Wings of Power: An Art-Critical Analysis of the Eagle Motif from Antiquity to the Present

In the long history of visual culture, there is hardly a motif that exhibits such a persistent yet ambivalent presence as the eagle . As the "king of the skies," this bird of prey occupies a semantic interface where divine sovereignty, state authority, and the often painful deconstruction of human claims to power intersect.

The art historical journey of this symbol begins in the archaic cultures of antiquity, traverses the sacred spaces of the Middle Ages , transforms into a heraldic tool of nationalism, and undergoes a radical revision in contemporary art, leading to a complete inversion of its meaning.

From the perspective of art criticism, the depiction of birds of prey reveals far more than a zoological interest; it is a continuous documentation of societal power structures, their religious glorification and their eventual collapse in the age of postmodernism.

The archaic vision: Formation and iconography in antiquity

The roots of eagle symbolism reach deep into the religious and political structures of early civilizations. Already in early Greek art, particularly from the late 8th century BC onwards, the eagle established itself as an indispensable component of iconography. It served not merely as a decorative element, but as an attribute, symbol, or even personification of the supreme deities and rulers.

In the early cultures of Egypt and Mesopotamia, we already find precursors of this heroic representation: The falcon-headed Horus or the lion-headed eagle Anzu represent a divine sphere that is beyond human reach.

Iconographic conventions and the interchangeability of views

A crucial aspect of early depictions of birds of prey is the development of established pictorial conventions. In the Archaic period, roughly in the 7th and 6th centuries BC, artists developed a specific visual language to capture the essence of the bird. A characteristic feature is the so-called "alternating perspective" of the bird.

This involved combining incompatible perspectives – for example, a body in profile with symmetrically spread wings – to make the animal's essential features simultaneously and functionally complete. This "pre-perspective" technique aimed to manifest the power of the talons, the dynamism of the wings, and the vigilance of the eye as a unified, commanding presence.

While oriental models often favored a static, strictly symmetrical pose, Greek artists gave the figures greater dynamism through a horizontal head orientation and curved wings, suggesting the expression of a gliding flight movement.

epoch	Cultural circle	Primary symbolism	Formal characteristics
Early civilizations	Egypt	Divinity (Horus/Nekhbet)	Stylization, folded wings
Archaic	Greece	Attribute of Zeus, omen	Switching view, profile view
Classical/Hellenistic	Greece/Rome	Imperial power, apotheosis	Naturalism, monumental sculpture
Medieval Times	Europe	Evangelist John, Resurrection	Symbolic abstraction, book illumination
Modern era	Europe	Absolutism, nation-state	Heraldic severity, monumental architecture

Birds of prey appear in great numbers in vase painting of the Archaic period, particularly on Corinthian and Attic black-figure pottery. They often appear as companions of mounted warriors or as shield-bearing symbols, underscoring their role as symbols of strength and divine support. This meaning is further reinforced in the Homeric epics: at crucial moments, eagles or hawks appear in the sky as omens of the gods in warfare.

The eagle in myth: instrument of divine power

The mythological dimension of the eagle is inextricably linked to the stories of Prometheus and Ganymede . In the Prometheus myth, the eagle Aithon serves as the instrument of divine vengeance, tearing out the Titan's liver daily. Visual art has taken up this motif for centuries, with depictions often oscillating between the brutal destruction of the body (as in Laconian vase painting) and the heroic rescue by Heracles (in Attic art).

A well-known example of modern art is the painting “Dante and the Eagle” by Gustave Doré , which depicts a scene from 'The Divine Comedy' (Purgatorio) by Dante Alighieri.

In contrast, there is the Ganymede myth, in which Zeus himself transforms into an eagle to abduct the beautiful youth to Mount Olympus. Artists such as Correggio and Giovanni Battista Palumba have depicted this scene. Here, the eagle appears not only as a predator but also as a manifestation of an overwhelming, transcendent power that elevates the earthly realm to the divine sphere.

The Sacralization of the Bird: Christian Iconography and Spiritual Dimension

With the spread of Christianity, ancient symbolism was not discarded, but rather subjected to a profound theological transformation. The eagle became one of the most multifaceted symbols of Christian art, primarily originating from two sources: pagan antiquity and biblical tradition.

