Warburg and the Warburgian Tradition of Cultural History

Author(s): Michael Diers, Thomas Girst and Dorothea von Moltke

Reviewed work(s):
Source: New German Critique, No. 65, Cultural History/Cultural Studies (Spring - Summer,
1995), pp. 59-73
Published by: New German Critique
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/488533 .
Accessed: 03/07/2012 14:07
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

New German Critique and Duke University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to New German Critique.

http://www.jstor.org

Warburgand the WarburgianTradition

of Cultural History
MichaelDiers
Almost forgottenfor decades, above all in Germany,the works of the
art historian Aby Warburg(1866-1929) have become topical again in
an exceptional way far beyond the confines of his own field. This is
due to the specific claim and programof Warburg'sscholarshiprather
than to the outputof his factualresearch.As Jacob Burckhardt'ssuccessor and a student of the historian Karl Lamprecht, the Hamburg
scholar's entire work is emphaticallydevotedto cultural-historical[kulturhistorisch]research.The currentrelevance of the so-called Warburg
method is founded precisely upon this interdisciplinary,problem-oriented, and integrativedeterminationof the tasks in his field.
Recourse to a scientific traditionof the twenties has made possible a
present which discusses the term culture anew, which contemplates a
revision of the concept of cultural history,and for which cultural science [Kulturwissenschaft]as model becomes interestingagain in terms
of self-understanding.Since about 1980, there has been much discussion, particularlyin Germany,'about an updatedand advancedconcept
of cultural science, a reflection which has already been embodied in
the founding of numerousinstitutions.A process of integrationof the
sciences, which was programmaticfor Warburgeven in his days, is at
issue once again, a process which, as Walter Benjamin - who was
1. Such as, for example, the "Kulturwissenschaftliches
Institut"at the Wissenin Essen, the "Zentrumzur Erforschungder friihen
schaftszentrumNordrhein-Westfalen
at the Universityof Frankfurt/Main,
the "Institutflir KulNeuzeit - Renaissance-Institut"
at the Humboldtturwissenschaften"in Leipzig, or the FachbereichKulturwissenschaften
Universityin Berlin,all of which arefoundationsor re-foundationsof the past few years.

59

60

Warburgand CulturalHistory

engaged with the WarburgSchool - put it in 1928, "increasinglytakes

down the dividing walls between the disciplines, characteristicof the
concept of the sciences of the last century"in order, for instance, to
"promotean analysis of the work of art which recognizes in it an integral expression of the religious, metaphysical,political, and economic
tendencies of an epoch which can in no way be limited in termsof subject areas."2This passage could have been borrowed from Warburg's
plea at the end of his famous lecturein Rome, 1912, on the astrological
Renaissancefrescoes in the Palazzo Schifanoia,in which he insisted on
a "methodologicalextension of the boundariesof our studies of art in
terms of both content and geographicscope."3He fulfilled this extension of boundariesin an exemplaryfashionin his publishedand unpublished writings as well as in the organizationof his librarywhich also
served as a researchinstitute.
One of the centraltermsthat characterizesthe currentinterdisciplinary
discourse and determinesthe presentdiscussionin numerousbranchesof
the humanitiesis "culturalmemory"[kulturelleErinnerung].4Since the
complex of problemsconjuredup by this term is, not only for the hishe
tory of art, "foreverbound up with the life-workof Aby Warburg,"5
is consideredone of the prominentexponentsof the historyof forms and
functions of art as an organum of "remembrance"[Eingedenken].
Throughhis method as well as his library,the "Kulturwissenschaftliche
BibliothekWarburg"- the traditionof which has been continuedat the
WarburgInstitutein Londonever since Warburgwas forced to emigrate
in 1933 - Warburgdevotedhimself to the inquiryinto the memory of
images. It is thanksto this emphasisthathis writingshave remainedtopical or ratherhave become so once again afterhaving been forgottenfor
a long time. By looking carefully at the history of his work's critical
reception, it becomes clear how much the presentowes to the work of
the art-historianWarburgandhis conceptof culturalscience.

2. Walter Benjamin,"LebenslaufIII," GesammelteSchriftenvol. 6 (Frankfurt/

Main, Suhrkamp,1972) 218. All quotedmaterialtranslatedfromthe Germanby NGC.
3. Aby Warburg,"ItalienischeKunstundinternationale
Astrologieim PalazzoSchifanojazu Ferrara,"GesammelteSchriftenvol.2 (Leipzig/Berlin:B. G. Teubner,1932) 478.
4. Introductionto Mnemosyne.Formen und Funktionender kulturellenErinnerung,eds. A. AssmannandD. Harth(Frankfurt/Main,
Suhrkamp,1991).
5. Wolfgang Kemp, "Memoria,Bilderzahlungund der mittelalterlicheesprit de
syst6me,"Poetik undHermaneutik15 (1993):264.

