is to have a pope who raises his voice for peace and justice for all. And one can hope that his voice can give everyone the courage to stop the mad march towards war.
On Palm Sunday, Leo XIV forcefully reiterated that no one can justify war in the name of the Lord:
God « does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war. » « On the contrary, he who has turned his back on the living God, making himself and his own power a mute, blind, and deaf idol, is enslaved to death. »
In addition to the thirst for power, there is also the thirst for money, which was denounced during his trip to the Principality of Monaco.
During his first year as Pope, he repeatedly called for a reconciliation that was « disarmed and disarming. » To the « warlords » who make their power « a mute, blind, and deaf idol, » he contrasted listening to a « melody greater than ourselves » —a harmony to which we can dance when the world seems to forget even « the light. »
The arrival of Pope Leo XIV in France
In a statement published on May 6, the president of the Conference of Bishops of France confirmed what many had been hoping for for a year: although it remains to be confirmed, Leo XIV could come to France at the end of September 2026, stopping in Paris and Lourdes.
This is an opportunity for us to evoke one of the most luminous upsurges of our country, which reached its peak in 1521, with the creation of the Cenacle of Meaux by the philosopher-theologian Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (1450-1537) , at the request of his student Bishop Guillaume Briçonnet (1472-1534) .
It was not a philosophical or prayer circle. Its primary purpose was to read, study, translate, and print the Gospel in French and to train clergymen in preaching. The approach was so simple, honest, and innovative that it deeply disturbed the established political and religious powers. The Cenacle was closed after only four years, its leaders were persecuted, and forced into exile. It was only thanks to the protection of Marguerite of Navarre (1492–1549) (also known as Marguerite of Angoulême or Marguerite of Valois-Angoulême), sister of king Francis I, who embraced this movement, that its leading figures were able to escape the flames of the stake.
Renaissance Evangelicalism
For Guillaume d’Alonge, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples is
« The intellectual leader and founder of French evangelicalism, a reform movement that developed in the early decades of the 16th century, in parallel with the Protestant Reformation, with which it had important points of contact. » 2
What some call « Renaissance evangelicalism » (not to be confused with American messianic evangelicalism, a current that animates today’s warmongers) corresponds to a movement of ideas characterized by the valorization of biblical exegesis.
Unlike evangelicalism in the most common sense of the term, it does not necessarily relate to the Protestant Reformation. On the contrary, many humanists who did not wish to break with the papacy but nevertheless declared themselves hostile to ecclesiastical abuses, such as Erasmus of Rotterdam and François Rabelais, were driven by a desire for reform without schism.
While Catholics sought to eradicate them by ignoring them, Protestants have always claimed that they were one of their own.
Like Erasmus, Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples was certainly a reformer, but he never considered breaking with the Roman Catholic Church, as demanded by Luther, Calvin, and other figures of the Protestant Reformation. The Christian humanists of the Renaissance believed, perhaps naively, that by appealing to reason, the Roman Curia would eventually yield to their demands and agree to eradicate the corruption and abuses that severely plagued the institution.
Humanism
It was in Italy, with Petrarch (1304-1374) , that humanism was born. The poet began by collecting inscriptions on the old stones of Rome and continued his quest for the Ancients in manuscripts.
With his friend Boccaccio , he brought Byzantine scholars to Italy to revive the study of Greek and Latin. While the term humanist then referred to someone who, through the study of Greek and Latin , « cultivated the humanities » ( studia humanitatis ), Renaissance humanist thinkers did not renounce their Christian faith but rather sought to reconcile the two.
A very clear break with scholastic pessimism then took place. Conceiving of himself as « created in the living image of the Creator, » the Renaissance man, uomo universale, endowed with reason and free will, no longer blamed the devil. It was he who had to strive to overcome his evil inclinations. And if he fully developed his creative potential, it was above all to please the Creator by placing his life at the service of the public good rather than his personal glory.
In Northern Europe, the movement of the Brethren and Sisters of the Common Life and that of the Beguines stemmed from the conviction that the contemplative life and the active life should complement each other and not oppose each other. Each person should live « in imitation of Christ. » It was in Deventer, among the Brethren of the Common Life , that Erasmus, inspired by teachers like Rudolph Agricola , discovered Christian humanism and the « good literature . «
Greek and the Greeks

While the study of Greek penetrated Italy and the Netherlands from the beginning of the 15th century, in France, young elites jostled to attend, from 1476 onwards, the courses of a Greek exile, Georges Hermonyme of Sparta, a poor pedagogue, rapacious and with little mastery of his own language.
But, as Jacqueline de Romilly points out:
“Hermonymus had only one merit: that of being the first. The fact is that he had as students, (…) or simply through his advice, all those who were to become the glory of nascent humanism: Reuchlin was his student, Lefèvre d’Étaples said he benefited from his advice, Erasmus asked him for lessons, as did Beatus Rhenanus – and above all our patron saint, Guillaume Budé.” 4
Two other Greeks played a major role in the revival of Hellenic studies.

And first of all , Constantin Lascaris (1434-1501). A student of Jean Argyropoulos between 1444 and 1553, he arrived in the West around 1460, after being taken prisoner during the Turkish occupation of Constantinople in 1453.
After a few short stays between the Greek islands, he became tutor to Francesco Sforza’s daughter in Milan, where he began writing his grammar, the Erotemata .

An essential tool for learning Greek, the work was first printed in Milan, then published twice by Aldus Manutius in Venice.
Constantin Lascaris then went to Rome where he met the greatest protector of Greek scholars in the West and of Byzantine humanism within the clergy, Cardinal Jean Bessarion (1403-1472), Latin Patriarch of Constantinople from 1463.
Bessarion was a friend of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), with whom he collaborated in particular during the Ecumenical Council of Ferrara/Florence, convened to end the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches.
Jean Lascaris

The other Greek scholar (unrelated to the first) is Jean (Janus) Lascaris (1445-1535) , also a protégé of Cardinal Jean Bessarion who entrusted him with numerous missions, notably bringing back precious manuscripts from Mount Athos in 1492.
Although born in Asia Minor and frequenting the great figures of Italy, Lascaris entered the service of France as Louis XII ‘s ambassador to Venice between 1503 and 1508. There he joined the academy of the printer Alde Manutius (1449-1515) where scholars from the East and West met to discuss and edit the classics.
When Erasmus went to Venice to the printer Alde Manutius to publish his Adages, a masterful work aimed at popularizing all ancient wisdom, Lascaris not only offered to welcome him into his home, but also contributed to the work himself.
Erasmus, writes the Belgian historian Yvonne Charlier, feverishly composed his Adages there.
« with the help of a host of distinguished scholars, including Jean-Baptiste Egnazio, a member of the Aldine Academy, and Jean Lascaris, a Greek refugee, passionate about manuscripts and ambassador of Louis XII to Venice. »
He also worked with Lascaris, the young French student Germain de Brie.
A few years later, when Erasmus and Thomas More published Utopia in 1516, a fictional account of a people (the Utopians) who attempt to create an ideal society based on the principles defined by Plato in his Republic, they argue that they must be of Greek origin, since Lascaris « was their only grammarian ».
It was in Venice that Jean Lascaris and Erasmus together conceived the idea of a College of Languages. Being able to compare the translations of the Gospel into Hebrew and Greek was the essential condition for achieving a proper understanding of its content.
Lascaris ended his life in Rome with Pope Leo X , who in 1514 commissioned him to found the « Greek College of the Quirinal. » Erasmus, against all odds, and especially against the theologians of the Brabant university town of Leuven, opened the Trilingual College there in 1517.
Lascaris also took care of the Royal Library, which was established in Blois in 1501 by Louis XII, then moved to Fontainebleau with Guillaume Budé under Francis I.

Subsequently, at Budé’s insistence, François I created in 1530, under royal patronage, the « Collège des Lecteurs royaux, » allowing the study of Greek and all subjects rejected by the Sorbonne.
Lascaris’s close relationship with Lefèvre d’Étaples may have led to the writing that the work of the great French scholars, Budé, Scaliger, Casaubon, Lambin, Cujas, Estienne, appeared
« To be a continuation of the schools of Byzantium and Alexandria, rather than an emanation of currents coming from Italy. » 5
Hidden from Europeans for centuries, this immense heritage – one could say a vast civilization that was being rediscovered – thus made its way to the kingdom of France thanks to men such as Lascaris, whose disciples like Lefèvre took over.
Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples

Philosopher, mathematician, musicologist and theologian, Jacques Lefèvre was born around 1450 in Étaples, Picardy, and died in 1536 in Nérac (Lot-et-Garonne). He Latinized his name to Jacobus Faber Stupulensis, hence the nickname « Fabritists » given to those who adhere to his doctrine.
He studied in Paris, where he earned a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree in arts. He then entered the clergy and became a priest, though it is unknown whether he actually served in this capacity. Gentle and timid by nature, of delicate constitution, and possessing a selflessness that led him to bequeath his inheritance to his brothers and nephews in order to devote himself more freely to his studies, Jacques Lefèvre primarily studied literature and philosophy.
After completing his studies and teaching literature for a time, he developed a taste for travel. He explored parts of Europe, and it is even said that his desire to broaden his knowledge led him to Asia and Africa. Drawn by the winds of renewal that the Renaissance was sweeping across Europe, Lefèvre traveled to Italy at least twice, spending extended periods in Pavia, Padua, Venice, Rome, and Florence.
With his translation of Plato and Aristotle, Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444) provided Italy, and with it the scholarly world, with a philosophical framework. Italian humanism sided with Plato.
Aristotle was attacked for « his metaphysics which puts the particular before the general, his theology which substitutes an inactive god for Plato’s creator God, his psychology which does not dare to resolutely affirm the immortality of the soul, his morality which locates virtue not in goodness, but in the golden mean between good and evil. » 6
In 1492, Lefèvre met and discussed with Florentine Platonists and Neo-Platonists, grouped around Marsilio Ficino, his student Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Poliziano and Ermolao Barbaro.
Starting with Hermes Trismegistus, Plotinus, Iamblichus, and Cicero, this school of thought emphasized the supposed complementarity between Plato and Aristotle rather than their opposition, hoping to reconcile the doctrines of the two philosophers. Positioning himself above both camps, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola was preparing a major work, which death prevented him from completing: the Concordia Platonis et Aristoteles , which aimed to reduce all philosophies and religions to a single wisdom, naturally under the tutelage of the Vatican. Florentine Neoplatonism then exerted a significant influence on an entire generation of prelates and clergymen.
Later, in 1509, under the warrior Pope Julius II, his Neoplatonists advisors dictated to Raphael the content of the frescoes in the Stanza della Segnatura, where Pico della Mirandola features prominently. In his treatise The Ciceronians, Erasmus denounced these Neoplatonists who, instead of Christianizing Plato, used ancient philosophy to reduce Christianity to pagan barbarity.
Returning to Paris in 1495, Lefèvre became a professor at the Cardinal Lemoine college where he taught, until 1507, according to the fashion of the time, philosophy, geometry, arithmetic, grammar, geography, cosmography and music.
His first works were commentaries on Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who was often quoted but rarely read. Somewhat surprisingly, it was only after his encounter with the Florentine Neoplatonists that he decided to publish Aristotle’s writings, in the versions of the Quattrocento humanists, accompanied by commentaries aimed at restoring the philosopher’s sound understanding . Ambitious, Lefèvre conceived his Aristotelian corpus as a reaction against scholastic teaching, against which he had no words harsh enough in his prefaces.
Using the partial or incomplete translations provided by Boethius and Bessarion, he attempts to rid them of what François Rabelais called « the so filthy glosses. » At the time, he still hoped to reconcile Aristotle’s thought with the message of the Gospel.
But Lefèvre did not forget Plato . In 1499, he published the works of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, a 6th-century Neoplatonist thinker who was mistakenly considered one of Christ’s disciples. He then turned his attention to John of Damascus, Nicholas of Cusa, and the Spanish mystic Raymond Lull : authors who nourished the spiritual reflection of French Christians throughout the century. Lefèvre, the mathematician, found himself aligned with the approach of Nicholas of Cusa, for whom, as for Pythagoras, mathematics was simply the science of divine proportions.
Paradoxically, it was after reading Pseudo-Dionysius that he rejected what he had once adored, and his subsequent commentaries reveal a profound distrust of Platonism. In 1506, following his Politics, he published a summary of the Republic and the Laws , entitled Hecatonomies , the margins of which are frequently annotated with « stultitia » (foolishness) or « semistultitia » (half-foolishness). In this treatise, he grouped together the Platonic principles he approved of and those he condemned.
Briçonnet

At one point, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples got the attention of the powerful Briçonnet family.
It was a true dynasty of diplomats, builders and great servants of the Kingdom.
Guillaume Briçonnet (1445-1514) was a French royal officer and later a clergyman, known as the Cardinal of Saint-Malo. Initially a financier, he served as the general of finances for Languedoc under Louis XI.
After his wife’s death, he entered the clergy. Recommended by Louis XI to his successor, he was appointed Secretary of the Treasury. He served as Minister of State under Charles VIII and was created a cardinal by the Pope in 1495. On May 27, 1498, he crowned Louis XII in Reims.

Guillaume Briçonnet (the elder) had a son of the same name, born in 1470. In 1489, while a student in Paris at the Collège de Navarre (he was only 19 years old at the time), Guillaume Briçonnet (the younger) was appointed Bishop of Lodève in Southern France. He also became Abbot of Saint-Guilhem-le-Désert in 1493, a monastry built by one of the lieutenants of Charlemagne. .
He continued to reside in Paris for a time to complete his education, under the tutelage of flemish theologian Josse Clichtove, through whom he met Lefèvre d’Étaples and his circle. In 1495, succeeding his uncle Robert, Archbishop of Reims, Guillaume Briçonnet became one of the two presidents of the Chamber of Accounts in Paris, a position he held until 1507. Having been made a canon of the Church of Paris in 1503, he had a magnificent residence built for himself in the cloister of Notre-Dame.
Appointed abbot of Saint-Germain-des-Prés in 1507, he summoned Lefebvre to his side to promote a reform of the monks’ morals. For Lefebvre, this was a moment of truth. What becomes strikingly clear is that he never practiced philosophy to distance himself from religion; on the contrary, his quest for truth was merely a step in his journey toward God. Prudent in examining the doctrines of others, he avoided taking sides while pursuing his own reflections. Far more than from Aristotle or Plato, it was from the Gospels that Lefebvre drew his inspiration. For him, the study of Holy Scripture was to be the culmination of his work, its natural endpoint.
“In the distance,” he wrote, “such a brilliant light struck my eyes that human doctrines seemed like darkness compared to divine studies, while the latter appeared to exhale a fragrance whose sweetness is unmatched on Earth.” 8
Lefèvre wanted to draw closer to the light he saw in the distance. It could be said that he was going through a « mystical crisis. » The list of « mystical » authors whose works Lefèvre published is long. From the one he considered the most ancient of all, Dionysius the Areopagite, it extends to the most recent, Nicholas of Cusa, passing through Heraclitus, Hermes Trismegistus, John Damascene, Raymond Lull, Richard of Saint Victor, and Ruysbroeck the Admirable .
In 1509, Lefèvre published a Psalter in five languages. The choice to focus first on the Psalter was primarily pastoral in nature: he wanted to offer monks an effective tool to fully understand the content of their prayers, but also to emphasize the centrality of the direct relationship between the faithful and God.
In 1511, while passing through Paris, Erasmus met Lefèvre. Although they may have criticized each other, they deeply respected one another and shared a common commitment throughout their lives.
Lefèvre continued his offensive by publishing the Epistles of Paul (1512), which we know constituted one of the battlegrounds for the Reformation in general and for Luther in particular (« faith and works » or « faith alone » as the path to salvation).
One important point clearly aligns Lefèvre with Erasmus and distinctly separates him from Luther: his interpretation of free will. For the Picard theologian, despite the state of misery and powerlessness into which original sin has plunged humanity, we retain the capacity, however diminished, to receive the gift of grace, to open ourselves to salvation, to reject evil, and to choose good. From this stems a more optimistic and serene vision of the salvation process, truly open and accessible to all, in contrast to the somber and anguished interpretation of salvation that the Reformers reserved for a select few.
Lefèvre, publisher of Nicholas of Cusa

in the 1514 edition by Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples at Josse Bade in Paris.

