Hermitage Reports 66

To Mark the Centenary of the Birth of Boris Piotrovsky
REPORTS OF THE STATE HERMITAGE MUSEUM LXVI
Saint Petersburg The State Hermitage Publishers 2008
7 (047.5) 79.1
Published by the decision of the State Hermitage Editorial Board
ANASTASIA BUKINA CORINTHIAN ARYBALLOI IN THE STATE HERMITAGE MUSEUM
Editorial Committee: Mikhail Balan (secretary), Mariam Dandamaeva, Lidia Dobrovolskaya, Anna Geyko, Alla Kamchatova, Elena Khodza, Elena Korolkova, Tatiana Kustodieva, Andrey Nikolayev, Elena Petrukhina, Mikhail Piotrovsky, Alla Rodina, Nina Tarasova, Georgy Vilinbakhov (chairman), Tamara Zeymal and Elena Zviagintseva Translated from the Russian by Maria Artamonova, Alexandra Davydova, David Hicks, Yuri Kleiner, Natalia Magnes and Yuri Pamfilov Editor of the English version: Julia Redkina
Since 2008 the Reports of the State Hermitage are published in Russian and English.
Photography by Natalia Antonova, Leonard Kheifets, Yuri Molodkovets, Inessa Regentova, Konstantin Siniavsky, Svetlana Suetova, Andrey Terebenin and Vladimir Terebenin Photographic portrait of Boris Piotrovsky by Vladimir Terebenin
On the cover: Shield from Karmir-Blur. Bronze. 8th century B.C. The State Hermitage
In the collection of the State Hermitage Museum there are over a hundred and fifty Corinthian painted perfume flasks aryballoi (both complete vessels and fragments). The collection was formed during the 19th and 20th centuries. Some pieces come from private individuals and various institutions, a number of aryballoi and their fragments were found during excavations in the North Black Sea region*. One of the principal sources of this kind was the site of the earliest Greek settlements in the North-West Black Sea region situated in the island of Berezan, in the estuary of the rivers Dnieper (ancient Borysthenes) and Bug (ancient Hypanis). Many aryballoi were found at the site of the Milesian colony Olbia (near Berezan, on the right bank of the Dnieper and Bug estuary). Some flasks and fragments come from the sites of the Bosporan kingdom (the North-East Black Sea region, ancient Cimmerian Bosporus) Pantikapaion (modern Kerch), Nymphaion (to the south-west of Kerch) and different settlements on the Taman peninsula. At present, only one third of these materials was published by Leo Stephani (Stephani 1869), Boris Pharmakovsky (Pharmakovsky 1904), and Oscar Waldhauer (Waldhauer 1914). The aryballoi acquired by the Imperial Archaeological Commission were also mentioned in the reports and newsletters of this institution. From these sources some aryballoi belonging to the Hermitage Museum became known to Hamfry Payne (Payne NC: 321, no. 1264A; 322, no. 1294). A number of pieces were
* The author is deeply indebted to the curators of the Department of Classical Antiquity Dr. Sergey Solovyov, Nina Kunina (), Olga Sokolova, Julia Ilyina, and Elena Vlasova, who kindly allowed access to the objects in their care.
ISBN 978-5-93572-305-7
@ State Hermitage, 2008
studied and published by Dr. Sophia Boriskovskaya (see below) and by Varvara Skudnova (Skudnova 1987). Many attributions made by Boriskovskaya were confirmed by Darrel A. Amyx (Amyx CorVP). Other pieces were studied and attributed by Amyx himself as well as by Cornelius Neeft (Neeft PSA) and Axel Seeberg (Seeberg CKV). The longstanding studies of Corinthian aryballoi may be summarized in some sort of the methodological compendium. Modern researchers believe that there were several specialists of aryballoi (and related alabastra) among the vase-painters in the Kerameikos of orinth during each period of the history of the Corinthian vasepainting (Amyx CorVP; Neeft Addenda); for the problems of chronology of the Corinthian vase-painting see Harrison 1996. The attribution of the piece to an individual painter is a result of the analysis of few standard decorative elements (often, even a single figure) which find room on the surface of a small perfume flask like aryballos. For this reason, there are lists of aryballoi decorated with specific figures (e.g., a lion or a goat) that are ascribed to many different artists; to establish the relation between the lion-aryballoi and the goat-aryballoi (and the common authorship as a result) the researcher needs to find a vase decorated with both specific animal depictions (see Neeft Addenda: 22). With more publications on the subject, the system of painters and groups changes and the main criteria for attribution remain the coincidence of standard repetitive elements (figures, compositions, secondary patterns, filler ornaments) as well as of the decorative syntax at large. For stylistic study of an aryballos made during Protocorinthian period (c. 725/720 c. 620/615 B.C.) both
5
Ill.1. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1130
the systems of J. Benson (Benson ECW) and of Cornelius Neeft (Neeft PSA) are of actual importance. One piece in the State Hermitage Museum collection belongs to the early stage of Protocorinthian period (inv. no. . 1130; from the Laval collection; h. 7.5 cm; see Boriskovskaya 1968; ill. 1)*. It is a globular aryballos (Neeft PSA: 33, 35). The layout of its patterns (the main ornament on the shoulder, encircling lines covering the rest of the body, except one row of sigmas under the handle) indicates the relation between this aryballos and the flasks collected by Benson in his List , Naples Sigmatoid Group (Benson ECW: 23; cat. no. 2 is close) or by Neeft in his List XIX: PICU, Subgroup E (Neeft PSA: 5051; cat. nos. 2, 5, 9 are close). Benson dated his grouping to the late 8th early 7th century B.C. (Benson ECW: 22, 3637). Neeft considers the globular aryballoi of such proportions to be among the earlier pieces (c. 715 c. 700 B.C.) (Neeft PSA: 48, 380), but the flasks with most closely related painting may be dated according to his system c. 700 c. 685 B.C. (ibid: 308, 379).
* Only the latest publications are mentioned; for other bibliography as well as inventory data for the published pieces, see the previous publications.
Another aryballos (inv. no. . 1129; from the Laval collection; h. 6.3 cm; see Amyx CorVP: 301, 5bis; ill. 2) is of different shape (a still globular aryballos) (Neeft PSA: 33). The piece is decorated in a much finer manner than the previous one. The painting illustrates one important artistic tendency of the time the rise of the Orientalizing style and its primary influence upon the Geometric style. This phenomenon is evident from the new appearance of the aryballos: the painting includes much more sophisticated motives, the main decoration is located on the belly of the flask instead of its shoulder (ibid: 66). Motives on the belly of the Hermitage aryballos (fish figures, vertical braid patterns) provide analogues to the decorative elements of the vessels collected by Neeft in his Bird-Plant Group (cf. ibid: list XXVII, fig. 15a: -1, -3). The syntax of the painting and the character of the upper body decoration are related to the later aryballoi of Neefts Circle type. All this allows to suggest the date corresponding with the common chronological frames of these two groups (690s early 670s B.C.); for chronology, see ibid: 380. Other Protocorinthian pieces in the Hermitage collection are a conical aryballos (inv. no. . 3390; SanktPeterburg i antinost 1993: no. 76), an ovoid aryballos dated to the Middle Protocorinthian period (inv. no. . 4129; see Boriskovskaya 1973; Neeft PSA: 166, D-2; 335), and the owl-shaped flask. Five pointed aryballoi are typically Late Protocorinthian (for type, see Neeft PSA: 89); these vessels are decorated with a scale-pattern in black-polychrome or with painted bands and figures of running hounds. A round aryballos (inv. no. . 9047; from the collection of I. Tolstoy; h. 5.5 cm; ill. 3), also very typical, was produced already in the Early Corinthian period (c. 620/615 c. 590 B.C.) The vessel has a globular body and a flat rim almost like a disk. It is common for the Corinthian aryballoi from the late 7th to the early 5th century B.C. (Payne NC: 287ff ). The decoration consists of a single swan figure and few rosettes on the body. The fine appearance and the shape of this flask (Payne NC: Shape B1] indicate the Early Corinthian piece, although the aryballoi decorated in this simple manner were still produced during the Middle Corinthian period (c. 590 c. 570 B.C.) (cf. CVA Erlangen 1: pl. 24, 710, 25, 45; CVA Karlsruhe 1: pl. 39, 5; CVA Kassel 1: pl. 9, 7; CVA Nantes: pl. 2, 34). Some other pieces painted in a more individualistic manner can be attributed to certain painters and stylistic groups identified by modern specialists.
6
One of the earliest aryballoi of this kind in the Hermitage collection is the piece ascribed to the Potnia Painter (inv. no. . 2475; see Amyx CorVP: 84, AP1; cf. CVA New York, Hoppin and Gallatin collections 3: pl. 1, 5). Works belonging to the important Lion Group are also present in the Hermitage collection. One flask bears the depiction of the flying eagle with a snake in its beak (inv. no. . 2483; acquired from Bogolyubova; h. 8.8 cm; cf. CVA Gela 1: pl. 35, 47; Amyx CorVP: 122, 1214; ill. 4). The shape and the decoration of this piece are fairly typical of the style of the Group (Amyx CorVP: 118): the body is very globular (Payne NC: Shape B2), the painting on the body has no bounding line (usually the composition consists of a single figure), there is almost no filler ornament, the area under the handle is blank; standard ornamentation of the secondary parts is also present (in this case, narrow petals on the rim and on the shoulder as well as the line of dots around the rim border). Another aryballos of the similar style is decorated with the figure of a horseman (inv. no. . 4130; from the Museum of the former Baron Stieglitz School of Technical Design; h. 6.3 cm; see Poltcarstva za konja 2007: no. 115; ill. 5); there is also a whirl framed by double line on the bottom another standard element of the Lion Groups repertory. There is a number of analogous vessels with horsemen (cf. CVA Louvre 8: pl. 19, 1619 = Neeft Addenda: 38, nos. A-6, A-7; CVA Kiel 2: pl. 27, 912) ascribed, at present, to the Sonderliste Painter, one of the members of the Lion Group (Neeft Addenda: 38). Also definitely related to the Lion Group is one fragment found at the settlement of Nymphaion (inv. no. -49.71; c. 2.5 4.0 cm; see Boriskovskaya 1967: 426 errata: not by the Warrior Group). The closest analogue to this piece is provided by the better preserved lower body of one aryballos from Corinth: it bears the equal whirl and the lower part of heraldic group of two birds flanking a snake (Amyx and Lawrence 1996: pl. 20, 74). From the archaeological context of the Corinthian fragment it may be dated to the Middle Corinthian period; so both pieces may be considered the latest specimens of the Lion Groups production. The Hermitage collection includes also some pieces produced by the Warrior Group of painters that was active during the same period as the Lion Group. One aryballos is ascribed to the Duel Painter who was the leading artist of this grouping (Boriskovskaya 1965). His fine manner of drawing and his own discoveries in the field of composition remained influential for the Corinthian vase-painting up to the late Middle Corinthian
7
(Amyx CorVP: 9597, 309, 338; Neeft Addenda: 35). Another flask in the Museum collection demonstrates a close style of painting (inv. no. . 1907; from the collection of A. Bludov; h. 6.1 cm; see Poltcarstva za konja 2007: no. 116); it is ascribed to the Warrior Group (Boriskovskaya 1966b: 104) (ill. 6). The pieces of this kind were once regarded the works of the Duel Painter himself, but later these aryballoi were identified by Amyx as the nucleus of a new grouping, dubbed the Equine Constellation (Amyx CorVP: 97, list on pp. 9798; Neeft Addenda: 35). The aryballoi of this grouping are distinctive by friezes with horsemen (very close to the composition on the flask in the Hermitage Museum). Fine polychrome patterns on the rim and handleback are also peculiar and almost similar to the decoration of the Protocorinthian perfume flasks of the mid-7th century B.C.; this feature may indicate the earliest date in the Early Corinthian period (Boriskovskaya 1966b: 104). Some painter related to the Warrior Group could have decorated the aryballos found in the island of Berezan (fragment of the lower body, inv. no. . 86-24; 5.5 4.5 cm; (Domansky and Solovyev 1986: 22); (ill. 7). Judging by the tails, paws and legs on the lower part of the animal frieze, some felines and avians
(possibly sphinxes or sirens) were depicted; such compositions are very typical of the works of different painters of the Group of the Duel Painter (cf. CVA University of Missouri: pl. 3, 47). The works of the Panther-Bird Group painters are also represented in the Hermitage collection. These are one complete aryballos with the figure of the PantherBird (inv. no. . 1300; h. 12.5 cm; see Stephani 1869: 99; ill. 8) as well as several fragments typical for this grouping of the Early Corinthian period (Amyx CorVP: 9394, 308309, 338; Neeft Addenda: 34). One of the fragments comes from the excavations of the settlement in the island of Berezan (inv. no. . 90-19; h. pres. c. 6.0 cm, max. d. pres. c. 11.0 cm; from the earth-house dated to the 1st quarter of the 6th century B.C.: (Domansky and Solovyev 1990: 11); (ill. 9). It is the lower part of the vessels body decorated with large outstretched wings covering the entire surface which is common for the figures represented on the aryballoi of the Panther-Bird Group. The Hermitage possesses also two complete aryballoi decorated by the Padded dancers masters (Seeberg CKV; Amyx1988: 101118; Neeft Addenda: 3537). One vessel is ascribed to the De Young Painter (inv. no. . 2144; see Seeberg CKV: 50, U40 = Amyx CorVP: 112, B9). The other aryballos is considered a work of the Bok Painter (inv.no. . 2145; see Seeberg CKV: 59, no. 64a = Amyx CorVP: 105, no. 2, pl. 45,4). One more fragment from the island of Berezan may be regarded as a part of the aryballos painted by the Bestum Painter (inv. no. . 89-61; 2.9 3.4 cm; see Domansky and Solovyev 1990: 38; cf. CVA Gela 1: pl. 27, 13; Papuci-Wadyka 1989: no. 27; Sardis. 10: Cor120 (dated to the Middle Corinthian period); (ill. 10). The three painters were mediocre artisans; the Bestum Painter seems to have been active later than the other two (from the latest Early Corinthian to the Middle Corinthian period) (Amyx CorVP: 104 105; Neeft Addenda: 36). About the same date the plaster siren-vases were produced; the Hermitage collection includes one flask of this kind (inv. no. . 3056; unknown provenance; h. 9.6 cm; cf. CVA Heidelberg 1: pl. 6, 12; CVA Mainz 1: pl. 22, 79; CVA Kassel 1: pl. 10, 1011; ill. 11). Due to its shape and detailed painting, the piece should be placed in the earlier group of siren-vases with an ovoid body, wings indicated Later Early Corinthian/ Early Middle Corinthian (Biers 1999: 144). Three Early Corinthian black-polychrome aryballoi in the Hermitage Museum were acquired from different private collections (inv. no. . 4133; from the Museum
9
Ill.7. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 86-24
Ill.9 Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 90-19
Ill. 10. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 89-61
Ill.11. Corinthian siren-vase, inv.no. . 3056
of the former Baron Stieglitz School of Technical Design (earlier in the collection of A. Polovtsev; donation of Heinrich Schliemann); h. 5.5 cm; ill. 12). These so-called football aryballoi are distinctive for their very globular bodies divided with incised vertical lines into sections that are painted alternately red and white (possibly in imitation of leather vessels (Payne NC: 291). Vessel fragments of this type also emerged from the island of Berezan (inv. no. . 78-86: 3.2 4.4 cm; inv. no. . 78-88: two parts 1) 4.2 5.7 cm; 2) c. 4.0 4.3 cm; see Kopeykina 1978: 12). Later football aryballoi (flat-bottomed, dated the 2nd quarter of the 6th century B.C.) with a polychrome frieze in the central part of the body are also represented in the Museum collection (inv. no. . 7447; from the Leningrad Institute of Literature and Art; h. c. 11 cm; ill. 13). Apart from the flat-bottomed black-polychrome aryballoi acquired from different collections there are also some vessels of this kind found in the necropolis of Pantikapaion (inv. no. .1903.84; see Boriskovskaya 1967: 426) as well as in the island of Berezan (fragments; inv. no. . 72-81; inv. no. . 70-89; inv. no. . 73-131). The only specimen of the aryballos decorated in silhouette style (inv. no. . 9127; from the collection of I. Tolstoy; h. 6.2 cm; ill. 14) may be dated to the c. 590550 B.C. (cf. CVA Reading: pl. 3, 17). Typically of the style, there are no incisions and the filler ornament is reduced to the thick net of dots (so-called hailstone pattern)
10
Ill. 12. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 4133
11
Ill. 16. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 7952, with the drawing of female protome
(see Hopper 1949: 187190; Corinth, XV, 3: 226239), (also see Sardis. 10: 58). The aryballoi of linear style are of even simpler decoration (ornamented with lines and rows of dots, painted and added in red); these pieces should be attributed to the wider period from the Early Corinthian to the late Middle Corinthian (for example, inv. no. . 1277; from the collection of the Public Library, St. Petersburg; h. 6.3 cm; ill. 15). The fragment of an aryballos (only the rim with neck and handle preserved) found in the island of Berezan (inv. no. . 79-52; h. pres. 3.2 cm; cf. Corinth, XVIII, 1: pl. 26, no. 252; ill. 16) may also be regarded as the Middle Corinthian. The handleback was decorated with the outlined female protome (no incisions or added colours; forepart of the head and the ear and eye are outlined; a mass of hair falling on the back of the neck is solid in colour). The painters of the aryballoi with equal decorations of the handleback and with floral patterns on the body are considered, at present, the members of the Liebighause Group active in the Middle Corinthian period (see Amyx CorVP: 164165, 315, 342343; Neeft Addenda: 4950). Like the Greek Archaic painters and their Near Eastern colleagues, the artist of the Hermitage aryballos has rendered the female body in light colour (i.e. in outline), while the male figure would be dark (cf. the aryballos with a fine male protome, also Middle Corinthian, inv. no. . 9123; from the collection of I. Tolstoy; h. 6.5 cm; ill. 17). Among the Middle Corinthian aryballoi in the Hermitage Museum there are three vessels of special shape: the ring-aryballoi, decorated with figure friezes around the body and linear patterns on the flattened ring-sides. All these pieces were acquired from private collections. One flask bears the representation of a horseman and several shaded rosettes (the rest of the frieze is severely damaged) (inv. no. . 6734; formerly in the Marble Palace; h. 7.7 cm; ill. 18). The manner of painting, the figures outline and the character of incisions are very distinctive and close to the style of the Blaricum Painter, obviously the chief painter of ring-aryballoi (Neeft 1984: 133, nos. 90117, fig. 28). The core of the Corinthian aryballoi made during the 6th century B.C. consists of flasks decorated with peculiar patterns of lotuses and palmettes; these floral motives are close in style to the same patterns in Assyrian art. Two of every five aryballoi in the Hermitage collection are of this kind. One of the earliest pieces is the flask from the collection of Likhachev (inv. no. . 8683,
12
The miniature aryballos (with an odd figure of siren and filler ornament of few lines along the edges of the figure) may be regarded as the standard work by the Kalauria Painter (Boriskovskaya 1972: ill. 8; Amyx CorVP: 246, no. 26). The Empedocles Painter, who painted two aryballoi in the Museum collection (on the painter, see Amyx CorVP: 245246; Neeft Addenda: 72), also had his own peculiar manner. An aryballos from a private collection (inv. no. . 2393; gift of V. Golenishchev; h. 6.3 cm; ill. 21) is obviously decorated by this painter, as well
Ill. 18. Corinthian ring-aryballos, inv. no. . 6734, with the drawing of a horseman
transferred from the Academy of Sciences); another early fragment was found in the island of Berezan (inv. no. . 78-93; h. pres. 3.2 cm; ill. 19). Both pieces seem to be Early Corinthian (cf. CVA Heidelberg 1: pl. 12, 12; CVA Zrich 1: pl. 4, 1015). More numerous are the quatrefoil and the cinquefoil aryballoi, later, less carefully painted vessels (these pieces should be dated from the Middle Corinthian period to the early 5th century B.C.) (see CVA Gela 1: 23) for discussion and previously bibliography; see also: Skudnova 1987 for quatrefoil aryballoi from the necropolis of Olbia). There are also the Late Corinthian aryballoi (made after 570 B.C.) decorated with multifoil patterns; the Hermitage possesses the sixfoil aryballoi that come from the private collections as well as from the excavations in the island of Berezan and in the Taman peninsula (inv. no. . 5554; from the Society for the Encouragement of the Arts; h. 6.5 cm; ill. 20). Among the aryballoi dated to the Late Corinthian I (c. 570550 B.C.) there is a series of pieces decorated in a more individual style that may be associated with the known Corinthian painters.
13
as another piece found in the island of Berezan (fragment, inv. no. . 91-38; 3.6 3.1 cm). The two flasks bear identical bulls depictions with distinctive flexible rows of large blobs along the edges of the figures (cf. Amyx CorVP: pl. 108, 1; CVA Kiel 2: pl. 30, 13; CVA Japan 2: pl. 3, 910). The Painter of the Munich Siren, specialist of the large flat-bottomed aryballoi, is represented by three flasks (Boriskovskaya 1972: note. 23, ill. 7; Amyx CorVP: 240, 13, A16, 17). Another flat-bottomed aryballos is very close to these pieces, but smaller and of poorer quality of the potters work; the painting is also distinctive for the silhouettes and the three-figure (instead of typical two-figure) composition (inv. no. . 2141; from the collection of V. Bok; h. 8.3 cm; see Boriskovskaya 1972: note 23; Amyx CorVP: 241, E2; ill. 22). We consider this aryballos to be the work of some secondary painter of the period e.g., of the Painter of Goateed Sirens (cf. CVA Frankfurt am Main 1: pl. 17, 1 = Amyx CorVP: 241, A5). This painter was very close to the Painter of the Munich Siren, but rougher, and queer (Amyx CorVP: 241).
Ill.19. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 78-93
In any case, this aryballos is related to the large group of the Late Corinthian I flasks not yet attributed. The style of painting and the shape of these vessels have much in common with aryballoi listed by Amyx under the name of his Torino Painter. The list, however, is very extensive and still subject to extending (see Amyx CorVP: 243, A1, pl. 107, 3), (cf. Neeft Addenda: 72) this certainly is not one hand. There is half a dozen of aryballoi in the Museum collection, for the attribution of which the problem of distinguishing the styles of the Late Corinthian I is of actual importance. One piece of this group is the large flat-bottomed aryballos decorated with a floral complex flanked by two ducks (or swans) (inv. no. . 4629; from the collection of Levitsky; h. 16.0 cm; see Boriskovskaya 1967: pl. 7,2 = Amyx CorVP: 180, B5; ill. 23). Similar type of decoration of the flat-bottomed aryballoi (mostly with pairs of felines or sphinxes) seems to be used for the first time in the Middle Corinthian period by the painters of the Chimaera Group as well as by the Laurion Painter and the Borowsky Painter (see Amyx CorVP: 181183, B5B7; Neeft Addenda: 5253). The large rosettes of the filler ornament on the Hermitage flask resemble most of all the patterns on the aryballoi ascribed to the Otterlo Painter active during the Middle Corinthian period (cf. for this Hermitage aryballos: Amyx CorVP: 180) possibly late, careless work by the [Otterlo] Painter himself?; cf. also the patterns on the aryballoi in the Hermitage collection regarded as the undoubted works of the Otterlo Painter (inv. no. . 9226; from the collection of I. Tolstoy; h. 2.1 cm; see Boriskovskaya 1968b; Boriskovskaya 1973b; ill. 24). Similar patterns are peculiar to this painters followers that were active in the Late Corinthian I; the works of these later artists were also collected in the catalogue of the Torino Painter. The birds on the Hermitage aryballos also correspond to the avians characteristic of the paintings of the Torino Painter artists. Obviously, the Hermitage piece is a work of the painter who was active during the Late Corinthian I but followed the patterns of the Middle Corinthian and used ornamental elements typical for that period. Stylistic similarity may indicate the chronological closeness as well (i.e. the Hermitage flask may be dated to the early stage of the Late Corinthian I). Thus, the collection of Corinthian aryballoi in the State Hermitage Museum includes the specimens from all periods of the history of Archaic Corinthian vasepainting. The aryballoi constitute approximately a quarter
15
14
of the whole collection of fine Corinthian pottery in the Museum. The complete vessels originating mostly from private collections are of greatest importance. These pieces are the works of the leading painters and groups of the Protocorinthian, Early Corinthian and Middle Corinthian periods. Also noteworthy are fragments and complete vessels found or acquired at the archaeological sites in the North Black Sea region in view of their fixed historical background.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Amyx CorVP Amyx, Darrel A. Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period. Vols. 13. Berkeley, 1988. Amyx and Lawrence 1996 Amyx, Darrel A. and P. Lawrence. Studies in Archaic Corinthian Vase-Painting. Hesperia. Suppl. 28. Princeton, 1996. Benson ECW Benson J. L. Earlier Corinthian Workshops: a Study of Corinthian Geometric and Protocorinthian Stylistic Groups. (Allard Pierson Series Scripta Minora. Vol. 1.) Amsterdam, 1989. Biers 1999 Biers W. Plastic Sirens from Corinth, an Addendum to Amyx. Hesperia 68. 1999. Borisovskaya 1965 Boriskovskaya, Sophia. Le Maitre des duels corinthien. Bulletin du Muse Hongrois des beaux-arts 27. 1965: 712. Borisovskaya 1966a Boriskovskaya, Sophia. K voprosu o kulte Artemidy v arxaieskom Korinfe [On the Cult of Artemis in Archaic Corinth]. In: Kultura antinogo mira, Moscow, 1966: 3945. Borisovskaya 1966b Boriskovskaya, Sophia. Raspisnaja keramika arxaieskogo Korinfa, jego xudoestvennoje i istorieskoje znaenije [The Painted Pottery of Archaic Corinth. Its Artistic and Historical Significance]. PhD Thesis. Leningrad, 1966. Borisovskaya 1967 Boriskovskaya, Sophia. On Trade Connections between the Greek Cities of the Northern Black Sea Coast in the Archaic Period. Wissentschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universitt Rostok. 16. Jhrg. Gesselschafts- und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe. Heft 7/8. 1967: 425429. Boriskovskaya 1968a Boriskovskaya, Sophia. K voprosu ob orijentalizirujuem stile v iskusstve arxaieskogo Korinfa [On the Orientialising Style in Corinthian Archaic Art]. Vestnik drevnej istorii 3. Moscow, 1968: 105115. Boriskovskaya 1968b Boriskovskaya, Sophia. O nekotoryx proizvedenijax korinfskoj orijentalizirujuej vazopisi 6 veka do nashej ery [On Some Works of Corinthian Orientalizing Vase-Painting of the 6th Century
B.C.]. In: Antinaja istorija i kultura Sredizemnomorja i Priernomorja. Leningrad, 1968: 5661. Boriskovskaya 1972 Boriskovskaya, Sophia. Mastera i stilistieskije gruppy pozdnekorinfskix orientalizirujuix vaz [Painters and Stylistic Groups of the Late Corinthian Orientilizing Vase-Painting]. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa XIII. 1972: 105115. Boriskovskaya 1973a Boriskovskaya, Sophia. Dve korinfskije vazy v sobranii Ermitaa [Two Corinthian Vases in the State Hermitage Collection]. Soobenija Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa XXXVII. 1973: 3940. Boriskovskaya 1973b Boriskovskaya, Sophia. Korinfskij orientalizirujuij ariball pervoj etverti 6 veka do n. e. [A Corinthian Orientalizing Aryballos from the First Quarter of the 6th Century B.C.]. Soobenija Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa XXXVII. 1973: 4041. Corinth, XVIII,1 Pemberton E. G. Corinth. Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. XVIII, part 1: The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore: the Greek Pottery. Princeton (N.J.), 1989. Corinth, XV, 3 Stillwell A. N. and J. L. Benson. Corinth. Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. XV, part 3: The Potters Quarter: the Pottery. Princeton (N.J.), 1984. CVA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Domansky and Solovyev 1986 Domansky J. V. and S.L. Solovyev. Otjot o rabote Berezanskoj arxeologieskoj ekspedicii Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa v 1986 godu [Report of the Berezan Archaeological Expedition of the State Hermitage Museum, 1986]. Papers in the Scientific Archive of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science. 1986. Domansky and Solovyev 1990 Domansky J. V. and S.L. Solovyev. Otjot o rabote Berezanskoj arxeologieskoj ekspedicii Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa v 1990 godu [Report of the Berezan Archaeological Expedition of the State Hermitage Museum, 1990]. Papers in the Scientific Archive of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science. 1990. Harrison 1996 Harrison A. Chronological Method and the Study of Corinthian Pottery. Hephaistos 14. 1996: 193216. Hopper 1949 Hopper R. J. Addenda to Necrocorinthia. Annuals of the British School at Athens 44. 1949: 187190. Kopeykina 1978 Kopeykina L. V. Otjot o raskopkax Berezanskoj arxeologieskoj ekspedicii Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa v 1978 godu [Report of the Berezan Archaeological Expedition of the State Hermitage Museum, 1978]. Papers in the Scientific Archive of the Ukrainian National Academy of Science no. 1978/51. 1978.
LIMC Lexicon iconographicum mythologiae classicae. Zurich, Munchen, 19811999 Neeft 1984 Neeft, Cornelius W. The Dolphin Painter and His Workshop, a Corinthian Atelier Busy on Small Oil-Vases. In: C. W. Neeft. Studies in the Chronology of Corinthian Pottery. Amsterdam, 1984: 113170. Neeft PSA Neeft, Cornelius W. Protocorinthian Subgeometric Aryballoi. (Allard Pierson Series. Vol. 7.) Amsterdam, 1987. Neeft Addenda Neeft, Cornelius W. Addenda et Corrigenda to D. A. Amyx, Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period. (Allard Pierson Series Scripta Minora. Vol. 3.) Amsterdam, 1990. Papuci-Wadyka 1989 Papuci-Wadyka E. Corinthian and Italo-Corinthian Pottery from the Polish Collections. Warszawa, Krakw, 1989. Payne NC Payne, Hamfry . Necrocorinthia. Oxford, 1931. Pharmakovsky 1904 Pharmakovsky, Boris. Archologische Funde im Jahre 1903, Ruland. Archeologischer Anzeiger. 1904.
Polcarstva za konja 2007 Polcarstva za konja. Load v mirovoj kulture [A Kingdom for a Horse. The Horse in the World Culture]. Exhibition catalogue. St. Petersburg, 2007. Sankt-Peterburg i antinost 1993 Sankt-Peterburg i antinost [St. Petersburg and Antiquity]. Exhibition catalogue. St. Petersburg, 1993. Sardis. 10 Schaeffer J., N. Ramage and H. Greenewalt. Archaeological Exploration of Sardis. Vol. 10: The Corinthian, Attic, and Laconian Pottery from Sardis. Cambridge, London, 1997. Seeberg CKV Seeberg, Axel. Corinthian Komos Vases. University of London, Institute of Classical Studies: Bulletin. Suppl. 27. London, 1971. Skudnova 1987 Skudnova, Varvara. Arxaieskij necropol Olvii [Archaic Necropolis of Olbia]. Leningrad, 1987. Stephani 1869 Stephani, Leo. Die Vasensammlung der Kaiserlichen Eremitage. St. Petersburg, 1869. Waldhauer 1914 Waldhauer, Oscar. Imperatorskij Ermita. Kratkoje opisanije sobranija antinyx raspisnyx vaz [The Imperial Hermitage. Brief Description of the Collection of Antique Painted Vases]. St. Petersburg, 1914.
16
DMITRY ALEXINSKY ANTIQUE SPHEROCONICAL HELMETS IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION Helmets of spheroconical form are known to have been in use in the Mediterranean region since Classical Antiquity. In the Near East this form existed as early as the second half of the 3rd millennium B.C. (Gorelik 1993: 157). Yet in spite of their close contacts with Oriental peoples that led to a large number of historically attested military-technical borrowings (Herodotus I: 171), the Greeks were in no hurry to adopt spheroconical helmets. Apart from the early archaic period (8th 7th centuries B.C.), for which the existence of composite helmets with a conical crown, so-called Kegelhelme probably deriving from Oriental models, has been confirmed by archaeological finds, such helmets, though, no doubt, familiar to the Greeks*, were apparently not used by them up to the Hellenistic period. It was not until the 3rd 2nd centuries B.C. that helmets with a spheroconical crown became part of the Hellenistic arsenal, a development which some researchers fairly convincingly associate with the Celtic invasion of the Balkans in the first quarter of the 3rd century B.C. (Connolly 1981: 80; Dintsis 1986: 77)1. Spheroconical helmets did in fact appear in Greece after the intrusion of Celtic tribes, probably as a reaction to the Celtic practice of applying the effective hacking weapons (Vinogradov 2004: 128). On the other hand, this development may have been prompted by the Celtic tradition of arms and armour production that had a notable influence in the Balkans in general. The spread of spheroconical helmets might also be the result of the Hellenistic rulers extensive employment of Celtic mercenaries (Griffith 1975: 166, 173, 184; Bikerman 1985: 55; Szab 1991: 333336). Paul
1 Petros Dintsis, though, regards this form as developed on the basis of various influences, not excluding Oriental ones.
Couissin, for instance, unhesitatingly refers to the spheroconical helmets depicted on the Pergamon reliefs of the Attalids as the Celtic (Galatian) arms, though at the same time pointing to a Greek influence in their decoration (Couissin 1927: 46). However, except one depiction evidently showing an actual Celtic helmet (Jaeckel 1965: 101, pl. 23), the other helmets on the Pergamon reliefs should rather be defined as Greek or, in any case, East Mediterranean Hellenistic examples. Iconographic monuments representing Hellenistic helmets with a spheroconical crown are fairly numerous. First of all, they include triumphal reliefs from Asia Minor, burial reliefs from Aegeis2 as well as coins and gems3. Petros Dintsis holds the coins of the last Macedonian kings Philip V and Perseus to be the earliest pictorial sources of such helmets (Dintsis 1986: 78). Some of them are presented in his superb, albeit not very exhaustive catalogue (ibid: 233 254, cat. nos. 94152). All these artefacts, predominantly dated to the 2nd century B.C., reproduce spheroconical helmets provided with a cap and characterized by the design of a foreheadguard in the shape of a pediment formed by semi-cylindrical surfaces with volutes on the ends. Like Dintsis, we think it possible to regard the shape of the crown as the main indication of the type of helmet while the differ2 A number of tombstone reliefs cited by Petros Dintsis can be supplemented with a tombstone of the 2nd century B.C. from the Hermitage collection (inv. no. A. 477), which, in spite of a considerable loss in the upper part, most likely depicts a spheroconical helmet. 3 Among the gems, housed in the Hermitage, special mention should go to the intaglio under inv. no. .6109. Taking this opportunity I wish to express my sincere gratitude to E.I. Arsentyeva, the researcher of the Antiquity Department, who drew my attention to this artefact.
ences in the helmets bottom section and the variable decorative elements should be classed as individual peculiarities (ibid: 77). Some researches designate such helmets by the term konos []. This term meaning helmet is used in epigraphic documents dated to the time of the last Antigonids (the late 3rd first half of the 2nd century B.C.), among others, in the inventory of the Temple of Apollo at Delos (Homolle 1882: 130) and the so-called Amphipolis Regulations (Feyer 1935: 31). Following Heinz Khler (Khler 1948: 192), Henry Lumpkin (Lumpkin 1975: 195) identified it with the spheroconical helmets of Hellenistic iconography. Although this interpretation is not universally recognized,4 it seems correct while the term itself is undoubtedly authentic because it was in use at the same time as the helmet of the type in question. Since in one of its meanings konos implies a conical form (Frisk 1960: 62: Chantrain 1970: 606; Dintsis 1986: 57, notes 6, 7), it may by adopted as a technical term for helmets with a spheroconical crown (Feyel 1935: 37; Dintsis 1986: 77). A number of such helmets are known. Bronze Hellenistic konoses are housed in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (inv. no. 1971. 904) and the Museo Egizio, Turin (inv. no. 7173). An iron spheroconical helmet recovered from a Numidian royal grave at Es Souma is in the Muse Constantine, Algiers (Waurick 1979). A helmet from ctepe, Turkey (Mellink 1993: 117, pl. 15; Feuger 1994: 27) was published in 1933. Several konoses were found in Bulgaria: in Kasanlyk (Kasanlyk Museum, inv. no. 767) (Getov 1962), Merdane (Turnove) (Tsrov 1991: 97124; Dimitrov 20022003: 179187); Kulnovo (Shumen) (Atanasov 1995) and Zruncha (Pasardzhik) (Katincharova 2003: 7). Of the Bulgarian artefacts only the Kasanlyk helmet figures in the Dintsis catalogue whereas those from Russian collections are totally ignored. This despite the fact that quite a number of helmets of the type in question originate from the burial grounds dug out in Southern Russia and the North Caucasus; four of them are in the Hermitage.5 A. V. Simonenko mentions a konos from the Greki II burial ground (excavations 1981) (Simonenko 2001: 259, note 257, pl. 36) and one more helmet was found in 1985 in a grave near the stanitsa (Cossack
4 According to A. Snodgrass, for example, the helmets referred to as konos in inscriptions from Amphipolis and Delos (...) will be of either Thracian or, more probably, Boeotian type (Snodgrass 1899: 155). For more details, see: Dintsis 1986: 5758, note 8. 5 Im sincerely thankful to E.V. Vlasova, I.P. Zasetskaya, L. K. Galanina, E.F. Korolkova and A.Yu. Alexeyeva, curators and researchers of the Antiquity Department and Department of the Archaeology of Eastern Europe and Siberia, for the kindly provided opportunity to study these artefacts.
village) of Orekhovka, Petrovsky District, Stavropol Region (Pavlovich 1995: 200). V. R. Erlich names four similar helmets discovered in the Transkuban region: one each from the Sereginsky and Kurganinsky burial grounds and two from the Chetyk mound (Erlich 1991: 100107). Moreover, Yu. P. Zaitsev, contrary to an old reconstruction by Dombrovsky, reconstructs as a helmet with a spheroconical crown an artefact found in the mausoleum of Scythian Naples (Zaitsev 1994: 94100; Simonenko 2001: 261). Three Hermitage helmets (two from Merdzhany and one from Akhtanizovskaya stanitsa), along with fragments from the Buerova Moghila burial mound, that may hypothetically be related to the helmet of the type in question, are listed in a work by B. Z. Rabinovich (Rabinovich 1941, tables XXIVXXV, figs. 28a, b)6. One more piece which entered the Hermitage in 1962 from the Artillery Museum is mentioned by Simonenko, albeit among the helmets of another type (Simonenko 2001: 257, pl. 34, 1). The best-preserved helmet of the konos type is in the Hermitage Department of Antiquity (inv. no. A.31; 14179, ill. 1)7. In spite of some losses, we can nevertheless form a virtually exhaustive idea about the appearance and design of this artefact. It was found on 7 August 1900 within the so-called Akhtanizovskaya hoard8 and entered the Hermitage from the Archaeological Commission in 1906. In the Inventory of antiquities, attached to the Commissions memorandum, it appeared under no. 19.
6 The three Hermitage helmets are also mentioned in Gotz Wauricks article (Waurick 1988: 157, notes 36, 37; p. 158, pls. 1719). 7 In his work B.Z. Rabinovich gives the wrong number A. 3 (Rabinovich 1941: 160, note 3). 8 In actual fact, it was a tomb, found by chance by the Cossacks between Plevaka and Tsimbalka mountains in a yurta (tent) in stanitsa Akhtanizovskaya, the Department of Temriuk, and partly plundered by them. Early documents mention the Cossack Yakov Karpovich Lupikov as the finder of the tomb whereas in his reports to the Archaeological Commission of 12 December 1900 K.E. Dumberg names Yakovs son, Kasyan Lupikov (Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1900, inv. no. 194, p. 24) and 24 April 1901 (ibid: 95). The helmet already figures in the report of the ataman of Akhtanizovskaya dated 8.08.1900: 1)The iron cone-shaped casque with ear-pieces, broken into twelve fragments (ibid: 12 verso). Also with an incorrectly named material and an erroneous date of the discovery, the helmet is included in the Inventory of Artefacts found by the Cossack Yakov Lupikov in a yurta in stanitsa Akhtanizovskaja on 8 August 1900 (ibid: 28). The correct date is given in the aforesaid Dumbergs report (ibid: 12) and in a letter of 15 August sent by N.N. Veselovsky to the Archaeological Commission (ibid: 7). 9 Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1900, inv. no. 194, p. 99 (1.copper broken helmet); also Blue Inventory, 1906, C (suppl. to the Report to the Imperial Archaeological Commission, 12 January 1906, no. 64).
18
19
The helmet was first published by A. A. Spitsyn (Spitsyn mm in diameter. B. Z. Rabinovich held it to be a fragment 1909: 23, figs. 1, 2), but later M. I. Rostovtsev related the of the spire of the helmet analogous to the tall points of complex to Hellenistic burials in the Prikuban and Taman the helmets depicted on Pergamon reliefs that apparregions (Rostovtsev 1925: 555557). Gotz Waurick plac- ently represent autonomous parts inserted or laid from es the Akhtanizovskaya helmet in a series of other sphe- above (Rabinovich 1941: 164). If the Akhtanizovskaya roconical helmets of the Hellenistic period (Waurick 1988: helmet really had such a spire (probably used for fastening 137, note 37). the hair plume as shown on an Ephesus relief), the rodIn the second half of the 1930s the helmet was re- like stake itself most likely served as a frame whereupon stored10. Its overall height (without cheek-pieces and a the bush of the lost finial was mounted. cylindrical inset which juts out 4 mm over the edge) is c. Helmets of the type in question are distinguished by 260 mm in a vertical position. The height from the top to their characteristic forehead-guards shaped like a low the neck-piece edge is c. 240 mm and to the upper point pediment formed by relief semi-cylindrical surfaces or of the face-hole c. 220 mm. However, the edge of the cap, masses diverging from the top and ending in schematic which was jutting forward about 30 mm in its central part volutes on the sides. The volutes of the artefact from at an angle of c. 30o (with a rim bent downwards 4.5 mm Akhtanizovskaya jut out 3 mm over the crowns surface to provide rigidity), was practically level with the neck- on the overage, have beak-like configurations and vary piece. The cap skirted the helmet from the sides, ending in size: the right is 38 x 28 mm, the left is 4 mm shorter behind the ears where its rim smoothly passed into the and lower. U-like projections of the neck-piece. The inner diameters With the exception of the helmet from Zruncha, the of the base: 205 x 190/195 mm11; the length along the Akhtanizovskaya konos is the only one preserving both axis from the outer edge of the cap to the neck-piece edge cheek-pieces. Their original form has been noted by all is 253255 mm. The maximum width (with the lateral researchers. A. A. Spitsyn writes: The ear-pieces are very brims of the cap) is not less than 220 mm. The largest prominent, they hang on three-loop hinges and have outer diameter of the crown is c. 210 mm, the diameter openings on the ends (Spitsyn 1909: 23). According to at the level of the upper edge of volutes is 172 mm and B. Z. Rabinovich these openings, c. 5 mm in diameter, the outer diameter of the top is 1011 mm. were intended for a strap that tightened the helmet under The helmet was hammered from tin-containing the chin (Rabinovich 1941: 160). Such designation of the bronze12. The crown was hammered out of a solid ready- openings does not in fact arouse any doubts, although it made sheet of metal. The thickness of the walls is c. 1 mm can be assumed that they were initially used for attaching and a little less on the cheek-pieces. The inner surface of small pins or rivets fixing the straps. In the Hellenistic the crown shows fairly distinct traces of the tool. The period helmets were fastened in various ways. Two vercylindrical inset in the top of the crown, composed of sions were employed for the konos. In the first, cheekbronze with small proportions of tin and lead13, was pieces were tied under the chin by simple strings. In the probably added after the helmet manufacture had been second, a long belt was first passed through a ring (or two completed. The inset has the shape of a rod-like stake rings) located on the inner surface of the neck-piece, after roughly cut on both ends, c. 10 mm in length and c. 9.5 which both of its ends were brought forward over the cheek-pieces and crossed over on the pins in the lower part of the cheek-pieces, tightening them at the chin. The 10 From 2 November 1936 the helmet was in the restoration workshop of the Hermitage. B.Z. Rabinovich also confirms that the helmet has been second technique is exemplified by a marble head of Pyrrecently cleared from oxide and restored (Rabinovich 1941: 160). rhus of Epirus from the National Archaeological Museum 11 The dimensions are approximate because the helmet is somein Naples (inv. no. 6150) and a depiction on the verso of what deformed and assembled from fragments. the tetradrachma of Seleucus I Nicator. 12 The surface of the helmet and its fragments was subjected to a It was also by a strap passed through two rings (or, X-ray fluorescence analysis (instrument ArtAX) by S.V. Khavrin, the senior researcher in the Department of Scientific Examination and possibly, two straps attached to these rings) that the cheekAuthentication of Works of Art. The metal content: copper base, pieces of the helmet from Zruncha were secured in posi1012% tin, less than 0.7% lead, less than 0.3% arsenic, less than 1% tion (Katincharova 2003: 7). G. A. Pavlovich who has zinc, less than 0.2% iron, nickel and silver in traces; no antimony in published the helmet from the Stavropol Region, expressed ore admixtures. the opinion that the opening in its neck-piece served for 13 14. Copper base, 1012% tin, 610% lead, silver in traces; attaching the lining (Pavlovich 1995: 202). This view can arsenic, zinc and nickel are absent.
20
left cheek-pieces without loops is c. 150 mm; the maximum width in the middle part is 99 mm and 97 mm respectively; the reconstructed width along the cheek-piece top is less than 60 mm. The cheek-pieces loops were formed by bending inside two tails left along the top of the plates. On each cheek-piece only the front loop survives and traces of an ancient repair are visible on the right cheek-piece: the loop is secured by two rivets. The extant loops are 18 mm and 21 mm wide on the right and left cheek-pieces respectively. The coupling-bolts of the hinges, presumably iron rods, did not survive. On the right side of the crown, practically at cap level and directly over a semicircular projection passing into the neck-piece, there is a punched inscription. Two letters BN (ill. 2) are clearly readable. Unfortunately, it is difficult to say whether the small cavities on the metal surface slightly to the left of the readable symbols are the remnants of some signs or whether they were formed as a result of erosion14. Yuri Kalashnik, the senior researcher in the Hermitage Department of Antiquity, drew my attention to this inscription and made a suggestion that the signature might denote a cardinal number. In this case Ill.1. Helmet from the burial ground near beta and nu can be read as fifty-two (Guarducci 1967: Akhtanizovskaya stanitsa. Bronze. The State Hermitage 422). S. R. Tokhtasyev, who examined the Akhtanizovskaya helmet, in principle agreed with such interpretation. hardly be accepted, however, as in all cases when a lining One of the helmets from the Olonesht hoard, published was sewn onto helmets or fastened with rivets through the by G. P. Sergeyev, is also supplied with a two-letter inscripopenings in the edge, such openings are cut along the tion, albeit on the left ear of the neck-piece (Sergeyev entire edge. The opening in the lower edge of the Stavropol 1966: 140). Judging by its outline, the inscription was cut helmet neck-piece was most likely intended for the ring out rather than punched and consists of two symbols: AN. fixing the strap. A similar opening is found on the Ash- Regrettably, in his article Sergeyev offers no interpretation molean helmet. But since there is no such opening on the of this inscription. neck-piece of the Akhtanizovskaya helmet nor there any As a rule, owners inscriptions (or commanders traces of another way of fastening the rings, all this pre- names) were put on the back of neck-pieces of the helsumably testifies to the use of the first version here. This mets. Such punched inscriptions are found on a helmet version is known, for example, from the representation of from Lake Ochrid (Staatliche Museum, Berlin, misc. a konos on the coins of the usurper Tryphon (between 11905: BAIE MONOYNIOY) and the abovemen142/141 and 140 B.C.) (Mrkholm 1991: 189). tioned helmet in the Ashmolean Museum (AENPOY The form of the cheek-pieces is very characteristic of TOY NIKANOPOS) (Dintsis 1986: 78). Similar inscripthe helmets of the type in question, known from numer- tions often occur on Roman helmets from the later Reous depictions. Cheek-pieces were mounted on helmets publican period, for instance, on a specimen in the Staby means of three-loop hinges. Every cheek-piece was atliche Museen, Berlin (L 176: SCP IMP). There are also provided with two loops, while one (central) loop was large numbers of dedicatory inscriptions on arms and riveted on each of the helmet walls. Loops on helmets armour recovered from sanctuaries. The inscription on were made from bronze strips (not over 20 mm wide), 14 According to Yu. A. Vinogradov (personal communication), folded in two, of unequal length and with uneven edges. the inscription had more than two signs; in the cavities slightly left Each one is fastened to the crown on the inside with two of the beta he singles out the letter I. S. P. Tokhhtasyev refrained rivets, the unpolished heads of which can be clearly seen from making a categorical conclusion but in his view there are only from the outside over the cap. The height of the right and two signs that can be deciphered with certainty.
21
Ill. 2. Punched inscription on the helmet from Akhtanizovskaya stanitsa (enlarged)
the Akhtanizovskaya helmet apparently does not belong to any of these groups. Its meaning will probably be clarified after the publication of some analogies from other collections. Two helmets, closely resembling the Akhtanizovskaya one, are in the Hermitage Department of the Archaeology of Eastern Europe and Siberia (inv. nos. 2521/1 and 2522/2; ill.3). M. I. Rostovtsev was the first to draw an analogy between them (Rostovtsev 1925: 555). Both derive from a burial mound excavated by robbers in the vicinity of Merdzhany (IAK 1913: 133; Rabinovich 1941: 162)15; both were acquired in 1876 by the Archaeological Commission and entered the Imperial Hermitage a year later16. The crown walls are c. 1 mm thick but become
15 The story of this find is rather entertaining. In July 1876 A. E. Liutsenko, Director of the Kerch Museum of Antiquities, was visited by a dealer, S.D. Kupedzhi, who informed against a certain Kiryako Spirov, a Greek from Merdzhany. [That Greek] had confidentially told him that digging for some needs of his household not far from his home, in a small forest, on an even place, he accidentally uncovered an ancient tomb which contained two decayed corpses (Copy of A. E. Liutsenkos letter to the Chief of the Kuban Region, dated 6 July 1876, in the Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1877, inv. no. 6, p. 5). Among the objects found by Spirov in the tomb, two bronze crowns, i.e. helmets, are also mentioned (ibid.). 16 Two bronze pointed helmets with a somewhat damaged lower part (A. E. Liutsenkos report of 14 January 1877, in the Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1877, inv. no. 6, p. 11 verso); cf. 9. Bronze helmet of a pointed form; 10. A similar helmet (Inventory of Artefacts found in 1876 in the Kuban Region near the village of Merdzhany by the inhabitant of this village Kiryako Spirov and delivered by the Archaeological Commission to the State Hermitage, in the Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1877, inv. no. 6, p. 4).