MichaelDiers

61

Although Warburg'scollected works were publishedat the beginning

of 1933, they were hardly distributedat the time, and in National
Socialist Germany his writings achieved only an extremely limited
effect. The rediscoveryof and renewed interestin Warburgresults (1)
from the unusuallywidespreadreceptionof Benjamin'swritings during
the second half of the sixties (and continuingsince then) and (2) from
the continuationof the FrankfurtInstitutefor Social Research, which
was able to resumeits workin Germanyas earlyas 1951.
There have not been any effortsat "repatriating"
the WarburgInstitute
which was integratedinto London University in 1944 - they most
likely would have failed in any case, and not only for legal reasons.
Efforts to call Erwin Panofsky- then at Princeton- back to his old
chair at Hamburg failed not least because of their half-heartedness.
Thus a continuationof the Warburgtradition, even in the broadest
sense, in Hamburgor elsewherein Germanywas out of the question for
the foreseeable future.It took almost two decades after the war before
the name Warburgand with it the researchtraditionof his librarygradually became a perceptiblepart of art-historicaldiscourse once again.
The change came about at first throughratherdutifullyheld commemorationsand speeches, then, however,throughvariousscholarlycontributions such as William Heckscher'sat the InternationalCongress for Art
History in Bonn, 1964;6 an articleby Erik Forssmannin 1966 written
und allgemeineKunstwissenschaft;7and
for the Zeitschriftfir
,Asthetik
an essay by the historian
Carlo Ginzburgwhich was published in Italy
the same year,8all of which togetherhada lastingimpact.
Yet it might also be noted thatthe majorityof the articleswere neither
writtenin Germany,nor,for thatmatter,by full-fledgedarthistorians.Furthermore,they were publishedin quite remoteplaces and dealt predomianalysisof images.
nantlywith iconology,the theoryof cultural-scientific
Formally,this theoryseemed closely associatedwith Warburg'sresearch,
6. The Germantranslationof William Heckscher's"The Genesis of Iconology"
can be found in Ikonographieund Ikonologie, ed. E. Kaemmerling(Cologne: DuMont,
1984) 112ff.
7. Erik Forssmann,"Ikonologieund allgemeineKunstgeschichte,"Zeitschriftfir
Asthetikund allgemeineKunstwissenschaft11 (1966):132-69.
8. Carlo Ginzburg,"Da A. Warburga E. H. Gombrich.Note su un problemadi
metodo,"StudiMedioevaliIII(1966):1015-65.

62

Warburgand CulturalHistory

althoughin fact it is only one of its aspects. The careerof iconology as

a method of art history and its eventualestablishmentas "international
style"g was first and foremostbased on Panofsky'sstudies and not, or
less so, on a rereadingof Warburg'swritingswhich, in their 1932 double-volume edition, were eithercataloguedin librariesor to be found in
second-handbookshops - a situationwhich the reprintof 1969 did
not essentially change.While eventuallyattainingto the statusof "paradigmatic obligatoriness"[paradigmatischeVerbindlichkeit],iconology
as a model of interpretationturnedout to be accordinglyone-sided and
in its adaptation seemed rather formulaic and empty.10 Panofsky
already distancedhimself from Warburg'sdemandfor an "art-historical
cultural science" and his followers departedfrom this idea even further.11In terms of their power of abstraction,Panofsky's exemplarily
systematical and theoreticalexplications of the term "iconology" surpass Warburg'sdefinition. The latter's use of the term was almost
entirelybased on concreteapplicationsandpracticalusage.
This distancebecomes evidentwhen one looks back to 1927, the year
in which Panofskypublishedhis articleon "Problemsof Art History"in
which he states, among otherthings, that- with regardto the question
of methodology- the near futurebelongs to those examinations"with
a narrowly circumscribedbut preferablyuniversal method,"a method
"which attempts to examine a specific single phenomenon from as
many sides as possible and to reveal its premises (not only temporally
speaking)to as great an extent as possible."l12
SecondingPanofsky,as it
were, Warburgmade the field take note: "Not until art history can show
. . . that it sees the work of art in a few more dimensionsthan it has
done so far will our activity again attractthe interestof scholarsand of
the general public."13This almost identical sounding demand for a
diverse method that would take into accountnumerousdimensions and
aspects of a work of art, this call for a variety of methods,was shared
9. MartinWamke, "SalvatoreSettis: La 'Tempesta'Interpretata,"
KritischeBerichte 7.2/3 (1979): 41.
10. AndreasBeyer, "78 Jahredanach- Bemerkungenzur Geistes-Gegenwartder
Aktendes internationalenSymposions,eds. H. Bredekamp,M.
Ikonologie,"Aby Warburg.
Diers, and Ch. Schoell-Glass(Weinheim:VCH Acta humaniora,1990) 269.
11. This is also Warburg'sofficial termfor his "discipline,"ef. Verzeichnisder Vordas Sommersemester1928, 79.
lesungender HamburgischenUniversitditfi'r
12. ErwinPanofsky,"Problemeder Kunstgeschichte,"
IDEA7 (1988): 12.
13. Warburgin a letter to JacquesMesni. ErnstH. Gombrich,Aby Warburg.Eine
intellektuelleBiographie(Frankfurt/Main,
Verlagsansstalt,1981) 430.
Europaiische

