The Art Institute of Chicago

Chagall's "White Crucifixion" Author(s): Ziva Amishai-Maisels Source: Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies, Vol. 17, No. 2 (1991), pp. 138-153+180-181 Published by: The Art Institute of Chicago Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4101588 . Accessed: 18/01/2011 12:16
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=artic. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. 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.

The Art Institute of Chicago is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

Chagall's

White

Crucifixion

AMISHAI-MAISELS ZIVA Hebrew Jerusalem University,

n 1938, Marc Chagall executed the first of a series of

major crucifixion paintings, the White Crucifixion (fig. I), in which he combined traditionaland new iconographicalelements to provide the subject with a novel meaning.This painting, as well as those that followed, has been the center of a greatdeal of controversy, as varioustheorists haveponderedthe problemof why a Jew renowned for his treatmentof Jewish themes began at this time to turn persistently to such a pronouncedly Christiansubject.1 This articlewill examinethe painting within the religious, political, and personal context in which it was painted, taking into considerationthe origins of the theme in Chagall'swork, his statementson the subject,and his laterdevelopmentof it. In the WhiteCrucifixion,Christ is depictedwearing a short headcloth ratherthan a crown of thorns, and a fringed garmentin lieu of the traditionalloincloth. This garmentis a varianton the Jewish ritualprayershawl: it has two black stripes near its fringed edge and longer fringes in the corners.Above Christ'shead, just over the limits of the upper bar of his T-shaped cross, appearsthe traditionalINRI sign ("Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews"), which is translatedon the cross-bar itself into Aramaic: Yeshu HaNotzri Malcha D'Yehudai. This inscription, like the fringed garment, is used to stress as Jesus'sJewish character, Aramaicis written in Hebrew charactersand was a languagespoken by many Jews in Jesus's time. Chagall's spelling of the Aramaic allowed him a play on words, for the term "HaNotzri" is more usually used to mean "the Christian" than either "the Nazarene"or "theman from Nazareth."He thus emphasized Jesus'simportanceto both ChristiansandJews, for the Jewish Jesus with his covered head and fringed garment is also a Christian.

Chagallfurtherstressedthis duality in his illumination of the scene: Christ is lit by a ray of white light from on high, but the Christian halo around his head is balancedat his feet by the halo surroundingthe menorah, one of the oldest symbols of Judaism.ThisJewish context is echoed above in four figures-three biblical patriarchs and a matriarch-who are dressed in explicitly Jewish garments: the man in white wears phylacteries and a prayer shawl, while the others cover their heads either with a skullcap,a mantle,or a kerchief. They hover above the cross to mourn Christ's death, floating out of the darknessinto the ray of light that illuminateshim. This combination of Christian and Jewish motifs would havebeen complicatedenough, but Chagalladded to their complexity by placing the historical Jesus in a modern setting.The artistpaintedsmaller,"explanatory" scenes aroundthe crucifiedfigure like those in a Russian icon, but he integratedthem into the landscape,so that it seems that both they and Christ inhabit the same time To and space.2 Christ'sleft (on the right side of the painting), Chagalldepicteda synagogue,whose Toraharkgoes up in flames,while a booted soldier with baggy trousers, who may be responsiblefor the fire, opens its doors to

FIGURE Marc White 1887-1985). I. (French Russia], [born Chagall

S. Gift of cm. x date);155 139.7 TheArtInstitute Chicago, of Alfred works use Alschuler within imagery Chagall's of Christian (1946.925). The observers. life to devoted many primarily Jewish hasmystified the to was of the White designed draw Crucifixion originally imagery in of world of attention theChristian to thedireplight Jews NaziGerthe timeof finishing work, a Within veryshort however, Chagall many.

over (with painted ata later 1938. Crucifixion, Oiloncanvas details

references obvious the over of obscuring more painted some itsdetails, of outoffear prosecution figs. totheNazis, (see 2-4). perhaps 139

Bs:-i

, ,

i~iii iiii:!i':ii i:i

...

!i~iii!:

!i?i~iiiiii

!!:!!:!ia:

reveal the scrolls within. Below the soldier lie other objects from the pillaged synagogue: an overturned chair, the torn remnantsof a prayer book, a Hanukah menorahwith a tall backstand,and what appearsto be a lamp,perhapsthe EternalLightthatonce hungbeforethe ark. Further below, but still part of the same scene, an open prayerbook and a smokingTorahscroll lie violated on the ground.The fire and the scatteredobjects document the pogrom that has taken place in the synagogue. It is from this scene of destructionthat the Wandering Jew attemptsto escape to the right, carryinghis sack on his back.Below him, a mothershieldsher babyas she too runs away,this time toward the bottom of the painting. This scene continueson the other side of the cross, where three more beardedJews escape toward the bottom left. One wipes away his tears as he flees; another,in torn garments,wears an unreadablesign on his chest; while the third, who looks back in horrorat the burningsynagogue, escapes wearing only one shoe, but clutching a Torah scroll in his arms, successfully saving it from destruction. This pogrom has been visited not only on a synagogue, but also on an entire village. Above these three refugees,houses lie overturned,brokenopen, or burning in the snow.To the left, a Jew,seeminglyconsumedby the flames, lies dead and unburied amid the tombstones of the cemetery.Above him standshis empty chair,attended by his faithfulgoat, who appearsto wait for him to return to it. Other formerinhabitantsof the village sit outdoors on the snow-coveredgroundamidthe destruction,with a basket and a fiddle beside them, too dispirited either to eat or to console themselveswith music. In front of them, other dispossessed inhabitantsof the town try to flee in an overloadedboat, but since it has only one oar,it seems stuck in the white waters,unableto move. Despairing,the refugees lean over the side of the boat, trying to figure out a way to get it to move, or raise their hands to the heavensor to Jesus, seeking salvation.Above the village, a crowd of peasantsenters,wavingred flags and carrying swords and farm implementsas weapons.They resemble the fleeing villagers, and it is at first not clear whether of they are the perpetrators the pogrom or the defenders of the village. In the latter case, their meager weapons seem inadequateto effect the hoped-for salvation. To understandthis painting,one must be awarethat it is clearlydated 1938at the lower right, and yet when it was first publishedin 1939and exhibitedin 1940, Chagall dated it r939 on both occasions. This suggests that the work was completed in the last third of 1938 because Chagall constantly assigned works painted after his returnfrom summervacationin Septemberto the following year,conformingto the Jewish ratherthan the Christian New Year.3On the other hand, the date on the
140 AMISHAI-MAISELS