noticeably thicker in the upper part. The forehead-pieces of both helmets were decorated in the shape of a pediment with volutes on the sides. The volute of the first helmet is 40 x 32 mm whereas the second helmet retains fragments only of the front wall of the right volute. In their metal composition, both objects are virtually identical with the Akhtanizovskaya helmet17. With a reference to S. V. Khavrins conclusion that the difference of the alloys lies within permissible limits, we can state that in metal composition both Merdzhany samples and the Akhtanizovskaya helmet belong to the same group. It is very probable that all the three artefacts originate from one centre, possibly one workshop. A certain interest in connection with the given group of artefacts is presented by the fragments of the helmet recovered from the Buerova Moghila burial mound by I. E. Zabelin in 1870 (OAK: XII) (inv. no. . 33, ill. 4). These fragments, along with the other materials from the plundered grave, entered the Hermitage from the Archaeological Commission18. M. I. Rostovtsev dated the complex to the period not earlier than the 3rd 2nd centuries B.C. (Rabinovich 1941: 164). The only elements that remained of the helmet are the right ear of the cheekpiece with a fragment of the crown walls and the left neckpiece on a three-loop hinge with a fragment of the cap and crown. The artefacts state of preservation does not allow us to assign it with certainty to the group of objects under consideration, yet such a supposition, already made by B. Z. Rabinovich, seems not only possible but also preferable. Judging by the surviving fragments, the neckpiece was supplied on the sides with much more developed wing-like projections than those of the Akhtanizovskaya helmet. In its configuration, the relief cheek-piece is close to those of the Akhtanizovskaya helmet but has a more pronounced contour of the front edge. The maximum width in the middle part is c. 116 mm, along the top 79 mm and the height without loops c. 150 mm. The loops are arranged in the same way as on the Akhtanizovskaya helmet: two on the cheek-piece and one, middle, riveted into the crown. It is noteworthy that the rear loop is also lacking here. The width of all loops is c. 26 mm, the outer diam17An analysis of the bronze of the back of the crown has yielded the following results: copper base, 1012% tin (1013% for the second example), less than 1% zinc (13% for the second example), less than 0.4% lead (less than 1% for the second example). 18 Six fragments of a bronze helmet (Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 1, year of 1870, inv. no. 19, pp. 811); fragments of the broken helmet (Blue Inventory 1870, B, no. 28 (615i).
Ill.3. Helmets from the burial ground near the village of Merdzhany. Bronze. The State Hermitage
eter is around 6 mm. Like the Akhtanizovskaya cheekpiece, the cheek-piece of the helmet from the Buerova Moghila has an opening, 4.5 mm in diameter, in the forward-curving lower part that screened the chin. Two more openings, 3.5 mm in diameter, occur at c. 6 mm from the upper edge, between the side loops. They are equally separated from the edges (28 mm). The distance between the openings is 19 mm. Having noted the presence of these openings, B. Z. Rabinovich offered no explanation of their purpose, however (Rabinovich 1941: 163). In their metal composition, the fragments from the Buerova Moghila differ from one another by a somewhat greater content of tin in the cheek-piece (1015% against 810% in the fragments of the helmets bottom section)19. In Khavrins opinion, this difference can be explained by a casually or deliberately changed dosage of tin in the process of melting, but the base (copper) of all the fragments is identical. Finally, one more extremely remarkable bronze helmet of spheroconical form was in 1962 transferred to the Hermitage from the Museum of the History of Artillery (now the Military Historical Museum of Artillery and Engineering Troops) (inv. no. 1114.59 (B 226); ill. 5)20. The story
19 In the cheek-pieces bronze, in natural admixtures, there is less than 0.4% lead, 0.2% arsenic and silver in traces. The bronze of the helmet bottoms fragments has a similar composition: 0.5 lead, 0.2% arsenic and silver in traces. The copper loop contains practically the same ore admixtures: less than 0.4% lead plus silver, antimony and zinc in traces. The rivets, also made of copper, are identical in metal content. A metallographic analysis was accomplished by S. V. Khavrin. 20 Certificate no. 545 of 21 November 1962. OND GE [The State Hermitage Department of Scientific Documentation]. The acceptance certificates for permanent storage at the State Hermitage: II-a, 1962.
of this artefact after its discovery is not very clear. The helmet originates from a shaft grave in a Bronze Age burial mound that was flooded during the construction of a dam on the Manych River near the farmstead Vesely. A number of objects from the destroyed burial mound were handed over by the technician N. S. Marchukov to the personnel of the State Academy of the History of Material Culture, who carried out rescue diggings in the vicinity of Manychstroi. M. I. Artamonov, who was in charge of the diggings on the Manych in 1933, reports: the destroyed burial mound yielded an iron sword and a bronze plate from the swords scabbard. In the words of Marchenkov (sic D. A.), a bronze helmet was found there
Ill.4. Left cheek-piece and fragments of the bottom section of the helmet from the Buerova Moghila burial mound. Bronze. The State Hermitage
22
23
Ill. 5. Helmet from the destroyed burial ground on the Manych River. Bronze. 1 side view; 2 back view; 3 three-quarter view. The State Hermitage
but it was lost by workers (Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 2, inv. 1, year of 1933, no. 116, p.12). Yet in her 1934 report V. V. Golmsten, who took over, notes that both the bronze helmet and the iron sword were transferred by comrade Marchukov to the Academy. In conclusion, Golmsten supplies a list of other artefacts subsequently found in the same sand-pit and transferred by Marchukov to the expedition in 1934 (Manuscript Archive of the Institute of Material Culture History, fund 2, inv. 1, year of 1934, no. 192, pp. 3940). In the inventory of photographs signed by Golmsten, the photograph of undoubtedly the same bronze helmet, is mentioned under no. 84 (ibid: inv.194, no. 76). In spite of this, in the inventories of finds for 1933 or 1934 the helmet is not included, although other items transferred by Marchukov are listed and supplied with field numbers. Traces of this artefact come to the surface again only two years later. In her memorandum of 31 October 1936 to V. P. Kiparisov, the Vice Director of the Hermitage, V.V. Golmsten, at that time the Head of the Hermitage Section of Pre-Class Society reports that the helmet must be at present in the State Academy of the History of Material Culture. Golmsten also notes that during the preceding transfers of collections from the State Academy of the History of Material Culture there were delays in relation to certain objects, usually of considerable value, which should be landed over to the Hermitage now. These objects include: 1. The bronze helmet from a Sarmatian burial ground on the Manych River (a vessel from it is in the Section of Pre-Class Society)... (State Hermitage
24
Archives, fund 1, inv. 5, no. 2025, pp. 4445; cited from p. 44 verso). Among the Hermitage archival records on the transfer and entry of objects for 1936, I have failed to find any documentary confirmation of the helmets entry into the museum and its subsequent transfer elsewhere. Nonetheless, in the certificate of 15 November 1962, confirming its transfer from the Artillery Museum,21 it is said that the exhibit kept in the Museum of the History of Artillery since 1936 now returns to the Hermitage.22 According to the Artillery Museum archival records, the helmet was received for temporary storage as per the certificate of 19 January 1936. The overall height of the helmet is 200 mm, the width of the crown over the volutes is 200 mm and at volute level, 202 mm. The maximum outer diameter of the crown is 223 mm and with the helmet bottom section is 275 mm. The thickness of the crown walls ranges from 1 to 1.51.8 mm in the upper part. The Manych example stands apart from other Classical Antiquity spheroconical helmets. The specific feature of its decor is the crest knob surmounting the apex. This peculiar decorative element is akin to cone-shaped pro21 Bronze helmet recovered from the burial mound in the farmstead of Vesely by the Manych expedition of the State Academy of the History of Material Culture in 1934 (transferred to the Museum of the History of Artillery in 1936), OND GE [The State Hermitage Department of Scientific Documentation]. The acceptance certificates for permanent storage at the State Hermitage. II-a, 196: 299. 22 Ibid. Cf.: Acceptance certificate no. 5 arms / State Hermitage 545 21 November 62, OND GE [The State Hermitage Department of Scientific Documentation]. The acceptance certificates for permanent storage at the State Hermitage. II-a, 1962: 300.
jections on the crowns of the Etrusco-Italic helmets of Montefortino type (Robinson 1975: 1314, figs. 1113; Gulyaeva 2006: 3539) and probably appeared not without their influence. Simonenko even went so far as to ascribe this artefact to the Montefortino type represented in the region by a series of finds from Sarmatian burial mounds. This is hardly correct, though, as apart from the decor of the upper part of the crown, the helmet has a number of features that bring it close to the Eastern Hellenistic tradition and distinguish from the Celto-Italic one. Among the main distinctive features of the Manych helmet is undoubtedly the technology of its manufacture: it is hammered out of a single sheet. It is worth noticing the imitation of a cast cord-like rim characteristic of Montefortino helmets that is achieved by rough notches. Around the circumference of the narrow margin forming the cap and the neck-piece (the maximum width 29 mm) there is a continuous row of adjacent crescent-shaped grooves creating a kind of cabled finish. Moreover, on the back of the bottom section one can see an engraved frieze of a herring-bone pattern divided by larger crescent-shaped notches. The lower part of the crown has an unusual decoration. On the sides are two rounded flat projections in the form of volutes characteristic of Hellenistic helmets (the diameter of the right one, 47 40.5 mm and the left one, 50 x 46 mm). Two massive semi-cylindrical surfaces pass from the projections to the forehead-piece and the back of the crown, rising 20 mm and 22.5 mm from the edge of the helmets bottom section respectively. On the front of the crown over the semi-cylindrical surfaces is a 46 mm-high pediment with slightly concave lateral sides. In the aggregate, such decor has no analogies among the concurrent artefacts, although incomplete analogies are found among the representations of helmets on the tomb reliefs of the 2nd century B.C. with scenes of funeral feast. The maximum diameter of the cone-shaped projection embellished with a double rim along the bottom is 31 mm, at top level c. 18 mm, the height 16 mm; the diameter of the neck is 19 mm. In contrast to the geometrically identical crest knobs of Montefortino helmets, that of the Manych sample is forged; on the inside, it is filled with lead to hold the crest pin firmly in an upright position. As the upper part of the projection is lost, we cannot determine whether there was a through opening in it for fastening the hair plume. Such a massive lead filling seems to rule out this possibility. The cheek-pieces are lost too. It is not excluded that already in this shape the helmet was placed into a grave.
25
The cheek-pieces were apparently fixed by loops riveted into the edge of the helmet bottom section. Two blind rivets survive on the right side over the rim, the bottom edge on the left is lacking. In terms of metal content, the rivets are identical with that of the helmet crown. The loops with the cheek-pieces were probably removed on purpose and the fastening openings riveted. In the rim of the neck-piece there is a round hole for fixing the chin strap (diameter, 4 mm). Two more holes of unclear purpose, both 5 mm in diameter, are cut in the side volutes (not at the centre in the right one). The artefact in question differs from the Akhtanizovskaya and Merdzhany ones by a smaller proportion of tin in the alloy and by the absence of a zink admixture.23 The Manych helmet is a unique example of the imitation of Montefortino type, combined with elements characteristic of the Eastern Mediterranean tradition. To all appearances, it reflects the influence of the Celto-Italic tradition in the production of arms and armour that becomes noticeable starting from the 3rd century B.C. For lack of reliably dated analogies, it is impossible to state whether such form as a more obvious imitation of North Italic and Celtic specimens was the predecessor of the classical konos, or it was an entirely independent, parallel line of the development of combat head-pieces. The popularity of Western, including Celtic, helmets has also been attested by numerous finds in barbarian burial grounds in the North Black Sea Coast area and the North Caucasus. There is no complete consensus among researchers about the dating of such helmets. Petros Dintsis, basing himself on iconographic data, assigns them to the 2nd century B.C. (Dintsis 1986: 77). Indeed, most iconographic sources representing the form under review belong precisely to this time. Yet it should be emphasized that konos depictions appear, at the minimum, in the very beginning of the century whereas some of them can be equally assigned to the 3rd century B.C. as well. As in many similar cases, documented archaeological artefacts are confined to the borders of the Hellenized world, that is, the north of the Balkans (Thracia) and the North Caucasus. Regrettably, the North Caucasian finds are partly discredited because of their origin from the sites excavated by robbers; to rely unreservedly on the full authenticity of the complexes from Akhtanizovskaya and Merdzhany is quite risky. Nevertheless it is impos23 The helmet was examined by S.V. Khavrin; decision of an experts commission no. 1341 of 11 September 2007.
sible to ignore these complexes either, for in my opinion, they permit dating the formation of the given type of helmet to an earlier period. The Merdzhany complex has traditionally been placed in the late 4th early 3rd centuries B.C., although B.Z. Rabinovich, in his time, supposed that it should be dated to the middle or even the end of the 3rd century B.C. (Rabinovich 1941: 162). Rather closely placed (300200 B.C.) by G. Atanasov is the burial ground with a konos in Kulnovo (Atanasov 1995). Not long ago Yu. A. Vinogradov offered for the Merdzhany complex a still later date, nearer the middle of the 2nd century (Vinogradov 2001: 6470); following in M. I. Rostovtsevs footsteps, he dated the burial ground near Akhtanizovskaya to the time of Mithradates VI Eupator (Rostovtsev 1925: 557; Vinogradov 2004: 175)24. There is no doubt that before being buried all these helmets must have been in use for some time. G.A. Pavlovich, for example, lays emphasis on an active application of the Stavropol helmet; singling out the numerous traces of blows and a primitive repair made in antiquity; he writes: The quality of the repair allows us to assume that it was done by the Sarmatians (Pavlovich 1995: 201). Traces of the repair of the Akhtanizovskaya helmet have been dealt with above. All these characteristic features definitely point to a prolonged functional application of helmets from the North Caucasian burial grounds, which accords perfectly well with other analogous facts. Expensive imported weapons, highly valued by the barbarians, were quite frequently used for long periods of time. Moreover, the North Caucasian burial mounds hardly belong to the first owners of Greek helmets. It appears possible to transfer the lower border of the occurrence of helmetkonoses at least to the second half of the 3rd century B.C. But if we accept the hypothesis about the Celtic influence, the genesis of the Greek konos should be placed within the beginning of the 2nd third of the same century. We cannot state with certainty how the abovementioned helmets found themselves in barbarian burial grounds. They may have been spoils of war, but it is not excluded that such helmet-konoses were purchased by their owners in large trade-and-craft centres on the Bosporus. The place of their production can scarcely be determined at the present stage. The geography of their distribution is fairly extensive: from Bactria in the East to Numidia in North Africa, but there is no reliable data on any concrete centre that could be with confidence associ24 Cf. the representation of a spheroconical helmet on a stele with a decree from Apollonia (Historical Museum, Varna, inv. no. II 1344).
ated with their production. It is likewise difficult to locate the area where this form had originated (Dintsis 1986: 85). Finds are better concentrated in Thracia (not less than four) and in the Northeast Black Sea Coast area (at least ten). At the same time groups of pictorial artefacts take shape in the Balkans (Macedonia), Aegeis (Samos) and Asia Minor (Pergamon, Magnesia, Ephesus)25. As in other similar instances, we can only assume that the Greek konoses found in the North Caucasus represent the products imported to the Bosporus from some workshops of Balkan Greece (Macedonia ?) or, possibly, Aegeis.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Atanasov 1995 Atanasov G. Trakijsko vorenije ot fonda na Istrorieski muzej umen [Thracian Arms and Armour from the Collection of the Historical Museum, Shumen]. In: Vorenije ot Drevna Trakija. Shumen, 1995. Bikerman 1985 Bikerman E. Gosudarstvo Selevkidov [The State of the Seleucides]. Moscow, 1985. Chantrain 1970 Chantrain P. Dictionnaire tymologique de la langue grecque. Vol. II. Paris, 1970. Connolly 1981 Connolly P. Greece and Rome at War. London, 1981. Couissin 1927 Couissin, Paul. Les armes gauloises figures sur les monuments grecs, trusques et romains. Revue archologique 26. 1927. Dimitrov 20022003 Dimitrov S. Dva lema ot drevna Trakija [Two Helmets from Ancient Thracia]. Izvestija na istorieski muzej vv Veliko Trnovo XVIIXVIII. 20022003. Dintsis 1986 Dintsis, Petros. Hellenistische Helme. Rome, 1986. Erlich 1991 Erlich V. R. O mestnoj gruppe bronzovyx lemov Zakubanja [On a Local Group of Bronze Helmets in the Transkuban Region]. In: Drevnosti Kubani. Materijaly nauno-praktieskoj konferencii. Krasnodar, 1991. Feugr 1994 Feugr M. Casques antiques. Paris, 1994. Feyel 1935 Feyel M. Un nouveau fragment de rglement militaire trouv a Amphipolis. Revue archologique 6. 1935. Frisk 1960 Frisk H. Griechisches etymologisches Wrterbuch. Vol. II. Heidelberg, 1960.
25 Representations of konoses also occur on Seleucid coins and medals, which is yet only another proof of their wide distribution in the Hellenistic world. P. Dintsis, in his turn, cites a number of gems with konoses, drawing the conclusion that they do not point at the nationality of the wearers (Dintsis 1986 : 84).
Getov 1962 Getov L. Novi dani za vorenijeto u nas prez latenskata epoxa [New Data on the Arms and Armour in Our Region from the Pre-Roman Era]. Arxeologija IV: 3 (1962). Griffith 1975 Griffith G. T. The Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World. Cambridge, 1975. Gorelik 1993 Gorelik M. V. Oruije drevnego Vostoka. IV tys. IV v. do n.e. [Weapons of the Ancient Orient. 4th millennium 4th century B.C.]. Moscow, 1993. Guarducci 1967 Guarducci M. Epigrafia Greca. Vol. I. Roma, 1967. Gulyaeva 2006 Gulyaeva, Nadezhda. Montefortinskije lemy iz kollekcii Antinogo otdela [Montefortino Helmets from the Collection of the Antiquity Department]. Soobenija Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa LXIV. St. Petersburg, 2006. Homolle 1882 Homolle Th. Comptes des hi ropes du temple dApollon Dlien.Bulletin de correspondance hellnique 6. 1882. IAK Izvestija Imperatorskoj Arxeologieskoj Komissii [Imperial Archaeological Commission News]. St. Petersburg, 1913. Jaeckel 1965 Jaeckel P. Pergamenische Waffenreliefs. Waffen- und Kostmkunde 2. 1965. Katincharova 2003 Katincharova D. Grob na vojn ot elinistieskata epoxa pri Crna, Pasardiko [Warriors Grave from the Hellenistic Era at Zruncha, Pasardzhik]. Arxeologija XLIV: 4 (2003). Khler 1948 Khler, Heinz. Der Groe Fries von Pergamon. Berlin, 1948. Lumpkin 1975 Lumpkin, Henty. The Weapons and Armour of the Macedonian Phalanx. The Journal of Arms & Armour Society 8:1 (1975). Mellink 1993 Mellink M. J. Archaeology in Asia Minor. American Journal of Archaeology 97. 1993. Mrkholm 1991 Mrkholm O. Early Hellenistic Coinage. Cambridge, 1991. Otjot Imperatorskoj Arxeologieskoj komissiii [Report of the Imperial Archaeological Commission] for 187071. St. Petersburg, 1874. Pavlovich 1995 Pavlovich G. A. Greeskij lem ellinistieskogo vremeni iz Stavropolskogo kraja [A Greek Helmet of the Hellenistic Period from the Stavropol Region]. Rossijskaja Arxeologija 3. 1995. Rabinovich 1941 Rabinovich B. Z. lemy skifskogo perioda [Helmets of the Scythian Period]. Trudy Otdela istorii pervobytnoj kultury Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa 1. Leningrad, 1941.
Robinson 1975 Robinson R. H. The Armour of Imperial Rome. London, 1975. Rostovtsev 1925 Rostovtsev M. I. Skifija i Bospor [Scythia and the Bosporus]. Leningrad, 1925. Sergeyev 1966 Sergeyev G. P. Olonetskij antinyj klad [The Olonesht Antique Hoard]. Vestnik drevnej istorii 2. 1966. Simonenko 2001 Simonenko A. V. Bewaffung und Kriegswesen der Sarmaten und der spten Skythen im nrdlichen Schwarzenmeergebiet. Eurasia antique. Zeitschrift fr Archologie Eurasiens 7. 2001. Snodgrass 1999 Snodgrass A. M. Arms and Armour of the Greeks. Baltimore, London, 1999. Spitsyn 1909 Spitsyn A. A. Falary Junoj Rossii [Phalerae from Southern Russia]. Izvestija Imperatorskoj Arxeologieskoj Komissii 29. St. Petersburg, 1909. Szab 1991 Szab M. Il mercenariato. In: I Celti. Milano, 1991. Tsrov 1991 Tsrov I. Vorenie ot ksnoeliaznata epoxa ot regiona na Veliko Trnovo [Arms and Armour from the Iron Age Period in the Veliko Turnove Region]. Izvestija na istorheski muzei vv Veliko Turnove IX. 1991. Vinogradov 2001 Vinogradov Yu. A. O datirovke kompleksa naxodok u derevni Merdany [On the Dating of a Complex of Finds near the Village of Merdzhany]. Tamanskaja starina 1. St. Petersburg, 1998; 2001. Vinogradov 2004 Vinogradov Yu. A. Tam zakololsja Mitridat Vojennaja istorija Bospora Kimmerijskogo v dorimskuju epoxu [There Mithradates Stabbed Himself to Death A Military History of the Cimmerian Bosporus in the Pre-Roman Era]. St. Petersburg, Moscow, 2004. Waurick 1979 Waurick, Gotz. Die Schutzwaffen in Numidischen Grab von Es Souma. In: Die Numider. Kln, Bonn, 1979. Waurick 1988 Waurick, Gotz. Helme der hellenistischen Zeit und ihre Vorlufer. Antike Helme. Sammlung Lipperheide und andere Bestnde des Antikenmuseums Berlin. Monographien Rmisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum. Vol. 14. Mainz, 1988. Zaitsev 1994 Zaitsev Yu. P. Verxovnaja znat Neapolja Skifskogo (Novyje issledovanija zaxoronenija v kamennoj grobnice mavzoleja) [The Ruling Nobility of Scythian Naples (New Investigations of a Burial in the Stone Tomb of the Mausoleum)]. In: Elitnyje kurgany Jevrazii v skifosarmatskuju epoxu. St. Petersburg, 1994.
26
ELENA KHODZA TERRACOTTA HUNCHBACK MARIONETTES IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION The Hermitage terracotta collection includes a fairly considerable group of marionettes, sometimes referred to as dolls, more particularly, figurines with either their legs or all the limbs movable. Two of these (both 8.0 cm high), with non-extant limbs, are representations of hunchbacks, absolutely identical from the point of view of their shape and dimensions. The figurines belong to the same archetype and were definitely produced using one and the same original mould. The main difference between them is the composition of the clay. It should be noted that the marionettes were purchased at two different places, although located not far from each other: one (inv. no. 10104, inventory .1463) was bought in 1878 in Kerch from a Yemelyanenko, the other (inv. no. 11408, inventory .1288) in 1901 in Olbia from N.L. Levitsky. The former (.1463, ill. 1) has some losses, not very significant (the chin, the tip of the nose and the top of the hat); besides, it has many small scratches on the face. There is a round hole under the bent left elbow. The outer surface is rubbed off; the inner surface is covered with limescale. Bright-orange and reddish fine elutriated clay without intrusions is visible in a small split-off at the lower front edge. The upper clay layer is light brown. There are traces of greyish slip over the surface. The terracotta is hollow; it was made using a double mould, the junction seam having been smoothed, judging by parallel strips, as if wet clay had been combed. The back of the figurine is lightly modelled; only the edge of the cloak worn over the left shoulder was conveyed by moulding. The other figurine (.1288, ill. 2; see Winter 1903: 172, 5) is of yellow fine-grained elutriated clay, without intrusions. It has yellow slip with traces of paint, pink on the chin at right, a tiny blue patch on the cloak edge near the neck, and several black spots over the cloak surface. The figurine is in a good state of preservation, except for some drops of wax on the back, which must be fairly recent. The production technique is similar to that of the other figurine, but the junction seams are smoother and some tiny details have been conveyed with greater precision. In the Imperial Archeological Commission Report ( OAK ) for 1878 (XXXIX, pl. VI, 5, pp. 123124; cf. Compte rendu for 1880: 123, pl. VI, 4), the figurine is described grotesquely as an ugly old hunchback wearing a cap, which is not quite true, because the man is a fairly good-looking one. His arms bent at the elbows are pressed tightly to the body. The right hand lifted to the chest is completely hidden under the cloak. With his left hand, the hunchback holds the edge of the cloak worn over his shoulder. His full oblong face has regular features; none of these (small eyes with clearly delineated eyelids, straight nose, round prominent chin and small full-lipped mouth) has anything grotesque or comic about it. A similar type of facial features can be come across in Graeco-Roman Egyptian coroplasts art (see Himmelmann 1983, pl. 5; Dunand 1990: 33, no. 10). Under the chin, one can discern two barely visible dents which were probably meant to imply that the man was unshaved. The ears are done in relief. Both hunchbacks wear pointed conical hats with holes on the tops for a string to manipulate the non-extant legs and possibly the phallus. Judging by the figurine discovered in Capua, the hole could be used for a bronze hanging loop (Rohden 1880: 56). The movable parts were fixed to a horizontal bronze rod. The two holes at the sides show where it was inserted. The physical defect (hump) is not accentuated, although the absence of a neck and, hence, shrunken shoulders, suggest that the body under the cloak is deformed.
Ill. 1. Hunchback marionette. From the Kerch purchases. The State Hermitage
Such an approach to the depiction of these characters is in contrast to the late Hellenistic bronze and clay figurines of naked hunchbacks belonging to the pathological grotesque representations characterized by naturalism similar to that of a medical atlas (Winter 1903: 444, 5, 7, 8; Perdrizet 1911: 59, no. 95, pl. XXVIII, en haut; Schneider-Lenguel 1936: fig. 92; Neugebauer 1951: 69, pl. 30, no. 62; Besques 1972: 170, D 1183, pl. 236a; Himmelmann 1983: 62, 65, pls. 4446, 5153; Pfisterer-Haas 1994: 496, fig. 20). The figurines show unfortunate sufferers from a form of spine tuberculosis known as Potts disease. The presence of such subjects in visual arts reflects the keen interest of ancient medicine in this kind of pathology, which is reflected in written sources as well. Very expressive bronze and terracotta figurines of this kind were found in Asia Minor and Egypt, well-known medical centres of the Classical Antiquity (Stevenson III 1975: 114115, 178 ff.). An epigram by Kallikteros demonstrates the cruel methods of treatment of this disease and their tragic consequences:
, .
Promising to straighten Diodorus humped back, Socles (the physician) put three thick four-foot stones on his bent backbone. But, he was crushed to death, although he became straighter than a rod (translated by W.R. Paton. The Greek Anthology: 128129). The Hermitage marionettes are closer to those images which are not so cruelly naturalistic, first of all because the characters are clothed (Hoffmann 1960: 109, figs. 3637; Reeder 1988: 139, no. 54). Both the clay type and the quality of the execution of our figurines suggest that they had been imported to the Northern Black Sea region. Yet their origin can hardly be established with confidence. The sole close enough analogue found outside the area in question, although in a bad state of preservation, is known only from a drawing. It may have been made in Centuripe, Sicily (Kekul 1884: 81, pl. LII, 3). Its lower part is a plaster addition. After the restoration, it does not look like a marionette, which it was judging by a through hole in the upper part of the hat. All this is not enough to make any conclusions concerning the origin and evolution of the type of image. Since several figurines of this type have come down to us, the depiction of humpbacks must have been popular in the Northern Black Sea region. One of these, found in Myrmekion, is 0.5 cm taller than the Hermitage marionettes and has different proportions: it is narrower,
28
29
Ill. 2. Hunchback marionette. From the Olbia purchases. The State Hermitage
its head being somewhat smaller with respect to the general height. Besides, this statuette, preserved in the National Museum in Warsaw (inv. no. 5), is much cruder in execution, especially in the folds of the cloak. The eyes are also different; they are large and protruding, with the outer corners lowered (Bernhard 1956, no. 262, fig. 12; Michalowski 1958: 9092, fig. 111). Kazimierz Michalowski dates the terracotta to the 1st century A.D.; according to him, the terracotta, which could have been imported from elsewhere, is a replica of a marionette of the Hellenistic period (Michalowski 1958: 91, note 131, p. 149). Using the imported marionette types, Bosporan artists made their own versions, such as the marionette preserved in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow (inv. no. II 1 858) that differs considerably from the Hermitage version (Muratov 2005: 138139, pl. 204). Its original dimensions are unknown, because the lower part is a restoration addition; it is clear, however, that the head is disproportionally large. The piece in question, allegedly purchased in Theodosia, is much cruder in execution; the facial features are blurred, as it were, and the cloak folds are only delineated, without any attention to details. The hole is in the front part of the hat above the forehead, rather than at the top. Besides,
30
the hump is accentuated in a greater degree compared to the Hermitage marionettes, and is bulging out angularly. Much closer to the Olbia and Kerch marionettes is another Bosporan piece represented by a fragment discovered in Nymphaion as early as 19411. It came to the Hermitage in 1947 and has not been published so far (inv. no. -41.392, ill. 3). The obverse of the statuette is absent, but a cut in the hat and a groove going from it down the inner surface leave no doubt that the hole was a through one and the figurine was a marionette. Extant is its upper part including the head, part of the chest and the left shoulder with the cloak folds done in a somewhat monotonous and rigid manner. Judging by this fragment, 6.1 cm high, the dimensions of this statuette were close to the Kerch and Olbia ones, but it has a larger head and a broader face. On the other hand, the colour of the clay, orange with a reddish tint, its coarse texture and fairly considerable white intrusions in it speak in favour of local production. The surface has a thin layer of yellow slip, but no traces of paint are visible. The left-hand part of the face has been rubbed out so much that the facial features at left are not discernible,
1 I am grateful to O.Yu. Sokolova for having given me the access to the terracotta.
except for the eye and the eyebrow. This may have been a manufacturing defect. In contrast, the right-hand part of the face is in a good state of preservation, suggesting that the mould was very similar to that used in making the two Hermitage marionettes from the purchases. It is not impossible that all these moulds originally had one and the same patrix. The coroplast repeated even such details as transverse and vertical wrinkles on the bridge of nose. The individual manner of the Nymphaion artist manifests itself in a somewhat mechanically uniform treatment of the cloak folds. Besides, the piece has one element typical of Bosporan artists generally, but absolutely unambiguous here, namely the bruises and small dints that must have conveyed unshavenness. According to the field inventory, the terracotta was found in the grey-clay layer of the C4 square, at the depth of 30.0 50.0 cm, together with some local production items, e.g. a fragment of the lower part of a grey-coloured vessel (inv. no. -41.613), possibly a cup with two handles when complete, similar to the vessel from burial 5 of the interment east of the village of Zolotoye, Eastern Crimea, dated to 2nd 1st centuries B.C. (Maslennikov 1995: 23, figs. 41, 5). The same layer yielded two Patikapeion coins (inv. nos. -41.616 and -41.617) of an earlier period, c. 330315 B.C. (Golenko 1974: 81), plus a fragmented red-coloured terracotta closed lamp and a fragment of another, red-coloured lamp with an elongated nozzle (inv. nos. -41.367 and -41.352).
Such lamps were used in the Hellenistic and the Roman periods (Waldhauer 1914: pl. VI, 65, p. 25; Sztetyllo 1976: 99, pl. 99; Korpusova 1983: 49, fig. 13, 9). The finds also include a small fragment of the upper part of a terra sigillata cup, in which the spot can be seen where the flat vertical handle was fixed to the body. Below a horizontal groove separating the body and the shoulders is a dainty vine- and flower relief. The cup is undoubtedly an imported one, most probably from Pergamon, judging by both the structure of the pink-yellow, dense and well-elutriated clay without mica intrusions, and by the existing analogues. They are usually dated to the late 2nd century B.C., although fragments of such vessels can be found in layers containing much later materials, viz. those of the 1st century A.D. (Vnukov and Kovalenko 1998: 7072, fig. 4, 6 and 6, 1). Another Hermitage statuette (inv. no. . 59-49; height 8.9 cm; ill. 4), from Myrmekion, demonstrates a most substantial alteration of the original type (Pruglo 1970: 100, 32, pl. 45, 7; Denisova 1981: 124, pl. XXVI ). The change is so considerable that V.I. Denisova, who dated the terracotta to the 2nd 3rd centuries, defined it as a goddess wearing a hat similar to a Phrygian cap. Indeed, the Bosporan artist has changed the shape of the hat, adding to it a top that makes it look like a Phrygian cap, but the composition in general has been preserved. It should be noted that mime-actors sometimes wore Phrygian caps (Stevenson 1975: 63).
Ill. 3. Hunchback marionette. Fragment. From the Nymphaion excavations. The State Hermitage
31
According to A.V. Sazanov, the Bosporan marionettes were copies after Italic productions of the 2nd to early 1st centuries B.C. This does not seem convincing. Sazanovs chief argument is that a Kerch mime marionette was supposedly made from Italian clay. He refers to I.D. Marchenkos dissertation (Sazanov 1985: 20). In her much later publication, however, Marchenko does not mention this circumstance; from among hundreds of the typically local statuettes, she only separates a group of the earliest ones, based on common Greek marionette-types (Marchenko 1974: 38). Marionettes with immovable arms are likely to be come across in the late Hellenistic or the Roman period, not only in Southern Italy, but also in Asia Minor and on the North Coast of the Black Sea; in Greece such finds are rare (Winter 1903: 171, 13, 6, 8; 172, 17; 173; Grandjouan 1961: 58, nos. 492495; Burr Thompson 1963: 89, pl. XXIX, no. 138; Mollard-Besques 1963: 85, MYR 280, pl. 104 e; Marchenko 1974: 3839; True and Hamma 1994: 236237, no. 119; Schmidt 1994: 182, no. 307, table 55; Hamdorf 1996: 39, ill. 33). In our case, the marionettes were connected with theatre, rather than religious ceremonies. The marionette theme was mentioned by a number of authors; for example, Plato speaks about the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets (The Republic; translated by Benjamin Jowett; cf. also Plat. pol. VII.514B; Plat. nomoi. 644de). Xenophon tells about one , a professional puppeteer from Syracuse on a visit in Athens, who says that he depends on fools because they look at his puppets and give him bread. This is why, says Philip, I saw you pray to the gods the other day to send the abundance of bread and failure of intelligence wherever you come (Xen. Ag. symp. IV, 55). It follows that the marionette theatre belonged to a somewhat lower kind, close to the thematically similar mime- or phlyax play. The fact that the art of a certain puppeteer was estimated so highly that he was admitted to the Theatre of Dionysos in Athens suggests that this kind of play was popular with the public in large. Yet, the opinion of an ancient author who regarded it unworthy of the stage where Euripides divine masterpieces were presented shows that puppets were fairly low in the hierarchy of theatrical genres (Lafaye 1905: 7677). But this circumstance did not prevent the philosophers, who were the societys intellectual elite, from using puppets for the purpose of comparison when discussing most serious topics, such as, for example, the motivation and correctness of mans behaviour, cf. May
32
Ill. 4. Terracotta. From the Myrmekion excavations The State Hermitage
we not conceive each of us living beings to be a puppet of the Gods, either their plaything only, or created with a purpose which of the two we cannot certainly know? But we do know, that these affections in us are like cords and strings, which pull us different and opposite ways, and to opposite actions; and herein lies the difference between virtue and vice. According to the argument there is one among these cords which every man ought to grasp and never let go, but to pull with it against all the rest; and this is the sacred and golden cord of reason, called by us the common law of the State; there are others which are hard and of iron (Plat. nomoi. 644645; translated by Benjamin Jowett). It was the stoics more than other philosophers who especially favoured this comparison, using it to describe one as prey to ones passion or a slave of somebody elses wish. Galen, in turn, used the comparison of the human body and the puppet in his medical studies to explain the work of the muscles (Lafaye 1905: 77). The high position of Antioch IX, the king of Syria (11695 B.C.) did not preclude him from having a marionette theatre. According to Diodore of Sicily, the king himself operated puppets five cubits tall, dressed in costumes adorned with gold and silver (Diod. XXXIV, 34). Such marionettes were made of wood; they had
numerous hinges that allowed the puppeteer to manipulate not only the limbs, but also the head and even the eyes of the marionette. (Lafaye 1905: 77). Diodores evidence is especially valuable, since the marionettes have not come down to our day. Such large puppets with many moveable parts were expressive enough and were visible to spectators, unlike our terracotta dolls which, in addition, were incapable of arm gestures. The latter were very important, however, first of all, from the point of view of the well-developed cheironomy (Greek ), the system of hand gestures, which at the Hellenistic period were associated not only with dance, but also with pantomime. One of Lucians characters, praising a mimes dance representing Aphrodite and Ares, exclaims that besides seeing the story, he hears, as it were, the actor speaking with his hands (Lonsdale 1993: 30). The main mime-play characters, including our hunchbacks, are from the hoi polloi who did not dislike grimaces and gestures. This finds confirmation in the writings of the intellectual elite who unanimously denounced such a manner of acting as extremely vulgar. Aristotle was the first to note that exaggerated gesticulation was typical of the lower type of spectators only (Aristot. poet. 1461 1462a). Cicero, too, remarked that the orator will not use the laughable too incessantly, to avoid scurrility, nor crudely, like a mime actor, adding that [h]is gesture also will be neither pompous, nor theatrical, but consist in a moderate and easy sway of the body, and derive much of its efficacy from the countenance, not a stiff and affected countenance, but such a one as handsomely corresponds with his sentiments (Cic. or. 25 translated by E. Jones; see also Hunter 2002: 189195). It is hard to imagine that such or similar small figurines of bone or wax could be used for theatrical play and that they were used to stage various farces well known to the public (Marchenko 1974: 39). They could be used only at small home theatres with no more than a dozen spectators. A different thing was the terracotta marionettes of the extremely rare type, a man and a dog grotesquely depicted, in private collections in New York and Munich, the former being c. 60 cm high and the latter c. 30 cm long. Both have a complicated system of strings that can be used to manipulate the various parts, including the mans jaw and the dogs tail2. In all probability, however, the clay marionettes, like numerous other Greek terracotta figurines of actors, mostly comic ones, were
2 I am grateful to Dr. Maya Muratov for having familiarized me with these terracottas.
but representations of real marionettes used in theatrical plays. This, in fact, is what Lafaye must have meant when he suggested that such miniature representations of theatre marionettes could be used as childrens toys, cf., for example, his description of Hercules: This crude toy can give us an approximate idea of more elaborate marionettes that were used in the theatre of a very special kind (neurospaston) (Lafaye 1905: 97). Nothing is known about real marionette scenes, but it is more than probable that the characters were well known to the public. According to Kazimierz Michalowski, the hunchback marionette represents a comedy character of an oriental merchant (Michalowski 1958: 91, 149). Another interpretation of it is possible, however. The cunning and cruel hump-backed Dossenus, a representation of either a teacher, a charlatan scholar or a quack-physician could well have been borrowed from the atellanae or farces of South-Italian phlyakes and itinerant actors in Rome, known from Livy (Liv. VII.2, 89). Dossenus was one of the four characters of those comedies, together with the gobbler Maccus, the stupid braggart Buffoons and the feckless old Pappus. According to M. Bieber, the four characters first appeared in the ancient Doric farce (Bieber 1939: 298, 307). Scholars are at variance, however, as to the interpretation of the characters in question. Polette Ghiron-Bistagne, for example, suggests that the hunchback was Maccus. At the same time, she admits that this cannot be proved with absolute certainty (Ghiron-Bistagne 1970: 278). As Richard Hunter has demonstrated, different, even conflicting, kinds of theatre play, such as tragedy and mime-play, were connected with one another during the Hellenistic period (Hunter 2002: 195207). Doro Levi mentions a quickthinking and sarcastic hunchback, edacious and witty, himself an object of jokes, to which he was always ready to retort, as insatiable as his jokes were inexhaustible, a character popular through the ages both in the West and East. According to Levi, the character belongs to the popular type originating from the labourers and craftsmen, dwarfs, jesters, Africans and pigmies who were part of the antic Hellenistic and Alexandrian world. Traditionally, the resourceful and sarcastic hunchback played an important role in popular farces and stories (Levi 1941: 229 and notes 93, 97). Among the epigrams by Marcus Valerius Martialis about marbre statues, pictures, items of bronze and precious metalls there is one devoted to terracotta huncback (Mart. XIV.182). It is not impossible that such figurines were used as apotropaea protecting from evil eye. The age-old belief
33
that hunchbacks bring good fortune has come down to our day in Greece, Italy, the Mediterranean, Spain, England, and even India (Levi 1941: 228). In The Life of Aesop (1st century A.D.), the first detailed description of his ugly appearance, it is said that he was a hunchback. On the other hand, on the fragment of a vase (5th century B.C.) Aesop (if it is Aesop) is depicted without a hump (Zinserling 1967: 571, pl. 128). During the Classical period, physical defects were less attractive to the artists than in the Hellenistic period. In the Life, it is Aesops hump that explains to his fellow-slaves the new acquisition of the slave-dealer: The slaves said to themselves: By Nemesis, what has made our master purchase such a filthy creature? One of them then said: Dont you know why he has bought him?. When he was asked why, he replied: So that he might employ him as an apotropaeum for the slave-shop (quoted from Dickie 1995: 242; cf. Levi 1941: 229; Stevenson 1975: 45). Like Aesop clay hunchbacks could be used as talismans. It is possible that miniature marionettes were hung by a string or metal loop near smiths hearths, for example, as it was done with grotesque satyr masks and gorgoneia (), which, according to Pollux, was a protection from bad luck (Stevenson 1975: 4445; 55, note 17; Khodza 2003: 71).
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Bernhard 1956 Bernhard M. L. Katalog wystawy zabytkow z wykopalisk w Mirmeki w r. 1956. Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie. Warszawa, 1956. Besques 1972 Besques S. Catalogue raisonn des figurines et reliefs en terre-cuite grecs trusques et romaine. Vol. III. Paris, 1972. Bieber 1939 Bieber M. The History of the Greek and Roman Theatre. Princeton, 1939. Burr Thompson 1963 Burr Thompson, Dorothy. Troy. The Terracotta Figurines of the Hellenistic Period. Princeton, 1963. Cicero [Cicero, Marcus Tullius.] Ciceros Brutus, or History of Famous Orators: also, His Orator, or Accomplished Speaker. Now first translated into English by E. Jones: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/ etext06/8cbho10.txt Compte-rendu 1882 Compte-rendu de la Comission Impriale Archologique pour lanne 1880. St. Petersburg, 1882: 123, pl.VI, 4. Dnisova 1981 Dnisova V. I. Koroplastika Bospora [Bosporan Coroplasts Art]. Leningrad, 1981.
Dickie 1995 Dickie, Matthew. A Joke in Old Comedy: Aristophanes Fragment 607 PCG. Classical Philology 3 (July). Vol. 90. 1995. Dunand 1990 Dunand F. Catalogue des terres cuites grco-romaines dEgypte. Muse du Louvre, dpartement des antiquits gyptiennes. Paris, 1990. Ghiron-Bistagne 1970 Ghiron-Bistagne, Polette. Les demi-masques. Revue archologique, fasc. 2. 1970: 253281. Golnko 1974 Golnko K. V. Monty iz raskopok Nimfja 19301970 gg. [Coins from the 19301970 Excavations of Nymphaion]. Numizmatika i epigrafika IX. Moscow, 1974. Grandjouan 1961 Grandjouan S. Terracottas and Plastic Lamps of the Roman Period. Vol. 6. Princeton: The Athenian Agora, 1961. The Greek Anthology The Greek Anthology. (Loeb Classical Library). Vol. IV. New Haven, 1960. Hamdorf 1996 Hamdorf F. W. Hauch des Prometheus. Meisterwerke in Ton. Mnchen, 1996. Himmelmann 1983 Himmelmann N. Alexandria und der Realismus in der griechischen Kunst. Tbingen, 1983. Hoffmann 1960 Hoffmann H. Neuerwerbungen der Antikenabteilung im Hamburgischen Museum fr Kunst und Gewerbe 19401960. Archologischer Anzeiger. 1960: 79150. Hunter 2002 Hunter, Richard. Acting Down: the Ideology of Hellenistic Performance. In: Easterling P. and E. Hall (eds.). Greek and Roman Actors. Aspects of Ancient Profession. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002: 189206. Kekul 1884 Kekul R. Die Terrakotten von Sicilien. Berlin and Stuttgart, 1884. Khodza 2003 Khodza . N. Pozdnellinistiskij trrakotovyj golovki v polumaskax iz sobranija Ermitaa [Late Hellenistic Terracotta Halfmasked Heads from the Hermitage Collection]. Soobenija Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa LX. 2003: 6073. Korpusova 1983 Korpusova V. N. Nkropol Zolotoj: K etnokulturnoj istorii jevropjskogo Bospora [The Zolotoye Necropolis: On the Ethnocultural History of European Bosporus]. Kiv, 1983. Lafaye 1905 Lafaye G. Neurospaston. In: Daremberg Ch. and E. Saglio. Dictionnaire des antiquits, grecques et romaines daprs les textes et les monuments. Vol. IV. Paris, 1905: 7677. Levi 1941 Levi, Doro. The Evil Eye and the Lucky Hunchback. Antioch on-theOrontes. Vol. III. The Excavations 19371939. Princeton, 1941. The Life of Aesop iznopisanij Ezopa [The Life of Aesop]. In: Basni Ezopa. (Literaturnye pamatniki.) Moscow: Nauka, 1968: 762.
Lonsdale 1993 Lonsdale, Steven H. Dance and Ritual Play in Greek Religion. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993. Marchenko 1974 Marchenko I. D. Mariontki i kultovyj statuetki Pantikapja. [Marionettes and Cult Statuettes of Panticapaeum]. In: Kobylina . . (ed.). Trrakoty Svrnogo Prirnomorja. III. Pantikapj. Svod arxeologieskix istonikov. G1-11. Moscow, 1974: 3846. Maslnnikov 1995 Maslnnikov A. A. Kamnnyj jaiki Vostonogo Kryma: (K istorii slskogo naslnija Jevropjskogo Bospora v VII vv. do n. e.) [Stone Boxes of the Eastern Crimea: On the History of the Rustic Population of European Bosporus in the 6th 1st Centuries B.C.]. Bosporskij sbornik 8. Moscow, 1995. Michalowski 1958 Michalowski, Kazimierz. Mirmeki. Wykopaliska odcinka polskiego w r. 1956. Warszawa, 1958. Mollard-Besques 1963 Mollard-Besques S. Catalogue raisonn des figurines et reliefs en terre-cuite grecs et romains. Vol. II. Paris, 1963. Muratov 2005 Muratov, Maya. From the Mediterranean to the Bosporos: Terracotta Figurines with Articulated Limbs. Ph.D. Thesis. New York University, Institute of Fine Arts, 2005. Neugebauer 1951 Neugebauer K. A. Die griechischen Bronzen der Klassischen Zeit und des Hellinismus. Berlin: Academie-Verlag, 1951. OAK Otet Imperatorskoj Arxeologieskoj Komissii [Imperial Archeological Commission Report] for 1878. St. Petersburg, 1881. Perdrizet 1911 Perdrizet P. Bronzes grecs dgypte de la collection Fouquet. Paris, 1911. Pfisterer-Haas 1994 Pfisterer-Haas S. Die bronzenen Zwergentnzer. In: Hellenkemper Salies G., Hans-Hoyer von Prittwitz, Gaffron and G. Bauchhenss (eds). Das Wrack: Der antike Schiffsfund von Mahdia. Bd. 1. Kln: Rheinland-Verlag GmbH, 1994: 483504. Pruglo 1970 Pruglo V.I. Statuetki iz Mirmkija [Statuettes from Myrmekion]. In: Kobylina . . (ed.). Trrakoty Svrnogo Prirnomorja. III. Pantikapj. Svod arxeologieskix istonikov. G1-11. Moscow, 1970: 94100.
Reeder 1988 Reeder, Ellen. D. Hellenistic Art in the Walters Art Gallery. Baltimore, Maryland and Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1988. Rohden 1880 Rohden H. Die Terrakotten von Pompeji. Stuttgart: Verlag von W. Spemann, 1880. Sazanov 1985 Sazanov A. V. Proisxodnij odnoj gruppy bosporskix ritualnyx trrakot [The Origin of One Group of Bosporan Ritual Terracottas]. Pamjatniki antinoj arxologii: Kratkij soobnija 182. Moscow, 1985: 1822. Schmidt 1994 Schmidt, Evamaria. Katalog der antiken Terrakotten Martin-vonWagner-Museum der Universitt Wrzburg. Mainz am Rhein, 1994. Schneider-Lenguel 1936 Schneider-Lenguel A. Griechische Terrakotten. Mnchen, 1936. Stevenson III 1975 Stevenson III, W. E. The Pathological Grotesque Representation in Greek and Roman Art. Dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, 1975. Sztetyllo 1976 Sztetyllo Z. Mirmeki. III. Warszawa, 1976. True and Hamma 1994 True, Marion and Keneth Hamma (eds). A Passion for Antiquities. Ancient Art from the Collection of Barbara and Lawrence Fleischman. Malibu, California, 1994. Vnukov and Kovalnko 1998 Vnukov S. Yu. and S.A. Kovalnko. Mgarskij ai s gorodia Kara-Tob [Megarian Cups from the Kara-Tobe Site]. In: uravlv, Denis (ed.). Ellinistiskaja i rimskaja kramika v Svrnom Prirnomorj I. Moscow, 1998. Waldhauer 1914 Waldhauer, Oscar. Die antiken Tonlampen. Kaiserliche Eremitage. St. Petersburg, 1914. Winter 1903 Winter F. Die Typen der figrlichen Terrakotten. Part I. Berlin and Stuttgart: Verlag von W. Spemann, 1903. Zinserling 1967 Zinserling V. Physiognomische Studien in der sptarchaischen und Klassischen Vasenmalerei. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universitt Rostock 16. Jahrgang. Heft 7/8. 1967: 571575.
34
BY ALEXANDER KRUGLOV EROS WITH A SHELL, AN ANCIENT FOUNTAIN STATUE

