=e]

ted by
als istopher Dell. *y

HAT MAKES A MASTERPIEC UtFc ARTISTS, WRIT

ovens
pies
VAVfoy ale! s Gre
¥:

=
 $45.00 (ca, 497.0)

Over the course of history works of art have

emerged that transcend boundaries of period
and place. In this exploration of the masterpiece,
distinguished artists, critics and art historians write
about their personal encounters with the greatest art
of all time, representing cultures from around the
world, and stretching from prehistory and the birth
of art to Cézanne at the cusp of Cubism.
What Makes a Masterpiece begins with the
forms of animals inscribed on the walls of Chauvet
Cave in France, and travels through the worlds of
the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Greeks and
Romans, embodied by images of royal or martial
potency and mysterious religious rites. Medieval
representations of Christ are celebrated alongside
images of Vishnu, the Buddha and his priests, and
the royal figures of South American and African
civilizations. The jewels of the Quattrocento appear
beside the lesser-known triumphs of Aztec and
Japanese court artists, while the masters of the
European Renaissance and Baroque mingle with
Mughal, Arab and Chinese virtuosos. The journey
ends with the nineteenth century, depicted as an age
of revolution, introspection and modernization.

285 illustrations, 265 in color

On the jacket:
Front: Detail from The Birth of Venus by Alessandro Bot}icelli,
1480s. Photo akg-images / Erich Lessing.
Back: Detail from Sunflowers by Vincent Van Gogh, <888. National
Gallery, London / Bridgeman Art Library.
What Makes a Masterpiece
What Makes a Masterpiece
Artists, Writers and Curators on the
World's Greatest Works of Art

Edited by Christopher Dell

285 illustrations, 265 in color

rut Thames & Hudson

 CONTENTS

Introduction:
Making Masterpieces
CHRISTOPHER DELL

THE ART OF POWER:

500 BC-AD 1000

The ‘Seven Against Thebes’

Relief
THE BIRTH OF ART: GIOVANNI COLONNA

UP TO 500 BC
The Ludovisi ‘Throne’
16 The Chauvet Cave ROBIN OSBORNE

JEAN CLOTTES

© 2010 Thames & Hudson Ltd, London, The Riace Bronzes

save for the articles listed on page 299. 20 The Mycerinus Triad ROBIN OSBORNE
(Translation credits can also be found on
TOM PHILLIPS
that page.)
46 The Lady of Elche
All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication 24 Olmec Colossal Head 8 RUBI SANZ GAMO
may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
MICHAEL D. COE
or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopy, recording or any other 48 The Villa of the Mysteries,
information storage and retrieval system, 26 Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt Pompeii
without prior permission in writing from the
JULIAN READE MARY BEARD
publisher.

First published in 2010 in hardcover in the 30 The ‘New York Kouros’ Hnho The Equestrian Statue of
United States of America by
JAS ELSNER Marcus Aurelius
Thames & Hudson Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue,
NANCY H. RAMAGE
New York, New York 10110

thamesandhudsonusa.com
nNON The Buddha Preaching the
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number First Sermon
2010923353 JOHN GUY

ISBN 978-0-500-23879-0

Printed and bound in China by Toppan Printing

—_—_—_—— ne
60 The Virgin and Child with 88 Unkei 120 Masaccio and Masolino
Angels and Two Saints Muchaku and Seshin The Brancacci Chapel Frescoes
JAS ELSNER DONALD F. McCALLUM ORNELLA CASAZZA

Moche Portrait Vessel 90 The Stained Glass of Chartres 124 Fra Angelico (and Lorenzo
CHRISTOPHER B. DONNAN Cathedral Monaco)
~ PAINTON COWEN The Deposition
64 The Relief of Ahkal Mo’ MAGNOLIA SCUDIERI
Nahb III, Ruler of Palenque
MICHAEL D. COE 128 Rogier van der Weyden
The Descent from the Cross
GABRIELE FINALDI

£52 Donatello
A NEW BEGINNING: David
1300-1500 ULRICH PFISTERER

THE BLENDING 98 Ife Copper Mask 134 Aztec Eagle Knight

OF CULTURES: SUZANNE PRESTON BLIER SUSAN TOBY EVANS
1000-1300
100 Giotto 136 Piero della Francesca
68 Zhang Zeduan The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes The Montefeltro Altarpiece
Spring Festival on the River GIUSEPPE BASILE MARILYN ARONBERG LAVIN

RODERICK WHITFIELD
106 Kim U-mun and other artists 140 Alessandro Botticelli
Vishnu Reclining on the Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara The Birth of Venus
Serpent Anantha YOUNGSOOK PAK PAUL JOANNIDES

