Two Old Men Disputing
Southgate, M. Therese
1998-01-21 00:00:00
Wars, plagues, and politics aside, it is not without reason that the 17th century has been called "golden." It was, after all, the age of Caravaggio, of Kepler and Scarlatti; it was the age of Galileo and the Carracci, of Monteverdi and Frescobaldi, of Milton, El Greco, and Murillo; it was the age of Reni, Bernini, Ribera, Sir Christopher Wren, and Thomas Willis; of Sydenham, Cervantes, Praetorius, Terborch, and Descartes; of Hals, Hudson, Newton, Schütz, and Inigo Jones; of Rubens, Velázquez, and Van Dyck; and of Moliere, Bacon, Huygens, Johnson (Ben), and Purcell. But of all the roster, none were greater, nor had greater effect on medicine and art, respectively, than William Harvey and Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn (1606-1669). They epitomized the qualities that are the foundation of all science and art, whether on the canvas or in the laboratory or at the bedside: keen observation, faithfulness to nature, and truth in reporting. Coincidentally, Rembrandt's Two Old Men Disputing (cover ) belongs to the same year, 1628, that Harvey published De motu cordis. The one was a mature investigator publishing the results of years of research, the other a brash young man testing his calling. Two Old Men Disputing is early Rembrandt. At age 22 he was still in his home city of Leiden, one of the major intellectual centers of Europe and a leading academic center of humanism. Rembrandt had himself been a "student of letters" at the University of Leiden for several months in 1620. He soon left, however, and for 3 years was a student of the painter van Swanenburgh in Leiden, a man distinguished today only for having been Rembrandt's first teacher and a dulling mediocrity. Van Swanenburgh's teaching fortunately had no impact on Rembrandt's work—except perhaps to turn him firmly in the opposite direction. Rembrandt next went to Amsterdam, where he studied with the famed painter Pieter Lastman. Though he spent much less time with Lastman than with van Swanenburgh—only 6 months—his Amsterdam studies had far more impact. By 1625, Rembrandt was back in Leiden, having set himself up as an "independent master." His first signed (with an "R") and dated painting, The Stoning of St Stephen, belongs to that year. He was 18, at most 19. Two Old Men Disputing followed 3 years later. Over the years, Two Old Men Disputing has been known by many titles. One historian has called it "Elijah Predicting His Death" (a title now considered unlikely), another "Democritus and Heraclitus," and a third "The Apostle Peter and St Paul." But just as the image does not change, regardless of what one calls it, so, too, does the essence of the painting remain the same regardless of its name. Two persons, one venerable with age, the other best called "mature," the one as teacher, the other as learner, are searching among the words of their forebears for truth. Depending on the title, the books they are searching are Scripture or the ancient Greek and Roman writers, but the goal, truth, does not change. What is striking in the work is that while the most prominent objects in the painting are the faces, hands, and books—given almost equal importance—there are nevertheless subtle gradations. The figure in white, for example, is brilliantly lit, as is the book in the other figure's lap; on the other hand, the tome propped on the lectern, though still prominent, is, by contrast, less so, as is the figure of the man in the dark robe. And while the man in white faces the viewer, the darker figure sits with his back to the viewer. His entire world is the book and the figure in white. Symbolically, the teacher is in the light, the learner in shadow. But what is more striking, and what makes Rembrandt Rembrandt, is the face of the older man. The watery eyes and slack lower lip are so true a reminder of the eventual physical deterioration that accompanies old age as to be painful to look at. On the other hand, the intensity of the man's gaze, the animation of the gesture with the pointing forefinger, and his obvious eagerness as he searches the book indicate not only an undiminished spirit, but a waxing spirit. Curiously, a candle, set on a stand and placed atop a closed book, is unlit. Traditionally, the candle, when it is lighted, is a symbol for truth (in addition to allowing the artist to have an evident source of light in the composition). Is it possible—in the sort of wordless statements that Rembrandt is so good at—that the old man needs to be no longer lighted by external light, that he, in a kind of mystical transformation, has himself become light? Rembrandt does not say. He paints. Meanwhile, just as William Harvey changed the course of medicine and physiology by bothering to look at things and to report what he saw, so too did Rembrandt change the course of painting by looking into faces and souls and putting them on canvas. Neither saw what they wished to see. They saw what was. Each has lit the lives of nearly 4 centuries. Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn(1609-1669),Two Old Men Disputing (Possibly St Peter and St Paul?), 1628, Dutch. Oil on wood. 72.4×59.7 cm. Courtesy of the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia (http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au); Felton Bequest, 1934.
http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.pngJAMAAmerican Medical Associationhttp://www.deepdyve.com/lp/american-medical-association/two-old-men-disputing-SQ0i7V0OQF
Wars, plagues, and politics aside, it is not without reason that the 17th century has been called "golden." It was, after all, the age of Caravaggio, of Kepler and Scarlatti; it was the age of Galileo and the Carracci, of Monteverdi and Frescobaldi, of Milton, El Greco, and Murillo; it was the age of Reni, Bernini, Ribera, Sir Christopher Wren, and Thomas Willis; of Sydenham, Cervantes, Praetorius, Terborch, and Descartes; of Hals, Hudson, Newton, Schütz, and Inigo Jones; of...