Dedicated to Mark
It has often been noted that the ancient marble statue of Eros with a Shell (inv. no. 9187, code A.855; height of figure 1.31 m, height with base 1.38 m; Stefani 1872: 1113, no. 4; Reinach 1908: 437, 8; Waldhauer 1923: 167, no. 479; Waldhauer 1931: 2628, no. 126; Dhl 1968: 60, l.1; Kapossy 1969: 38; Korolev and Kuchumova 1987: 24, 26, 31, note 18) is in a better state of preservation than many other sculptures in the Hermitage collection of classical antiquities (ill. 1). Thanks to this, several years ago it took a central place in the exhibition of the Hall of Ancient Decorative Sculpture (no. 108) in the New Hermitage building. Any work of ancient Roman fountain sculpture presupposes its study in such important aspects as archaeological origin, functioning as a technical device, symbolism of the image and cultural and historical environment. In this sense the Hermitage exhibit has the most enviable qualities worthy of intent research. Especially interesting is the fact that the statue falls into the category of historical 18th-century acquisitions of ancient sculpture made by Russia and this fact significantly enhances its value. The statue found its way to Petrograd in 1922 when, as a result of the new museum policy, the best works of the former Imperial residencies were transferred to the Hermitage. In spite of intensive debate and strong criticism, Oscar Waldhauer was able to obtain some of the most significant works from Pavlovsk Palace (Zubov 1922: 5; Sapozhnikova 1923: 30; Korolev and Kuchumova 1987: 2034)1. We can assume that if by 1922 the Hermitage had not had its own Eros with a Bow, a Ro1 Im grateful to E. V. Korolev for furnishing information on Zubovs articles.
man copy of Lysippos original acquired during the reign of Nicholas I, then all the three ancient Erotes of Pavlovsk Palace, Eros with a Bow, Eros of the Centocelle Type and Eros with a Shell (highlights of its 18th-century collection of antiques) would have been transferred to the Museum. Luckily, the Eros with a Bow bought by Paul I in Italy is still on view in the niche of the Italian Hall of Pavlovsk Palace where it was originally installed by the architect Charles Cameron himself. Waldhauer marked out the Eros with a Shell as kept in the Church Hall, called also the Knights Hall or the Antechurch Gallery (Korolev and Kuchumova 1987: 26, note 18). Following the Emperors order on the transfer of monuments from Tsarskoye Selo, the sculpture was brought to Pavlovsk Palace in 1798 where the architect Vincenzo Brenna was working at the time (Korolev 1996: 213). It is significant that the statue entirely escaped the fire of 1803. The Eros with a Shell comes from the collection of John Lyde Brown, Director of the Bank of England. Purchased for Catherine the Great in 1785, it was placed in the Grotto (Morning Hall) at Tsarskoye Selo in 1787 (Neverov 1984a: 420; Neverov 1984b: 8496; Loewinson-Lessing 1985: 97, 272; Androsov 1989: 40; Neverov 1999: 154 160; Androsov 2000: 1213; Chekmarev 2002: 240; Kruglov 2007: 282294). The catalogue of the collection describes the work in this way: A statue, one of the nicest and most elegant, of a little winged Cupid holding a shell; in antiquity it was adapted for use as a fountain; discovered in the vicinity of Lake Nemi (Catalogo 1779, Statue Mezze Figure, no. 35). The statue was found and recorded by the Scottish painter, archaeologist and dealer of antiques Gavin
Ill. 1. Eros with a Shell: 1 general view; 2, 3 side view. The State Hermitage
37
36
Hamilton (Irwin 1967: 87102).2 In his letters to the collector Charles Townley, one of his most influential clients, Hamilton reviews the ancient marbles he found between 1769 and 1779 in various areas near Rome. He writes about the excavations carried out in 1771 on the Via Appia and enumerates sculptural objects recovered during an archaeological campaign in Albano (they are also mentioned in his letters of 177274 and 177677). At that time he hired a team of workers who dug near Monte Cagnolo and on the banks of Lake Nemi. A number of remarkable statues were recovered in the territory which, in Hamiltons opinion, had once belonged to the Villa of Antoninus Pius near ancient Lavinium. Hamilton concludes his review with a remark that the excavations on Nemi were not so successful as the place had been already dug; nevertheless I found that young Cupid holding a Vase which was purchased by Mr. Brown and in some degree recompensed my trouble (Dallaway 1800: 376; Smith 1901: 311314). Quite noteworthy are the last words which imply that Hamilton (unlike his prosperous partner Jenkins who permitted himself to ask exorbitant prices) was not financially independent and lived by selling ancient monuments, being constantly in need of their inflow both from old collections and archaeological excavations. This is evidenced by the well-known story of Hamiltons offer of Jupiter to Catherine II (Kruglov 2008). This sculpture was in actual fact discovered not on the Villa Hadriana, as insisted by some authors (Chekmarev 2002: 237238), but in Tivoli on the Villa dEste, and subsequently ended up in the J. Paul Getty Museum. The work presented both difficulties and troubles. Apart from the hazards caused by importunate insects and reptiles so vividly described by Hamilton to Townley in connection with the excavations at Pantanello by the Villa Hadriana (Smith 1901: 308), it was also necessary to obtain a concession for conducting excavations in this place and to hand over more than a third of the finds to the state (as a result, the finest pieces usually entered the Museo Pio Clementino). Like many of his countrymen, however, Hamilton would not present everything to the Supervisory Commissioner for Antiquities in Rome (Ingamells 1997: 449). According to its inventory card, the Hermitage statue was discovered in 1771 but this date should be consid2 Hamiltons painting The Abduction of Helen by Paris (178284), bought by Nikolay Yusupov, is in the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow.
ered erroneous. In his letter to Townley Hamilton does not speak directly when he found the statue but if we take into account the sequence in which he described the excavations in Albano (those at Lake Nemi and the statue of Eros were the last to be mentioned), we may assume that this happened in the second half of the 1770s. As follows from the letter, Brown bought the statue directly from Hamilton (that is, without any mediators) and the sale apparently took place shortly after the excavations. It is to be supposed, though, that some time must have been spent on restoring the statue before the sale. Repeated references to the statues good state of preservation are first of all motivated by the fact that it seems solid, not fragmented and without defects on the surface. Yet this does not mean that it has come down to the present completely undamaged. On the contrary, there are some losses and additions, and it is splendidly restored. Re-created in marble as one large piece is part of the left arm from the elbow to the edge of the shell, including the hand; also re-created are the lower part of the neck, part of the edge of the shell, a large portion of the rounded base with the sole of the left foot up to the ankle, and a small part of the base; some curls on the head; part of the chin, and the nose with the lower lip (ill. 2). The tip of the left wing was added in plaster. The broken tip of the right wing an original fragment was reattached to the main part of the wing (ill. 3). The fragment shows an entirely different state of preservation: the stone is corroded and darker in colour because of the incrustation of lime salts, which probably signifies that it was embedded in another layer of soil, the humidity and composition of which differed from those of the stratum in which the figure itself was found. The most important observation, entirely at variance with the previous statements on the condition of the statue, is that its head is antique but does not belong to the rest of the statue. This fact was not recorded in the documents of its day and, as a rule, dealers did not warn their clients of such peculiarities, except for a few cases. Jenkins, for example, inscribed the words Head not its own (Neverov 1999: 157) on a drawing of the statue of Venus sent to Townley. The head of our Eros is made in marble which at first glance looks similar to that of the rest of the figure (white coarse-grained), although this marble has grey veins. Moreover, if the head belonged to the given body, the ends of the long curls would fall onto the neck, but they are absent. In the modelling of the wing feathers should the head and body be a single whole one could have expected the same thin deep
grooves that separate the locks of hair, but the contours of the feathers are engraved not deeply. At a closer look we notice that the marble surface of the head and especially the face is different from that of the rest of the figure. The head seems polished more thoroughly and has an oily shine; in addition, the marble of the head has a yellowish tint. All this undoubtedly points to the restorers use of an acid completing the mechanical cleaning of the stone surface. Presumably the same techniques were employed in restoring the figure too, which is why the ancient fragments of different
Ill. 2. Head of Eros: 1 front view; 2 side view; 3 side and back view
time and different treatment produce the impression of a single whole. The restorer displayed great delicacy and finesse in combining the fragments and finishing the thin seams; he achieved a unity of form and a sense of integrity by modelling the colour of the marble statue, as a result of which the composite character of the antique remained unnoticed for two centuries. The above-mentioned qualities demonstrate a special approach to ancient sculpture that was used in recreating the present monument. According to researchers, in the second half of the 1770s Italian restorers developed a method that differed from the long-estab39
lished technique of the leading Roman restorer Bartholomeo Cavaceppi (17161799) and that became characteristic for his pupil and, later, his rival Carlo Albacini (17361824) (Vaughan 1991: 183197). Cavaceppi insisted that a true restorer should not only know how to fill in losses on a beautiful arm or a beautiful head; he was also supposed to work in the spirit of an ancient master, in order to grasp his manner and approach (Cavaceppi 1768). Cavaceppi based his method on the theory of ancient art formulated by Johann Joachim Winckelmann (Rossi Pinelli 1981: 4148). Yet there also flourished among the restorers the practice
38
of a fairly arbitrary combination of various ancient fragments, an example of which is provided by the re-creation of the Jenkins Venus (Dallaway 1800: 349350; Michaelis 1882: 7980; Ingamells 1997: 555; Ramage 1999: 83; Scott 2003: 99100). Many contemporaries criticized this practice, and at a later date researchers revealed an affinity between such restoration methods and the falsification of antiques (Picon 1983: 1617). It is noteworthy that Albacini achieved greater integrity in restored ancient pieces than his teacher Cavaceppi. There are good reasons to associate the restoration of the Hermitage statue with Albacini, who from the mid1770s fulfilled Hamiltons commissions (Vaughan 1991: 185, 187). Statues restored by Albacini, such as the Ince Diana and the Townley Venus, are distinguished by a rounded form of the base where the foot soles are close to its edge; a yellowish tone of marble (Bartman 2003: 116, 119) and a soft combination of the old and new
Ill. 3. Eros with a Shell, back view
parts. It is worth mentioning that in Albacinis statue Cupid and Psyche (Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, Madrid) the form of Cupids head reproduces the type of face (somewhat elongated with slightly puffy cheeks) and hairdo (with locks and a bun over the forehead) characteristic of the Hermitage work. The head of our Eros, broken off another statue, was properly fixed to the body, in accordance with the composition of its prototype Eros with a Bow by Lysippos. On the whole, the losses were filled in with due regard to the subject and the figures movement in space. The restorer may have been familiar with some of the ancient replicas of the Eros with a Bow, known in Italy from the 15th century (Bober and Rubinstein 1986: 88 89). He did not have to go far in search for them: in the same letter to Townley, Hamilton mentions a place twelve miles away from Rome, namely the Castel di Quido, where a statuette of Eros drawing a bow was found (Smith 1901: 317). The statuette passed to Townley and its restorer, probably none other than Carlo Albacini, the main restorer of Townleys marbles throughout the 1770s and 1780s (Vaughan 1991: 183, 187ff.), might have re-created the Eros with a Shell, too. If this supposition is correct, the date of the excavations at the Castel di Quido, 1776 (Pietrangeli 1983: 386) can help to define more precisely when the Eros with a Shell was recovered, namely, between 1776 and 1779. The dating of the Hermitage piece itself is fairly difficult. The manner of the head treatment would be helpful, had the figures own head survived. On the basis of the characteristically long bored grooves separating the locks, the attached head can be dated to the 2nd century A.D., the time of the Antonine dynasty. The dating of the figure is more complicated. The marble surface is not polished thoroughly and the hollows separating the joints of the parts (the heels and calves of the right leg with the tree-trunk (ill. 4) are marked out by a running drill. Such techniques were widely employed by marblecutters starting from the late Hellenistic period. One should also bear in mind that large fountain statues appeared in the 1st century B.C. and gained currency in the next century. In his days Oscar Waldhauer proposed to assign the statue to the early Imperial period (Waldhauer 1931: 2628, no. 126), but, as we see, the attached head dates from a later time. One may logically infer that the indication of the place of discovery, the vicinity of Lake Nemi, would have helped to solve the problem. Unfortunately, Hamilton has not left any information in what
particular area he worked. Therefore we have no other choice but to assume that the statue probably decorated one of the Roman villas of the Imperial period or belonged to the votive sculptures of Dianas ancient sanctuary Nemorensis. Archaeological explorations of the late 19th and first third of the 20th century have revealed numerous marble statues from this famous grove dedicated to the goddess. Some 39 pieces are housed in the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia (Romano 2006: 73 161). Altogether almost 200 pieces dating from the late 2nd century B.C. to the mid-2nd century A.D. were registered (Guldager Bilde 2000: 93), including statues of Erotes (Romano 2006: 128132, nos. 6667) and one fountain figure (ibid: 124127, no. 65), all dated to the late Republican period. They have many affinities with the Hermitage work in the modelling of the bodys volume, the details of the trunk-shaped support and the joint between the tree-trunk and the leg. These features also make it akin to the statue of Eros from the late Hellenistic period in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen (Nielsen and stergaard 1997: 3031, no. 7). Consequently, the figure of the Hermitage statue can be dated to the 1st century B.C. and the attached head to the 2nd century A.D. In the manuscript of his unfinished article Flavische Idealplastik, cited by Anna Peredolskaya (1938: 3034), Oscar Waldhauer mentions an anonymous sculptor, Master of Ganymede in Madrid, who produced a number
Ill. 4. Support and leg of Eros
of sentimental, genre figures. In Waldhauers opinion, the Hermitage Eros with a Shell might have been created in the same workshop and probably even by the same sculptor. It must be stated, however, that such attribution is absolutely groundless: on the one hand, in its present restored condition the figure consists of parts varying in the time of production; had the authentic head survived the conclusion about the sculptor and the period of creation would be entirely different. On the other hand, the name of the sculptor, unlike that of a vase-painter, cannot be established on the basis of photographs without seeing the original and without knowing the restored state of each particular object, the type of marble of which it is made and many other things. Even though there are objects of similar origin, for example, in Afrodisias, famous for its sculptural workshops of the Imperial period and a number of signed statues, contemporary researchers of ancient sculpture see no reason to use conventional names for sculptors. Enumerating the formal stylistic features of works by the master in question, Waldhauer writes, with great power he [the sculptor A.K.] treats the body in space, moving forward some of its parts, strongly curving and turning the upper part while intensely concentrating all forms despite a significant mobility of lines (Peredolskaya 1938: 34). Everything will be much clearer if we say that the Eros with a Shell is not the work of an independent artist, but an ancient Roman variation of the original composition by Lysippos, the statue of Eros drawing a bow that probably stood in the famous sanctuary of Eros at Thespiae (Edwards 1996: 139140). Only thanks to this dependence, the work has all the necessary qualities of a spatial composition. At the same time, we must note that the figure of Eros holding a shell did not turn into a literal repetition of the Eros drawing a bow because the ancient Roman sculptor re-created the figure by hand without resorting to mechanical copying. Comparison of the sculptures shows that they are different in composition, especially as regards the position of the legs. The right foot heel of the Eros with a Shell is not extended so far forward as that of the Eros with a Bow, and this feature accounts for other differences as well: there is no such amplitude of balancing, no such deep curving of the torso in space, no play of contours at the slightest change of the vantage point. There appear, instead, more distinct planes and more definite contours, of which the lateral left from the onlooker is the least elegant. Moving further the onlooker may notice the completeness of
40
41
the back-plane composition, in which the form of the support merges with that of the right leg while the wings, located close, almost parallel to each other, do not distort the contours of the human figure (ill. 4). Moving from back to right we can enjoy the perfectly built composition of the curved torso, presenting a view entirely in tune with our notion of the most distinctive Lysippic quality in sculpture the dynamic, changeable contour (ill. 5). I believe that the Roman sculptor must have preserved the type of head and hairdo of the Eros with a Bow in his new creation, basing himself on his understanding of the characters age. Lysippos Eros has a large head, with short locks of hair compactly adjoining it and the boy Eros is about 10 to 12 years old. The ancient head attached to the body of Eros with a shell is proportional to it, although the long locks combined with a large bow of hair tied over the forehead attest to a younger age: this hairstyle is often found on the statues of the child Eros from the Hellenistic period.
Ill. 5. Eros with a Shell, side and back view
The type of statue in the shape of a youths figure with a shell was very popular and several replicas of it, albeit highly fragmented, survive today (Dhl 1968: 6061). Among them, the Hermitage sculpture, although with a head not its own, is in the best state of preservation. The closest analogy in the Museum of Archaeology in Taranto, presumably of local make, is also dated to the 1st century B.C. while its prototype is referred to the 3rd century B.C. (Belli Pasqua 1995: 117 119). The latter date is unlikely, however, as at that time pressurized water was not yet in use and large fountain statues simply did not exist. Noteworthy versions of the type that had evolved by the Imperial period can be exemplified by the image of an infant Eros with a shell, standing on or riding a dolphin that served as a fancy support for the large marble statue of Venus (copies in the Museum of Archaeology in Antalya (Sculptures 1996, no. 16) and in the Museo Civico di Lucera (Introduzione 1992: 121, fig. 294). That the statue falls into the category of fountain sculpture is above all confirmed by the surviving lead water-pipe, something that occurs not often on those large fountain figures which have come down to the present. The spout of the metal pipe is seen inside the shell (ill. 6) and its outlet below the shell (ill. 7). This witnesses to the rational arrangement of water conduits by the ancients who understood that to bore a hole for passing a pipe through the sloping statues support might affect the solidity of marble and need a lot of effort. On some fountain figures found in Pompeii one can still see pipes laid from afar, which testifies to the use of this practice even for rather low statuettes. There may have been yet another reason for the non-stationary coupling of sculptures to a source of water, as in this case the ancients could mount them in any place of a garden or a nymphaeum changing decoration as they wished. Any fountain device requires drainage of the water fed through its pipe. If it was desired that the water should not overflow the edges of a fountain, mainly vessel-shaped, an additional pipe was used. As there is no such pipe in our case, the water might have freely run over the edge of a frontal bowl, in the shape of a shell, whose grooves contributed to a pleasant roar of water sprays. At present we can only guess whether the figure was placed in the niche of an exedra with a stepped cascade-like discharge of water into a canal or whether it stood uncovered at the edge of a pool. At first glance, it seems unusual that Eros, not being a sea personage, is holding a shell, a symbol of the sea,
and in this way is likened to a nymph. There is no doubt that the composition of a fountain sculpture with Aphrodite or a nymph with a shell served as a model. At the same time one may recall that in antiquity the scallop shell was the attribute of Eross mother Aphrodite, who was born of the sea; moreover, examples of Eross association with the cult of nymphs are found in Grecian sanctuaries, something that endows the composition with a meaning. Discussion of prototypes in the iconography of Eros himself leads to interesting results. The depiction of Eros as a boy holding a vessel is characteristic for compositions of Greek vasepainting from the 4th century B.C., in which Eros is shown assisting at the toilet of Aphrodite or a mortal woman, acting as the giver of beauty in the literary and figurative sense. Genre motifs with an allegoric meaning also occur in scenes of Eros pouring out water on the plants from a large hydria: in such scenes Eros appears as an assistant of Demeter and Dionysos, the gods of fertility (Bieber 1949: 3138). In the Hellenistic era the already familiar image assumes a more concrete form and the little deity acts as a solicitous gardener; an idea of this, however, can be gleaned not so much from pictorial works as from poetic epigrams in which the beauty of a garden is likened to that of the infant Eros, see Anthologia Palatina IX: 666, 668669 (Venturi Ferriolo 1987: 5574). At the same time, the tradition of religious, or hieratic art was preserved as evidenced by a marble relief from the National Museum in Athens: presumably a decorative piece in the sanctuary of Aphrodite and Eros on the Acropolis, it shows a procession of young Erotes bearing incense-burners, bowls and jugs for libation (Kaltsas 2002: 289, no. 610). Finally, Hellenistic artists depicted the infant Eros with a fan-like shell in his raised arm. This genre motif had of course a symbolic tint: the shell held an erotic meaning (Dhl 1968: 191, note 191) and on the whole the composition with a naked Eros pouring out water from a shell which he holds on the level of his genitals, embodied the idea of fertility fairly vividly. In our statue this motif is so obvious that there can be no doubt it was used deliberately. There is also something in the visual effect of the monument that cannot be overlooked. The body of the naked boy holding a large bowl has bent under the burden and sloped forward, creating innumerable kinds of the changeable contour and beautiful forms, because of which the statue looks immensely sensual. In Classical
43
Antiquity man normally was both the customer and spectator of an artwork and the homoerotic feelings that were never alien to classical society throughout its history undoubtedly influenced the choice of themes. Moreover, the statues of sexy boys who, as defined by Bartman (2002: 249271), were close to the young Erotes, Ganymedes, Apollos and Dionysoses of Greece, in a way reflected the philhellenic tastes of the refined Roman elite. Among the themes of decorative sculptures, in addition to mythological subjects, there occurs the motif of a lamp-bearing boy, which shows an attractive boy-slave attending at a banqueting table. One cannot but marvel, looking at a Roman terracotta statuette of Eros crowned with a flower wreath and holding a multi-burner lamp in the form of a shell in front of himself on the genitals level. (Grandjouan 1961: 74, pl. 25, figs. 926928, 932). Examining the iconography of this work, we come to the conclusion that it contains a poetic metaphor which is meant to show that the god of love himself, young and attractive, acts as a servant at a lovers feast.
Ill. 6. Shell with a lead pipe spout
42
In an attempt to interpret the Hermitage statue, relying on the modern theory of the development of Greek and Roman art, it is most reasonable to use the word imitation rather than such definitions as copy, version of the type and replica. The traditional view that Roman art was dependent on the copying and repetition of Greek models has been revised recently (Gazda 1995: 121156). The spirit of competition marked the work of classical artists over the centuries, and the imitation of a famous preceding model was not peculiar either to the creative process or the perception of an artwork. Imitation of iconography and style was a norm for the creation of a new work satisfying the refined tastes of the customer. Wealthy ancient Romans, who had enough means to indulge in leisure pursuits, gathered collections of such sculptures for their homes and suburban villas (Bartman 1991: 7188). Imitative sculpture was in demand since it matched the level of knowledge and the aesthetic needs of the connoisseurs who were fond of discussing the art of the past and who assessed a new image through the prism of its original. Imitative sculpture was also in vogue as with the passage of time it had become virtually impossible to acquire any authentic work by a well-known Grecian sculptor. For this reason, Eros with a Shell was likened to Lysippos Eros with a Bow and simultaneously turned into an original work of the fountain genre. It is surprising that this attachment to the celebrated prototype proved very stable in later times as well. There is a unique work in the Hermitage, an immensely large pen drawing on canvas by Hendrick Goltzius entitled
Without Bacchus and Ceres, Venus is Chilled (1606); it depicts Bacchus, Venus, Ceres and Eros before the altar. The figure of Eros repeats the composition of the Eros with a Bow, but his long hairstyle derives from the depiction of the deity of a younger age. It seems that Goltzius, who during his journey to Italy in 159091 visited Venice (Luijten 2003: 117, 123) was familiar with two statues from the Giovanni Grimani collection. One of them is a faithful copy of Lysippos statue while the other is a Roman reproduction of its Hellenistic replica depicting the child Eros with long curly hair and in the same pose as that of the boy Eros with a bow (Favaretto and Traversari 1993: 89, figs. 29 and 9394, figs. 3435). Goltzius became friends with the outstanding Venetian sculptor Alessandro Vittoria who is known for his restoration of Grimanis marbles and who most probably showed the Dutchman the finest pieces of antique sculpture in Venice. The drawing of Goltzius found its way to the Hermitage in the 1770s, approximately at the same time as the Eros with a Shell was discovered in Italy by the archaeologist and painter Gavin Hamilton who derived inspiration from the same classical type. From 1782 to 1784 Hamilton worked in Rome on his Story of Paris series of paintings for the Casino Borghese, modelling many figures on the ancient statues he had seen (Cesareo 2002: 222224 and 220, fig.16). In the composition Paris Taught by Eros, the appearance and hairstyle of Paris along with the proportions and vibrating contour lines of his naked young body all call to mind an ancient Eros.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Androsov 1989 Androsov S.O. Jekaterina II, Ermita i sobranije skulptury [Catherine II, the Hermitage and Its Collection of Sculpture]. In: Istorija Ermitaa i jego kollekcii. Sbornik naunyx trudov. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Leningrad, 1989. Androsov 2000 Androsov S.O. Skorivijsa malik: Zabytoje proizvedenije Mikelanelo [Crouching Boy, a Forgotten Work by Michelangelo]. In: Ermitanyj Malik i Novaja Riznica Mikelanelo. Florence, 2000. Bartman 1991 Bartman E. Sculptural Collecting and Display in the Private Realm. In: Gazda E. K. (ed). Roman Art in the Private Sphere. New Perspectives on the Architecture and Decor of the Domus, Villa, and Insula. Ann Arbor, 1991. Bartman 2002 Bartman E. Eross Flame: Images of Sexy Boys in Roman Ideal Sculpture. In: Gazda E. K. (ed). The Ancient Art of Emulation. Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to
Classical Antiquity. (Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome.) Supplementary. Vol. I. 2002. Bartman 2003 Bartman E. Piecing as Paragone. Carlo Albacinis Diana at Ince. In: Grossman, Janet Burnett, Jerry Podany and Marion True (eds.). History of Restoration of Ancient Stone Sculpture: Papers Delivered at a Symposium Organized by the Department of Antiquities and Antiquities Conservation of the J. Paul Getty Museum, 2527 October 2001. Los Angeles, 2003. Belli Pasqua 1986 Belli Pasqua R. Taranto. La scultura in marmo e in pietra. Catalogo del Museo Nazionale Archeologico di Taranto. [Vol.] IV. Taranto, 1995. Bieber 1949 Bieber M. Eros and Dionysos on Kerch Vases. Hesperia. Supplement VIII. 1949. Bober and Rubinstein Bober P. P. and R. O. Rubinstein. Renaissance Artists and Antique Sculpture. London, 1986. Catalogo 1779 Catalogo dei piu scelti e preziosi Marmi, che si conservano nella Galleria del Sig Lyde Browne, Cavaliere Inglese a Wimbledon, nella contea di Surrey. Raccolti con gran spesi nel corso di trenntanni, molti dei quail si ammiravano prima nelle piu celebre Gallerie di Roma. London, 1779. Cavaceppi 1768 Cavaceppi B. Dellarte di ben restaurare le antiche statue. Raccolta dantiche statue, busti, bassirilievi ed altre sculture restaurate da B. Cavaceppi, scultore romano.Vol. I. Roma, 1768. Cesareo 2002 Cesareo A. Gavin Hamilton (17231798): A Gentleman of Probity, Knowledge and Real Taste. Saggi e memorie di storia dellarte 26. 2002. Chekmarev 2002 Chekmarev V.M. Formirovanije oteestvennogo fonda antinoj skulptury v kontekste rossijsko-britanskix svazej [Forming the Home Stocks of Ancient Sculpture in the Context of Russian-British Relations]. Pamatniki kultury. Novyje otkrytija. Moscow, 2002. Dallaway 1800 Dallaway J. Anecdotes of the Arts in England. London, 1800. Ingamells 1997 Ingamells, John. A Dictionary of British and Irish Travelers to Italy, 17011800. Compiled from the Brinsley Ford Archive by John Ingamells. New Haven, 1997. Dhl 1968 Dhl H. Der Eros des Lysipp. Frhhellenistische Eroten. Gttingen, 1968. Edwards 1996 Edwards Ch. M. Lysippos. Yale Classical Studies. Vol. XXX: Personal Styles in Greek Sculpture. Ed. by Palagia O. and J. J. Pollitt. 1996. Favaretto and Traversari 1993 Favaretto I. and G. Traversari. Tesori di scultura greca a Venezia. Raccolte private del 500 al Museo Archeologico. Venezia, 1993.
Gazda 1995 Gazda E. K. Roman Sculpture and the Ethos of Emulation: Reconsidering Repetition. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 97. 1995. Grandjouan 1961 Grandjouan C. Terracottas and Plastic Lamps of the Roman Period. The Athenian Agora VI. Princeton, 1961. Guldager Bilde 2000 Guldager Bilde P. The Sculptures from the Sanctuary of Diana Nemorensis, Types and Contextualization: an Overview. In: Brandt J. Rasmus, A.-M. Leander Touati and J. Zahle (eds.). Nemi Status Quo. Recent Research at Nemi and the Sanctuary of Diana: Acts of a seminar arranged by Soprintendenza Archeologica per il Lazio, Accademia di Danimarca, Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, Istituto di Norvegia in Roma, Istituto Svedese di Studi Classici a Roma at Accademia di Danimarca. October 23, 1997. Roma, 2000. Introduzione 1992 Introduzione allartigianato della Puglia antica dall et coloniale allet romana. Bari, 1992. Irwin 1967 Irwin D. Gavin Hamilton: Archaeologist, Painter, and Dealer. The Art Bulletin XLIV, 2: 87 (June). 1967. Kaltsas 2002 Kaltsas N. Sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens. Athens, 2002. Kapossy 1969 Kapossy B. Brunnenfiguren der hellenistischen und rmischen Zeit. Zrich, 1969. Korolev 1996 Korolev E.V. Skulptura Italjanskogo zala Pavlovskogo dvorca [Sculpture of the Italian Hall of Pavlovsk Palace]. Pamatniki kultury. Novyje otkrytija. Moscow, 1996. Korolev and Kuchumova 1987 Korolev E.V. and A.M. Kuchumova. Antinaja skulptura Pavlovska v 19181922 godax i problemy muzejnoj specializacii [Ancient Sculpture of Pavlovsk in 19181922 and Problems of Museum Specialization]. In: Antinoje iskusstvo v sovjetskom muzejevedenii. Sbornik naunyx trudov. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Leningrad, 1987. Kruglov 2007 Kruglov A.V. Puteestvija antikov iz Italii v Rossiju. Novoje i staroje o kollekcii Lajda Brauna [Travels of Antiques from Italy to Russia. New and Old on the Lyde Browne Collection]. In: Iz veka Jekateriny Velikoj: puteestviya i puteestvenniki. Materialy XIII Carskoselskoj naunoj konferencii. St. Petersburg, 2007. Kruglov 2008 Kruglov, Alexander. Intrigi vokrug antikov. Jekaterina, Denkins, Gamilton i Lajd Braun [Intrigues around Antiques. Catherine, Jenkins, Hamilton and Lyde-Brown]. Ermitanyje chtenija pamati V.F. Levinsona-Lessinga. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. St. Petersburg, 2008 (forthcoming). Loewinson-Lessing 1985 Loewinson-Lessing V.F. Istorija Kartinnoj galerei Ermitaa (1764 1977), [History of the Hermitage Picture Gallery (17641917)]. Leningrad, 1985.
Ill. 7. Outlet of the pipe below the shell
44
45
Luijten 2003 Luijten G. The Fruits of the Journey to Italy, 15901591. In: Hendrick Goltzius (15581617). Drawings, Prints and Paintings. Exhibition Catalogue. Amsterdam, New York, Toledo (Ohio), 2003. Michaelis 1882 Michaelis A. Ancient Marbles in Great Britain. Cambridge, 1882. Neverov 1984a Neverov O.Ya. Kollekcija Lajda Brauna (K istorii skulpturnogo sobranija Ermitaa) [The Lyde Browne Collection: On the History of the Hermitage Collection of Sculpture]. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa XXIV. 1984. Neverov 1984b Neverov O.Ya. Skulpturnyje portrety v carskoselskom sobranii Jekateriny II [Sculptural Portraits in the Tsarskoe Selo Collection of Catherine II]. In: Skulptura v muzeje. Sbornik naunyx trudov. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Leningrad, 1984. Neverov 1999 Neverov O. La collection des antiquits forme par Lyde Browne achete par Catherine II. Rivista di archeologia. Supplementi 21: Le collezioni di antichit nella cultura antiquaria europea. Incontro internazionale. Varsavia Nieborw, 1720 Giugno 1996. A cura di Manuela Fano Santi. Roma, 1999. Nielsen and stergaard 1997 Nielsen A. M. and J. S. stergaard (with contributions by M. Moltesen and B. Lundgreen). The Eastern Mediterranean in the Hellenistic Period. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Catalogue. Copenhagen, 1997. Peredolskaya 1938 Peredolskaya A.A. Oskar Ferdinandovi Valdgauer [Oscar Ferdinand Waldhauer]. In: Valdgauer O.F. Etudy po istorii antinogo portreta. Leningrad, 1938. Picon 1983 Picon C. A. Bartolomeo Cavaceppi. Eighteenth-Century Restorations of Marble Sculptures from English Private Collections. London, 1983. Pietrangeli 1983 Pietrangeli C. The Discovery of Classical Art in Eighteenth-Century Rome. Apollo 117(May). 1983. Ramage 1999 Ramage N. H. The Pacetti Papers and the Restoration of Ancient Sculpture in the 18th Century. In: Von der Schnheit weissen Marmors. Zum 200. Todestag Bartolomeo Cavaceppis. Herausgegeben von Thomas Weiss. Mainz, 1999. Reinach 1908 Reinach S. Rpertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine. Vol. 2. Paris, 1908.
Romano 2006 Romano I. B. Catalogue of Cypriot, Greek, and Roman Stone Sculpture in the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Philadelphia, 2006. Rossi Pinelli 1981 Rossi Pinelli O. Artisti, falsari o filologhi? Da Cavaceppi a Canova, il restauro della scultura tra arte e scienza. Ricerche di storia dellarte. Vol. 1314: Il Neoclassicismo tra rivoluzione e restaurazione. 1981. Sapozhnikova 1923 Sapozhnikova T. Kameron v Pavlovske [Cameron at Pavlovsk]. Sredi kollekcionerov May. 1923. Scott 2003 Scott J. The Pleasures of Antiquity. British Collectors of Greece and Rome. New Haven, 2003. Sculptures 1996 Sculptures of the Museum in Antalya I. A Journey into Mythology and into History. Antalya, 1996. Smith 1901 Smith. A.H. Gavin Hamilton Letters to Charles Townley. Journal of Hellenic Studies XXI. 1901. Stefani 1872 Stefani L. Sobranije drjevnix pamatnikov iskusstva v Pavlovske [Collection of Ancient Artworks at Pavlovsk]. St. Petersburg, 1872. Vaughan 1987 Vaughan G. James Hugh Smith Barry as a Collector of Antiquities. Apollo 126 (July). 1987. Vaughan 1991 Vaughan G. Albacini and His English Patrons. Journal of the History of Collections 3: 2 (1991). Venturi Ferriolo 1987 Venturi Ferriolo M. Eros e Afrodite. Alle origini dellidea di giardino. In: Il Giardino. Idea, natura, realt. Milano, 1987. Waldhauer 1923 Waldhauer, Oscar Ferdinand. Antinaja skulptura. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita [Sculpture of Classical Antiquity. The State Hermitage]. Petrograd, 1923. Waldhauer 1931 Waldhauer, Oscar. Die antiken Skulpturen der Ermitage. Vol. 1. Berlin, Leipzig, 1931. Zubov 1922 Zubov V. Poemu ne nado razruat dvorcov-muzejev [Why We Must not Destroy Palace-Museums]. Krasnaja Gazeta 121 (1273), June. 1922.
NADEZHDA GULYAEVA BRONZE MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS IN THE COLLECTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTIQUITY A pair of bronze cymbals (inv. nos. B. 964 and B. 965) were acquired by the Hermitage in 1898 as part of the collection of antiquities belonging to Th. Orphanidis, the Greek Consul in the town of Mytilene, the Isle of Lesbos, then under the Turkish rule (Gulyaeva 2002: 210251). They are spheroid in shape, 8.4 cm in diameter, with a wide flat rim which has a slight outward bend at the edge (ill. 1). The ring in the middle of the sphere is fastened with a bronze band, with its ends divided on the inside. On the outside, the flat rim of each plate bears an incised inscription [Aischrios], which is probably the name of the donor (ill. 2). Herodotus mentions this name in relation to one of the heroes who fought in the battle of Artemisius in 480 B.C. (Herodotus VIII. 11). Herodotus also names the Aischrionian tribe from the Island of Samos (Herodotus III. 26). The KBN contains evidence of the name Aischriona carved on a stele found in Kerch (KBN 1965: No 206). In all these cases, the name occurs in conjunction with the Isle of Samos (RE 19962002,Vol. 1: 350). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, has a similar pair of Greek cymbals. They are 9.9 cm in diameter and bear the name of the donor, Kallistheneia (Richter 1915: 454456, nos. 1778, 1779). G. Richter believes the cymbals to be votive and dates them to the 5th or 4th century B.C. A. Snodgrass mentions a pair of similar Greek votive cymbals, 9.5 cm in diameter, once connected by a chain. They are kept in the British Museum and bear the owners name: (Snodgrass 1964: 42, pl. 22). Cymbals could vary greatly in shape and size. The Metropolitan Museum owns an Eastern Mediterranean mirror stand found in Cyprus (540530 B.C.), originally
47
from the Cesnola collection. It is in the form of a naked woman beating on the cymbals, which look like a pair of elongated cylinders with flat tips (Karageorghis 2000: 190191, no. 311). A poorly preserved bronze statuette of a woman, made in Sparta and found in the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia, shows cymbals of an archaic shape (Lamb 19261927: 101, pl. XII). These are flattened plates with a small semispherical boss in the centre, like modern kettledrums. Similar cymbals can be seen on the golden signet ring from a Late Minoan tomb (Evans 19211935, Vol. III: 471, fig. 328), in which an enthroned goddess (Rhea) and a woman standing behind her hold cymbals similar to those found in the Cymbalist Tomb in East Crete, as well as in the Egyptian Thebes (ibid: 472, fig. 329). Similar votive cymbals of the 6th or early 5th century B.C., with a dedication to Cora, are kept in Berlin (Darember and Saglio 18771904, Vol. I (2): 1697, fig. 2265). These musical instruments, like the two pairs of cymbals from the Metropolitan Museum, come from the Cesnola collection and were found in Cyprus (Richter 1915: 455456, nos. 178588). They are already close to our semispherical plates with a flat rim and rings for fingers. The later Roman cymbals could be shaped like two or even three plates connected by special ribbons by means of the holes in the centre. The ribbons could be used to hang the cymbals, as demonstrated by a Roman relief showing the goddess Cybele with the attributes of her cult (Giro 1995: 373), or by a Pompeian fresco (RMB 1831: VII, table LVI). A curious mistake accompanied the description of the Hermitage cymbals from the very beginning. Page 34 of the acquisitions record for 1898 has the following entry
Ill. 1. Cymbals. 4th 3rd centuries B.C. Bronze (obverse and reverse). The State Hermitage
Ill. 2. Inscription on the cymbals (enlarged)
in the hand of Head Curator G.E. von Kizeritsky, ... nine bronze objects: 2 folding mirrors, two simple mirrors, crotales... In the inventory, however, these exhibits are described as a round convex lid with a ring in the middle. But the later entry cards still list them as crotales. The fact that such mistakes can still occur today is underscored by C. Gasparris description of a 400 B.C. red-figured Apulian crater found in Ruvo (The National Museum, Naples) (LIMC, Vol. III (1): 495), ...the Maenads dance with kettledrums and crotales (ibid: Vol. III (2): 405, no 863).
48
What is really shown in this scene of preparation for a sacrifice to Dionysus are maenads holding kettledrums and cymbals. While some of the characters prepare an animal to be slaughtered, the musician is trying her instruments. The girl holds one plate in all the fingers of her right hand, and the other in the thumb and index finger of her left hand. She brings it close to her ear, as if checking the cymbal sound. In ancient Greece and Rome, crotales were percussion instruments which looked like elongated wooden sticks connected by a special joint, somewhat similar to Spanish
castanets. Since crotales were made of perishable wood, we only know them from images. The Hermitage Department of Antiquity has a black-figured plate of 500490 B.C., painted by the master Cleophrades, in which can be seen a dancer holding crotales in both hands (inv. no. 2213; ill. 3). Cymbals were known to the Greeks as early as the 6th century B.C. But there is only one Attic vase which depicts them, the Franois vase by Kleitias, approximately dated to 575 B.C. On its A side, under the handle on the left, a nymph can be seen holding cymbals connected in the centre by a metal rod (Hirmer and Arias 1962: 13, 44). The Southern Italic painted vases of the Magna Graecia, on the other hand, often exhibit images of cymbals. Like other percussion instruments, cymbals were used in the cults of Dionysus and Eros. Thus, on the Pronomos red-figured crater made around 410 B.C. and preserved in Naples, Eros can be seen playing the cymbals (Paquette 1984: 212, P14). The plate in his right hand is much larger than that in his left, and the left plate is much shallower than the right one. Alexander the Greats mother Olympias, a native of Epirus, took part in Dionysian mysteries, ...the women of this country having always been extremely addicted to the enthusiastic Orphic rites, and the wild worship of Bacchus... Olympias, zealously, affecting these fanatical and enthusiastic inspirations... was wont in the dances proper to these ceremonies to have great tame serpents about her, which sometimes creeping out of the ivy in the mystic fans, sometimes winding themselves about the sacred spears, and the womens chaplets, made a spectacle which men could not look upon without terror (Plutarch, Alexander; translated by John Dryden). A volute crater of 440430 B.C. (group of Polygnotus) depicts a member of a Dionysian scene, a musician in a short tunic, beating on his cymbals, his hair adorned with sacred serpents (ibid: 212, P12). Olympias was an initiate of the Kabeirian cult based on the Island of Samothrace, which is where she had met Philip of Macedonia, whom she was later to marry. The most famous places associated with the cult of the Kabeiria were the temple near Thebes, the islands of Samothrace, Imbros and Lesbos, which flourished during the Hellenistic period. It is quite possible that the Hermitage cymbals originate from a Kabeiria sanctuary on Lesbos, where Th. Orphanidis was the Greek Consul. Since they are just as small as the above-mentioned bronze cymbals from the Metropolitan and the British Museum, and since they have an inscription which can be considered
49
as votive, our cymbals can be regarded as votive. Their shape makes it possible to date them to the 4th or 3rd century B.C. The Greeks believed that the brass sound of cymbals had purifying and sanctifying effect, therefore this sound was often heard during Moon eclipses; it was also used in the cult of the dead, who were thought to enjoy it. Cymbals were one of the key musical instruments used in Eleusinian mysteries since it was believed that Demeter used a tympanon and cymbals while looking for her daughter Persephone abducted by Hades. Pindar calls Demeter , proceeding to the accompaniment of brass cymbals (see OAK 1859: 59). The use of cymbals in the cult of the dead is further proved by bone plates (3rd century B.C.) which used to decorate wooden sarcophagus no. 26 of burial chamber no. 3 in the Bolshaya Bliznitsa mound. Among the poorly preserved bone images, there are three small figurines of Sirens with a flute, a tympanon and cymbals (The State Hermitage, inv. no. 106; ill. 4). Ovid notes the link between the Sirens and Persephone (Roman Proserpine):
...But why have you, Sirens, skilled in song, daughters of Achelos, the feathers and claws of birds, while still bearing human faces? Is it because you were numbered among the companions, when Proserpine gathered the flowers of Spring?
(Ovid, Metamorphoses V, 553557, translated by Anthony S. Kline)
An example of a Bachhic scene from the Roman times is provided by a marble relief from the Borbonico Museum in Naples. It shows a Maenad dancing around Bacchus and beating on the cymbals (RMB III 1827: table XL). In Pompeian frescos these musical instruments can be seen in the hands of Jupiter, Juno or Psyche (RMB XV 1856: table 47), centauresses, satyrs etc., as well as Bacchic characters. A sarcophagus from Sparta depicts Erotes making music with cymbals in their hands (Frnkel 1881: 163, table 14). Cymbals were used to decorate the branches of sacred trees, as shown in a relief from the Louvre dedicated to a sacrifice to Cybeles tree (Daremberg and Saglio 18771904, Vol. I (1): 360, fig. 447). The surviving sources mention cymbals accompanying the Greek Dionysian Mysteries and the Roman Bacchanalia, cf. Apuleiuss description of the arrival of priests carrying the image of a Syrian goddess (possibly Atargatis), whose festivals had an orgiastic touch, A leading citizen... was roused by the clashing of the cymbals,
Ill. 3. Black-figured plate showing a dancer with crotales. 500490 B.C. The State Hermitage
the beating of the drums, and the soothing measures of Phrygian chant. There is also a depiction of a eunuch dressed as a woman: He was representative of the meanest dregs of society, those people who parade through the streets of towns banging cymbals, shaking castanets, and carrying round the Syrian goddess... (Apuleius, The Metamorphoses: VIII, 24; translated by P.G. Walsh). When describing the belongings of the servants of the goddess, Apuleius mentions an ass loaded with the rattles and cymbals (ibid: IX, 4; translated by P.G. Walsh). The Romans did not use cymbals as often in their mysteries. In Lucians story of the two rogues who decided to set up an oracle, one of them has the following argument to suggest how lucrative such an enterprise can be, [O]ne had only to go there with someone to play the flute, the tambourine, or the cymbals, set the proverbial mantic sieve a spinning, and there they would all be gaping... (Lucian, Alexander the Oracle-monger, 9; translated by H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler). From the hands of the priests of mystical cults, cymbals pass into the hands of dancers and courtesans. The latter could even be named after the instrument, cf. Cymbalia (Lucian, Dialogues of the Hetaerae, XII, 1; XIV, 4). In Satyricon by Petronius we read, ...in came a female cymbal player and
50
the crashing brass awoke everybody (Petronius XXII; translated by W. C. Firebaugh); and later: the crash of the cymbals len(t) ardor to her revel (Petronius XXIII; translated by W. C. Firebaugh). Nevertheless, echoes of ancient mystical cults found a reflection in the events that took place in the Roman times. According to Livy, a certain Greek who proclaimed himself a priest and prognosticator was responsible for orgies and murders in Etruria, which were carried out under the disguise of sacred Bacchic rituals. Many crimes were committed by treachery; most by violence, which was kept secret, because the cries of those who were being violated or murdered could not be heard owing to the noise of drums and cymbals (Livy XXXIX, 8; translated by Rev. Canon Roberts); a place which resounded with yells and songs, and the jangling of cymbals and drums... (Livy XXXIX, 10; translated by Rev. Canon Roberts). It is not surprising that such a horrible din was even able to drown Orpheuss divine singing as he was torn apart by the furious Bacchantes. Another musical instrument, a small bronze rattle or sistrum (inv. no. 1870; 3.8 cm in length; ill. 5), was acquired by the Hermitage in 1926 as part of the Stroganov collection. It looks like a horseshoe-shaped frame with ends meeting at a straight handle which has a thicker base. Three parallel crossbars with loops at the ends are attached to the frame. There are sockets on both sides in the lower part of the handle, which probably used to form a hole for suspending the instrument. A votive sistrum close to the Hermitage one is kept in the Metropolitan Museum in New York. It was donated by Henry G. Marquand in 1897 and dates back to the Roman times (Richter 1915: 454, no. 1777). Its length is 13.3 cm, which is twice as long as that of the Hermitage sistrum, and it is slightly different in shape. The New York sistrum has a more elongated rectangular shape, with rounded angles, somewhat like Egyptian name cartouches. The tip of the sistrum is decorated with a miniature figure of a lying cat. There is a similar sistrum in the Hume Museum (Daremberg and Saglio 18771904, Vol. IV (2): 1356, fig. 6473). The British Museum has a sistrum with a twisted handle and three perpendicular crossbars, found in the Tiber. Its central part is decorated with two Egyptianlooking busts (Walters 1899: 159, fig. 20, no. 872). The height of the sistrum is 28.3 cm (111/8). The loops at the ends prevented the crossbars from falling out as they were shaken. The sculpture at the tip shows the she-wolf feeding Romulus and Remus, as if illustrating the Aeneid:
There, by the wolf, were laid the martial twins. Intrepid on her swelling dugs they hung; The foster dam lolld out her fawning tongue: They suckd secure, while, bending back her head, She lickd their tender limbs, and formd them as they fed.
(Vergil, The Aeneid VIII, 630635; translated by John Dryden.)
In ancient Egypt, the sistrum was used from the time of the Sixth Dynasty, as a ceremonial musical instrument, in the cult of the goddess Hathor; later it was associated with cults of other female deities, such as Tefnut, Sekhmet and Bastet (hence cats on sistra), and later still with the Ill. 4. Bone plate showing a Siren with cymbals. 3rd century B.C. The State Hermitage cult of Isis. There were two types of Egyptian sistra, a naos sistrum, made of faience and decorated with the double head of Hathor (found only in Egypt), and a horseshoeshaped bgel sistrum, which was made of bronze. The Egyptians placed sistra in burial chambers as symbols of life and protective amulets for the departed. A painted vessel of the 16th century B.C. from Hagia Triada, now in the Heraklion museum, shows harvesters accompanied by a man, probably a priest, with a sistrum in his upraised hand (Paquette 1984: 207, fig. 17). It is an interesting fact that the sistrum was used in Egypt in ceremonies linked to the papyrus harvest and dedicated to Hathor as the goddess of the Nile delta. The Minoan culture which flourished on Crete, not too far away from the Egyptian coast, had close links with the Egyptian culture. This could well mean that musical instruments and cults related to them could penetrate into Crete. A bronze sistrum found in the sanctuary of Aphrodite and Hermes on Crete, possibly made in a Syrian or Palestinian workshop in the 9th to 7th centuries B.C., has an image of Hathors head and a naked woman (Astarta?) (Lambropoulou 2000: 516, fig. 2, 3). There are no Greek images of the sistrum. It may well Ill. 5. Sistrum. 2nd 3rd centuries A.D. Bronze. be due to the absence of a deity with which it was The State Hermitage traditionally connected. The Apulian pelike of the mid4th century B.C., now in Copenhagen, has an image of a woman with a harp in her lap (Paquette 1984: 1986, Moreover the women of the Kyrenians too think it not H8). Behind her, the so-called Apulian sistrum, similar right to eat cows flesh, because of the Egyptian Isis in shape to the naos sistrum, is propped against her stool. (Herodotus IV, 186; translated by G.C. Macaulay). Besides This was a lyre-shaped instrument with plates, similar Kyrene described by Herodotus, the cult of Isis was also known in other coastal Greek cities trading with Egypt, to a modern xylophone. The cult of Isis was not widespread among the Greeks such as Eretria and Piraeus (Schefold 1998: 322). The Isis cult did not become widespread in Greece until of the Balkan peninsula and the Magna Graecia, but other places were a lot more susceptible to the influence of the 3rd century B.C., the age of Hellenism which followed oriental cults. Herodotus mentions the city of Kyrene, the campaigns of Alexander the Great and his conquest of founded in Libya by the inhabitants of the Isle of Thera, Egypt, when a number of Greek immigrants came to live
51
in Egyptian cities. But even then, the worship of Isis did not become an all-Greek phenomenon and remained confined to the peoples of Africa and Asia Minor. In Rome the Isis cult was introduced in the 1st century B.C., during Sullas rule, but it did not attain wide recognition. It was not until the 1st and 2nd centuries A.D. that it gained a true state importance and spread across the whole territory covered by the Roman rule.
Let Isis decide whatever she pleases about my body, let her blast my sight with her angry rattle...
this is how Juvenal describes the torment of a liar dreading disclosure (Juvenal, Satires. Book 5, Satire 13, 92; translated by N. Rudd). The shape and the use of the sistrum are known to us from Roman authors, first and foremost from Apuleius. In the eleventh book of his Metamorphoses, the goddess appears to the hero in the guise of a beautiful woman: In her right hand she carried a bronze rattle; it consisted of a narrow metal strip curved like a belt, through the middle of which were passed a few rods; when she shook the rattle vigorously three times with her arm, the rods gave out a shrill sound. (Apuleius XI, 4; translated by P.G. Walsh). The second-century statue of Isis from the National Museum, Naples, found in the town of Puteoli (De Franciscis 1963: 80, table C) shows the goddess dressed in a long chiton and cloak wrapping her head and tied on her breast. In her uplifted right hand Isis has a sistrum with four perpendicular crossbars and a small loop at the tip of a horseshoe-shaped bow. There are similar images in the Capitoline Museum in Rome (Daremberg and Saglio 18771904, Vol. III (1): 579, fig. 4095) and in the Glyptotek in Munich (ibid: 580, fig. 4099). Both the images and written works contain information concerning the hand that was supposed to hold the sistrum: A priest at my (Isis) prompting will be carrying a garland of roses tied to the rattle in his right hand (Apuleius XI, 6; translated by P.G. Walsh) and further A priest approached... his right hand held an adorned rattle for the goddess (Apuleius XI, 12; translated by P.G. Walsh). Many coins of the 1st century B.C. from Asia Minor and Thrace bear images of Isis with a sistrum in her right hand (LIMC, Vol. V (1): 792). There are also two Pompeian frescoes (dating from 6279) in the National Museum, Naples. In one of them, Ios arrival into Egypt is greeted with sistra and a caduceus (RMB, X, 1834: table 2). The second one shows Isis with a sistrum in her right hand, treading on the globe (LIMC, Vol. V (2): 513,
no. 210). The National Museum in Rome has a relief from a marble fountain of the 1st century A.D., possibly from Cerveteri, depicting Isis riding a dog, a personification of the sacred Egyptian star Sothis, which the Greeks identified with Sirius (ibid: 523, no. 321). The museum of the city of Ostia possesses a multiple-cup lamp (1st century B.C. 1st century A.D.) in the shape of a ship with an image of Isis with a sistrum in her right hand (ibid: 510, no. 165). Similar images occur in antique jasper, carnelian and prassium gems of the 2nd century A.D., in the Oriental Museum of the State Museums in Berlin (ibid: 504, nos. 37a, 37b; 511, no. 176). The National Museum of Egypt in Cairo has two terracotta statuettes of Isis with a sistrum (ibid: 503, nos. 30d; 506, no. 86). Some later coins (dating from 123124) depict the Emperor Hadrian as Egypt with a sistrum in his right hand (Daremberg and Saglio 18771904, Vol. I (1): 104, fig. 149), a half-length image of Isis with a sistrum interpreted by Roman priests as the Zodiac sign of Virgo (ibid: Vol. III (1): 579, fig. 4096), and Isis with a sistrum on board a ship (first third quarters of the 2nd century) (LIMC, Vol. V (2): 519, no. 275). According to Apuleius, sistra could be made of any metal known in Classical Antiquity, including precious ones. Next, a crowd of those initiated into the divine rites (of Isis) came surging along, men and women of every rank and age... With their rattles of bronze, silver, and even gold, they made a shrill, tinkling sound (Apuleius XI, 10; translated by P.G. Walsh). In this context, the Hermitage bronze sistrum is either votive, i.e. a donation to the temple, or it is a suspension amulet against the evil eye which used to belong to one of the adepts of the cult of Isis or the Syrian goddess. It is quite likely that it was made in one of the Egyptian or Syrian Romanized workshops in the 2nd or the 3rd century A.D. Three major kinds of musical instruments were known to the Ancient world: wind, string and percussion ones. By the end of the 5th century B.C., percussion musical instruments appropriated from the cults of Oriental deities, such as Potnia Theron (Mistress of the Animals), Cybele, Attis, Demeter, Dionysus etc., became widespread in most regions familiar with the Graeco-Roman influence. Percussion instruments were used in many spheres, both for religious and utilitarian purposes. This is supported by the evidence of numerous written, archeological and pictorial sources, such as painted vases, frescoes, reliefs, statues and figurines. The ancient percussion instruments were not melodic. They were
primarily associated with orgiastic cults. On the whole, Greeks tended to ascribe miraculous properties to music. Thus, Plato believed that this art was capable of turning the soul towards virtue, while one of Damons principles was that changing the rules of music would shake the very staples of the state (Giro 1995: 5556).
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS AA Archologischer Anzeiger. BSA Annuals of the British School at Athens. Daremberg and Saglio 18771944 Daremberg Ch. and E. Saglio. Dictionnaire des antiquits, grecques et romaines daprs les textes et les monuments. Paris, 18771944. De Franciscis 1963 De Franciscis A. Il Museo Naszionale di Napoli. Napoli, 1963. Evans 19211935 Evans A. The Palace of Minos at Knossos. London, 19211935. Frnkel 1881 Frnkel M. Zu Tafel 14. Archologische Zeitung 1880. Berlin, 1881. Giro 1995 Giro P. astnaja i obestvennaja izn grekov [The Private and Public Life of the Greeks]. Moscow, 1995. Gulyaeva 2002 Gulyaeva, Nadezhda. Krotaly iz sobranija Antinogo otdela Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa. K probleme atribucii [Crotales from the Department of Antiquity of the State Hermitage: the Problem of Attribution]. In: Muzyka Kunstkamery. K 100-letiju Sankt-Peterburgskogo muzeja muzykalnyx instrumentov: Materialy pervoj instrumentovedeskoj nauno-praktieskoj konferencii Muzyka Kunstkamery (Sankt-Peterburg, 2627 ijuna 2002 g.). St. Petersburg, 2002. Hirmer and Arias 1962 Hirmer M. and P.E. Arias. A History of Greek Vase Painting. London, 1962.
Karageorghis 2000 Karageorghis V. Ancient Art from Cyprus. The Cesnola Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 2000. KBN Korpus Bosporskix Nadpisej [Corpus of Bosporan Inscriptions]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1965. Lamb 19261927 Lamb W. Notes on Some Bronzes from Orthia Site (Plates XI XII). BSA XXVIII, Session 19261927. London, 19261927. Lambropoulou 2000 Lambropoulou A. A Bronze Sistrum from the Sanctuary of Syme/ Crete. AA 1999, Heft 4. Berlin, 2000. LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mithologiae Classicae. Zrich, Mnchen, 19811999. OAK Otet Imperatorskoj Arxeologieskoj Komissii [Imperial Archeological Commission Report] for 1859. St. Petersburg, 1862. Paquette 1984 Paquette D. LInstrument de Musique dans la Cramique de la Grce Antique. Paris, 1984. RE Paulys Realenzyklopdie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung. Stuttgart, Weimar, 19962002. Richter 1915 Richter G. M. A. Greek, Etruscan and Roman Bronzes. New York, 1915. RMB Real Museo Borbonico. Napoli, 18241857. Schefold 1998 Schefold K. Der religise Gebalt der antiken Kunst und die Offenbarung. Mainz am Rhein, 1998. Snodgrass 1964 Snodgrass A. Early Greek Armour and Weapons. Edinburgh, 1964. Walters 1899 Walters H. B. Catalogue of the Bronzes, Greek, Roman and Etruscan in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum. London, 1899.
52
ALEXANDER KAKOVKIN AND CLARA NIKITINA