The eagle as the symbol of the Evangelist John

In Christian iconography, the eagle's most significant role is as a symbol for the Evangelist John. This association is based on the visions of the prophet Ezekiel and the Book of Revelation, in which four creatures appear at the throne of God: a man (angel), a lion, an ox, and an eagle.

While the other three symbols emphasize different aspects of Jesus' life, the eagle is associated with John. His Gospel begins with a soaring prologue that focuses on the spiritual depth and divine nature of Christ. Here, the eagle symbolizes the ability to rise above earthly concerns and behold the light of divine truth. This parallels the ancient belief that the eagle is the only creature capable of looking directly at the sun unharmed.

Liturgical function and symbolic renewal

In ecclesiastical art and architecture, the symbolism of the eagle is most physically manifested in the lectern. The placement of the Word of God on the wings of an eagle in the sanctuary symbolizes the elevation of Holy Scripture above all earthly matters and the divine inspiration of its authors.

Furthermore, in Christianity the eagle is considered a symbol of Christ's ascension and the renewal of human strength through the Holy Spirit, based on Psalm 103:5: "Your youth is renewed like the eagle's ." This connection of strength, renewal, and turning towards the light makes the eagle a central motif for contemplation and the believer's longing for God.

The eagle as an emblem of power: heraldry and political instrumentalization

From its religious context, it was only a small step to using the eagle as an instrument of state authority. The Roman tradition of the "Aquila ," the legionary eagle as the most important standard, formed the foundation for European heraldry and state iconography. The eagle became the epitome of power, strength, and immortality.

From the Holy Roman Empire to the Prussian eagle

In the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the eagle was considered a symbol of power from an early stage. From the 15th century onward, the double-headed eagle became established as the emblem of the emperor. This underscored his dual role as ruler of the empire and protector of the Church, as well as his claim to the succession of the Roman Caesars.

With the rise of nation-states in the 19th century, the eagle became increasingly nationalized. In Prussia, the single-headed eagle became the central symbol of identification. The Prussian motto "Suum cuique" (To each his own), the motto of the Order of the Black Eagle founded in 1701, underscores the claim to justice under the firm hand of the monarchy.

The transformation of the eagle in the 19th century was characterized by an increasing bureaucratic and military significance. As the king's importance diminished, the state's responsibilities grew, and the eagle on government buildings, monuments, and coins served as a visual unifying element of a strengthening national identity.

In the architecture of the Reichstag building, constructed between 1884 and 1894, this ambition manifested itself in monumental forms of the Italian High Renaissance. The eagle, clutching the imperial crown in its talons, stood enthroned as guardian of trade, science, and art.

The contamination of the symbol in National Socialism

A dark chapter in art history is the appropriation of the eagle by National Socialism. Here, the motif was imbued with racial theories and became a symbol of a destructive ideology. In the architecture and sculpture of the Nazi era, the eagle was often depicted as gaunt, aggressive, and monumental, usually in combination with the swastika.

After 1945, due to this systematic instrumentalization, the eagle was considered a "tainted" symbol with which artists had to critically examine its implications. The campaign against "degenerate art" also demonstrated how symbols of power were used to defame avant-garde modernism and suppress artistic freedom.

The democratic answer: Ludwig Gies and the “Fat Hen”

After the end of the Second World War, the young Federal Republic of Germany faced the task of finding new symbols for a democratic society. In 1953, the Cologne artist Ludwig Gies an eagle for the plenary hall of the Bundestag in Bonn. This eagle broke radically with the aggressive aesthetics of the past. It was plump, almost maternal in appearance, which soon earned it the less-than-majestic, but certainly affectionate, nickname "Fat Hen .

Gies created a form that exuded stability and tranquility, rather than dominance and violence. When the Bundestag moved to Berlin in 1999, the architect Sir Norman Foster wanted to make the eagle slimmer and more modern, but the members of parliament insisted on retaining the familiar form. Foster was only allowed to make minor changes to the back: this "reverse eagle" is slightly slimmer, has no talons, and—as a subtle detail—it smiles ever so slightly.