paintingitself suggeststhat, in the artist'smind, the work is indisputablyconnectedwith events of 1938. Moreover,the paintingis currentlynot in its original form, for Chagall overpaintedsome of the details that These details helpedto pinpointits meaningmore exactly. are visible in a reproductionpublished in Cahiers d'art (fig. 2) in the second half of 1939, before the paintingwas exhibited.First of all, the sign worn by theJew on the left bore the clearlylegible Germaninscription:Ich binJude ("I am a Jew") (fig. 3). Second, both the flag above the burningark and the armbandof the soldier who has just opened its doors bore an inverted swastika (fig. 4), as though Chagall was loathe to draw this feared symbol correctlyand,therefore,superstitiouslyreversedit. These details are repeated in a sketch of the painting (fig. 5) probablyexecuted at the time Chagallmadethe changes, in order to keep his own record of its originalstate.The drawingelaborateson the originalpaintingby suggesting that the books lying on the groundin front of the ark are the remnantsof a book-burning scene, a detail not evident in the originalpainting.4 WhereasChagall explainedto Franz Meyer that he had alteredthe painting "becausehe found its statement too 'literal,'"5just when he made the changesis not clear. They may havebeen made before he exhibited the work in Parisin late January1940,after the start of WorldWar II, becausehe was unsurehow the Frenchwould reactto such obvious political elements in his work. The photographof this exhibitionpublishedin Cahiersd'art (fig. 6) is not clearenough to be used as evidence:the configurations on the flag and the sign can be read as indicating either their originalor their revisedforms.6The changes, however,could also havebeen made either after Germany's invasionof Francein May 1940,or after its defeatin June, becausesuch clearsymbols would haveendangered the painting's safety if it had fallen into Nazi hands.7 Another possible date for the changes-again to safeguardit - would be April 1941, when Chagallcratedthe paintingfor shipmentvia Lisbon to New York.The need for such precautions amplydemonstrated two facts: is by first, that Chagall was arrestedand detained for a while by the Germansin Marseillesas he tried to get to Lisbon; and, second, that the cratedpaintingswere impoundedby the Germanembassy in Madriden route to Lisbon and by the Spanish authorities in Lisbon, arriving in New Yorkonly throughthe help of Chagall'sdaughterIda.8In any event, it is clear that the changes had been made by

FIGURE

over in ofa 3-4) apparentthisreproduction painted (seefigs. are the was taken Crucifixion displayed photograph before White publicly.

2. Marc White Photo: state). Crucifixion (original Chagall. d'art 14, 5-Io (1939),p. I52.The detailsthat Chagalllater Cahbiers

CHAGALL'S WHITE CRUCIFIXION

141

detail fig.2).Photo: of state; (original Cahiers d'art14, 5-Io (i939), P. 152. detail the This of state that painting's original reveals thesign worn themanin thelower corner a left bore by Ich message: binJude("IamaJew").

FIGURE Marc White 3. Chagall. Crucifixion

May 1944, at which time a photographof the work was published in LiturgicalArts.9 It is also evident that the changeswere not meantto be temporary:Chagalldid not repaintthe details upon arrivalin New York or after its in appearance LiturgicalArts, althoughthe painting was in his possession for most of the time until its exhibition at The Museumof ModernArt, New York,in 1946.10 Whenever these changes were made, the original details of the painting and the drawing (figs. 3-5) prove that the subsidiaryscenes around Christ were meant to be depictionsof actualevents in Nazi Germanyto which Chagall was reacting.Thus, the book-burning and the labeling of Jews with such a sign were common pracThe tices."11 lattermay also referto the first Jewish census (May 17, 1938), the registrationand marking of Jewish businesses(June 14, 1938),the forced adoptionby Jews of the namesAbrahamand Sarah(August 17, 1938),and the stampingof the letter "J"("Jude")into Jewish passports (October 5, 1938)- all events that happenedwhile Chagall was working on the painting.'2Moreover,the burning of the Torahark and the desecrationof the scrolls in
142 AMISHAI-MAISELS

the White Crucifixion were clearly inspired by the destructionof the synagoguesin MunichandNuremberg on June 9 and August io, 1938,while the pogrom on the left side of the painting can be linked with those that occurred throughout the year, reaching their height on Kristallnacht(CrystalNight, November9-10, 1938). The attemptsof Jews duringthe 1930sto emigratefrom Nazi Germanyis representedin the paintingby the Jews who try to escapethe destruction.Their flight in all directions derivesfrom a Yiddishpoem by Abraham Waltthat Chahad illustratedshortly before.Walt asserted that the gall patriarchJacob had thought of a plan that has saved the Jews to this day: if threatened,the Jews scatter,so that if one is killed, the others will be saved.'3Even the armed peasantsat the upperleft havehistoricalmeaning,as their red flags indicate that they are Russian Communists. They should thus not be read as attackingthe village but as coming to relieve it, for, in 1938, Russia was in the vanguardof resistanceto Nazi plans for the domination of Europe. Chagall, like many others at this time, believed that liberation from the Nazi yoke could be

White 4. Marc Chagall. Crucifixion detail fig.2).Photo: state; of (original Cahiers d'art14,5-Io (1939), p. 152. thisdetail In of theoriginal of the White state we Crucifixion, findother details Chagall obscured: that later inverted swastikas a flagandonthe on armband a soldier. of of Chagall's placement inverted swastikas theburning near Torah ark andthedesecrated demonstrate synagogue that, conclusively in the White Crucifixion, anti-Semitism tiedto was Chagall's against cry events contemporary in NaziGermany.
FIGURE

achievedwith Russianaid, althoughhe made it clearhere that the Russianswere not yet ableto combatthe evil and may arrivetoo late to help.14 Thus, the scenes surroundingChrist in the White Crucifixion all clearly relate to the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany,and it is these events, as well as the Crucifixion, that the patriarchsmourn. Their presence here stems from the popular Jewish legend that, afterthe destructionof the FirstTemple,God summoned Moses and the Patriarchsto share His grief, for they knew how to mourn.15 They arejoined by the matriarch Rachel, whom the prophets described as mourning the exile and destructionof her children,refusingto be comforted (see Jeremiah31:14). This meaning of the painting was immediately understood by certaincriticswhen it was first exhibited. Thus Chagall'sRussian friend Alexandre Benois wrote of it: Thispainting undoubtedly was in conceived suffering. One feelsthat.. .something wokehim[theartist] witha start, that

he was frightenedand revoltedby it. It is clearthat this vision was provokedby the events of the last years,especially by that horrorthat has spreaditself over Chagall'scountranslatable religionists .... [It] correspondsentirelyto the villainy of the
epoch in which we live.16

It is in this connection that one must view Chagall's use of Jesus in this painting as the crucified Jew. He becomes the very symbol of Jewish martyrdom under the Nazis, and it is as such that Chagall later described him: For me, Christ has alwayssymbolized the true type of the Jewish martyr.That is how I understoodhim in 19o8when I used this figurefor the first time. . . It was underthe influence of the pogroms.Then I paintedand drew him in pictures about ghettos, surroundedby Jewish troubles,by Jewish mothers,runningterrifiedwith little childrenin their arms." This novel usage of the Crucifixion derives from two separate but related artistic traditions that became popular in the nineteenth century. The most well-known of these utilized elements of Christ's Passion, either within or removed from a biblical context, to symbolize the
CHAGALL'S WHITE CRUCIFIXION 143

FIGURE Marc White Chagall. Crucifixion, 5.

after1939 Pencil penonpaper; x and (?). 46 estate. made 40.7cm.Artist's Chagall probably in of state thissketch thepainting its original over before painted someof its details. he

6. was FIGURE The White Crucifixion displayed in theGalerie in Paris January Mai from 26 as in to February 1940, documented this 26, from d'art. photograph thejournal Cahiers conclusive Thisphotograph notprovide does that altered White the evidence Chagall Mai before Galerie exhibition, the Crucifixion in andcomments a reviewer, by appearing the sameissueof Cahiers d'art, be interpreted may in that details the as evidence theoriginal were Photo: d'art painting stillvisible. Cahiers 15,1-2 (1940),p. 34.