A COPTIC CARVED IVORY IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION
Coptic bone carvers were known to produce series Liapunova 1939). Some of them were displayed at temof objects with identical or very close designs. One such porary exhibitions over the past few decades: Byzantine series is a group of small-size (no more than 6.0 4.0 Art in the Collections in the USSR (The State Hermitcm) flat medallions with a crude design on one side, age; the State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, 1975 showing a galloping rider facing right and striking a ser- 1977), Coptic Art (The State Hermitage 1987), The Art pent-like or human-like creature with his spear. The reof Coptic Egypt: from the Collections of the State Herverse of such plates is smooth: the presence of tabs, or mitage and the State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts (The crown-shaped tripartite projections, in the upper part Pushkin Museum 1991), Christians in the Holy Land suggests that these objects could have served as amulets. (sic). The Art of the Melchites and Heterodox DenomiSuch objects have been described since the end of the nations (The Hermitage Menshikov Palace, 1998). 19th century, and over ten of them have been mentioned The amulets were mentioned in the guide to the 1935 in publications (Forrer 1893: 21, pl. 16; Strzygowski 1941 exhibition of Coptic Art (Matye and Liapunova 1904: pl. ; Wulff 1909: 121, nos. 436, 437, pl. XX; 1939: 57, nos. 2932), and three of them (except for Lunsingh Scheurleer 1998: 10, fig. 20; 38, cat. 54). inv. no. 10360) were later published: inv. no. 10357 Scholars have so far differed as to the origin of these (Kakovkin 1990: 182; Kakovkin 1999: 9, table V.3); medallions, their dating and the interpretation of the sub- inv. no. 10358 (Bystrikova 1986: 48, ill.; Kakovkin jects carved on them. The majority view is that they were 1990: 182; Kakovkine 1995: pl. 117, 2; Zalesskaya, Piatmade in Alexandria (although some could have originat- nitsky and Ukhanova 1998: 156, no. 203; Kakovkin 1999: ed from Luxor and Akhmim), most probably in the 7th 9, table V.1; Kakovkin 2004: 93, no. 190); inv. no. 10th centuries A.D., and the images on them (ubiquitous 10359 (Bystrikova 1986: 49; Kakovkin 1999: 9, table V.2). in Coptic art: textiles, paintings, stone sculptures and The purpose of this paper is to attract scholars attenobjects of applied art (Brune 1999)) have a Judeo-Chris- tion to the fourth object in the possession of the Hertian origin: they depict King Solomon, St. George, St. mitage (inv. no. 10360), which has been barely menSisinnius, etc. and are treated as the battle and triumph tioned in the existing publications and has never been of the forces of good and light over those of evil and dark reproduced. The 1939 guide has only one line of dein their many manifestations (Schiemenz 1986: 5971). scription devoted to it: Part of a large bone amulet: a The Hermitage has four of these objects. They were relief image of a mounted saint, behind him a small figpurchased by Vladimir Bock during his second trip to ure with uplifted hands (Matye and Liapunova 1939: the Nile valley in 189798. They have been entered in the 57, no. 29; see also Kakovkin 1990: 182). inventory of the Ancient East Section, Department of It is not just the desire to publish this object that Oriental Art under the following numbers: 10357 made the author write this article. The carving is re(5.7 4.0 cm), 10358 (4.1 2.8 cm), 10359 (4.4 markable indeed: unlike other similar ones, it has not 2.2 cm), 10360 (5.2 2.5 cm). survived intact (its lower right part has been lost). But it These amulets were twice exhibited together: in 1898 is also interesting in connection with one circumstance 99 (Kakovkin 2000: 59, ill.) and in 193541 (Matye and related to it. It is as follows.
54
Amulet. Egypt. 7th 8th century. The State Hermitage. First publication: 1 before restoration, 2 during restoration (obverse), 3 during restoration (reverse), 4 after restoration (obverse), 5 after restoration (reverse)
In 2006, during one of the routine checks of the Coptic materials at the Hermitage, it was discovered that this medallion had disintegrated into multiple pieces. The decision was taken to have it restored. At first, the estimation of its condition simply meant counting the number of surviving fragments and their arrangement according to their size, texture, colour and traces of carving. Afterwards, magnifying devices (magnifying glass and microscope) were used to study the structure of the bone, the state of the surface layer, the typical characteristics of the carving, the type of fragmentation, etc. This research found that the bone mass was in a very poor condition; it was uniform in colour and fragment55
ed all over (not just along the length and breadth of the object), and that the fragments were irregular in shape, often with chipped edges. This had probably been caused by the uniform fine-meshed structure of the bone and its considerable salinification. Its surface was darker than the rest and smoothened. The suggestion that salinification and the change of temperature and humidity was the cause of the disintegration was supported by microchemical analysis (reg. no. 1293 of 6 April 2007). On the basis of the organoleptic study, the condition of the object and the microchemical analysis, it was decided to piece the fragments together. Starting the
assembling from the definitely known facts (considering the finishing of the corners and the relief) and moving to the probable (considering the type of carving on the surface of the obverse side and the direction of the lines of the scratched inscription on the reverse side, as well as the look, colour, texture and shape of the fragments), it was possible to assemble and glue the pieces together, and in this way restore the amulet. The numerous and multidirectional glue seams (the glue used was a 10% solution of polyvinyl butyral (PVB) in rectified alcohol), as well as the filling of the cracks and microscopic gaps (the mastic filler used was wax and tar putty with dry pigments of the same colour as the bone) created a grid inside the amulet which was holding it together. On the reverse, the seams and cracks were filled with utmost care, so that traces of the scratched inscription could be preserved. It was decided not to undertake a through preservation treatment of the whole object, so that it was not exposed to additional pressure. Each stage of the restoration process was documented photographically and accompanied by microscope checks. It was recommended to store the artifact in special low impact conditions, protecting it from abrupt temperature and humidity changes, heat or mechanical impact. Apart from the fact that the amulet is now of special interest due to the painstaking restoration it has undergone, it is also remarkable for at least two other reasons. The first one is the presence of a small human figure behind the rider which is an orans type absent from any similar objects. The second reason is the presence of a scratched inscription (regrettably illegible) on the reverse: as far as we know, there are no inscriptions on other similar amulets. These circumstances make the Hermitage carving a unique specimen. The orans figure on the rump of the horse has analogues in narrative sources, one of which mentions a human figure placed next to a mounted saint who strikes down a dragon with a spear (Polyakova 1994: 194195); it can also be seen in some images of St. George (Rau 1958: 578). It is possible to interpret it as an intercessor praying to the patron saint for protection. It is also possible that it was the intercessors name that was scratched on the reverse of the amulet.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Brune 1999 Brune K.-H. Der koptische Reiter: Jger, Knig, Heiliger. Ikonographische und stilistische Untersuchung zu den Reiterdarstellungen im sptantiken gypten und die Frage ihres Volkskunstcharakters. Altenberge, 1999.
Bystrikova 1986 Bystrikova M.G. Dva koptskix kostjanyx amuleta [Two Coptic Bone Amulets]. Soobenija Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa LI. 1986. Forrer 1893 Forrer R. Die frhchristlichen Altertmer aus dem Grberfelde von Achmim-Panopolis. Strassburg, 1893. Kakovkin 1990 Kakovkin, Alexander. art copte de Ermitage. Coptic Studies: Acts of the Third International Congress of Coptic Studies. Warsaw, 2025 August, 1984. Warsaw, 1990. Kakovkin 1999 Kakovkin, Alexander. Pamjatniki rezby po kosti v koptskom sobranii Ermitaa. Iz istorii kollekcii [Bone Carving Artifacts in the Coptic Collection of the Hermitage. The History of the Collection]. St. Petersburg, 1999. Kakovkin 2000 Kakovkin, Alexander. Pervaja koptskaja vystavka v Ermitae [The First Coptic Exhibition in the Hermitage]. Coptica Hermitagiana: Sbornik materialov: K 100-letiju koptskoj kollekcii Ermitaa. St. Petersburg, 2000. Kakovkin 2004 Kakovkin, Alexander. Sokrovia koptskoj kollekcii Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa [Treasures of the Coptic Collection of the State Hermitage]. Catalogue. St. Petersburg, 2004. Kakovkine 1995 Kakovkine, Alexandre. De certaines monuments coptes de Ermitage (Saint-Ptersbourg). In: Jahrbuch fr Antike und Christentum. Ergnzungsband 20, 2: Akten des XII. Internationalen Kongresses fr christliche Archologie. Bonn, 22.28. September 1991. Teil 2. Mnster, 1995. Lunsingh Scheurleer 1998 Lunsingh Scheurleer, Robert (ed.). Kopten. Christelijke cultuur in Egipte. Mededelingenblad 7273. Amsterdam, 1998. Matye and Liapunova 1939 Matye Militsa and Xenia Liapunova. Greko-rimskij i vizantijskij Jegipet. Putevoditel po vystavke [Graeco-Roman and Byzantine Egypt: Exhibition guide]. Leningrad, 1939. Polyakova 1994 Polyakova, Sophia (ed.) Vizantijskie legendy [Byzantine Legends]. Moscow: Nauka, 1994. Rau 1958 Rau L. Iconographie de art Chrtien. Vol. III (II). Paris, 1958. Schiemenz 1986 Schiemenz G. P. Kreuz, Orans und heiliger Reiter im Kampf gegen das Bse. Studien zur frchristlichen Kunst. Vol. II. Wiesbaden, 1986. Strzygowski 1904 Strzygowski J. Koptische Kunst. In: Catalogue gnral des antiquits gyptiennes du Muse du Caire. Wien, 1904. Wulff 1909 Wulff O. Altchristliche und mittelalterliche byzantinische und italienische Bildwerke. Vol. 3. Part I: Altchristliche Bildwerke. Berlin, 1909. Zalesskaya, Piatnitsky and Ukhanova 1998 Zalesskaya V., Yu. Piatnitsky and I. Ukhanova (eds.). Xristiane na Vostoke. Iskusstvo melkitov i inoslavnyx xristian [Christians in the Holy Land (sic.). The Art of the Melchites and Heterodox Denominations]. St. Petersburg, 1998.
KIRILL CHERNYSHOV THE FIRST BRANDENBURG COINS (12TH CENTURY) IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION Among the medieval German coins kept in the Hermitage, a special place belongs to the twenty-six Brandenburg pennies and bracteates struck during the reign of the last Slav princes, Pribislav Henry (Pribislaw-Heinrich) (ruled 11271150) and Jakza (ruled c. 11541157), as well as the first German Margraves Albrecht the Bear (c. 11001170) and his son Otto I (ruled 11701184), who subjugated the Polabian Slavs in the second half of the 12th century. Pribislaw-Heinrich was born c. 1080. In 1127, he became the prince of the Stodorans (Stodoranie), one of the Polabian Slav tribes. The Stodorans, or Hevellers (Stodoranie, or Hawolanie) lived along the Havel River; their chief cities were Brenna (Brandenburg, Branibor) (Nalepa 1952: 702747) and Poztupimi (Potsdam). Pribislaw was baptized early in his life, taking the name Heinrich, and strove to maintain peaceful relations with his neighbours. In 1128, he became the godfather of Otto, son of Albrecht the Bear. Pribislaw-Heinrich died childless in 1150, and his widow Petrissa handed over the rule of Brenna to Albrecht the Bear, who then founded the Brandenburg Margraviate. This went contrary to the wishes of Jakza, ruler of the Sprevan Slavs and a relative of Pribislaw-Heinrich. In 1154 (or somewhat later), he took Brenna, thus becoming the prince of the Stodorans. But on 11 June 1157, Albrecht the Bear, supported by Archbishop Wichmann of Magdeburg, won the city back (Sulowski: 309; Mysliski: 399 400). Albrecht and his wife Sophia are known to have gone on pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 115859. It has been suggested that the Margraviate of Brandenburg was handed over to Albrechts son Otto straight after the expulsion of Jakza in 1157, making him the independent ruler of the land until his death in 1184 (Gaettens 1953/54: 7195). It follows that Pribislaw-Heinrichs coins must have been struck between 1127 and 1150. Jakzas coins have been dated by the leading German numismatists to 115457, the time of his rule in Brenna. It is also traditionally believed that they were struck at the local mint, although coin legends mention Kpenick, then probably chief city of the Sprevan Slavs, Jakzas stronghold, now a district of Berlin, rather than Brenna (Bahrfeldt 1889: 6870; Suhle 1964: 105). Little is known about Jakza after 1157; the information is contradictory, and even the date of his death is uncertain. Most of Albrecht the Bears coins are attributed by modern researchers to his Anhalt mint, and only three coin types (Bahrfeldt 12, 13 and 14, the latter existing in three versions) could have been produced at the mint of Brandenburg. Another possible Brandenburg attribution is a recently described bracteate, which is believed to have been struck for Albrecht and Otto jointly (Mller 1998: 1620). Over forty existing types of Ottos coinage bear witness to the intensive production of coins during his reign. While Pribislaw-Heinrichs coins are produced in the traditional 10th 11th-century form of double-sided pennies, Jakzas, Albrechts and Ottos coins are one-sided bracteates (the term bracteate itself only appeared in numismatic literature in the 17th century). The German bracteates of the 12th early 13th centuries are a remarkable phenomenon in the history of European coinage, which has not been studied suffi-
57
ciently. While their weight was equal to that of a penny, or pfennig, the staple coin in the High Middle Ages, the technique of their making was very different from the production of European 10th 11th-century pennies. The bracteates were struck on very thin but relatively large silver blanks with a single die iron, so that the reverse had a negative, sunken impression of the raised image on the front side. Thus, the process of their making was a lot more simple than the minting of a doublesided penny, but the resulting coin was thin and brittle and could not last long. While 10th 11th-century pennies were used in foreign trade (hence, hoards containing them have been found mostly outside Germany), 12th 13th-century bracteates are known as regional pennies, which emphasizes that they were made for local markets, for individual, specific places not far removed from the mints where they were struck. The issuing of bracteates was accompanied by the socalled coin renovation, when the population was forced to exchange old coins for new ones every year or even every six months. Local rulers who controlled the mints usually exacted exchange fees (it was customary to give nine new coins in exchange for twelve old ones). Such practices and the repeated overstriking explain the presence of various dots, circles, stars, crosses, etc. on the surviving bracteates. When old die irons were used, it was a way of marking the coinage to distinguish between old and new issues. Thus, 12th 13th-century bracteates are a vivid reflection of the important facts of medieval economy, such as the predominance of subsistence households, poorly developed trade, weak central power and feudal subdivisions. This meant that even a minor local lord was a sovereign ruler in his own domain, possessing the full economic power which allowed him to pursue policies that benefited neither the local population nor the large-scale merchants, but provided maximum profits for himself. It is even more surprising that having as they did altogether a negative influence on coin circulation, many of the bracteates made between the 1130s and the 1210s are remarkable in terms of their style. By no means inferior in the accomplishment of their workmanship to the best contemporary works of applied art, the coins are real masterpieces of small-scale Romanesque plastic art. The rapid flowering of the bracteate art in the 12th century was followed by an equally precipitous decline in the 13th century, when coin images became crude, monotonous and perfunctory.
58
The first Brandenburg coins of the 12th century clearly have a great cultural and historical relevance. Pribislaw-Heinrichs and Jakzas coins are extremely interesting witnesses to the historical development of the Polabian Slavs state and culture. The same applies to their onomastics. The name of Petrissa, wife of Pribislaw-Heinrich, is comparatively rare. In the history of Slavonic Brandenburg coinage, one Petrissa was a maiden from the train of St. Ursula, the other being the wife of Count Otto III von Speyern from Bavaria (Bahrfeldt 1889: 61; Liefmann 1912: 267268). This name is all the more probable for the region of Polabia since St. Peter was venerated as the patron saint of Brandenburg. Also noteworthy is Jakzas title on his coins, viz. CNE, KES, i.e. kniaz, the Slavonic for prince. This is one of the first occurrences of this word on coins. The same title is present on Serbian and Russian coins from the 14th century onwards (Bahrenfeldt 1889: 64; Kiersnowski 1988: 10). The Christian symbols on the coins (the cross and the palm, symbol of the victory of life over death and an attribute of glory), as well as the Christian names (Heinrich, Petrissa, Jakza a form of Jacob), along with the data provided by written sources, allow us to trace the spreading of Christianity among the Polabian Slavs. The exemplary workmanship seen in the coinage of Pribislaw-Heinrich and Jakza, the type of imagery (a conjugal couple, Jakzas profile on one of the bracteates, etc.), the correct Latinized inscriptions all confirm that the princes employed skilful coin-makers. The influence of Magdeburg coinage on Brandenburg mints has often been noted (Bahrfeldt 1889: 60; Suhle 1964: 105). Considering the political, religious (the Bishoprics of Brenna and Havelberg) and economic influence of Magdeburg and its Archbishopric on the Polabian Slavs, as well as the tradition of Magdeburg coinage, it is reasonable to suggest that this is where Jakzas coin-makers came from. As for Ottos coins, the presence of Magdeburg coin minters is beyond doubt. The figure of a standing Margrave, fully armed, is reminiscent of St. Maurice on the early Magdeburg bracteates, while the cross on one of Ottos coins (cat. no. 19) is identical to that on St. Maurices shield on one Magdeburg coin (cat. no. 28). Another coin of Ottos (cat. no. 25) is of even greater interest for the study of medieval heraldry and weapons. The ruler has a large Norman almond-shaped shield in his hands. Transverse dotted lines can be seen on the surface of the shield. It is not clear whether these lines
are heraldic signs, decorative elements, or the engravers attempt to show the metallic bands that could be used to strengthen the shield. Not a single 12th-century shield has survived to the present day (the earliest surviving medieval shield is that belonging to Arnold von Brienz (11801225) kept in the Zurich Museum and most likely dating from the early 13th century); however, a number of researchers admit that metal bands and other pieces of metal could be used to reinforce the surface of the shield (Boeheim 1995: 135; Gorelik 2004: 182195; Slater 2005: 5253; Kohlmorgen 2005: 3335). Such reinforcements could also be decorative a hypothesis supported by the shield in the sculpture of Roland (a church in Verona, 1130s). By the early 13th century the use of these elements would have been discontinued, but the remnants of such practice survived (the bas-reliefs of warriors in the church of St. Justina, Padua, c. 1210). The question of whether or not images struck on German 12th-century bracteates could be regarded as an additional pictorial source has been repeatedly raised by a number of German scholars. While these images generally tend to be perfunctory and symbolic, they regularly contain realistic details of armour, clothes and weapons, as well as household utensils. This topic is, however, beyond the scope of the present article. The published coins belong to the Western European Coinage collection of the State Hermitage, which was fully formed by the 1930s. The overall number of 12th- and 13th-century German bracteates in the Hermitage is around 3,000, which makes the collection as important as those of the greatest German museums (the Mnzkabinette in Berlin, Dresden, Hannover and Gotha). The Hermitage collection of early Brandenburg coins is based on three major acquisitions. The origin of some items remains unknown. The bulk of the published Brandenburg coins comes from the collection of Jacob Reichel (17801856), a medal-maker at St. Petersburg Mint, later a Ministry of Finance official and the owner of one of the largest numismatic collections in Europe. In 1857, the collection was sold to the Hermitage by his executors. The Reichel collection is the source of the Hermitage Pribislaw-Heinrichs coins (cat. nos. 1, 2), Jakzas coins (cat. nos. 6, 1012),
as well as Ottos bracteates (cat. nos. 16, 17). As noted in the Reichel collection catalogue, the coins published there under nos. 7577 (State Hermitage Department of Numismatics, inv. nos. 2979/38339, 2979/38337, 2979/38333) were found in Freienwalde (or, more precisely, in Grabow near Freienwalde, Brandenburg) in the early 1840s (Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: 11; Bahrfeldt 1889: 284). Among Reichels correspondents was the antiquarian and numismatist J.F. Weidhas, author of a book on Brandenburg coins (Weidhas 1855). It is quite likely that he assisted Reichel in the purchase of the coins in question. The latter had a number of correspondents in various German cities, but Weidhas had a special interest in medieval German coins. Pribislaw-Heinrichs pennies (cat. nos. 35) were acquired by the Hermitage together with the Brandenburg coins of Albrecht the Bear and Otto (Imperial Hermitage Coin and Medal Department Acquisition Book for 18791892: 9, entry for 3 March 1882; the find is erroneously localized as Middendorf ). They were purchased in 1882 from J. Lange of Potsdam, near Michendorf where the post-1184 hoard was found in 1880 (Bahrfeldt 1880: 103110; Eckstein 1880: 761763; Lange 1880: 115118; Bahrfeldt 1881). The Michendorf hoard is remarkable not only for its size, but also for the fact that it contains nearly all the known types of 12th-century Brandenburg coins. Three of Jakzas coins (cat. nos. 79), as well as Ottos coins (cat. nos. 23 and 25) were acquired by the Hermitage in 1925 with the Stroganov collection, which had been most actively assembled in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In the 19th century, the Stroganovs were assisted in the purchasing of coins by the well-known numismatist B.V. Koehne (18171886), who had close ties with German numismatists, both researchers and traders. The coins presented here were described in detail in the State Hermitage Numismatics Department scientific catalogue published in the 1930s by the then curator of European coins at the Hermitage, A.A. Markova (1895 1975). Their publication was started by Vsevolod Potin (19182005), who compiled the descriptions for the first half of the present catalogue (coins of Slav princes) (Potin 2003: 126127).
59
A PPE N DI X CATALOGUE OF BRANDENBURG COINS (12TH CENTURY) IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION
Bracteates of Jakza (Jaksha, Jaxa, c. 11541157) 6. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor) or Kpenick (?). Jakza. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.74 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38333. In the portal between two towers a half-length front image of the prince clad in chain mail and helm, on his left a branch, on his right a dot. Encircling Latin inscription: IA-KZA. COPTNIC. C=NE Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 77; Weidhas 1855: pl. I, 12; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 5. 7. The same, die iron variation. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.51 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38334. Condition: edge chipped off. Acquired: 1925 from the Stroganov collection, entry no. 44a/476. 8. The same, die iron variation. Diam. 29 mm., weight 0.62 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38335. Acquired: 1925 from the Stroganov collection, entry no. 44a/476. 9. The same, die iron variation. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.75 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38336. Acquired: 1925 from the Stroganov collection, entry no. 44a/476.
3 Obverse Reverse
Pennies of Pribislaw-Heinrich (11271150) 1. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor). Pribislaw-Heinrich. Penny (no date). Silver. Diam. 22 mm., weight 0.81 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38328. Obverse: mounted prince facing right, in helm, a standard in his right hand, behind him a cross above the horses croup. Encircling Latin inscription (retrograde): HEINRICV(S) Reverse: building consisting of four towers. Encircling Latin inscription (retrograde): BR(A)NDE(B)VRG Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 72; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 1b. 2. The same, die iron variation (larger cross on the obverse). Diam. 22 mm., weight 0.75 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38329. Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 73; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 1b. 3. The same, die iron variation (thinner cross on the obverse). Diam. 22 mm., weight 0.69 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38330. Acquired: 1882 from the Michendorf hoard. Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 1b. 4. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor). Pribislaw-Heinrich. Penny (no date). Silver. Diam. 19 mm., weight 0.86 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38331. Obverse: half-length front image of the ruler, in helm, with a sword in his right hand and a standard in his left. Encircling Latin inscription: (HE)I(N) BRA(ND) Reverse: half-length front image of the rulers wife, with flowing hair, in long dress. On her right an eight-pointed star, on the left a cross made up of four dots. Encircling Latin inscription: PE(TRISS)M Acquired: 1882 from the Michendorf hoard. Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 3, Id. 5. The same, die iron variation (more crude image). Diam. 21 mm., weight 0.82 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38332. Obverse: encircling Latin inscription: HEI(N)(BRAN)D Reverse: encircling Latin inscription: P(ETRIS)SA Acquired: 1882 from the Michendorf hoard. Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 3 IIs.
12. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor) or Kpenick (?). Jakza. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.85 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38339. Condition: coin very worn, with a crack. Prince sitting between two towers, facing left, with a beard, a sword and a palm branch in his hands. Crosses and dots in the field. Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 75; Weidhas 1855: pl. I, 16; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 11.
1 Obverse Reverse
2 Obverse Reverse
10. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor) or Kpenick (?). Jakza. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 29 mm., weight 0.60 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38337. Half-length image of the bearded prince, facing right. Three stars in the field. Encircling Latin inscription: IACZA. DE COPNIC Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 76; Weidhas 1855: pl. I, 15; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 6. 11. Brandenburg (Brenna, Branibor) or Kpenick (?). Jakza. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 26 mm., weight 0.78 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38338. Full-length image of the prince, wearing cloak and helm, facing right, with a spear in his right hand and a shield in his left. In the field, next to the spear, a palm branch. Encircling Latin inscription: IC.=KES Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 74; Weidhas 1855: pl. I, 14; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 9.
11
12
Bracteates of Albrecht the Bear (11571170) 13. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Albrecht the Bear. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 24 mm., weight 0.9 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38340. Mounted margrave facing left, in chain mail and helm, with a shield, spear and standard, a star on his right. Encircling Latin inscription (retrograde): ALBREH+ Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 13a; Berger 1993: no. 1656. 14. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Albrecht the Bear. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 1.01 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38341. Half-length image of the margrave above a castle wall with gate, in chain mail and helm, with a sword in his right hand and a shield in his left; flanked by two towers. Encircling Latin inscription: +BRA(NDEB)VRG Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 14a.
4 Obverse Reverse
5 Obverse Reverse
60
61
13
14
19. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 1.01 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38353. Full-length front image of the margrave, wearing chain mail and helm, with a sword in his right hand, his left hand propped on the shield, on his right a tower, on his left a building with a turret. Encircling Latin inscription: OTTO-BRA-ND Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 40; Berger 1993: no. 1667. 20. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 29 mm., weight 0.84 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38354. Building with three towers surrounded by walls with a tower in the foreground. Latin inscription on top: BR-AND-EBV-RG Latin inscription in the field: OT-TO Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 41; Berger 1993: no. 1668.
21. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 30 mm., weight 1.04 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38355. Full-length image of the margrave, three-quarter view, facing right, in chain mail and helm, with a standard in his right hand and a shield in his left. Encircling Latin inscription: BRANDE Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 42. 22. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 29 mm., weight 1.03 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38357. Full-length image of the margrave, three-quarter view, facing right, in chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand, his left hand holding a standard and propped on a shield; flanked by two towers. Latin inscription in the upper left: Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 83; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 42. Berger 1993: no. 1670. 23. The same die iron. Diam. 29 mm., weight 1.02 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38358. Acquired: 1925 from the Stroganov collection, entry no. 44a/476. 24. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 24 mm., weight 0.89 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38359. Condition: coin very worn, with oxidation spots. Full-length image of the margrave, in chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand, his left hand holding a standard and propped on a shield; flanked by two towers. Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection . Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 94; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 46. 25. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.83 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38361. Full-length front image of the margrave, in chain mail and helm, with a standard in his right hand and a shield in his left; flanked by two towers. Encircling Latin inscription: BRAN-DEBVRG Latin inscription in the field: OTO Acquired: 1925 from the Stroganov collection, entry no. 44a/476. Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 38; Berger 1993: no. 1661.
21
22
Bracteates of Otto I (11701184) 15. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 29 mm., weight 1.06 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38350. Full-length front image of the margrave in chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand and a standard in his left; behind him a building with a portal and two towers. Latin inscription on top: BRAVNDEBV Latin inscription on the building: RS-OT Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 37; Berger 1993: no. 1659. 16. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.83 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38351. Mounted margrave facing right, in chain mail and helm, with an upraised sword in his right hand and a shield in his left. Encircling Latin inscription: OTTOB-RAN-DE-N-BO-G Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 81; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 51. 17. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.96 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38360. Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection. Ref.: Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 82; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 51. 18. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 28 mm., weight 0.98 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38352. Margrave sitting on the wall between two towers, wearing chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand and a standard in his left. Encircling Latin inscription: BRANDE-BVRGENSIS Latin inscription in the field: OT-TO Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 39; Berger 1993: no. 1663.
24 25
15
16
26
26. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Otto I. Bracteate (no date). Silver. Diam. 25 mm., weight 0.99 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38363. Full-length image of the margrave, three-quarter view, facing right, in chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand and a standard in his left; flanked by two towers. Ref.: Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 47. 27. Germany. By medal-maker Nikolaus Zeelnder (?). 18th-century (?) forgery of a bracteate of Otto I (no date). Silver. Diam. 30 mm., weight 0.84 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 2979/38356. Full-length image of the margrave, three-quarter view, facing right, in chain mail, helm and cloak, with a sword in his right hand and a standard in his left, on the right a sceptre with a lily-shaped knob, on the left a palm branch, below on both sides half-length images of two warriors with shields. Latin inscription in the field: OTTO-BRANDE Acquired: 1857 from the Reichel collection.
18
19
20
62
63
27
28
Gaettens 1953/54 Gaettens R. Otto I, nicht Albrecht der Br, 11571170 Markgraf von Brandenburg. Deutsche Archologische Forschungen. Mittelalter 10. 1953/1954. Gorelik 2004 Gorelik M.B. Xalxa-kalkan (mongolskij it i jego derivaty) [Khalkha-kalkan (the Mongol Shield and Its Derivatives)]. In: Vostok-Zapad: dialog kultur Jevrazii. Kulturnyje tradicii Jevrazii 4. Kazan, 2004. Imperial Hermitage Coin and Medal Department Acquisition Book for 18791892 (Manuscript). Kiersnowski 1988 Kiersnowski R. Moneta w kulture wiekow rednich. Warszawa, 1988. Kohlmorgen 2005 Kohlmorgen J. Der mittelalterliche Ritterschild. Wald-Michelbach, 2005. Lange 1880 Lange J. Fund Michendorf. Beitrag zur vaterlndischen Mnzkunde 4 (November). 1880. Liefmann 1912 Liefmann M. Kunst und Heilige. Jena, 1912. Mller 1998 Mller J. Ist bisher unbekannter Brandenburger Bracteate Albrecht des Bren als Gemeinschaftsprgung mit Otto I. anzusehen? Beitrage zur brandenburgisch/preuischen Numismatik. Numismatisches Heft 5. 1998. Mysliski Mysli ski K. Przybys aw-Henryk. Sownik Staroytnostej Sowiaskich. Vol. 4, part 1. Wrocaw, Warszawa, Krakw. Nalepa 1952 Nalepa J. Brenna, pierwotna nazwa Brandenburga. Przeglad zachodni 7/8. Pozna, 1952. Potin 2003 Potin, Vsevolod. Monety slavjanskix knjazej Brandenburga (XII v.) v sobranii Ermitaa [Coins of the Slav Princes of Brandenburg (12th Century) in the Hermitage Collection]. In: XI Vserossijskaja numizmatieskaja konferencija: Tezisy dokladov i soobenij. St. Petersburg, 2003. Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846 Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg. Vol. IV. St. Petersburg, 1846. Seelnder 1743 Seelnder N. Zehen Schriften von Teutschen Mnzen lterer Zeiten. Hannover, 1743. Slater 2005 Slater S. Geraldika: Illjustrirovannaja enciklopedija [Heraldry: Illustrated Encyclopedia]. Moscow, 2005 (trans. from English). Suhle 1964 Suhle A. Deutsche Mnz- und Geldgeschichte von den Anfngen bis zum 15. Jahrhunderts. 2 Auflage. Berlin, 1964. Sulowski Sulowski Z. Jaksa. Sownik Staroytnostej Sowiaskich. Vol. 2, part 2. Wrocaw, Warszawa, Krakw. Weidhas 1855 Weidhas J. Die brandenburger Denare, Groschen und kleinen Mnzen. Berlin, 1855.
Ref.: Seelnder 1743: 83, no. 5; Die Reichelsche Sammlung in St. Petersburg 1846: no. 84; Bahrfeldt 1889: no. 44. The coin is most likely to be a collection forgery by Nikolaus Zeelnder (16831744), a German medal-maker who also forged medieval German bracteates and published them in his book printed in Hannover in 1743. Such antiquarian forgeries are on the whole rare in the collection of Jacob Reichel, a professional model-maker. 28. Germany, Brandenburg Margraviate. Bracteate (no date; second half of the 12th century). Silver. Diam. 27 mm., weight 0.98 grams. Department of Numismatics, the State Hermitage, inv. no. 3302/91468. Full-length front image of St. Maurice, in helm, with a halo, wearing chain mail, with a sword in his right hand and a shield in his left; flanked by two buildings with turrets. Encircling Latin inscription: SCS-AV-IC-VS Acquired: 1953 from the Gokhran (State Storage Centre of Precious Metals and Stones) Ref.: Berger 1993: no. 1521.
OLGA KARASKOVA CAPER DEI, OR SOME CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT THE UNUSUAL ICONOGRAPHY OF THE STAINED-GLASS PANEL DEPICTING ABRAHAMS SACRIFICE FROM THE MARIENKIRCHE IN FRANKFURT-ON-THE-ODER The one hundred and eleven stained-glass windows of the complex created in the 1360s 1370s for the apse of the Marienkirche in Frankfurt-on-the-Oder were received by the Hermitage in 1946 and restored to Germany in 2002. The windows are of extraordinary interest, both due to their eventful history and unusual iconography (see Shlikevich 2002; Kozina 2005; Kaiser 2005). A number of publications have been devoted to the various problems connected with the panels under review (cf. Seeger 1977; Kozina 2002). Worthy of special notice are the south-eastern window, a unique example of stained-glass art, depicting the Story of Antichrist, and the north-eastern window with the Genesis scenes, from the Creation to the Drunkenness of Noah, characterized by an iconographical programme, untypical of Germany. Compared with these, the central typological window, based on the Biblia Pauperum principle of juxtaposing a Gospel subject with two Old Testament scenes, looks as typical of the German art of the period; therefore nothing really surprising can be expected in connection with it. There is one panel, however, in the central window, the iconography of which is less common, viz. Abrahams Sacrifice in the eighth row (I 8c; ill. 1) juxtaposed with The Brazen Serpent and The Crucifixion. The textual source of this and many other Western European representations of Abrahams Sacrifice is the twenty-second chapter of Genesis, cf. And he put forth his hand, and took the sword, to sacrifice his son. And behold, an angel of the Lord from heaven called to him, saying: Abraham, Abraham. And he answered: Here I am. And he said to him: Lay not thy hand upon the boy, neither do thou any thing to him: now I know that thou fearest God, and hast not spared thy only begotten son for my sake. Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw behind his back a ram, amongst the briers, sticking fast by the horns, which he took and offered for a holocaust instead of his son (Genesis 22:1013)1. The Marienkirche depiction differs from the Old Testament episode in one detail, namely, the animal caught in a thicket by his horns resembles a goat rather than a ram; indeed, it has long horns and ears, a beard and long grey hair. A similar depiction can be found in The Creation of the Animals in the same complex (NII 9a), while the ram is depicted in The Passover Lamb Offering (I 5c) and, at Moses feet, in The Burning Bush (I 1a; ill. 3); both differ significantly from the animal in Abrahams Sacrifice. It is very unlikely that the discrepancy results from the artists mistake or lack of skill; the deviation from the established iconography must have been deliberate. This representation of Abrahams Sacrifice, although rare, is not the only one; at least three other similar depictions are known (all of them created in Germany in the 15th century). One depiction (ill. 2) belongs to the group of woodcuts by Michael Wolgemut and Wilhelm Pleydenwurff made for the Nuremberg Chronicle by Hartmann Schedel (Hartmannus Schedel. Liber chronicarum . Nuremberg, 1493. The Hermitage Library, inv. no. . 2799. F. 22v); the other two can be found on the altar panels showing The Presentation in the Temple by the so-called Master of the Life of the Virgin (active in Cologne, 146380). In the background of both scenes is depicted a carved altarpiece that contains the scene of Abrahams Sacrifice, where an angel holds the sacrificial goat by the horns (National Gallery, London, inv. NG706;
The Bible quotations are given in the Douai-Reims version of English translation of the Vulgate.
1
REFERENCES
Bahrfeldt 1880 Bahrfeldt E. Rietzneuendorf. Der Mnzfund von Michendorf. Numismatisch-hragistischer Anzeiger 11 (30 November). 1880. Bahrfeldt 1881 Bahrfeldt E. Ein Beitrag zur Brandenburgischen Mnzkunde des XII Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1881. Bahrfeldt 1889 Bahrfeldt E. Das M nzwesen der Mark Brandenburg von der ltesten Zeiten bis zum Anfang der Regierung der Hohenzollern. Berlin, 1889. Berger 1993 Berger F. Die mittelalterlichen Bracteateen im Kestner Museum Hannover. Sammlungskatalog. Hannover, 1993. Boeheim 1995 Boeheim W. Enciklopedija oruija [Weapons Encyclopedia]. St. Petersburg, 1995 (trans. from German: W. Boeheim, Handbuch der Waffenkunde. Leipzig, 1890). Eckstein 1880 Eckstein O. Der M nzfund zu Michendorf bei Potsdam. Bltter fr Mnzfreunde 89 (15 November). 1880.
65
Ill. 2. Michael Wolgemut. Abrahams Sacrifice. Woodcut. From Nuremberg Chronicle by Hartmann Schedel. 1493
Ill. 1. Abrahams Sacrifice. Stained-glass window. 136070. Marienkirche, Frankfurt-on-the-Oder
Aachen, the Cathedral Treasury; see Lepie and Minkelberg 1995: 70). It is only natural to ask, in this connection, what the source of the goat in Abrahams Sacrifice was. Indeed, the goat in this scene is contradictory to not only the unambiguous Old Testament episode and the established iconography, but also to itself, as it were, that is, to the medieval symbolic meaning of the goat. In the notion of medieval man, the goat had primarily negative connotations. Briefly, the Classical Antiquity and early medieval tradition connected with the goat was as follows. In Classical Antiquity, the goat symbolized male fertility and lust. Goats draw the Chariot of Bacchus; Pan, satyrs and fawns, lustful by nature, have goat-like features (hairy legs, hooves, pointed ears and horns). The goat was associated with natures self-reproduction and utmost lewdness. Aphrodite Pandemos was normally represented riding a goat. It should be noted, however, that these features of the goat were neither negative nor positive in themselves, for the authors were concerned with describing nature, rather than animals morals. Christian authors interpreted the world in terms of symbols, therefore nature to them was a visible embodiment of Divine Providence, rather than nature per se. For them the study of nature was but a way to apprehend the Providence of God. In the medieval mind, the bestiary characters of Classical Antiquity had undergone a number of drastic changes; in the new morale they were to perform a deictic function, symbolizing spiritual ascent and decline. This explains the role the goat had to play as a character of medieval art and literature.
67
According to St. Jerome of Stridon and St. Isidore of Seville, the goat was a lascivious animal (cf. Hieronimus, In Mat. 25, 31ss in PL 26: 196; Isidorus Hispalensis, Etymologiae, 12.1 in PL 82: 426: hircus lascivum animal). In the bestiaries, the goat is described as follows: The he-goat (hircus) is a wanton and frisky animal, always longing for sex; as a result of its lustfulness its eyes look sideways from which it has derived its name. For, according to Suetonius, hirci are the corners of the eyes. Its nature is so very heated that its blood alone will dissolve a diamond, against which the properties of neither fire nor iron can prevail2. Numerous examples of such symbolic interpretation of the goat in medieval culture can be found, first and foremost, in the sculptural decor of cathedrals, cf. the renowned 14th-century composition in the Cathedral of Auxerre, showing a girl riding a goat, the personification of Lechery (Hamann 1932); cf. also a young woman wrapped in a goat skin in the Cathedral of Freiburg representing Voluptuousness. The degradation of the goat in the medieval tradition, as compared to Greek and Roman neutrality (see above), resulted also from the approach to it in the New Testament tradition, cf. And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty. And all nations shall be gathered together before him: and he shall separate them
This and the following bestiary quotes are from Aberdeen University Library MS 24. The MS belongs to the so-called second family, the most common type of bestiary; texts of these books are standard enough and vary only insignificantly; see http://www.abdn hn.ac.uk/bestiary.
2
66
one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world (Matthew 25: 3134). Cf. also, Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the Devil and his angels (Matthew 25: 41). The conclusion that the Church Fathers drew from this passage was clearly defined. As St. Gregory the Great put it, Haedi peccatores significantur (Goats are sinners) (In I Reg. IV 5, 9 in PL 79: 286). In this capacity, i.e. as a symbol of those condemned to eternal torment, the goat repeatedly recurs in early Christian art. It should be observed that in the medieval notion the Devil had a number of goat-like features. Besides, in medieval Europe, the goat could be associated with the Jews and the Synagogue, largely due to the ancient practice of purification sacrifice dealt with more than once in the Old Testament, cf. And afterwards shall come to know his sin, he shall offer a buck goat without blemish, a sacrifice to the Lord (Leviticus 4:23). Asserting the superiority of the New Testament over the Old Testament, St. Paul wrote in the Epistle to the Hebrews (10:4), For it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away. In this connection the association of the goat with the Jews was not in favour of the latter. The Synagogue was frequently depicted in medieval art with the goats head in her arm, e.g. in the Hermitage Freiburg Cross, in the stained-glass windows of Strasbourg Cathedral and in the Church of St. Elizabeth (Marburg). It is this practice of Jewish offerings, however, although condemned by the Christian Church, that gives the clue (or one of the clues, at least) to the subject under review, viz. the well-known scapegoat rite going back to the time of the Holy Temple, practiced once a year, on the so-called Day of Atonement, cf. After he hath cleaned the sanctuary, and the tabernacle, and the altar, then let him offer the living goat. And putting both hands upon his head, let him confess all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their offences and sins. And praying that they may light on its head, he shall turn him out by a man ready for it, into the desert (Leviticus 16:2021). A number of early Christian and medieval authors regarded the scapegoat as the symbol of Christ, because it was he who, according to St. John, taketh away the sin
68
of the world (John 1:29). Besides, the scapegoat was interpreted as an offering to the Devil3, therefore some theologians considered Christs sacrifice as an ancient debt paid to the Devil who held a man captive after the original sin (for details, see Rivire 1934). In connection with the eighth row of the central window of the Marienkirche, which includes Abrahams Sacrifice, it should be observed that redemption and salvation are the chief motif of the two accompanying scenes, The Crucifixion and The Brazen Serpent. In this context, a goat instead of a ram in our panel does not seem to be fortuitous. As the ram became the substitute for Isaac and saved him from death, so the scapegoat was the substitute for Israel, as it were, taking the peoples sins upon itself4. Likewise, Christ by his self-sacrifice saved mankind from sin. Thus the goat in the Marienkirche Abrahams Sacrifice connects Old and New Testament themes. Thus, on the one hand, the goat in the panel seems to be well grounded theologically. On the other hand, however, the above interpretation is not uncontradictory, first of all because of the incompatibility of the two manifestations of one and the same animal. Indeed, the lascivious goat, symbolizing sinners, closely related to the Devil and the Jews who crucified Christ, is most unlikely to be a personification of Christ. It should also be noted that the Marienkirche Abrahams Sacrifice was located close to the window with the story of Antichrist. Since according to some medieval theologians the latter was associated with the goat, Hircus iste Antichristus est, (Rupertus Tuitensis. De Trinit. In Lv. II. 31 in PL 167: 819), it is doubtful that this animal could be used as a symbol of Christ. A goat, although extremely rare, is not altogether impossible in Abrahams Sacrifice (see above). It may not be futile therefore to compare this scene with other instances, as puzzling, where the context indicates that the animal has an undoubtedly positive connotation, not resulting from the scapegoat allusion, viz. The Burning Bush, The Annunciation to the Shepherds and also different subjects from the cycle of Creation (The Creation of the Animals, The Creation of Adam, The Creation of Eve, The Naming
The Vulgate has no direct indication of it, unlike the original Hebrew text, where the demonic creature Azazel is mentioned; yet, the idea of the desert as the demons dwelling is typical of the Christian tradition as well, see, for example, the story of the temptation of Jesus or numerous lives of desert hermits at the time of early monasticism in the Middle East. 4 The custom of slaughtering a rooster or a hen on the eve of Yom Kippur (Kaparoth) is derived from the earlier scapegoat ritual. Even nowadays, it is accompanied by a prayer, This is my exchange, my substitute, my atonement.
3
Ill. 3. The Burning Bush. Stained-glass window. 136070. Marienkirche, Frankfurt-on-the-Oder
69
of the Animals)5. It should be noted that only those scenes off all who approach her, and she knows whether they in which the goat is specifically accentuated and thus come with guile or with friendship. The roe represents the wisdom of God who loves the could have special significance are discussed here6. In all the depictions of The Burning Bush and The prophets, that is, the high mountains toward which the Annunciation to the Shepherds (see Supplement), the goat Prophet has raised his eyes. I have lifted my eyes up to is clearly separated from the rest of the flock; its location the mountains, he said, whence my help will come (Ps. is somewhat privileged, close to Christ the Logos appear- 121: 1). Of the roe Solomon said in the Song of Songs, ing in the bush, or to the Angel; it can be depicted on a Behold, my cousin comes leaping over mountains, boundmountain, above the other animals. The goat is often ing over the hills (S. of S. 2:8). Thus, the roe feeds in the depicted grazing tree leaves, as in the Marienkirche valleys just as our Lord Jesus Christ feeds in the Church, Abrahams Sacrifice (see below for the explanation of the since the good works of Christians and the gifts of the motif). Besides, a goat in The Burning Bush scene con- faithful are the food of Christ. He said, For I was hungry tradicts the Old Testament episode, in which Moses fed and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me the sheep of Jethro, his father in law, the priest of Madian drink (Mt. 25:35), and so on. There are valleys and moun(Exodus 3:1; italics mine O.K.). tains throughout the world. These are to be understood Of the sixty animals of medieval bestiaries, the Cre- as the churches in various places. ation and the Naming scenes have only twenty-six; in this The roe, however, leaps over the prophets, bounding selected group, the goat occupies the seventh place, after over the hills (that is, the apostles). She has keen vision the ox, horse, deer, sheep, lion and hare (representing signifying that the Saviour sees everything that is done. rock hyrax, Procavia capensis, known in the Middle Ages He is called God because he sees all things, and from afar as lepusculus Domini). In medieval theology all the ani- he sees those approaching him with guile. He knew that mals had only positive connotations (Dines 2004: 7384). Judas was coming to betray him with a kiss (cf. Luke An explanation of the presence of the goat in the Naming 22:48). Furthermore, it is written, The Lord knows those scene can be found in St. Isidore of Sevilles commentar- who are his (Tim. 2:19). And John said, Behold, the ies in some of the bestiaries (Etymologiae 12.1 in PL 82: Lamb of God, behold he who takes away the sins of the 426), where the goat is among the animals named by world (John 1: 29) (Physiologus). Adam; but this text does not explain either the presence It follows that the gazelle was identified with Christ. of the goat in the other Creation scenes or the privileged What did the Greek gazelle and the German goat have in position it occupies not infrequently. common? It was the Latin translation of the 4th- or 5thHow can we explain the goat paradox in medieval century Physiologus that brought them together. The culture, inexplicable at first glance? The goat as a per- translation was the basis for numerous bestiaries; the sonification of sin would be inadmissible in the above most popular version of it reads, There is an animal scenes; the scapegoat allusion (see above) is not a fully called in Latin caper, goat, because it chooses (capere) to satisfactory explanation. Yet, the latter may suggest a live in places where thorns grow; some call it capra from solution of the paradoxes connected with the goat in the crepita, a rustling noise. These are wild goats that the Middle Ages. The anonymous (presumably, Alexandrian) Greeks called dorcades, gazelles, because they have very Physiologus, or a treatise on animals, of the 2nd or 3rd sharp eyesight. They live in high mountains and can feel century, reads: On the Roe. There is an animal in the approaching men from afar, either hunters or travellers. mountains who is called dorchon in Greek and caprea in Likewise, our Lord Jesus Christ loves high mountains, Latin. The beast loves the high mountains but finds her that is, the prophets and Apostles, as it is said in the Song food in the foothills of the mountains. She sees from far of Solomon, Behold, my beloved cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills. 5 The Marienkirche complex includes The Creation of the Animals As the goat grazes in the valleys, our Lord grazes on (NII 9a), The Naming of the Animals (NII 11a) and The Burning Bush the church; his food is the good deeds of the Christians, (I 1a; ill. 3); all of these have depictions of goats. Similar examples can or he said, For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat; be found in many medieval illuminated manuscripts, stained-glass panI was thirsty, and ye gave me drink. els, murals and bas-reliefs; some of these are listed in the Supplement. 6 Scenes in which the goat is depicted amidst the flock are not By the valleys of the mountains the churches in difdiscussed here, because in all probability they reflect the shepherds ferent parts are meant, as is said in the Song of Solomon, practice to include a leader goat in a flock of sheep. I am grateful to My beloved is like a roe or young hart. Dr. Elizabeth Renne for attracting my attention to this curious fact.
70
That the goat has very keen eyesight and sees everything and recognizes things from afar, signifies our Lord, who is the Lord of all knowledge and God. And it is also said, Though the Lord be high yet hath he respect unto the lowly but the proud he knoweth afar off. He created and established all things, and rules and judges and sees; and before anything arises in our hearts he foresees and understands it. Lastly, just as the goat perceives from afar hunters approaching, so Christ knew in advance the plot of his betrayer, saying, Behold, he is at hand that doth betray me. It is possible in this context that the explanation of the presence of a goat in the Marienkirche Abrahams Sacrifice is this distinction between hircus and caper a domestic goat and a wild goat respectively, made by medieval authors. Moreover, the fact that the goat in the scene in question is depicted grazing on a mountain, with so-called ledges under its hooves, is another indication of the caprine nature of the goat depicted. This in turn implies a reference to the bestiary, As the goat grazes in the valleys, our Lord grazes on the church (Tesnire 2005: 161). To sum up. A goat, instead of the traditional ram in the Marienkirche Abrahams Sacrifice, can be accounted for on the basis of two premises, viz. (a) the scapegoat allusion (this is also confirmed by the Crucifixion scene juxtaposed to it) and (b) the animal depicted is not hircus, a domestic goat with a bad reputation, but caper, a wild goat, which was a medieval Christological symbol with a positive meaning.
SUPPLEMENT
The Creation (episodes): Aberdeen, University Library, MS 24, f. 2v; London, British Library, MS Cotton Claudius B. IV, f. 6; London, British Library, MS Royal 2B. VII, f. 2; London, British Library, MS Add. 47682, f. 2v; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.494, f. 1; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.729, f. 286v; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.791, f. 4v; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.833, f. 5; Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 1511, f. 7; Paris, Bibliothque Nationale de France, Arsenal, MS 1186 rs., f. 10; St. Petersburg, Russian National Library, MS Latin Q.v.V.I, f. 20; Cahors, cathdrale de Saint Etienne, mural painting; Strasbourg, cathdrale de Notre Dame, stone relief. The Naming of the Animals: Aberdeen, University Library, MS 24, f. 5; Douai, Bibliothque Municipale, MS 711, f. 17; The Hague, Museum Meermanno-Westreenianum, MS 10 B 25, f.18v; Paris, Bibliothque Nationale de France, MS lat. 364, f. 4; St. Petersburg, Russian National Library, MS Latin Q.v.V.I, f. 5. The Burning Bush: Klner Dom, Stephanuskapelle, Das jngere Bibelfenster (2a); Saint-Denis, basilique de Saint Denis, chapel of St. Peregrin, stained-glass panel; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.638, f. 7v. The Annunciation to the Shepherds: Rothenburg ob der Tauber, St. Jakobskirche, stained-glass panel (I, 4c); Cambridge, Fitzwilliam
Museum, Macclesfield Psalter, f. 139v; Cambridge, Saint Johns College, MS D.6, f. 27v; London, British Library, MS Arundel 83, f. 124; New York, Morgan Library, MS G.59, f. 22; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.43, f. 19v; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.711, f. 61v; New York, Morgan Library, MS M.729, f. 267v; Oxford, St. Johns College, MS D.6, f. 27v; Paris, Bibliothque Nationale de France, Arsenal, MS 1186 rs., f. 17v; Paris, Bibliothque Nationale de France, MS Latin 18014, f. 40v; Chartres, cathdrale de Notre Dame, stone relief from former choir screen. REFERENCES Dines 2004 Dines I. The Hare and its Alter Ego in the Middle Ages. Reinardus 17:1 (2004): 7384. Hamann 1932 Hamann R. The Girl and the Ram. The Burlington Magazine 60. 1932: 9197. Kaiser 2005 Kaiser F. 2005. Der Schiksal des glsernen Schatzes . In: Der glserne Schatz. Die Bilderbibel der St. Marienkirche in Frankfurt-on-the-Oder. Berlin, 2005: 135143. Kozina 2002 Kozina E. Ikonografieskaja programma vitraej Marienkirxe Frankfurta-na-Odere [Iconographic Programme of the Marienkirche Stained-Glass Windows in Frankfurt-on-the-Oder]. In: Vitrai Marienkirxe: Exhibition catalogue. St. Petersburg: The State Hermitage Museum, 2002: 1443. Kozina 2005 Kozina E. Donatio Incognita. Istorija zakaza vitranogo xora Marijenkirxe vo Franfurte-na-Odere [Donatio Incognita. History of the Commission of Stained-Glass Windows for the Apse of the Marienkirche in Frankfurt-on-the-Oder]. In: Ermitanyje tenija pamjati B.B. Piotrovskogo. St. Petersburg, 2005: 6377. Lepie and Minkelberg 1995 Lepie H. and G. Minkelberg. Die Schatzkammer des Aachener Domes. Aachen, 1995. Physiologus Physiologus. Translated by M.J. Curley. University of Texas Press, 1979: 3334 PL Patrologia Latina. Ed. by J. Migne. Paris, 18441855. Rivire 1934 Rivire J. Le dogme de la rdemption au dbut du Moyen Age. Bibliothque Thomiste, Section historique 16. Paris, 1934. Seeger 1977 Seeger J. Die Antichristlegende im Chorfenster der Marienkirche zu Frankfurt an der Oder. Stdel-Jahrbuch 6. 1977: 265292. Shlikevich 2002 Shlikevich Ye. Sudba vitraej Marienkirxe [The History of the Marienkirche Stained-Glass Windows]. In: Vitrai Marienkirxe: Exhibition catalogue. St. Petersburg: The State Hermitage Museum, 2002: 612. Tesnire 2005 Tesnire M.H. Bestiaire medieval: Enluminures. Paris: Bibliothque Nationale de France, 2005.
71
TATIANA KUSTODIEVA ALL ABOUT LEDA (SODOMAS PAINTING IN THE HERMITAGE) Was there a Leda in Leonardo da Vincis oeuvre? The hypothesis about it is based on some older sources, e.g. Anonimo Gaddiano (first half of the 16th century), where also a Leda is mentioned among Leonardos works (see Vezzosi 1983: 84). In the 15th chapter of the second book of his Trattato dellarte della pittura (1584) devoted to such human feelings as trust, fear, humility etc., Lomazzo illustrates meekness by Leonardos Leda, completely nude, with a swan by her bosom, her eyes lowered timidly (Lomazzo 1844: 274). For a second time, he mentions this painting in his Idea del tempio della pittura (1590; Calvesi 1977: 137). In 1623, Cassiano del Pozzo saw in Fontainebleau Leonardos Leda, cf. a standing Leda almost completely nude, with a swan and two eggs by her feet, four infants seen to appear from the shell; the painting is exquisitely finished, although somewhat dry in style, especially in the breast of the woman, but the landscape and the vegetation are rendered with utmost diligence; regretfully, since the panel consists of three pieces of wood which have split apart, paint has flaked at places (Vezzosi 1983: 84). The posthumous inventory of the belongings of Salaino, one of Leonardos favourite pupils (1524), includes a painting called Leda, which was estimated higher than the other works in the list. In this connection the publishers remark: What exactly were these pictures: originals by Leonardo or copies or elaborations of Leonardesque themes by Salai? This cannot of course be answered with absolute certainty, but the enormously high values assigned to the first few paintings (the Leda is no. 1 in the list T. K.) suggests that they at least were the work of the master. The Leda, appraised at 200 scudi, or 1010 lire imperiali, was worth as much as Salais house... (Shell and Sironi 1991: 96). According to many students of Leonardo, a painting or a cartoon with such composition was lost, as well as a number of other works by Leonardo. References to a cartoon are to be come across in the 17th and 18th centuries. In 1614, the Florentine ambassador to Milan mentioned two large cartoons by Leonardo da Vinci, one showing a standing Leda and a swan caressing her near a pond, with two cupids nearby (Rossoni 2002: 34). In 1721, also in Milan, in the collection of Marquis Casnedi, admired were cartoons by Leonardo da Vinci A Leda, standing naked, with a Cupids in one of the corners at the bottom. All of these are by Leonardo da Vinci and are as big as the Life (ibid.). Dependence of Leonardos school on their master suggests that some composition with a full-length Leda by Leonardo must have existed, otherwise numerous versions based on it by his followers remain unexplained. The Leda myth was variously treated by the authors of Classical Antiquity. The most popular version of it tells about the wife of the King of Sparta, loved by Zeus who came to her in the form of a swan. As a result of their union she became the mother of the heavenly twins hatched from eggs Castor and Pollux, and Helen of Troy and Clytemnestra, symbolizing amity and discord respectively. Two of them, Castor and Clytemnestra, were mortals, while the other two, Pollux and Helen, were immortal. Classical Antiquity subjects are comparatively rare in Leonardos oeuvre. But he definitely was preoccupied with the story of Leda. This follows from his drawings on the subject. As was typical of Leonardo, everything he touched began to be seen in a new light. Before him, the Leda myth, popular in the vase-painting of Classical
Antiquity had not had a well-established manifestation. After Leonardo, numerous variations of the theme appeared, all of them based on his idea. In the two cartoons by Leonardo (usually dated to c. 1504), the version with Leda kneeling is the most accomplished one. One of the cartoons is in the Boymansvan Beuningen Museum in Rotterdam, the other is in the collection of the Duke of Devonshire at Chatsworth. The former shows Leda, nude, down on one knee, looking at the swan, one of her hands caressing the swan, the other pointing at the twins hatching from the egg. In the other drawing, the womans posture and the position of the left arm are the same, but her right arm is around the neck of the swan which cranes its neck towards her face. They are shown amidst reeds and swamp grass. This type of composition is not connected directly to the theme of the present paper, therefore suffice it to mention the most important work based on these drawings, namely Leda and Her Children by Giampetrino (Staatliche Museen, Kassel). More problematic is the development of Leonardos idea in the standing version of the theme. The posture may have been suggested by statues of Venus. Only few chance drawings have survived, e.g. one from the Royal Library, Windsor (inv. no. 12642 v), with a nude female figure, her posture and gesture close to the Uffizi Leda. The latter, as well as the painting at the Galleria Borghese, Rome (artist unknown), and a number of compositions similar to it, Raphaels drawing at Windsor and a drawing by an unknown artist at Louvre suggest a possibility of not necessarily a painting by Leonardo, but at least, a cartoon by him, on which the other versions were based. In any event, it is the Uffizi Spiridon Leda (oil on panel, 130 x 78 cm), formerly ascribed to Leonardo that is regarded as the archetype of the above works. The painting reflects problems connected with the mystery of nature, life and its origin, which interested Leonardo when he was working at his anatomical drawings of a foetus in the mothers womb and male- and female reproductive organs, as well as on some of his paintings. The Spiridon [Leda] and the other works of this group are not likely to be real copies of some finished work; the authors must have had access to the cartoons by Leonardo and borrowed certain motifs from them. This supports the hypothesis that Leonardo did not go farther than creating a cartoon finished in its principal elements (Regoli et al. 2001: 140). The Uffizi painting shows a nude Leda amidst flowers, on the bank of a lake (or marsh?), with her arm embrac73
ing the black swan (quite a few publications have been devoted to the unusual colour of the bird) (Calvesi 1977: 137153); the swans wing is wrapped around her side, lifting the head with a red beak towards her. Ledas eyes are lowered; her subtle smile is very characteristic of Leonardo; at her feet are two eggs with four infants hatched from them. The jasmines, aquilegias and reeds are typical of Leonardos school, as well as the grotto and bluish mountains in the background. The painting has been ascribed to Leonardo himself, Leonardo in collaboration with Bernazzano, as well as to Sodoma, Francesco Melzi and Fernando Spagnolo (?). In the catalogue of the Leonardo and the Leda Myth exhibition (Vinci 2001), the work is listed as after Leonardo da Vinci (Regoli et al. 2001: 140), but in 2002 A. Natali suggested Piero di Cosimo as the author of the paining in question (Natali 2002: 120). Scholars are at variance as to the date of the Spiridon Leda. Calvesi, who connects it with the weddings in the family of Lodovico il Moro of Milan, dates the painting to 149193 (Calvesi 1977: 209). But the majority prefers to date it to between 1505 and 1510. A. Vezzosi (1983: 100111) gives a list of the numerous versions of the composition, viz. Leda Borghese with the swan and twins (Rome), the paintings from the Philadelphia Museum, the collection of the Duke of Pembroke, Wilton House (Salisbury), and a number of private collections, as well as the Louvre drawing, etc. In this book, two identical paintings have been reproduced (nos. 195 and 196) accompanied by the following legend: The standing Leda with her four children. There are two variants of this version, often mixed up in quotations and references concerning their provenance Nonetheless the difference is obvious: no. 195 (notice also the small swans detail), 57.5 x 36.8 cm, in the North Carolina Museum was ascribed to Sodoma by Berenson, Fiocco, Longhi, Perkins, Van Marle, Venturi and, lastly, Carli (1965) who suggested to date it to 151213; no. 196 (Brussels ?) was o ascribed to Beccafumi, although it was published as a work by Sodoma as early as the 1929 Pantheon (III: 237) (Vezzosi 1983: 108109). Under no. 196, Vezzosi has published the work which was regarded as lost and which is in the Hermitage at present (inv. no. 757). It is by Giovanni Antonio Bazzi known as Sodoma (14771549). It is painted on a poplar panel, 53.3 37.0 cm; it is almost identical to the painting that is in the U.S.A: in the old photo reproduced in the catalogue of the 198384 exhibition, the small swan present in the original is simply invisible.
72
The goal of the present paper is to attract the scholars A quarter century later, the Pantheon journal anattention to the Hermitage painting by tracing its history nounced in its May 1929 issue that in the second half of in various collections, giving a bibliography of the rele- May, J. Cremer-Dortmund would put to the Bangel & vant publications, and presenting the results of technical Wertheim sale in Berlin a number of well-known works examination. of art, among them, some first-class Italian pieces, includThe Leda entered the Museum in 1945, with other ing a comparatively small Leda from the Somze collecworks of art deported from Germany after World War II. tion (Pantheon 1929: 234). In the 1839 catalogue of the collection of Count GiovanThe Hermitage Library has a copy of the catalogue of ni Battista de Sommariva (17601826), it is listed under the sale (Sammlung Cremer Dortmund 1928) that beno. 38, as a work by Leonardo da Vinci, with a comment longed to Stepan Yaremich who worked at the Museum that the painting comes from the ancient Parmesan San from 1918 to 1939. It has Yaremichs notes in pencil in Vitalli family and that the author of the catalogue does the margin; the note at the end reads: To me the trip is not take the liberty to question the attribution (Cata- like a faraway nightmare. No wonder, for 1929 was a logue de Sommariva 1839: 22, no. 38). tragic year in the history of the Hermitage, for in that Most probably, the painting found its way into the year the Museum collections were being sold; Yaremich collection of Sommariva, during the peak of his career, had to represent the Hermitage as an art expert. In the in 180002, when under Napoleon, he became de facto spring of 1929 he was sent to the Lepke sale in Berlin to dictator of Milan. At least as early as 1803, the painting protect the Soviet art valuables from the Western experts was in Sommarivas collection (naturally, as a work by and antiquaries speculations for the decline of the pricLeonardo da Vinci), which is confirmed by a cast of a es fixed in Leningrad (Solomakha 2006: 504). Yaremich marked the prices in the margin of the catacameo with the depiction after the painting by Giovanni Cremona (17771854). The reverse of the cast (now in logue, adding at times his comment concerning certain the Pinacotheca of Cremona) is inscribed: Sommariva paintings. Beside the Leda (no. 115) it is written in his possiede 1803 (Vezzosi 1983: 109). Besides the villa on hand: . . very good. In his introduction to the catthe bank of Lake Como, Sommariva had several houses, alogue, H. Voss described the painting as Sodomas Leda, including one in Paris, where the Leda was in 1824 (see full of poetry, undoubtedly one of the gems of the collecNagler 1850: 314; and Venturi 1920: 182 with a refer- tion (Sammlung Cremer Dortmund 1928: 12). The note ence to Nagler). After Sommarivas death, his son Luigi on the painting reads: The painting imbued in light-blue inherited him, who died in 1838. In 1839, Luigis widow and olive-green tones. Being under the influence of the put to sale a considerable number of works of art which well-known composition of Leonardo, [it is] the artists masterpiece. Can hardly be overcome in the exquisiteness were in Paris, including our painting. In 1876, the work, as painted by Sodoma, was in- of colouration by any other painting (ibid: 63). Even if this comment be an exaggeration, as is typical cluded in the catalogue of the sale of the collection of the late Camille Marcille, Paris (Catalogue de Tableaux de of sale catalogues, the price was high enough, 95,000 D.M., which was higher than that of the other paintings. Marcille 1876: 6). The most detailed description of the painting is in the For example, The Nativity by Taddeo Gaddi, also marked 1904 catalogue of Somzes valuables sold in Brussels. . very good by Yaremich, cost only 47,000 Here, too, the painting was listed as a work by Leonardo. D.M. It is unknown, however, who bought the Leda and The catalogue gives the replicas of the painting and the for what price. Most probably, it had remained in a priowners of these, viz. San Vitalli, Sommariva and Marcille. vate collection in Germany until the end of World War The work is reported to have been shown at the World II, when it was brought to Russia. It is to this painting that Suida, the student of the Exhibition in Paris in 1904; also mentioned in the catalogue is the seal with a monogram and a crown on the Leonardo school, referred as full of poetry (Suida 1929: reverse, which has come down to our day (Catalogue des 242). The painting undoubtedly deserved this characteristic. A small one, it must have been commissioned by a Monuments dart de Somze 1904: 55). It must have been at the 1904 sale that Leda was private person. Originally, the panel was made to fit in a bought by the Geheimrat Josef Cremer, who was a rep- laid-on frame that is not extant today. Leda is depicted nude, standing on a bank (ill. 1), her resentative of one of the leading German export comparight arm entwined with the long neck of the swan ready nies in Brussels from 1869 to 1889.
