May 9, 2020 12:24 AM
I’ve been interested in Albrecht Dürer’s master prints here lately. I’ve read all the interpretations. What’s fascinating to me is that all three of them are attempts at redemption. In my opinion they’re just different ways to justify our existence. He says, "The lie is in our understanding, and darkness is so firmly entrenched in our mind that even our groping will fail."
I was surprised by this sixty symbol video, however. Professor Eaves was fascinated by the fact that if you take the number 1 in the title (Melancholia I) and add it to the total, it equals 137, which is related to the fine structure constant. Eddington was the first to propose why the value might be important for cosmology but he originally thought it was exactly 1/136. Professor Eaves admits it’s just a coincidence but he doesn’t even mention anything about the noticeable 6 underneath the number 5, with one being the difference, nor does he mention anything about the unusual number 9 that appears to be the symbol of Leo (lion), which IMHO would tie all three master prints together.
"The prints are considered thematically related by some art historians, depicting labours that are intellectual (Melencolia I), moral (Knight), or spiritual (St. Jerome) in nature. While Dürer sometimes distributed Melencolia I with St. Jerome in His Study, there is no evidence that he conceived of them as a thematic group. The print has two states; in the first, the number nine in the magic square appears backward, but in the second, more common impressions it is a somewhat odd-looking regular nine."—Melencolia I
I didn't verify the part about the orignal sketch being a backwards nine. Who knows?
![[Image: Slide63.jpg]](https://www.albrechtdurerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Slide63.jpg)
This odd looking regular 9 though looks exactly like the Leo symbol that he used in his portrait of Johannes Kelberger.
![[Image: durers_magic_square.jpg]](https://themathcircle.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/durers_magic_square.jpg)
This might be a bit of of a stretch but the 6 underneath the 5 is odd and St. Jerome’s letter 65 is To Principia, is about the intellectual female. It’s a memoir of Saint Marcella.
He said this about her...
As in those days my name was held in some renown as that of a student of the Scriptures, she never came to see me without asking me some questions about them, nor would she rest content at once, but on the contrary would dispute them; this, however, was not for the sake of argument, but to learn by questioning the answers to such objections might, as she saw, be raised. How much virtue and intellect, how much holiness and purity I found in her I am afraid to say, both lest I may exceed the bounds of men's belief and lest I may increase your sorrow by reminding you of the blessings you have lost. This only will I say, that whatever I had gathered together by long study, and by constant meditation made part of my nature, she tasted, she learned and made her own.
What do you think? It this 6/5 thing too big of a stretch?
I was surprised by this sixty symbol video, however. Professor Eaves was fascinated by the fact that if you take the number 1 in the title (Melancholia I) and add it to the total, it equals 137, which is related to the fine structure constant. Eddington was the first to propose why the value might be important for cosmology but he originally thought it was exactly 1/136. Professor Eaves admits it’s just a coincidence but he doesn’t even mention anything about the noticeable 6 underneath the number 5, with one being the difference, nor does he mention anything about the unusual number 9 that appears to be the symbol of Leo (lion), which IMHO would tie all three master prints together.
"The prints are considered thematically related by some art historians, depicting labours that are intellectual (Melencolia I), moral (Knight), or spiritual (St. Jerome) in nature. While Dürer sometimes distributed Melencolia I with St. Jerome in His Study, there is no evidence that he conceived of them as a thematic group. The print has two states; in the first, the number nine in the magic square appears backward, but in the second, more common impressions it is a somewhat odd-looking regular nine."—Melencolia I
I didn't verify the part about the orignal sketch being a backwards nine. Who knows?
![[Image: Slide63.jpg]](https://www.albrechtdurerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Slide63.jpg)
This odd looking regular 9 though looks exactly like the Leo symbol that he used in his portrait of Johannes Kelberger.
![[Image: durers_magic_square.jpg]](https://themathcircle.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/durers_magic_square.jpg)
This might be a bit of of a stretch but the 6 underneath the 5 is odd and St. Jerome’s letter 65 is To Principia, is about the intellectual female. It’s a memoir of Saint Marcella.
He said this about her...
As in those days my name was held in some renown as that of a student of the Scriptures, she never came to see me without asking me some questions about them, nor would she rest content at once, but on the contrary would dispute them; this, however, was not for the sake of argument, but to learn by questioning the answers to such objections might, as she saw, be raised. How much virtue and intellect, how much holiness and purity I found in her I am afraid to say, both lest I may exceed the bounds of men's belief and lest I may increase your sorrow by reminding you of the blessings you have lost. This only will I say, that whatever I had gathered together by long study, and by constant meditation made part of my nature, she tasted, she learned and made her own.
What do you think? It this 6/5 thing too big of a stretch?