144

AMISHAI-MAISELS

sufferingsof humanity, especiallyin times of war.Thus in Thirdof May i8o8 (Madrid,Museo del Prado)of Goya's 1814,the mainvictim extends his armsas though he were crucified, and his hands bear the stigmata.This symbolism was revived with a vengeance in 1927 by George Grosz, who portrayed the crucified Christ wearing a soldier'sboots and a gas mask to symbolize the martyrdom of soldiers in World War I. His message was accentedby the brutalinscription:"Shutyour mouth and This symbolism was taken up by continue to serve."'8 anti-Fascistartistsin the 1930s:in Germany,in 1933-34, Otto Pankok did a series on the Passion in which he suggested that Christ symbolized the victims of the Nazis by giving Christ "Jewish"and "Gypsy" facialfeatures, as opposed to the "Aryan"physiognomy of his persecutors;while in Italy,in a sketch from 1940,Renato Guttausoactuallydrew Hitler at the foot of the cross."9 The second artistic tradition involves the use of Christologicalsymbolism by Jewish artists and is based on ideas current since the mid-eighteenth century in both Jewish and Christiantheology,which stressed that Jesus was an orthodox Jew who had come first specifiThese ideas were given artistic cally to his own people.20 expressionin 1873 by two Jewish sculptors,the Russian Mark Antokolsky and the American Moses Jacob Ezekiel. Antokolsky's Ecce Homo (fig. 7) depicts Jesus with

Jewish facial features, side curls, a skullcap, and an ancient "Jewish" costume culled from a book on historical dress. Antokolsky's letters to his friends make it clearthat the sculpturewas inspirednot only by theological ideas current at the time, but by the pogroms that shook Russia in 1871, after a period of relativecalm. In this work, he tried to remind Christiansthat Jesus was a Jew, and that the persecutionof his brethrenwas an antiChristianact, a perversionof Jesus'steachings.His later depictionsof Christ are also, for the most part, reactions to anti-Semitic acts and pogroms in Russia.21 Ezekiel's relief Israel (fig. 8) approachesthe question from a different angle.Here Christ, crucifiedon a Y-shaped cross, is surroundedby allegoricalfigures: Israel, on the right, raiseshis eyes to heavenin complaintwhile clenchinghis
FIGUREMark Homo, (Russian, Antokolsky 7. 1873. I834-1902).Ecce

Marble. and Moscow, Jacob Tretyakov This Gallery. sculpture Moses Ezekiel's (fig. are Israel 8) works Jewish that, Chagall's artists like by use Both and White Crucifixion,Christian imagery. Antokolsky Ezekiel thefigure Christ symbolize persecution for of to the ofJews; employed these as as acts were artists, well forChagall, ofanti-Semitism resolutely innature. anti-Christian
FIGURE 8.Moses Ezekiel Israel, (American, Jacob 1844-1917). 1873. Bronze 144.8 113.7 Los cm. Angeles, Hebrew College Union relief; x

Skirball Museum.

WHITE CHAGALL'S CRUCIFIXION

145

fist in desperateresistance;on the left, Jerusalemwearsa crown depicting a walled city as she sits bent over in mourning;and, behind Christ, the lastJewish king holds a brokenscepter.It is from his spilledblood, accordingto the artist, that the tree that becomes Christ's cross has grown.22 However, since Ezekiel carved the name "Israel"on the base directly under the cross, it seems to refer to Christ himself ratherthan to any of the other figures, so that the artist seems to suggest not only that Christ is Jewish, but that Israelis Christ crucified.These works inaugurateda long series of Christologicalpaintings by Jewish artists, most of which were reactionsto anti-Semiticoutburstsandpogroms.23 These traditions, especially the Jewish ones, were well known to Chagall. He suggested that a Jewish

artist'sgoal in Russiawas to be a future Antokolsky,and he was himself a protege of Antokolsky's assistantand close friend, Ilya Ginzberg, who regaled Chagall with tales concerning the master. Chagall was undoubtedly acquainted with Antokolsky's works, which were on exhibit in St. Petersburg while Chagall was studying there, and he could easily havereadthat artist'spublished letters, which explained the ideas behind his Ecce

FIGURE 9. MarcChagall. 1912. Golgotha, Oil on canvas;174x 191 cm. NewYork, Museum Modern Lillie Blissbequest. The of P. In Art,

thispainting itspreliminary (fig. Chagall and sketch io), the portrayed

innocent Christ Child crucified suggest victimization as to the of innocent in Russia the twentieth Jews during early century.

146

AMISHAI-MAISELS

FIGUREIO. Marc Sketch Chagall. for "Golgo-

c. Present wheretha," 1908/12.Penon paper.

abouts unknown.

Homo.24 He was equally acquainted with Ezekiel's Israel,which had been reproducedin the December 1903 issue of Ost und West, a magazine on Jewish art and culture that had a pronounced effect on Chagall as a young man.25 Their approachmay have influenced his early Golgotha of 1912 (fig. 9), also entitled Dedicated to Christ, and its undatedpreliminarysketch (fig. io), which Chagall latersuggestedwas drawnin Russiabefore he moved to Paris.26 this unusual depiction of the scene, the In crucifiedvictim is the innocent Christ Child ratherthan the matureJesus.The paintingwas executedwhen it was fearedin the West that pogroms were about to breakout againin Russiabecauseof the Beilis affair.Mendel Beilis, a Jew, had been arrestedin July 1911, accusedof murdering a Christianchild in order to use his blood for ritual purposes, in accordancewith medievalblood libels. The two yearshe spent in jail beforehis trialin the fall of 1913 called forth displays of anti-Semitismin Russia, and a strongoutcry in the West againstthese abusesand against the very idea of the blood libel. This revivalof the blood libel that had also been a leitmotif of the pogroms of 1904-O6, of which Chagall had been only too aware, The helps to explainthe depictionof the crucifiedchild.27