74
Ill. 1. Sodoma. Leda. 1510s. The State Hermitage
75
to touch the womans cheek with the tongue protruding from the beak, her head bent towards her lover, pressing his wing to her side with the left hand, without looking at the four children beside her. Behind the swan one can see a strange dry tree. Generally, the tree is a symbol of life and death; when green and in blossom, it represents female fecundity. It is possible that the painting contains a hidden contrast of fecundity and infertility, but it may simply be a decorative motif, in which the twisted knotty trunk of the tree accentuates the mellow contours of the neck of the swan and Ledas body. It should be observed that a dry tree is present in another painting with a standing Leda by Leonardo, that of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, with the tree in the background (normally, the painting is ascribed to a Dutch painter). The landscape background of the Hermitage work is typical of the Italian painting of the first quarter of the 16th century, in particular Sodoma: valleys alternating with hills, with silhouettes of buildings against the sky and haze in the distance. The painting, exquisite in execution, is characterized by dominating blue-brown tones, with alternating cold and warm colour patches, the birds feathers and Ledas body, the blue of the sky and vegetation, the surface of the water and the rust-brown crown of the tree, the blue water of the lake and the pink-white legs reflected in it. The Hermitage painting differs from those of Leonardos other followers based on the composition of the Spiridon Leda type in which the swan on Ledas left is a replica of that of Leornados drawing from the collection of the Duke of Devonshire (except the position of the right wing), and the womans gaze is directed towards the twins. In the Hermitage painting, the location of the swan and the children on the canvas have been reversed; the swan is also different; all this have changed the focus and the meaning of the painting. Leda pays no attention at the children; loving and loved, she presses the swans wing against her side (ill. 2). The instinct of a mother gives way to desire. Sodoma was hardly interested in the ideas connected with either Leonardos concept of Leda or the Spiridon Leda, particularly, nature (the painting has no meadow vegetation) or the metamorphosis of the egg that conceals something and then reveals it, or else the union of the earthly and the heavenly aspect, alias the body and soul. Bazzi used the story of Leda as a plot for a small and extremely elegant scene, with a tint of eroticism. Stylistically, the Hermitage painting differs from the above ones; the difference manifests itself in a certain playfulness favoured by the Mannerists, such as the swans
76
excessively elongated neck entwined with Ledas arm, the S-shaped twist of Ledas body, the intricate line of the bank, the reflection in the water, not typical of other painters, and the body alive contrasting with the dead tree. When acquired by the Hermitage, the paining was catalogued as a copy after Sodoma. In reality, however, the painting is undoubtedly the original; it is of very high quality, exquisite in the manner of execution, its style not dissimilar to that of Giovanni Antonio Bazzi. No wonder, the painting has been restored several times during the past centuries. The original colour gamut is somewhat distorted due to several thick layers of brown varnish. It is visible in ultraviolet luminescence, as well as individual patches of yellow restoration varnish, especially on Ledas legs and the swans feathers (ill. 3). The craquelure is toned at places. Coloured varnish covers Ledas brow, cheek and the bridge of the nose. The infrared picture has revealed numerous overpaints and toning, on the sky, under the swans right wing and the reflection in the water (ills. 4 and 5). At places, the overpaints are above the craquelure. It has been observed that the marvellous depiction of Eve in Sodomas wall painting with Christ descended into hell (by Sodoma T. K.) corresponds exactly to Leonardos standing Leda reversed. It is the excellent Leda painting of the former Somze collection in Brussels, however, that demonstrates Bazzis progress, although via the liveliest copy, to his own discovery (Suida 1929: 242). The wall painting referred to by Suida is in the Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena, nowadays. Sodoma created it when his art was at the period of thriving; it has been dated to either c. 1518 or 152025. In the depiction of Eve his ability to depict the ideal beauty of the naked body reached its peak (Torriti 1977: 100), Ledas fragile gracefulness speaks in favour of a different period. E. Carli has dated the Leda of the North Carolina Museum of Art to 151213, on the basis of its stylistic affinity to the Lucretia of the Museum August Kestner, Hanover, and the Judith of the Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena (Carli 1979: 56). It is unlikely, however, that the two Ledas, in the U.S.A. and in St. Petersburg, belong to different periods. Carlis dating seems to be absolutely convincing; it can be accepted for the Hermitage panel as well. It is shortly after 1510 that Sodoma became preoccupied with mythological subjects seen in his canvases decorating the ceilings of Palazzo Chigi, Siena, created c. 1510. In 151112, Sodoma took part in the decoration of the Palace of Pandolfo Petrucci, the ruler of Siena. It has been suggested that both Lucretia and Judith belonged
Ill. 2. Sodoma. Leda. Detail
77
Ill. 3. Sodoma. Leda. Ultraviolet photograph
Ill. 4. Sodoma. Leda. Infrared photograph
to the allegorical decoration ensemble of the Palace (Carli 1996: 2). The two paintings are reminiscent of Leonardo, both in the type of facial features and the landscape. The two womens bend of the head is similar to that of Leda (but the other way); they have similar chains with pendants on the forehead (present in the painting of the North Carolina Museum of Art but not in the Hermitage Leda). Also worthy of a notice is a tree, almost leafless, both in Judith and the two versions of Leda, as well as hair locks falling onto the shoulders. All this demonstrates stylistic affinity of the three paintings suggesting that they were created at about the same time, viz. the very beginning of the second decade of the 16th century. Later, the Leda and swan theme in Italian art underwent certain changes, cf. the representation of a family group gained popularity due to Leonardos work in the first years of Cinquecento and was echoed in works of different
78
artists, but it was practically exhausted in the 1520s; generally speaking, the representation of the love of Leda and the swan had great resonance in the first half of the 16th century, while in the second half only few paintings were created, in which, among other things, the context of the entire scene is different (Rossoni 2002: 4445). It is difficult to decide which of the two versions of Leda, the Hermitage or the North Carolina one is primary or secondary. The two paintings differ but insignificantly in size (the North Carolina painting is 3.7 cm shorter and 0.2 cm narrower), as well as in the landscape depiction (the bush right of Leda in the Hermitage painting is more rounded in shape) and the stuffage elements (the Hermitage painting has two donkey-men ). The hair of the Hermitage Leda has no chain and pendant present in the North Carolina work that such authorities as Berenson, Fiocco, Longhi, Suida and others ascribed to
Ill. 5. Sodoma. Leda. Infrared photograph. Detail
79
Bazzi. Nonetheless, in the 1968 catalogue it is listed as ascribed to Sodoma, with the following comment: Whether Sodoma repeated himself so nearly (in the North Carolina work T. K.) or whether the two paintings are by different hands remains an open question (Shapley 1968: 145). The Hermitage painting rightly deserves to be regarded as a work by Sodoma himself; as was typical of him, it has reminiscences of not only Leonardo but also Domenico Beccafumi. The painting was copied when it was in Count Sommarivas collection. The Modern Art Gallery (Galleria dArte Moderna), Milan, has a miniature enamel on copper after it (13.2 10.1 cm) from this collection. It is by Giambattista Gigola (17691841) of Lombardy. The reverse is inscribed: Gigola / F / Per / Sommarriva / Gran / Mecenate. There were two other miniatures by Gigola, which, according to him, were copies after Leonardo (Vezzosi 1983: 100). In summation. The Hermitage painting is an excellent Leonardesque work by Sodoma. It has been referred to many times in art history publications; it changed owners, many of them outstanding collectors; it was lost by art scholars for almost a century, to reappear today.
REFERENCES Calvesi 1977 Calvesi M. Leda. In: Leonardo: la pittura. Firenze, 1977. Carli 1979 Carli E. Sodoma. Vercelli, 1979. Carli 1996 Carli E. Sodoma. In: J. Turner (ed.). The Dictionary of Art. Vol. 23. New York, 1996. Catalogue de Sommariva 1839 Catalogue de la Galerie du Comte de Sommariva Paris, 1839. Catalogue de Tableaux de Marcille 1876 Catalogue de Tableaux de feu M. Camille Marcille Paris, 1876. Catalogue des Monuments dart de Somze 1904 Catalogue des Monuments dart antique composant les Collection de Somze Bruxelles, 1904.
Lomazoo 1844 Lomazzo, Gio. P. Trattato dellarte della pittura Vol. I. Roma, 1844. Nagler 1850 Nagler G. K. Neues allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon Vol. XX. Mnchen, 1850. Natali 2002 Natali A. Leonardo. Il giardino di delizie. Milano, 2002. Pantheon 1929 Pantheon May. 1929. Regoli et al. 2001 Regoli G. Dalli, R. Nanni and A. Natali (eds.). Leonardo e il mito di Leda. In: Modelli, memorie e metamorfosi di un invenzione a cura di G. Dalli Regoli, R. Nanni, A. Natali. Milano, 2001. Rossoni 2002 Rossoni E. Il bianco e dolce cigno. Metafore damore nellarte italiana del XVI secolo. Nuoro, 2002. Sammlung Cremer Dortmund 1928 Sammlung Geheimrat Cremer Dortmund. 1928. Wertheim Berlin W 9 Antiquitthaus, Bellvuesstrasse 7. Shapley 1968 Shapley F. R. Paintings from the Samuel Kress Collection. Italian Schools XVXVI Century. New York, 1968. Shell and Sironi 1991 Shell J. and G. Sironi. Salai and the Leonardos Legacy. The Burlington Magazine 133 (February). 1991. Solomakha 2006 Solomakha E. Yu. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Muzejnyje rasprodai 19281929 godov. Arxivnyje dokumenty [The State Hermitage. The Sale of the Museum Collections in 19281929. Archival Documents]. St. Petersburg, 2006. Suida 1929 Suida W. Leonardo und sein Kreis. Mnchen, 1929. Torriti 1977 Torriti P. La Pinacoteca Nazionale di Siena. I dipinti dal XV al XVIII secolo. Genova, 1977. Venturi 1920 Venturi A. Leonardo da Vinci pittore. Bologna, 1920. Vezzosi 1983 Vezzosi A. (ed.) Leonardo e il leonardismo a Napoli e Roma. (Catalogo a cura di A. Vezzosi. Testi introduttivi di C. Pedretti). Firenze, 1983.
NATALIA SEPMAN DESIGNS FOR STAINED-GLASS WINDOWS BY CHRISTOPH MURER AND HIS STUDIO IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION The State Hermitage possesses several dozen designs for stained-glass windows of the Swiss school, including four sheets with the monogram of Christoph Murer (15581614) (inv. nos. 18582, 4595, 4598, 4593). This master was born in Zurich in the family of glass painter Jos Murer. After apprenticeship with his father, he travelled to Basel and Strasbourg. In 1586, Murer returned to his native city, joined the Saffron guild, and opened his own workshop. By the early 1590s, he had become a leading master of the Zurich school of glass painting. In 1600, he was elected to the Grand Council of the Guild, and after 1611 he was living in Winterthur as a Zurich representative of his guild (see Sandrart 1675: 253254; Meyer 1884: 215218; Reinhart 1908: 453455; Vignau-Wilberg 1982: 1038). Although Christoph Murer spent most of his life in Zurich, his activity went far beyond this city. He received commissions from Basel, Strasbourg, Lucerne, Nuremberg and other Swiss and German cities. Like many artists of his time, Murer was a man of many talents. He painted house walls, produced easel paintings and engravings (Andersen 1866: nos. 152, 115; Hollstein 1990: nos. 1108), and, like his father, he even dabbled in poetry. But his greatest fame came from his many cartoons for stained-glass panels, and from his glass painting. The master reached the peak of his artistic career at the time when so-called cabinet stained glass became one of the main art forms in Switzerland1, equally important to portrait painting and book engraving. Designs for glass panels had evolved as a special type of drawing. They were not really sketches, but complete works of art. Prominent artists, who often did not paint glass themselves,
81
nevertheless determined with their sketches the development of the art form. The emergence of cabinet stained glass greatly widened the thematic repertoire of glass paintings. Biblical scenes (Christs Passion, the Life of Mary the Virgin, or saints lives) would often give way to symbolic, allegorical or even secular motifs. The subjects of Christoph Murers works are diverse and cover almost the whole range of themes typical for cabinet stained glass. Christoph Murers style was formed under the influence of a major late-Renaissance artist Tobias Stimmer (15391584). The main purpose of young Murers journeys of 15831584 was to see the great master in Strasbourg. Sandrart wrote of Murer: he was close to the famous Tobias Stimmer from Strasbourg, which is why their drawings are so similar (Sandrart 1675: 253). Murer followed Stimmers tradition in his designs for cabinet stained glass, but his works are more pictorial and decorative, more diverse in their ornamentation. While Murers early sketches are very close to Stimmers manner, later they become more free and energetic. Preserving the general structure which had taken shape by the first half of the 16th century, the artist moved away from representative painting, bringing an air of genre scenes into his compositions.
1 The term cabinet stained glass most likely originates from the so-called Kunstkabinetten (art cabinets) which first appeared in the 16th century. Stained-glass panels were among the objects that could be collected and kept in such cabinets. This type of glass painting evolved from the images of donors which used to take a humble place in the lower rows in large-scale church panels. After 1500, these small stained-glass panes, usually round or rectangular in shape, were often used in the decoration of public buildings and private houses.
There are extant stained-glass panels by Murer in the Swiss National Museum in Zurich (Schweizerisches Landesmuseum Zrich), in the Museum of Fine Arts in Basel (Kunstmuseum Basel), in the German National Museum in Nuremberg (Deutsches Nationalmuseum Nrnberg) and in the Austrian Museum of Applied Art in Vienna (sterreichisches Museum fr angewandte Kunst Wien). Several of his works from the Museum of Decorative Arts in Berlin (Kunstgewerbemuseum Berlin) were lost during World War II. A series of panels in the town hall of Lucerne is still in its original place. A number of designs by Murer have survived, giving us a much better understanding of his work in this area. This is the more important since most of the masters stained-glass windows have been lost. The largest collections of Murers sketches are kept in the Prints and Drawings Cabinets in Zurich, Basel and Karlsruhe, and individual sheets exist in various other museums. The full catalogue of his oeuvre has not yet been compiled, but publications of the past few decades have augmented our knowledge of his work (Boerlin 1976; Vignau-Wilberg 1982; Hasler 1996). Two of the four drawings in the Hermitage collection were first displayed at the 2002 exhibition What a Wondrous Flowering and later described in its catalogue (Kakoje krasok divnoje socvetje... 2002: cat. nos. 49, 50). One of them (inv. no. 18582) was then attributed to Murer by A.O. Larionov, and identified as one of a unique series made for the famous adventurer, alchemist, physician, astrologist and collector Leonard Thurnheysser, who commissioned a large cycle of stained-glass panels for his new house in Basel (Boerlin 1976: 1130). This series is unique because it captures not just abstract aristocratic scenes, but episodes from Thurnheyssers own life. At the turn of the 15th century, when it became very fashionable in Switzerland to decorate houses with stained-glass panels, a tradition developed by which families, guilds, monasteries, societies, towns and cantons presented small-scale stained-glass panels to ecclesiastical and public buildings, as well as private houses (the tradition continued until the mid-1600s). Such donations were meticulously planned. The donor honoured the recipients by presenting their house with a panel bearing his coat of arms. There were strict rules regulating such gifts, which took into account, among other things, the position of both donor and recipient in society (see Meyer 1884). These rules were clearly disregarded when the Thurnheysser panels were being made. The coats of arms in the drawings are those of persons of very high rank, who would hardly have been expected to give panels to
82
a private house belonging to an ordinary citizen. Christoph Murer worked on the designs for this cycle in Basel, where he stopped on the way to Strasbourg. The Hermitage sheet dated 1579 represents events that Thurnheysser experienced during his own travels. The stained-glass panel made after this drawing that same year is now in the Museum of Fine Arts in Basel. The second drawing, bearing the coat of arms of Abbot Herold Zurlauben in its central field, was also described in the above-mentioned exhibition catalogue and bears the date 1598. It represents a traditional sketch for a heraldic panel (inv. no. 4595). It is noteworthy that the glass panel made after this drawing has also survived (Kakoje krasok divnoje socvetje 2002: 76). It was produced in 1600, probably in a Zurich workshop. The glass painter followed Murers design very closely. Today, the panel is in the Walters Art Gallery in Baltimore (Corpus Vitrearum 1978: 66). Two other drawings bearing Murers monogram, which are the main focus of the present article, have not previously been mentioned in scholarly publications. Both were acquired by the Hermitage as part of the collection of Count Carl Cobenzl, bought in Brussels in 1768 by the Russian diplomat Prince D.A. Golitzyn for Catherine the Great (cf. Levinson-Lessing 1985: 6768; Larionov 1999: 67). The earlier of the two drawings is a sketch for a stainedglass panel depicting Saul Anointed King by Samuel (inv. no. 4598; quill pen, black ink, brush wash; 38.0 27.4 cm; acquired from the Brussels collection of Carl Cobenzl in 1768; watermark not detected since the sheet is laid down; ill. 1) dates back to 1595, the time when Murer was already an established artist and was running a flourishing workshop in Zurich. The artists monogram and date are in a cartouche in the lower part of the sheet. The authenticity of the monogram is beyond doubt, since it is identical to many other examples of the masters signatures dating from this period, as well to those noted in Georg Naglers dictionary and in Thea Vignau-Wilbergs monograph (Nagler 1860: 146; Vignau-Wilberg 1982: 275). The drawing is executed in a combined technique typical for the designs for cabinet panels: the contours of the image are delineated with a quill pen, and then washed with a brush in order to achieve chiaroscuro and colouring effects. The virtuoso use of watercolour wash allowed Murer to obtain the highly painterly effect demonstrated, for instance, by the Hermitage drawing. The subject is taken from the Old Testament, which themes were typical for church stained glass of the
12th 14th centuries, later ousted by New Testament scenes. But cabinet panels of the second half of the 16th century saw a real renaissance of Old Testament scenes, widely popular in Protestant Switzerland, which had no use for images associated with the Catholic veneration of the Virgin and saints. The central part of the composition depicts a scene often used in cabinet glass panels: Saul Anointed King by Samuel. Then Samuel took a flask of oil, and poured it on Sauls head... (1 Samuel 10:1). Murer follows the Biblical text precisely. The figures of Saul and Samuel are given in close-up, against a background partially significant for the continuation of the Biblical story. The buildings in the background (city gates and castles) must be interpreted as a depiction of Gilgal, where Saul is sent by Samuel. The structure on the right with the figures of two travellers can be identified as the entrance to Rachels tomb, where, according to Samuels prophecy, Saul was to meet two men. The trees stand for the great tree of Tabor. On the left, a man can be seen walking away, carrying a wine-sack on his back: his appearance was also foretold by the prophet. The highly ornamental framing of the scene is similar to the architectural treatment of an arch: it is flanked by columns with Corinthian capitals and surmounted by a cartouche supported by cherubs: traditional place for a textual comment on the image. Such a structure is highly characteristic of Murers stained-glass panels. The theme is also typical of him: the Books of Samuel and Kings, especially the story of Saul, were among his favourite Old Testament sources. Murer was somewhat influenced by similar woodcuts by Tobias Stimmer illustrating the book New Artistic Illustrations of Biblical Stories (Neue kunstlerische Figuren Biblischer Historien) (Andersen 1866: nos 148. 73; see ill. 2). Although the engraved figures of Saul and Samuel are different from Murers drawing in terms of their plastic execution, they are also shown in close-up, and the two compositions are clearly related. Iconographic details are identical as well: Stimmer also has Gilgal shown on the left, and Rachels tomb on the right, with buildings and a road leading towards it. The great tree of Tabor is also present, as is the man carrying a wine-sack on a staff. In the lower part of Murers drawing, flanking the cartouche, are coats of arms of Zurich families. The whole shield on the right is occupied by a heraldic emblem of a fish, which is also twice repeated in its medallion. This coat of arms could be identified after the comparison of the sketch with a surviving stained-glass window of 1605 designed by Christophs brother, Josias Murer. It contains
83
Ill. 1. Christoph Murer. Saul Anointed King by Samuel. 1595. Drawing. The State Hermitage
a circle of coats of arms belonging to members of the Sailors Guild with their names. Among them are the coats of arms of three members of a Zurich family, Wolf, members of the guild. The coat of arms of Johannes Wolf is identical to that in the right-hand side of the Hermitage drawing. Christoph Murer knew Johannes Wolf very well. Their close acquaintance probably began when Wolf commissioned a drawing of Samuel anointing Saul from Murer. In 1595 Wolf became the owner of a large publishing house based in Zurich, which often commissioned graphic works from Murer (Vignau-Wilberg 1982: 29). The second coat of arms on the drawing may be that of Johannes Wolf s wife. The panel made for these clients on the basis of the Hermitage drawing has probably not survived. But the Swiss National Museum has a panel which also goes back to this drawing by Murer (inv. no. LM-16662) (ill. 3). It reproduces the Anointing scene faithfully, but removes the coats of arms and the decorative frame and cuts off
Ill. 2. Tobias Stimmer. Saul Anointed King by Samuel. 1574. Woodcut from the book Neue kuenstlerische Figuren Biblischer Historien
Ill. 3. Saul Anointed King by Samuel. C. 1600. Stained-glass panel. The Swiss National Museum, Zurich
part of the right-hand side of the central scene. This small monolith panel (21.0 15.5 cm), dated to c. 1600, is executed wholly in grisaille (Schneider 1970: 273, no. 444; 372, ill.). There is a copy of the Hermitage sketch in the State Graphic Collection in Munich (inv. no. 33124 D) (ill. 4)1. It is a faithful copy of Murers design, but the manner is slightly different: shapes are more crudely executed, and the treatment of shades of colour is less energetic. There is an inscription in the lower cartouche reading Hanss Ulrich Jegli, and a date: Ao 1651. Hans Ulrich Jegli (1604 1654) was a member of a family of glass painters from Winterthur, a small town with an independent tradition of making glass panels. The art of cabinet stained glass flourished there in the first half of the 17th century, after it had already started to decline in the larger centres. The Winterthur masters were influenced by the Murer
The author is grateful to the curator of 15th 18th-century German drawings at the State Graphic Collection (Munich) Dr Achim Riether for providing access to these works of art and giving permission to reproduce the drawing in question.
1
workshops: Christoph and Josias Murer maintained close links with the town and undertook various commissions for it. Such cross-regional influences were possible largely thanks to the circulation of glass designs. Hans Ulrich Jegli was the son of the most influential local master Hans Jegli (15791643). Jegli the Younger mostly made stained-glass panels based on other artists designs, including those by his own father. He himself, according to the surviving materials, made sketches only rarely: only a few of his drawings are known, and they tend to be derivative2.
2 The drawing by Hans Ulrich Jegli has a collectors mark repeated twice (in the upper and lower cartouche): Z // HN (in a circle). An identical mark was used by the founder of a dynasty of Zurich glass painters Heinrich Nscheler (15501616) (Lugt 1921: no. 1345), who had a large collection of Swiss drawings. But by 1651, the date of the sketch, Nscheler had been long dead. It is possible that his collectors mark was used by his son Hans Jacob I (15831654), who added to his fathers collection. But it is more probable that, as Boesch suggests, this mark (which often occurs on the drawings by Jegli the Elder and Jegli the Younger) should be considered as a sign of an unknown 19th-century collector (Boesch 1955: 26).
Jeglis Anointing of Saul from the Munich collection plays witness to the popularity of Murers designs even decades after his death. His works were copied widely, sometimes faithfully and sometimes freely, when only selected fragments or compositional ideas were used. In this respect the fourth Hermitage drawing bearing Murers monogram becomes especially interesting. It is the latest of those in this collection and bears the coat of arms of Escher vom Luchs dated to 1608 (inv. no. 4593; quill pen, black ink, brush wash, brown ink; 30.0 20.4 cm; acquired from the Brussels collection of Carl Cobenzl in 1768; watermark not detected since the sheet is laid down; ill. 5). The authorship of Christoph Murer is supported by an inscription in an engraved frame glued on the mount. This sketch was identified as a work by Murer in Cobenzls manuscript catalogue (Department of Drawings of the Western European Art Department, State Hermitage), as well as in all the Hermitage inventories. But there are grounds for doubting that this drawing was a genuine product of Murers own hand. The sketch is a design for a very common classic heraldic stained-glass panel, so the focus of the composition is the coat of arms. This type originated from the images of donors in church stained-glass panels. Heraldic panels, placed in the lowest part of the windows, were common in cathedrals from the 14th century. A secularized subtype of such heraldic panels was especially widespread in Switzerland. The donor might be pictured next to his coat of arms, sometimes serving as the charger, but the donor figure might be entirely substituted by his device a version which gained special popularity in the 16th century. Murers works encompass all types of designs, but the latter type was prevalent. The most characteristic scheme for heraldic panels designed by Murer was as follows: the coat of arms was in the centre, flanked by architectural designs, and surrounded by small-scale secular or religious scenes in the upper register or on both sides. Sometimes these scenes were replaced with decorative columns. The coat of arms present in the Hermitage drawing has been identified as that of the Escher vom Luchs family from Zurich. There exist several versions of Murers sketches for panels displaying the arms of this family. An identical coat of arms is present in a design attributed to a Schafhausen master Werner Kbler (15551586), together with the coats of arms of the Fels and Meyer von Knonau families (Hasler 1996: 171). The earliest Murer sketch with this coat of arms dates to 1593 (ibid: 173). The coat of arms is shifted to the right-hand side, where85
Ill. 4. Hans Ulrich Jegli. Saul Anointed King by Samuel. 1651. Drawing. The State Graphic Collection, Munich
as the left part of the panel depicts the donor serving as the charger: the Commander of the Zurich Fusiliers Johannes Escher vom Luchs in ceremonial dress. The stained-glass panel made from this sketch has survived in Zurich (ibid: 193). Another drawing with the Escher vom Luchs coat of arms dating to 1608 was auctioned at Sothebys in New York in 1994 (Sothebys New York, Old Master Drawings, Sale 6522, 12.01.1994, cat. no. 37) (ill. 6). It was doubtless produced by Murer himself and bears his monogram. This sketch has the same date, 1608, as the Hermitage drawing, and its overall design is also similar. In both drawings, the central field is occupied by the Escher vom Luchs coat of arms with the heraldic figure of a lynx on the shield and in the medallion. But there are several significant differences in the decorative framing. The emblem of the lynx is located on two differently-shaped shields in the two drawings. The medallion decorations
84
gram is not authentic. There can be several hypotheses here. It is possible that Murer, like many other artists, allowed the sketches made in his studio to be signed with his own name. But it is much more probable that the monogram was added later, in order to make a drawing originating from Murers workshop more valuable. On the left of this monogram, there is another, drawn in a light brown tone and consisting of interwoven letters S and T. This looks like Tobias Stimmers monogram. But since Stimmer clearly had nothing to do with the making of this drawing, it is possible that the monogram was added by an unknown monogrammist of Murers circle, or that it was a similar ploy to make the drawing appear as a work by a major master. Finally, both monograms could represent different collectors marks. Christoph Murers designs were very important for the development of cabinet stained glass in Switzerland. From the late 16th century onwards, Murers school was determining the evolution of glass painting both in Zurich and in other centres of this art. The works of this master are being researched by many German and Swiss art historians at the moment. The present publication of hitherto unknown drawings from the Hermitage collection and the associated works is intended to contribute to the study of Murers heritage and augment our knowledge of his oeuvre.
Ill. 5. Workshop of Christoph Murer. The Escher vom Luchs Coat of Arms. 1608. Drawing. The State Hermitage Ill. 6. Christoph Murer. The Escher vom Luchs Coat of Arms. 1608. Drawing. Sothebys, New York, 12.01.1994 REFERENCES Andresen 1866 Andresen A. Der deutsche Peintre-Graveur. Vol. III. Leipzig, 1866. Boerlin 1976 Boerlin P. Leonhardt Thurneisser als Auftraggeber. Basel, 1976. Boesch 1955 Boesch P. Die alten Glasmaler von Winterthur und ihr Werk. Winterthur, 1955. Corpus Vitrearum 1978 Corpus Vitrearum. Checklist II. New York, 1978.
Hasler 1996 Hasler R. Die Scheibenriss-Sammlung Wyss: Katalog. Vol. II. Bern, 1996. Hollstein 1990 Hollstein F. W. H. German Engravings, Etchings and Woodcuts, ca. 14001700. Vol. XXIX. Amsterdam, 1990. Kakoje krasok divnoje socvetje 2002 Kakoje krasok divnoje socvetje... Zapadnojevropejskije vitrai i projektnyje risunki k vitraam XV-XVII vekov iz sobranija Ermitaa [What a Wondrous Flowering. West European Stained Glass and Drawings from the 15th to 17th Centuries in the State Hermitage Collection]. Exhibition catalogue. St. Petersburg, 2002. Larionov 1999 Larionov A.O. Risunki sraryx masterov Gollandii i Flandrii v sobranii Ermitaa: Oerk istorii kollekcii [Drawings by Old Dutch and Flemish Masters in the Hermitage Collection: An Outline of Its History]. St. Petersburg, 1999. Levinson-Lessing 1985 Levinson-Lessing V.F. Istorija kartinnoj Galerei Ermitaa (1764 1917) [History of the Hermitage Picture Gallery (17641917)]. Leningrad, 1985. Lugt 1921 Lugt F. Les Marques de Collections de Dessins et dEstampes. Amsterdam, 1921. Meyer 1884 Meyer H. Die schweizerische Sitte der Fenster- und Wappenschenkung von XV bis XVII Jahrhundert. Frauenfeld, 1884. Nagler 1860 Nagler G. K. Monogrammisten. Vol. II. Mnchen, 1860. Reinhart 1908 Reinhart E. Christoph Murer. Schweizerisches Kuenstlerlexikon. Vol. II. Frauenfeld, 1908. Sandrart 1675 Sandrart J. Teutsche Akademie der Edlen Bau-, Bild- und MahlereyKuenste.Vol. 1. Nrnberg, 1675. Schneider 1970 Schneider J. Glasgemlde: Katalog der Sammlung des Schweizerischen Landesmuseum. Zrich, 1970. Vignau-Wilberg 1982 Vignau-Wilberg, Thea. Christoph Murer und die XL Emblemata miscella nova. Bern, 1982.
are different as well: the Hermitage drawing has the helm decorated with a mantle, while the second has a net. Instead of the cherub musicians flanking the cartouche in the lower frieze of the Hermitage sketch, the Sothebys drawing has allegorical figures of virtues with corresponding attributes: Prudence with a mirror and a serpent and Justice with scales and a sword. Moreover, the second drawing has a more complicated architectural framing scheme. It is worked up in detail and is a fully finished glass design. In the Hermitage drawing, the contours of an architectural frame are barely sketched on the right-hand side. A comparison reveals that the Hermitage work is weaker in terms of the quality of execution, and the pen strokes seem less confident than in the other one. The shapes of objects are not so perfectly defined, there is a certain restraint and simplicity in the drawing, and the details are executed with less ingenuity and artifice. It is hardly likely that this drawing was produced by the accomplished master that Murer was in his
86
later years. His remarkable draughtsmans talent is evident from his authentic drawings of the 1600s, e.g. the 37 sheets of the Passions series (State Art Gallery, Karlsruhe)3 or the 1608 Baptism of Jesus sketch. They are far more accomplished than the Escher vom Luchs heraldic sketch, which was probably made in Murers studio as a version of the masters drawing (which was eventually sold at Sothebys). The shape of the monogram placed in the lower cartouche of the Hermitage sheet is also worthy of note: it is a version unknown to researchers, and it does not occur in Murers other works. Moreover, technical examination has revealed that the monogram was drawn using a binding agent, pigment and filler different from those in the paints of the drawing. This, together with the quality of the drawing, allows us to suggest that the mono3 The author is grateful to the curators of the Prints and Drawings Cabinet of the State Art Gallery (Staatliche Kunsthalle), Karlsruhe, for the possibility to examine the drawings by Christoph Murer.
LUDMILA KAGAN TWO PAINTINGS OF ST. FRANCIS BY LUCA GIORDANO The Hermitage collection of paintings has two canvases which were originally acquired as works by Spanish masters, but there are reasons to re-attribute these to Luca Giordano. One of the two paintings, St. Francis (inv. no. 372, oil on canvas, 75.0 63.7 cm; ill. 1), was purchased by Fiodor Bruni, Director of the Hermitage, in 1852, at a posthumous sale of Marshal Soults collection in Paris. It was then ascribed to Sebastian Gomez, a pupil of Murillo. The name of this little-known artist most probably came up by chance. It was noted in the sale catalogue that the four Gomez paintings were different in the manner of painting; this could be an indication of the first doubts as to the correctness of the attribution (Catalogue 1852: 2728, no. 80). According to Nikolai Wrangell, A. Beruete who visited the Hermitage in 1903 believed the painting to be a copy after Riberas work. Wrangell was of the same opinion (Wrangell 1914: 27). Nonetheless, the painting continued to be listed as a Gomez in all the Hermitage catalogues. A query beside the name of the artist only appeared in the 1974 catalogue. The 1997 catalogue attributed the painting to the circle of Ribera (Kagan 1997: 214, no. 108). Riberas oeuvre includes a similar depiction of St. Francis, signed and dated 1643 (Pitty Gallery, Florence; Prez Snchez and Spinosa 1978: 120, no. 183). The saint is depicted with his eyes lifted up to heaven and with a skull in his hands. In the Hermitage version the iconographic face type is different, and the saint is holding a cross instead of a skull. His hands are done in a more expressive manner, they look more nervous, and the lightand-shade contrasts are more pronounced. It is clear that the Hermitage painting is by an artist close to Ribera, but not by Ribera himself. Giordanos authorship was first suggested by Jos Milicua (personal communication) during his 1977 visit to the Hermitage. The Hermitage St. Francis does indeed have a lot more in common with the paintings of this saint by Luca Giordano than with Riberas works. There are several examples that illustrate this affinity, first of all Giordanos Ecstasy of St. Francis (National Museum of Ancient Art, Lisbon), dated to c. 165053 (Ferrari and Scavizzi, 1992: 253, no. A 17). Comparison of the two paintings exposes similarities in the depiction of the face, the eyes and the long tense fingers. The striped cloth of the cloak and the thin cord along the edge of the hood are treated similarly in the two paintings, as well as the stark light-and-shade contrasts which are characteristic of both. All this suggests the common authorship of the Lisbon and the St. Petersburg work. Luca Giordano (16341705), a Neapolitan artist, was under a strong influence of Ribera, his older contemporary. It is possible that he made preliminary paintings of St. Francis while preparing his large altarpiece, The Ecstasy of St. Francis, and that he used Riberas work as an example. The Lisbon and St. Petersburg canvases must have been produced at the same period, therefore the latter can also be dated to 165053. A version close to the Hermitage one was mentioned as held in a private collection in Novi Ligure (oil on canvas, 70 80 cm; Prez Snchez and Spinosa, 1978: 121, no. 183-). It was ascribed to Ribera, but it is possible that this, too, is a work by Luca Giordano. St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull (inv. no. 2981; oil on canvas, 112.0 87.0 cm; ill. 2) was acquired by the Hermitage as a painting by Ribera. The painting was part of the collection of Piotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky,
Ill. 1. Luca Giordano. St. Francis. 165053. The State Hermitage
88
89
bought for the museum in 1910 and included in the inventory in 1914. It is possible to trace the earlier provenance of this work. It can be identified as one of the paintings purchased for the Hermitage in 1834 in Spain by Alexander Gessler, the Russian Consul to Cadiz. The list of works of art he sent to St. Petersburg includes Guerchinos St. Francis of Assisi lifting his eyes to heaven, with a cross in his hand and holding a skull. The lighting effect is superb (10. Guercino (Jean Franois Barbieri, dit le). cole Bolonaise. St. Franois dAssis les yeux lev vers le ciel, une croix dans la main et tenant lui une tte de mort. Effet de lumire suprmement. the State Hermitage Archives, fund 1, inv. 2, no. 24, year of 1834, p. 2). The manuscript catalogue of 17971850 gives the size of the painting: 1 arshin 6.5 vershoks in height, 1 arshin 2 vershoks in width, which is roughly equivalent to 99.6 79.8 cm. There is a marginal note marking the sale of the painting (Catalogue 1797: no. 4714). In Nikolai Wrangells article about the 1855 Hermitage sale in St. Petersburg, the painting was mentioned as a Guerchino (Wrangell 1913: 144, no. 907). V.V. Antonov, who has published the archival materials on Gesslers acquisitions, provides more precise information concerning the sale. According to him, Guerchinos St. Francis was bought on 6 July 1855 for 67 roubles 55 kopecks in silver, by A.M. Prevost, who later sold it for 40 roubles to Piotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky (Antonov 1982: 291, 298, no. 6). Semyonovs collection, now part of the Hermitage collection of painting, included mostly works of the Dutch and Flemish schools, but it also contained two Spanish paintings (Catalogue 1910, nos. 613 , 613 ). One of them, The Portrait of a Man, was ascribed to an unknown Spanish artist. In 1929, this painting was transferred to the Antiquariat, but it was returned to the Hermitage in 1933 and entered in the inventory as a 17th-century work of Flemish school. The second painting, St. Francis of Assisi, was attributed to Ribera. Semyonovs catalogue placed a high value on this painting, but this did not prevent it from sharing the fate of the other one: it was also handed over to the Antiquariat to be restored to the Hermitage in 1931. This is when Riberas authorship was questioned. The canvas was entered in the inventory as by the school of Ribera. Comparison of this painting with the description of the one bought from Gessler makes it plain that it is one and the same work. It shows St. Francis of Assisi, with his eyes lifted up to heaven, with a cross in one hand and a skull in the other. The size of the canvas of the Semyonov-Tyan-Shansky collection is 112.0 87.0 cm, which is slightly larger than the
90
size given by Gessler. But the study of the painting has shown that the outer edges mounted on the stretcher were not taken into account in the description of the painting. In other words, St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull was purchased by the Consul as a Guerchino, then sold to Prevost at the Hermitage sale of 1855 with the same attribution, then bought from the latter by Semyonov and finally restored to the Hermitage with an attribution to Ribera. In the Hermitage, the painting was ascribed to the school of Ribera. T.P. Znamerovskaya (1955: 212) also thought it to be by a Spanish master influenced by Ribera. Once again, Jose Milicua (personal communication) was the first to suggest Luca Giordanos authorship (Kagan 1991: 437; Kagan 1997: 215, no. 109). Comparison of this painting to Luca Giordanos oeuvre does indeed bring into focus a clear affinity. As in the other case, this follows from a comparison with the aforementioned Ecstasy of St. Francis of the National Museum of Ancient Art (Lisbon). In fact, St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull looks even closer to the Lisbon painting than St. Francis from the Soult collection discussed above. It reflects the same emotional surge as the Lisbon painting, in which the treatment of the image has been primarily dictated by the subject chosen, the saint is depicted at the time of his vision of Christs Deposition in the Tomb. St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull conveys a stronger feeling of exaltation than the Soult collection piece: the saints eyes are rolled further in ecstasy, his face is more ascetic and the contours of the lips, eyebrows and lines on his forehead are more tensely curved. Stylistically, however, these paintings are very close. St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull could well be dated to the time of the creation of the Ecstasy of St. Francis, i.e. to 165053. Technical examination by L.P. Viazmenskaya (the Hermitage Department for Scientific Examination of Works of Art) has confirmed the similarities between the pictorial manner of St. Francis and St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull with that in the works by Luca Giordano (Viazmenskaya 1991: 446 447). It is not surprising that the paintings that eventually came to the Hermitage had been in Spain for some time; there were many works by Luca Giordano in this country. In the 17th century, Naples was ruled by Spanish Viceroys, and the majority of the population was Spanish. Ribera was the citys chief painter. Works by the great master, as well as those by his pupils and followers were brought to the Iberian Peninsula. Luca Giordanos paintings were highly valued. For ten years, from 1692 to 1702, he lived in Spain, where he was Court painter between 1694 and
Ill. 2. Luca Giordano. St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull. 165053. The State Hermitage
91
1700. Giordanos paintings were in many Spanish collections. After the Napoleonic invasion of 1808 and during the following period of the war for liberation, works of art were moved around the country. Many of them lost their original attributions and were ascribed to other masters. This is what is most likely to have happened to St. Francis from the Soult collection, and St. Francis with a Cross and a Skull purchased by Gessler, which should now be regarded as works by Luca Giordano.
REFERENCES Antonov 1982 Antonov V. La adquisicin de Gessler para el Ermitage. Archivo Espaol de Arte. 1982: 287302. Catalogue 1797 Katalog kartinam, xranaimsa v Imperatorskoj Galereje Ermitaa... soinonnyj... pri uastii F.I. Labenskogo v 1797. [Catalogue of Paintings Kept in the Imperial Gallery of the Hermitage... Compiled... with Assistance of F.I. Labensky in 1797]: 3 vols. State Hermitage Archives, fund. 1, inv. 6 a, no. 87 (served as inventory until 1850). Catalogue 1852 Catalogue raisonn des tableaux de la Galerie de feu le Marchalgnral Soult duc de Dalmatie dont la vente aura lieu a Paris dans lancienne Galerie Lebrun... Paris, 1852. Catalogue 1910 Catalogue de la collection Semenov-Tianchanski. Supplment (Manuscript). 1910 (The original is at the State Hermitage Library, inv. no. 448770).
Ferrari and Scavizzi 1992 Ferrari O. and G. Scavizzi. Luca Giordano. Lopera completa. Vol. 2. Napoli, 1992. Kagan 1991 Kagan, Ludmila. Los cuadros de Ribera y de su crculo en el Ermitage. Archivo Espaol de Arte 256. 1991: 423437. Kagan 1997 Kagan, Ludmila. The Hermitage Catalogue of Western European Painting. Spanish Painting. Fifteenth to Nineteenth Centuries. Moscow, Florence, 1997. Prez Snchez and Spinoza 1978 Prez Snchez A. E. and N. Spinosa. Lopera completa de Ribera. Milano, 1978. Viazemskaya 1991 Viazmenskaya L. Un experimento: el estudio radiogrfico comparativo de los cuadros de Ribera y su crculo en el Ermitage. Archivo Espaol de Arte 256. 1991: 439447. Wrangell 1913 Wrangell, Nikolai, Baron. Iskusstvo i Gosudar Nikolaj Pavlovich [Art and His Majesty Nicholas Pavlovich]. Staryje Gody (JuliSept.). 1913: 53163. Wrangell 1914 Wrangell, Nikolai. Ob ispanskix kartinax Ermitaa [On Spanish Paintings in the Hermitage]. Staryje Gody (January). 1914: 2533. Znamerovskaya 1955 Znamerovskaya T.P. Tvorestvo Xusepe Ribery i problema narodnosti ispanskogo iskusstva [The Art of Jusepe de Ribera and the Problem of the Popular Character of Spanish Art]. Leningrad, 1955.
SVIATOSLAV SAVVATEEV THE PORTRAIT OF CARLO RIDOLFI BY MATTEO PONZONI IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION The collection of Spanish paintings at the Hermitage of an Unknown Man by Matteo Ponzoni (see the State contains the Portrait of a Knight of the Order of the Hermitage Archives, fund 1, inv. 6 , no. 1, Vol. III). Golden Spur (inv. no. 383; oil on canvas, 73.0 60.0 The archive materials on the purchase of the Barbarigo cm; ill. 1), which has until recently been described as a collection contain a list of forty-five paintings of this work by an unknown 17th-century Spanish artist. Since collection which were sent for restoration immediately the painting was acquired by the Hermitage as part of after the acquisition. In this list, no. 3 is the Portrait of a the Barbarigo collection bought in Venice in 1850, it Man by Ponzoni, its size being the same as that of the was suggested that it might be a work of an Italian artist painting under discussion (see the State Hermitage Ar(Ludmila Kagan, Irina Artemyeva). In fact, the style chives, fund 1, inv. 2, no. 22). Thus, Ponzonis name and the manner of painting seem to speak in favour of turns up twice in connection with the portrait. mid-seventeenth-century Italian authorship. The official inventory of the sale of the collection was The portrait shows a man in a dark suit with a white its catalogue published in 1845 by the Venetian artist collar and lapels; on his breast is the badge of the order, Gian Carlo Bevilacqua (Levi 1900: 282). Our painting is viz. the golden Maltese cross with a golden chain. In his easily identified as no.6, which is described as follows: left hand the knight holds a book, pointing at it with his A portrait by Matteo Ponzoni. Canvas, 72 58. A fine right hand. A hint of a smile gives emphasis to the ges- half-length image of a man in the flower of age; with ture. The depiction is half-length, nearly frontal, with a black hair and moustache, and a white collar; [his breast] slight rightward turn. There is an antique torso of Venus decorated with a golden star and golden chain. In his left hand he holds a closed book, to which he points in a niche at the background. A study of archive materials, inventories and cata- with his right. Ponzoni is much complimented by Cavalogues of the Hermitage Picture Gallery has allowed us lier Ridolfi (Bevilacqua 1845: 9). Since both the archive to identify the author of the portrait. B. Koehnes cata- document and the Inventory of 1859 contain the name logue tentatively attributes the painting to the Spanish of Matteo Ponzoni, there is every reason to believe that artist Alonso Cano and calls it the Portrait of a Man he is the author of our painting. The Cavalier Ridolfi mentioned above is Carlo (Koehne 1863: 9192). In the catalogue by Briningk and Somov (1889: 203204), this attribution is pre- Ridolfi, a 17th-century artist and author of books on art, served, but under a different title, viz. The Portrait of often called the Venetian Vasari. It is clear that Bevilaca Knight of the Golden Spur. The same is repeated in qua was referring to Ridolfis book published in 1648 E. Lipharts catalogue (Liphart 1912: 220). Here Liphart and entitled Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli ilmakes reference to the inventory number (2349) of the lustri pittori veneti e dello stato. The book provides some work in question in the 1859 Inventory of Paintings and information on Matteo Ponzoni. The final part of the Ceilings Kept in the Custody of the II Department of the biography of Sante Peranda contains the following lines: Imperial Hermitage, which corresponds to the Portrait Among the pupils who honoured the name of Peranda...
93
Ill. 1. Matteo Ponzoni. The Portrait of Carlo Ridolfi. 1650s. The State Hermitage
is Signor Matteo Ponzoni, who has successfully demonstrated his most noble artistic talent and aptitude in many works of his (Ridolfi 1648, II: 281). Comparison of the frontispiece engraving portraying the author of the book (see ill. 2) and the Hermitage portrait makes it clear that the same man is shown in both cases. The precise dates of Ponzonis birth and death are unknown. It is quite probable that he was born in 1583. It has been indicated that he was born either in Dalmatia which, from the 15th century had been a Venetian colony, and there either in Split (Thieme and Becker 1933, 27: 255) or the Isle of Rab (Donzelli Pilo 1967: 336; Pallucchini 1981: 86), or Venice (Turner 1996, 25: 227). He is supposed to have studied art in Venice, where he is mentioned as a pupil of Palma the Younger and where
94
he came to know Peranda who was also one of his mentors. From the end of 1609, the young artist worked in Perandas studio in Mirandola, then Peranda moved to Modena to the court of the dEstes who commissioned portraits from him. Ponzoni probably collaborated with Peranda until the end of 1611 (see Pallucchini 1981: 86). Then he returned to Venice, where he appears in the lists of the artists guild between 1612/1613 and 1633. Having spent twenty years in Venice, he moved to Split in Dalmatia (he was most likely invited by his brother Sforza Ponzoni (15811640), the Archbishop of Split). He spent at least ten years in Dalmatia, working on commissions from the cathedral and painting altarpieces for the churches of several Dalmatian towns (ibenik, Trogir, Korcula, Omi, the islands of Ciovo and Rab). Then
he came back to Venice and set up a studio there; but he maintained contacts with what was probably his native land by sending paintings there. He died in Venice between 1663 and 1675. This short biography can be supplemented by the fact that Matteo Ponzoni was a member of a knightly order, most probably the Venetian Republican Order of St. Mark. He is described as Cavalier by the 17th- and 18th-century Venetian authors M. Boskini and M. Zanetti. Around fifty paintings by Ponzoni have survived. A slightly smaller number have not been traced. The Hermitage portrait used to be considered among those lost (see Prijatelj 1970: 6063). Much more is known about Carlo Ridolfi, mainly from his autobiography included in Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato. He was born in the town of Lonigo (Province of Vicenza). The date of his birth is a contested issue. P. Orlandi (a mid-eighteenth century author) and R. Pallucchini believe it to be 1602 (Orlandi 1753: 117; Pallucchini 1981: 79), while art dictionaries give it as 1594 (Thieme and Becker 1933, 28: 312; Turner 1996, 26: 363). Ridolfi studied painting in Venice, in the studio of Antonio Vassilacchi, nicknamed Il Aliense, between 1607 and 1612. According to his own testimony, he simultaneously studied rhetoric, logic, philosophy, architecture and perspective (Ridofli 1837: 558559). He also learned the art of engraving. P. Orlandi (1753: 117) calls Ridolfi a poet and orator. He is known to have composed a Latin ode. Ridolfi was a collector of drawings; the three volumes of his collection are preserved at Christ Church College, Oxford. In 164142, the artist visited Dalmatia, where he painted altarpieces for the churches in the towns of Silba and Korcula. Those were the years when Matteo Ponzoni was also working in Dalmatia. The year 1614 saw the publication of Carlo Ridolfis book, The Life of Jacopo Robusti, which was dedicated to the Doge Francesco Erizzo and the Venetian Republic. The book remains the most important source of information on Tintorettos life and artistic method. In 1642 or soon afterwards, Ridolfi was awarded the Order of St. Mark by the Venetian Senate, and in 1645 he became the Knight of the Order of the Golden Spur, which he received from Pope Innocent X. In 1646, he published his Life of Carlo Cagliari, and in 1648, as noted above, he produced his great work, Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato, which contained biographies of 151 masters. Ridolfi died in Venice in 1658.
95
Ill. 2. Giacomo Piccini. The Portrait of Carlo Ridolfi. Frontispiece of Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato by Ridolfi. Venice, 1648
Ridolfis oeuvre contains portraits, as well as religious and mythological paintings. In his autobiography, he names dozens of people whose portraits he painted. They include authors, philosophers, poets and aristocrats (Ridolfi 1837: 573576). The brothers Domenico and Luigi Barbarigo commissioned him to paint portraits of Doges and famous statesmen from their family (ibid: 570). Ridolfi had several commissions from other members of the Barbarigo family as well. He decorated Daniele Barbarigos two palazzos with allegorical and mythological frescoes (ibid: 561). Ridolfi stresses his Classical interests in his autobiography, specially noting that he painted several Venuses and other Poesies (ibid: 568). He mentions one of these works, viz. Venus, Ceres and Bacchus (ibid: 576). Matteo Ponzoni also
Ill. 3. Giacomo Piccini. The Portrait of Carlo Ridolfi. 164546. From N. Melchioris Nitizie di pittori e altri scritti
addresses this theme popular in the 16th and 17th centuries (see Boschini 1966: 598). Besides, Ridolfi indicates that he painted Penelope for Bartolomeo Nanti (Ridolfi 1837: 571), which became the subject of an epigram by the lawyer Marcantonio Romiti, whom Ridolfi calls the joy of Latin poetry (ibid: 577). The aforementioned M. Romiti is the author of the Latin inscription in the cartouche of the engraved portrait of Carlo Ridolfi on the frontispiece of his book. The inscription reads Here you will see the image of a man depicted as if he was alive, and the image of his soul will be created by [his] eloquent writings1. Romitis name is given in the lower left corner. The oval frame of the portrait is inscribed Carlo Ridolfi, the Golden Knight, aged 46. The fact that Ridolfi is referred to as the Golden Knight suggests that he belonged to the Order of the Golden Spur, established by the Papal State in 1559. The award certificate proclaims the members of the order to be the
1
I thank Dr. Ilya Cherniak for the translation of the Latin texts.
cavaliers of the Golden Host; early sources also refer to them as Cavaliers of the Golden Cross. The order is suspended from a red ribbon or golden chain and has a badge in the shape of a white enamelled Maltese Cross with a spur hanging between the ends of the lower arm. The engraved and painted orders are not exactly the same. In the painting, there is no spur on the lower arm of the cross, and the cross itself is golden rather than white. Such inconsistencies between the way an order is shown in a painting and the way it is described in statutes are quite frequent. According to the inscription in the right-hand corner, the engraved portrait is by Giacomo Piccini (c. 1617 after 1669). Carlo Ridolfi knew the engraver and author of the inscription very well, since he mentions them in the list of people whose portraits he painted (Ridolfi 1837: 573, 574). It is clear that the portrait was engraved specially for Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato. This is proved by the mention of Ridolfis age. If he was born in 1602, he was 46 in 1648, the year when the book was published. By this time, he had already created all his eloquent writings and become the knight of the Golden Spur. If his date of birth is moved back to 1594, he would have been 46 in 1640, before he wrote any of his books or became a knight. There exists another engraved portrait of Ridolfi, which also shows him with the order of the Golden Spur (Melchiori 1969: 80, table II) (see ill. 3). It, too, must be dated to a time after 1645. The engraving has an inscription that gives the age of the man shown as 44 years old. If Ridolfi was born in 1602, the engraving must have been made in 1646, soon after he had been awarded the order of the Golden Spur, perhaps for this very reason. The portrait contains the same text by M. Romiti as the engraving in Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato (Melchiori 1969: 89). It is possible that this portrait is by Giacomo Piccini as well. The two depictions are very similar in terms of their composition and are only different in a few details. Piccini has even conveyed the slight age difference of two years. The later portrait is more detailed and looks more pictorial, since it was intended for a book. A comparison with the Hermitage portrait reveals that Ridolfi looks older in the latter, which suggests that M. Ponzoni painted his portrait in the 1650s. In Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato, Ridolfi mentions that he had his portraits painted by Domenico Tintoretto (1562
1637) and Tiberio Tinelli (15871639) (Ridolfi 1837: 507, 543). The portrait painted by Tinelli is at the Carrara Academy in Bergamo2. From the time of its acquisition from the collection of Salvatore Orsetti and until very recently, it was described as a self-portrait (Rossi 1979: 251). F. Bottacin (2004: 122123) has lately suggested Tinellis authorship and the date, 1638. Thus, the two extant images of Ridolfi are approximately twenty years apart. Raising scholarly awareness of the Hermitage portrait is important both for widening the scope of Ridolfis iconography and for studying Ponzonis legacy. Although portraiture was quite important for Ponzoni, only a few of his works in this genre have survived. The artist painted the portraits of two Popes, Paul V and Urban VIII, for the Split cathedral. There was also a lost portrait of Sofonisba Anguissola (Boschini 1966: 526). As a portrait painter, Ponzoni kept to the once established scheme which he rarely departed from. He chose the same point of view, a little below his model; his figures are located close to the foreground, in a neutral setting, occasionally with faintly hinted vertical architectural details which stabilize the composition. Careful treatment of hands is also noteworthy. On comparison of the portraits of Ridolfi and Elena Pesaro (1649; oil on canvas; private collection, Venice; see ill. 4), stylistic affinity of the two works becomes especially evident, cf. the same point of view from which the model is portrayed, the placement of the figures in space, the background, the slightly turned head and the alert look conveying the models emotional state. The history of the portrait of Carlo Ridolfi prior to 1845, when it was first mentioned in Bevilacquas catalogue is unknown. It was most probably commissioned by one of the members of the Barbarigo family. In the Hermitage, Ponzonis authorship was soon forgotten. By the time the portrait was acquired by the Hermitage Picture Gallery, the Imperial collection was already in possession of three Ponzonis.3 In 1779, his Holy Family (oil on canvas, 109.0 160.0 cm.) was bought as part of the Walpole collection. In 1800 it was transferred to Pavlovsk Palace, where it is at present (Dukelskaya and Moore 2002: 158). There were two more Ponzonis paintings in the Picture Gallery. They were sold at a famous 1855 sale, after which the museum lost over 1,200 works
I am grateful to Dr. Irina Artemyeva who brought this fact to my attention and also directed me towards the article identifying the author of this portrait. 3 I thank Dr. Irina Artemyeva for bringing this fact to my attention.
2
Ill. 4. Matteo Ponzoni. The Portrait of Elena Pesaro. 1649. Private collection, Venice
of art. Their list is provided in an article by Nikolai Wrangell published in the Starye Gody [Old Years] journal. Under no. 154 he lists Ponzonis Venus, Bacchus, Ceres and Cupid (Wrangell 1913: 90), which was mentioned by M. Boschini in the 17th century (Boschini 1966: 598). It was added to the Imperial collection during the reign of Catherine the Great and figures as no. 2497 in Mnichs manuscript catalogue of 17731783 (Wrangell 1913: 90). In Wrangells list, a Ponzoni painting Bacchus and Ceres is also listed under no. 1037 (ibid: 155). While the fate of the first painting is still unknown, the second one was returned to the Hermitage in 2006. It was bought from a St. Petersburg private collection and is at present exhibited in the Hermitage as Bacchus, Ceres and Cupid (oil on canvas, 99.0 38.0 cm.)4.
The entry on Ponzoni in Thieme and Becker (1933, 27: 255) mentions, without further comment, the existence in Russia of a painting showing St. Helen with the Cross and Two Saints.
4
96
97
In the only short monograph devoted to Matteo Ponzoni published in Split in 1970, its author Kruno Prijatelj mentions The Holy Family from Pavlovsk Palace. It is included in the list of the artists lost works, with a note to the effect that it once belonged to the Russian Imperial Collection (see Prijatelj 1970: 63). The Croatian scholar also mentions a second painting, of which the subject is unknown to him. In both cases, he quotes Ivan Kukuljevi, a mid-nineteenth-century Serbian author and compiler of a Dictionary of Yugoslav Artists (Kukuljevi, I. Slovnik umjetnikah jugoslavenskih. Zagreb, 1858). Kukuljevi notes that an unknown painting by Ponzoni was bought into the Russian Emperors collection from the Gallery of Barbarigo della Terrazza. It is clear that he means the Ridolfi portrait. Thus, as early as eight years after the sale of the Venetian collection, the title of the painting (Portrait of a Man) was already lost. Approximately at the same time, the name of the artist was lost at the Hermitage.
REFERENCES Bevilacqua 1845 Bevilacqua G. C. Insigne pinacoteca della nobile veneta famiglia Barabarigo dalla Terrazza descrita ed illustrata da Gian Carlo Bevilacqua. Venezia, 1845. Boschini 1966 Boschini M. La carta del navegar pitoresco. Venezia, Roma, 1966. Bottacin 2004 Bottacin F. Tiberio Tonelli. Pitore e Cavaliere (15871639). Notizie da Palazzo Albani 1. 2004. Briningk and Somov 1889 Briningk E. and A. Somov. Imperatorskij Ermita: Katalog kartinnoj galerei [The Imperial Hermitage: Picture Gallery Catalogue]. St. Petersburg, 1889. Donzelli and Pilo 1967 Donzelli C. and G. Pilo. I pittori del Seicento veneto. Firenze, 1967.
Dukelskaya and Moore 2002 Dukelskaya L. and A. Moore (eds.). A Capital Collection: Houghton Hall and the Hermitage. New Haven, London, 2002. Koehne 1863 [Koehne B., von.] Imperatorskij Ermita: Katalog kartin [The Imperial Hermitage: Catalogue of Paintings]. St. Petersburg, 1863. Levi 1900 Levi C. A. Le collezioni veneziane darte e dantichit dai secolo XIV ai nostri giorni. Venezia, 1900. Liphart 1912 [Liphart E.K.] Imperatorskij Ermita: Katalog kartinnoj galerei [The Imperial Hermitage: Picture Gallery Catalogue]. Part I: Italian and Spanish Paintings. St. Petersburg, 1912. Melchiori 1969 Melchiori N. Nitizie di pittori e altri scritti. Venezia, Roma, 1969. Orlandi 1753 Orlandi P. A. Abecedario pittorico. Venezia, 1753. Pallucchini 1981 Pallucchini R. La pittura veneziana del Seicento. Vol. 1. Milano, 1981. Prijatelj 1970 Prijatelj K. Matej Ponzoni Ponun. Split, 1970. Ridolfi 1648 Ridolfi C. Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato. Vols. III. Venezia, 1648. Ridolfi 1837 Ridolfi C. Le maraviglie dellarte ovvero le vite degli illustri pittori veneti e dello stato. Edizione secondo. Vol. II. Padua, 1837. Rossi 1979 Rossi F. Accademia Carrara. Bergamo. Catalogo dei dipinti. Bergamo, 1979. Thieme and Becker 1933 Thieme U. and F. Becker. Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Knstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Vols. 27, 28. Leipzig, 1933. Turner 1996 Turner J. (ed.). The Dictionary of Art. Vols. 25, 26. New York, 1996. Wrangell 1913 Wrangell Nikolai, Baron. 1913. Iskusstvo i Gosudar Nikolaj Pavlovich [Art and His Majesty Nicholas Pavlovich]. Staryje Gody (JulySept.). 1913: 53163.
SVETLANA KOKAREVA CAMEO SERIES WITH PORTRAITS OF EMPERORS IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION The Western European Glyptic Cabinet at the Hermitage accommodates a series of one hundred and ninetyeight carneol cameos (inv. nos. 5897 6094) representing ancient Roman emperors and rulers of the Holy Roman Empire, from Julius Caesar to Francis II (ill. 1). The series also includes portraits of Byzantine and Oriental rulers. All the cameos offer relatively conventionalized images of the historical characters, their attire, armour and headdresses, and employ only a limited number of carving techniques. Each cameo has a double setting: a smooth silver frame covering the reverse side, with a curved handle, and the overlying punctured gold setting. One hundred and ninety-four silver frames bear names of the emperors, from Julius Caesar to Charles VII, and numbers from 1 to 194. The last four portraits of Austrian emperors (Francis I, Joseph II, Leopold II and Francis II) differ from the others owing to a more liberal treatment of the royal images (ill. 2). There is yet another distinction: the reverse sides of their silver settings only carry Roman numbers, IIV. Both the majority of the carvings and the last four cameos are fairly sketchy and generalized, which, however, does not diminish the historical and cultural significance of the suite. The suite is one of the numerous sets favoured in German glyptic in the first half of the 18th century portraying outstanding historical and contemporary personalities (mainly intaglio sets). The custom to carve such suites from stone existed as early as the 17th century (Maksimova 1926: 140); in the 18th century, it became a typical feature of German glyptic, which distinguished it from the Italian school where mythological scenes were preferred. Some of these sets, commissioned by royal courts, aristocrats and rich burghers, included the grand so-called Kaiser-Suiten. The latter incorporated images of a number of emperors, from Julius Caesar to Byzantine and Oriental rulers and to the then rulers of the Holy Roman Empire and were often concluded by a selfportrait of the author. As a rule, each cameo series was inspired by printed graphics or, more frequently, medal art, where sets of coins and medals on similar subjects were often based on earlier models. One prime example is the Kaiser-Suite by the Saxon master Christian Wermut (16611739) who worked on two hundred and seventeen medals from 1694 to 1715. The most successful craftsman in the first third of the 18th century, when those gem series were at the height of fashion, was the Nuremberg master Johann Christof Dorsch (16761732), who left a vast heritage of suites of different sizes representing the family members of Ludwig Rudolf von Braunschweig und Lneburg (c. 1716), French and Portuguese kings, popes, Venetian doges (all c. 1722), professors of Altdorf University (1723), Bavarian dukes (17269) as well as genealogical suites portraying Russian Grand Dukes and Tsars (c. 1723; the State Hermitage, inv. nos. 11207 11238) and Austrian Emperors (c. 172530). Dorsch also replenished a set of one hundred and sixty-three cameos with portraits of emperors from Julius Caesar to the then emperor Charles VI, which may not have survived till the present. The only items that have survived are the engraved images of those cameos from the collection belonging to Johann Martin von Ebermayer, Dorschs patron, antiquary and collector (published in Nuremberg in 1722). As for the suite in question, it should be noted that the one hundred and ninety-four carneol cameos were part of the Hermitage collection by the mid-1790s, when
99
placed within the pyramid, together with other attributes, formed a set apparently intended to symbolize the wise governance based on the ancient Roman tradition (as personified by the she-wolves, which could also be interpreted as a symbol of valour) and sanctified by the glory and memory of good Rulers (Maksimovich-Ambodik 1995: 58, no. 309). On 20 November 1814 the triangular pyramid carrying carneol antiques was transferred to the Curiosities
The missing images were replaced in 1811. In his article Geschnittene Steine des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts in der Antikensammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien. Gemmenschneider und Gemmensammler in Wien und das k.k. Mnz- und Antikenkabinett quoting documents from the Antikensammlung Archive, Alfred Bernhard-Walcherr refers to a letter written on 1 April 1811 by State Councillor Heinrich Karl Ernst Khler to Franz de Paula Neumann, Director of the Imperial
Ill.2. Cameos with the portraits of the Austrian emperors Francis I, Joseph II, Leopold II and Francis II. The State Hermitage
Ill.1. Part of the suite comprising portraits of ancient Roman emperors and rulers of the Holy Roman Empire. The State Hermitage