Wars, plagues, and politics aside, it is not without reason that the 17th century has been called "golden." It was, after all, the age of Caravaggio, of Kepler and Scarlatti; it was the age of Galileo and the Carracci, of Monteverdi and Frescobaldi, of Milton, El Greco, and Murillo; it was the age of Reni, Bernini, Ribera, Sir Christopher Wren, and Thomas Willis; of Sydenham, Cervantes, Praetorius, Terborch, and Descartes; of Hals, Hudson, Newton, Schütz, and Inigo Jones; of Rubens, Velázquez, and Van Dyck; and of Moliere, Bacon, Huygens, Johnson (Ben), and Purcell. But of all the roster, none were greater, nor had greater effect on medicine and art, respectively, than William Harvey and Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn (1606-1669). They epitomized the qualities that are the foundation of all science and art, whether on the canvas or in the laboratory or at the bedside: keen observation, faithfulness to nature, and truth in reporting. Coincidentally, Rembrandt's Two Old Men Disputing (cover ) belongs to the same year, 1628, that Harvey published De motu cordis. The one was a mature investigator publishing the results of years of research, the other a brash young man testing his calling. Two Old Men Disputing is early Rembrandt. At age 22 he was still in his home city of Leiden, one of the major intellectual centers of Europe and a leading academic center of humanism. Rembrandt had himself been a "student of letters" at the University of Leiden for several months in 1620. He soon left, however, and for 3 years was a student of the painter van Swanenburgh in Leiden, a man distinguished today only for having been Rembrandt's first teacher and a dulling mediocrity. Van Swanenburgh's teaching fortunately had no impact on Rembrandt's work—except perhaps to turn him firmly in the opposite direction. Rembrandt next went to Amsterdam, where he studied with the famed painter Pieter Lastman. Though he spent much less time with Lastman than with van Swanenburgh—only 6 months—his Amsterdam studies had far more impact. By 1625, Rembrandt was back in Leiden, having set himself up as an "independent master." His first signed (with an "R") and dated painting, The Stoning of St Stephen, belongs to that year. He was 18, at most 19. Two Old Men Disputing followed 3 years later. Over the years, Two Old Men Disputing has been known by many titles. One historian has called it "Elijah Predicting His Death" (a title now considered unlikely), another "Democritus and Heraclitus," and a third "The Apostle Peter and St Paul." But just as the image does not change, regardless of what one calls it, so, too, does the essence of the painting remain the same regardless of its name. Two persons, one venerable with age, the other best called "mature," the one as teacher, the other as learner, are searching among the words of their forebears for truth. Depending on the title, the books they are searching are Scripture or the ancient Greek and Roman writers, but the goal, truth, does not change. What is striking in the work is that while the most prominent objects in the painting are the faces, hands, and books—given almost equal importance—there are nevertheless subtle gradations. The figure in white, for example, is brilliantly lit, as is the book in the other figure's lap; on the other hand, the tome propped on the lectern, though still prominent, is, by contrast, less so, as is the figure of the man in the dark robe. And while the man in white faces the viewer, the darker figure sits with his back to the viewer. His entire world is the book and the figure in white. Symbolically, the teacher is in the light, the learner in shadow. But what is more striking, and what makes Rembrandt Rembrandt, is the face of the older man. The watery eyes and slack lower lip are so true a reminder of the eventual physical deterioration that accompanies old age as to be painful to look at. On the other hand, the intensity of the man's gaze, the animation of the gesture with the pointing forefinger, and his obvious eagerness as he searches the book indicate not only an undiminished spirit, but a waxing spirit. Curiously, a candle, set on a stand and placed atop a closed book, is unlit. Traditionally, the candle, when it is lighted, is a symbol for truth (in addition to allowing the artist to have an evident source of light in the composition). Is it possible—in the sort of wordless statements that Rembrandt is so good at—that the old man needs to be no longer lighted by external light, that he, in a kind of mystical transformation, has himself become light? Rembrandt does not say. He paints. Meanwhile, just as William Harvey changed the course of medicine and physiology by bothering to look at things and to report what he saw, so too did Rembrandt change the course of painting by looking into faces and souls and putting them on canvas. Neither saw what they wished to see. They saw what was. Each has lit the lives of nearly 4 centuries. Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn(1609-1669),Two Old Men Disputing (Possibly St Peter and St Paul?), 1628, Dutch. Oil on wood. 72.4×59.7 cm. Courtesy of the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia (http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au); Felton Bequest, 1934.
To get new article updates from a journal on your personalized homepage, please log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.