sketch (fig. io), which may havebeen relatedto the originalpogroms or to the Beilis trial,depictsa child bleeding copiously from his wounds, while at his feet stand two Yet, by substitutsaints,one of them a Russianbishop.28 ing his own first name in Hebrew abovewhat appearsto be the Russian INRI inscription at the top of the cross, Chagall made it clear that the child is not Christianbut Jewish.The sketch thus reversesthe blood libel: it is the Jewish child, Chagall-Jesus,who is killed for ritual reasons by the Christians;it is the Jewish child from whom the ladder of the Descent from the Cross is removed in the painting,so that he must remaincrucifiedforever. is This interpretation borne out by a 1912 sketch for the cross and the landscape in Golgotha, which was found on the back of a contemporarysketch for Adam and Eve (New York, Hans S. EdersheimCollection). At the bottom of it, Chagallwrote in Russian: "Landscape In of blood and of death."29 the painting (fig. 9), the blood has drainedout of the blue child into the brilliant red ground, which is literally drenched with blood. At the foot of the cross, the Russian saints have been replacedby the child'sJewish parents.His beardedfather wears a fringed stole, which recallsthe traditionalprayer shawl and is visible below his hands, while the mother
CHAGALL'S WHITE CRUCIFIXION 147

Marc Seen Chagall. Crucifixion a Window, Pen, and on through 1930. ink, color cm. wherevellum 25.4 paper; x 20.3 Present As works figs. abouts unknown. inearlier (see here emphasized theidentifica9-io),Chagall tion Christ Jewish. thisinstance, of as In the crucified wearsJewish Christ a shawl prayer in of loincloth. traditional place themore
FIGUREII.

Yet exposes her breastto succor her sufferingchild.30 the blue child is no longer suffering. Drained of his life's blood, he slowly becomes detached from his brown cross, absorbedinto a green and golden halo as though he were soaring heavenwardin an apotheosis. He moves away from his parents,as does the equally blue-garbed figure in the boat with a blue sail. As in many of his paintingsfrom this period, Chagallconcealeda personal and bitter messageundera seeminglypurely spiritualand poetic theme, so that only those who shared the same type of associationsand reactionswould understandhis meaning.3 This painting also has another level of meaning stemmingfrom Chagall'sidentificationwith the crucified child in the sketch.32 placementof his nameabovethe His cross suggests his awareness of such art-historical precedents as the crucifixionsof James Ensor, who also Whereas replaced the INRI sign with his own name.33 Ensor saw himself as martyredby the art establishment
148 AMISHAI-MAISELS

that rejectedhim, Chagall'sidentificationwith the martyred child can be partiallyexplainedby his contact with anti-Semitismand pogroms in his own childhood. Moreover, the artist left Russia in August i9go, shortly after majorRussiancities had begun deportingJewish "illegal residents"such as Chagall,who had been imprisonedin St. Petersburg for traveling without a pass.34Thus, in Golgotha, the blue figure in the sailboat hoping to find refugefrom Russiaand its pogroms is thematicallylinked to the blue suffereron the cross. Both of these meanings- the political and the personal-would recur when Chagall returnedto the Crucifixion theme in the 193os. The connection between Golgotha and these later works, especially on the political level, is made clear by Chagallhimself: "The Crucifor me a meaningof humandecadence[dicheance] rather than a dogmatic meaning."35" fact that there was a The involved in Golgotha is also suggested political meaning
fixions I painted from I9o8-I2 up to these last times, had

by the fact that Chagallonly returnedto the theme when he became frightened once more by anti-Semitic outbreaks,this time in Germany. The earliestof these laterworks appearsto be a 1930 drawingof a beardedJesus whose loincloth is a striped prayershawlwith corner fringes (fig. ii). He is crucified in in the landscapeof Peyra-Cava southernFrance,which can be seen through a window.36To understand the sudden appearance this image with its clearidentificaof tion of Christ as a Jew, one must realizethat Chagallhad spent part of the spring of 1930in Berlin, where he was undoubtedlystruckby the threateningatmospherethere. He would later learn of the events of October 15, 1930, the day the Reichstag opened, when the windows of Jewish stores were broken.This occurredwhen Chagall was in Peyra-Cava,and it accountsboth for his returnto the Crucifixiontheme after almost twenty years and for his use of the traditionthat stressedJesus'sJudaism.The windows brokenin the pogrom also gavea new meaning to the window motif Chagallhad used in his Peyra-Cava

works, and led him to emphasizethe window as a literal and figurative In framefor the Crucifixion."7 this case,the of the cross outside the areainhabitedby Chagall setting can also be interpretedas expressingboth his feeling of safety from what was happeningbeyond the borders of France,and the threat it posed to himself as a Jew, as it was clearlyperceptiblefrom his "window." Chagall'sapproachto this theme was strengthened in 1931, when he visited Palestinein preparation his for work on the Old Testament, with EdmundFleg, traveling the French writer who is said to haverehabilitated Jesus for the Jews."8Fleg, a Jewish theologian, had gone to Palestineto write a life of Christ and, in 1933, published Jesus racontepar le juif errant. Like Chagall, Fleg fused the Crucifixion with the suffering of the Jews over the centuries,writing that the Jewish thieves who were cru-

FIGURE 12.

Gouache paper; x 48.5 Private on cm. collection. 37

MarcChagall.Sketchafter "The FallingAngel,"1934.

WHITE CHAGALL'S CRUCIFIXION

149

cified along with Jesus were more worthy of pity than he was: on Buthe,the "Sonof God," howlongdidhe haveto endure on thecross? hours... .Andthesonsof Israel, his right, Six been that on hisleft,it is almost twentycenturies theyhave nailed theircrosses hisname norwill theybe taken to in
down from them tomorrow.39

Whereas Fleg saw the thieves as paradigmaticof Jewish martyrdom, Chagall preferred the image of Christ himself in this role, as we have seen in his 1930 sketch (fig. ii). He continuedto use Christ'sPassionand Crucifixion in this context in sketches that derive from his 1933 version of The Falling Angel (Basel, Kunstmuseum).40In the original painting, a red angel hurtles downwardtoward a sleepingvillage, a clock on his wing suggestingthat time is running out. His motion causes a Jew clutchinga Torahscroll and an airbornefigurewith a caneto flee the scene. In the 1934sketch (fig. 12), the Jew is joined by a whole company of refugees who flee a

pogrom, symbolized by a burning village and crucifixions in the background.41 for the time being, Chagall Yet, employed this Christological imagery only in his sketches,and it would take the constantlyworsening state of affairsin Germany to make him decide to proclaim these images in a more public way in the White Crucifixionof I938. This decision was prompted by several considerations. First of all, Chagallmay haveheard of the scandal revolving around Otto Pankok'sPassion series in Germany in 1936, where its exhibition and publicationhad been bannedbecausethe artistwas accusedof incorrectly portraying Christ as a Jew rather than as an Aryan!42 More important,however,was the strongencouragement Chagall receivedin Franceitself through the publication in 1937 of Joseph Bonsirven'sLes Juifs et Jesus, which reviewed modern attitudes toward Christ, a book he probablyknew throughhis close friendshipwith Jacques and RaissaMaritain,both of whom were deeply involved in Catholic circles. Bonsirven, a Jesuit, quoted portions

Marc c. 1940. Chagall. Crucifixion, Oilon canvas; x 36.5cm.NewYork, 43.8 Here collection. Chagall private portrayed a and the Christ wearing skullcap, replaced traditional signatthetopof thecross INRI withtheTenCommandments, thereby making as theidentification Christ a Jeweven of than White stronger in theearlier Crucifixion the held (fig.i). While White Crucifixion out of for this hopeforsomeform escape theJews, darker does later, Crucifixion not.
FIGURE 13. I50 AMISHAI-MAISELS

Wash cm. 1941. onpaper; x 39.5 Present 33 whereabouts unknown.