MichaelDiers

63

by both representativesof the "HamburgSchool."But in the later writings of Panofskyand his successors,the multifacetednatureof the arguments is sacrificed in favor of a form of intellectualhistory, so that
under the keyword "iconology"two separatemethods could be distinguished, each leading to differentresults. Warburg'sresearch, in contrastto Panofsky'sviews, can be termeddecidedlycultural-historic.
At issue here is not a terminologicalquarrel,nor, for that matter,one
of authorshipor patrimony.What is importantis rather the starting
point for the rediscoveryof Warburgat the end of the sixties and in the
following decade. While being far fromundisputed,Panofskyianiconology, albeit in a somewhat corruptedform, could readily be integrated
into the traditionalspectrumof methodologiesin art history,and finally
could succeed - together with stylistic and formal analysis - as a
complementaryvariant,focusing on the interpretationof contents. Yet
in this form, it only had limited value as a self-proclaimedcritical science, limited insofar as it dealt primarily(and in the eyes of the critics
of this method exclusively) with questionsof meaning and (image-)content, in short, less with representationthan with what was represented.
And after 1968, the epithet"critical,"in art history as well as in neighboring disciplines such as history and Germanstudies, developed in no
time into a hallmarkof a strict opposition,aligned against the conventional "ruling" science and the "bourgeois"notion of the discipline.
This attributewas derived as a philosophicaland political term from
the FrankfurtSchool's critique of society and ideology and found its
agenda in Critical Theory, founded by Horkheimerin the thirties and
continuedby Adornoand laterespeciallyby Habermas.
Looking back to traditionalas well as forwardto futurescience, ideology critique,which was consideredmaterialistin the early seventies,
now served as a catalyst. Thus, a younger generationof art historians,
too, successfully staged an insurrectionin hallways, lecture halls, and
seminars, raising objection, demandinga say, and staking their claim
againsttheirprofessorsandthe teachingbody.
This claim was officially voiced for the first time at the XII German
Congressof Art Historiansin Cologne, 1970, and was takenup in a section called "The Workof Art between Science and Word-View"led by
MartinWamke.14This section was dominatedby younger art historians
14. The contributionswere publishedin Das Kunstwerkzwischen Wissenschaftund
ed. M. Warnke(Giitersloh:Bertelsman,1970).
Weltanschauung,