Lefèvre shared his « mystical » passion with the Briçonnet family, and later with Marguerite de Navarre.
And when, in 1514, Lefèvre had the complete works of Nicholas of Cusa printed in Paris, until then only published twice in Germany, he addressed his dedicatory epistle to William’s brother, Denys Briçonnet, bishop of Toulon.
According to Noëlle Balley ,
« The most remarkable example of this cooperation between scholars is the edition of the works of Nicholas of Cusa, directed by Lefèvre, for which he had manuscripts searched for and copied by all his correspondents, thus creating a truly international collective edition. » 9
His printer was Josse Bade, a passionate Fleming from Ghent, trained by printers in Lyon. Not always rigorous, he published many humanists, including Sebastian Brant (The Ship of Fools), Erasmus (In Praise of Folly), Guillaume Budé, etc.

His son-in-law was the humanist and scholarly printer Robert Estienne (1503-1559), son of the great printer Henri Estienne (1460-1520) (the elder). Francis I appointed him, before 1539, royal printer for Hebrew and Latin, as well as for Greek from 1544.
Cenacle of Meaux

From 1518 onwards, Lefèvre’s patron, Guillaume Briçonnet, decided to take up residence in his new diocese, Meaux, 41 km from Paris. There he intended to implement a pastoral reform inspired by the theological approach outlined by the Picard humanist. At the heart of this project lay the desire, shared by humanists, to bring the essential message of the Gospel to all people, even the simplest and least educated, and thus facilitate access to the mysteries of faith, with the conviction that the intervention of the Holy Spirit could inspire the minds and hearts of the faithful.
A friend and disciple of Lefèvre, Guillaume Briçonnet resolved to promote his moral ideas in his diocese. And, unusually for that time, he abandoned court life to live there.
At Briçonnet’s request, Lefèvre then founded in 1521 the Cenacle of Meaux, a center for reflection and reform of the Church of Meaux. The aim was to return to the sources of Christianity, to the original teachings of Christ, by spreading the New Testament in French: the Gospel texts were « de-Latinized. »

Oil on canvas, attributed to Jean Clouet.
Appointed in 1520 as vicar to Guillaume Briçonnet, who had become Bishop of Meaux, Lefèvre settled in that city. In 1521, Briçonnet became the spiritual director of the sister of the King of France, Marguerite de Navarre, who was committed to the cause.
That same year, Briçonnet and Lefèvre attracted several theologians and preachers to their circle, including the future Reformed philosopher Guillaume Farel, the tireless Gérard Roussel , the Flemish theologian Josse Clichtove, the Hebraist François Vatable, the eloquent Martial Mazurier, the intrepid Michel d’Arande, the renowned preacher Pierre Caroli , and Jean Lecomte de Lacroix.
Then others joined, expanding their circle: Pierre de Sébiville, Aimé Mégret , the Franciscan friar and friend of Rabelais, Pierre Amy, and Jacques Groslot , bailiff of Orléans. Their simple motto was also that of Marguerite de Navarre:
« To know the Gospel, to follow the Gospel, and to make the Gospel known everywhere. »
Marguerite of Navarre was close to Leonardo da Vinci during the last three years of his life (1516-1519) at the Château du Clos Lucé in Amboise. Marguerite had lived there with her husband, Charles IV of Alençon, in 1509. Subsequently, she stayed there regularly with her mother, Louise of Savoy, and her brother, Francis I, in the immediate vicinity of Leonardo da Vinci.

She was an influential patron of the arts, while Leonardo was the king’s « first painter. » In 1546, Rabelais paid tribute to her by dedicating his Third Book to her.
A recent thesis by Jonathan Reid has shown that Marguerite was already at the heart of a vast network including more than two hundred members of the court, diplomats, prelates, and men of letters. Extending well beyond Paris and Meaux, this network also encompassed Alençon, Lyon, Grenoble, Bourges, Poitiers, and Mâcon.
Printers, including Augereau and Du Bois, but also Simon de Colines, who was operating clandestinely in Lyon, were among them. In total, according to Reid, 450 editions of 200 « evangelical » works were printed in France thanks to Marguerite’s protection. 10
On the ground
After visiting his entire diocese, Briçonnet observed that most priests did not reside in their parishes and that the assistant priests had little to no theological training. Furthermore, they lacked the time to teach their parishioners because they had to work, as all parish income went to the priests. The only educated preachers were the Franciscan friars (aka Cordeliers), who often limited themselves to promising hell to wicked Christians.
As early as 1518, Briçonnet undertook to combat moral depravity and the laxity of ecclesiastical discipline by thoroughly reforming his diocese. He simplified worship, abolished the veneration of images and relics, and encouraged preaching to revive the faith. He considered his diocese a mission field and divided it into 26 stations of nine parishes each. But, year after year, he observed the inadequacy of these measures: more than half of the priests were incapable of properly carrying out their assigned duties. He decided to expel the 53 most unfit priests and to train new ones. The Cordeliers were forbidden from preaching.

In Meaux, the Cenacle ran a printing press to publish, among others, the works of Lefèvre d’Étaples: Commentary on the four gospels (in Latin) in 1522, Old Testament (in French), Homilies, Epistles, Gospels, Acts of the Apostles (1523) and Psalms (1524).
The main instruments of religious renewal were greater attention to the selection and education of the priestly body, the restoration of the bishop’s authority over competing religious orders, the control of pulpits entrusted to preachers faithful to Christocentric doctrine and firmly convinced of the principle of justification by faith alone, on which Lefèvre had insisted for years in his writings, as well as the printing and distribution of numerous writings and works intended for clerics and laity: these were devotional texts focused mainly on mental prayer and on the invitation to simplify and purify traditional rituals, as well as Latin and especially French versions of the Holy Scriptures.
Stripped of unnecessary glosses, the texts were read aloud to small groups of people with some education. Prayers in simple language were printed for the common people, as well as popular works beginning in 1525.
The sermons, which changed (no more threats of hell, no more collections at the end), were successful. Neighboring Picardy, the Thiérache region, and the monastery of Livry-en-Aulnoy followed the Fabrist approach.
Meaux served as a laboratory for other dioceses in the kingdom, where bishops close to the evangelical network attempted to implement the model of pastoral renewal developed by Lefèvre and his followers. But if evangelicalism did indeed become an influential and respected movement during the reign of Francis I, it was thanks to the support of a segment of the court which, as we have mentioned, referred to Marguerite. The political, economic, and diplomatic support of the king’s sister and her network allowed the Fabrists to have direct access to the court and to influence the crown’s decisions regarding the policy of tolerance toward « heresy » and the appointment of bishops and abbots.
The reaction

The Cenacle of Meaux immediately attracted the wrath of the Cordeliers (whom it deprived of the proceeds of their collections) and the theologians of the Sorbonne.
In April 1521, Luther’s theses, initially well received and studied, were condemned by the University of Paris.
Clichtove defected (he wrote a work on the cult of saints, proclaiming that « the intelligence of laymen will never be able to understand the sublime meaning contained in the divine books » which even the most learned struggle to understand).
Although Lefèvre’s translation of the New Testament is based on the Vulgate text, he makes about sixty corrections based on the Greek originals. The doctors of Paris are particularly irritated by the « Exhortatory Epistle » that he places at the beginning of the second part, where he recommends that all the faithful read Holy Scripture in the vernacular, that is, in French.
Eleven proposals were submitted to the faculty. The courts ordered that Lefèvre d’Étaples’s French New Testament be burned. But the king, informed of this affair, which he saw as nothing more than harassment by the dean of the Sorbonne, Noël Béda, intervened, and Lefèvre, having defended himself before the prelates and doctors whom the court had appointed as judges, emerged from this attack with his honor intact.
In October 1523, under pressure, Briçonnet banned Luther’s books in his diocese, and in 1524, he dismissed Farel, whose sermons were too provocative, in order to continue his work of spreading the Gospel. At his own expense, he organized public readings of the Bible and distributed translations, which reached Normandy, Champagne, and the Loire Valley.
This first phase of expansion of the Fabrist movement ended around 1525, when, under the regency, the conservative party imposed a repressive policy towards Lutherans and Evangelicals, without distinction.
The hour of persecutions

In 1525, geopolitical upheavals changed the situation in France. First, the trap set by the Italian Wars closed on Francis I. On February 24, 1525, the king was taken prisoner at Pavia by the troops of Charles V.
Consequently, he was no longer in a position to protect the Bishop of Meaux. Furthermore, in May, a papal bull authorized a group composed of three theologians from the Sorbonne and a priest to hunt down heresy.
While Lefèvre was publishing the Epistles and Gospels for the 52 Sundays of the coming year , his enemies were more successful with a new attack, taking advantage of the unrest stirred up in the diocese of Meaux by indiscreet preachers and turbulent monks. A trial opened before the Sorbonne at the instigation of the Cordeliers, who accused him of allowing « heresy » to spread.

That same year, the Parliament of Paris brought a case against Briçonnet. As a conciliatory measure, he again authorized the Cordeliers to preach, asked his parish priests to restore the veneration of saints and the Virgin Mary, forbade preaching to the most extreme elements, and took the statues and images of saints under his personal protection. Jean Leclerc, a wool carder converted to the new ideas, was flogged for putting up posters hostile to the Pope.
After barely four years of existence, the Meaux circle was dissolved in 1525.
For several months, in order to avoid arrest and conviction, Lefèvre and his family were forced to leave the kingdom and take refuge in Strasbourg. There, he strengthened his ties with moderate Protestants such as Capiton and Butzer, and associated with Otto Brunfels, to whom he was linked by a Nicodemite attitude, recognizing the legitimacy of religious concealment in a context of persecution.
In 1526, with the return of Francis I, negotiated with Spain by Margaret of Navarre, and thanks to her protection, they were back in France and managed to maintain some influence for a few more years at court and throughout the rest of the kingdom, through intense activity in printing and disseminating written works, as well as through systematic preaching in the heart of the capital. The king granted Lefèvre the position of personal librarian at Blois and entrusted him with the education of his two children.
Guillaume Briçonnet, for his part, was acquitted. In 1528, he participated in the Synod of Paris that condemned Lutheranism. A year later, Francis I and Marguerite failed to save the life of preacher Louis de Berquin (1490-1529), a friend of Erasmus and also a translator of Lutheran treatises. He was burned alive in the Place de Grève in Paris.
Exile

In 1530, Lefèvre chose to leave the court to go to Nérac to be with his patroness, Marguerite de Navarre. He remained there until his death in 1536, preferring not to take sides in the disputes between Protestants and Catholics.
He cannot be accused of Protestantism, although his comments on priestly celibacy, fasting, and the sacraments are extremely harsh and pave the way for the Reformed movement. The term « evangelicalism, » recently proposed, seems, on the other hand, to be appropriate for this attitude of absolute fidelity to the spirit and the letter of Scripture.

Marguerite de Navarre , it must be emphasized, was a learned woman.
While she knew Latin and even Greek, she was far from mastering these ancient languages like Lefèvre, whose lessons she was able to attend.
For religious reasons, she even received Hebrew lessons from Paul Paradis, nicknamed Canosse, who would later become a lecturer at the Collège Royal. She was greatly influenced by the inspiration and ideas of the Cenacle of Meaux, examples of which she provides particularly in her secular comedies and poems.
And according to one historian,
« She was also familiar with Nicholas of Cusa, author of ‘De Docte Ignorance’, also edited by Lefèvre, with Saint Bonaventure, and with Pseudo-Dionysius, actually a 5th-century Syrian monk. » 11
In 1531, the Venetian scholar Jerome Aleander, former papal nuncio who had become Erasmus’s chief persecutor for the Roman Curia, proved to be very well informed about the situation. He regretted that Lefèvre remained under the influence of his former disciple Gerard Roussel, Bishop of Oloron.
The ambition of the Roman and French conservatives at that time was to convince Lefèvre to write a retraction of his errors and to go to Rome to obtain his full reintegration into the Roman Church.
This was not the case. Although Lefèvre could no longer publicly display his spiritual beliefs, he remained close to the positions of his disciples Roussel and Marguerite, who, throughout the reign of Francis I, even after the Affair of the Placards, continued to advocate a third way between Rome and Geneva. In 1534, Briçonnet died at the Château d’Esmans, near Montereau-Fault-Yonne.
Conclusion

Lefèvre’s translation of the Holy Bible , based on the Vulgate text, was printed not in France, but in Antwerp in 1530.
This was the first Bible in the vernacular language, which served as the basis for all French translations, including modern ones.
A center of preaching, this epicenter of Christian humanism, the Cenacle of Meaux , a precursor of « reformism » , had a great influence on the humanists and writers of this generation.
Marguerite protected François Rabelais (1483-1553) and encouraged him to write Gargantua and Pantagruel.
A friend of Rabelais, the famous poet Clément Marot, entered Marguerite’s service. He was soon accused of heresy and took refuge in Nérac in 1535.

Nicknamed the « mother of the Renaissance, » Marguerite de Navarre was the mother of Jeanne d’Albret and therefore the grandmother of Henri IV, the good King Henri who, knowing this intellectual and spiritual lineage, would embody this ideal in action.
It was certainly with the work of the Cenacle of Meaux in mind that he succeeded, at least in part, in putting an end to the Wars of Religion ravaging France.
The inclusive peace he organized in France, based on the coincidence of opposites theorized by Nicholas of Cusa, would be the model for the Peace of Westphalia which ended the Thirty Years’ War in 1648.
Selected Bibliography
- ALONGE, Guillaume Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples in the religious crisis of the 16th century , nord’ 2022/2 No. 80, pages 15 to 21, Éditions Société de Littérature du Nord.
- BARNAUD, Jean
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples: the preparation , Theological and religious studies, 11th year, No. 1, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples, Master of Philosophy , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 2, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (continued) , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 3, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (continued and concluded) , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 4-5, 1936. - CHARLIER, Yvonne , Erasmus and friendship, based on his correspondence , Editions Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1977.
- DE ROMILLY, Jacqueline, Five centuries of Hellenism in France , Bulletin of the Association Guillaume Budé, March 1977.
- EICHEL-LOJKINE, Patricia, Marguerite de Navarre, pearl of the Renaissance , Perrin, Paris, 2021.
- PERNOT, Jean-François, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (1450? – 1536), Proceedings of the Etaples colloquium on November 7 and 8, 1992, Classiques Garnier, Paris, 1995.
NOTES:
- https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/agreement-catholic-church ↩︎
- file:///C:/Users/User/Desktop/alonge-2022-jacques-lefevre-detaples-dans-la-crise-religieuse-du-xvie-siecle.pdf ↩︎
- Christian humanism differs from « secular humanism » (anti-religious) and supposedly « scientific. » Once the spiritual dimension was eliminated, the humanist dimension also fell by the wayside. Julian Huxley, one of the great promoters of « secular humanism, » ended up inventing the term « transhumanist, » an ideology he saw as capable of replacing all religions. Millionaire Jeffrey Epstein, as well as billionaires Elon Musk, Larry Ellison, and Peter Thiel, are adherents of this ideology .
- file:///C:/Users/User/Desktop/Jacques%20LEtap/Romilly_Helle%CC%81isme-France.pdf ↩︎
- Börje Knös , An Ambassador of Hellenism: Janus Lascaris and the Greco-Byzantine Tradition in French Humanism , Uppsala, Almqvist & Wiksells, 1945 .
- Philip. Monnier , The Quattrocento . Volume II, p. 82. ↩︎
- https://www.etudesheraultaises.fr/publi/evocation-de-guillaume-briconnet-eveque-de-lodeve-de-1489-a-1519/ ↩︎
- Heminjard , Correspondence of the Reformers, vol. I, p. 4, note. ↩︎
- https://theses.chartes.psl.eu/document/ENCPOS_1991_01 ↩︎
- Jonathan Reid , King’s Sister, Queen of Dissent: Marguerite de Navarre (1492-1549) and her Evangelical Network . Leyden, Brill, 2009; 2 vol. ↩︎
- Jean-Pierre Duteil . Marguerite de Navarre . Ellipses, 2021. hal-04186835.
La coïncidence des opposés


Genèse







A Milan, Karel Vereycken appelle à une « nouvelle Renaissance »


Le 21 mars, lors de la remise du Prix international « Le Génie universel – Hommage à Léonard de Vinci », dans l’auditorium du prestigieux Musée national des sciences et des techniques Léonard de Vinci, à Milan, le peintre graveur Karel Vereycken a lancé un appel en faveur d’une « Nouvelle Renaissance ».