FIGURE Marc The to 14. Chagall. Way Calvary,

of Max Hunterberg'sevocatively titled 1927 book The Jew. Bonsirvanalso made severalstatementsof Crucified his own that probably influenced Chagall: he repeated the argumentthat Jesus was a Jew and stated that if he came again,he would come to the Jews and pray in their synagogues. Moreover, he made the identification betweenJesus and the Jews even strongerby quoting the English novelist and playwrightIsraelZangwill:Jews are not only "the People of Christ, but the Christ of the peoples." Bonsirven added: "Like Jesus, the Jews have not ceased to mount Golgotha; like him, they are always nailed to the cross."43 Bonsirven'swords aptly describe Chagall'sCrucifixions,and may well haveinfluencedhim to treat the subject of the persecution of Jews more openly in his painting. Chagall'schoice of subject also took his intended audienceinto account.He did not haveto explainto Jews what was happening-they already knew. Instead, he wanted to explain the deeper meaningof events in Germany to Christians,and to do so he decided to address them in their own symbolic language,through the use of the Crucifixion.Moreover,his stress on Christ'sJudaism is much more visually strikingthan it had been in the art of Pankokand other anti-Fascistartists.Insteadof translatingthe INRI inscriptioninto the languageof the country in which he worked, as Pankok had done, Chagall wrote it in Aramaicso that the letters themselves stress Christ's connection with Judaism, although only those who can read the Hebrew letters can decipherthe mes-

sage.The meaningwould be conveyedto most Christians through the letters themselves,the inclusion of a prayer shawl as a loincloth, the menorahplaced at Christ'sfeet, the mourning patriarchs above him, and the pogrom scenes aroundhim in the background. As the situationworsened, Chagallmade his meaning increasingly clear, constantly drawing inspiration from events. In a small oil painting of 1940, he painted a variationon the White Crucifixionin which he stressed Jesus's Jewishness by setting a skullcap rather than a shawl on his head and by replacingthe INRI sign with
the Ten Commandments (fig. 13).44 Jesus is thus com-

pletely reassimilatedinto Judaism,and his crucifixionon a cross bearingthe Tabletsof the Law suggests that it is because he is a Jew that he is being killed. The painting also emphasizes new disasters: the Russians no longer come to the rescue,since they had madepeace with Nazi Germany and invadedPoland together in 1939; furthermore, in this variationon the WhiteCrucifixion,no ray of light penetratesthe darknessof war-tornEurope to illuminateJesus, and even the candleat the foot of the cross has toppled over.The Torahlies abandonedbeside it, no longer rescued by the fleeing Jew, while the synagogue continues to burn at the right. Of the main charactersin the foregroundof the WhiteCrucifixion,only the mother and child at the lower right escape.The refugees on the left fall out of the boat, which has now lost even its one oar, and drown. In all of these works, the political element rather
WHITE CHAGALL'S CRUCIFIXION

151

FIGURE I1.

on Gouache paper; x 33cm. Cross, 1941. 48.6 collection. in thesketch As Switzerland, private forGolgotha io), Chagall his substituted (fig. name theINRI for at inscription thetopof the himself thepersecuted with cross, identifying In Christ. thisinstance, was to Chagall alluding his recent salvation thatis, hisescape from theNazisandhis arrival NewYork. in

Marc The Chagall, Descent the from

than Chagall's personal identification with Christ is dominant, and this political level of meaning continued to dominate his works throughout the war in such paintings as The Yellow Crucifixion and Obsession of 1943, and The Crucified of 1944.45 Like these paintings, Chagall's war-time poetry has a political dimension: A Jew passeswith the face of Christ He cries: Calamityis upon us Let us run and hide in the ditches.46 His 1944 comments to James Johnson Sweeney should also be understood in this light: "For me Christ
152 AMISHAI-MAISELS

was a greatpoet, the teaching of whose poetry has been This is not just a laudforgotten by the modernworld."47 remark about Jesus, but a condemnation of the atory Christianworld, which hadforgotten his teachings,and it echoes the ideas statedboth by Jewishtheologiansand by artistssuch as Antokolsky. When Chagall himself was caught up in the Nazi terror and had to flee Paris for New York, however,his more personalidentificationwith Christ came back into play.Thus his fears of deportationare expressed in The Way to Calvary sketches of 1941 (see fig. 14), where Christ in his prayershawl-loinclothis helped on his way

by his fellow Jews, several of whom have already been crucifiedin the burningvillage in the background.Forcing them to continue, a soldier raises his whip in the As gestureof a Nazi beatingJews duringa deportation.48 Chagall fled that same year, he drew a group of Jewish refugees,some of whom seem to be carryingthe crucified Jesus along with them on their flight.49 In The Yellow Christ (c. 1941;private collection), Christ in his prayer shawl-loincloth smiles consolingly at the refugees at his feet who leave the burningvillage on the right and head for the immigrantship on the left, stoppingfor a moment beneath the cross.5" Finally, on reachingNew York, he painted The Descent from the Cross (fig. I5), in which Jesus is lowered from a cross whose INRI sign has once more been replaced by the artist's name, "Marc Ch."51 Held by a bird-headedwoman, againsta backgroundof the still-smoking Jewish village, Jesus-Chagall is removed from the cross of his suffering. Although he seems to be dead, Chagallobviously hopes to be revived, as an angel with bright blue wings brings him his palette and brushes,calling him back to work. From this point on, the Crucifixion assumed the double meaning it originally had in the 1912 Golgotha: Jesus symbolizes both the artist himself and the fate of the Jewish people. This personal symbolism, which can clearly be seen in works such as The Painter Crucified, was also expressedin Chagall'spoetry of this period. In one poem, he wrote: a Every I carry cross day Theypushmeanddragmeby thehand the of me Already dark nightsurrounds Youhave deserted my God?Why? me, In anotherpoem, he stated:
To my dry brushes