64

Warburgand CulturalHistory

who furtheredthe demandfor a generalopening up of their discipline

by criticizing its self-portrayal.On the one hand, they examined traditional themes and means of interpretation
by critically looking at their
the
and
content
ideological
epistemologicalinterestmanifestedtherein,
while on the other hand introducingnew themes and theories, particularlythose of WalterBenjamin.
If not before, then certainly with this section of the conference,
which adoptedthe critiqueof science as its motto, the FrankfurtSchool
made its entrance into art history before the incumbent public of
experts. The very title of the section is reminiscent of Walter Benjamin's much discussed study of The Workof Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. It was he who was presented as a highly
contemporaryguide - Warburgprobablywould have said a "Pfad- for a different,materialistarthistory.
finder" [pathfinder]15
The "HamburgSchool" was, to stay with the metaphor,still or once
again on its way to being a recognized part of German art history.
Some of the contributionsto the conferencewere publishedin the same
year in a book with the title of the section mentioned above, which
also documentedthe controversialdiscussions.For leftist art historians,
this publicationbecame somewhatof an alternativetextbook- for the
time being, however,Warburgwas mentionedonly in a footnote.
One importantcontributionto the section could not be included in
the volume but was published seperatelyone year later: Leopold D.
Ettlinger's paper on Art History as History.1 Considered from the
standpoint of a reconstructionof the Hamburg School, his treatise
doubtlessly represents an essential building block. It is certainly no
coincidence that an emigrantart historianof the older generationwho is closely linked to the WarburgSchool and, as a scholar, to the
WarburgInstitutein London- took up the task of decisive and effective recollection. Taking his cue from Warburg'swritings, Ettlinger
in his treatise, with the quesdevelops "methodologicalreflections"l17
tion of the "originalfunction"of a work of art and its historical context at the centerof his thoughts.
15. Warburg,vol. 1, 93.
16. Leopold Ettlinger,"Kunstgeschichte
als Geschichte,"Jahrbuchder Hamburger
Kunstsammlungenvol.16 (1971): 7-19. Expandedversion in Aby Warburg.Ausgewdhlte
ed. D. Wuttke(Baden-Baden:v. Koerner,1980) 499-513.
Schriftenund Wiirdigungen,
17. Warnke,Das Kunstwerk11.

MichaelDiers

65

researchcanbe understood
Theroleof iconographic
only if one does
not takeit to be a scholarlyanswerto charadesinventedin the past.
thework
as an attemptto comprehend
Instead,it mustbe understood
of artin all its manifestations
as a productof the historicalcircumstancesunderwhichit arose.18
Insisting on the legacy of Warburg(and Panofsky), the author maintained that iconology should once again be equippedwith those theoretical foundationsthat were lost in the course of history - particularly
of Germany's(academic)history.In his article,Ettlingerwantedto
so as to showthathis iconological
give Warburg
ampleconsideration
methodis preciselynotjustanexplanation
of content... , butrather
an encompassing
examination
of thefunctionof theworkof art,both
in its immediatehistoricalcontextandwithina tradition.It should
moreoverbecome... clearthatforWarburg
artderivesfroma collaborationamongindividuals
andthusis a symbolthatdoesnotallowfor
of formandcontent.19
theseparation
Warburg'sunderstandingof the term "symbol"as linking form and content inseparablytogetherwas directedagainstthe objections of iconology-opponents who accused this method of neglecting precisely the
aspects of form. Ettlinger'sdefinitionof art as "communication"[Mitteilung] throughwhich the inherentfunction of a work of art is to be
deciphered20in order to clarify that art history as "partof social history" must never be an autonomousfield existing ouside of common
historical,social, or economicconditions.
With his lecture, Ettlinger not only brought Warburgback to the
attention of art historians,but moreoverremindedthem of the latter's
ethos and understandingof art history. It was realized that Warburg's
demand remainedvalid and had not yet been met. Whoever wished to
examine the question of topicality was referredto Warburg'swritings
further.This reading could soon be supplementedby Ernst H. Gombrich's "intellectualbiography"about the Hamburgscholar which was
published in London and soon became a standardwork providing the
readerwith extensiveandpreviouslyunpublishedmaterial.21
18. Ettlinger507.
19. Ettlinger510. (Emphasismine - M. D.).
20. Ettlinger512.
21. Gombrich,firstpublishedas Aby Warburg.
An IntellectualBiography(London:
The WarburgInstitute,1970).

66

Warburgand CulturalHistory

Ettlinger'sappeal (as well as Gombrich'stributeto Warburg)did not

go unnoticed; a look at the discussions within the art history departments of the early seventies makes clear the gradualreintroductionof
Warburgianthought. Along with the art theorist Walter Benjamin whose name became ubiquitousto an incomparablygreaterdegree, due
not least to the continuouspublicationsof his works - Warburgas an
historian of culture and of the arts graduallybecame visible again in
Germany during the seventies. The field of art and cultural history,
which at the time was seeking to reorientitself, soon recognized Warburgas an importantprogenitor.