JOHN GUY
110 Claus Sluter
76 The Vézelay Tympanum The ‘Well of Moses’
JEAN-RENE GABORIT SUSIE NASH

80 The Cefalu Mosaics 114 Hubert and Jan van Eyck

JOHN JULIUS NORWICH The Ghent Altarpiece
CHRISTOPHER DELL

84 The Reclining Buddha

of Polonnaruwa
ANTONY GORMLEY
 178 Titian Artemisia Gentileschi
The Assumption of the Virgin Judith Slaying Holofernes
FRANCESCO DA MOSTO GERMAINE GREER

Sultan Muhammad Bichitr

PERFECTING THE ART: The Court of Gayumars Portrait of Jahangir Preferring
1500-1600 DAVID J. ROXBURGH a Sufi Shaikh to Kings
DEBORAH SWALLOW

148 Albrecht Diirer 186 Qiu Ying and Lu Shidao

Self-Portrait Pavilions inthe Mountains 214 Peter Paul Rubens
ULRICH PFISTERER of the Immortals Minerva Protects Pax
CRAIG CLUNAS from War (‘Peace and War’)
150 Leonardo da Vinci DAVID JAFFE

Portrait of Lisa del Giocondo 188 Pieter Bruegel the Elder

(Mona Lisa) The Proverbs Rembrandt van Rijn
MARTIN KEMP STEPHAN KEMPERDICK The Night Watch
CHRISTOPHER DELL

Giovanni Bellini 192 Tintoretto

The San Zaccaria Altarpiece The Crucifixion Gianlorenzo Bernini
PETER HUMFREY QUENTIN BLAKE The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa
MARINA WARNER

158 Hieronymus Bosch 196 El Greco

The Garden of Earthly The Burial of the Count Nicolas Poussin
Delights of Orgaz The Phocion Paintings
GRAYSON PERRY XAVIER BRAY PIERRE ROSENBERG

164 Michelangelo 230 Diego Velazquez

The Sistine Chapel Ceiling Las Meninas
WILLIAM E. WALLACE AVIGDOR ARIKHA

170 Raphael 234 Johannes Vermeer

The School of Athens The Art of Painting
INGRID D. ROWLAND PAST AND PRESENT: ARTHUR K. WHEELOCK JR.
1600-1800
174 Matthias Griinewald Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin
The Isenheim Altarpiece 202 Caravaggio The Jar of Olives
JOSEPH LEO KOERNER The Supper at Emmaus PIERRE ROSENBERG
HELEN LANGDON
242 Utamaro 268 Claude Monet
‘Lovers’ from Erotic Book: Wild Poppies
The Poem ofthe Pillow JOHN HOUSE

JULIE NELSON DAVIS

DUBS Edgar Degas

Unless otherwise indicated, all dimensions
La Petite Danseuse de
are given in the order height x width.
quatorze ans
QUENTIN BLAKE
half-title
The Lady ofElche, Artist unknown
276 Edouard Manet
A Bar at the Folies-Bergeére page 4
The Villa of the Mysteries, Pompeii,
TOWARDS THE PHILIP PULLMAN
Artist unknown
MODERN WORLD:
page 5
AFTER 1800 280 Vincent Van Gogh The Court of Gayumars from Shah
Sunflowers Tahmasp’s Shahnama (‘Book of Kings’),
248 Francisco de Goya LOUIS VAN TILBORGH Sultan Muhammad

The Third of May, 1808 page 6

MANUELA MENA MARQUES 284 Auguste Rodin The Night Watch, Rembrandt van Rijn

Iris, Messenger of the Gods page 7

Sunflowers, Vincent Van Gogh
252 Caspar David Friedrich ANTHONY CARO

The Wanderer above the Sea The part-title pages show details from the
following works:
of Mist 286 Paul Cezanne
pages 14-15
WERNER BUSCH Apples and Oranges
Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt, Artist unknown
CHRISTOPHER DELL
pages 32-33
256 Eugene Delacroix The Villa of the Mysteries, Pompeii, Artist
Liberty Leading the People 290 Vilhelm Hammershoi unknown
BARTHELEMY JOBERT Dust Motes Dancing in the pages 66-67
Sunbeams (Sunbeams) The Reclining Buddha of Polonnaruwa,
260 J. M. W. Turner ANNE-BIRGITTE FONSMARK Artist unknown