This shows how a once martial symbol can be transformed into an object of identification for a stable democracy through artistic intervention and parliamentary habituation.

feature	The heraldic/Prussian eagle	The Federal Eagle (Ludwig Gies)
Radiance	Aggressive, powerful, strict	Stable, calm, protective
Body shape	Lean, strong claws	Full-bodied, rounded ("Fat Hen")
Political message	Imperial ambition, authority	Parliamentary sovereignty, continuity
View direction	Mostly to the right (heraldic)	Fixed to the right, smiling (back view)

Radical deconstruction: Georg Baselitz and the inversion of the image

In contemporary art, the eagle underwent an even more profound reinterpretation. One of the most prominent artists who grappled with the eagle is Georg Baselitz . His decision, starting in 1969, to invert motifs was an act of liberation from the burden of interpreting the subject matter.

Painting as an autonomous act

For Baselitz, the eagle is a motif he uses to foreground painting itself. In works such as "Finger Painting II Eagle" (1972), the bird is stripped of its heraldic dignity through the rough, tactile manipulation with his fingers. Baselitz emphasizes that this reversal gives him the freedom to concentrate entirely on color and composition. Here, the eagle is no longer a national emblem, but an aesthetic object that loses its unambiguous meaning in the "maelstrom" of art.

This approach challenges the viewer's visual habits and prevents the motif from being easily instrumentalized. In his later works, often executed as "remixes" of his own classics, Baselitz depicts the eagle in delicate, almost fragile lines. This further softens its former symbolic power and reveals a form of nostalgia for the landscape of his youth in Saxony.

Anselm Kiefer: Lead, Melancholy and the Archaeology of History

While Baselitz formally deconstructs the eagle, Anselm Kiefer delves deep into the material and psychological layers of German history. For Kiefer, the eagle is not a fleeting image, but a "charged object" inextricably linked to collective trauma and individual memory.

Heroic symbols and the weight of lead

In his early works of the late 1960s, such as the series "Heroic Symbols ," Kiefer provocatively engaged with the symbols of National Socialism. He used the Hitler salute in his "occupations" to break the silence of the post-war generation and to visually expose hidden fascist tendencies. Joseph Beuys , Kiefer's mentor, defended these actions as professional artistic statements that, precisely through their "incorrect" execution, got to the heart of the matter.

A central element in Kiefer's work is the use of lead. For him, this "Saturnian" metal is the ideal medium to represent the weight of history. A leaden eagle, as often appears in Kiefer's sculptures or mixed-media works, is a paradox: a creature of the heavens bound to the earth by its own weight. In works such as "20 Years of Solitude" (1971–1991), Kiefer combines organic materials with lead and canvas to suggest a process of alchemical transformation, which, however, often remains in a state of melancholy.

The Painter's Wings

Kiefer also uses the eagle as a metaphor for the role of the artist. The "winged palette," a recurring motif, suggests art's transcendent, almost divine ability to transform reality. Yet this ambition is always at risk: like Icarus, the artist risks flying too close to the sun and plummeting to his death. In his work "Interior" (1982), Kiefer places the palette in a monumental space reminiscent of Nazi architecture and dedicates it to the "unknown painter"—a reflection on whether the artist is a hero, a victim, or a follower of history.

Marcel Broodthaers: The museum as a place of exposure

Marcel Broodthaers chose a fundamentally different path of deconstruction . With his “Musée d'Art Moderne, Département des Aigles” (1968-1972), he created a fictional institution that critically questioned the mechanisms of the art world and the overdetermination of symbols.

The arbitrariness of the symbol

Broodthaers assembled an immense number of objects depicting the eagle—from ancient works of art to contemporary everyday items such as wine bottles or cigar boxes. By ironically elevating these objects within a museum context, he demonstrated how the eagle functions as a "myth par excellence." His seemingly scientific categorization exposed the "pathetic terms" applied to the eagle in European cultural history.

By placing the sign "Ceci n'est pas une oeuvre d'art" (This is not a work of art) , he pointed to the arbitrariness of museum value creation. Broodthaers argued that the eagle as a symbol had become so overused that it could only serve as an "empty tool." His museum was a "refuge" in the falsehoods of the art world, an act of institutional critique that challenged the viewer to abandon the passive role of the consumer and question the construction of truth.

Hans Haacke: Participation and the Deconstruction of the National

In recent German art history, Hans Haacke's project "Der Bevölkerung" (2000) in the Berlin Reichstag marks a turning point in the engagement with state symbols. Haacke intervened directly in the architectural and symbolic structure of the parliament.