In the early seventies,the extensivelist of propostionsby the Warburgian researchprogramhad to appearas a demandingcounter-program
to
the then common specialization of that field. Warburg'sprogram
includedthe demandthat arthistorybe an historicalscience ("arthistory
must remaina history"22);the demandfor the integrationof the subject
into a broadercontext of a historyof civilization,aimed at interdisciplinary research ("art-historicalcultural science"); for expansion of the
field of studies ("in terms of content and geography"),which would
then include all visual data along with the so-called "high"arts, extending also to the low, small, and trivial art forms. Furthermore,Warburgian research called for a history of visual medias' use of images
("historiansof the image"23)and a close analysisof its constantlychanging historicalfunction.Also partof the Warburgian
programwas a problem-orientedhistory of art, that is, a discipline startingout from overarching questions and transcendingthe establishedcanon of masterpieces only, which allegedlyjustify the attentionthey receive in and of
themselves. Warburghad done the groundworkfor the newly developing fields of study concerningsociety, politics, culture, theory of the
media, (visual) communications,and the culture industry,all of which
were evolving not least as a resultof the turnto criticaltheory.With his
historical studies, Warburghad done much preliminarywork in these
areas:a vast stockof paradigmatic
researchreadyto be calledupon.
22. Warburg'sletterto KarlKoetschau,February19, 1906, Briefkopier-Buch1.184
(London:The WarburgInstitute).
23. Cf. Warburg'sdiary entryof February12, 1917, Tagebuch3.1 (London:The
WarburgInstitue):885.

MichaelDiers

67

Iconology, this could be learnedfrom Warburg,could not be reduced

to the scholarly decipheringof images or to iconographicalresearchof
motifs; it also had to embracesocio-historicaland socio-psychological,
social and political questions. Art did not merely develop at the base
and didn't only produce effects within a historicallyspecific order,but
was itself part of the system and representedit - albeit only through
mediations. The worldview of the Renaissance societies in Florence,
Bruges, or Nuremburg,for example, manifested themselves in their
"sense of reality,"24in their faith and superstitions,in their "spiritual
politics" [Geistespolitik],25as well as in their daily trade or in their
fashion and literature.To Warburg,a work of art and its documented
functionalizationin, for instance, the fields of religion, politics, and
business was an eloquent expressionof all these aspects. According to
Warburg'sessays, the worldview of a society can be determinedvia
iconology. Thus it became necessary to examine closely the collection
or lists of commissioned art works of a Florentinebanker,in order to
reconnectartwith the surroundingcultureandhistoricalreality.
In method and program,Warburg'sstudies recommendedthemselves
to a highly criticalarthistoricalpractice,mainlybecause of the ambitious
and straightforwardmannerof his writings. Characterizedas a "living
method"26- a term that tries to grasp the curious correspondenceof
work and biography- this kind of researchmust deny any kind of
superficialexaminationof randomsubjectmatter.Warburg'ssystematic
inquiryinto "the significanceof the influenceof heathenantiquityon the
Europeanmentality"27is rooted in the idea of enlightenmentor, to be
more specific, in a concernwith the endangeringof enlightenmentand
which is equivalentto the loss of the "feelthe betrayalof "Sophrosyne,"
ing of detachmentbetween the subjectand the object"and the relapseof
man into a "mythicallyfearful orientation."The arts, which can be
regardedespecially as an inventoryof the emotions of a given epoch,
reveal this dangerposed to humankind.The visual symbols which are
transmittedby the historyof art carrywith them the feelings of a certain
age and throughthem we can discernthe form of and stage in the struggle for reason. Works of art, to Warburg,are productsof a continuous
24. Warburg,GesammelteSchriftenvol.1, 188.
25. Warburg,GesammelteSchriftenvol.2, 490.
26. Heinrich Dilly, Kunstgeschichteals Institution.Studienzur Geschichte einer
Suhrkamp,1979) 25.
Disziplin (Frankfurt/Main:
27. Warburg,AusgewaihlteSchriften308.