Venus de soixante pays, une bonne centaine d’artistes et d’amateurs d’art assistaient à la cérémonie.
En guise de clôture, un représentant diplomatique du Mexique a félicité organisateurs et artistes présents.
Avant de se métamorphoser en fondation, c’était une association destinée à promouvoir les artistes débutants et confirmés. Galerie d’art et éditeur, la Fondation organise régulièrement des expositions internationales dans de nombreuses villes italiennes et étrangères.
Les finalistes avaient été sélectionnés pour la consistance artistique de leur démarche par les conservateurs de la « Fondazione Effetto Arte » de Palerme.
Concernant leur mission, les organisateurs écrivent sur leur site :
« Nous sommes convaincus que nos expériences doivent se concrétiser et s’étendre, afin de contrer l’aplatissement intellectuel de notre époque. Plus que jamais, en ce moment historique, l’art a besoin d’espaces de participation maximale pour que le grand public puisse y prendre part. C’est la voie que nous nous engageons à suivre pour les événements futurs, afin de permettre à un nombre croissant de personnes d’entrer en contact avec la dimension artistique, de la manière la plus simple et la plus directe, comme un moment de partage social avec les communautés artistiques. »
Vereycken n’était que l’un des nombreux lauréats primés. Remerciant les organisateurs pour cette distinction, plusieurs artistes ont expliqué en quoi Léonard de Vinci avait été pour eux une source d’inspiration personnelle et constante.
L’un d’eux a déclaré :
« À 28 ans, je pouvais reproduire de mémoire la plupart des tableaux de Léonard. »
Nombre d’entre eux, très émus, ont évoqué leur art, non seulement comme un refuge face à l’anxiété envahissante du moment présent, mais aussi comme un moyen pour combattre et réduire la menace d’une guerre imminente.
Discours

Chers organisateurs, chers collègues, honorables invités,

Tout d’abord, félicitations à vous tous, et plus particulièrement aux graveurs, car nous nous faisons rares. Voici ma gravure sur cuivre. (Apparaît sur grand écran « Le pêcheur flamand », à gauche sur la photo du catalogue.)
C’est avec un grand honneur et un immense plaisir que j’assiste à cet événement important et que j’accepte cette distinction.
Je tiens à féliciter les organisateurs pour cette initiative. Jamais le moment n’a été plus opportun pour rendre hommage au génie de la Renaissance, Léonard de Vinci, car aujourd’hui, en ces temps sombres de guerre, de corruption et de déprévation, il est absolument urgent que nous, artistes et amateurs d’art, renouions avec les plus hautes exigences.
Où en est le monde aujourd’hui ? Nous sommes entrés dans le siècle de la supercherie absolue, où de fausses informations et de fausses monnaies sont produites par de fausses élites se servant de l’intelligence fausse pour manipuler l’information, tout en poussant le monde réel à de véritables guerres contre de véritables êtres humains.
Pire encore pour les arts : le meurtre, la guerre et même le génocide sont promus sur internet comme des œuvres d’art à vendre.
Réveillons-nous ! Déjà en 1789, alors que les révolutions balayaient l’Europe, le poète allemand Friedrich Schiller, dans un poème, soulignait l’importance de l’ART :
« Artistes ! La dignité de l’homme est remise en vos mains : gardez-la ! Elle tombe avec vous ! Avec vous elle s’élèvera ! »
Par conséquent, une nouvelle Renaissance n’est pas un simple rêve. Il faut la concrétiser à nouveau, afin de réhumaniser l’humanité et de recréer l’empathie nécessaire au dialogue et à la compréhension mutuelle.
Milan est un lieu idéal pour jouer un rôle majeur dans cette nouvelle Renaissance. C’est ici, au palais de Ludovic Sforza, qu’une jeune et brillante poétesse, Cecilia Gallerani, dont le portrait nous est familier grâce à la « Dame à l’hermine », initia Léonard de Vinci à ses discussions musicales, poétiques et philosophiques – une rencontre qui marqua sans conteste l’ascension de Léonard de Vinci au rang de génie.
Pour lui, comme pour le penseur de la Renaissance Nicolas de Cues, dont les écrits furent lus ici, il nous faut apprendre à déchiffrer le macrocosme invisible à travers le microcosme. Le monde a besoin de nouvelles Cecilia et de nouveaux Léonard.
Mettons fin dès maintenant au « siècle de la supercherie » en organisant ensemble, grâce à des concours artistiques de grande qualité, une nouvelle Renaissance qui célèbre la beauté et la dignité intérieure.
Tel est le défi que nous devons relever aujourd’hui.
Merci.




L’ombra di Vernadsky nella Sant’Anna di Leonardo da Vinci

Di Karel Vereycken
(First published in Italian on the italian Movisol website)
Nel marzo del 1821, il poeta inglese Percy Bysshe Shelley concluse il suo scritto « Difesa della poesia » con questo concetto visionario:
«I poeti sono i gerofanti di un’ispirazione non percepita, gli specchi delle ombre gigantesche che il futuro getta sul presente, le parole che esprimono ciò che non capiscono, le trombe che chiamano a battaglia e non sentono ciò che ispirano, l’influenza che non è mossa, ma muove. I poeti sono i legislatori non riconosciuti del mondo.»
Ci proponiamo di esaminare qui, da questo punto di vista, il capolavoro di Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519, « La Vergine con Bambino e Sant’Anna », attualmente al Louvre).
Non ci si stanca mai di contemplare questo capolavoro. Il dipinto raffigura Sant’Anna, sua figlia Maria e Gesù Bambino che abbracciano un agnello sacrificale, simbolo della sua missione: liberare l’umanità dal peccato originale.
Leonardo da Vinci non creò questo dipinto per un principe, un duca, un cardinale o un papa, ma per se stesso, e come tale lo lasciò in eredità all’umanità.
Dopo aver esaminato le ricerche più recenti, Vincent Delieuvin , lo storico francese del Louvre, giunse nel 2000 a questa sorprendente conclusione: Leonardo accolse con favore il ritorno del regime repubblicano a Firenze, di cui Sant’Anna era la protettrice.1
Benché l’opera sia rimasta praticamente incompiuta alla sua morte nel 1519, sappiamo che Leonardo da Vinci iniziò a lavorarci nel 1503 (all’età di 51 anni), mentre viveva a Firenze. Re Francesco I non rubò il dipinto, ma rubò il suo creatore, che lo portò con sé in Francia per completarlo.
Lo spettatore è immediatamente colpito da un potente, quasi inquietante, senso di movimento, da una sensazione di amore supremo e di grande bellezza. Pur raffigurando delle figure delle Sacre Scritture (Sant’Anna, la Vergine Maria, Cristo) anziché illustrare una particolare sequenza liturgica (che, peraltro, non esiste), l’opera scaturisce chiaramente da una profonda concezione filosofica.
Cercherò di convincervi che esiste un « lungo arco storico » , una coerenza intellettuale tra persone e menti che non si sono mai incrociate e non si sono mai parlate, ma le cui intuizioni e i cui progressi epistemologici coincidono.
Il capolavoro di Leonardo da Vinci appare, a mio avviso, come una sorta di anello mancante tra la visione di Dio e della creazione di Niccolò Cusano e il concetto di « noosfera » di Vladimir Vernadsky, passando per l’idea di « cosmo » di Alexander von Humboldt. A prima vista, questo potrebbe sembrare azzardato, ma permettetemi di approfondire.
Un’unità
Cosa si può mai unire questi quattro brillanti intellettuali, Cusano, Leonardo da Vinci, Alexander von Humboldt e Vernadsky? Tutti e quattro erano convinti che l’universo fosse un tutto vivente, unificato e armonioso.

Nel suo trattato *Sulla dotta ignoranza* (1440), il cardinale tedesco Niccolò Cusano (1401-1464) , pensatore di spicco e figura di riferimento nei grandi concili ecumenici, nonché nel Rinascimento italiano ed europeo, inizia con questo simbolo: Dio è il « massimo assoluto » e l’unità perfetta ( unio ). In quest’unità, tutte le distanze, le divisioni e le contraddizioni si trasformano e si fondono nell’unione. L’Universo è l’immagine contratta di quest’unità e di questo massimo assoluto. Come uno specchio, è il massimo « contratto » perché non comprende tutte le cose, ma solo tutte le cose al di fuori di Dio, tutte le cose create. Il filosofo usa i termini *complicatio * (avvolgimento) ed *explicatio* (svolgimento) per spiegare che tutte le cose sono avvolte in Dio (la fonte) e dispiegate nel mondo. Il mondo, il cosmo e il tempo geologico sono lo svolgimento dell’unità di Dio.

Sulle orme di Cusano, Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) affermò con forza: « Comprendete che ogni cosa è connessa a ogni altra ». Per lui, il progresso significava unificare campi diversi come l’arte, l’anatomia e l’ingegneria in una comprensione completa e coerente. L’artista-ingegnere incoraggiò i suoi contemporanei a imparare a percepire i legami che uniscono la natura, l’arte, la scienza e l’anima umana. L’osservazione permise a Leonardo di scoprire le cause invisibili dietro gli effetti visibili e di immaginare e verificare ipotesi creative. In particolare, postulò che il corpo umano potesse essere una versione in miniatura (microcosmo) della Terra (macrocosmo), osservando che la ramificazione dei vasi sanguigni nell’uomo rispecchia gli affluenti dei fiumi, così come i movimenti del corpo imitano le maree. A suo avviso, la Terra è un organismo vivente con « carne » (il suolo), « ossa » (gli strati rocciosi) e « sangue » (le vene d’acqua). Studiò il volo degli uccelli e il movimento dell’acqua, convinto che entrambi obbedissero alle stesse leggi della fisica dei fluidi. L’arte è una scienza e la scienza è un’arte, entrambe strumenti per comprendere le leggi fondamentali del mondo. Per Leonardo da Vinci, i pittori dovevano possedere l’intero cosmo nella mente e nelle mani per riflettere veramente la bellezza, l’armonia e la complessità della natura. Per lui, il movimento è l’essenza stessa di un universo vivo e in continua espansione. Studiò i motivi a spirale presenti in ogni cosa, dai fiori ai riccioli dei capelli ai vortici dell’acqua, nel tentativo di comprendere come la forza vitale generi forme diverse. Infine, considerava la stagnazione una forma di declino, osservando che « il ferro arrugginisce per mancanza di utilizzo » e che « l’inazione prosciuga il vigore della mente ».

Anche il naturalista e rivoluzionario tedesco Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) si sforzò di comprendere come i vari fenomeni naturali, nonostante la loro apparente indipendenza, formino un sistema armonioso e unificato. Parlò di un « sistema terrestre » in cui clima, flora, fauna e vita umana sono interdipendenti. Humboldt credeva che esistesse un « legame intrinseco » tra il generale e il particolare, che gli permetteva di percepire l’interconnessione tra diverse regioni e climi. Nella sua ultima opera in cinque volumi, Cosmos (1845-1858), descrisse la natura come un « soffio di vita » e un « tutto organico », e vide l’intero universo – fisico e celeste – come un « sistema magnificamente ordinato e armonioso ». Come Cusano e Leonardo da Vinci, sostenne che una comprensione scientifica dei processi naturali accresce il nostro apprezzamento per la loro bellezza.

Per il geofisico russo-ucraino Vladimir Vernadsky (1863-1945) , la vita è eterna e inseparabile dal cosmo, non solo dalla Terra. Considerava la materia vivente come un « fenomeno cosmico » sorto altrove o da sempre esistente, che plasma l’ambiente chimico dei pianeti. La biosfera circonda la Terra come un « involucro saturo di vita », dove organismi viventi e materia inerte interagiscono costantemente, inseparabilmente e dinamicamente. La fase successiva dell’evoluzione è descritta come la transizione dalla biosfera alla « noosfera », dove l’attività umana razionale, la scienza e la tecnologia diventano la principale forza geologica che modella il pianeta. Vernadsky era convinto che il futuro dell’umanità dipendesse dal riconoscimento di questa unità, suggerendo che il pensiero umano fosse una naturale estensione dei processi geologici e cosmici.
Ora diamo un’occhiata al dipinto
È tenendo presente questo « lungo arco di storia » che l’osservatore attento può scorgere l’ombra di Vernadsky nella Sant’Anna di Leonardo.
Decifrare:

- Lo sfondo del dipinto raffigura creste scoscese dall’aspetto preistorico, ispirate agli studi di Leonardo sulle Dolomiti e sulle Alpi. Questo paesaggio arido, roccioso, quasi lunare, è stato descritto dagli storici come « fantastico » o « metafisico ». Come testimoniano i suoi taccuini, Leonardo era interessato a rappresentare i movimenti « invisibili » , non solo delle anime, ma anche di fenomeni fisici come il tempo, e più specificamente, il tempo geologico. Come si sono formate le montagne, ad esempio? Per altri, questo paesaggio « morto » o lunare dello sfondo – ciò che Vernadsky chiamerebbe « litosfera » – serve solo a mettere in risalto gli altri elementi della composizione.
- Di fronte a questo paesaggio, sulla destra, si erge un albero, la prima indicazione della biosfera, ma una semplice tappa in un processo evolutivo di sviluppo accelerato del cosmo.
- Di seguito, l’agnello (simbolo religioso del sacrificio di Cristo) rappresenterebbe una forma superiore di coscienza di questa biosfera.
- Poi appare Gesù, che, nella sua incarnazione come bambino, rappresenta solo una sorta di coscienza ingenua, una mera potenzialità per il suo sviluppo futuro.
- La Vergine Maria è raffigurata in una posa paradossale, che illustra perfettamente ciò che il pensatore americano Lyndon LaRouche definì un « cambiamento a metà movimento » , ovvero un momento ambiguo di indecisione tra movimenti apparentemente opposti. Il gesto maestoso, amorevole e protettivo di Maria, e il suo abbraccio a Gesù, coincidono con il suo profondo desiderio di concedergli tutta la libertà di movimento necessaria per compiere la sua sacra missione.
- Sant’Anna, sulla vetta, colma di gioia divina, sorride mentre contempla il gesto aggraziato di sua figlia Maria e l’amore che ella nutre per Cristo. Gioisce di essere, in un certo senso, l’anima « noosferica » consapevole di un Cosmo divino e vivente, dove il Creatore concepisce incessantemente nuove forme per la Sua creazione e gradi sempre più elevati di consapevolezza della Sua stessa natura creativa. Gli allineamenti circolari delle catene montuose lunari risuonano visivamente con gli anelli armoniosi formati da braccia e vesti in una spirale a cascata.
Anche scrittrici come Viviane Forrester , il cui lavoro2 è contaminato da perniciose interpretazioni moderniste e freudiane, e che affermano erroneamente che siamo ingannati dalla « sciocca » gentilezza di Maria (p. 19), riconoscono tuttavia intuitivamente che c’è qualcosa di molto speciale in quest’opera, una sorta di unità che la scrittrice descrive, in mancanza di una parola migliore, come « organica ».
Quando scopriamo queste figure, scrive, « percepiamo chiaramente che si tratta di organismi viventi all’interno di un paesaggio, un organismo vivente. L’organico nell’organico » (p. 12).
Questo momento organico, osserva, appare allo spettatore come un « momento congelato » di un « movimento transitorio » .
«Il loro respiro successivo, quello che segue, sembra più importante, più vitale, più sospeso di qualsiasi trama, di qualsiasi storia. E la loro presenza tangibile e fragile è simile a quella delle montagne, che respirano anch’esse.» (p. 13)
La nascita di un fungo

L’eccessiva enfasi posta sul fatto che Leonardo da Vinci fosse un genio « autodidatta » ha in qualche modo trascurato la ricerca sulle influenze intellettuali di cui ha beneficiato.
La sua prima esperienza fu l’apprendistato presso Andrea del Verrocchio (1435-1488) , la cui bottega fiorentina era modellata su quella del suo precettore, il dotto scultore Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378-1455) , dove gli studenti studiavano astronomia, poesia, architettura, scultura, pittura, fusione del bronzo, metallurgia, chimica, anatomia e leggevano i classici.
In seguito, a Milano, come pittore di corte, Leonardo fu « adottato » dalla giovane Cecilia Gallerani (1473-1536) , amante prediletta (ma non l’ultima) del duca Ludovico Sforza , detto Ludovico il Moro, duca di Milano.
Nacque a Siena in una famiglia numerosa, il cui padre, Fazio Gallerani, non era un nobile ma ricoprì diverse posizioni importanti alla corte di Milano, in particolare quella di ambasciatore presso le repubbliche di Firenze e Lucca.
Cecilia, insieme ai suoi sei fratelli, ricevette un’istruzione in latino e letteratura. È nota soprattutto per aver ispirato il dipinto di Leonardo da Vinci « Dama con l’ermellino » (circa 1489), un’opera in cui il senso del movimento prevale già sulla rappresentazione statica. Si narra che, durante una seduta, invitò Leonardo a unirsi al circolo letterario che ospitava a Palazzo Carmagnola, dove presiedeva dibattiti intellettuali con filosofi, poeti e musicisti.
Compositrice di opere musicali e poetiche, oratrice in latino e italiano fin dall’età di 16 anni, rinomata per il suo spirito e la sua erudizione, è considerata una delle donne più colte del Rinascimento italiano.
Benché quasi tutta la sua opera sia andata perduta, rimane nella nostra memoria come una figura di spicco della lingua italiana, grazie alla sua maestria nella letteratura e nella poesia.