Bible series. Previously,he had depicted single biblical scenes both in his paintings and in his etchings for AmbroiseVollard,and he had, with few exceptions,kept within the historical and chronological framework of each scene. In the White Crucifixion,Chagall expanded the meaningof the event, not only changingthe original biblical image, but placing it in a more clearly modern historical context than had been the case in Golgotha. The play in time and space between major and minor scenes becamethe basis both for his laterseriesof biblical paintings,which he called his Messagebiblique, and for his use of Old andNew Testament imageryin his stainedglass windows for churchesand his tapestriesand mosaics for Jerusalem'sKnesset.53In these later works, he used a more allegoricalmannerof connecting the various levels of his message. But in the White Crucifixionhe preachedit loudly and clearly,statingthat what was happening in Germany was a recrucifixionof the Jewish Jesus,an act that only a world forgetfulof Christ'steachings could tolerate.He wanted this messageto be understood by the Christianworld, andto havea positive effect on that world's behavior.For this reason, Chagall chose in the WhiteCrucifixionnot to follow his usual penchant for using his art as a vehiclefor personalexpressionwith ambiguous messages that could often be fully understood only by people whose backgroundwas similar to his own. On the contrary,he chose clearimagery,hoping that his paintingwould be a meansof political communication with an unresponsiveworld.

I runupstairs

Andamcrucified Christ like Fixedwithnailsto theeasel.52

Whereasthis personalmeaningbecamevery important in Chagall'spostwarpaintings,beforeand duringthe war Jesus remainedpredominantlya symbol of Jewish martyrdom,as he had indeed been in the WhiteCrucifixion. Considering this painting in its original context makesclearthat Chagallwas not trying hereto depict the ChristianMessiah who overcomes all suffering through his sacrifice, but the Jewish martyr who holds out no this hope of salvation.Furthermore, paintingshows Chagall to havebeen as firmly rooted in Jewish traditionsof art and iconography as in Christian ones, and to have been awareof, and capableof reactingto, actualpolitical events that moved him. This painting is, moreover,the first of his biblical works to invoke the principles underlying his postwar
CHAGALL'S WHITE CRUCIFIXION 153

in "An with Tuchman, Interview Robert 3. Quoted Phyllis Artforum Rvman," (May 1971), 53. p. in "Robert in Zurich, InK. 4. Quoted Christel Sauer, Introduction," Ryman: Halle internationale Kunst, fir neue Robert exh. Ryman, cat.(1980), 15. p. in Tate Piero and Reliefs Paintings, 5. Quoted London, Gallery, Manzoni: exh. Objects, cat.(0974), 47. P. 6. Ibid. in "The inHouston, Institute Klein, Monochrome 7.Quoted Yves Adventure," fortheArts, University, Klein, Rice Yves A exh. 1928-1i962, Retrospective, cat. (1982-83),p. 220. 8.Quoted Margit in "Ad inNew Rowell, Reinhardt: asRecurrence'," York, Style Solomon Guggenheim R. Ad and exh. Museum, Reinhardt Color, cat.(I98c), P.23. "The A Personal of in Klein, War: Little 9.Yves MythologytheMonochrome"' Institute theArts, University 7),P.218. for Rice Houston, (note R. Solomon Guggenheim Museum 8),p.26. York, (note io. SeeNew 11. Klein in Institute theArts, University 7), for Rice quoted Houston, (note
p. 221.

Oeuvres

sur

papier,
on

exh.
the
a

cat.

(1984),

no.

106.
1937,"

The

drawing
it
as
a

bears

strange
on

inscription
drawing

bottom,
unique
on occurrence

"Esquisse
in

labeling
Chagall's
work.

sketch information when

also

the
is
a

itself,
writ en

Such
104),

usual y
is

later
or

the
it is

back
sent

of
of

mount

(e.g.,
exhibition.
in

no.

either drawing
to
even

work usual

al
is
to
a

catalogued of the
blocked-out conclude

when

for

The

contains

details
method

of

the

original
nos.

work,
12,

contradistinction
37,
15,
nos.

Chagall's
when
the
se ms

sketching

(e.g.,
cartoon

30-32,
painting
was

129),

sketch

for
the of
this

(e.g.,
drawn

76-77).
rather
his

It

thus for
is
nos.

logical painting.
docuIf the
also

that

sketch

after
after acknowledged changed
he
were

than

the

Chagall's mented,
sketch
was

practice although
done his
it Mever
at

making
is
not

sketches

always
time

paintings (e.g.,
the
trying

amply
38,
it

i0 ).
would

the
in

Chagall
as

painting,
to

explain when
5.

mistake had
be n

dating,
and
(1940),

though

remember

afterward

painted.
3),
p.
15,
1-2

(note
dart

414,

p.
p.

609
34.

n.

9.

6.

in

Cabiers the

There

is
Mai

no

photograph
in
not

of
Paris

the

painting
26-Feb. 26, exhibition

194.)
photographs
details
7.
or

catalogue However,
in
were

for Alexandre stil

have the
year

this

show
Benois's

at

the
review,

Galerie which

(Jan.

accompanied
does

the

Cabiers visible
be n he

dart,
(se
either remained

suggests quotation before there,

was

(but
on

state)
cited
to

that
in
note

the
16). in Easter

original

page moved

143,

This

could

Chagall
while
in

Gordes

1940 France.

during
this
Mever
0ork,

the hands.

Germans

occupied
Mlarc

During
8.

time,

the
3),
p.

painting
4'1-,2;

his Sidnev

12.Ibid., 224. p. in with by January 1985. 13.Suggested theartist conversation theauthor, in when rubber the Kawara on the used 14.Theseries stopped 1979, stamp was in This postcards stolenfromhis briefcase Stockholm. work maybe resumed See Moderna On continuitv/ Museet, Kawara: someday. Stockholm, discontinuity, p. I963-i79, exh.cat.(1980-81), IO5. dates to 15.Thebeginning/concluding varyaccording the yearin which Kawara started volumes. Million the One Years-Past existsin twelve ediwhile editions One of Years-Future stillin progress, are tions, eight Million orninehaving completed. been

(note
1978),

and

Alexander,

Chagall

(New

p.
Arts

327,
12

332-33.
(May

9.

Liturgi-al
exhibited

194 ),

p.

65.