A.I.Luzhkov compiled the first inventory of engraved triangular pyramid made of plain wood painted black, gems, or the so-called Catherine Inventory (the State Her- bearing on its three flat surfaces one hundred and ninemitage Archives, fund 1, inv. 6 , no. 2). However, the ty-four carved reddish carneols portraying all Roman descriptions of these cameos in Volume 2 of the Inven- emperors, in gold settings. At the top of the pyramid a tory, which are distributed by portrait subjects, contain seated Minerva with a spear in her right hand, her left no information on the time they appeared in the Impe- hand resting on a shield. At the bottom, under the corners rial Cabinet or their source, just the names of the rulers of the pyramid [are] three she-wolves of gilded silver and minerals. lying on a triangular tray of the same plain wood. The In the early 19th century it was decided to display the pyramid is placed in a case made of three pieces of glass, portraits of the emperors on a specially designed pyramid. with wooden frames and a lock. The woodwork is by the According to The Inventory of Items Stored in the Hermit- cabinet-maker Gambs. The Minerva and she-wolves age Since 1786 by I.L.Lukin, the pyramid formed part of made of silver and gold antiques are by the master Sosnthe Mineral Room, one of the three principal rooms of ner. The Antiques from State Councillor Khler, Supervithe Hermitage, once located near the Raphael Loggias sor of Department 2, 1811. (Case ? ) by the cabinet-makbut were destroyed during the construction of the New er Gambs (the State Hermitage Archives, fund 1, inv. 6 Hermitage (Semenov 2003: 95). On the console a small k, no. 1, p. 446). Thus, cameos with images of emperors
100
Room (Room 7) on the top floor together with the glass Medal and Antique Cabinet in Vienna (17441816): case on the order of Obersthofmarshall Cavalier Count Die hiesige kaiserliche Sammlung von Gemmen besitzt Tolstov (the State Hermitage Archives, fund 1, inv. 6 k, eine Suite von 194 erhaben geschnittenen Karneolen die Folge welche der rmischen Kaiser von Julius Caesar bis no. 1, p. 447). The handwritten Carneol Collection Catalogue stored Karl VII. enthalten. Der Herr Obersthofmarschall Graf in the State Hermitage library (Catalogue dune collection Tolstoj wnscht die noch fehlenden 4 Portrts der Kaiser de cornalines) (ill. 3) features the diagram showing the des sterreich. Hauses zu erhalten. Und ich nehme mir location of one hundred and ninety-eight gems on the daher die Freiheit sie gehrig zu bitten, mir diese 4 Porthree facets of the pyramid, but the list only includes the trts, nemlich Franz I., Joseph II., Leopold II. und Franz one hundred and ninety-four images then present. The II. auf gewhnliche Karneole, in der Gre der beiliegenden Paste schneiden zu lassen (Bernhard-Walcher last four boxes in the third palette are left empty (ill. 4). There is a later, more decorative copy of the catalogue 1996: 169). On 11 November of the same 1811, Neu(the State Hermitage Library: inv. no. 4688) which in- mannn sent the required four carneol cameos for Khler cludes the lacking portraits and mentions that they were to St. Petersburg with the following comment on the gemengraver: Laudicina ist dermalen der einzige geschickte wrought by Laudacina in Vienna. Volume 11 of the second Inventory of Engraved Gems, Steinschneider in Wien. Ein paar andere sind mehr nur compiled in the 1830s under Heinrich Karl Ernst Khler, bloe Petschaftschneider (ibid: 169170). The techniques used in the making of the one hundred Head of Department 1 (the State Hermitage Archives, fund 1,inv. 6 , no. 3) includes the whole suite of em- and ninety-four carneol portraits forming the core of the peror portraits as an independent separately numbered suite are largely consistent with the so-called Dorsch list. It follows from the note at the beginning of the list style; however, they are not completely in accord with that at the time the Inventory was compiled the pyramid the Nuremberg gem-engravers individual manner. For with heads of Roman and German emperors was dis- this reason, Julia Kagan suggested some time ago that the played in the Medal Cabinet; the note at the end of the cameos might have been carved by Johann Christoph Schaupp rather than Johann Christoph Dorsch. list names the author of the last four portraits.
101
Ill. 3. Catalogue dune collection de cornalines. Title-page. The State Hermitage. The Library
Schaupp was among 18th-century masters that enjoyed recognition (even if controversial) during their lifetime and were nearly forgotten later. Schaupp was rediscovered in 1832 by South German antique lovers, when the engravers signatures were found on the capsule-shaped settings of a grand two-hundred-piece set of cameos with images of emperors, bought by Samuel Schwab of Ichenhausen. The event was covered in an enthusiastic article by Ritter von Reiser, Head of the Bavarian Government, reprinted in the Wrttemberg Annual (Reiser 1833). Nowadays, the principal source of information about this medallist and gem-engraver is reference books of the mid-19th early 20th centuries; the entries in the Neues allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon by Georg Kaspar Nagler (Nagler 1845: 154), Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 1890: 647648) and Biographical Dictionary of Medallists Coin-, Gem-, and Seal-Engravers, Mint-Masters, &c by Forrer (Forrer 1912: 376; Forrer 1930: 191), in combination, provide a fairly complete picture of his career. Later, Gustav Pazaurek (Pazaurek 1920: 294, 317), Elizabeth Nau (Nau 1966: 18)
and our contemporary Ingrid Weber (Weber 1995: 26, 204205, cat. nos. 259261; Weber 1996: 154; Weber 2001: 36, 208, cat. no. 451) referred to Schaupp in connection with the development of glyptic in Wrttemberg in the 18th century. Johann Christoph Schaupp was born in Biberach on 1 September 1685 and died in his native town on 20 November 1757. It is not known who taught him his art or where, but in 1717 the Biberach city books refer to Schaupp as a gem-engraver and a Senator. This high rank was obviously awarded to Schaupp for four jubilee medal stamps commemorating the Reformation. According to Forrer, the Biberach master also worked with pressed horn and tortoiseshell. Schaupp never left his home town and, counter to the established tradition, never visited Rome, which, according to some art historians, was to the detriment of his craft. His contemporary and fellow countryman Lorenz Natter (17051763) was the first to reproach Schaupp of being old-fashioned, unsophisticated and even mercenary: On peut aussi leur associer Mr. Shaup de la ville de Biberach en Suabe, qui aprs avoir puis toutes les graveurs des Livres imprims, sest enfin born graveur en Crystal de roche, des Cartes jouer, & dautres bagatelles; le tout pour senrichir plus vite; en quoi il a bien mieux russi que ceux de les Confrres qui sappliquent faire des ouvrages exellens. Il est certain en effet que Graveurs dArmoiries, de Cachets, & dautres choses la mode, sont bien plus facilement fortune, que ceux qui tudient la Mthode ancienne, & qui cherchent y exeller (Natter 1753: XVII). In his entry about Schaupp in Volume 30 of the Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, Beck carried on with this line of criticism; he claimed the gemengraver to be lamentably slow in his work and compared him with his more progressive fellow-countrymen, namely Lorenz Natter and the Dinglinger brothers of Biberach. The harshest judgment was passed by Elizabeth Nau, who labelled Schaupp a narrow-minded provincial. By far, more credible is the opinion of Ingrid Weber, who saw Schaupp as a gem-engraver that produced intaglios representing contemporary or ancient characters following a trend typical of 18th-century German Cisalpine glyptic. However, Elizabeth Nau believes that even in this field Schaupp opted for a more archaic 17th-century Nuremberg style, as exemplified by Christoph Dorsch, who died in 1732 (Nau 1966: 18). At the time when glyptic was dominated by the Greek style based on the antique ideals of beauty, famous for their lightness and grace (ibid.), Schaupp adhered to the solid yet ponder-
ous manner. This is true of the four intaglios in the Mnzkabinet, Munich, which form part of the so-called Royal Suite attributed to Schaupp by Ingrid Weber. Ingrid Weber neglected, and Elizabeth Nau, thirty years earlier, (ibid.) offered severe criticism of the principal achievement and, essentially, the only known major work by the Wrttemberg gem-engraver, namely, a twohundred-piece carneol cameo suite on the subject already familiar to us, which consisted of ninety-nine images of Roman emperors, from Julius Caesar to Romulis Augustalis, thirty-three images of Oriental and Byzantine rulers, from Arcadius to Michael I, as well as sixty-seven German emperors, from Charlemagne to Francis II. According to the authors who wrote about Schaupp, the Biberach gem-engraver while working on the suite used silver and gold coins and medals representing the suite characters. (This is equally true of the Hermitage suite.) The collection also included a cameo with the artists self-portrait, executed in the same manner as the emperors images. Notably, all cameos sized had silver settings in the form of capsules, with engraved names of the rulers and the gem-engravers signatures (SCH; SCHAUPP FECIT or S. F.; the self-portrait is signed J.C.SCHAUPP Edelstein-graveur zu Biberach 1745). The last three cameos portraying Joseph II, Leopold II and Francis II, signed W., were carved by a different master after Schaupps death; they were included in the set at a later stage. His part of the suite took Schaupp eight or nine years to complete; the master carved two cameos a month for a fee of three ducats each (three louis dors, according to other sources). The suite was commissioned to Schaupp by the wealthy treasurer Hartman of Ulm, changed hands many times (an aristocratic family from Neubronn; at the end of 1831, the merchant Samuel Schwab of Ichenhausen; later, his son, Aron; in the late 19th century, the Wrttemberg Hofmarshall Baldinger of Stuttgart; in 1912, the suite was put up for sale by the Spink & Son auction house specializing in numismatic items), and finally, after the Biberach city authorities bought it from an American owner in the early 1960s, returned to its homeland. We have no sufficient grounds to claim that it was Schaupp that authored the Hermitage set. At present, we have no opportunities to make a detailed comparison of the Hermitage and Wrttemberg suites (the only fragment of the Wrttemberg suite published in literature is the portrait of Frederick II Hohenstaufen (Nau 1966: 18). There is indirect evidence that the two suites displayed marked affinity. Both consisted of reliefs in carneol stones (while most of the surviving suites consist of intaglios).
Ill. 4. Catalogue dune collection de cornalines. Palette III. The State Hermitage. The Library
The cameos are of similar size (2.1 1.7 cm) and have similar silver capsule settings. Finally, the core parts of both suites, equal to each other in number, were carved at approximately the same time: Schaupps suite closed with the portrait of Francis I (ruled in 174565), the last image in the Hermitage set was the portrait of Charles VII (ruled in 174245). There is no literary evidence to the existence of suites identical to Schaupps, apart from the comment made in 1832 by Ritter von Reiser that King Ludwig I of Bavaria had seen a similar suite in one ducal collection. Another possibility is that such suites may have been replicated by Schaupps studio or imitated by other South German gem-engravers. Similarly to Johann Christoph Schaupp, who is credited with the authorship of the larger part of the Hermitage suite, the once popular and then nearly forgotten Michele Laudicina (or Laudacina) (17921832), later recommended to the Russian customer as the only Viennese gem-engraver capable of replenishing the incomplete Hermitage set, is now mentioned by only a few dictionaries. In the Biographical Dictionary of Medallists, Coin-,
102
103
Gem-, and Seal-Engravers, Mint-Masters, &c., Forrer refers to him as the author of two subscription table medals, one commemorating the coronation of King Ferdinand II in 1830, the other celebrating the birth of Francis, Duke of Calabria (Forrer 1923: 535). The most detailed information is available from Carson Ritchies book on the history and techniques of shell carving: Michele Laudicina of Trapani. Schooled by Francesco Nolfo. Famous for pietra dura as well as shell and coral carvings. Worked in Malta and Rome, where he studied sculpture and won a prize from masters Pichler and Sacci. He also worked in Florence, where he carved a cameo for the Grand Duke. Favoured by the Viennese imperial court. Visited Milan, Genoa and Venice. In Naples, he was commissioned sculptural portraits (bust, full-length and equestrian) by Ferdinand I. At the end of his life, he taught pietra dura in Naples, then in the art college in Palermo and finally in Academia degli studi in Trapani (Ritchie 1974: 193). Bernhard-Walcher attributed to the Sicilian gem-engraver, medallist and sculptor a cameo with three masks from the Viennese collection: owing to Neumanns notes, the gem ascribed by E. Kris to Cerbara on the basis of the erroneous data in the Inventory, can be attributed to Laudicina (Bernhard-Walcher 1996: 170). Thus, the Hermitage suite echoes an artistic practice typical of 18th-century German glyptic, which continued into the first third of the 19th century. Although we do not have answers to all the questions arising in connection with this grand suite, our research has enabled us to significantly expand our knowledge of the attributed and the documented authors of the cameos Johannn Christoph Schaupp and Michele Laudicina.
REFERENCES Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 1890 Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 30. Leipzig, 1890. Bernhard-Walcher 1996 Bernhard-Walcher, Alfred. Geschnittene Steine des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts in der Antikensammlung des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien. Gemmenschneider und Gemmensammler in Wien und das k.k. Mnz- und Antikenkabinett. Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte. Vol. 2. Mnchen, 1996: 162182. Catalogue dune collection de cornalines Catalogue dune collection de cornalines. Description de 194 cornalines graves en relief representant les portraits des Emprereus Romains, montes dans les trois faces dune piramyde, qui se trouvent dans le Cabinet Imperial de lHermitage. S. a.
Forrer Forrer L. Biographical Dictionary of Medallists Coin-, Gem-, and Seal-Engravers, Mint-Masters, &c. London, 1912: Vol. V; 1923: Vol. VII.; 1930: Vol. VIII. Maksimova 1926 Maksimova M.I. Portrety russkix carej i gosudarej raboty rezika Ioganna Dora [Portraits of Russian Tsars and Emperors Executed by the Gem-Engraver Johannn Dorsch]. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Sbornik III. Leningrad, 1926: 133149. Maksimovich-Ambodik 1995 Maksimovich-Ambodik, Nestor. Emblemy i simvoly [Emblems and Symbols]. (Reprinted edition of Izbrannyje emblemy i simvoly St. Petersburg, 1788). Moscow, 1995. Nagler 1845 Nagler, Georg Kaspar. Neues allgemeines Knstler-Lexicon. Vol. 15. Mnchen, 1845. Natter 1753 Natter, Lorenz. Trait de la mthode antique de graver en pierres fines, compare avec la mthode moderne, et explique en diverses planches. Londres, 1753. Nau 1966 Nau, Elizabeth. Lorenz Natter. 17051763. Gemmenschneider und Medailleur. Biberach an der Ri, 1966. Pazaurek 1920 Pazaurek, Gustav. Wrttembergische Glas- und Edelsteinschneider. Der Kunstwanderer. 1 Aprilheft: 290294, 2 Aprilheft: 317319. 1920. Reiser 1833 Reiser, Ritter von. Der Steinschneider J. C. Schaupp von Biberach. Wrtembergische Jahrbcher. 1832, Heft 2. Stuttgart; Tbingen, 1833: 434440. Ritchie 1974 Ritchie, Carson. Shell Carving: History and Techniques. London, 1974. Semenova 2003 Semenova T.B. Mebelnoje ubranstvo Novogo Ermitaa. Novatorstvo i tradicii [Furniture of the New Hermitage. New Tendencies and Traditions]. In: Novyj Ermita. 150 let so dnja sozdanija: Proceedings of the New Hermitage Jubilee Conference, Held on 1921 February 2002. St. Petersburg, 2003: 95101. Weber 1995 Weber, Ingrid. Geschnittene Steine des 18. bis 20. Jahrhunderts. Vergessene Kostbarkeiten in der Staatlichen Mnzsammlung Mnchen. Mnchen, 1995. Weber 1996 Weber, Ingrid. Zu deutschen Gemmensammlungen und Gemmenschneidern des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts. Zeitschrift fr Kunstgeschichte. Vol. 2. Mnchen, 1996: 139161. Weber 2001 Weber, Ingrid. Geschnittene Steine aus altbayerischem Besitz. Kameen und Intaglien des 15. bis spten 17. Jahrhunderts in der Staatlichen Mnzsammlung Mnchen. Mnchen, Berlin, 2001.
NATALIA AVETYAN THE PHOTOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF IVAN TURGENEV BY SERGEY LEVITSKY FROM THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION The Hermitage possesses a rare salted-paper photograph of Ivan Turgenev taken by Sergey Lvovich Levitsky (inv. no. -30318; ill. 1). This is one of the best prints in the series of portraits of Russian authors, an outstanding achievement of 19th-century portrait photography, produced by Levitsky in the second half of the 1850s. These prints can be said to have introduced a strikingly vivid representation of a new hero, who was to become the main subject of the portraits painted in the second half of the 19th century, primarily those by Ivan Kramskoy, Nikolay Ghe and Ilya Repin. Interestingly enough, Levitskys photographic portraits do not betray the fact that his subjects have a literary occupation: no books, pens or paper are in sight. The writers are deliberately portrayed in an everyday environment, wearing ordinary clothes, typical of the time, or military uniforms. The gravitas reveals itself in the intense process of thinking captured by the photographer. This visible travail of thought makes these literary portraits an extraordinary phenomenon of the Russian art of the 1850s, while the characters themselves become new heroes of the society living and breathing the expectation of change. These images are most striking when placed next to one another. The stark differences between the people shown in them (in their bearing and the way they look at the spectator) become more evident, as well as their profound affinity, provided by in the intensity and depth of their inner life. In the mid-1800s, an author held a nearly prophet-like status in society. This transpires from the diaries and memoirs of the period. If Russian literary men are to be believed, the passion for Russian letters is resurgent in the upper classes of St. Petersburg society. The most exalted persons read our journals, show interest in their proceedings and are vexed by the inopportune niggling of the censors (Druzhinin 1986: 274). These words were written by Alexander Druzhinin in his diary entry for February 1854. They are a true reflection of the way Russian writers were viewed by the society at the end of Nicholas Is reign. A few years later, in 1857, Elena Stakenschneider, the daughter of the court architect, wrote in her diary: Once I had the audacity to tell my friends that I did not enjoy Nekrasov; but I would never have dared to admit that I disliked Herzen. ...we now seem to have two kinds of censorship and seemingly two governments, and it is hard to tell which one is more rigorous (Stakenschneider 1934: 161). Another record by Druzhinin is interesting since it brings up the name of Levitsky: I am very glad that I went to one of Krayevskys Thursdays last night. There was not too much public, but mostly they were pleasant company. Fet, Turgenev, Gayevsky, Mikhailov (with whom I arrived), Dudyshkin, Korsh, Levitsky with his wife and Vladimir Zotov with his spouse I had not seen him for a long time. There were also less familiar faces, including, by the way, the Moscow wise man Granovsky with his wife. The wise mans nose looks bluer than before, and his bald spot is larger than the time I last saw him during my fierce struggle with the Moscow prophets. Levitsky, who was sitting next to me at dinner, was admiring Granovskys apostolic face and kept telling me: Here is a star of the first order (Druzhinin 1986: 268). In spite of vitriol and sharp wit, Druzhinins diary gives an accurate picture of the environment in which Levitskys famous photographic portraits of Russian writers were created. Most prints of the series convey the
105
Ill. 1. Sergey Levitsky. Portrait of Ivan Turgenev. Taken in 185859. The State Hermitage
admiration and worship Levitsky must have felt towards the literary stars of the first order. We only know the history of the Portraits of Russian Writers series in general terms, but this is more than can be said about Levitskys other works. One of the major sources is a short note in the Biblioteka dlya Chteniya journal for 1857, which had been overlooked by photography historians, and was first used by S. Dolgopolova and A. Tarkhova in their article Tyutchevs Lifetime Iconography. This is the note in its entirety: Speaking of literary portraits, we cannot but mention a remarkable collection of portraits of our artistic figures made in Sergey Levitskys photographic establishment. We had a chance to view a full collection the other day: it merits the greatest praise for the likeness of the faces and the perfection of the execution. The collection was started by chance in March 1856. Last winter is memorable for many men of letters, since it was the time when many persons of literary persuasion, especially those working in the St. Petersburg tradition,
came to the capital from the theatre of war and from remote provinces. To make use of their chance reunion, several of our authors agreed to have their portraits made in Mr. Levitskys establishment, to exchange them and to leave individual prints of all the images at the full disposal of the artist. This led to the making of the group and single portraits of Goncharov, Count Tolstoy, Grigorovich, Turgenev, Druzhinin and Ostrovsky, soon augmented by the addition of the portraits of Yevgraf Kovalevsky, Vasily Botkin, Afanasy Fet, Alexey Pisemsky, Pavel Annenkov, Count Vasily Sollogub, Apollon Maikov, Nikolay Nekrasov, Ivan Panayev, Fyodor Tyutchev and many other literary figures. The collection was growing steadily, becoming fuller and fuller... One copy was sent to the Imperial Public Library, and others were purchased by private persons. The portraits are quite inexpensive, while their execution can only be called exemplary (Dolgopolova and Tarkhova 1989: 610622). The gist of the information quoted above was repeated by the Russkaya Starina journal in 1880, which reproduced the group portrait of Russian writers that was taken by Levitsky in 1856 and evidently gave rise to the idea of a whole series of portraits (Russkaya Starina 1880: 871). The history of this photograph is recorded in Alexander Druzhinins diary. On 15 February (Wednesday) 1856, he wrote: In the morning, following Tolstoys plan, we gathered at Levitskys: Turgenev, Grigorovich, Tolstoy, Ostrovsky, Goncharov and myself, preceded by Kovalevsky. Photographic images of our faces were made. In the morning, a curious thing happened in the photographic pavilion, indoors. We were viewing our own portraits and those of others, we were laughing, talking and killing the time. The general group took long to achieve, but was finally a welcome success (Druzhinin 1986: 376). The fact that the idea to have a group picture taken belonged to Tolstoy is confirmed by his letter to Maria Tolstaya of 14 April, 1856: Moreover, at my suggestion, all the literary men had a group photograph made: Turgenev, Grigorovich, Druzhinin, Goncharov, Ostrovsky and myself; I shall send you this group [image] (Tolstoy 1965: 93). Thus, according to Druzhinins diary, on 15 February 1856 (and not in March, as other sources indicate) Sergey Levitsky took a group photograph of six writers (the State Hermitage, inv. no. -30319; ill. 2), and also made individual shots which were the beginning of a future series. As far as we know, there have hitherto been no attempts to study the history of the Portraits of Russian Writers series
Ill. 2. Sergey Levitsky. Group portrait of writers (left to right sitting: Ivan Goncharov, Ivan Turgenev, Alexander Druzhinin and Alexander Ostrovsky; standing: Leo Tolstoy and Dmitry Grigorovich). Taken on 15 February 1856. The State Hermitage
in detail. It is important that there was probably no precise list of photographs making up the series: The collection was growing steadily, becoming fuller and fuller. The State Literary Museum (Moscow) holds the earliest prints of the future series, made on 15 February and signed as mementos for Dmitry Grigorovich on 19 February; these are portraits of Yevgraf Kovalevsky, Alexander Druzhinin, Leo Tolstoy, Alexander Ostrovsky and Ivan Turgenev. The latter is shown with a clean-shaven chin, moustache and whiskers. It is a half-length portrait; we can see a light-coloured waistcoat under his unbuttoned jacket. The same negative was used to make a print now in the Institute of Russian Literature (the Pushkin House, inv. no. 29646; ill. 3). The portraits of other writers in this museum come from various private archives and so can hardly be characterised as a series. The first group of photographs representing the Russian Writers series was probably gathered together by Vasily Stasov and presented to the Imperial Public Li-
brary (now the Russian National Library, or RNB) around 1857. But it has unfortunately proved impossible to discern Stasovs series in the RNB collection. The portraits of Ivan Turgenev, Vasily Botkin, Fyodor Tyutchev, Dmitry Grigorovich, Ivan Goncharov, Pavel Annenkov, Nikolay Nekrasov, Ivan Panayev, Alexander Druzhinin, Alexander Strugovschikov, Apollon Maikov, Vasily Sollogub, Alexander Ostrovsky, Alexey Pisemsky, Leo Tolstoy, Alexey Potekhin and Pyotr Vyazemsky, currently in the Print Department of the Russian National Library, were acquired from different private collections and at different times. According to recently discovered advertisements about the sale of portraits of Russian men of letters, the photographs were sold individually; anyone interested could buy any number of prints and thus keep their own version of the series. Thus, by May 1858 the publishers of the Svetopis magazine had thirteen portraits for sale, which were advertised to the subscribers in the Miscellaneous
106
107
Ill. 3. Sergey Levitsky. Portrait of Ivan Turgenev. Taken on 15 February 1856. The Institute of Russian Literature (the Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences
section: The editors of Svetopis, thanks to the grace of our most renowned writing men who allowed portraits to be made of them, are now able to offer them to the public. You can buy the portraits of Messrs. 1) Grigory Gennadi, 2) Dmitry Grigorovich, 3) Vladimir Zotov, 4) Yelisey Kolbasin, 5) Andrey Krayevsky, 6) Vasily Kurochkin, 7) Apollon Maikov, 8) Mikhail Mikhailov, 9) Nikolay Nekrasov, 10) Ivan Panayev, 11) Alexey Pisemsky, 12) Alexander Chumikov and 13) Nikolay Shcherbina. The price of a copy is as follows: for an ordinary-size sheet 1 s(ilver) r(ouble); 1 r(ouble) 50 k(opecks) including postage; for a large-size collectors sheet 3 s(ilver) r(oubles); 3 r(oubles) 50 k(opecks) including postage. (Svetopis 1858: 143). It follows from this that the copying and selling of portraits was authorised by the writers themselves. The State Historical Museum (Moscow) has a collection of photographs of Russian writers which was in all probability gathered by Mikhail Korsh. There were
seventeen portraits in it: those of Ivan Turgenev, Vasily Botkin, Fyodor Tyutchev, Dmitry Grigorovich, Ivan Goncharov, Pavel Annenkov, Nikolay Nekrasov, Ivan Panayev, Alexander Druzhinin, Alexander Strugovshchikov, Apollon Maikov, Vasily Sollogub, Alexander Ostrovsky, Alexey Pisemsky, Leo Tolstoy, Alexey Potekhin and Pyotr Vyazemsky. The interesting feature of this series is that the half-length picture of Turgenev has been replaced with a knee-length portrait (in different clothes and with a short beard). The main advantages of this version are a well-chosen position of the sitter and the expression of his face. It is because of its compositional expressiveness that this picture came to replace the earlier photograph. Prints from the same negative also exist in the collections of the Literary Museum (Moscow) and the State Hermitage (see ill. 1). It is relatively easy to establish when the photograph was taken. The Literary Museum copy has an inscription, probably in Turgenevs own hand: Ivan Turgenev, year 1859. That year can be considered the terminus ante quem for dating the photograph. The terminus post quem is provided by facts from Turgenevs biography. After the photo session was held at Levitskys studio in the spring of 1856, Turgenev went abroad in July and did not return to Russia until April 1858. He spent most of his time working in his estate of Spasskoye, occasionally making visits to Moscow and St. Petersburg. In May he went back to Paris, in June he was in Spasskoye again, and in November 1858 he was in St. Petersburg. In the following year Turgenev could only have gone to Levitskys studio before May, when the latter, in turn, went to Paris. Thus, the knee-length portrait which replaced the 1856 portrait in the Russian Writers series, could have been made in 1858 or the first half of 1859. The contemporaries were first to note the photographers skill to convey the individual qualities of his subject, which was evident in the portraits of Russian writers. Each of the faces reveals a unique personality and life experience. In all the portraits, the faces are exceptionally lively, their mimic agility masterfully captured. The crucially important factor in the history of this series is that Levitsky knew his subjects very well since he had had a chance to observe and study them for a long time during many literary soires. The careful arrangement of the composition is one of the key methods that Levitsky used. The diversity of characters conveyed in the series is directly linked to the composition of each individual portrait, the choice of precise postures and characteristic gestures. There are
very few strictly traditional portraits, like those of Maikov and Annenkov (half-length or knee-length photographs with hands cut off by the frame) or those of Ivan Goncharov or Alexey Pisemsky (half-length or knee-length pictures of the subjects sitting in a chair, usually against the background of a draping). In spite of their overall effect and masterfully captured facial expressions, which are alive with thoughts and feelings, these are not the defining portraits of the series. The best portraits are those where the expressive composition creates a unique artistic impression. Portraits with hands are more successful, they focus on the variety of postures and silhouettes, giving a touch of the scenic effect to each shot while at the same time revealing some important features of the face that is being photographed. Turgenevs portrait of 185859 is especially remarkable from this point of view. The soft chiaroscuro makes it look like a painting and is a true delight for the eye. The complex texture of the clothes gives the photograph a diversity of tone. This is one of the best portraits of the great author, among other things, due to the skill with which the photographer captured Turgenevs keen look with a tinge of irony and melancholy. Very few of the numerous surviving portraits of the writer have him looking straight at the audience. It is interesting to compare Levitskys portrait with a photograph taken approximately in the same period by August Bergner (the Pushkin House, inv. no. 2898; ill. 4). In my opinion, Levitskys work surpasses a solid but slightly banal work by the Moscow photographer. Bergner started a trend of Turgenevs official portraits which became popular later. They show Turgenev as an outstanding Russian author and have something memorial in their character. In them the writer is portrayed in a solemn but somewhat artificial manner; there is no movement; the overall composition is rigid and theatrical. Bergners photograph is slightly reminiscent of Tropinins Moscow burghers. Turgenev himself looks more like a merchant than a member of the Russian intelligentsia, an author whose prose was greeted with an intensely controversial response both in the 1850s and later. Nearly all of Turgenevs later portraits made in the 1860s and 1870s, both photographic and painted, look more like monuments than images of a living man. A good example is provided by Deniers photograph of 1877 (the Pushkin House) and a portrait painted by Perov (1872, the State Russian Museum). The 1879 photo by Denier (the Pushkin House) shows a stern-looking old man with a hand behind the lapel of his suit, holding a book in the
Ill. 4. August Bergner. Portrait of Ivan Turgenev. Taken in 1856. The Institute of Russian Literature (the Pushkin House) of the Russian Academy of Sciences
other hand. This monumental posture is further enhanced by the three-quarter representation; the lack of movement makes the whole image somewhat stilted and theatrical. The other, intimate, way of developing Turgenevs iconography often stresses his mild personality, and an air of weariness and melancholy. His wisdom and sadness are palpable in the portrait painted by Konstantin Makovsky (1871, the State Museum of Ivan Turgenev, Oryol). The same mood is conveyed by the photograph taken by Panov in 1880 (the State Historical Museum) as well as by a Levitsky photograph taken in the 1870s (the State Hermitage, inv. no. -28762; ill. 5). Of all the portraits of Turgenev, including those mentioned above, it is Levitskys photograph of 185859 that conveys the writers lively and complicated personality in the most multi-faceted and precise manner. There are few such portraits in Turgenevs iconography; a Tissier photograph of 1871 and a photograph taken in 1881 by
108
109
produce a series of lithographic portraits of the writers Vissarion Belinsky, Alexander Herzen, Nikolay Gogol, Alexey Koltsov, Pavel Annenkov, the historian Timofey Granovsky, and the journalist Yevgeny Korsh. But only a limited number of copies of the series were published, and they did not have the response that Levitskys portraits elicited. When they were made available for sale, they became an important event in the social life of the time. The artistic value of Levitskys series is also worthy of notice. The well-chosen postures and the overall composition of the photographs, the skilfully emphasised characteristic features of each writer, their evocative and life-like facial expressions make this series of photographic portraits of Russian writers a significant achievement in the history of Russian painting, graphics and photography of the middle and second half of the 19th century.
REFERENCES Dolgopolova and Tarkhova 1989 Dolgopolova S.A. and E.E. Tarkhova. Priiznennaja ikonografija F.I. Tjuteva [F.I. Tyutchevs Lifetime Iconography]. Literaturnoje Nasledstvo 97: F.I. Tyutchev. Bk. 2. Moscow, 1989: 610622. Druzhinin 1986 Druzhinin A.V. Povesti. Dnevnik [Short Novels. Diary]. Moscow, 1986. Russkaya Starina 1880 Russkaya Starina XXVII (April). 1880. Ill. 5. Sergey Levitsky. Portrait of Ivan Turgenev Taken in the 1870s. The State Hermitage Svetopis 1858 Svetopis 5 (May). 1858. Tolstoy 1965 Tolstoy L.N. Sobranije soinenij v 20 tomax [Collected Works in 20 vols.]. Vol. XVII: Pisma 18451886 [Letters of 184586]. Moscow, 1965. Stakenschneider 1934 Stakenschneider E. Dnevnik i zapiski [Diary and Notes]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1934.
EKATERINA KHMELNITSKAYA AUGUST SPIESS SCULPTURAL FIGURES
the Moscow photographer Panov can be named as the most successful ones. Levitskys idea of creating a gallery of prominent men of letters was not new. As early as 1845, Alexander Herzen commissioned the artist Kirill Gorbunov to
The artistic career of August Karl Spiess (18171904) reached its peak in the mid- to the late 19th century. The sculptor served as chief model-maker (Modelmeister) at the Imperial Porcelain Works for a long time and designed many sculptural models for this St. Petersburg manufacture. August Spiess studied at Berlin Academy of Arts, founded by Elector Friedrich III in 1696. In 1836, he arrived in Berlin from his native town of Stralsund in North-East Prussia (AdK: no. 420, pl. 34). He was nineteen at the time. Spiess was enrolled as a student of the Sculpture Department at first attempt. This was believed to be a promising beginning for an Academy student. But the marks and references which Spiess received after the end of his basic course and three more years spent at the School of Painting do not set him apart from his fellow students in terms of his ability and talent. He was trying hard to achieve better results and attended courses on different aspects of sculpture between 1845 and 1847: modeling (Modellierklasse) and drawing of plaster models (Gipszeichnenklasse). Between 17 April 1846 and 13 April 1847 August Spiess was taking Sunday lessons from the sculptor Ludwig Wichmann. After finishing all the basic courses at the Academy, Spiess started revising for his final exam (Entlassungs-Prfung) which required students to present their own work of art. He may have still had doubts concerning his abilities because he signed up for revision classes in which pupils were expected first to make drawings of plaster models and then to start their examination projects under the tutors supervision. The revision class attended by Spiess was taught by Dehling. According to the attendance records, Spiess came to lessons regularly between the autumn of 1846 and the
early 1847 (ibid: no. 419, pl. 40). A successful exam could largely determine a students later career, and a failure meant that all the years of study and work at the Academy ateliers had been in vain and that the student had to start again nearly from scratch. The section on the procedure and rules regulating the final examination in the Academy Statute proclaimed that in the event of an unsatisfactory result caused by insufficient effort or natural talent, a subsequent career in the sphere of fine arts seems unlikely. Spiess performance immediately before his exam was at an average level. The column characterising his work contained only a brief note with quite a good certificate (m.g.g.z. mit ganz guten Zeugnis), while works by other pupils received much more laudatory comments (ibid: no. 635, pl. 1). Spiess examination was scheduled for 20 January 1847. According to the Academy Statute of 14 May 1838, the final exam required the presentation of a work made by the student during the period from six weeks to three months, depending on the challenges presented by the subject and material. The final version, together with the tutors references regarding the students talent and skills, was submitted to the Academic Council for approval. Spiess got an average mark for his exam, accompanied by the following verdict: He has average abilities, his skills are not always evident. He has a propensity for applied art. No immediate progress is to be expected from him (ibid: no. 420, pl.148). This was the unflattering certificate that Spiess had to take away from the Academy of Arts. We do not know what caused him to seek employment abroad. He must have realized that being characterised as a sculptor with some abilities, but little promise meant that he was unlikely to find a decent position
111
in his home country. His departure may also have been connected with the general emigration mood which gripped Germany at the time. The 1840s were the peak years for mass emigration. Between 1815 and 1848, over 600,000 people went to seek their fortunes in America, Canada, New Zealand and other countries. Because of the political alliance between Russia and Prussia formed during the Napoleonic wars, Russia became one of the most favoured countries for German citizens. Dynastic links between the two countries had been forged since the 18th century. Yet another German princess would become a Russian Empress or Grand Duchess and offer patronage to her fellow countrymen, relatives and friends who followed her to Russia, hoping to find a lucrative place at court, enter service and make a career. According to A. Presnyakov, the Romanov House was under a great German influence and was Russian purely in terms of its national and patriotic outlook (Presnyakov 1990: 264265). In the early 19th century, 12 per cent of the officers in the Guard regiments were German, and the percentage was even higher among generals. During the reign of Nicholas I, the key ministries such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of the Navy, as well as the Ministries of Finances and Communications were headed by Russian Germans. A similar situation obtained in the state administration and in nearly all other spheres. Nicholas Is reign was an especially favourable time for Germans looking for career advancement. This was the period when August Spiess came to Russia. Despite his disappointing graduation from the Academy of Arts, Spiess career in Russia took a turn for the better from the first days of his sojourn in St. Petersburg. He arrived in the capital in late winter or early spring of 1847. The Imperial Porcelain Works. 17441904 and the Lexicon of Artists by Thieme and Becker erroneously give 1846 as the year of Spiess arrival in Russia, but it is clear that he could not have travelled to St. Petersburg before he got his diploma at the Academy of Arts (Wolf et al. 1906: 258; Thieme and Becker 1937: 375). Archival documents, primarily the attendance records for the Academy drawing and preparatory classes, provide direct proof that Spiess stayed in Germany throughout 1846. While working in the Winter Palace for two years as an apprentice sculptor (184749), he had a good opportunity to see Russian culture up close and to study the masterpieces of world art in the palace collection. On 1 May 1849 Spiess was hired as a sculptor at the Imperial Porcelain Works, and four years later he was elevated to the position of model-maker.
The sculptured works designed by Spiess in the second half of the 19th century were repeated many times, becoming traditional presents for festive occasions. Many of them were still in production after the sculptor retired. We cannot but mention the rather harsh remarks concerning Spiess plastic models which were justly described by the critics as down-to-earth, often crude motley moulds (Wolf et al. 1906: 258). But the longevity enjoyed by many of his works is a tribute to their popular appeal. It is noteworthy that Spiess career advancement came quite quickly and that he was very successful in his elevated position of model-maker at the Imperial Porcelain Works. Even the most talented artists seldom end up having such a trouble-free and at times splendid career. The secret of the master is to a large extent explained by his talent for administration, what could be defined in modern terms as management skills. Spiess was without doubt a gifted manager, a person with a keen sense of the tastes and demands of the time. More importantly, he was good at guessing the desires of his exalted commissioners. The main criterion and the necessary prerequisite for a successful career was to gain the approval of the Imperial Family, especially Empress Maria Alexandrovna. After he had formed a notion of her taste and personal preferences, Spiess was able to design objects which were in full conformance with her ideas about porcelain and provided harmonious additions to her everyday routine. This is where Spiess proved both a remarkable talent and a very enterprising man. He knew perfectly well how important it was for any architect, sculptor or artist to maintain good relations with the commissioner and to be a good judge of the ideals and tastes of his time. It took an above-average talent to make a correct and accurate evaluation of the existing tendencies and to choose the artistic trend likely to elicit a particular response from the group of people for which these works of art were intended. There is no doubt that Spiess possessed that kind of talent. This was the secret of his artistic success, even in spite of the fact that his ability as a porcelain designer can only be described as a successful mediocrity. The themes favoured by Spiess were most often inspired by the heritage of the 18th century. Copies of 18th-century works were both popular with his clients and consistent with his own tastes and views. When one looks at the charming and sweet figurines of children, one cannot fail to feel the warmth and care lent by the master to his works. If he had lived a century earlier, his creations may well have merited much higher praise.
The sculptors artistic methods and techniques were formed within the German porcelain-making tradition, primarily that of Meissen, the height of European porcelain art. Spiess designed a great variety of figures, including courtiers and ladies, street traders and artisans, representatives of different peoples of the world, mythological characters, Italian comedians, etc. All the themes used by the masters of the Meissen Porcelain Manufactory were adopted by him as well. Many of Spiess works recall Meissen figurines, and some are straightforward copies, their sizes conforming to those of their prototypes. His figurines are light, the proportions are not distorted by the shrinking of the moulds after baking, which is a mark of a highly professional sculptor. Spiess works follow a popular tradition in European porcelain. His most sought-after figurines were those of children and Cupids, which were special favourites with Maria Alexandrovna, a loving and virtuous mother of eight children. The mischievous putti and Cupids are full of natural grace and childlike charm. Worthy of special note are the figures of little angels shown as musicians, or allegorical representations of putti as seasons of the year, planets, types of weather, occupations, etc. The figurines were given symbolic attributes: flowers as symbols of spring, ears of corn for summer etc. Such objects were so popular in the 18th century that guessing the symbols and allegories of little porcelain knickknacks became a popular game. A figurine showing a putto as Mercury made by August Spiess can be described as part of the Seven Planets series popular in Europe (inv. no. 4267; 1850s 1870s; unglazed porcelain; 21.5 8.0 8.5 cm; stamped inscription at base: S.K. initials of the moulder; ill. 1). The proportions of the figure, the treatment of the face and hands are very close to similar works made by the Meissen and Royal Berlin porcelain manufactures. The prototype for a statuette showing a putto as Hercules after defeating the Nemean lion is most probably the Meissen original made around 176065, currently in the Museum of Decorative Arts in Berlin (Kunstgewerbemuseum, inv. no. 1968, 6). It was customary for the Meissen porcelain of the late 1750s and 1760s to portray mythological characters as children. In the 1760s Johann Joachim Kndler produced a whole series of gods and heroes of classical antiquity shown as children. It may well have been a statuette from this series that inspired Spiess. The similarities are apparent both in the posture of the putto figurine and its softly moulded face. The lion skin wrapped around Hercules shoulders like
a cloak is much shorter in Spiess version, but the rendering of its texture, folds and waves is identical to the Meissen original. A figurine especially popular in the 18th and 19th centuries was that of a little girl feeding chickens. It was originally made at the Meissen Porcelain Manufactory, then copied in Ansbach, and then, with some alteration, in Hchst. Imitating Meissen originals was typical of German porcelain manufacturers. Copying existing models was not regarded as plagiarism or something illegal. This was the reason why Spiess himself would not hesitate to make copies of the works he liked. The figure of a girl feeding chickens from the Hermitage collection (inv. no. 3373; 1850s 1870s; porcelain, overglaze polychrome painting, gilding; 14.5 8.5 7.5 cm; green stamp under glazing: A II under a crown; ill. 2) is stylistically closest to the Ansbach statuette from the collection of the Museum of Applied Art in Cologne (Angewandte Kunst Museum, Kln, inv. no. 4584). However, this model could also be based on an original painting. Like many other European porcelain-makers, Spiess drew on drawings and paintings to create the compositions of many of his works. At present, there are at least two known drawings by Franois Boucher of The Little Farm Girl and his painting Girl with Chickens made in 1752. The Little Farm Girl by Claude-Augustin Duflos could also serve as a model for the statuette made at the Imperial Porcelain Works. The Hermitage has three genre scenes and figures by Spiess (A Singer, A Gardener and A Shepherdess) which are nearly exact copies of Meissen works with a few changes. When comparing Spiess works with the German originals, one can be excused for doubting that the former were indeed made at the Imperial Porcelain Works. It is only the colour of the white porcelain, the seals and special marks in the porcelain mixture, the method of moulding most figures with an even unglazed bottom without holes, the quality of painting and the shades of colour and gilding, as well as the small-scale decorative alterations introduced by Spiess into his sculptural groups, that testify that these figurines were in fact created in St. Petersburg. The original versions of the works described above were made in Meissen in the 18th century and repeatedly copied throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. They were illustrated in the catalogues of the Meissen Manufactory which had been offering its products for sale from 1764. It is well known that Spiess often used these catalogues to order the figures which were to serve
112
113
Ill. 1. Sculpture Putto as Mercury. The State Hermitage
as models for his future works. The Knigliche Schsische Porzellan-Manufaktur Meien, Verkaufskatalog contains the sculptural groups Allegory of Winter, Allegory of Summer and Grape Harvest (Meissen 19101920: 25, no. J 2, no. 2490, no. 2495). The allegories of summer and winter were first made in Meissen as part of the Seasons series in the 1760s. They are mentioned in the Meissen Manufactory price list for 1765. According to K. Butlers study of Meissen porcelain, the author of this series of four groups, each consisting of four children was Johann Joachim Kndler (Butler 1977: 134). One of the versions of the Allegory of Summer was made by Spiess in 1855 (inv. no. 9122; 1855; porcelain, underglaze polychrome painting; 19.0 20.6 15.3 cm; red inscription under glazing: A.K. the mak-
ers initials and the date: 1855; ill. 3). This work represents a type of a childs face favoured by Spiess: with golden locks of hair, plump cheeks and a small mouth. The painting of the sculptural group Allegory of Summer is superb; it is also very important, because unpainted compositions tend to lose a significant part of their charm. The masterful work of the painter and sculptor are here blended together in mutual enhancement. The intense and vivid colours red, yellow, brown, combined with the gilding, underscore the beauty of the porcelain, its whiteness and the translucence of the glazing. The Allegory of Winter was made simultaneously, as a companion piece to the Allegory of Summer (inv. no. 4259; 1850s; porcelain; 19.0 20.7 14.8 cm; with marks stamped on the mass: 28; ill. 4). Spiess must have known the drawing by Franois Boucher in the collection of the Prussian Society of Castles and Gardens, BerlinBrandenburg (Stiftung Preussische Schlsser und Grten. Berlin Brandenburg) (Archives of the Royal Berlin Manufacture (KPM-Archive), inv. no. G 602-05), which shows four cupids by the fire, symbolising the coming of winter. The original version of the Grape Harvest group was produced in the mid-1760s; it is mentioned in the Meissen Manufactory price list for 1765 (Berling 1911: 197). In 1784, the group was reworked by the sculptor Schnheit: the new model was bigger, had a different pedestal, and the figures of children were changed. K. Berling believes that the new version of the group was based on a drawing by Johann Eleazar Schenau (ibid: 79). Spiess made a new porcelain interpretation of this composition, influenced by Schenaus heritage (inv. no. 8774a, ; 1850s 1870s; porcelain; 26.8 20.5 20.5 cm.; ill. 5). The figure of a boy gardener is part of the series Children Gardeners mentioned in the Meissen price list for 1765 (Meissen 19101920: pl. 4). Unfortunately, there are no indications as to when and which figures were united into a series. According to Schnorr von Carolsfeld, it consisted of twenty-three pieces (see Butler 1977: 139). Spiess copied the boy gardener figurine, which is also present in the Meissen sales catalogue (Meissen 1896: no. G 1). In 1906, it was first described in the Imperial Porcelain Works edition as a Gardener (Wolf et al. 1906: 236). The Hermitage has two of these statuettes, one of which is painted in the same way as the Meissen original. Spiess decorative figure of a Singer, formerly from N. Lukutins collection, is also reminiscent of Meissen originals. In this case, the master did not produce a straightforward copy of the model, but only used a part
Ill.2. Sculpture Girl Feeding Chickens. The State Hermitage
114
115
Ill.3. Sculpture The Allegory of Summer. The State Hermitage
of the sculptural group decorating the base of a Meissen porcelain clock. A similar figure of a girl with a mandolin exists in different decorative versions. In one case, the figure of the Singer is placed on the left-hand side of the base, while the version used by Spiess for his statuette has this figure placed on the right in a mirror image (Meissen 19101920: pl. 49, nos. 1047, 1049). The Shepherdess by Spiess also belongs to this group. This statuette is most like the Meissen figurines nos. 1295 and C 75 (ibid.) in its decorative and plastic qualities, but it is not, strictly speaking, a replica of either. The inspiration for this statuette may have also been provided by various French graphic images of pretty flower-girls and shepherdesses, which were widely drawn upon by German and Russian masters. Extensive collections of books and engravings were kept at porcelain factories. Modelmakers tended to follow their examples quite closely, changing only occasional details; sometimes one figure was selected from a group if it was considered interesting. But each time, the original had to be reworked to suit the demands of the material, transferred from a two-dimensional to a three-dimensional scale, and often transformed into an altogether different work of art. Another of Spiess works is a porcelain figurine showing a girl with a flower basket, which can also be viewed as a free interpretation of a popular gallant-scene motif of shepherdess or girl with a flower basket. The closest interpretation of this figure is extant in the decoration of candelabra made in Meissen. Preserving the general composition of the work, Spiess provides a different view of the model. A close comparison shows that the girl is still a child, but dressed as an adult, in a wide-skirted dress and a short cloak. In her left hand, she has a flower basket, a symbol of love and tenderness. The image of an adolescent posing as an adult was one of the favourite themes of 18th-century artists. The second half of the 18th century saw a rising popularity of French art in both Germany and Russia. Most German artistic manufactures drew upon the heritage of Louis XVs reign. The Berlin Royal Porcelain Manufacture produced a great number of rococo objects from the first days of its existence. Friedrich the Greats interest in French culture inspired the making of porcelain figures and statuettes in the style of the gallant century. August Spiess had studied the originals and illustrations of these works when he was still a student in Berlin, as well as during his subsequent visits to the city. Francomania was typical of the Russian aristocratic society as well. Imperial and aristocratic collections took
Ill.4. Sculpture The Allegory of Winter. The State Hermitage
pride in possessing works by French masters. The art of porcelain-making, which was considered a mirror of fashion for every age was certain to reflect the fashionable French tendencies (Schmidt 1925: 31). The artists and sculptors working for the Imperial Porcelain Works brought forward their own interpretations of popular subjects, decorative devices and ornaments. August Spiess, an adept of the Neo-Rococo style, designed several dainty French-style statuettes of young girls and their cavaliers with children, flower baskets, jugs etc. These works were based on the gallant scenes by Watteau, Boucher and Fragonard. Spiess works designed in the second half of the 1860s include A Girl with a Jug, A Girl with a Flower Vase, A Shepherdess, etc. The figures of charming young girls with refined features and flowing hand movements were most likely based on French originals. The masterful finish and delicate treatment of the subjects make Spiess works superior to many similar figures made by German porcelain manufacturers.
116
117
Ill.5. Sculpture The Grape Harvest. The State Hermitage
The sculptors works based on genre scenes testify to his fresh and immediate approach, an original, if somewhat nave, treatment of the themes. The figurines of town and country dwellers are charmingly joyful and festive. The figures of a peasant and a boy wearing Russian national costumes (inv. nos. 4294; 3463) are bright eye-catchers. These statuettes are of course far removed from real peasants and artisans of the time; they are far too idealised and seem to pose before the onlookers. Continuing the traditions of the Imperial Porcelain Works which went back to the reign of Catherine the Great, Spiess designed the figures of the peoples of Russia and other Slavonic nations. The statuettes of a Bulgarian Man, a Bulgarian Woman, or The Serbs which were included in the Imperial Porcelain Works. 17441904 pub-
lication forestall the making of an expansive series of Peoples of Russia largely designed by P. Kamensky during the reign of Nicholas II. Some of Spiess pieces were inspired by theatrical or comedic themes popular since the 18th century. The images of jugglers and acrobats, dancers and actors, and Pierrots and Harlequins transformed by the artists and sculptors fancy into delicate porcelain statuettes were a favourite subject of porcelain-makers throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, (Schnorr von Carolsfeld 1956: 126). Following Meissens lead, all the European ceramic manufactures were producing figures of the Commedia dellarte. According to the distinguished Italian theatre historian Vito Pandolfi, the Commedia dellarte started playing an important role in Italian society in the middle of the 16th century (Pandolfi 1957: 33). Spectacular carnivals, masquerades and pageants became an integral part of the cultural life of Italy and other European countries. From the 17th century onwards, the Commedia dellarte became a favourite theatrical genre in the south of Germany, as well as in Austria and France. In the 18th century, France created its own Commedia dellarte style, which was different from the Italian tradition in the way and manner of performance, as well as in the repertoire. The carefree and cheerful characters of the paintings by Watteau, Boucher, Callot and Gillot were portrayed as the leading characters of the comedies. Owners of dainty knickknacks were happy to display their figurines on chests of drawers, mantelpieces and cabinets. The fantastic and whimsical world of the theatre penetrated into every nook and cranny of Imperial and Grand Ducal residences. Although the Commedia dellarte characters were extremely popular in Europe, they were largely ignored by the Imperial Porcelain Works. This may have been caused by the fact that Russia was far removed from the routes of the travelling actors. They rarely left central Europe, while Russias European territory would have been considered a very exotic tour destination. Moreover, by this time Russia already had its own theatrical tradition, which meant that the characters of Italian comedy were less well known. However, it was impossible for Spiess to ignore such a popular topic, given his desire to follow the traditions of European porcelain-making. Nevertheless, he designed only a few porcelain statuettes depicting characters of the Commedia dellarte. One of his early works in this series is a small figurine of a child wearing a Pierrot costume. This remarkably vivid, expressive and well-designed sculpture showcases Spiess
Ill.6. Sculptures Colombina and Harlequin. The State Hermitage
118
119
ability to grasp new material quickly, and to understand and exploit its advantages. The master also designed two small figurines of dancing children, who could be interpreted as Colombina and Harlequin (inv. nos. 3391, 3398; porcelain, overglaze polychrome painting, gilding; 16.0 6.6 6.5 cm; 17.0 6.5 7.0 cm; ill. 6). The way their costumes are painted recalls later French-style models rather than traditional dress worn by Italian comedians. Colombinas multi-coloured chequered dress with ribbons and bobs is inspired by the French style, and her costume is complete with a matching cap. Harlequin is wearing a playful multi-coloured costume and a polkadot cap. Such a fanciful interpretation of the traditional characters was typical of many European manufactures. Whole theatrical scenes were done in porcelain, inspiring awe and enthusiasm in many collectors and lovers of the Commedia dellarte. The Colombina and Harlequin figures can be regarded as individual or companion pieces. August Spiess often designed them as pairs. The tradition of making porcelain groups was brought from Germany, where figures were produced so that they could be exhibited alone or together, depending on the clients wishes and means a move designed to boost sales (Jansen 2001: 23). With little exception, all of Spiess works have round or oval-shaped bases decorated with gilded rocaille ornaments. Such flat pedestals with moulded flowers and leaves first appeared in Meissen in the 1740s. By the mid1750s, the flat Meissen pedestals were replaced with taller ornamental foundations with relief or cut-through rocailles, usually tinted with gold. Spiess used both the earlier and the later type. Some of the pedestals are shaped as lawns with a gilded border. August Spiess works can be called simple and downto-earth, but they are more than just sugary 19th-century models based on earlier originals. His treatment of child figures shows a keen feeling, an attentive and delicate desire to embody his vision of Beauty in a fragile material. While his porcelain sculptures were not up to the artistic standards distinguishing the works made at
the leading European porcelain factories of the time, they are an important landmark in the history of the Imperial Porcelain Works in St Petersburg1.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS AdK Preuische Akademie der Knste, Berlin. Berling 1911 Berling K. Festschrift zur 200jhrigen Jubelfeier der ltesten europischen Porzellanmanufaktur Meissen. 1910. Leipzig, 1911. Butler 1977 Butler K. Mejsenskaja farforovaja plastika XVIII veka v sobranii Ermitaa [18th-Century Meissen Porcelain Sculptures in the Hermitage Collection]. Leningrad, 1977. Jansen 2001 Jansen R. The Commedia dellarte and the Ansbach Porcelain Factory. In: Commedia dellarte. Carnival of Comedy Players: Exhibition catalogue. 2001. Meissen 1896 Knigliche Schsische Porzellan-Manufaktur Meien. Meien, 1896. Meissen 19101920 Knigliche-Schsische Porzellan-Manufaktur zu Meien. Verkaufskatalog. Meien, 19101920. Nikolay Mikhailovich, Gr.D. 1904 Nikolay Mikhailovich, Grand Duke. Peterburgskij Nekropol [The St. Petersburg Necropolis]. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg, 1904. Pandolfi 1957 Pandolfi V. La Commedia dellarte. Storia e testo. Vol. I. Florence, 1957. Presnyakov 1990 Presnyakov A.E. Rossijskije Samodercy [Russian Monarchs]. Moscow, 1990. Schmidt 1925 Schmidt R. Das Porzellan als Kunstwerk und Kulturspiegel. Mnchen, 1925. Schnorr von Carolsfeld 1956 Schnorr von Carolsfeld L. Porzellan der europischen Fabriken. Braunschweig, 1956. Thieme and Becker 1937 Thieme U. and F. Becker Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Knstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Vol. 31. Leipzig, 1937. Wolf et al. 1906 Wolf N.B., S.A. Rozanov, N.M. Spilioto and A.N. Benoit (eds.). Imperatorskij farforovyj zavod [Imperial Porcelain Works]. St. Petersburg, 1906.
HISTORY OF THE STATE HERMITAGE
ALEXANDER KAKOVKIN ONE PAGE FROM THE HISTORY OF RUSSIAN COPTIC STUDIES The Publication of The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt by Militsa Matye and Xenia Liapunova In the 1950s, several important works were published in Russia; one of them was The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt by Militsa Matye (18991966) and Xenia Liapunova (18951942), which came out in 1951 (Matye and Liapunova 1951). At the end of the same decade, Peter Ernstedt published two books devoted to Coptic texts in the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow (Ernstedt 1959a) and the Hermitage (Ernstedt 1959b). The present paper is concerned with the book on textiles, more particularly, with the calamities connected with its publication1 (for scholarly evaluation of the book, see Bank 1953: 288294). As early as the end of the 19th century, the Hermitage received a considerable collection of objects of Coptic art, crafts and writing, accumulated as a result of two expeditions to Egypt organized by the Museum curator, Vladimir Bock (18501899). Almost all of the finds were shown in the autumn of 1898, at a temporary exhibition that Bock and his closest associate, Yakov Smirnov, organized in the northern part of the Hermitage Raphaels Loggia (Kakovkin 2000: 5669). In the 20th century, a number of additions to the collection were made (Kakovkin 2004: 1718), but the core, more than half of the collection, consisted of textiles produced between the 4th and 12th centuries, known as Coptic textiles. Until the mid-1930s, the Hermitage Coptic textiles had been preserved in several divisions, viz. the Department of Classical Orient, part of the Antiquities Section of the Hellenic and Scythian Department, the Section of
The article is based on the paper given by the author at the Meeting of the Oriental Department of the State Hermitage on 26 May 1997, which was dedicated to the 55th anniversary of Xenia Liapunovas death.
1
August Spiess died in St. Petersburg on 12 April 1904 and was buried at the cemetery belonging to the Imperial Porcelain Works (Nikolay Mikhailovich, Gr.D. 1904: 574].
Art and Industry of the 1st Branch of the Hermitage (the former Museum of the Alexander Stieglitz School of Industrial Design) and the Department of Textiles. During a reorganization of the Museum, all the textiles were transferred to the Ancient Orient Department (now Section) of the Oriental Department. In 1927, the first temporary exhibition of Byzantine art took place in the Hermitage, its Byzantine Egypt section containing a wide variety of Coptic objects of art, including textile productions (Matsulevich 1929: 1213). Seven years later, premises for the Ancient Egypt exhibition were allotted near the Commandant Entrance, with another four rooms devoted to Graeco-Roman Egypt added in 1935 as its continuation (Matye and Liapunova 1939). Simultaneously, an inventory and description of the Coptic collection were being made. The Egyptologist Militsa Matye (ill. 1) was concerned with Coptic painted pottery, ivories and textiles (Kakovkin 2001: 1620), while her assistant Xenia Liapunova (ill. 2) concentrated on the Coptic textiles featuring subjects from Classical Antiquity (Kakovkin 2005: 59). The chief result of the many years meticulous work, however, was the catalogue of a part of the early Coptic textiles at the Hermitage. (It should be observed that by 1937 Ernstedt had completed his work on the Hermitage Coptic texts; see Yelanskaya 1972: 525). In the mid-1930s, at the meeting of the Oriental Department, the manuscript of the catalogue was discussed and recommended for publication at the USSR Academy of Sciences Press. The scholarly editor of the catalogue was to be Joseph Orbeli. In 1940, the Oriental Department celebrated its twentieth anniversary. In the article published on this occasion, the Head of Department, Alexander Yakubovsky wrote:
121
Matye was evacuated from Leningrad. When she returned, she concentrated on her main subject, Egyptology; but she did not abandon the idea to publish the completed catalogue volume. For some unknown reason, it was decided that the book should be printed at the Museum publishers (rather than at the Academy of Sciences), in the Monuments of Culture and Art in the Hermitage Collections series, the first book of it being The Monuments of Graeco-Bactrian Art by Kamilla Trever, published in 1940. As previously, only two galley-proof pieces, the half-title and the title-page, have survived. The former (ill. 4, 1) has The State Hermitage, Monuments of Culture and Art in the Hermitage Collections. II in large bold print in four lines below it, and Leningrad 1948 at bottom. The titlepage (ill. 4, 2) has The State Hermitage at top; below it, the title: The Artistic Textiles of Byzantine Egypt, in bold type in two lines, and under the title: M.E. Matye and X.S. Liapunova (the latter, in a black frame). At
bottom is The State Hermitage Publishers. It follows that in 1948 the catalogue was being prepared for publication. It is likely that the original structure of the book was preserved, viz.
Contents Chapter I. A brief survey of the history of the study of Coptic textiles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Chapter II. Depictions on Coptic textiles, the 4th to 6th centuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Chapter III. Surviving Old Egyptian motifs . . . . . . . . . . 34 Chapter IV. Textiles with Classical Antiquity motifs . . . 56
The bulk of the book was the description of the textiles, on the basis of their function and the depictions on them. According to the former, the textiles were subdivided into canopies and tunics. The subject-based classification included eight groups, viz. textiles with portraits, textiles with the Nile deities, textiles with the Nile nature and
Ill. 1. Militsa Matye. Photo. 1950s
Ill. 2. Xenia Liapunova. Photo. Late 1930s
In the Departments publications, the problem of the art Orbeli (there are two corrections in violet ink: an o has of Byzantine Egypt is seen in a completely new light. As been inserted between the p and u in Liapounova; an has been established, the art formerly regarded as a bar- (Cyrillic = [r]) has been removed between the [t] and barian distortion of Classical Antiquity is, in reality, a [a] in Hermitage). The title-page (ill. 3, 2) has a text in Russian. At top: very interesting syncretism of Egyptian, Antique and Oriental art forms. We can see the summation of these The State Hermitage. Below it, two lines in large capitals: works both at the exhibition and in the book by Militsa Artistic Textiles of Byzantine Egypt. Under it, in ordinary Matye and Xenia Liapunova, now being printed, which print: M.E. Matye and X.S. Liapunova. At bottom: The is concerned with the publication of the Hermitage col- USSR Academy of Sciences Press. It should be noted that lection of Coptic textiles, one of the worlds best the French title (The Coptic Textiles of the Hermitage Museum) differs from the title in Russian. (Yakubovsky 1940: 20). All seemed to be going well with the publication of The Archive of the Hermitage Oriental Department has two galley-proof pieces of the work once being the catalogue. According to the head curator of the Oriprinted. The half-title (ill. 3, 1) has a printed line at top, ental Department, Xenia Rakitina, at the Department which reads: Muse de Ermitage. dition de Acadmie meeting devoted to research programmes at the end of des sciences de URSS. Below: Les tissus coptes du Muse 1940, the authors announced their intention to prepare de Ermitage. Below it: Les tissus coptes du Muse de materials for the second volume that was to include about Ermitage, and, under the latter: M. Matthieu et X. Li- a thousand catalogue entries, which was twice as many apounova and Moscou, Leningrad. 1941 below it. Two as in volume one, then in the press. But the War broke printed lines at bottom read: Printed at the submission next summer. Xenia Liapunova who stayed in Leningrad of the State Hermitage. Director, Academician Joseph during the siege did not survive the winter of 1942.
122
Ill. 3. Pages of the catalogue to be published in 1941: 1 Half-title, 2 Title-page
123
The title changed several times: The Coptic Textiles of the Hermitage Museum and The Artistic Textiles of Byzantine Egypt in the 1941 version (the second title was used in the version of 1948), and The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt in the published edition of 1951. The text section of the book entitled The Coptic Textiles as Cultural Monuments also underwent some obvious changes. Although the number of chapters (four) remained as it was originally, considerable changes have taken place in the focus of the discussion of the problems within the chapters, cf. Chapter I. Coptic Egypt and the study of its cultural monuments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Chapter II. Coptic textile technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Chapter III. Old Egyptian traditions in Coptic art . . 34 Chapter IV. Subjects of fifth-century Coptic textiles . 51 Notes on chapters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Ill. 4. Pages of the catalogue to be published in 1948: 1 Half-title, 2 Title-page Ill. 6. Title-page of the catalogue published in 1951
genre scenes on the banks of the Nile, one genre-scene textile, textiles with cupids, textiles with mythological subjects, textiles with horsemen, textiles with human beings and animals, and textiles with birds and fishes. Then followed the lists of text illustrations and plates in and after the text, Subject index (ill. 5), Index of museums and Index of written sources and finally Abbreviations. The imprint at the end of the book had the editor (Joseph Orbeli) and the tentative number of printers sheets, thirty-three (about 792 standard pages). For some reason, this project was not to be materialized either. At last, the manuscript (the text part reduced to twenty-nine editors sheets = 692 standard pages) was given to the Leningrad Branch of the Iskusstvo (Art) Publishers; instead of Orbeli, it was to be edited by Academician Vasily Struve.
In the summer of 1951, the book came out in two thousand copies. Embossed on the calico binding is
M. Matye and X. Liapunova Textiles of Coptic Egypt Iskusstvo (Art) [Publishers].