68

Warburgand CulturalHistory

process of balancing, they are "productsof the inevitable dialectic

between the expressiveenergiesof a distantpast and the rationalorientations of the present."28
The artist,accordingto Warburg,should
allowtheheritageof passionate
(thatis, sensual)experiencestoredin
to takeitseffectuponhim... andshouldgive it expresmemory-form
sive formintheactof artisticreflection....Theaestheticobjecttherefore appearsas the constantreturnandhumanization
of mythin no
longermythicaltimes.29
Warburgdefines cultureas the historicalsum of all efforts made by
man to overcome his fear, which tries to hold him captive again and
again. The act of liberationfrom irrationality,pagan stupidity,and the
rule of desire, is carriedout in a slow process of humanization,a process which is neverthelesssubjectto setbacksat any given moment. In
that respect Warburgdescribesthe reservesof transmittedculturalpossessions as "humanity'streasureof suffering"[Leidschatz]which is waiting to be transformedinto human porperty."Humanity'sstores of
suffering become the possessions of the humane."30This "Leidschatz
des Menschen"is waitingto be transformed
into humaneproperty.
The "to and fro" of humankindbetweenaffect and rationality,between
myth and logos, is one of the centraltheoreticalfiguresof a Warburgian
"dialecticsof enlightenment."
Culturedoes not standfor barbarismovercome once and for all by progress;instead,it is only the inseperable
reverseof that barbarism.Warburg's
personalexperiencesin WorldWarI
showedhim thatenlightenment
can revertto mythologyat any time. As an
historian,Warburgsoughtexplanationsfor these experiencesin his study
on "Prophecyof PaganAntiquityin WordandImagein Luther'sTimes."31

Up until today, after a quarterof a centuryof criticalreceptionof his

work, the examinationof Warburg'sresearchhas followed the path of
28. BernhardBuschendorf,"'Warein sehr tiichtigesgegenseitigesF6rdem:'Edgar
Windund Aby Warburg,"
IDEA4 (1985): 187.
29. Buschendorf187.
30. Warburgnotebook(1928), quotedin Gombrich339. Cf. also M. Warnke,"'Der
Leidschatzder Menschheitwird humanerBesitz,'"Die Menschenrechtedes Auges. Ober
Aby Warburg,eds. W. Hofmann, G. Syamken, and M. Warnke (Frankfurt/Main:
EuroptiischeVelagsanstalt,1980) 113ff.
31. Warburg,GesammelteSchriften,vol. 2, 487ff.

Michael Diers

69

discussing and continuinghis theses. Very rarely has the example of

text-exegesis been followed, this being a rathersterile approachwhich
nevertheless could have suggested itself in dealing with a "masterof
modem art history."32The factualand positivistic results of his studies
had alreadybeen taken up by the art history of the twenties and in the
meantime have in many ways been revised and superseded.But the
reception history of the Warburgianresearchprogramis based neither
on the wealth of data gained for the historyof art nor on his positivistic
approach,but ratheron his expansionof the notion of "art"within the
boundariesof culturalhistoryas he developedand practicedit. Warburg
startedoff as an arthistorianbut even before the turnof the centuryhad
become estrangedfrom what was traditionalhistory of art at that time.
Since he understoodhis subjectas a truly historicaldiscipline, the then
common stylistic critique or formal analysis appeared inadequate to
him. Works of art, no matterhow elaborateand aestheticallydignified
they might be, were primarilyregardedby Warburgas images which
had to be put alongsideotherkinds of images and documentsand which
had to be consideredas historicalevidence. In his classical essay about
Edgarwrites :
Warburg's"Conceptof Kulturwissenschaften,"
Theconceptof pureartisticvision,whichW6lfflindevelopedin reacwiththeconceptof culture
tionto Burckhardt
is contrasted
byWarburg
withinwhichartisticvisionfulfillsa necesas a whole[Gesamtkultur],
thisfunction- so theargument
saryfunction.However,tounderstand
continues- one shouldnotdissociateit fromits connectionwiththe
functionsof otherelementsof thatculture.Oneshouldratheraskthe
twofoldquestion:what do these otherculturalfunctions(religion,
poetry,myth,andscience,societyandthestate)meanforthepictorial
andwhatdoestheimagemeanfortheseotherfunctions.
imagination;
?
was
of Warburg's
basicconvictionsthatany attemptto
It
one
..
detachthe imagefromits relationto religionandpoetry,to cultand
drama,is like cuttingoff its lifeblood.Thosewho, like him, see the
boundupwithcultureas a wholemust,if
imageas beingindissolubly
theywishto makeanimagethatis no longerdirectlyintelligiblecommunicateits meaning,go aboutit in a ratherdifferentway fromthose
whosubscribeto thenotionof "purevision"in theabstract
sense.It is
notjusta matterof training
theeyeto followandenjoytheformalramificationsof anunfamiliar
linearstyle,butof resurrecting
the original
modeof visionfromtheobscurity
conceptionsimpliedin a particular
into whichtheyhavefallen.Themethodused forachievingthis can
32.

AltmeistermodernerKunstgeschichte,ed. H. Dilly (Berlin:Reimer, 1990).