Although
between
1941

the
and

painting
Art
i946 Library,
or

se ms

to

have

be n "Chronology"'
have it

in

the

United
find
a

States

(Marc

Chagall,

p.

j, typescript,
to

Museum catalogue
it
se ms

of
listing,
unlikely
A

Modern
a

New
photograph
were

York),

I
of
at

be n

unable
194 . in

description,
that York the

preceding
date
the
The
or,

However,

changes
dating
is

made

that
by

fact
in

that
New

fact, similar York-such of

in

New

York.
The

pre-New
bin
)Ml ow

also
in

suggested
other
works

"smudged"
as

"Ich

Jude"

signs
Cru*cifi on
Mever

executed
and

appear of

194'
3
,

(lower
P.
are

right)
and
no

Lionel o

Cruciped Venturi,
to

194

(main
[.New

figure)
York,
194
were

(se
5,

[note
59) -but

456-57;
photothat
way

Chagall
that
these

pl.

there

graphs
from the

indicate
start.

signs
(note

altered

rather

than

painted

"Chagall's Crucifixion,"138-153. AMISHAI-MAISELS, White pp. I. See,forexample, A.-M., ne feras d'images," sacr (JulyFr. "Tu pas L'Art Cassou, Aug.i96i),pp.7-8;Jean (London, pp.240-48; Chagall 1965), JeanPaul (New Erben, Chagall Crespelle, Chagall York, 1970), 214; P. Walter Marc L'Art (London, pp.112-16; Maritain, "Chagall," sacr (July-Aug. Raissa I966), and "Marc 1950),pp. 26-30;Cornelia Chagall, Siissman Irving Siissman, Painter theCrucified," Bridge (1955), 96-117; of The Hans-Martin Roterpp. i "Die in Studien Kunst aus mund, GekreuzigteWerk Chagalls," Mouseion: und Geschichte Otto Firster and Wein(Cologne, pp. H. 1960), 265-75; Allyn fiir of Chagall," Review (1954), 41-45. 16 stein, "Iconography Kenyon pp. 2.For with "Icon and icons, Friedman, Painting comparisons Russian seeMira Russian Art of Works Chagall"'Journal Popular asSources Some by ofJewish Art 5 (1978), 96. Forcompositions compartmentalized with descriptive P.
scenes arounda mainimage,see Tamara Talbot-Rice, Concise A Historyof Art wouldalsohavebeenknown Russian (London, 1963), 73.Thistradition p. to ChagallfromByzantine Western and medieval sources:see KurtWeitzmann,Manolis Chatzidakis, KrstoMiatev, Svetozar and Iconsfrom Radojcic, SouthEastern Europe Sinai (London, and I968),pl. 76; andPaolod'Ancona, LesPrimitifs italiensdu XIeau XllIe siecles(Paris,i935),figs. 12, 14, 3I, 54. d'art 5-IO(1939), I52;andParis,Galerie Mai,Chagall, exh. 3. Cabiers P. cat. (i940), no. I4, On Chagall's I. system of dating,see Raymond Cogniat, (Paris,i965),p. 6; andFranz Meyer, Chagall MarcChagall (NewYork,I963), pp. io-ii, 599n. 3. d'art(note3);andParis, Centre Georges Pompidou, 4. Cahiers MarcChagall,
180
NOTES
FOR

io.

Chagall,
(New
for

"Chronologv"
York,
1946),

9),
62.

p.

3;

and

James
The

Johnson
Star

Sweenev,

lMarc

Chagall
Ii.
p.
12.

p.

Se ,

example,
and
Fr.

Gerhard

Schoenberner,
"Arbeit

Mel ow

(London,
1946),
pl.

1969),
i.

i8-i9;
Encnclopedia
,3.

Reichental,

Macht

Frei"

(Bratislava,
p.

judaica,
Walt,

vol.
"Al
Tira

(Jerusalem,
Ya'akov"
Vol.
2

1971),
("Fear

839.
not
mv

Abraham
un

Avdi

servant

Jacob"),

Lieder
14.

Poemen

(in

Yiddish),
finished
his and
in

(New

York,

1938),

p.

284-86.

Chagall
the
Russian

had
for
Art

just
Revolution

major
its

painting,
aftermath,
Mever

Revolution
in

of
he
P.

1937,

celebrattaken

ing
Commissar
15.

which
3), 392,

had
412-14.

part

as

Vitebsk.

Se
the

(note

David and

G.

32-3 ;

Roskies, Jfidrash

Against
Rabbah:

Apocalpse
trans.

(Cambridge,
A.

Mas .,
Cohen
(London,

1984),
1939),

p.

Lamentations,

PP? 42-43-? recentes," Cabiers 16.Alexandre "Les Benois, Exupositions: Oeuvres Chagall, inthe are 15, p. All d'art I-2(1940), 33. translations text bythe author. alsSymbol "Marc I7.L.Leneman, Chagall zeine wegen Christus-figuren fun Martyrertum,"Wo~rt (Jan. Yiddish) 22,I977), 4? Y'idishe L'nzer (in P? 18. Thomas, Th~e ofitay; (New I973\,PPHugh Goyla: Th~ird 808 York, Ir-r4; and Grosz, (Berlin, pl. Hintergrund I928), I0.SeealsoBoardman George is as Robinson'scartoonwihich the ofpeace,shot adeserter; Jesus, man 1916 in in J. Sevinour Soldier and Nowak's Bohdan Un~known of r930 D. R.Bruckner, and Heller, against (NLew 1984), soilr, York, pp. Chwast, Stev?en A-rt 76. Itar

PAGES

126-145

ig.
tuso

Otto

Pankok,
(Milan,
the
1963),
Future

Die
pl.

Passion
6. For
a

(GiUtersloh, ful discussion

1970);

and

Mario

De

Micheli,
iconography,
Remem-

Gutse

of

this

Ziva

Amishai-Maisels, Interpretation:
The
2,

"Christological
(Oxford,
198 ),

Symbolism
vol.
2,

of
p.

type the

of Holocaust,"
and

see he this with (note3), compare landscape those didin Peyra-Cava, Meyer no.577. (note and (note and 37.Dubnov 27),vol.5,P.868; Meyer 3),P.381 nos.575of 78.Thecontext thisdrawing clarified is somewhat anundated in sketch in of or where the which Crucifixion the through door window a room appears of Riders theApocalypse ominously are while people fighting, theFour hover overhead (Meyer 3],p. 432). [note
of

beringfor
and
in
20.

1657-71;
on

idem,
Arts

Depiction
(Oxford,

Influence
3.

of
here
and

the

Holocaust

the

Visual

pres ),
For

pt.
the

chap.

theology
and

involved
Jews,
se

the

differences
"The

in

approach
Jesus,"

between

Christians
Jewish
21.

Ziva
92-93,

Amishai-Maisels,
95.

Jewish

journal

Art

9 (1982),

p.

La and Schwartz, Rihabilitation (note 38.Crespelle 1),pp.207-08; Simon de n.d.), (Limoges, p. I8I. juiv.e jsus racontj lefuiferrant (Paris, 1933), 299. par 39.Edmund p. Fleg,]Jsus in at in and was sketched 1923/24 painted 1933, Falling 40. The Angel first to The state and which itwas time exhibited photographed. current dates 1947, Der andin it Chagall several added (Franz figures Marc Chagall, Meyer, Engelssturz [Stuttgart, 1964]). und Hans-Martin (note3),no.613; Rotermund, Chagall die 41.Meyer Marc Bibel 1974), 24. (Lahr, p. andKarl Otto Zimmermann, Pankok (Berlin, 1972),pp.47-51; 42. Rainer Kunst in Karlsruhe, "Antifaschistische in Deutschland," Hofmann, Ludwig Statt Badischer Kunst-verein, (Berlin, p. 1980), 67. Widerstand Anpassung S.J., -Attitudes nouvelles Bonsirven, LesJuifs (Paris, 1937), 43.Joseph etJdsus 199, 170-72, 203-04. pp. exh. no. of 44.Tokyo, Museum Art, Seibu Chagall, cat.(I98i), 7. Marc

Ibid.,
Moses

p.