Il poeta di corte Bernardo Bellincioni (1452-1492) , amico di Leonardo, ne elogiò il talento letterario, arrivando a paragonarla alla celebre poetessa greca Saffo, che si dice abbia ispirato Platone.
La Corte di Milano e i suoi mecenati attrassero e incoraggiarono anche altri artisti e scienziati, tra cui l’architetto Donato Bramante, il matematico e amico di Leonardo da Vinci, Luca Pacioli, la dotta duchessa Beatrice d’Este, il poeta Bernardo Bellincioni e l’umanista e pedagogista Francesco Filelfo.
Cecilia Gallerani fece conoscere a Leonardo da Vinci le idee di Cusano? Non lo sappiamo, ma senza dubbio aveva sia la capacità che l’opportunità di farlo.

Il Codice Trivulziano di Leonardo (1487-1490), compilato a Milano in questo periodo, segna una svolta. Fino ad allora, l’artista aveva spesso sostenuto con veemenza la superiorità della pittura rispetto alla poesia. Tuttavia, dopo la sua frequentazione con Cecilia, il Codice Trivulziano rivela il suo desiderio di migliorare drasticamente le sue capacità letterarie, fino ad allora piuttosto modeste, compilando lunghe liste di parole erudite, inclusi termini latini, tratti da autorevoli fonti lessicali e grammaticali. A quanto pare, considerava questo un prerequisito che gli avrebbe permesso di descrivere con precisione scientifica i fenomeni che avrebbe scoperto in seguito.
Circa vent’anni dopo la morte di Leonardo da Vinci, si narra che l’orafo e scultore Benvenuto Cellini (1500-1571) abbia dichiarato:
«Non mancherò di riferire le parole che ho sentito pronunciare dal re a proposito di lui. Il re disse che non pensava ci fosse mai stato un uomo che sapesse tanto quanto Leonardo, non solo di scultura, di pittura e di architettura, ma anche di filosofia, dove eccelleva.»3
Come ha concluso un ricercatore:
«L’unità epistemologica di Leonardo da Vinci consente di accedere a una prospettiva più elevata. Non solo accresce la nostra propensione all’empatia autentica e alla profonda comprensione (essenziali nella società pluralistica odierna), ma ci consente anche di accedere a una forma di libertà sociale e intellettuale. È un metodo per acquisire una comprensione più completa della condizione umana; in breve, per ricevere una vera istruzione.»
Il mondo ha bisogno di nuove Cecilia Gallerani e nuovi Leonardo da Vinci. Sei pronto ad accettare questa sfida?
- Vincent Delieuvin, La Vergine, il Bambino Gesù e Sant’Anna, nota come Sant’Anna, sito web del Louvre.
https://collections.louvre.fr/ark:/53355/cl010066107 ↩︎ - Al Louvre con Viviane Forrester, La Vergine con Bambino e Sant’Anna , dossier preparato da Cécile Scailliérez, Servizio Culturale del Louvre, Symogy, Editions d’Art, Parigi, 2000. ↩︎
- Marianne Tregouët , Cellini alla corte di Francesco I (1540-1545): I meccanismi di una disgrazia , dicembre 2024, HAL Id: dumas-04797814 https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-04797814v1 ↩︎
The Shadow of Vernadsky in Leonardo’s Virgin and Child with Saint Anne

In march 1821, the English poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, concluded his poem « A defense of Poetry » with a visionary concept:
« Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration; the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present; the words which express what they understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle, and feel not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world. »
We examine here, from that standpoint, Leonardo da Vinci‘s masterwork The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne.
One never gets tired of looking at “The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne”, Leonardo’s superb masterpiece in the Louvre. Formally, the painting depicts Saint Anne, her daughter the Virgin Mary and the infant Jesus. Christ is shown embracing a sacrificial lamb symbolizing the mission he took on to liberate mankind from the original sin.
Remarkably, Leonardo didn’t make this painting for a Prince, not for a Duke, not for a Cardinal, nor for a Pope, but for himself, and as such, as a legacy for humanity.
Vincent Delieuvin, the French historian of the Louvre who cross-checked all the available documentation and hypothesis, arrives at the interesting but paradoxical conclusion that with this painting Leonardo wanted to give tribute to the return of the Florentine Republic:
« Since the Florentines rose up against Gautier de Brienne, Duke of Athens, on July 26, 1343, the feast day of Saint Anne, the city had devoted particular worship to the mother of the Virgin Mary, who was considered the protector of the Republic.
After the Medici were exiled in 1494, the honors bestowed upon the saint increased once again. Leonardo’s work fits perfectly into this context of the restoration of republican government, in which the artist participated with the execution of The Battle of Anghiari in 1503. »1
When the painting was finished is not known. In general, it is thought that Leonardo da Vinci (1454-1519) started working on it in 1503 when he lived in Florence at the age of 51. The French King Frances I, who bought the panel in 1518, didn’t steal the panel, just its author who brought it with him to France to finish it.
The viewer is immediately overwhelmed by a powerful and nearly disturbing sense of motion, supreme love and beauty. The scene itself, if it shows figures from the Holy scriptures (Anne, the Virgin Mary, Christ), rather than illustrating a given liturgical sequence, manifestly springs from a well of profound philosophical reflections.
I will try to convince you here there exists a “Long arch of History” of thinking and coherence between persons and minds that never met or spoke to each other, but whose intuitions and mindsets werecongruent and oriented in the same directions. Leonardo’s masterpiece appears (in my view) as a sort of “missing link” between Nicolaus Cusanus’ vision of God and nature and Vladimir Vernadsky’s concept of the Noosphere, eventually via Alexander von Humboldt’s idea of the “Cosmos”. That might look wild and even silly at first glance, but please allow me to elaborate.
A Single Harmonic One
What unites the four towering intellectuals named Cusanus, Leonardo, Alexander von Humboldt and Vernadsky? All four were convinced that the universe is a single harmonic One.

The German cardinal Nicolas of Cusa (1401-1464), a thinker and major figure in the great ecumenical councils and the Italian and European Renaissance, begins his treatise On Learned Ignorance (1440) with a symbol. God is the “absolute maximum” and perfect unity (unio); in this unity, all distances, all divisions, all contradictions are transformed and merge into union. The universe is the contracted image of this absolute maximum and this absolute unity; it is not the absolute maximum, but, as in a mirror, the “contracted” maximum, for it does not comprise all things, but only all things outside of God, all created things. The thinker uses the terms complicatio (envelopment) and explicatio (unfolding or development) to explain that all things are enveloped in God (the source) and unfolded in the world. The world, the cosmos, and geological time are the unfolding of God’s unity.

Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), following in the footsteps of Cues, emphatically stated: “Understand that everything is connected to everything else.” For him, progress meant unifying different fields such as art, anatomy, and engineering into a comprehensive and coherent understanding. The artist-engineer invited his contemporaries to learn to perceive the links that unite nature, art, science, and the human soul. Observation allowed Leonardo to discover invisible causes rather than visible effects, and to imagine and test creative hypotheses. In particular, he postulated that the human body could be a miniature version (microcosm) of the Earth (macrocosm), observing that the branching of blood vessels in humans mirrors the tributaries of rivers, just as the movements of the body mimic the tides. In his view, the Earth is a living organism with “flesh” (the soil), ‘bones’ (rock strata), and “blood” (water veins). He studied the flight of birds and the movement of water, convinced that both obeyed the same fluid physics. Art is science, and science is art; both are tools for understanding the fundamental laws of the world. For Leonardo da Vinci, painters must possess the entire cosmos in their minds and hands in order to truly reflect the beauty, harmony, and complexity of nature. For the artist, movement is the very essence of a living, expanding universe. He studied the spiral patterns found in everything from flowers to curls of hair to whirlpools in water in order to understand how the life force generates different forms. Finally, he considered stagnation to be a form of decline, writing that “iron rusts from lack of use” and “inaction saps the vigor of the mind.”

The German naturalist and revolutionary Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) also sought to understand how various natural phenomena, despite their apparent independence, form a harmonious and unified system. He refers to an “earth system” in which climate, flora, fauna, and human life are interdependent. Humboldt believed in studying the “intrinsic link” between the general and the particular, which allowed him to perceive the interconnectedness of different regions and climates. In his ultimate multi-volume work, Cosmos (1845-1858), he described nature as a “breath of life” and an “organic whole,” and sought to describe the entire universe—physical and celestial—as a “magnificently ordered and harmonious system.” Like Cusanus and Leonardo da Vinci, he argued that a scientific understanding of natural processes increases our appreciation of their beauty.

Ukrainian-Russian geophysicist Vladimir Vernadsky (1863–1945) viewed life as eternal and inseparable from the cosmos, not just from Earth. He proposed that living matter was a “cosmic phenomenon” that had appeared elsewhere or had always existed, shaping the chemical environment of planets. He defined the “Biosphere” as a “life-saturated envelope” around the Earth, where living organisms and inert matter interact constantly, inseparably, and dynamically. Vernadsky described the transition from the biosphere to the “Noosphere” as the next stage of evolution, where rational human activity, science, and technology become the main geological force shaping the planet. He was convinced that the future of humanity depended on recognizing this unity, suggesting that human thought was a natural extension of geological and cosmic processes.
What do we see?
It is with this “Long arch of History” in mind, that the viewer can discover the “Shadow of Vernadsky » in Leonardo’s Saint Anne. Because, what does the viewer see?

- The background of the painting features sharp, prehistoric-looking crags inspired by Leonardo’s studies of the Dolomites and the Alps. This barren, rocky terrain, nearly lunar, has been described by historians as “fantastical” or “metaphysical”. As we know from his notebooks, Leonardo was interested in painting “invisible” movements, not only those of the souls, but also universal phenomena such as “time”, especially “geological” time. How did mountains arise, etc.? Others, correctly argue that the « dead » or lunar landscape of the background, what Vernadsky would call the “Lithosphere” serves to highlight the other elements of the composition.
- On the right, one could see the tree (the “biosphere”) as representing a step in an evolutionary process of the development of the cosmos.
- Beneath the tree, the lamb (in religious terms a symbol of Christ’s sacrifice to free mankind) also represents a higher form of conscience of that same “biosphere”
- Then appears Jesus, who, represented in his human incarnation, that of a child, represents only a sort of naive conscience, merely the potential for his further development.
- The Virgin Mary, is represented in a paradoxical position which is a perfect example of what the late Lyndon LaRouche identified as “mid-motion-change”, meaning an ambiguous instant of indecision between two or more contrary movements. Her majestic, loving and protecting gesture and embrace of Jesus coincides with her vivid desire to induce the boy all the freedom of movement he needs to fulfill his sacred mission.
- Saint Anne, on top, as a sort of self-conscious form of agapic love, looks down and smiles seeing the majestic gesture and love for Christ of her daughter Mary. She is happy to be the self-conscious “noospheric” soul of a divine and living Cosmos, where the creator permanently creates ever higher forms of creation and of consciousness of its own creative nature. The rings of lunar mountain chains resemble and resonate visually with the harmonic rings formed by arms and clothes in a cascade of aesthetic spiral action.
Even authors polluted by nasty modernist and Freudian misinterpretations such as Viviane Forrester2 who wrongly pretend we are mislead by an overwhelming sentiment of mildness of Mary, nevertheless acknowledge intuitively there is something very special in this work, a sort of unity Forrester brands, not finding a better name, “organic”. When we discover these figures, she writes:
“one clearly sees they are living organisms in the midst of a landscape, a living organism. Organic inside Organic.” (p. 12)
That organic moment, she observes, appears here to the viewer as a “frozen moment” of a “transitory movement”.
Their “next respiration, the one that will follow, seems more important, vital, more suspended than any intrigue, any narrative. And their [the figures] tangible presence, fragile, matches that of the mountains, who respire as well.” (p. 13)
The making of a genius
By over-emphasizing that Leonardo was a “self-taught” genius, research on the intellectual influences he underwent was somehow neglected.
The first chance he had, was to be an apprentice of Andrea del Verrocchio (1435-1488), whose Florence workshop was modeled on that of his tutor, the Florentine erudite sculptor Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378-1455) where pupils studied astronomy, poetry, architecture, sculpture, painting, bronze-casting, metal-works, chemistry, anatomy and read the Classics.

Then, in Milan, as a court painter, Leonardo was “adopted” by the young Cecilia Gallerani (1473 – 1536), the favorite (but not the last) mistress of the Duke Ludovico Sforza, known as Lodovico Il Moro, Duke of Milan.
She was born into a large family from Siena. Her father’s name was Fazio Gallerani. He was not a member of the nobility, but he occupied several important posts at the Milanese court, including the position of ambassador to the Republic of Florence and Republic of Lucca. Cecilia was educated alongside her six brothers in Latin and literature.
She is best known as the subject of Leonardo da Vinci’s painting Lady with an Ermine (c. 1489), already a painting where movement prevails over static representation. It is said that while posing for the painting, she invited Leonardo to be part of the literary circle she hosted at her residence in the Palazzo Carmagnola, where she engaged in intellectual debates with philosophers, poets, and musicians. Gallerani herself presided over these discussions.

Composing music, poetry and delivering orations in both Latin and Italian at the age of 16, renowned for her wit and scholarship, she was considered one of the most cultured women of the Italian Renaissance.
While nearly all of her works were lost, she is remembered as a “great light of the Italian language” due to her mastery of literature and verse. The court poet Bernardo Bellincioni (1452-1492) highly praised her literary talents, even comparing her to the famous Ancient Greek poetess Sappho which allegedly inspired Plato.
The Court of Milan and its patrons also attracted and protected other artists and scientists, among which the architect Donato Bramante, the mathematician and friend of Leonardo, Luca Pacioli, the duchess Beatrice d’Este, the poet Bernardo Bellincioni and the humanist educator Francesco Filelfo.

Did Cecilia Gallerani introduce Leonardo to the ideas of Cusanus? We don’t know, but she certainly had both the knowledge and ability to do so.
Leonardo’s Codex Trivulzianus (1487-1490), shows he was working hard to improve his modest literary education, through long lists of learned words, including Latin words, copied from authoritative lexical and grammatical sources.
The scientist reportedly saw this as a precondition that was going to allow him to describe with scientific precision the phenomena he was going to discover in the future.
About twenty years after Leonardo da Vinci’s death, the goldsmith and sculptor Benvenuto Cellini (1500–1571) is said to have remarked:
“I would not want to fail to repeat the words I heard the king say about him. The king said that he did not believe there had ever been a man who knew as much as Leonardo, not only in sculpture, painting, and architecture, but also in philosophy, in which he excelled.”
As one scholar concludes:
Leonardo’s “epistemological unity allows one to be elevated to a higher perspective. It not only increases our propensity for genuine empathy and understanding (much needed in today’s pluralistic society), but also for a kind of social and intellectual freedom. It is a method of acquiring a more holistic understanding of the human condition; or in short, of getting a real education.”
The world needs new Cecilia Gallerani’s and new Leonardo da Vinci’s. Are you ready to go there?
NOTES:
- Vincent Delievin, La Vierge, l’Enfant Jésus et sainte Anne, dit La Sainte Anne, website of the Louvre; ↩︎
- Au Louvre avec Viviane Forrester, La Vierge et l’Enfant avec sainte Anne, Léonard de Vinci, dossier établi par Cécile Scailliérez, Service Culturel du Louvre, Symogy, Editions d’Art, Paris, 2000. ↩︎
ARTKAREL AUDIO GUIDE : Van der Weyden and Cusanus

Listen:
To the audio on the website
Read :
- Rogier Van der Weyden, le maître de la compassion;
- The Greek language project, Plato and the Renaissance (EN online).
- Devotio Moderna, Brothers of the Common Life, the cradle of humanism in the North (EN online)
- Jan van Eyck, la beauté comme prégustation de la sagesse divine (FR en ligne) + EN on line.
- Jan Van Eyck, a Flemish Painter using Arab Optics (EN online)
Van Eyck, a Flemish Painter using Arab Optics?