From the people to the population

The artwork consists of a wooden trough in the northern atrium, in which the words "DER BEPÖLKERUNG" (TO THE POPULATION) are displayed in imposing illuminated letters – a deliberate antithesis to the dedication "DEM DEUTSCHEN VOLKE" (TO THE GERMAN PEOPLE) on the west portal. Haacke called upon all members of parliament to contribute soil from their constituencies, in which wild, uncontrolled vegetation would then develop.

This act of participation deconstructs the heroic image of the imperial eagle by focusing on the real, diverse population and the process of democratic growth. Haacke countered the criticism that this was a "blood and soil ideology" in new guise by emphasizing inclusivity: what counts is not origin, but presence in the country. The work is thus a "living monument" that uses the building's eagle context to question the boundaries of national identity in the 21st century.

Postcolonial Perspectives: The Eagle as a Symbol of Resistance

Beyond the European context, the eagle motif is increasingly used in contemporary art to challenge colonial power structures. The eagle plays a particularly central role in the art of Indigenous peoples in Canada and the USA, though this differs radically from Western iconography.

Kent Monkman and the Reversal of the Gaze

, Cree artist Kent Monkman uses his gender-fluid persona "Miss Chief Eagle Testickle" to deconstruct 19th-century myths. In his works, the eagle headdress and the symbolism of the eagle are not used as exotic attributes, but as symbols of sovereignty and survival against colonial oppression. Monkman reverses the "colonial gaze," making Indigenous perspectives the central axis of art history.

Artists like Robert Houle and Nelda Schrupp use traditional materials such as eagle feathers or horsehair to address the effects of colonization while simultaneously asserting the continuity of indigenous identity. Here, the eagle becomes a symbol of "survival"—a blend of survival and resistance—that defies Eurocentric appropriation.

The eagle in nature and the ecological transition

The latest exhibition formats of 2024 and 2025 reveal a return to the "nature" of the bird of prey, albeit under the auspices of the Anthropocene. In projects such as "Once We Were Trees, Now We Are Birds" at the ifa Gallery in Berlin, the bird becomes a metaphor for migration, flight, and the longing for freedom in a fragmented world.

Artists today often view birds of prey as indicators of ecological change. The exhibition "ANIMAL LIFE" (2025) at MEMU Essing reflects on the relationship between humans and animals across millennia. Here, the depiction of the eagle appears less as a power-political emblem and more as part of a fragile biological cycle. The fascination with the bird's anatomy—its rapid wingbeat or its sharp vision—is used to establish a deeper connection to the "world soul" or the breath of the world.

The theoretical perspective: Bazon Brock and the triumph of culturalism

A significant theoretical discourse on eagle symbolism can be derived from the writings of Bazon Brock . Brock warns against a "culturalism" that misuses art as a mere illustration of social or national identities. He argues that modernity must always attempt to view the "old" through the eyes of the "new" in order to enable continuity through change.

With regard to symbols like the eagle, this means that any form of "rigid stance" or affirmative use of heroic symbols must now be critically examined as "cabaret-style rationality" or even as a neo-fascist tendency. For Brock, art is an "aesthetics of omission" that resists simple identification. In this sense, the eagle can only be "true" art if it loses its function as an identity-forming symbol and becomes the object of a radical critique of knowledge.

The fate of an immortal motif

The analysis of the use of the eagle motif in the visual arts reveals a fascinating paradox:

The more a symbol is imbued with historical significance, the more necessary its artistic deconstruction or inversion becomes. From the ancient "mutualistic" representation, which strove for total comprehension, to Baselitz's "inversion," which leads to the total liberation of the gaze, the eagle has passed through all stages of humanity's desire for representation

In contemporary art, the eagle now functions as a kind of "seismograph" for social tensions. Whether as a leaden witness in Anselm Kiefer's work, as a deconstructed object in Marcel Broodthaers's, or as an ecological corrective in the latest exhibitions – the bird of prey remains an indispensable tool. It helps us reflect on power, history, and our relationship with nature. The "Fat Hen" in the Bundestag serves as a cautionary example that symbols of power in a democracy must above all be one thing: human and capable of smiling.

The eagle will continue to spread its wings in art. But its flight path will be determined less by heraldic rules than by the individual freedoms of artists and the necessary discourses of a globalized society. It has transformed from the "king of the skies" to the "wanderer between worlds"—a motif that compels us to constantly redefine what we understand by sublimity, authority, and freedom.