The frontispiece has a multicolour medallion with Gaea (Gaia), goddess of the earth. The title-page (ill. 6) reads:
M. Matye and X. Liapunova The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt Iskusstvo (Art) State Publishers Moscow 1951 Leningrad.
Ill. 5. Subject index of the catalogue to be published in 1948
The descriptions of the textiles and their classification are the same, viz. canopies and tunics; and portraits, textiles with depictions of the Nile deities, Nile nature and genre scenes on the Nile banks, etc. The total number of descriptions in the book is 409; the book includes 48 plates (IXLVIII) with 234 samples in black-and-white and 22 figures and the Abbreviations section (the last one) with 37 abbreviations (p. 231). To sum up. Compared to the Academy of Sciences version, the catalogue published by the Iskusstvo has undergone considerable changes: the contents of the individual chapters have been modified and the indices removed. All this has had a negative effect on the catalogue as a research instrument. Besides, the bibliography has remained at the level of the 1920s. Nonetheless, the catalogue was a significant contribution
125
124
to the study of Coptic textiles, because before it, only the text of Bocks 1890 report had been available, with a little more than fifty textiles published (Bock 1897: 218245, pls. XVIXXII), plus several articles by the authors of the catalogue, published before WWII. It should be pointed out in this connection that the majority of scholars outside Russia were misled by the title of the book and the absence of the dating of the materials represented in it, which made them believe that the catalogue by Militsa Matye and Xenia Liapunova represents the entire Coptic textile collection of the Hermitage.
REFERENCES AND ABBREVIATIONS Bank 1953 Bank, Alisa. Recenzija [Review (of Matye and Liapunova 1951)]. Vizantijskij vremennik VI. Moscow, Leningrad, 1953: 288294. Bock 1897 Bock, Vladimir. O koptskom iskusstve: Koptskije uzoratyje tkani [On Coptic Art: Coptic Inwrought Textiles]. In: Trudy VIII Arxeologieskogo sjezda v Moskve v 1890 g. Vol. III. Moscow, 1897. Ernstedt 1959a Ernstedt, Peter. Koptskije teksty Gosudarstvennogo muzeja izobrazitelnyx iskusstv im. A.S. Pukina [The Coptic Texts of the A.S. Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1959. Ernstedt 1959b Ernstedt, Peter. Koptskije teksty Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa [The Coptic Texts of the State Hermitage]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1959. Kakovkin 2000 Kakovkin, Alexander. Pervaja koptskaja vystavka v Ermitae [The First Coptic Exhibition in the Hermitage.] Coptica Hermitagiana. St. Petersburg, 2000.
Kakovkin 2001 Kakovkin, Alexander. Trudy M.E. Matye po koptologii [M.E. Matyes Coptic Studies]. In: Istorija i kultura drevnego i rannexristianskogo Jegipta. Materialy naunoj konferencii, posvjaennoj 100-letiju so dnja rodenija M.E. Matje i M.A. Korostovceva, g. Moskva, 1315 dekabrja 2000 g. Moscow, 2001. Kakovkin 2004 Kakovkin, Alexander. Sokrovia koptskoj kollekcii Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa [Treasures of the Coptic Collection of the State Hermitage]. Catalogue. St. Petersburg, 2004. Kakovkin 2005 Kakovkin, Alexander. Izuenije koptskogo iskusstva uenymi Rossii. Istoriko-bibliografieskij obzor [Russian Scholars Studies of Coptic Art. Historical and Bibliographic Survey]. St. Petersburg, 2005. Matye and Liapunova 1939 Matye, Militsa and Xenia Liapunova. Gosudarstvennyj Ermita. Greko-rimskij i vizantijskij Jegipet. Putevoditel po vystavke [The State Hermitage. Graeco-Roman and Coptic Egypt. Exhibition guide]. Leningrad, 1939. Matye and Liapunova 1951 Matye, Militsa and Xenia Liapunova. Xudoestvennyje tkani koptskogo Jegipta [The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1951. Matsulevich 1929 Matsulevich, Leonid. Vizantija v epoxu velikogo pereselenija narodov. Kratkij putevoditel [Byzantium during the Great Migration. A short catalogue of the exhibition]. Leningrad, 1929. Yakubovsky 1940 Yakubovsky, Alexander. K dvadcatiletiju Otdela Vostoka [Twenty Years of the Oriental Department]. Trudy Otdela Vostoka Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa. Vol. III. 1940. Yelanskaya 1972 Yelanskaya, Alla. Koptologija [Coptic Studies]. In: Aziatskij muzej Leningradskoje otdelenije Instituta vostokovedenija AN SSSR. Moscow, 1972.
ACQUISITIONS
IRINA BAGDASAROVA A PORCELAIN CUP AND SAUCER with the St. Basil Church design In 2006, the Russian Porcelain and Ceramics Section of the Department of Russian Culture, through the State Hermitage Purchasing Commission, acquired a porcelain cup and saucer. The body of the cup carries a design representing the Cathedral of the Intercession of the Virgin (Church of St. Basil the Blessed) in the Red Square in Moscow (inv. nos. -9534, -9534; Russia, Moscow Province, Dmitrov District, the village of Gorbunovo, Alexey Popovs private porcelain works; 1840s; porcelain; underglaze cobalt, polychrome overglaze painting, white enamel, gilding, diverging pattern; cup (): 8.4 12.8 10.0 cm; saucer (b): 3.2 16.7 cm; ill.1, 1). The tea pair was produced by the private porcelain works owned by the Moscow merchant Alexey Gavrilovich Popov. The business was started in 1811 after Popov had bought the then unprofitable porcelain factory from Collegiate Assessor Karl Milly. Popovs enterprise quickly took off and operated until 1875 (in the 1850s, after the death of its owner, the factory passed down to his relatives; in the 1860s, it was sold and re-sold several times). In terms of their technological properties, the cup and saucer are typical of the Popov Works produce: the porcelain paste has practically no manufacturing defects; the paint layer is smooth and well adherent; the evenness of the gilding indicates its top-quality composition. The pear-like shape of the cup, popular as early as the mid-18th century, is consistent with the Second Rococo style. The loop-shaped handle formed by two intertwined stems splitting on top, at the point of attachment to the body of the cup, is decorated with a leaf relief (ill. 1, 2). The fairly deep round saucer rests on a low ring. Tea pairs of this shape were manufactured by the Popov Works in the 1830s 1840s. The Popov porcelain, with its inimitably Russian character, has a special place in the history of Russian porcelain-making. The manufacturer tailored the products to the tastes of his Russian customers and created artworks expressing Russian national identity more dramatically than any other Russian 19th-century factory (Saltykov 1962: 423). The location of the Popov factory (in the village of Gorbunovo, Dmitrov District, Moscow Province) and its focus primarily on the local market determined the choice of subjects for porcelain miniatures. Landscapes first appeared on Russian porcelain products (namely, those of the Imperial Porcelain Factory) in the last third of the 18th century not surprising, as images of old Italian architecture were consistent with the Classicist aesthetics. As Russian graphic art continued to develop and private businesses multiplied in the 19th century, views of Russian cities became increasingly popular. Interestingly enough, St. Petersburg manufacturers (e.g. Batenin Works) preferred views of the then Russian capital, while Muscovites tended towards designs representing the stately homes of Moscow. These works played a special role among the Popov Works souvenir produce catering to a wide range of customers. The popularity of Moscow architectural landmarks in the 1830s 1840s was also due to the revived interest in the national art legacy and the spread of the so-called Russian style during the Russian Historicism period, which widely used images borrowed from ancient Russian architecture and applied art. Most of St. Basils Cathedral, which consisted of eight pillar-shaped churches symmetrically placed around the ninth one, crowned with a tent-shaped roof, was built in 155561 by the
127
Ill. 1. Porcelain cup and saucer with The Church of St. Basil the Blessed design: 1 general view; 2 handle; 3 brand mark on the bottom of the cup and the saucer. The State Hermitage. First publication Il. 2. The Church of St. Basil the Blessed Colour print by Louis Pierre Alfonse Bichebois based on the painting by Victor Adam
Russian masters Barma and Postnik. The source of the design on the porcelain set was a colour print by LouisPierre-Alfonse Bichebois (18011850) based on the original painting The Church of St. Basil the Blessed by Victor Adam (18011865/66) (ill. 2). This image was part of the lithographic Views of Moscow series published in the 1840s by a company founded by Giuseppe (Joseph) Daziaro (18061865), which enjoyed particular success. In Moscow, the most popular editions were available for sale from the companys shop on Kuznetsky Bridge (Kaganov and Miroliubova 1996: 7). This was the source from which the Popov Works may have obtained prints for reproducing the most in-demand pictures on porcelain. The Popov Works manufactured a whole series of cups with the Daziaro views of Moscow. Take, for instance, the cup and saucer with the pattern representing Ivan the
Greats Bell Tower (State Museum of Ceramics in the 18th-entury Kuskovo Estate, inv. no. . 6834), which was part of the State Hermitage collection until 1924 (Popov 1980: cat. no. 114) (ill. 3, top and right). The comparison with the Daziaro prints allows to identify the source image: the view of the bell tower from the north side was based on the lithograph of the same name by Philip Benois (18131879). Judging by the typical (albeit scanty) samples, this was not the only batch of this series of souvenir tea pairs. For example, the same State Museum of Ceramics in the 18th-Century Kuskovo Estate has a cup and saucer of the identical shape and design among its exhibits (inv. no. . 3875); the pair formed part of A.V. Morozovs collection until 1919 (Popov 1980: cat. nos. 114, 115) (ill. 3, bottom and left). A similar cup (without a saucer) is on display at the Peterhof State Museum-Preserve
128
129
shades. Which is why it was no coincidence that upon in the State Hermitage collection, an effort which rethe closure of Moscow Porcelain Works the paint recipes quires special in-depth research. were first bought by the Brothers Kornilov Works in St. Petersburg and then, in the first years of the SoREFERENCES viet rule (before 1922), transferred to the State Porcelain Factory in Petrograd (former Imperial Porcelain Factory) Lazarevsky 1999 Lazarevsky I. Farfor [Porcelain]. Sredi kollekcionerov. (Reprint (Saltykov 1962: 423). of the 1914 edition.) oscow, 1999: 63114. The cup and saucer carry an authentic brand proving Kaganov and Miroliubova 1996 that they were indeed produced by Alexey Popovs Por- Kaganov G.Z. and G.A.Miroliubova. Moskva i okrestnosti v litocelain Works: it is a monogram composed of Alexey Pop- grafijax firmy Duzeppe Daziaro. Iz sobraniya Gosudarstvennogo ovs initials, A A[lexey] P[opov]. The blue underglaze Muzeja izobrazitelnyx iskusstv im. A. S.Pushkina [Moscow and Its monogram is located at the bottom of the cup and the Suburbs in the Lithographs of Giuseppe Daziaros Firm. In the Collection of the State Museum of Fine Arts Named after Pushsaucer (ill. 1, 3). Apart from the brand, the bottoms bear kin]. oscow, 1996. numbers 6 and 8 imprinted in the porcelain mass; in Muzej kollekcionerov 2001 addition, the cup also has an overglaze blue mark, 7. Such Muzej kollekcionerov. Gosudarstvennyj muzej-zapovednik Pemarkings may have indicated product numbers or might terhof. Sobranije A. A. and R. M. Timofeevyx. hivopis. Grafika. Farfor. Knigi [Museum of Collectors. The State Museum-Preserve have been put by moulders or artists at the works. Peterhof. Collection of A. A. and R. M. Timofeevs. Paintings. Alexey Popov in the 1830s 1840s knows no rivals Graphic Works. Porcelain. Books]. Sokrovia Rossii 45. St. Peamong Russian porcelain manufacturers (Lazarevsky tersburg, 2001. 1999: 73). Porcelain manufactured by his factory near Popov 1980 Moscow became valuable collector items as early as the Popov V. . Russkij farfor. Chastnyje zavody [Russian Porcelain. 19th century. In the future, the St. Basils Church cup and Private Factories]. Leningrad, 1980. saucer, a fine example of the Popov Works produce, may Saltykov 1962 adorn the cover of the catalogue of Popov porcelain Saltykov A. B. Izbrannyje trudy [Select Works]. oscow, 1962.
Il. 3. Top and right: a covered porcelain cup and saucer decorated with Ivan the Greats Bell Tower design; bottom and left: a porcelain cup and saucer with The Church of St. Basil the Blessed design. The State Museum of Ceramics in the Kuskovo 18th-Century Estate
IRINA KUZNETSOVA (inv. no. 6749-). It came to the museum from A.A. and R. M. Timofeevs collection in 1987 (Muzej kollekionerov 2001: cat. no. 153). The landscapes on the museum exhibits differ by original staffage compositions in the foreground. This seemingly unimportant detail shows that the artists took a very creative approach to copying graphic models. The artistic merits of the exquisite miniature on the Hermitage cup body (the side opposite the handle) are worthy of special note. What makes the miniature special is not only its highly decorative look, but the artists skill of transforming the large-scale source image into a jewel-sized pattern. The porcelain painter was able to preserve the basic composition and colour scheme of the original, making just a few justified amendments to the initial image as required by the new medium. The sky is rendered with tremendous dexterity. Forming a vibrant background for the landmark building, the sky is at the same time an art object in itself owing to the low horizon and naturalistic blue-white colour transitions. The pattern on the saucer is dominated by two bouquets placed in white oval medallions on the wide field of the side surface. The imaginative treatment of the popular mid-19th century motifs and the lightness of composition were achieved by using professional techniques honed to perfection. The artists have taken a special approach to polychrome overglaze paintings by finishing them with textured white enamel which creates an additional threedimensional effect. The surfaces free from painting are covered with underglaze deep cobalt emphasizing the significance of the paintings and the preciousness of the porcelain areas left white. This regal background forms a dramatic contrast with the gilded designs and the rocaille pattern of stylized flowers and flying ribbons. On the whole, the execution shows the preference of large decorative objects painted with a combination of pure colours, so typical of the Popov Works. The paints, specially developed by the in-house laboratory, were remarkable for a peculiar unity and vibrant richness of A LINEN NAPKIN BY THE ALEXANDROVSKAYA IMPERIAL MANUFACTURE, ST. PETERSBURG An important contribution to the State Hermitage collection of Russian tablecloths and napkins was a largesize white linen napkin (acquired in 2005) decorated with a monochrome meander pattern along the edge and a wide fringe of flower garlands and vases (inv. no. -21193; 87.5 78.1 cm; ill. 1). A delicate grotesque ornament is located in four strips in the central field. The corners (on the fringe level) carry a woven brand mark with the letters [IAM], standing for Imperial Alexandrovskaya Manufacture. The manufacture was founded in 1798 near the village of Alexandrovo in the suburbs of St. Petersburg by M. Ossovsky, who received a considerable governmental subsidy for the purpose. After his death, the manufacture was transferred under the control of the Foundling Home. Despite a relatively short period of operation (just over 50 years), the Alexandrovskaya Imperial Manufacture played a seminal role in the development of Russian pattern weaving. It quickly grew into a well-managed business equipped with state-of-the-art machinery. The manufacture, for instance, was among the first mills in Russia to have Jacquard machines installed which first appeared in Russia in the 1820s. It also ran a school teaching weaving craft. Thus, the factory was not only exemplary in terms of equipment, it was also geared for training highly qualified workers for Russian textile industry. The manufacture reached its prime in the 1830s 1840s, when it mainly specialized in linen fabrics for the Russian royal court. Unfortunately, only isolated examples of these have survived till today in museum
130
131
LUDMILA DOROFEEVA A 17th 18th-CENTURY SPANISH CABINET: A NEW ACQUISITION FOR MENSHIKOV PALACE, A DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE HERMITAGE Several museums in St. Petersburg and its environs aim to recreate the culture of Peter the Greats reign. One of them is Alexander Menshikovs palace in Vasilyevsky Island, a department of the State Hermitage. The researchers working at the palace exhibition are faced with the challenge of restoring the rich collections and interiors which made it famous in the age of Peter the Great. There are only a few extant decorative items surviving from the time when the palace was still occupied by its original owner. Their history can be traced through documents. The rest of the exhibits were transferred from the Hermitage funds. Besides, some objects were purposebought through the Purchasing Commission1. Each new piece of furniture brought into the museum during the twenty-seven years of its existence has required a document-based and substantiated verification. Our main resources for furniture research are the estate inventory of Menshikovs Oranienbaum palace made in 1728 (Russian State Historical Archives, fund 467, inv. 2, no. 68, year of 1728, pp. 169185) which was built at the same time as the Vasilyevsky Island palace (no inventory survives for the latter), the 1728 inventory for Menshikovs house in Kronstadt (ibid: 213218), the inventory of his Izhora estate (St. Petersburg Institute of History (in the Russian Academy of Sciences) Archive, fund 84, inv. 1, no. 95, pp. 17) made in June 1727 and the Peterhof inventory of 1727. Our understanding of the period furniture is much enhanced by the ledgers kept by the clerks of Prince Menshikovs chancelery. They provide information on several specific items either shipped over from Europe or made in St. Petersburg. Studying these books has allowed us to define the types of state apartments existing around 1727: the hall, the anteroom, the state bedroom and the kitchen, which were all furnished appropriately.
These few objects include an oak cabinet which was repeatedly mentioned in the 1880s (cf. Dorofeeva 1992: 63). When exhibits from Menshikov Palace were transferred to the Russian Museum in 1928, it was recorded by the well-known art historian and architect Nikolay Lanceray as a cabinet made in 1710, possibly commissioned by Menshikov himself (Kalyazina, Dorofeeva, Mikhailov 1986: 134135). Another memorial object is the chest acquired by Alexander Krutetsky in the 1920s.
1
Ill. 1. Linen napkin. 1830s. The Alexandrovskaya Imperial Manufacture, St. Petersburg. The State Hermitage
Ill. 2. Napkin design. Ink
collections. Thus, none among the five ornate tablecloths in the Hermitage could give a full idea of the technical and artistic sophistication of the woven pattern textiles produced at that time. The Hermitage Department of Russian Culture has a book of 134 designs for tablecloths and panels from the Alexandrovskaya Manufacture. The perfectly executed designs display a large variety of composition techniques and are extremely imaginative in the use of ornamental motifs. The drawings are made in ink in a hand betraying highly gifted artists. The napkin under discussion is based on Design 19 published on the first pages of the book (ill. 2). The pattern covering the whole of the field is harmonious in
composition. The grotesque ornament strips are surrounded by flower garlands, creating a natural link with the wide floral fringe. Garden and field flowers, represented in minute detail, are gathered in bouquets and form a composition reminiscent of the famous Kolokoltsevo shawls, with their elaborate treatment of floral patterns. However, the monochrome colour scheme, where the rich ornament is created exclusively by different types of weave, renders a certain austerity to the pattern an impression further enhanced by the meander design. The comparison with the original drawing shows what mastery of execution was required to produce this napkin, a fine example of Russian pattern fabrics dating back to the Historicism period.
The Danzig or Hamburg cabinets, which were popular all over Europe in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, were also imported to Russia. Unfortunately, not a single interior preserving its architectural decoration and furniture has survived from the time of Peter the Great. But the reconstruction is made easier by the fact that the furniture types mentioned in the inventories and ledgers were often design copies. The documents mention a certain type of case furniture very characteristic of this time, viz. cabinets, also known as cases. By the early 18th century this type of furniture had already undergone a complicated evolution, but it was always in demand. St. Petersburg rooms were most often furnished with cabinets of a certain type comprised of a commode with a flap lid and a double-door case. Such objects have survived in St. Petersburg in the House of Peter the Greats Museum, as well as Peter the Greats oak study in Peterhof. Two such cabinets are also extant in the House of Peter the Great Museum in Tallinn, Estonia. Other types of cabinets were also known in the interiors of the time. Thus, according to the inventory, Menshikovs house in Kronstadt possessed a walnut cabinet made overseas stationed in the fourth room (Russian State Historical Archives, fund 467, inv. 2, no. 68, year of 1728, p. 217). The palace in Oranienbaum had small cabinets with mirrors which were placed on the bedroom tables. One of them was decorated with the star of the Order of St. Andrew First-Called. Menshikov had an Italian bone-encrusted cabinet sent from Lbeck. Another interesting cabinet belonged to Baron Peter Shafirov, a diplomat and Peter the Greats Vice-Chancellor, an extremely well-educated man for his time. The inventory of his house made in 1735 states that in the walnut chamber there is a cabinet upholstered with tapestries, golden and silver cloth. In the (probably, back L.D.) wall of this cabinet there is a small walnut chest with nine detachable drawers containing tobacco, a small white leather pouch, and... a small number of medicinal herbs (Russian State Historical Archives, fund. 467, inv. 4, no. 755, year of 1728, p. 4). Menshikov Palace possesses, among other things, 18th-century Italian carved cabinets made in Northern
132
133
Liguria a small desk cabinet for medals, and a more traditional multifunctional black lacquered cabinet. The palace has two more black lacquered and painted desk cabinets. All of them were transferred from the State Hermitage storerooms. From the very beginning, the museum has tried to conform to the symmetrical principle of furniture arrangement which was customary in the early 18th century. Thus, the walnut drawing room has an 18th-century tortoiseshell cabinet decorated with bronze, on a stand, placed between the windows and flanked by two armchairs and two standard lamps. The tortoiseshell cabinet serves as the centre of the Eastern wing of the palace. Menshikov Palace has had its share of good fortune. Once a visitor to the museum saw this small cabinet on the stand with tortoiseshell columns placed in the walnut drawing room, which was very similar to a cabinet she had
at home2. In 2001, the State Hermitage bought the cabinet from her (inv. no. 7835; 149 130 45 cm; ill. 1). Such cabinets first appeared in Spain in the 17th century. According to Aguil Alonso, some have survived in Spanish collections (Aguil Alonso 1993). Alonsos book cites an identical cabinet of 1630, which is currently in Spain. Its central plaquette shows Athena (Minerva). A similar 17th-century cabinet with a plaquette showing Athena was sold at Christies in September 1999. Another one is in Palais National de Sintra, Portugal. Aguil Alonso believes that they were mass-produced in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our cabinet has six pull-out drawers with bronze inlays. Its central part is shaped as a portal with four tortoiseshell-encrusted twisted columns with four more drawers behind them. The drawers are decorated with tortoiseshell and walnut encrustation. The portal door consists of two planks: the lower one is constructive and the upper veneer is decorative. The portal door is decorated with a bronze relief showing Hercules killing the centaur Nessus (ill. 2). The upper part of the cabinet is a balustrade with a bronze relief showing grotesque motifs. The cabinet is placed on a stand, with six bronze lion paws supported by wooden balls, which enhances its air of richness and monumentality. Thus, the Spanish cabinet bought by the Hermitage is a subtype of expensive 17th- and 18th-century furniture. It is decorated with various materials: tortoiseshell, bronze and wood (walnut, pine, beech, plane and rosewood). Besides, it is a product of fine workmanship: veneer, encrustation and casting. The encrustation on the six drawers and the facade frame is done in fruit tree wood mounted on rosewood. Apart from wood encrustation and tortoiseshell, such cabinets could be decorated with bronze, with a plaquette in the middle. From the 16th century onwards, such plaquettes were custom-made for the decoration of various objects: weapons, bells, inkstands, door handles, church and household utensils, watches and clocks, ornamental tableware and many other things. However, they were most often used in furniture. The plaquette matrices were made by sculptors, gold- and silversmiths, engravers and medal-makers. First produced in Renaissance Italy, these tiny casts presented free variations of Classical Antiquity and Renaissance round sculpture, high reliefs in various materials, as well as various decorative objects. All of this
According to the visitor (V.P. Dashkevich), the cabinet came from the family of the War Minister Birilev and has been kept in St. Petersburg since the second half of the 19th century. The Dashkevich family received it as a gift in the 1930s.
2
Ill. 1. Cabinet. Spain. 17th 18th century The State Hermitage
Ill. 2. Central part of the cabinet with the plaquette Hercules Killing the Centaur Nessus
134
135
contributed to the evolution of a characteristic imagery. The range of subjects depicted on the plaquettes became wider and wider and included motifs borrowed from paintings, sculptures and printed works (for details see Mezentseva 1996: 85, 86, 128). The Hercules myth was a common inspiration for such plaquettes. Thus, the plaquette of the Spanish cabinet acquired by the Hermitage is different from the cabinet published by Aguil Alonso, in that it shows one of the Labours of Hercules: a naked and bearded Hercules, wrapped in a lion skin, lifts his club over the bent figure of the centaur Nessus. This model was first identified by the plaquette researcher E. Braun as Hercules Killing the Centaur Nessus. The plaquette is surrounded by a grotesque cutthrough ornament harmonious with the central Hercules picture, making up a single composition of female halffigures blending with plant ornaments and bird figures. The Hercules Killing the Centaur Nessus model was used in 1574 in the decoration of the Hans Grubber clock, currently in the Hofburg Museum, Vienna; similar plaquettes are also present in the decoration of a Spanish cabinet currently in Warsaw (Wilanw Palace). E. Braun believed that such plaquettes originated in South Germany, possibly in Nuremberg, in the mid-1500s, and were copied repeatedly thereafter3. There exist multiple accounts of auctions selling out such plaquettes. When the cabinet was purchased by the State Hermitage, it was in a poor condition and in need of restoration. From the passport kept in the State Hermitage Specialized Research and Restoration Workshop we learn that the surface of the cabinet was soiled and had layers of darkened lacquer. The veneer was loose in many places, sections of the encrustation and tortoiseshell had been lost, and the veneer on the drawers was chipped near the keyholes. The case and drawer structure was unbalanced. The bronze was very worn and painted with bronze paint. The balustrade lacked two panels with bronze inlays and five pyramid-shaped knobs. Two bronze rosettes, the handles on the inner drawers and six paw-shaped legs had also been lost. The cabinet showed signs of previous restorations. Some details had been replaced with later ones. The cabinet and stand were in need of an urgent complex reconstruction involving a full disassembling and strengthening of its structure, which was faultlessly executed by the Hermitage restorer Alexey Snagin. The
The information on plaquettes and the Hercules Killing the Centaur Nessus theme can be found in Braun 1918; Wber 1975. I am very grateful to Charmian Mezentseva for bringing these books to my attention.
3
Ill. 3. Inscriptions on the reverse side of the lower plank of the portal door
work included restoring the veneer and encrustation, replacing the lost pieces of tortoiseshell veneer, removing the later layers, reconstructing the decoration, restoring the locks and making the keys. Some bronze decorations were made on the basis of surviving analogues: four knobs for the balustrade, two grilles, six lozenge-shaped rosettes, and two rosettes on the stand. Six legs shaped as lion paws on balls were also made anew. Several discoveries were made in the course of the restoration, including a re-identification of the image on the central bronze plaquette. When the cabinet had been first acquired by the Hermitage, the subject had been erroneously identified as Cain Slaying Abel. This erroneous identification was caused by the soiling and the damage incurred during a fire suffered by the cabinet. Besides, a part of the plaquette was removed during an earlier restoration. The meticulous work by the restorer Alexey Snagin allowed us to confirm our hypothesis concerning the dating of the cabinet to the 17th 18th centuries. The reverse side of the lower plank of the portal door was discovered to contain inscriptions (ill. 3). These had been damaged by three centuries of use, but some words and letters were still legible, which made it possible for Dr. Ludmila Kiseleva, paleographer of the Manuscript Department of the Russian National Library, to date them to the 17th century4.
4 I am very grateful to Dr. Ludmila Kiseleva for taking the trouble to look at the inscriptions on the reverse of the lower plank of the central portal door.
As for the meaning of the inscriptions, it was hard to determine because of their poor condition. The first line is illegible by sight; the magnified image reads Jocr... finished in a flourish. This must be a name. The second line probably reads: Jo[hann ?] de Puros in a 17th-century hand. The third line (inscription upside down) reads: Jw[annes] de Uxona in an 18th-century hand. The fourth line reads: Franco (?) (Seniora) Bensigo (?) / Mando jo Fernando de Bensigo (?) decliner in a 17thcentury hand. The fifth line (inscription upside down) reads: Jo. Uxona in the same hand as the third line. Individual words or phrase snatches allow us to believe that they were either inscribed by the cabinet commissioner, thus confirming the commission, or made during the sale of a ready-made object. The purchase of the Spanish cabinet by the State Hermitage for Menshikov Palace was not a chance one. Large and small cabinets were kept in many palaces of the first third of the 18th century. By that time, Menshikov Palace already possessed two Spanish 18th-century cabinets: a vargueo cabinet and a tortoiseshelldecorated cabinet on a stand. The newly-acquired Spanish cabinet is a multifunctional piece of furniture. The numerous drawers could be used for keeping important papers, letters, gold and jewelry. The cabinet took its place in the Antechamber, a central room in the Prince Menshikovs quarters, a pendant to an analogous cabinet in the walnut drawing room. This allowed us to preserve the symmetrical principle of furniture arrange-
ment which was originally maintained in Menshikov Palace (Zharkova 1992: 34).
REFERENCES Aguil Alonso 1993 Aguil Alonso M. P. El Mueble en Espaa siglos XVIXVII. Madrid, 1993. Braun 1918. Braun E. W. Die Deutsche Renaissanceplaketten der Sammlung Alfred Ritten von Molthein in Wien. Wien, 1918. Dorofeeva 1992 Dorofeeva, Ludmila. Russkaja nabornaja mebel v expozicii dvorca Menikova [Russian Case Furniture in Menshikov Palace Museum]. In: Russkaja kultura pervoj etverti XVIII veka. St. Petersburg: The State Hermitage, 1992: 6278. Kalyazina, Dorofeeva, Mikhailov 1986 Kalyazina N.V., L.P. Dorofeeva and G.V. Mikhailov. Dvorec Menikova: Xudoestvennaja kultura epoxi. Istorija i ljudi. Arxitekturnaja xronika pamjatnika [Menshikov Palace. The Decorative Art of the Period. History and People. The Architectural Chronicle of the Monument]. Moscow, 1986. Mezentseva 1996 Mezentseva Ch.A. O vlijanii grafiki na iskusstvo plaketki [On the Influence of Graphic Arts on the Plaquette Art]. In: Zapadnojevropejskaja grafika XVIXX vekov. Part 2. St. Petersburg, 1996. Weber 1975 Weber I. Deutsche, Niederlndische und Franzsische Renaissanceplaketten. 15001650. Mnchen, 1975. Zharkova 1992 Zharkova N.Yu. Nekotoryje principy organizacii i dekora dvorcovyx interjerov v Peterburge pervoj treti XVIII v. [Some Principles of Palace Interior Organization and Decor in St. Petersburg in the First Quarter of the 18th Century]. In: Russkaja kultura pervoj etverti XVIII veka. St. Petersburg: The State Hermitage, 1992.
136
NEW EXHIBITIONS
NATALIA KOSLOVA THE URARTU EXHIBITION AT THE HERMITAGE On 7 December 2006, the Room of History and Culture of the Ancient Kingdom of Urartu reopened after restoration. This kingdom existed in the 9th 7th centuries B.C. in the area adjoining the lakes of Van, Urmia and Sevan. The room is part of the permanent Caucasus exhibition and is dedicated to the memory of Boris Piotrovsky, whose excavations of Urartian fortresses in Armenia and subsequent publications of the finds laid the foundation for the systematic research into the history of the Kingdom of Urartu. The majority of the artefacts in the new exhibition are the result of excavations undertaken between 1939 and 1971 on the Karmir-Blur hill on the western outskirts of Yerevan. The diggings were jointly organized by the Armenian Academy of Sciences and the Hermitage, and headed by Boris Piotrovsky. The choice of Karmir-Blur (The Red Hill) as an excavation site was the product of painstaking search, long deliberations and fine scholarly intuition exhibited by Piotrovsky. This choice has proved exceedingly fruitful: the ancient city of Teishebaini, the ruins of which were discovered under the Red Hill, is currently one of the most interesting and well-studied monuments of Urartian civilization. The expedition explored the citadel itself and a few residential houses of a settlement at the foot of KarmirBlur1. Teishebaini, the city of the god Teisheba, was
1 For the results of the excavations and studies of the monuments of Urartian art and culture in their archaeological and historical context see Boris Piotrovskys archaeological reports : Karmir-Blur I: Rezultaty rabot arxeologieskoj ekspedicii Instituta istorii Akademii nauk Armjanskoj SSR i Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa 19391949 godov [Karmir-Blur I: Results of the Archaeological Expedition Organized by the Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR and the State Hermitage in 19391949]. Yerevan, 1950; Karmir-Blur II: Rezultaty rabot ... 19491950 godov [Karmir-Blur II: Results 19491950]. Yerevan, 1952; Karmir-Blur III: Rezultaty rabot ... 19511953 godov [Karmir-Blur III: Results 1951 1953]. Yerevan, 1955; as well as his monographs: Istorija i kultura Urartu [History and Culture of Urartu]. Yerevan, 1944; Vanskoje arstvo (Urartu)[The Kingdom of Van (Urartu)]. Yerevan, 1959; Iskusstvo Urartu VIIIVI vv. do n.e. [The Art of Urartu in the 8th 6th Centuries B.C.]. Leningrad, 1962; Il regno di Van Urartu. Roma, 1966; Urartu: The Kingdom of Van and its Art. London, 1967; Ourartou. Mnchen, Genf, Paris, 1969; Karmir-Blur. Leningrad, 1970.
founded by one of the last Urartian kings Rusa II in the 7th century B.C. It was a major administrative Urartian centre in the Transcaucasia. The excavated storerooms of the citadel were found to contain wine and grain vessels and other household goods, but also a vast number of metal (mostly bronze) weapons and armour (shields, helmets, plated armour, quivers, arrow- and spearheads), elements of horse harness, as well as bowls and other utensils, which, as was shown by the inscriptions on them, were older than the fortress itself. The majority of these objects belonged to 8th-century kings, Menua, Argishti I, Sarduri II and Rusa I. Many inscriptions state that these objects were dedicated by the kings to Haldi, the chief god of the Urartian pantheon. Some of them directly indicate that the objects in question were intended for the fortress of Erebuni, close to the city of Teisheba. It is quite possible that once the latter was built, temple offerings from neighbouring cities were transferred there. The present exhibition was planned with the original one very much in mind just as it had been conceived in the 1960s by Boris Piotrovsky. It is mainly centered around the Karmir-Blur finds. Just as before, the exhibi-
tion starts with the famous bronze door loop, part of the door fastening with the inscription reading, From the storehouse of Rusa, son of Argishti, in the city of god Teisheba. This loop inscription was the first indication of the original ancient name of Karmir-Blur, making real the city of Teishebaini mentioned in the texts dated to the reign of Rusa II. Apart from the loop parts, the first Karmir-Blur showcase contains inscribed objects illustrating the Urartian script and the organization of chancery. The first and second showcases also include various ceramic artefacts (vessels of different shapes and types), stone grain bruisers, a wooden spoon, iron knives and sickles. The second Karmir-Blur showcase is mostly dedicated to the wine-cellars of Teishebaini. Overall, eight of them were found: dark damp elongated rooms where huge wine vessels (karas) were partly dug into the earth floor, each between 800 and 1,000 litres. When the fortress was destroyed (most probably, as a result of a surprise), many storerooms were empty, and so were the wine-vessels. One of them, however, contained 97 flat bronze bowls with cuneiform inscriptions, covered with some planks of wood. It is quite possible that someone
Ill.1. Memorial plaque: This room is dedicated to Boris Borisovich Piotrovsky, Director of the Hermitage.
Ill.2. Urartu Room
138
139
Ill.3. Objects with inscriptions from Karmir-Blur
had hidden these valuable utensils in an empty wine ves- just occur on weapons. At least urihusi and urihi / sel during the storming of the citadel. The Karmir-Blur urihus have been found on bronze bowls. On the other part of the exhibition is concluded with a showcase of hand, the translation of urihi as property, possessions bronze armour decorated with images and inscriptions, suggested by some scholars (e.g. Salvini 1980: 181190), telling about the history and types of Urartian weapons is treated by Seidl as too broad. Having analyzed the inand armour, including horse harness. scribed objects containing the terms in question, she Urartian studies have progressed quickly over the past interprets them as follows3: urihi is an item of armour/ decades: Piotrovskys original systematization of the vast weaponry (Teil der militrischen Ausrstung), urihusi material has been and is being re-interpreted and re-ex- is equipment, property (Ausrstung, Gut), urihi plored by other scholars. The new data (historical conclu- / urihus is a storeroom (Schatzhaus, Zeughaus; sions and linguistic interpretations) have been taken into Magazin)4. The showcase labels give the following variaccount in the new cover materials compiled for the ex- ants of translation: item of equipment/armour, equiphibition. A good example is the translation of the Urar- ment and storeroom. Worthy of notice among the new exhibition solutions tian term urihi and its derivatives urihusi and urihi / urihus, which often occur in the royal inscriptions on in the Urartu Room is a special showcase section dealing bronze objects from Teishebaini. According to the Ger- with the Urartian writing system. Cuneiform writing, man scholar Ursula Seidl, translating the terms urihi / imported from Assyria, was the prevalent form throughurihusi as weapons / arms, and consequently, inter- out more than two centuries of Urartus history. The first preting urihi / urihus as house of armour, i.e. arse- cuneiform inscriptions found in Urartu date back to the nal or fortress2 is too narrow, since these terms do not 3
Translated thus by Boris Piotrovsky; see also, among others, Melikishvili 1960.
2
See the discussion in Seidl 2004: 4548. Translated in a similar way by N.V. Harutyunyan, see Harutyunyan 2001. Cf. relating to tools, store of tools/arms in Diakonoff 1963: 92.
4
reign of Sarduri I (mid-9th century B.C.) and are in Akkadian, but already after several decades the cuneiform was adapted to Urartian, the language of the majority of extant texts. Having adopted the Assyrian cuneiform, the Urartians modified the form of the signs: whereas the Assyrian symbols had a triangular head and a line-shaped shaft, the Urartian signs are more like elongated triangles. But the Assyrian mode of writing can be come across as well. The first script section exhibits side by side the bronze bowls from Karmir-Blur with different modes of writing: a bowl with the inscription dating back to the reign of Sarduri I, in the Assyrian mode, and bowls of 8th-century kings showing the Urartian symbols. The exhibits in this section also help to illustrate the different types of Urartian royal inscriptions a genre borrowed from Assyria together with the writing system. They vary from very concise (e.g. [A bowl] from the stores of Menua) to longer ones (e.g. To God Haldi, Lord, to the city of Erebuni, Argishti son of Menua dedicates this shield. Argishti is a mighty king, a great king, king of the land of Biainili, ruler of the city of Tushpa). Inscriptions could occur on different types of objects (exhibited in the section): lock loops, bowls, shields, arrowheads, and harness bells. The next section continues the theme of Urartian written sources. It exhibits a fragment from the only cuneiform legal document from Teishebaini in the Hermitage collection and one of about two dozen Urartian administrative and legal documents and letters extant in the whole world; a clay bull with a seal imprint, probably from a papyrus scroll, which is a possible indication that papyrus documents written in Aramaic could have been current in Urartu; a red glazed jug with a hieroglyphic sign designating its holding capacity, a seal on its handle showing a fortress tower with a tree. Such hieroglyphic signs alternate with cuneiform ones on bronze objects and are a testimony of the fact that cuneiform writing was not the only one known to the Urartians. They must have possessed a hieroglyphic writing system of their own before cuneiform was adopted, but that system could not have been widely spread and has been barely deciphered due to the paucity of inscriptions. The story of Urartian writing and chancery is concluded with stone and ceramic seals exhibited together with a fragment of a cuneiform tablet. Just as in neighbouring Mesopotamia, seals in Urartu were both amulets, protections from evil forces, and a means of identification (for instance, they served the function of a signature under a document). This is why it was logical to exhibit them in close proximity to the written sources.
Ill.4. Bronze bowl with the inscription of King Argishti from Karmir-Blur. 8th century B.C.
Apart from the Karmir-Blur artefacts, the new exhibition also houses objects from other complexes within the territory of the kingdom of Urartu: a rock tomb discovered in 1859 on the banks of the river Arax, on the Iranian-Russian border, near the border-crossing post of Alishar; from a burial discovered in 1904 near the settlement of Zakim, Kars Province; as well as from the Urartian fortress of Rusahinili on the hill of Toprak-Kale, in the north-east suburb of the town of Van. The objects from Toprak-Kale, mostly excavated by Josef Orbeli in 191112 and Nikolay Marr in 1916, are presented in a section of their own. The majority of these artefacts had been displayed before, but some objects have been moved from stocks, e.g. the fragments of a marble frieze (found by Orbeli), which could have decorated a temple pediment in Rusahinili. The showcase in the centre of the room gathers together for the first time all the details of one, or possibly several, thrones from Toprak-Kale in the possession of the Hermitage: four bronze figures of hybrid creatures: a winged lion with a human torso and a human face (a sphinx), winged bulls (lying and sitting), a lying bull with an anthropomorphic figure standing on its back. Such figurines of bulls and lions with bird-like wings and human faces, of lions with bull-like horns, of griffins etc. first appeared on the antiquarian markets of Turkey and Europe in the 1870s. They were the first Urartian
140
141
antiquities to be introduced to the Western world. All of these originally came from the ruins of a fortress at the hill of Toprak-Kale. These bronze statuettes, scattered by chance among different museums of the world, were identified already by the first students of these as details which used to decorate a throne of an Urartian sovereign. Royal thrones are known to us from relief images from the palaces of Assyrian kings. These images primarily served as bases for all the reconstructions suggested for the Urartian throne over time (Barnett 1950: 143, pls. IIVIII, XI, XVIIIXXII; Riemschneider 1966: 102, fig. 17; Seidl 1994: 6784, pl. 623). The new exhibition presents for the first time the reconstruction suggested in 1994 by Ursula Seidl. According to this reconstruction, the Toprak-Kale throne was decorated with over twenty figures of anthropomorphic and hybrid beings, placed in several tiers, primarily under the seat of the throne, at least on three sides: front, right and left. All the figurines were made of bronze according to the technology of a lost wax model5, gilded and decorated with inlays of multi-coloured jewels and smalts. For instance, the faces still extant on some of the figures were made from white stone, the eyes and eyebrows encrusted in dark stone; the facets of the wings and plumage were found to contain traces of coloured smalt. On the top and bottom of some of the statuettes on the heals, back of the head and headdresses there are small rectangular sockets or stubs, as well as hieroglyphic signs which could have served as prompts when parts of the throne were assembled together. The figurines in the lower tier were not hollow and are consequently much heavier than the hollow ones intended for the upper levels. This must have made the throne more stable. The figurines on the next level are anthropomorphic figures (possibly gods) standing on the backs of beasts. Their divine status is suggested by the horned headdress worn by one of the statuettes (the upper parts of other similar ones have not survived), which was a sign of the deity in Ancient Near Eastern art. The gods serve as Atlases supporting the seat of the throne. Such figures decorating pieces of furniture are well known
5 This technology of making the throne details was first discussed by Boris Piotrovsky (Piotrovsky 1939: 4560).
from Assyrian reliefs. The suggestion that the Urartian statuettes with their upraised hands could have served just such a function was first voiced by Ursula Seidl on the basis of new publications of hitherto unknown parts of the throne (Seidl 1994: 79ff.). The fact that the seat is supported by deities, and the large number of hybrid beings decorating the throne, suggest that it could have been intended for a god rather than a king. The Hermitage Urartu collection is not large, but it allows us to demonstrate the richness of Urartian art and various aspects of the history and culture of a most interesting ancient kingdom. The Urartu exhibition at the Hermitage is the best possible memorial to the founder of Urartian studies in Russia, Boris Borisovich Piotrovsky.
REFERENCES Barnett 1950 Barnett R. D. The Excavations of the British Museum at Toprak Kale near Van. Iraq 12. London, 1950. Diakonoff 1963 Diakonoff I.M. Urartskije pisma i dokumenty [Urartian Letters and Documents]. Moscow, Leningrad, 1963. Harutyunyan 2001 Harutyunyan N.V. Korpus urartskix klinoobraznyx nadpisej [The Corpus of Urartian Cuneiform Inscriptions]. Yerevan, 2001. Melikishvili 1960 Melikishvili G.A. Urartskije Klinoobraznyje Nadpisi [Urartian Cuneiform Inscriptions]. Moscow, 1960. Piotrovsky 1939 Piotrovsky, Boris. Urartskije bronzovyje statuetki sobranija Ermitaa [Urartian Bronze Statuettes in the Hermitage Collection]. Trudy Otdela Vostoka Gosudarstvennogo Ermitaa. Vol. 1. Leningrad, 1939. Riemschneider 1966 Riemschneider M. Das Reich am Ararat. Berlin, 1966. Salvini 1980 Salvini M. Iscrizione cuneiformi Urartee su oggetti di metalli. Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici 22. Roma, 1980. Seidl 1994 Seidl, Ursula. Der Thron von Toprakkale. Ein neuer Rekonstruktionsversuch. Archologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 27. Berlin, 1994. Seidl 2004 Seidl, Ursula. Bronzekunst Urartus. Mainz, 2004.
Ill.5. Details of the throne from Toprak-Kale. 7th century B.C.
142
IN MEMORIAM
TO MARK THE CENTENARY OF THE BIRTH OF BORIS PIOTROVSKY (19081990)
situation. That I will never forget... This noble attitude towards his students was highly characteristic of him. I will mention only G. A. Tiratsian and R. M. Bartikian, repatriated students from Yerevan in the early 1950s who subsequently became major scholars: it was thanks to Piotrovsky that they took their postgraduate studies in Leningrad and were for a long time part of the Hermitage environment; or the already mentioned A. A. Vaiman, whom, in spite of all the difficulties, Piotrovsky appointed first to Leningrad State University, then to the Hermitage, where he left him his collection and his study...
Once, when Vaiman was away, I helped Piotrovsky by then Director of the Hermitage to open his (Vaimans) study (to look for a book). He started grumbling about some trifle or another. I said, You know why youre grumbling? Youre just envious of Aizik, who can sit quietly and study here, and youre now deprived of that!... He gave me a clip round the ear and said, Insolent woman! But then youre probably right: how this job obstructs me!
company, eating and drinking, anecdotes and gossip; he radiated a wit and charm that won everybody over including foreign colleagues and friends, though he conversed with them mainly in Russian (apart from German, he spoke no other languages), but he was understood, respected and simply loved everywhere.
At the grand opening of our major archaeological exhibition in Venice, when, after speeches by ministers, Presidents and other VIPs, Hermitage Director Piotrovsky was announced, everyone got to their feet and gave him an ovation that had not been accorded to anyone before him...
I should like to close this simple little essay with a story about the far-off happy times in Karmir-Blur.
It was an ordinary hot day, and the excavation process was proceeding normally. We were uncovering the first wine-jar hall (a wine store with gigantic vessels dug into the floor). Nothing portended anything special, so Piotrovsky put on his jacket with all his regalia and set off for the bank on official business. Suddenly, almost immediately after he had left, we discovered in one of the jars, arranged in piles, gleaming bronze goblets with inscriptions, some of which can be seen in the Hermitage display (there were 97 of them in all). Somebody was sent to catch up with Piotrovsky, somebody else climbed into the wine-jar and began to hand out the goblets one by one, while the rest of us, speechless with delight, awaited the arrival of our leader and his congratulations on this epoch-making find. Then he appeared furious, waving his hands around and shouting: The Order of Hormuzd Rassam (a well-known Middle Eastern robber of architectural monuments) to all of you for this excavation! Where is the fixation? Where is Bulgakov (the photographer)? Who will now believe us that they were found in a wine-jar? It was a good thing that 70 of the goblets were still in the jar... Everything was sorted out and photographed, the chief himself in his formal dress jumped into the jar, with brushes, and started cleaning, drawing in his remarkable journal, still grumbling, but his grumbling gradually gave way to a contented purring.
Anna Ierusalimskaya Without realising it, of course, Piotrovsky played a Karmir-Blur). The teaching, as such, occurred impercepdefining role in my life: after reading Urartu in the tibly, as if by itself above all on account of his extraorninth form, I fell in love with the book, and on finishing dinary personality, his amazing stories, his archaeologischool I entered the Faculty of History at Leningrad State cal experience and intuition, and, finally, on account of University with the firm intention of studying with Boris his boundless fascination with science and industriousPiotrovsky. ness that was exemplary for us all. There was never any I would not dare to claim to be Piotrovskys pupil (alas, coaching. My dissertation on the Karmir-Blur materials I didnt become an expert on Urartu!). I think that teach- was slightly discussed at his home over a cup of tea ing and creating his own school were not at all his way: and his beloved game of patience but it still helped me he was, perhaps, too brilliant and deeply absorbed in his up to a point... I hasten to assure you that my personal own research for that. So his numerous students were for biography will have no bearing on the subject of these him a sort of testing-ground, an auditorium for expound- short reminiscences, though I cannot help but say how ing his ideas (as with his course on Trans-Caucasian ar- much I am indebted to Boris Piotrovsky for my admischaeology which he tried out on his first, and at that time sion to the Oriental Department (over fifty years ago!), only, student A. A. Vaiman on the way from Yerevan to for his friendly concern, for his readiness to help in any
144
Another quality with which Piotrovsky was generously endowed was loyalty to old friends. His closest friends from the pre-war years were Alisa Bank and Leon Gyuzalian. Once, when I was visiting the Gyuzalians home, I heard the tearful reminiscences of Gyuzalians wife Elizaveta, Alisa Bank and Boris Piotrovsky: after Leon Gyuzalians arrest, Alisa and Boris visited Elizaveta by night, walking through interconnected yards to avoid being tailed, supported her and, when she intended to visit her husband in the camp, brought her books and tinned food for him. You just had to see how they sat and embraced as they spoke of those terrible times. When still young, the three of them had an agreement never to miss each others birthdays, no matter what fate might bring. This tradition lasted a long time... And Piotrovsky was the last, apart from us constant nurses, to bid farewell to the dying Alisa Bank, finding her still alive... However, I do not wish to finish on a sad note. After all, Boris Piotrovsky was a cheerful man who adored good
I can still see the whole scene, and the archaeology lesson we were given that day has remained with me for life.
Evgenia Shchukina I had my only experience of practical archaeology in 1961, and that was due to my personal circumstances: I was on the point of a nervous breakdown, and was in such a state that I should soon have had to see a psychiatrist. Fortunately for me, the problem was solved by friends. My colleague and friend M. B. Severova spoke to the History of Material Culture Institutes photographer M. G. Agaronian the celebrated Maro and the
145
latter went to Boris Piotrovsky with a request to take me the excavations and back the members of the expedition for a month on his expedition to Karmir-Blur. At that usually spoke Armenian, and Piotrovsky made sure that time Piotrovsky was Director of the Institute of History I did not feel awkward. At first I shuddered when I heard of Material Culture, but he knew me slightly, since he had the name Zhenya [unofficial for Evgenia ed.] mentioned. taken me on in 1950 when he was Deputy Director for Noticing this, Piotrovsky laughed: Dont pay any attenResearch at the Hermitage. tion, in the neighbouring expedition there is a quarrelI remember that month July 1961 as one of the some woman your namesake. She is the talk of the town happiest times of my life, largely thanks to Piotrovsky. In for all the archaeologists and gives food for the gossips the first place, he immediately gave his consent for my every day. And there are no greater gossips in the world journey to Yerevan as a member of his expedition, and than men! subsequently surrounded me with fatherly care. Piotrovsky, who was deeply in love with Armenia and The journey to Armenia was truly magical. The expe- its culture, generously bestowed this fondness on an igdition had hired a lorry for its needs, and Maro and I noramus like me. On occasions when he had to go and rode in it from Moscow to Yerevan. We spent the nights visit neighbouring archaeologists, he would remember in sleeping bags in the open, woke up surrounded by me, so I had the chance to visit the excavations at Dvin camomile fields, and washed in streams, where we also and Garni, Zvardnots and the underground temple at washed up after our simple meals. Gegard. During a trip to Sevan Lake I even risked going The working routine began as soon as we arrived. At for a swim, and still remember how the icy water took 5.30 am the members of the expedition would assemble my breath away. A guided tour of Matenadaran was orby the fountain in Lenin Square and set off for Karmir- ganised for us, and at Echmiadzin we were shown a treaBlur. I was astonished by its scale and the range of ac- sure-house and a recently discovered pagan sanctuary in tivities of the archaeologists on its slopes. A few groups the basement. Piotrovsky took us to Echmiadzin personof workers mainly schoolchildren from the seventh to ally, and you had to see the respect, even reverence, shown tenth forms under the leadership of Piotrovskys pupils, to him by the priests. research workers at the Institute of History were digging That period was marked by the mass repatriation of at various levels of the hill, looking somewhat jealously Armenians from all parts of the world to their native land. at their neighbours. The heat was hellish, and each group They included several of Piotrovskys pupils. It was parhad its water carrier, who came with a clay pitcher at the ticularly interesting to talk to them: I was struck by call dzhur bereg!!! (bring water). their inner freedom, so unlike our constraint and supAt about midday we would go down to a tree at the pression by all kinds of prohibitions and limitations. foot of the hill and have our lunch there. The food was Yerevan itself, with its numerous private shops and very simple lavash, cheese, herbs and sweet peppers. workshops, was quite unlike poor Leningrad. IncidenPiotrovsky hardly ate anything, and drank very little: it tally, the people of Yerevan showed a particularly tenwas obvious that he found the heat hard to bear, but he der attitude towards my fellow-citizens, being of the still tried to crack jokes, keep the conversation going and opinion that they, like the Armenians, suffered at the settle arguments that arose among his pupils. hand of Moscow. Piotrovsky toured all sections of the excavation sevAlas! All good things come to an end. Before we left eral times a day, sometimes changing the direction of the I was summoned to receive my salary. I came to a typical work. I noticed the natural tact with which he dealt with Yerevan courtyard, to the little house belonging to Piotrothe expeditions members. Even with the schoolchildren vskys wife Ripsime. Handing over my symbolic pay, Piotrovsky said: he spoke with respect, attempting to leaven his criticisms I expect when you get to Moscow (the flights went only with humour. At 2 pm to 3 pm the heat became unbearable, and we to Moscow) youll go to Childrens World or GUM to would go back to the city. The section leaders under Pi- buy a jacket of some kind. Take another ten roubles, just otrovsky went to the History Institute to discuss the day in case, you can give it back later. I took the ten roubles, and it certainly came in handy (and when I got home and and plan the following days work. Throughout our stay in Yerevan I constantly sensed asked permission to return the debt, Piotrovsky told me Piotrovskys solicitude. Even when chatting with col- to come to his home, where I was very warmly received leagues he would always come to my aid. On the way to by his wife and invited to dine with them).
146
The day before my departure I was once again convinced of Piotrovskys good breeding and tact. One of the members of the expedition came to him and asked: May I take Zhenya to Parakar (the airport)? Of course, he replied, Lets go together! He gave up his time to prevent any unwanted and, by the way, pointless conversations.
Some may find this modest account unworthy of their attention, but life is sometimes made up of such details that, for all their insignificance, characterise a man and his relationships with those around him. Even on an everyday level, in trifling matters, Piotrovsky showed the best features of kindness and refinement. My memories of Boris Piotrovsky remain my warmest and most grateful.
Ludmila Voronikhina I remember Boris Piotrovsky, above all, as being cheerful, optimistic and...young as he was when I saw him in Yerevan in the 1950s, when my husband Pavel Gubchevsky and I took a trip to the Caucasus. Everyone, young and old, knew where the house Piotrovsky lived in was to be found. I dont remember whether there was any prior agreement concerning our arrival, but Piotrovsky greeted us as honoured guests. After the heat of the street, the simply furnished cool room seemed like heaven. Piotrovsky was wonderful tanned, with a golden mane of hair, in a freshly ironed snow-white shirt. His wife Ripsime was not at home: she had gone to Garni. The master of the house welcomed us together with his sons the very serious Misha (then in the eighth form, I believe), and the very lively Levon, just as golden as his father. I cant remember what kind of ice-cream Piotrovsky sent for, but I have never tasted water more delicious than that in Yerevan. We talked about the Hermitage, and what we ought to see in Yerevan. On the following day Piotrovsky showed us his beloved Karmir-Blur. The famous gigantic wine-jars, naturally, produced an impression on us, but we were struck most forcibly by Piotrovskys account. He spoke and the fortress walls began to grow, everything was filled with sounds, the ruins came to life! Much later, when Piotrovsky became Director of the Hermitage, I was lucky enough to hear him read aloud a page from his notebook with reminiscences of a visit to Egypt. It was the end of the working day. I had to conduct a guided tour of the Museum for a delegation after its members had met Piotrovsky. We were invited to wait in the Directors reception room and, as is usual in such circumstances, we counted the birds on the wall tapestries. Piotrovsky was obviously also tired of waiting for the delegation. He came out of his study with a little notebook in his hand and began to read excerpts from it, which might have had the heading: From the Window of a Cairo Hotel. Late Evening. The image he created remained with me for a long time: the city going to sleep, the houses giving back the heat of the past day to the encroaching night, the canopy of stars, the voice of a muezzin...It was a first-class work of art. The phenomenon of the Directors study occupies a special place in reminiscences about Piotrovsky. It was so easy to get in there! The Director was accessible to ordinary mortals. When you entered the reception room, his secretary Ida would give you such a joyous smile, as if she had been looking forward to your arrival. There was always a fresh rose in a crystal vase on her desk. Of course, petitioners who appeared in the Directors study unannounced interrupted his work, but Piotrovsky invariably greeted them with the same cordiality. I was always amazed that with the colossal responsibilities of being the Director he still found time for research work. I once had to write an urgent methodical paper. I went into the study, and there was Piotrovsky sitting at an unofficial table in the depths of the room with a neat pile of papers. He immediately began telling me what he was working on: about the Directors of the Hermitage, about materials he had devoted a great deal of time to collecting. How much interesting information I learned! So an impression of Piotrovsky the man can be assembled from many individual episodes: a scholar, fascinated by his work; a teacher, generously sharing his knowledge; a Director, who showed an exquisite simplicity in his dealings with VIPs, with colleagues of various generations, with children...
147
Tatiana Kustodieva The Uffizi Gallery celebrated its 400th anniversary in brains of her museum and assuring him that she could September 1982. Hermitage Director Boris Piotrovsky not let a day go by without looking at her dear San flew to Italy for the occasion, along with Irina Danilova, Giovanni. Our Director knew a great deal about poetry: he read Deputy Director of the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, and me with a paper on the gallerys anniversary. verses aloud, and wrote poems himself quite successI travelled abroad with Piotrovsky more than once, but fully, in my opinion. And we went to Fiesole especially to see the place from where Beato first saw Florence that trip has remained with me all my life. Released from all his obligations, Piotrovsky was from the mountains. We then spent a few more days in the Eternal City. cheerful, carefree and, if it is permitted to say so of a Director, extremely nice. After a day in Rome we trav- Piotrovskys name acted as a sort of password. Thanks elled to Florence by car. There, like a schoolboy, he to him I was able to see the Pauline Chapel in the Vatibunked off the tedious ceremonial sessions at the first can, painted by Michelangelo, which is not open to the opportunity, and we wandered around the most beauti- public. However, the greatest moment was the opporful city in Italy. I remember his delight at the Fra An- tunity to climb the scaffolding (the Sistine Chapel fresgelico frescoes in the San Marco Monastery, where each coes were being restored) and see Buonarrotis painting room has its jewel that was the word he used as he at close quarters. Our programme also included a visit to the Italyinspected the paintings in each cell. We did not have free passes to all the museums in Flor- USSR Society of Cultural Relations. There we found ence, and when he was offered free entry (in view of his Manzu, who was drinking champagne, and with whom advanced age) where we were supposed to pay, he took we went to eat in one of the open-air restaurants in Quatoffence like a child. I consoled him with all sincerity tall tro Fontane Square. There we were joined by Giacomos girlfriend, the beautiful Aurora. Piotrovsky, who was and handsome, it was a real pleasure to walk beside him. Both in Rome and in Florence Piotrovsky met the never indifferent to feminine charms, was at a loss to Giuntis: Renato Giunti, head of the family publishing understand how Manzu, even with a lot of drink inside house, and his son Sergio were intending to issue cata- him, could sit next to such an Italian madonna and still logues of the Hermitages paintings. As a digression, follow every passing skirt with his eyes. Piotrovsky flew out of Rome a day before me. Imagine I might add that afterwards their dealings with us were improper, to put it mildly. At that time, however, they my amazement, embarrassment and gratitude when he gave the impression that we were their most honoured met me at Sheremetyevo! guests, and received us at one of their villas near Fiesole. It could sometimes appear that something had esThe mistress of the house made us laugh when she said caped Piotrovskys attention. However, this was far from she loved black caviar, and wondered whether in Russia being the case: he was very sensitive towards people and we had special large spoons for eating it. As luck would knew them for what they were worth. He used to divide have it, I had a tin of caviar in my case, and I promised the Museums staff into Hermitageniks and Non-Herto give it to her (without a spoon). mitageniks. Everybody really wanted to be called a HerIn fact, we laughed a lot for various reasons. Irina mitagenik, the highest accolade for a Museum worker, Danilova amused Piotrovsky by calling herself the as Piotrovsky rightly considered. Irina Kureeva I am glad that in the years when Boris Piotrovsky was the Director of the Hermitage I was already working in the Museum and fairly frequently had the opportunity of communicating with him. Everyone knows that Piotrovsky was a distinguished scholar and academic who ran the Museum superbly, trying to ensure that peace and order reigned. He defended the interests of the Hermitage as far as he could, and had a very benevolent attitude towards his staff. Piotrovsky spoke simply, with a sense of humour. He was always interesting and easy to talk to. However, maybe not everyone knows that he possessed another
gift: he loved children. I am not talking about his own ways and means to run lessons for children. The departchildren and grandchildren, whom he adored I am ments specialists were entrusted with this work. It was talking about a character trait that not everybody pos- obvious which items young schoolchildren should be sesses. Piotrovsky was entirely natural with both teenag- shown, but how to convey material in a way that was ers and quite small children, always finding a common light and easy to understand was a problem. We began language with them. I should like to record my remi- to research this problem, and this led to the decision niscences on this subject. that with this audience it was necessary, above all, to The Director frequently came to our School Depart- use games and refer to fairytales that were familiar and ment, genuinely concerned to know if anything new and comprehensible to little ones. So it was that through interesting had occurred in our dealings with children. games and fairytales the children were introduced to He himself lectured to the Young Archaeologists Club the complex and fascinating world of art. We later deevery year: in the twenty-six years that he was Director vised series of guided tours entitled The Fabulous Herhe never once missed these lectures. His lectures on mitage and Planet Hermitage, which are already a Karmir-Blur and his work in Egypt were always received success. Today there are a lot of children in the Hermitwith interest by the young archaeologists. If the Museum age: a variety of thematic tours are organised for them, had not closed at 6 pm, the schoolchildren would have and they can come to the Museum with their parents. kept him for hours asking all kinds of questions, and he Young children have become regular visitors to the Muwould have answered them with pleasure. Piotrovsky had seum, as Piotrovsky wished. Mikhail Piotrovsky, the a very responsible attitude towards these lectures, and current Director of the Hermitage, once said: Today was always thinking of something new to tell his young the most important visitors to the Hermitage are chilaudience. In the School Department archive we have a dren. And that is true. photograph of Piotrovsky surrounded by young archaeAs I have already said, Boris Piotrovsky was a fairly ologists. They are at an excavation site, but I cannot re- frequent visitor to the School Department, and I remember where in the Leningrad Region it was most member one amusing episode. Entering a room where likely at Pudost, where the clubs supervisor Olga Davidan very small artists were working, he said hello and asked took the children on several occasions. them whether they knew who he was. The children said I think this warm relationship with children can also nothing. Piotrovsky left the office without a word. The be explained by the fact that Piotrovsky himself first came supervisor of the class was upset, thinking that the Dito the Hermitage as a schoolboy. His classs guided tour rector was offended. A short while later Piotrovsky reof the exhibition on Ancient Egypt was conducted by turned to the studio with a carrier-bag. Going up to Natalia Flittner, who noticed the inquisitive boy who each pupil, he took from the bag a badge depicting an asked her interesting questions. She then invited him to Atlas [emblem of the Hermitage ed.] and presented it come to her every week for lessons. Piotrovsky always to the child, shaking hands and asking his or her name, treated his first teacher at the Hermitage with reverence. then introducing himself: I am the Director of the HerPiotrovsky was associated with his beloved Museum from mitage. The scene was incredibly funny. After distributhis school days to the end of his life. ing the badges, Piotrovsky said goodbye to them all and Piotrovsky also frequently attended school confer- left. When he had gone, the children asked in surprise: ences. He liked listening to the pupils speaking, and if Is that man really the Director? Piotrovsky loved childrens festivals, especially the one of them forgot something while making his report, he was ready to come to the rescue. These school confer- opening of the exhibition We Draw in the Hermitage. ences were of great interest to Piotrovsky, and he always In twenty-six years there was only one year that he did not open the exhibition because he was on a business spoke of them warmly. However, Piotrovsky particularly liked the company trip, and was very distressed about it. The annual exhiof small children. He conversed with them in amaz- bition of childrens drawings and its opening ceremony ingly simple language: listening to him talking to the that is still held in the Hermitage Theatre before New Year very much appealed to Piotrovsky. It is a special little ones was a great pleasure. It was Piotrovskys idea to introduce children of pre- occasion for children, for their parents, and for all the school and early school age to the Museum, to organise staff of the School Department. The preparations for it special tours for them and, most importantly, to find take a long time, as it is necessary for the children to
149
148
get their costumes right: to present their favourite fairytale character or their favourite object in the Hermitage. On the day of this event visitors to the Museum observe with interest the children, elegantly dressed in a variety of costumes, emerging from the School Department and parading down the Main Staircase. As the procession moves through the Hermitage rooms, guided tours break off and everyone admires the ceremony. While Boris Piotrovsky was Director, he always walked solemnly at the head of the procession, leading the youngest participant by the hand. I am glad that the tradition of the Museums Director opening the childrens exhibition and attending the show in the theatre is still observed. Mikhail Piotrovsky, like his father before him, always opens our exhibition
and watches the performances of the young artists. May this tradition continue for many more years! The last years of Boris Piotrovskys life were hard, coinciding as they did with a difficult time for the whole country. Many unsolved problems lay on the Directors shoulders. He often came to our School Department, and when I asked him what he would like to know and see from us, he would reply: I just want to take a breather here. The air here is different from that in my office. After sitting with us for a while, he would get up and go. Over seventeen years have passed since Boris Piotrovskys passing. Every year on the anniversary of his death we go to the cemetery to pay our respects, and I always think: how lucky I am to have known this kind, fine person a real Man.
OBITUARIES
Grigory Lvovich Semyonov came to work in the Hermitage in 1978, initially as a referent to the Director, Boris Piotrovsky. Several months later, he joined the staff of the Oriental Department. Due to his talent as a leader and organizer, he was soon appointed the Academic Secretary of the Department. In this capacity he was the closest associate of its Head, Vladimir Lukonin, who regarded Semyonov as his successor. For various reasons, however, Semyonov did not become Head of the Department until 2001, to hold the office for a little more than six years thereafter. But during that short period, he was able to change the life of the Department completely. Before that, the public had no access to the permanent exhibitions of the Oriental Department, which had been somewhat neglected for a long time. The curators, as well as the majority of the Museum staff, had become used to this situation and regarded it as normal and natural. Therefore in addition to various logistical problems he had to solve, such as the re-creation and repairs of the exhibition, raising money for showcases, etc., Semyonov had to fight for changes in his colleagues attitudes. At the time, many things seemed to be more important than permanent exhibitions, such as research, temporary exhibitions, foreign trips, etc. In this situation, people were to be reminded of the Museums chief mission; this, in turn, required a drastic change in their view of life. Semyonovs energy and resolution resulted in what had seemed to be impossible; he gave a momentum to the train of events that, since then, have been moving, slowly but incessantly. Several rooms (Indian, Mesopotamian, Urartian, Armenian and Georgian) were opened to the public in Semyonovs lifetime; Central Asian exhibition had almost been completed. Besides, he encouraged the idea of some of the exhibitions, e.g. those devoted to the Golden Horde and the Moshchevaya Balka burial complex, which opened after he was gone. The rooms of Japanese, Chinese, Middle Eastern and Coptic art are due to open before long. Another of Semyonovs projects is connected with the White Column Room; it will accommodate the Oriental Arsenal. The Oriental Department is now opening its collections, each exhibition having a fraction of his soul in it, and each being a monument to Semyonovs energy, resourcefulness and vitality. Under Semyonov, considerable changes in the sphere of human relations within the Department took place. Due to him, they became similar to the relations typical of a patriarchal family. Semyonov himself was demanding but tolerant, always ready to consider opinions that were contrary to his own. He had an innate instinct of responsibility for those who were near him; therefore it was only natural that he felt responsibility for his co-workers. He was always for attracting young people to the Department; as a demanding and considerate father, he then kept their work under scrutiny. As a result, a new generation of young energetic researchers appeared in the Department. One of the traditions Semyonov inherited from Lukonin was his loyalty to the Oriental Department. He could be dissatisfied with his subordinates work, he could be furious with them, but he thought it his duty to protect the Department and its staff before the Directors. Semyonov regarded his Department as one of the most important in the Hermitage; the achievements of the members of the Department were an integral part of its reputation. At the funeral of Irina Novoselskaya, Head of the Department of Western European Art, Semyonov said that to him, she had always been an ideal leader always defending the interests of the unit she headed. He, too, stood by his Departments interests, zealously if need be. But for Semyonov, the Oriental Department was an integral part of the Hermitage, and he realized that its well-being depended on the prosperity of the Museum as a whole. One of the projects significant for the Hermitage as a whole was the Archaeological Committee, which would have never been created without Grigory Semyonov. He could easily have benefited both from his position of the head of a key department, and from being popular in the Museum, or used his personal ties of friendship, if his goal had been to
Grigory Lvovich Semyonov 20.10.1950 24.04.2007
150
151
change the financial situation of his own expedition for the better. But his idea was to change the situation generally, that is, to make both the Hermitage archaeological projects and their financing transparent. He was criticized, but he continued to speak both publicly and at a personal level, advocating changes that were to bring about what is now regarded as normal and only possible in the Hermitage. Archaeology played a tremendous role in Semyonovs life. As a first-year student, he took part in the Penjekent expedition under Boris Marshak. Later on, he organized an expedition to Paikend and remained its head to the end of his life. He was literally unable to live without archaeology, or Paikend and Central Asia; he visited it two times when he was already lethally ill. Global problems and interdisciplinary projects always attracted Semyonov; his dream was to organize a complex expedition to Sogdiana, for the study of the medieval city, both in the centre and in the periphery. This and many other plans were not to be materialized. He once said that life only begins at fifty. Indeed, it is at this age that he was able to implement many of his ideas and really demonstrate what he was worth. The period of thriving was fairly short, but the results will be making themselves felt for years to come. Grigory had a fantastic personal charm. Wherever he appeared, at Department meetings and parties, or Directors Conferences, everywhere, one felt as if it were a warm sunny day; immediately a conversation arose in which everyone became interested and involved. In spite of his age, position and academic achievements, he looked youthful, due to his vigour and energy. The secret of his charm became clear in the last year of his life. He was a good person, and neither the calamities of life nor the terrible illness could affect him. That year will be remembered in the Hermitage as a truly heroic deed. Fatally ill, Semyonov was living and working as before, coming to the Hermitage every morning, defending his position at the Directors meetings, and going on archaeological expeditions. He was able to bring the Departments work to the point when it could carry on without him. All he planned will be fulfilled, but without his jokes, his sharp remarks at times, and invariably, his supportive shoulder to lean on. With us remain his portraits and our memories of him. Another outstanding head of the Oriental Department is gone into the Hermitage history. Grigory Semyonov. Our Grisha. The one who warmed our hearts. By olleagues
on paintings by Caravaggio and his followers in the museums of the Soviet Union (Caravaggio and His Followers, 1975; with Irene Linnik, expert on Northern Caravaggism; second revised edition, 1993). The publication of the monograph was preceded by a very successful exhibition of works by Caravaggio and his followers from Soviet museums (1973), inspired and organized by Svetlana Vsevolozhskaya. Quite a few publications by Vsevolozhskaya in the Reports of the State Hermitage and various other editions are concerned with those Italian works which she revealed in the museum storage, suggesting a number of new attributions that have become accepted by the scholarly milieu. Among the works she has discovered and attributed are paintings by the artists of various local schools, Roman (Pietro Paolini, Ignaz Stern and Pier Francesco Mola), Florentine (Carlo Dolci) and Neapolitan (Francesco Solimena), Genoese (Gioacchino Assereto, Clemente Spera, Alessandro Magnasco and Pietro Tempesta). Among the paintings ascribed to Italian artists, she discovered 17th-century works of other schools, such as the Spanish Jusepe de Ribera and the Dutch Pre-Rembrandt painter, Leonart Bramer. The chief result of Vsevolzhskayas many years of research was a complete catalogue of the Hermitage 17th-century paintings that she created in spite of the severe illness she had been suffering from for several last years. Svetlana Vsevolozhskayas activities, varied and various, were not limited to those of a researcher and curator. A considerable portion of her time, she devoted to administrative responsibilities. In 196566, she was the Academic Secretary of the Department of the History of Western European Art; from 1966 to 1986, she was the Deputy Head of the Department. Besides, she took an active part in the social life of the Museum. Many times, her achievements and devotion were acknowledged by the Hermitage Administration, and in 2000, by the Russian Government that conferred upon her decoration of the Order of Merit for the Country, 2nd Class. Outwardly calm and restrained, Svetlana Vsevolozhskaya was a very sociable and wellintentioned person, always ready to share her profound knowledge with her colleagues from the Hermitage and other museums. She had a lot of friends, and those who knew and admired her are aware of an irreplaceable void now that she has left us. By Natalia Gritsai
Svetlana Nikolayevna Vsevolozhskaya 8.01.1930 25.06.2007
Svetlana Vsevolozhskaya, Senior Researcher of the Department of Western European Art, a renowned museologist and a leading expert on old Italian masters, died on 25 June 2007. She came to the Hermitage as a young woman and remained there for almost fiftyfive years. Vsevolozhskaya was born on 8 January 1930 in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) in the family of an architect. She chose art history as her profession and, having finished high school, she entered the Department of Art Theory and History of the Ilya Repin Institute of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. She graduated from it in 1953. After that, she came to work at the Department of the History of Western European Art where she passed through each level of museum work, from technical assistant to curator, to become a museum specialist of the highest level. She was the curator of 17th- and 18th-century Italian paintings, the former belonging to the sphere of her own interests (in 1978, she yielded the keeping of 18th-century paintings to another curator, Tatyana Bushmina). She began the study of Italian art under the guidance and supervision of Maria Shcherbacheva (18881968), a recognized expert on old Italian, Spanish and Dutch schools of painting. It is from Shcherbacheva that Svetlana Vsevolozhskaya acquired what later became the basis of the studies she carried out, a meticulous analysis of each individual work of art. During her last years, Shcherbacheva turned her attention to the artists influenced by Caravaggio. This was Vsevolozhskayas first research theme; it remained the centre of her interests to the end of her life. To the Caravaggisti, Vsevolozhskaya devoted a number of publications, including a small but significant book called The Paintings by Caravaggio and His School in the Hermitage (1970) and a monograph
152
CONTENTS
Anastasia Bukina Corinthian Aryballoi in the State Hermitage Museum 5 Ekaterina Khmelnitskaya August Spiess Sculptural Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 HISTORY OF THE STATE HERMITAGE Alexander Kakovkin One Page from the History of Russian Coptic Studies.
The Publication of The Artistic Textiles of Coptic Egypt by Militsa Matye and Xenia Liapunova . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Reports of the State Hermitage / The State Hermitage St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Publishers Vol. LXVI: 156 pp., ills.
ISBN 978-5-93572-305-7 Reports of the State Hermitage is an annual edition presenting the results of the Museums recent research, restoration, preservation and exhibition activities. The articles are primarily concerned with the Hermitage collections and individual works of art. Their authors introduce art pieces unknown to the wide public before and, using the latest scientific and scholastic achievements, specify and make more accurate traditional attributions, datings and interpretations of the already published works. Other sections of the book deal with most important recent acquisitions of the Museum, its newly-opened and reorganized permanent exhibitions as well as new studies in the Hermitage history. In Memoriam section covers careers and activities of outstanding members of the Hermitage staff. Since 2008 the edition is published in English. 7 (047.5) 79.1
Dmitry Alexinsky Antique Spheroconical Helmets in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Elena Khodza Terracotta Hunchback Marionettes in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Alexander Kruglov Eros with a Shell, an Ancient Fountain Statue . . . . . . . . .36 Nadezhda Gulyaeva Bronze Musical Instruments in the Collection of the Department of Antiquity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Alexander Kakovkin and Clara Nikitina A Coptic Carved Ivory in the Hermitage Collection . . .54 Kirill Chernyshov The First Brandenburg Coins (12th Century) in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 Olga Karaskova Caper Dei, or Some Considerations about the Unusual Iconography of the Stained-Glass Panel Depicting Abrahams Sacrifice from the Marienkirche in Frankfort-on-the-Oder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65 Tatiana Kustodieva All about Leda (Sodomas Painting in the Hermitage) . .72 Natalia Sepman Designs for Stained-Glass Windows by Christoph Murer and His Studio in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . .81 Ludmila Kagan Two Paintings of St. Francis by Luca Giordano . . . . . . . .88 Sviatoslav Savvateev The Portrait of Carlo Ridolfi by Matteo Ponzoni in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93 Svetlana Kokareva Cameo Series with Portraits of Emperors in the Hermitage Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99 Natalia Avetyan The Photographic Portrait of Ivan Turgenev by Sergey Levitsky from the Hermitage Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
ACQUISITIONS Irina Bagdasarova A Porcelain Cup and Saucer with the St. Basil Church Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Irina Kuznetsova A Linen Napkin by the Alexandrovskaya Imperial Manufacture, St. Petersburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Ludmila Dorofeeva A 17th 18th-Century Spanish Cabinet: a New Acquisition for Menshikov Palace, a Department of the State Hermitage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 NEW EXHIBITIONS Natalia Koslova The Urartu Exhibition at the Hermitage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 IN MEMORIAM
TO MARK THE CENTENARY OF THE BIRTH OF BORIS PIOTROVSKY
Anna Ierusalimskaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Evgenia Shchukina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Ludmila Voronikhina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Tatiana Kustodieva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Irina Kureeva. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 OBITUARIES Grigory Semenov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Svetlana Vsevolozhskaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
154
155
Scholarly edition
REPORTS of THE STATE HERMITAGE LXVI
Computer design by Nadezda Lakatosh Colour correction by Vitaly Demiashev
The State Hermitage Publishers 34 Dvortsovaya Embankment, St. Petersburg, Russia, 190000
. ., 15. .