What follows is an edited transcript of a lecture by Karel Vereycken on the subject of “Perspective in XVth-century Flemish religious painting”.
It was delivered at the international colloquium “La recherche du divin à travers l’espace géométrique” (The quest for the divine through geometrical space) at the Paris Sorbonne University on April 26-28, 2006, under the direction of Luc Bergmans, Department of Dutch Studies (Paris IV Sorbonne University).
Introduction
« Perspective in XVth-century Flemish religious painting ». At first glance, this title may seem surprising. While the genius of fifteenth-century Flemish painters is universally attributed to their mastery of drying oil and their intricate sense of detail, their spatial geometry as such is usually identified as the very counter-example of the “right perspective”.
Disdained by Michelangelo and his faithful friend Vasari, the Flemish « primitives » would never have overcome the medieval, archaic and empirical model. For the classical “narritive”, still in force today, stipulates that only « Renaissance » perspective, obeying the canon of « linear », “mathematical” perspective, is the only « right », and the “scientific” one.
According to the same narrative, it was the research carried out around 1415-20 by the Duomo architect Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446), superficially mentioned by Antonio Tuccio di Manetti some 60 years later, which supposedly enabled Leon Battista Alberti (1404-1472), proclaiming himself Brunelleschi’s intellectual heir, to invent « perspective ».

In 1435, in De Pictura, a book entirely devoid of graphic illustration, Alberti is said to have formulated the premises of a perspectivist canon capable of representing, or at least conforming to, our modern notions of Cartesian space-time (NOTE 1), a space-time characterized as « entirely rational, i.e. infinite, continuous and homogeneous », « in one word, a purely mathematical space [dixit Panofsky] » (NOTE 2)
Long afterwards, in a drawing from the Codex Madrid, Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) attempted to unravel the workings of this model.
But in the same manuscript, he rigorously demonstrated the inherent limitations of the Albertian Renaissance perspectivist canon.

The drawing on f°15, v° clearly shows that the simple projection of visual pyramid cross-sections on a plane paradoxically causes their size to increase the further they are from the point of vision, whereas reality would require exactly the opposite. (NOTE 3)
With this in mind, Leonardo began to question the mobility of the eye and the curvilinear nature of the retina. Refusing to immobilize the viewer on an exclusive point of vision (NOTE 4), Leonardo used curvilinear constructions to correct these lateral deformations. (NOTE 5) In France, Jean Fouquet and others worked along the same lines.
But Leonardo’s powerful arguments were ignored, and he was unable to prevent this rewriting of history.
Despite this official version of art history, it should be noted that at the time, Flemish painters were elevated to pinnacles by Italy’s greatest patrons and art connoisseurs, specifically for their ability to represent space.
Bartolomeo Fazio, around the middle of the 15th century, observed that the paintings of Jan van Eyck, an artist billed as the « principal painter of our time », showed « tiny figures of men, mountains, groves, villages and castles rendered with such skill that one would think them fifty thousand paces apart. » (NOTE 6)
Such was their reputation that some of the great names in Italian painting had no qualms about reproducing Flemish works identically. I’m thinking, for example, of the copy of Hans Memlinc‘s Christ Crowned with Thorns at the Genoa Museum, copied by Domenico Ghirlandajo (Philadelphia Museum).
But post-Michelangelo classicism deemed the non-conformity of Flemish spatial geometry with Descartes’ « extended substance » to be an unforgivable crime, and any deviation from, or insubordination to, the « Renaissance » perspectivist canon relegated them to the category of « primitives », i.e. « empiricists », clearly devoid of any scientific culture.
Today, ironically, it is almost exclusively those artists who explicitly renounce all forms of perspectivist construction in favor of pseudo-naïveté, who earn the label of modernity…

In any case, current prejudices mean that 15th-century Flemish painting is still accused of having ignored perspective.
It’s true, however, that at the end of the XIVth century, certain paintings by Melchior Broederlam (c. 1355-1411) and others by Robert Campin (1375-1444) (Master of Flémalle) show the viewer interiors where plates and cutlery on tables threaten to suddenly slide to the floor.
Nevertheless, it must be admitted that whenever the artist « ignores » or disregards the linear perspective scheme, he seems to do so more by choice than by incapacity. To achieve a limpid composition, the painter prioritizes his didactic mission to the detriment of all other considerations.
For example, in Campin’s Mérode Altarpiece, the exaggerated perspective of the table clearly shows that the vase is behind the candlestick and book.


Jan van Eyck’s Lam Gods (Mystic Lamb) in Ghent is another example.
Never could so many figures, with so much detail and presence, be shown with a linear perspective where the figures in the foreground would hide those behind. (NOTE 7)
But the intention to approximate a credible sense of space and depth remains.
If this perspective seems flawed by its linear geometry, Campin imposes an extraordinary sense of space through his revolutionary treatment of shadows. As every painter knows, light is painted by painting shadow.
In Campin’s work, every object and figure is exposed to several sources of light, generating a darker central shadow as the fruit of crossed shadows.
Van Eyck influenced by Arab Optics?

Roger Bacon, statue in Oxord.
This new treatment of light-space has been largely ignored. However, there are several indications that this new conception was partly the result of the influence of « Arab » science, in particular its work on optics.
Translated into Latin and studied from the XIIth century onwards, their work was developed in particular by a network of Franciscans whose epicenter was in Oxford (Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, etc.) and whose influence spread to Chartres, Paris, Cologne and the rest of Europe.
It should be noted that Jan van Eyck (1395-1441), an emblematic figure of Flemish painting, was ambassador to Paris, Prague, Portugal and England.
I’ll briefly mention three elements that support this hypothesis of the influence of Arab science.

Curved mirrors

Robert Campin (master of Flémalle) in the Werl Triptych (1438) and Jan van Eyck in the Arnolfini portrait (1434), each feature convex mirrors of considerable size.
It is now certain that glaziers and mirror-makers were full members of the Saint Luc guild, the painters’ guild. (NOTE 8)
But it is relevant to know that Campin, now recognized as having run the workshop in Tournai where the painters Van der Weyden and Jacques Daret were trained, produced paintings for the Franciscans in this city. Heinrich Werl, who commissioned the altarpiece featuring the convex mirror, was an eminent Franciscan theologian who taught at the University of Cologne.

Artistic representation of Ibn Al-Haytam (Alhazen)
These convex and concave (or ardent) mirrors were much studied during the Arab renaissance of the IXth to XIth centuries, in particular by the Arab philosopher Al-Kindi (801-873) in Baghdad at the time of Charlemagne.
Arab scientists were not only in possession of the main body of Hellenic work on optics (Euclid‘s Optics, Ptolemy‘s Optics, the works of Heron of Alexandria, Anthemius of Tralles, etc.), but it was sometimes the rigorous refutation of this heritage that was to give science its wings.
After the decisive work of Ibn Sahl (Xth century), it was that of Ibn Al-Haytam (Latin name : Alhazen) (NOTE 9) on the nature of light, lenses and spherical mirrors that was to have a major influence. (NOTE 10)

As mentioned above, these studies were taken up by the Oxford Franciscans, starting with the English bishop of Lincoln, Robert Grosseteste (1168-1253).
In De Natura Locorum, for example, Grosseteste shows a diagram of the refraction of light in a spherical glass filled with water. And in his De Iride he marvels at this science which he connexts to perspective :
« This part of optics, so well understood, shows us how to make very distant things appear as if they were situated very near, and how we can make small things situated at a distance appear to the size we desire, so that it becomes possible for us to read the smallest letters from incredible distances, or to count sand, or grains, or any small object.«

Grosseteste’s pupil Roger Bacon (1212-1292) wrote De Speculis Comburentibus, a specific treatise on « Ardent Mirrors » which elaborates on Ibn Al-Haytam‘s work.
Flemish painters Campin, Van Eyck and Van der Weyden proudly display their knowledge of this new scientific and technological revolution metamorphosed into Christian symbolisms.
Their paintings feature not only curved mirrors but also glass bottles, which they use as a metaphor for the immaculate conception.
A Nativity hymn of that period says:
« As through glass the ray passed without breaking it, so of the Virgin Mother, Virgin she was and virgin she remained… » (NOTE 11)
The Treatment of Light
In his Discourse on Light, Ibn Al-Haytam develops his theory of light propagation in extremely poetic language, setting out requirements that remind us of the « Eyckian revolution ». Indeed, Flemish « realism » and perspective are the result of a new treatment of light and color.
Ibn Al-Haytam:
« The light emitted by a luminous body by itself -substantial light- and the light emitted by an illuminated body -accidental light- propagate on the bodies surrounding them. Opaque bodies can be illuminated and then in turn emit light. »

This physical principle, theorized by Leonardo da Vinci, is omnipresent in Flemish painting. Just look at the images reflected in the helmet of St. George in Van Eyck‘s Madonna to Canon van der Paele (NOTE 12).
In each curved surface of Saint George’s helmet, we can identify the reflection of the Virgin and even a window through which light enters the painting.
The shining shield on St. George’s back reflects the base of the adjacent column, and the painter’s portrait appears as a signature. Only a knowledge of the optics of curved surfaces can explain this rendering.
Ibn Al-Haytam:
« Light can penetrate transparent bodies: water, air, crystal and their counterparts. »
And :
« Transparent bodies have, like opaque bodies, a ‘receiving power’ for light, but transparent bodies also have a ‘transmitting power’ for light.«
Isn’t the development of oil mediums and glazes by the Flemish an echo of this research? Alternating opaque and translucent layers on very smooth panels, the specificity of the oil medium alters the angle of light refraction.
In 1559, the painter-poet Lucas d’Heere referred to van Eyck‘s paintings as « mirrors, not painted scenes.«
Binocular perspective



Before the advent of « right » central linear perspective, art historians sought a coherent explanation for its birth in the presence of several seemingly disparate vanishing points by theorizing a so-called central « fishbone » perspective.
In this model, a number of vanishing lines, instead of coinciding in a single central vanishing point on the horizon, either end up in a « vanishing region » (NOTE 13), or align with what some call a vertical « vanishing axis », forming a kind of « fishbone ».
French Professor Dominique Raynaud, who worked for years on this issue, underscores that « all medieval treatises on perspective address the question of binocular vision », notably the Polish scholar Witelo (1230-1280) (NOTE 15) in his Perspectiva (I,27), an insight he also got from the works of Ibn Al-Haytam.
Witelo presents a figure to defend the idea that
« the two forms, which penetrate two homologous points of the surface of the two eyes, arrive at the same point of the concavity of the common nerve, and are superimposed at this point to become one » (Perspectiva, III, 37).
A similar line of reasoning can be found in Roger Bacon‘s Perspectiva Communis, written by John Pecham, Archbishop of Canterbury (1240-1290) for whom:
« the duality of the eyes must be reduced to unity »
So, as Professor Raynaud proposed, if we extend the famous vanishing lines (i.e., in our case, the « fish bones ») until they intersect, the « vanishing axis » problem disappears, as the vanishing lines meet. Interestingly, the result is a perspective with two vanishing points in the central region!

Suddenly, the diagrams drawn up to demonstrate the « empiricism » of the Flemish painters, if viewed from this point of view, reveal a legitimate construction probably based on optics as transmitted by Arab science and rediscovered by Franciscan networks and others.
Two paintings by Jan van Eyck clearly demonstrate that he followed this approach: The Madonna with Canon van der Paele of 1436 and the Dresden Tryptic of 1437.


What seemed a clumsy, empirical approach in the form of a « fishbone » perspective (left) turns out to be a binocular perspective construction.
Was this type of perspective specifically Flemish?
A close examination of works by Ghiberti, Donatello and Paolo Uccello, generally dating from the first half of the XVth Century, reveals a mastery of the same principle.


Cusanus
But this whole demonstration is merely a look into the past through the eyes of modern scientific rationality. It would be a grave error not to take into account the immense influence of the Rhenish (Master Eckhart, Johannes Tauler, Heinrich Suso) and Flemish (Hadewijch of Antwerp, Jan van Ruusbroec, etc.) « mystics ».
This trend began to flourish again with the rediscovery of the Christianized neo-Platonism of Dionysius the Areopagite (Vth-VIth century), made accessible… by the new translations of the Franciscan Grosseteste in Oxford.
The spiritual vision of the Aeropagite, expressed in a powerful imagery language, is directly reminiscent of the metaphorical approach of the Flemish painters, for whom a certain type of light is simply the revelation of divine grace.
In On the Heavenly Hierarchy, Dionysius immediately presents light as a manifestation of divine goodness. It ennobles us and enables us to enlighten others:
« Let those who are illuminated be filled with divine clarity, and the eyes of their understanding trained to the work of chaste contemplation; finally, let those who are perfected, once their primitive imperfection has been abolished, share in the sanctifying science of the marvelous teachings that have already been manifested to them; similarly, let the purifier excel in the purity he communicates to others; let the illuminator, gifted with a greater penetration of spirit, equally fit to receive and transmit light, happily flooded with sacred splendor, pour it out in pressing streams on those who are worthy… » [Chap. III, 3]
Let’s think again of the St. George in Van Eyck‘s Madonna to Canon van der Paele, which indeed pours forth the multiple images of the Virgin who enlightens him.
This theo-philosophical trend reached full maturity in the work of Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa (Cusanus) (1401-1464) (NOTE 16), embodying the extremely fruitful encounter of this « negative theology » with Greek science, Socratic knowledge and Christian Humanism.

In contrast to both a science « without a hypothesis of God » and a metaphysics with an esoteric drift, an agapic love leads it to the education of the greatest number, to the defense of the weak and the humiliated.
The Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life, educating Erasmus of Rotterdam and inspiring Cusanus, are the best example of this.
But let’s sketch out some of Cusanus’ key ideas on painting.
In De Icona (The Vision of God) (1453), which he sent to the Benedictine monks of the Tegernsee, Cusanus condenses his fundamental work On Learned Ignorance (1440), in which he develops the concept of the coincidence of opposites. His starting point was a self-portrait of his friend « Roger », the Flemish painter Rogier van der Weyden, which he sent together with his sermon to the monks.
This self-portrait, like the multiple faces of Christ painted in the XVth century, uses an « optical illusion » to create the effect of a gaze that fixes the viewer, regardless of his or her position in front of the altarpiece.
In De Icona, written as a sermon, Cusanus asks monks to stand in a semicircle around the painting and watch this gaze pursue them as they move along the segment of the curve. In fact, he elaborates a pedagogical paradox based on the fact that the Greek name for God, Theos, has its etymological origin in the verb theastai (to see, to look at).
As you can see, he says, God looks at you personally, and his gaze follows you everywhere. He is therefore one and many. And even when you turn away from him, his gaze falls on you. So, miraculously, although he looks at everyone at the same time, he nevertheless establishes a personal relationship with each one. If « seeing » for God is « loving », God’s point of vision is infinite, omniscient and omnipotent love.