70

Warburgand CulturalHistory
which
onlybe an indirectone.Onemuststudyall kindsof documents
historicalcriticismcanconnectwiththeimagein question
methodical
andproveby circumstantial
evidencethata wholecomplexof concephas contributed
to the
tions,whichmustbe established
individually,
formation
of theimage.33

To Warburg,this process becomes a "conceptuallyguided process of

recollection" which puts him alongside those who keep the "'experience' of the past"alive:
wasconvincedthatin his ownwork,whenhe wasreflecting
Warburg
functionto
upontheimageshe analyses,hewasfulfillingananalogous
thatof pictorialmemorywhen,underthe compulsiveurgeto express
to therecitself,themindspontaneously
synthesizes
imagesanalogous
ollectionof pre-existingforms.The wordMNHMOZYNH,
which
hadinscribed
abovetheentrance
to hisresearch
institute,is to
Warburg
be understood
in thisdoublesense:as a reminder
to thescholarthatin
theworksof thepasthe is actingas trusteeof a repository
interpreting
of humanexperience,
butatthesametimeas a reminder
thatthisexperienceis itselfanobjectof research,
thatit requiresus to usehistorical
to investigate
material
thewayinwhich"socialmemory"
functions."34
Wind's remarkswhich are quotedhere at length, paraphraseWarburg's
ideas, which were never systematicallycarriedout in his works; from
the viewpoint of a colleague and friend35closely associated with the
founder of the Warburglibrary during his last years, they provide a
superb summaryof the thoughtsthat Warburg- who truly cannot be
called a great theorist- expoundedin a scatteredway throughouthis
works as well as a summaryof the way in which he presentedthem in
regardto their applicationto the various fields of his studies, especially
those which were dedicated to the EuropeanRenaissance and to the
continuationof pictorialconceptionsin antiquity.
Warburgregardedit as his taskto
examinethe historicalfactsof tradition,
to revealthepathsthistradition followedin as multifaceted
a wayas possible.Then,however,it
becomesnecessaryto drawconclusionsregardingthe functionof
33. Edgar Wind, "WarburgsBegriff der Kulturwissenschaftund seine Bedeutung
fiir die Asthetik,"Zeitschriftfir Asthetikund allgemeine Kunstwissenschaft25 (1931),
here quotedfromthe reproductionin Wuttke450f.
34. Wuttke406f.
35. Cf. Buschendorf.

MichaelDiers

71

humanity'ssocialmemoryfromsuchknowledge:Whatis it in the
in antiquity
thatallowsthemto survive?
natureof theformsestablished
of antiquityin a certainperiodwhile
Whatcausesthe 'renaissance'
otherepochs- with the sameheritageof images- do not convertthat

heritageintoa livingpossesion?36

To Fritz Saxl, Warburg'sassistant and later head of the Warburg

Library,the image has to play an essential role within the framework
of cultural-scientificresearchin the Institute:
wasledby his studiesof Florentine
culturalhistoryto recogWarburg
sourcesof imagesas amongthe most
nize, for instance,astrological
of theheritageof antiquity.
Andthelibrary,
transmitters
too,
important
collectsthe visualandtextualdocuments
of astrologyas materialfor
of mythologemes.
the studyof the tranformation
Thenotionof a hisof
is
the
thus
tory images
expanded
by considering imagenotonlyfor
its artisticcontent,butmoreoveras a sourcein thehistoryof religion
andin disciplinary
history.37
The artistsof the Renaissancerediscoveredthe repertoireof classical
forms. Warburgdoes not only see this as a stylistic or visually rhetorical element: the fact that one remembersand uses certain forms does
not only stem from a historicizingor historicistorientationor fashion.
It comes, rather,from the fact that the new sensibility [Lebensgefihl]
just could not be expressed any longer through the ossified formal
canon of the Middle Ages. The newly-awoken interest of the Renaissance artists in the thematizationof sensual passion caused them to
returnto the traditionalrepertoireof the "pathosformulas"of antiquity,
though of course not without altering them characteristically.The
forms live on, one remembersthem, because the basic questions of orientationremainthe same for humankindin all ages. In spiritualdistress
and in the struggle for level-headedness -

"Sophrosyne" -

it is "Mne-

mosyne," the Europeanmemory of images, that provides older topoi.

