Anatomical Analysis of Holbein’s Dead Christ in the Tomb and Corresponding Theological Commentary

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This impressive article is excellently written, well-argued and consistent in its conclusions. I am not in a position to evaluate its contribution to scholarship since I am not knowledgeable about the discourse about similar art projects, but the article convinced me of the authors' medical and theological scholarship and expertise.  

Author Response

This impressive article is excellently written, well-argued and consistent in its conclusions. I am not in a position to evaluate its contribution to scholarship since I am not knowledgeable about the discourse about similar art projects, but the article convinced me of the authors' medical and theological scholarship and expertise. 

We thank the reviewer #1 for their time and effort in evaluating the manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

The article presents an intriguing approach to the interpretation of Holbein's painting, combining anatomical analysis, theology, and philosophy to challenge established assumptions about the painting and offer a balanced conclusion.

In particular, the authors conclude that the anatomical analysis reflects key elements of the hermeneutics of Gospel reports of Christ's passion and death. This statement implies that the findings of the analysis support the understanding of the biblical accounts of Christ's suffering and demise.

As convincing the theological and anatomical approach is, the main flaw of the study is the lack of integration of Holbein's work into the larger context of his own work and into the landscape of anatomically oriented artists of the European and Northern European Renaissance. The balance between anatomical knowledge and the intent to represent aesthetic, theological, or philosophical ideas is present both in the works of artists who are known to have participated in anatomical dissections and those who have not. Two paragraphs devoted to these comparative aspects would raise this otherwise very well-written aticle to the level of perfection.

Author Response

The article presents an intriguing approach to the interpretation of Holbein's painting, combining anatomical analysis, theology, and philosophy to challenge established assumptions about the painting and offer a balanced conclusion.

In particular, the authors conclude that the anatomical analysis reflects key elements of the hermeneutics of Gospel reports of Christ's passion and death. This statement implies that the findings of the analysis support the understanding of the biblical accounts of Christ's suffering and demise.

As convincing the theological and anatomical approach is, the main flaw of the study is the lack of integration of Holbein's work into the larger context of his own work and into the landscape of anatomically oriented artists of the European and Northern European Renaissance. The balance between anatomical knowledge and the intent to represent aesthetic, theological, or philosophical ideas is present both in the works of artists who are known to have participated in anatomical dissections and those who have not. Two paragraphs devoted to these comparative aspects would raise this otherwise very well-written aticle to the level of perfection.

As suggested by Reviewer #2, we added two paragraphs (section 1) about Holbein's anatomical knowledge in the context of European culture during his time and included similar artworks from the Northern and Italian Renaissance.

Reviewer 3 Report

Hello, dear colleagues!

Thank you for the opportunity to review your work, which is multidisciplinary and interesting from various angles.

First of all, it is necessary to add a null hypothesis and, I think, it will be useful to form a graphical abstract.

Separately according to the images. It is good that you refer to the authors of the paintings, but captions are also important, taking into account the logic of your research.

Regarding your emphasis towards the Adam's apple, I want to draw attention to image 2. In it we see the dominance of the right shoulder over the neck and a slight turn of the head. If we look anatomically at the proportions, we will see a shortening of the neck and a shift in landmarks. Therefore, I would talk about the features of the artistic image, but not about the detailing of the anatomy.

In this regard, you need, in my opinion, a small descriptive block on normal anatomy to validate image comparison

In general, your work examines all parts of the body in great detail and I have no other comments.

Author Response

Hello, dear colleagues!

Thank you for the opportunity to review your work, which is multidisciplinary and interesting from various angles.

First of all, it is necessary to add a null hypothesis and, I think, it will be useful to form a graphical abstract.

Separately according to the images. It is good that you refer to the authors of the paintings, but captions are also important, taking into account the logic of your research.

Regarding your emphasis towards the Adam's apple, I want to draw attention to image 2. In it we see the dominance of the right shoulder over the neck and a slight turn of the head. If we look anatomically at the proportions, we will see a shortening of the neck and a shift in landmarks. Therefore, I would talk about the features of the artistic image, but not about the detailing of the anatomy.

In this regard, you need, in my opinion, a small descriptive block on normal anatomy to validate image comparison.

In general, your work examines all parts of the body in great detail and I have no other comments.

We thank the reviewer #3 for their time and effort in evaluating the manuscript. Prompted by the comments of the reviewer, we have further expanded on this topic in a new separate section , the normal anatomy of larynx (in the context of the analysis of the absence of the Adam's apple)  in order to confirm the initial description (Section 2.1). As recommended by the third reviewer, we have created a graphical abstract and precise captions to all images in the text.