A parallel can be drawn here with the spherical mirror at the center of Jan van Eyck’s painting The Arnolfini portrait, painted in 1434, nineteen years before this sermon.
Firstly, this circular mirror is surrounded by the ten stations of Christ’s Passion, juxtaposed by a rosary, an explicit reference to God.
Secondly, it reveals a view of the entire room, an image that completely escapes the linear perspective of the foreground. A view comparable to the allcompassing « Vision of God » developed by Cusanus.
Finally, we see two figures in the mirror, but not the image of the painter behind his easel. These are undoubtedly the two witnesses to the wedding. Instead of signing his painting with « Van Eyck invent. », the painter signed his painting above the mirror with « Van Eyck was here » (NOTE 17), identifying himself as a witness.
As Dionysius the Aeropagite asserted:
« [the celestial hierarchy] transforms its adepts into so many images of God: pure and splendid mirrors where the eternal and ineffable light can shine, and which, according to the desired order, reflect liberally on inferior things this borrowed brightness with which they shine. » [Chap. III, 2]
The Flemish mystic Jan van Ruusbroec (1293-1381) evokes a very similar image in his Spiegel der eeuwigher salicheit (Mirror of eternal salvation) when he says:
« Ende Hi heeft ieghewelcs mensche ziele gescapen alse eenen levenden spieghel, daer Hi dat Beelde sijnre natueren in gedruct heeft. » (And he created each human soul as a living mirror, in which he imprinted the image of his nature).
And so, like a polished mirror, Van Eyck’s soul, illuminated and living in God’s truth, acts as an illuminating witness to this union. (NOTE 18)
So, although the Flemish painters of the XVth century clearly had a solid scientific foundation, they choose such or such perspective depending on the idea they wanted to convey.
In essence, their paintings remain objects of theo-philosophical speculation or as you like « intellectual prayer », capable of praising the goodness, beauty and magnificence of a Creator who created them in His own image. By the very nature of their approach, their interest lay above all in the geometry of a kind of « paradoxical space-light » capable, through enigma, of opening us up to a participatory transcendence, rather than simply seeking to « represent » a dead space existing outside metaphysical reality.
The only geometry worthy of interest was that which showed itself capable of articulating this non-linearity, a « divine » or « mystical » perspective capable of linking the infinite beauty of our commensurable microcosm with the immeasurable goodness of the macrocosm.
Thank you,
NOTES:
- Recently, Italian scholars have pointed to the role of Biagio Pelacani Da Parma (d. 1416), a professor at the University of Padua near Venice, in imposing such a perspective, which privileged only the « geometrical laws of the act of vision and the rules of mathematical calculation ».
- Erwin Panofsky, Perspective as Symbolic Form, p.41-42, Les Éditions de Minuit, Paris, 1975.
- Institut de France, Manuscrit E, 16 v° « the eye [h] perceives on the plane wall the images of distant objects greater than that of the nearer object. »
- Leonardo understands that Albertian perspective, like anamorphosis, condemns the viewer to a single, immobile point of vision.
- See, for example, the slight enlargement of the apostles at the ends of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper in the Milan refectory.
- Baxandall, Bartholomaeus Facius on painting, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 27, (1964). Fazio is also enthusiastic about a world map (now lost) by Jan van Eyck, in which all the places and regions of the earth are depicted recognizably and at measurable distances.
- To escape this fate, Pieter Bruegel the Elder used a cavalier perspective, placing his horizon line high up.
- Lionel Simonot, Etude expérimentale et modélisation de la diffusion de la lumière dans une couche de peinture colorée et translucide. Application à l’effet visuel des glacis et des vernis, p.9 (PhD thesis, Nov. 2002).
- Ibn Al-Haytam (Alhazen) (965-1039) wrote some 200 works on mathematics, astronomy, physics, medicine and philosophy. Born in Basra, after working on the development of the Nile in Egypt, he travelled to Spain. He is said to have carried out a series of highly detailed experiments on theoretical and experimental optics, including the camera obscura (darkroom), work that was later to feature in Leonardo da Vinci’s studies. Da Vinci may well have read the lengthy passages by Alhazen that appear in the Commentari of the Florentine sculptor Ghiberti. According to Gerbert d’Aurillac (the future Pope Sylvester II in 999), Bishop of Rheims, brought back from Spain the decimal system with its zero and an astrolabe, it was thanks to Gerard of Cremona (1114-c. 1187) that Europe gained access to Greek, Jewish and Arabic science. This scholar went to Toledo in 1175 to learn Arabic, and translated some 80 scientific works from Arabic into Latin, including Ptolemy’s Almagest, Apollonius’ Conics, several treatises by Aristotle, Avicenna‘s Canon, and the works of Ibn Al-Haytam, Al-Kindi, Thabit ibn Qurra and Al-Razi.
- In the Arab world, this research was taken up a century later by the Persian physicist Al-Farisi (1267-1319). He wrote an important commentary on Alhazen’s Treatise on Optics. Using a drop of water as a model, and based on Alhazen’s theory of double refraction in a sphere, he gave the first correct explanation of the rainbow. He even suggested the wave-like property of light, whereas Alhazen had studied light using solid balls in his reflection and refraction experiments. The question was now: does light propagate by undulation or by particle transport?
- Meiss, M., Light as form and symbol in some fifteenth century paintings, Art Bulletin, XVIII, 1936, p. 434.
- Note also the fact that the canon shows a pair of glasses…
- Brion-Guerry in Jean Pèlerin Viator, sa place dans l’histoire de la perspective, Belles Lettres, 1962, p. 94-96, states in obscure language that « the object of representation behaves most often in Van Eyck as a cubic volume seen from the front and from the inside. Perspectival foreshortening is achieved by constructing a rectangle whose sides form the base of four trapezoids. The orthogonals thus tend towards four distinct points of convergence, forming a ‘vanishing region' ».
- Dominique Raynaud, L’Hypothèse d’Oxford, essai sur les origines de la perpective, PUF, Paris 1998.
- Witelo was a friend of the Flemish Dominican scholar Willem van Moerbeke, a translator of Archimedes in contact with Saint Thomas Aquinas. Moerbeke was also in contact with the mathematician Jean Campanus and the Flemish neo-Platonic astronomer Hendrik Bate van Mechelen. Johannes Kepler‘s own work on human vision builds on that of Witelo.
- Cusanus was above all a man of science and theology. But he was also a political organizer. The painter Jan van Eyck fought for the same goals, as evidenced by the ecumenical theme of the Ghent polyptych. It shows the Mystic Lamb, symbolizing the sacrifice of the Son of God for the redemption of mankind, capable of reuniting a church torn apart by internal differences. Hence the presence of the three popes in the central panel, here united before the lamb. Van Eyck also painted a portrait of Cardinal Niccolo Albergati, one of the instigators of the great Ecumenical Council organized by Cusanus in Ferrara and then moved to Florence. If Cusanus called Van der Weyden « his friend Roger », it is also thought that Robert Campin may have met him, since he would have attended the Council of Basel, as did one of his commissioners, the Franciscan theologian Heinrich Werl.
- Jan Van Eyck was one of the first painters in the history of art to date and sign his paintings with his own name.
- Myriam Greilsammer’s book L’Envers du tableau, Mariage et Maternité en Flandre Médiévale (Editions Armand Colin, 1990) documents Arnolfini’s sexual escapades. Arnolfini was taken to court by one of his victims, a female servant. Van Eyck seems to have understood that the knightly Arnoult Fin, Lucchese financier and commercial representative of the House of Medici in Bruges, required the somewhat peculiar presence of the eye of the lord.
Devotio Moderna, Brothers of the Common Life: the cradle of humanism in the North

Presentation of Karel Vereycken, founder of Agora Erasmus, at a meeting with friends in the Netherlands on September 10, 2011.
The current financial system is bankrupt and will collapse in the coming days, weeks, months or years if nothing is done to end the paradigm of financial globalization, monetarism and free trade.
To exit this crisis implies organizing a break-up of the banks according to principles of the Glass-Steagall Act, an indispensable lever to recreate a true credit system in opposition to the current monetarist system. The objective is to guarantee real investments generating physical and human wealth, thanks to large infrastructure projects and highly qualified and well-paid jobs.
Can this be done? Yes, we can! However, the true challenge is neither economic, nor political, but cultural and educational: how to lay the foundations of a new Renaissance, how to effect a civilizational shift away from green and Malthusian pessimism towards a culture that sets itself the sacred mission of fully developing the creative powers of each individual, whether here, in Africa, or elsewhere.
Is there a historical precedent? Yes, and especially here, from where I am speaking to you this morning (Naarden, Netherlands) with a certain emotion. It probably overwhelms me because I have a rather well informed and precise sense of the role that several key individuals from the region where we are gathered this morning have played and how, in the fourteenth century, they made Deventer, Zwolle and Windesheim an intellectual hotbed and the cradle of the Renaissance of the North which inspired so many worldwide.
Let me summarize for you the history of this movement of lay clerics and teachers: the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life, a movement that nurished our beloved Erasmus of Rotterdam, the humanist giant from whom we borrowed the name to create our political movement in Belgium.
As very often, it all begins with an individual decision of someone to overcome his shortcomings and give up those « little compromises » that end up making most of us slaves. In doing so, this individual quickly appears as a « natural » leader. Do you want to become a leader? Start by cleaning up your own mess before giving lessons to others!
Geert Groote, the founder

The spiritual father of the Brothers is Geert Groote, born in 1340 and son of a wealthy textile merchant in Deventer, which at that time, like Zwolle, Kampen and Roermond, were prosperous cities of the Hanseatic League.
In 1345, as a result of the international financial crash, the Black Death spread throughout Europe and arrived in the Netherlands around 1449-50. Between a third and a half of the population died and, according to some sources, Groote lost both parents. He abhorred the hypocrisy of the hordes of flagellants who invaded the streets and later advocated a less conspicuous, more interior spirituality.
Groote had talent for intellectual matters and was soon sent to study in Paris. In 1358, at the age of eighteen, he obtained the title of Master of Arts, even though the statutes of the University stipulated that the minimum age required was twenty-one.
He stayed eight years in Paris where he taught, while making a few excursions to Cologne and Prague. During this time, he assimilated all that could be known about philosophy, theology, medicine, canon law and astronomy. He also learned Latin, Greek and Hebrew and was considered one of the greatest scholars of the time.
Around 1362 he became canon of Aachen Cathedral and in 1371 of that of Utrecht. At the age of 27, he was sent as a diplomat to Cologne and to the Court of Avignon to settle the dispute between the city of Deventer and the bishop of Utrecht with Pope Urban V. In principle, he could have met the Italian humanist Petrarch who was there at that time.
Full of knowledge and success, Groote got a big head. His best friends, conscious of his talents, kindly suggested him to detach himself from his obsession with « Earthly Paradise ». The first one was his friend Guillaume de Salvarvilla, the choirmaster of Notre-Dame of Paris. The second was Henri Eger of Kalkar (1328-1408) with whom Groote shared the benches of the Sorbonne.
In 1374, Groote got seriously ill. However, the priest of Deventer refused to administer the last sacraments to him as long as he refused to burn some of the books in his possession. Fearing for his life (after death), he decided to burn his collection of books on black magic. Finally, he felt better and healed. He also gave up living in comfort and lucre through fictitious jobs that allowed him to get rich without working too hard.
After this radical conversion, Groote decides to selfperfect. In his Conclusions and Resolutions he wrote:
« It is to the glory, honor and service of God that I propose to order my life and the salvation of my soul. (…) In the first place, not to desire any other benefit and not to put my hope and expectation from now on in any temporal profit. The more goods I have, the more I will probably want more. For according to the primitive Church, you cannot have several benefits. Of all the sciences of the Gentiles, the moral sciences are the least detestable: many of them are often useful and profitable both for oneself and for teaching others. The wisest, like Socrates and Plato, brought all philosophy back to ethics. And if they spoke of high things, they transmitted them (according to St. Augustine and my own experience) by moralizing them lightly and figuratively, so that morality always shines through in knowledge… ».
Groote then undertakes a spiritual retreat at the Carthusian monastery of Monnikshuizen near Arnhem where he devotes himself to prayer and study.
However, after a three-year stay in isolation, the prior, his Parisian friend Eger of Kalkar, told him to go out and teach :
« Instead of remaining cloistered here, you will be able to do greater good by going out into the world to preach, an activity for which God has given you a great talent. »
Ruusbroec, the inspirer

Groote accepted the challenge. However, before taking action, he decided to make a last trip to Paris in 1378 to obtain the books he needed.
According to Pomerius, prior of Groenendael between 1431 and 1432, he undertook this trip with his friend from Zwolle, the teacher Joan Cele (around 1350-1417), the historical founder of the excellent Dutch public education system, the Latin School.
On their way to Paris, they visit Jan van Ruusbroec (1293-1381), a Flemish “mystic” who lived in the Groenendael Priory on the edge of the Soignes Forest near Brussels.
Groote, still living in fear of God and the authorities, initially tries to make « more acceptable » some of the old sage’s writings while recognizing Ruusbroec as closer to the Lord than he is. In a letter to the community of Groenendael, he requested the prayer of the prior:
« I would like to recommend myself to the prayer of your provost and prior. For the time of eternity, I would like to be ‘the prior’s stepladder’, as long as my soul is united to him in love and respect.” (Note 1)
Back in Deventer, Groote concentrated on study and preaching. First he presented himself to the bishop to be ordained a deacon. In this function, he obtained the right to preach in the entire bishopric of Utrecht (basically the whole part of today’s Netherlands north of the great rivers, except for the area around Groningen).
First he preached in Deventer, then in Zwolle, Kampen, Zutphen and later in Amsterdam, Haarlem, Gouda and Delft. His success is so great that jealousy is felt in the church. Moreover, with the chaos caused by the great schism (1378 to 1417) installing two popes at the head of the church, the believers are looking for a new generation of leaders.
As early as 1374, Groote offered part of his parents’ house to accommodate a group of pious women. Endowed with a by-law, the first house of sisters was born in Deventer. He named them « Sisters of the Common Life », a concept developed in several works of Ruusbroec, notably in the final paragraph Of the Shining Stone (Van den blinckende Steen)
« The man who is sent from this height to the world below, is full of truth, and rich in all virtues. And he does not seek his own, but the honor of the one who sent him. And that is why he is upright and truthful in all things. And he has a rich and benevolent foundation grounded in the riches of God. And so he must always convey the spirit of God to those who need it; for the living fountain of the Holy Spirit is not a wealth that can be wasted. And he is a willing instrument of God with whom the Lord works as He wills, and how He wills. And it is not for sale, but leaves the honor to God. And for this reason he remains ready to do whatever God commands; and to do and tolerate with strength whatever God entrusts to him. And so he has a common life; for to him seeing [via contemplativa] and working [via activa] are equal, for in both things he is perfect.”
Radewijns, the organizer

Following one of his first sermons, Groote recruited Florens Radewijns (1350-1400). Born in Utrecht, the latter received his training in Prague where, also at the early age of 18, he was awarded the title of Magister Artium.
Groote then sent him to the German city of Worms to be consecrated priest there. In 1380 Groote moved with about ten pupils to the house of Radewijns in Deventer; it would later be known as the « Sir Florens House” (Heer Florenshuis), the first house of the Brothers and above all its base of operation?
When Groote died of the plague in 1384, Radewijns decided to expand the movement which became the Brothers and Sisters of the Common Life. Soon it will be branded the Devotio Moderna (Modern Devotion).
Books and beguinages


A number of parallels can be drawn with the phenomenon of the Beguines which flourished from the 13th century onward. (Note 2)
The first beguines were independent women, living alone (without a man or a rule), animated by a deep spirituality and daring to venture into the enormous adventure of a personal relationship with God. (Note 3)
Operating outside the official religious hierarchy, they didn’t beg but worked various jobs to earn their daily bread. The same goes for the Brothers of the Common Life, except that for them, books were at the center of all activities. Thus, apart from teaching, the copying and production of books represented a major source of income while allowing spreading the word to the many.
Lay Brothers and Sisters focused on education and their priests on preaching. Thanks to the scriptorium and printing houses, their literature and music will spread everywhere.
Windesheim
To protect the movement from unfair attacks and criticism, Radewijns founded a congregation of canons regular obeying the Augustinian rule.
In Windesheim, between Zwolle and Deventer, on land belonging to Berthold ten Hove, one of the members, a first cloister is erected. A second one, for women this time, is built in Diepenveen near Arnhem. The construction of Windesheim took several years and a group of brothers lived temporarily on the building site, in huts.