93-96.
Jacob

2.

Ezekiel,
1975),

Memoirs
Pp-

from
21-23. Themes
For

the
Ezekiel's

Baths
Art

of Diocletian,
reasons

ed.

Joseph
this
in Vision:

Gutmann

(Detroit,
se

for
Jacob

making
Ezekiel,"

relief,

Gutmann,
National

"Jewish
Museum

in

the

of

Moses

Philadelphia,

of
the Classical

American

Jewish
Tradition,
exh.

Histor,
cat.

Ezekiel's (1985),
p.

Moses]acob
23.
24.

Ezekiel

and

27-3)4.

Amishai-Maisels
Marc

(note
My Mark Matveyevitch

20),

p.

gI,
York,

96-io0.
1960),

Chagall,

Life

(New

p.

7,

79-8c;
19o5).
se

and

Vladimir

Stasov,
25.

ed.,
For
a

Antokolsky journal's Revival: Revolution:

exh.
cat.

(St.
on

Petersburg, Chagall,
Peripherv?" Renaissance

discussion
and Tradition the

of Jewish
and

the

influence
Center
Thejewish
or

Amishai-Maisels,
in in

"Chagall

Jerusalem,
Russian
Avant-

Israel

Museum,
Garde
26.
Art

1912-1928,

(1987),
The
in

p.

73,

78,
of
that
was

80-84,
this
he

92-96.
sketch had
not

Meyer
told that
p. 740) nonchalant

(note
Meyer, is before
because

3),

p.

172-75.

dating
1950s,

is

problematic.
the sketch the
was

Chagall Russia,

probably

the

done
to

in

i9r0.
there

Meyer,
is
no

however,
date
may writ en

careful
on

date who

sketch
notori-

see and a of works, Amishai-Maisels 20), (note 45.For discussion these related pp.85-86, 9c-9i, o101-02. Poemes (Geneva, p. 81. 46.Marc 1975), Chagall, with "Art Interview Marc 47.James Johnson Chronicle--I--An mine. Review (Winter PartisanSweene; 1944), 91,emphasis Chagall," p. ii no. (Paris, Christ, (note 48.Yvan dessins I953), 56;andRotermund Chagall it and called Rotermund thesketch Inferno dated to about 1943 4I),p. 133. similar sketch Christ's is clearly in book fornoclear the whereas very reason, see For of dated beside Chagall's signature. depictionsdeportations,Janet 1941 no.40;and and Art Blatter Svbil (New Milton, of theHolocaust York, I98I), and (note Amishai-Maisels, Depiction Interpretation i9),pt. 1,chap. 3. (note 49.Venturi 9),no.45. (note 5o.Meyer 3),no.696. his under had been Cassou (noteI), p. 249.TheINRI originally painted 5I. name.

(ibid.,

it.

Chagall,
it
to

ously
because
Since

about
remembered

dating,
that the
work
into
account

have

assigned
was

the

Russian in

period
Russia.

he
the

subject
in

inspired
and
in
es ay.

style

fits
is

both
taken

his

Russia
in

Paris

by pogroms between

ig,8
Simon
769.
p. 142.

and

1912,

each
27.

possibility
Encyclopedia

the
4,

judaica
rev.

(note
ed., vol.

12),
5 (New

vol.

p.

399-400;
1973),
p.

and

Dubnov;

History
28.
29.

ofthe~ews,
For

York,
se

716-47,
2),

the
Centre

types

of

saints

involved,

Talbot-Rice
Marc

(note
(note
for
to

Paris,
These
where

Georges
are

Pompidou,
particularly
shawl with
vestments

Chagall
the
appears

4),
these

p.

74.

30.
35),

details
the

clear

in

sketch

figures
from
the

(ibid.,

no.

slim
church

fringes
often
16 .

develop
in icons.

unfringed
for

stole

of

Russian

visible

Se ,

example,

Talbot-Rice
3P.

(note
the
of
its
context

2),

p.
in
se

142,

For

which

this

work

was

done

and

more

detailed

descripFor

tion

imagery,
of Chagall's
it,
5 (1978),
se

Amishai-Maisels

(note
in

20),
his

p.
at

io0-10c.
this
time In-Jokes,"

other

examples
reasons

behind
Art

symbolism Amishai-Maisels,
P.

hidden

paintings
Jewish

and

the

"Chagall's

journal

of

jewish

76-93. of
the personal

32.

For

one

possible

interpretation

meaning

involved

here,

se

after and (note (note 52.Meyer 3),no.689; Chagall 46),pp.66, 17,corrected The in theYiddish original DieGoldene 6c (1967), 95,10o2. imagery Keit pp. Yiddish on used poemis based UriZviGreenberg's Chagall in his second I written up 1920: morningamnailed anew "Golgotha," around "Every poem ontheburning cross" ZviGreenberg, red Werk, (Uri Gezamelte vol.I [Jerusalem,1979], p. 3o5). See, for example, Paris,Museedu Louvre, Message Le biblique Marc de 53. Marc Chagallat the Chagall,exh. cat. (1967);and Ziva Amishai-Maisels, Knesset (NewEork,I973).

Abraham "Marc Painter," Reconstructionist 16 Kampf, Chagall--Jewish Th~e pp. aan.12, 1951), I0-I3Zurich, Kunsthaus,]amesexh. (1983), 145-47Ensor, cat. 33. PPthe in in see 34.For pogrom Vitebsk October and deportations, I904 the Dubnov 27), 5, 728, For asa from (note vol. pp. 768. Chagall's sufferings boy? seeRoy Mullen, World Chlagall The ofltarcr anti-Semitism, Mc (London, I968), seeChagall 24), 8377, For (note p. pp. I42. hisimprisonment, Le du vol. Charbonnier, 35. Georges Monologue peintre, 2 (Paris, p.45. r960), and Marc exh. (I960), I4.To no. 36.Bern, Klipstein Kornfeld, Chagall, cat.

HINDMAN HEINLEN, Connoisseur's and "A Montage: FourEvangelists The Attributed GiulioClovio,' to pp. i54-x74. on see of Eminent I. ForVasari Clovio, Giorgio Vasari, Lives theMost Painters, Sculptors, Architects, and trans. B. Hinds, 4 (London, A. vol. 1927), 244-49. pp. FOR 145-161 NOTES PAGES I8I