Hermitage Reports 66

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hermitage Reports 66

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hermitage Reports 66

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

To Mark the Centenary of the Birth of Boris Piotrovsky

REPORTS OF THE STATE HERMITAGE MUSEUM LXVI

Saint Petersburg The State Hermitage Publishers 2008

Published by the decision of the State Hermitage Editorial Board

ANASTASIA BUKINA CORINTHIAN ARYBALLOI IN THE STATE HERMITAGE MUSEUM

@ State Hermitage, 2008

Ill.1. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1130

Ill.2. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1129

Ill.3. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 9047

Ill.4. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 2483

Ill.5. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 4130

Ill.6. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1907

Ill.7. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 86-24

Ill.8. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1300

Ill.9 Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 90-19

Ill. 10. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 89-61

Ill.11. Corinthian siren-vase, inv.no. . 3056

Ill. 12. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 4133

Ill.13. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 7447

Ill.14. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 9127

Ill. 15. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 1277

Ill. 17. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 9123

Ill.19. Fragment of the Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 78-93

Ill.20. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 5554

Ill.21. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 2393

Ill.22. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 2141

Ill. 23. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 4629

Ill.24. Corinthian aryballos, inv. no. . 9226

Ill. 2. Punched inscription on the helmet from Akhtanizovskaya stanitsa (enlarged)

Ill. 4. Terracotta. From the Myrmekion excavations The State Hermitage

BY ALEXANDER KRUGLOV EROS WITH A SHELL, AN ANCIENT FOUNTAIN STATUE

Ill. 3. Eros with a Shell, back view

Ill. 4. Support and leg of Eros

Ill. 5. Eros with a Shell, side and back view

Ill. 6. Shell with a lead pipe spout

Ill. 7. Outlet of the pipe below the shell

Ill. 2. Inscription on the cymbals (enlarged)

ALEXANDER KAKOVKIN AND CLARA NIKITINA

A PPE N DI X CATALOGUE OF BRANDENBURG COINS (12TH CENTURY) IN THE HERMITAGE COLLECTION

Ill. 1. Abrahams Sacrifice. Stained-glass window. 136070. Marienkirche, Frankfurt-on-the-Oder

Ill. 3. The Burning Bush. Stained-glass window. 136070. Marienkirche, Frankfurt-on-the-Oder

Ill. 1. Sodoma. Leda. 1510s. The State Hermitage

Ill. 2. Sodoma. Leda. Detail

Ill. 3. Sodoma. Leda. Ultraviolet photograph

Ill. 4. Sodoma. Leda. Infrared photograph

Ill. 5. Sodoma. Leda. Infrared photograph. Detail

Ill. 1. Luca Giordano. St. Francis. 165053. The State Hermitage

EKATERINA KHMELNITSKAYA AUGUST SPIESS SCULPTURAL FIGURES

Ill. 1. Sculpture Putto as Mercury. The State Hermitage

Ill.2. Sculpture Girl Feeding Chickens. The State Hermitage

Ill.3. Sculpture The Allegory of Summer. The State Hermitage

Ill.4. Sculpture The Allegory of Winter. The State Hermitage

Ill.5. Sculpture The Grape Harvest. The State Hermitage

Ill.6. Sculptures Colombina and Harlequin. The State Hermitage

HISTORY OF THE STATE HERMITAGE

Ill. 1. Militsa Matye. Photo. 1950s

Ill. 2. Xenia Liapunova. Photo. Late 1930s

Ill. 3. Pages of the catalogue to be published in 1941: 1 Half-title, 2 Title-page

M. Matye and X. Liapunova Textiles of Coptic Egypt Iskusstvo (Art) [Publishers].