The main feature of artistic objectifications,which borrow from the
"mnemonic energies" of collective recollection, is neither the limited,
explicit, and instrumentalizingreference to the past nor a concept of
memory,but ratherthose characteristicswhich indicate how fear as the
36. F. Saxl, "Die Kulturwissenschaftliche
BibiliothekWarburgin Hamburg,"Forschungsinstitute.Ihre Geschichte,Organisationund Ziele, ed. L. Brauer,A. Mendelssohn
Bartholdy,and A. Meyervol. 2 (Hamburg:De Gruyter,1930) 355.
37. Saxl 356.

72

Warburgand CulturalHistory

decisive driving force can be overcome throughcontemplation.Works

of art are products of these expressive energies; to Warburgthey are
retained as engrams in a collective memory,productsof a process of
balancing on the model of the present,which also hold "energies"for
the futureand arethusnevercompletelydonewith historically.
Warburgpleaded stronglyfor the inclusionof art history in a broader
context of cultural sciences which would deal with all kinds of symbolic forms of humanmodes of expression.Since this inevitablymeant
a dissolution of the conventionallimits of this science, many scholars
feared for their arduouslygained autonomy;but a counter-movement
developed simultaneously:the quest for a meeting and cooperationof
all disciplines assembled under the same roof of cultural science. It
goes without saying that the history of art - no matterhow broad its
scope - had to rely on neighboringdisciplines in order to meet the
new demands. The cultural-historicaland cultural-scientificlaboratory
which Warburgestablishedin 1903 as a librarysoon expandedinto a
researchcenter.It was intendedto functionas a coordinatingpoint and
was developed as an organ for informationand integration:historians
and art historiansalike, scholars of religon and philosophers,scholars
of literatureand musicologists, archeologistsand classical philologists
could find stimuli here and were free to publishtheirresults or give lectures at the library.By the end of the twenties, the library contained
around 60,000 volumes and included a huge collection of photographs
comprisingabout25,000 pictures.The books and otherresearchmaterials were regardedas a collection with which to solve specific problems. The librarywantedto help with the
of a singleproblem... in sucha waythattheselection,colelaboration
of thetextualandvisualmaterial
firstpermits
lection,andorganization
thepresentation
of theproblemit wishesto examine,andtheresultsof
whichaddresses
thisproblem
canthenbepublished.38
theresearch
As the reports of active membersand the numerousstudies submitted
by the WarburgLibraryprove, the collected researchmaterialwas able
to fulfill these promiseson a largescale.
Warburghimself never publishedanythingin the volumes of "Studies" and "Lecturesat the Library."His own researchin the last years of
his life remaineda fragment.He was workingon the as yet unpublished
38.

Saxl 355.

MichaelDiers

73

"Mnemosyne"pictureatlas,39which bearsthe somewhatawkwardsubtitle: "ImageSequencefor the CulturalStudyof ExpressiveMaterialReminiscent of Antiquity in the Representationof Cosmic and Human
Movements duringthe EuropeanRenaissance."The plates Warburgcollected present an historicalcorpus of well-chosen examples from the
wealth of Europeanpictorialmemory;they are meant to be viewed as
an attempt to map the paths of the prefiguredicons of remembrance
[Erinnerungsbilder].It was Warburg'saim to turn this atlas into an
organ for the history of images, art, and culture in general, achieving
this goal through a new form of scientific representation.This is why
the organizationof the books in the librarywas based on a certainsystem of shelving thatplacedthe books accordingto their contentand to a
"Law of Good Neighbourliness,"as Warburgput it. This idea also provided the organizingprinciplefor the pictureatlas as a tool that owed its
subject to history itself as well as to the historicalmemory-work[Erinnerungsarbeit]of a scholarwho also understoodhimself as an historian
of culturesince individualdisciplinescould not answerthose basic questions raisedby wordand image,by artand culture.

In his lecture of 1967, "In Search of CulturalHistory,"the former

head of the WarburgInstitute,ErnstH. Gombrich,put forth the following opinion (and demand):"If culturalhistory did not exist, it would
have to be inventednow."40Three years later,he publishedhis biography on Warburgwhich had a lasting effect on the (re-)inventionof cultural history within the interdisciplinarydiscussions about establishing
cultural-historicalresearchin the humanities.In returningto Warburg,
Gombrich recalled a successful model of cultural-scientific work,
which set high standardsthathave hardlybeen met to date.

Translatedby ThomasGirstand Dorothea von Moltke

of theposthumous
39. Thepublication
"Bilderatlas"-Materialien
is plannedas part
of a continuation
of theGesammelte
Schriften.
In Searchof Cultural
40. ErnestH.Gombrich,
Clarendon,
History(Oxford:
1969)45.