The Burning of the Houses pages 96-97

The Birth of Venus, Alessandro Botticelli
of Lords and Commons,
October 16, 1834 292 Further Reading pages 146-47
The Court of Gayumars from Shah
ANDREW WILTON 296 Contributors
Tahmasp’s Shahnama (‘Book of Kings’),
ao? Sources of Illustrations Sultan Muhammad
264 Thomas Cole 300 Index pages 200-01
The Oxbow The Night Watch, Rembrandt van Rijn
MICHAEL J. LEWIS pages 246-47
Sunflowers, Vincent Van Gogh

————————————————— 6
INTRODUCTION: MAKING MASTERPIECES

CHRISTOPHER DELL

he term ‘masterpiece’ originated in Europe in the late Middle

Ages to refer to a virtuoso work produced by a craftsman to win
entry into a guild. Often produced early in his career, such a work
was calculated to show off his skills to best advantage. Today,
however, the word has spread to many other arenas: films, music,
recordings and books are all frequently referred to as masterpieces. The word
has come to describe the pinnacles of a creative career, the works that define
an oeuvre. Museums hope to collect masterpieces, not ‘minor’ works, and the
jewels of their collections are highlighted and specially signposted. For many
the Louvre is immediately associated with the Mona Lisa, the Prado with Las
Meninas, the Rijksmuseum with The Night Watch and the Uffizi with The
Birth of Venus; and many other collections are defined, in the popular imagi-
nation at least, by.a small number of outstanding works.
This raises an interesting question: how do museums and scholars decide
which works to highlight? What makes an artwork a masterpiece? The words
employed to describe these pieces can be frustratingly nebulous: ‘timeless’,
‘profound’, ‘work of genius’, ‘visionary’, ‘perfect’. But what do these terms
mean? Sometimes it can feel as though critics are substituting one riddle for
another. And yet great art does stray into a mysterious, even magical, world.
This book opens with the remarkable cave paintings at Chauvet, made 30,000
years ago; their fluid, sinuous lines are charged with enormous power. And in
the long ages since then, artists and sculptors have executed works of such
supreme skill and accomplishment that, regardless of their medium, purpose
or form, they are generally acknowledged to be masterpieces. All artists are
conjurors, bringing to life before our eyes the real and the imaginary, the
commonplace and the arcane, imbuing earthly materials — marble, bronze,
clay, oil paint —with a sense of the numinous.
Without doubt the concept of the masterpiece is beguiling, and many
great minds have wrestled with what gives these select works their status.
Kenneth Clark, the connoisseur’s connoisseur, in his book What is a
Masterpiece? (1979), identified two key characteristics as: ‘a confluence of
memories and emotions forming a single idea’ and ‘a power of recreating
traditional forms so that they become expressive of the artist’s own epoch
and yet keep a relationship with the past’. The preface states his hope that his
book will drive the ‘final nail into the coffin of subjectivity’. In the attempt
to identify the objective greatness of great works, Clark highlights technical
virtuosity, groundbreaking skill and originality of approach. Certainly many
of the masterpieces of art were pioneering in their time — the monumental
Above
bronzes at Angkor and the equestrian bronze of Marcus Aurelius both pushed
Leonardo da Vinci, Portrait of Lisa del
Giocondo, formerly Lisa Gherardini (Mona materials to new limits; the kouroi of ancient Greece dared to become human
Lisa), c. 1503—06 (detail). and led to Classical naturalism; and Masaccio’s expression of perspective
—_———
OO

8 CHRISTOPHER DELL
 set the course of the Renaissance. Just as important is the artist’s unerring
ability to know when a work is finished — when to stop: ‘In sculpture did ever
anybody call the Apollo a fancy piece? Or say of the Laocoén how it might be
made different?’, asked Ralph Waldo Emerson in his essay on art in the collec-
tion Society and Solitude (1870). ‘A masterpiece of art has in the mind a fixed
place in the chain of being, as much as a plant or a crystal.’
Others have taken a more subjective and emotional view — namely, that
masterpieces are the works that make the greatest emotional impact on us.
Surely most people will feel touched by Van der Weyden’s fragile depiction of
a mother’s loss in his quietly devastating Descent from the Cross. And surely
it is Van der Weyden’s articulation of the figures in their airless space, his
careful arrangement of the composition, his exquisitely delicate and detailed
Above
Equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, late
painting that distinguishes this deposition from many an inferior, less moving
2nd century AD. version. And surely most people can be entranced by the peacefulness of the
Cee EEEEEnenen