In 1399 Johannes van Kempen, who had stayed at Groote’s house in Deventer, became the first prior of the cloister of Mont Saint-Agnès near Zwolle and gave the movement new momentum. From Zwolle, Deventer and Windesheim, the new recruits spread all over the Netherlands and Northern Europe to found new branches of the movement.
In 1412, the congregation had 16 cloisters and their number reached 97 in 1500: 84 priories for men and 13 for women. To this must be added a large number of cloisters for canonesses which, although not formally associated with the Windesheim Congregation, were run by rectors trained by them.
Windesheim was not recognized by the Bishop of Utrecht until 1423 and in Belgium, Groenendael, associated with the Red Cloister and Korsendonc, wanted to be part of it as early as 1402.
Thomas a Kempis, Cusanus and Erasmus

Johannes van Kempen was the brother of the famous Thomas a Kempis (1379-1471). The latter, trained in Windesheim, animated the cloister of Mont Saint-Agnès near Zwolle and was one of the towering figures of the movement for seventy years. In addition to a biography he wrote of Groote and his account of the movement, his Imitatione Christi (The Imitation of Christ) became the most widely read work in history after the Bible.
Both Rudolf Agricola (1444-1485) and Alexander Hegius (1433-1498), two of Erasmus’ tutors during his training in Deventer, were direct pupils of Thomas a Kempis. The Latin School of Deventer, of which Hegius was rector, was the first school in Northern Europe to teach the ancient Greek language to children.

While no formal prove exists, it is tempting to believe that Cusanus (1401-1464), who protected Agricola and, in his last will, via his Bursa Cusanus, offered a scholarship for the training of orphans and poor students of the Brothers of the Common Life in Deventer, was also trained by this humanist network.
What is known is that when Cusanus came in 1451 to the Netherlands to put the affairs of the Church in order, he traveled with his friend Denis the Carthusian (van Rijkel) (1402-1471), a disciple of Ruusbroec, whom he commissioned to carry on this task.
A native of Limburg, trained at the famous Cele school in Zwolle, Dionysius the Carthusian also became the confessor of the Duke of Burgundy and is thought to be the “theological advisor” of the Duke’s ambassador and court painter, Jan Van Eyck. (Note 4)
Gansfort

Wessel Gansfort (1419-1489), another exceptional figure of this movement was at the service of the Greek Cardinal Bessarion, the main collaborator of Nicolas of Cusa (Cusanus) at the Council of Ferrara-Florence of 1437. Gansfort, after attending the Brothers’ school in Groningen, was also trained by Joan Cele‘s Latin school in Zwolle.
The same goes for the first and only Dutch pope, Adrianus VI, who was trained in the same school before completing his training with Hegius in Deventer. This pope was very open to Erasmus’ reformist ideas… before arriving in Rome.
Hegius, in a letter to Gansfort, which he calls Lux Mundi (Light of the World), wrote:
« I send you, most honorable lord, the homilies of John Chrysostom. I hope that you will enjoy reading them, since the golden words have always been more pleasing to you than the pieces of this metal. As you know, I went to the library of Cusanus. There I found some books that I didn’t know existed (…) Farewell, and if I can do you a favor, let me know and consider it done.”
Rembrandt

A quick look on Rembrandt’s intellectual training indicates that he too was a late product of this educational epic. In 1609, Rembrandt, barely three years old, entered elementary school where, like other boys and girls of his generation, he learned to read, write and… draw.
The school opened at 6 in the morning, at 7 in the winter, and closes at 7 in the evening. Classes begin with prayer, reading and discussion of a passage from the Bible followed by the singing of psalms. Here Rembrandt acquired an elegant writing style and much more than a rudimentary knowledge of the Gospels.
The Netherlands wanted to survive. Its leaders take advantage of the twelve-year truce (1608-1618) to fulfill their commitment to the public interest.
In doing so, the Netherlands at the beginning of the XVIIth century became the first country in the world where everyone had the chance to learn to read, write, calculate, sing and draw.
This universal educational system, no matter what its shortcomings, available to both rich and poor, boys and girls alike, stands as the secret behind the Dutch « Golden Century ». This high level of education also created those generations of active Dutch emigrants a century later in the American Revolution.
While others started secondary school at the age of twelve, Rembrandt entered the Leyden Latin School at the age of 7. There, the students, apart from rhetoric, logic and calligraphy, learn not only Greek and Latin, but also foreign languages such as English, French, Spanish or Portuguese. Then, in 1620, at the age of 14, with no laws restricting young talents, Rembrandt enrolled in University. The subject he chose was not Theology, Law, Science or Medicine, but… Literature.
Did he want to add to his knowledge of Latin the mastery of Greek or Hebrew philology, or possibly Chaldean, Coptic or Arabic? After all, Arabic/Latin dictionaries were already being published in Leiden at a time the city was becoming a major printing center in the world.
Thus, one realizes that the Netherlands and Belgium, first with Ruusbroec and Groote and later with Erasmus and Rembrandt, made an essential contribution in the not so distant past to the kind of humanism that can raise today humanity to its true dignity.
Hence, failing to extend our influence here, clearly seems to me something in the realm of the impossible.

Footnotes:
- Geert Groote, who discovered Ruusbroec’s work during his spiritual retreat at the Carthusian monastery of Monnikshuizen, near Arnhem, has translated at least three of his works into Latin. He sent The Book of the Spiritual Tabernacle to the Cistercian Cloister of Altencamp and his friends in Amsterdam. The Spiritual Marriage of Ruusbroec being under attack, Groote personally defends it. Thus, thanks to his authority, Ruusbroec’s works are copied in number and carefully preserved. Ruusbroec’s teaching became popularized by the writings of the Modern Devotion and especially by the Imitation of Christ.
- At the beginning of the 13th century the Beguines were accused of heresy and persecuted, except… in the Burgundian Netherlands. In Flanders, they are cleared and obtain official status. In reality, they benefit from the protection of two important women: Jeanne and Margaret of Constantinople, Countess of Flanders. They organized the foundation of the Beguinages of Louvain (1232), Gent (1234), Antwerp (1234), Kortrijk (1238), Ypres (1240), Lille (1240), Zoutleeuw (1240), Bruges (1243), Douai (1245), Geraardsbergen (1245), Hasselt (1245), Diest (1253), Mechelen (1258) and in 1271 it was Jan I, Count of Flanders, in person, who deposited the statutes of the great Beguinage of Brussels. In 1321, the Pope estimated the number of Beguines at 200,000.
- The platonic poetry of the Beguine, Hadewijch of Antwerp (XIIIth Century) has a decisive influence on Jan van Ruusbroec.
- It is significant that the first book printed in Flanders in 1473, by Erasmus’ friend and printer Dirk Martens, is precisely a work of Denis the Carthusian.
Moderne Devotie en Broeders van het Gemene Leven, bakermat van het humanisme

Ce même texte en français
Op 10 september 2011, gaf Karel Vereycken van het Schiller Institute, de volgende presentatie voor een kleine groep vrienden van de LaRouche Studiegroep Nederland.
Het huidige globale financiële systeem is failliet en zal in elkaar zakken over de komende dagen, weken en maanden, als er niets gedaan wordt om het rotte economische paradigma van vrijhandel, globalisatie en monetarisme te verdelgen.
De weg uit de crisis betekent onmiddellijk brugpensioen voor Obama et de splitsing van banken (Glass-Steagall Act) als hefboom om terug een echt krediet systeem op te bouwen, in tegenstelling tot een geldsysteem. Het gaat erom echte investeringen te bemiddelen in de schepping van fysieke en menselijke rijkdom via grootschalige infrastructuur projecten en de creatie van hooggekwalificeerde en welbetaalde banen.
Kan dat gedaan worden? Ja, dat kan, maar de grootste uitdaging is niet de politieke uitdaging. De echte uitdaging die ons toekomt, is het leggen van de grondvesten van een nieuwe renaissance, een fundamentele wending, weg van het groene en malthusiaanse pessimisme, naar een cultuur die er naar streeft de creatieve vermogens van elke persoon, hier, in Afrika en elders, volledig te doen opbloeien.
Was dat ooit gedaan in verleden? Ja, en vooral vanwaar ik hier spreek, beroerd door een grote emotie. Misschien omdat ik het privilege heb een zeker inzicht te bezitten over de rol van enkele leidende figuren die in de XIVde eeuw Zwolle tot “neuronenversneller” van de Europese cultuur hebben gemaakt.
Vergun me het plezier om hier in het kort de geschiedenis te schetsen van een beweging van lekenbroeders en onderwijzers, de Broeders en Zusters van het Gemene Leven, die in feite de peetvaders zijn van onze geliefde Erasmus van Rotterdam.
Zoals heel dikwijls, begint alles met een persoon die beslist een einde te maken aan zijn eigen tekortkomingen, en daarom oprijst als een natuurlijke leider. Je wilt een leidinggevende persoon worden? Begin met je eigen boel op te kuisen vooraleer je gaat preken bij anderen!
Geert Groote, de stichter

De geestelijke vader van de Broeders is Geert Groote, geboren in 1340 als zoon van een rijke textielhandelaar van Deventer, in die tijd, zoals Zwolle, Kampen en Roermond, een rijke handelsstad van de Hanze liga.
In 1345, na de internationale financiële krach, woekert de pest over heel Europa en bereikt onze gewesten in 1449-50. Meer dan 50 % van de bevolking verliest het leven en Groote, volgens sommige bronnen, verliest beide ouders.
Groote walgde voor de schijnheiligheid van de hordes van flagellanten die door de straten trekken. In plaats van openlijke zelfkastijding meent hij dat innerlijke boetedoening belangrijker is.
Groote heeft aanleg voor studeren en wordt snel naar Parijs gestuurd. Als hij 18 is, geeft men hem de titel van Magister Artium normaal alleen maar toereikbaar aan studenten ouder dan 20. Hij blijft acht jaar in Parijs maar maakt waarschijnlijk enkele uitstapjes naar Keulen en Praag.
Gedurende die periode assimileert hij alles wat men weten moest en kon op het gebied van Wijsbegeerte, Theologie, Geneeskunst, Kerkelijk Recht en Astronomie. Volgens sommigen leert hij Grieks, Latijns en Hebreeuws en beschouwd als een van de meest erudiete personen van zijn tijd.
Vervolgens krijgt hij een prebende van de kapittels van Aken (1368) en Utrecht (1371-1374). Op zevenentwintigjarige leeftijd wordt hij als diplomaat naar Keulen en naar het hof in Avignon in Frankrijk gestuurd om met paus Urbanus V een verschil te regelen tussen Deventer en de bisschop van Utrecht.
Groote’s hoofd, vol met kennis en successen, wordt groter en groter. Zijn beste vrienden, bewust van zijn talenten, zeggen hem vriendelijk op te passen en zich los te werken van de obsessie van het aardse paradijs. De eerste is Guillaume de Salvarvilla, de koormeester van Notre Dame in Parijs. De andere is Heinrich Eger von Kalkar (1328-1408) met wie hij studeerde in Parijs en die nu de nieuwe prior was van het Kartuizerklooster van Monnikshuizen bij Arnhem.
In 1372 is Groote doodziek, maar de priester van Deventer weigert hem, zolang hij niet afstand doet van zijn boeken over zwarte kunst, de laatste sacramenten toe te dienen. Vrezend voor zijn leven, verbrandt Groote koortsig al deze boeken op de markplaats van Deventer. Nu voelt hij zich stukken beter en begint te genezen. Hij beslist ook afscheid te nemen van het luxe leventje met erebanen waar hij weinig voor hoefde te doen en die hem veel geld opleverde.
Na deze bekering neemt Groote keiharde resoluties. In zijn Besluiten en voornemens schrijft hij:
Mijn leven wil ik ordenen op de eer en verheerlijking en de dienst van God en op het heil van mijn ziel. Geen enkel tijdelijk goed: noch zingenot, noch eer, noch tijdelijke goederen, noch wetenschap zal ik stellen boven het heil van mijn ziel… Mijn eerste voornemen is niet langer mijn hoop te vestigen in, of in de toekomst naar het verlangen van aardse winst; want hoe meer ik zal bezitten des te hebzuchtiger ik zal worden; en in tweede instantie, volgens de regels van de primitieve kerk, kan men niet tegelijkertijd winst halen uit meerdere voordelen [zowel uit het wereldlijke als het geestelijke]… Onder de wetenschappen van de heidenen, dient hun morele filosofie het minst vermeden te worden – want ze is dikwijls van groot nut en voordelig voor eigen studie en om anderen te beleren. Dat is zo omdat de wijste onder hen, zoals Socrates en Plato, alle filosofie doortrokken tot morele beschouwingen, en wanneer zij diepe onderwerpen aanspraken deden zij dat op figuurlijke en lichte wijze, met een klemtoon op hun moreel aspect…
Hij trekt zich terug bij de Kartuizers in Monnikshuizen. Maar na drie jaar zegt zijn voormalige schoolkameraad en vriend, de prior Eger van Kalkar aan Groote: “U kunt veel meer goeds doen door in de wereld te gaan preken, waarvoor God U groot talent heeft gegeven, dan hier te blijven in het klooster”.
Vooraleer aan de slag te gaan, doet Groote in 1378 een laatste reis naar Parijs om daar de boeken te kopen die hij nodig heeft. Volgens Pomerius maakte Groote die reis met zijn vriend van Zwolle, de toen al vermaarde schoolmeester Joan Cele (circa 1350-1417).
Jan van Ruusbroec, bron van inspiratie

Onderweg bezoeken ze Jan van Ruusbroec (1293-1381), de Vlaamse mystieker en prior van Groenendaal, een kluis aan de rand van het Zoniënwoud bij Brussel. Groote trachtte eerst diens originele geschriften “te verbeteren” maar schreef later in een brief: “Voor tijd en eeuwigheid zou ik ‘des priors voetschabel’ willen zijn, zo sterk is mijn ziel in liefde en eerbied met hem verenigd”. (Nota 1)
Terug in Deventer, spits Groote zich toe op studeren en preken. Eerst meld hij zich in 1379 bij zijn bisschop om tot diaken te worden gewijd. Als diaken krijgt hij het recht te prediken in heel het bisdom Utrecht (ruwweg het huidige Nederland boven de grote rivieren, met uitzondering van de Groningse Ommelanden).
Grote gaat al predikend rond door de Nederlanden en verzamelt vele volgelingen om zich heen. Zijn roem spreidt zich snel over de Lage landen en van overal komt men naar hem luisteren. Hij preekt eerst in Deventer, dan in Zwolle, Kampen, Zutphen en later in Amsterdam, Haarlem, Gouda, Delft en verder. Zijn succes was zo groot dat er binnen de kerk wel wat jaloersheid ontstond. Anderzijds is het ook begrijpelijk dat de wanorde binnen de westerse kerk, namelijk grote schisma tussen 1378 en 1417, Groote’s inspanningen bewerkstelligden.
Al vanaf 1374, schenkt hij het huis van zijn ouders aan een groep arme vrouwen die er samen willen gaan wonen en voorziet hen van een reglement: het eerste zusterhuis van de ???? is in Deventer geboren. Hij noemt hen de Zusters van het Gemene Leven, een concept ontwikkeld door Ruusbroec in verschillende van zijn werken zoals in de slotparagraaf van Vanden Blinckenden Steen:
Die mensche die ute deser hoocheit van Gode neder-ghesent wert inde werelt, hi es volder waerheit, ende rijcke van allen doechden. Ende hi en soeket sijns niet, maer Des-gheens eere diene ghesonden heeft. Ende daer-omme es hi gherecht ende warechtich in alle dinghen. Ende hi heeft eenen rijcken melden [milden] gront, die ghefondeert es inde rijcheit Gods. Ende daeromme moet hi altoes vloeyen in alle die-ghene die sijns behoeven; want die levende fonteyne des Heilich Gheests die es sine rijcheit diemen niet versceppen en mach. Ende hi es een levende willich instrument Gods daar Gode mede werct wt Hi wilt ende hoe Hi wilt; ende des en dreecht hi hem nit ane, maar hi gheeft Gode die eere. Ende daarom blijft hi willich ende ghereet alles te doene dat God ghebiedt; ende sterc ende ghenendich alt te dogene ende te verdraghene dat God op hem gestaedt. Ende hier-omme heeft hi een ghemeyn leven; want hem es scouwen [contemplatie] ende werken even ghereet, ende in beiden is hi volcomen.
Florens Radewijns, de doener

Gedurende een van zijn eerste preken, rekruteert Groote Florens Radewijns (1350-1400). Geboren in Utrecht, studeerde deze in Praag waar ook hij Magister Artium werd op achttienjarige leeftijd. Groote stuurt hem eerst naar Worms om daar tot priester gewijd te worden.
In 1380 neemt Groote zelf met een groepje van tien leerlingen zijn intrek in het huis van Radewijns in Deventer. Dit huis zou later als ‘Heer Florenshuis’ of ‘Rijke Fratershuis’ bekend komen te staan: het eerste broederhuis. Het werd de uitvalsbasis van veel van Geert Groote’s activiteiten.
Wanneer Groote sterft in 1384 van de pest beslist Radewijns, de beweging die Groote uit te bouwen tot de Broeders en Zusters van het Gemene leven.
Al snel noemen ze zich de Devotio Moderna (Moderne Devotie).
Boeken en begijnhoven


Een aantal sterke overeenkomsten bestaan er met de Begijnen die in het begin van de XIIIde eeuw ontstonden. (Nota 2)
De eerste begijnen waren onafhankelijke, alleenwonende, geestelijk diepbewogen vrouwen (zonder man noch regel) die in de wereld het geweldige avontuur aandurfden van een persoonlijke verhouding met God. (Nota 3)
Ze verlangden geen geloften, geen klooster en geen speciale band met de hiërarchie. Ze leefden niet van aalmoezen maar werkten zelf voor hun dagelijkse kost.
Nog meer dan voor de Begijnen staan boeken centraal in alle activiteiten van de Broeders en Zusters van het Gemene Leven.
Het overschrijven en maken van boeken is een voorname bron van inkomsten die tegelijkertijd het goede woord aan de grote massa kan brengen.
De Broeder- en Zusterhuizen spitsen zich toe op onderwijs en hun priesters of preken. Dankzij hun scriptorium en drukkerijen zal hun geestelijke literatuur en ook hun muziek zich ver verspreiden.
Congregatie van Windesheim
Om de beweging tegen ongerechte kritiek te beschermen, richt Radewijns een klooster op van reguliere kanunniken die de regel volgen van Augustinus. In Windesheim, tussen Zwolle en Deventer, op een stukje land van Berthold ten Hove, een van hun leden, wordt een klooster opgebouwd. Een tweede klooster, ditmaal voor vrouwen, komt er in Diepenveen bij Arnhem. De bouw van Windesheim nam meerdere jaren tijd in beslag en verschillende broeders leefden daar tijdelijk in hutten op de werf.
Toen in 1399 Johannes van Kempen, die ook bij Groote had gewoond in Deventer, de eerste prior werd van het klooster Agnietenberg bij Zwolle, kreeg de beweging een nieuw elan. Van Zwolle, Deventer en Windesheim, zwermde de nieuwe leden uit over de lage landen en de rest van noord-Europa om overal nieuwe godshuizen te vestigen.

In 1412 kende de congregatie 16 kloosters en hun aantal rees tot 97 in 1500: 84 mannen- en 13 vrouwenpriorijen. Bovendien bestonden er talrijke kloosters van kanunnikessen, die niet formeel tot het kapittel van Windesheim behoorden, maar die een Windesheimer als rector hadden. Groenendaal en vele andere kloosters maakten vanaf 1394 deel uit van de Congregatie van Windesheim, slechts erkend door de bisschop van Utrecht in 1423.
A Kempis, Cusanus en Erasmus


Johannes van Kempen was natuurlijk de broer van de wereldberoemde Thomas a Kempis (1379-1471) die, na lange jaren leiding van de Broeders van het Gemene Leven, op 92 jarige leeftijd stierf in het klooster Agnietenberg van Zwolle. Behalve een relaas over het leven van Groote en de opkomst van de beweging schreef hij de Imitatione Christi (In navolging Christus), na de Bijbel, het meest gelezen boek ter wereld.
Zowel Rudolf Agricola (1444-1485) als Alexander Hegius (1433-1498), twee markante professors van Erasmus van Rotterdam en onvergelijkbare meesters van het Latijn, het Grieks en het Hebreeuws, werden in Deventer door de Broeders opgeleid en in Zwolle door Thomas a Kempis.
Ook Nicolaus Cusanus (1401-1464), die Agricola beschermde en na zijn dood, via een Bursa Cusana geld gaf om wezen en arme studenten op te leiden, werd mogelijkerwijs door de Broeders opgeleid. Wanneer Cusanus in 1451 naar de Nederlanden reist om daar de scheefgegroeide situaties recht te trekken, bezoekt hij de streek met Dionysius de Karthuizer (van Rykel) (1402-1471), een volgeling van Ruusbroec aan wie hij de opdracht geeft deze taak af te ronden. Geboren in Limburg, volgde ook Dionysius de Karthuizer school in Zwolle. (Nota 4)
Wessel Ganzevoort

Een andere uitzonderlijke figuur was Wessel Ganzevoort (1419-1489) die samenwerkte met de Griekse kardinaal Bessarion, zelf een intieme medewerker van Cusanus voor het Oecumenische concilie van Ferrare-Firenze.
Gansfoort werd opgeleid in de door de Broeders geleide Sint Maartensschool van Groningen alvorens verder te studeren aan de Latijnse School van Groote’s vriend Joan Cele in Zwolle. Ook de eerste Nederlandse paus, Adrianus VI, werd opgeleid aan de Zwolse Latijnse school alvorens te studeren onder Hegius in Deventer. Vooraleer hij naar Rome ging, stond deze paus open voor de ideeën van Erasmus.
In een brief verzonden van Deventer schrijft Hegius aan Ganzevoort, wie hij de Lux Mundi (het licht der wereld) noemt:
Ik stuur U, zeer eerwaarde heer, de Homiliën van Johannes Crysostomus. Ik hoop dat hun lectuur U mag behagen. Gezien gouden woorden U altijd meer plezier deden dan gouden geldstukken. Ik ben, zoals u weet, in Cusanus’s bibliotheek geweest. Daar vond ik veel boeken die me helemaal onbekend waren… (…) Vaarwel, en als U wilt dat ik voor U iets doe, geef me een teken en beschouw de zaak als gedaan.
Rembrandt van Ryn

Een blik op de vorming van Rembrandt bewijst dat ook hij een later product was van al deze inspanningen. In 1609 gaat Rembrandt, amper drie jaar oud, naar de basisschool waar jongens en meisjes leren lezen, schrijven en rekenen.
In de zomer beginnen de lessen om zes uur ’s morgens en om zeven in de winter. De lessen worden beëindigd om zeven uur ’s avonds. De lessen beginnen met bidden, het bespreken van passages uit de Bijbel en het zingen van psalmen. Het is daar dat Rembrandt een elegant handschrift ontwikkelt en meer dan een basisbegrip krijgt over godsdienst.
Gedurende die jaren trachten de Nederlanden te overleven. Het twaalfjarige bestand wordt gebruikt om het algemene goed to ontwikkelen en Nederland wordt één van de eerste landen waar iedereen de kans krijgt om te leren lezen, schrijven en rekenen.
Deze universele educatie voor zowel rijk als arm, zij het met enige tekortkomingen, was het geheim van de “Gouden Eeuw” en de belezenheid van Nederlandse immigranten in Amerika zal een eeuw later ook een voorname rol spelen gedurende de Amerikaanse revolutie.
Hoewel de meeste kinderen het secundair onderwijs aanpakten op twaalfjarige leeftijd, begon Rembrandt zijn opleiding op de Latijnse School van Leiden op zevenjarige leeftijd!
Daar leerde men, buiten retorica, logica en kalligrafie, niet alleen Grieks en Latijns maar ook Engels, Frans, Spaans of Portugees. In 1620, wanneer Rembrandt veertien jaar oud is, schrijft hij in als student aan de universiteit gezien toen geen wet jonge talenten kon weerhouden.
Als vak kiest hij niet Theologie, Rechten, Wetenschap of Geneeskunst, maar… Literatuur. Wilde Rembrandt Griekse en Hebreeuwse filologie en misschien Koptisch of Arabisch aan zijn brede cultuur toevoegen?
Men beseft dus, dat de Nederlanden, België inbegrepen, met Ruusbroec en Groote en later met Erasmus en Rembrandt, in een niet zo ver verleden, een bakermat was voor het soort humanisme dat de mensheid tot de grootste mogelijkheden kan verheffen. Hier falen om onze beweging uit te breiden is dus onmogelijk.

VOETNOTEN:
1. Geert Groote vertaalde in het Latijn op zijn minst drie van Ruusbroec’s werken die hij waarschijnlijk in Monnikshuizen voor het eerst had ontdekt. Hij stuurde het boek over het Tabernakel naar de cisterciënzers van Altencamp en naar zijn vrienden in Amsterdam. Toen de Brulocht werd aangevallen, nam hij persoonlijk de verdediging op van Ruusbroec. Dankzij het gezag van Groote werden de werken van Ruusbroec overvloedig gekopieerd en zorgvuldig bewaard. Ruusbroec’s leer werd gevulgariseerd in de geschriften van de Moderne Devotie en vooral in de Navolging van Christus.
2. In het begin van de XIIIde eeuw werden de begijnen beschuldigd van ketterij en vervolgd, behalve in de Bourgondische Nederlanden. In Vlaanderen werden ze vrijgesproken en kregen ze een officieel statuut. In feite genoten zij de bescherming van twee belangrijke vrouwen: Johanna en Margareta van Constantinopel, gravinnen van Vlaanderen. Zij organiseerden de stichting van de begijnhoven van Leuven (1232), Gent (1234), Antwerpen (1234), Kortrijk (1238), Ieper (1240), Rijsel (1240), Zoutleeuw (1240), Brugge (1243), Douai (1245), Geraardsbergen (1245), Hasselt (1245), Bergen (1248), Anderlecht (1252), Breda (1252), Diest (1253), Lier (1258), Tongeren (1257), Mechelen (1258), Haarlem (1262) en in 1271 deponeerde Jan I, graaf van Vlaanderen, persoonlijk de statuten van het Groot Begijnhof van Brussel. In 1321 schatte de Paus het aantal begijnen op 200.000.
3. Het poëtisch Platonisme van de Antwerpse begijn Hadewijch heeft een onmiskenbare invloed gehad op Jan van Ruusbroec.
4. Het eerste boek gedrukt in Vlaanderen door Erasmus’ vriend Dirk Martens, was Dionysius’ werk Een spiegel van de bekering van de zondaars in 1473.
On Leonardo da Vinci’s « Vitruvian Man »
By Karel Vereycken
Leonardo da Vinci’s « Viruvian Man ». Since we’re commemorating this year (2019) Leonardo Da Vinci, who died 500 years ago, many silly things are presented by fake scholars trying to make a real living.
Since I was introduced into the canon of proportions of the human body during my training as a professional painter and engraver, I want offer you some hints on how to look at what is called Da Vinci’s « Vitruvian man », a drawing currently on exhibit at the Da Vinci show at the Louvre in Paris.
Hence, as Leonardo underlines himself in his notebooks, adopting Cusanus wordings, it is only with the « eyes of the mind » that art becomes visible, because the « eyes of the flesh » are intrensically blind to it.
Canons of proportions
Europe, and Classical Greece, as everybody should know, emerged largely by absorbing several major discoveries accomplished much earlier by other civilizations. Much of it came from Asia, but African and especially Egypt, were key.
The very practice of mummification, a process which takes at least 60 days of work, made Egypt the key area of anatomical research.

As demonstrated by early Egyptian sculpture, the exact size of the entire adult human body is 7,5 times the size of the head. The size of a newborn is only four heads, that of a seven year old, six heads and that of a 17 years old adolescent, 7 heads.

If one subdivides the overall 7.5 proportion, for an adult, from the top of the head till the lowest part of the torso, one measures four heads, one till the nipples, one till the belly button and a fourth one till the lowest part of the pubis. Going up from the sole till the middle of the pelvis, one measures 3.5 heads: 2 heads till the knee and 1.5 till the middle of the pelvis. That brings the total till 7.5 heads for the entire length of the adult human body and it is proportional in the sense that people with smaller heads also have small bodies.
Polikleitos versus Lysippus
In the Vth Century BC, the Greek sculptor Polikleitos’ spear bearer (The “Doryphoros”) of Naples National Archeological Museum applied this most beautiful canon of proportions, known as the “Polikleitos canon”.
During the Renaissance, the nostalgics of the Roman Empire preferred another Greek canon, that of Greek sculptor Lysippus (4th Century BC), formalized by the Roman author, architect and civil engineer, Vitrivius (1st century BC).

Vitruvius only transcribed the prevalent taste of his epoch. Roman sculptors, in order to give an athletic and heroic look to the Emperors which they were portraying, adopting the canon of Lysippus, could reduce the head of their models to only an eight of the total length of the body. The trick was that by reducing the relative size of the head, the body looked more preeminent and powerful, something most emperors, who were often physical failures, appreciated and secured their popularity. Even extreme cases of 12 to 15 heads of body length appeared. In short, Public relations ruled at the detriment of science and truth.
Today’s comic strip drawers chose proportions according to purpose:
–For real life, 7.5 or “normal canon”
–For a movie star, 8 heads, with the “idealistic canon”;
–For a fashion magazine: 8.5 heads;
–For a comic book hero: 9 heads for the “heroic canon”
Vitruvian man

Text accompanying Leonardo DaVinci’s Vitruvian Man:
Vitruvius, the architect, says in his work on architecture that the measurements of the human body are distributed by Nature as follows that is that 4 fingers make 1 palm, and 4 palms make 1 foot, 6 palms make 1 cubit; 4 cubits make a man’s height. And 4 cubits make one pace and 24 palms make a man; and these measures he used in his buildings. If you open your legs so much as to decrease your height 1/14 and spread and raise your arms till your middle fingers touch the level of the top of your head you must know that the centre of the outspread limbs will be in the navel and the space between the legs will be an equilateral triangle.
The length of a man’s outspread arms is equal to his height.
From the roots of the hair to the bottom of the chin is the tenth of a man’s height; from the bottom of the chin to the top of his head is one eighth of his height; from the top of the breast to the top of his head will be one sixth of a man. From the top of the breast to the roots of the hair will be the seventh part of the whole man. From the nipples to the top of the head will be the fourth part of a man. The greatest width of the shoulders contains in itself the fourth part of the man. From the elbow to the tip of the hand will be the fifth part of a man; and from the elbow to the angle of the armpit will be the eighth part of the man. The whole hand will be the tenth part of the man; the beginning of the genitals marks the middle of the man. The foot is the seventh part of the man. From the sole of the foot to below the knee will be the fourth part of the man. From below the knee to the beginning of the genitals will be the fourth part of the man. The distance from the bottom of the chin to the nose and from the roots of the hair to the eyebrows is, in each case the same, and like the ear, a third of the face.
Of course, Da Vinci’s exploration of the Vitruvian man doesn’t mean he approves or disapproves the stated fakery in proportions.
Soul or muscle?
It should be known that in Italy, the pure Roman taste has become trendy again following the discovery in 1506 of the statue of the Laocoon on the site of Nero’s villa in Rome. From that moment, artist will feel obliged to increase the volume of the muscular masses in order to appear as working « in Antique style ».
Although Leonardo never openly criticized this trend, it is hard not to think of Michelangelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, when the artist, seeking to raise the spirit to unequalled philosophical heights, advised painters: « do not give all the muscles of the figures an exaggerated volume » and « if you act differently, it is more a sort of representation of a sack of nuts that you will have achieved than to that of a human figure » (Codex Madrid II, 128r).

No doubt inspired by his friend, the architect Giacomo Andrea, in « The Vitruvian Man », Leonardo is above all interested by other harmonies: if a person extends his arms in a direction parallel to the ground, one obtains the same length as one’s entire height. This equality is inscribed by Leonardo in a square (symbol of the earthly realm). But if one stretches his arms and legs in a star shape, they are inscribed in a circle whose center is the navel. The location of the navel divides the body according to the golden ratio (in this example 5 heads out of a total of 8 heads, 5+3 being part of the Fibonnacci series: 1+2 = 3; 3+2 = 5; 5+3 = 8; 8+5 = 13; 13+8 = 21, etc.).
Leonardo clearly understood what the golden section really means: not a “magical” number in itself, but the reflexion of the dynamic of least action, the very principle uniting man (the square) with the creator and the universe (the circle).
So if you take a look, beware of what you see and especially what you don’t !




















































