Introduction: Making Masterpieces 9

 Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, who holds with a calm and compassionate gaze
the attention of a reverent child, caught up in this awesome encounter.
Now let us consider the definition of a masterpiece from a different
angle. How universal is the concept of the masterpiece? Do all cultures make
value judgments about their art? In the case of ancient Egypt, whose artefacts
are remarkably well preserved, it is certainly true that the works we today
consider to be masterpieces are found in the most important tombs. For the
ancient Egyptians, the quality of the work was at least partly determined by
the quality of the materials and the amount of time taken to produce it. In the
intertwined traditions of Japan, Korea and China there is a broadly agreed
canon of master artists, whose works are, by definition, masterpieces. Qiu
Ying was regarded as one of the Four Great Masters of Ming painting, while
Zhang Zeduan’s remarkable Oingming Shanghe tu inspired a poem by a later
Yuan emperor, making it famous throughout China. The canons were largely
agreed on, even within the artists’ lifetimes, and today this veneration is
enshrined in a system of classified ‘cultural goods’ or national treasures.
While both the Far East and the West may think in terms of canonical
schools of art, the focus of this book is on individual works rather than artists
or movements. This is critical for two reasons. First, not all the works pre-
sented here have known creators. To concentrate on attributable pieces would
cut out a number of anonymous geniuses. Good examples are the strikingly
naturalistic Moche terracotta heads, or the powerful Ife bronzes. Secondly,
even lesser-known artists are capable of breaking the mould on occasion to
create a transcendental work: Hammershoi’s Sunbeams is a good example of
Top a work that enjoys more fame than its maker.
Rogier van der Weyden, Descent from the If we appeal only to the canon for our benchmark of the masterpiece,
Cross, c. 1435.
we are brought up sharp against the incontrovertible truth that though many
Above masterpieces are instantly recognized as great works, some emerge as such
Moche portrait vessel, c. 550. only after the artist’s lifetime: while he lived, Van Gogh’s brother, Theo, was
———:):.—
nn — eae

10 CHRISTOPHER DELL
 his only loyal patron, but now his Sunflowers are among the most immedi-
ately recognizable works in all art. Other artists have enjoyed huge success
in their lifetimes, only to be forgotten by successive generations. Although
Alessandro Botticelli enjoyed enormous popularity in Florence while he was
working for the Medici family, by the end of the 16th century his work was
already eclipsed and overlooked, and it was not until the 19th century that
collectors and then museums began to take a serious interest in him again.
Just as we can see only from far away which of a range of mountains is the
tallest, sometimes it is only with the distance of time that we can discern and
appreciate the pinnacles of art.
Where masterpieces have gained their status only long after they were
executed, their extended afterlife has often been the result of mechanical
reproduction — in books, prints and even greetings cards. I recently visited
the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, where I made the obligatory pilgrimage to
Rembrandt’s The Night Watch. The painting is a widely recognized master-
piece, held in such high esteem that since 1885 it has had its own dedicated
room in the gallery. As I looked at the work, I began to dissect it, attempting
to identify the details that make it distinctive. It struck me that certain ele-
ments border on the iconic: for example, the movement of the captain’s hand
as he turns to address his lieutenant. Can masterpieces be identified by partic-
ular constituents? Michelangelo’s nearly touching fingers are world famous,
as are Mona Lisa’s smile and Venus’s gathered golden hair. In the modern
period most of these elements have been reproduced millions of times, and (as
publishers, museums and galleries surely intend) we recognize them removed
from their context, in almost the same way as, subconsciously, we understand
branding in other situations. While a masterpiece is more than a collection of
memorable gestures, it is perhaps the artist’s genius at devising such speak-
ing details that accounts for the fame of some works. Or does celebrity result
from massive exposure? The two, of course, feed off each other.
At all events it is mechanical reproduction that allows us to make the
sorts of groupings found in this book. As little as a hundred years ago, such
comparisons could have been made only by the very few who had travelled,
and even they had to rely on memory or their own jottings and sketches to
set one work beside another. Today, however, we can assemble and compare
works from around the world and across the ages; and, without underrat-
ing this privilege, we can perhaps let our imaginations wander inventively
across the extraordinary variety of content, style and meaning of this col-
lection by turning things on their heads. Would Leonardo have recognized
the pared-down genius of a cave painting? What would the cave painter have
made of a 16th-century Persian miniature? And what would the miniaturist
in Tabriz have said to Delacroix’s Liberty Leading the People? While Monet
could discern the compositional genius of the work of, say, Utamaro, would
a Maya sculptor have recognized the regimented Classical beauty of Poussin,
for all its compositional rigour and use of ‘timeless’ proportions?This
lighthearted game underlines the simple truth that a masterpiece is often
determined by context — the context of the maker, the viewer, and what
each knows of the other. An understanding of the culture that has given
birth to a work of art remains critical in forming a value judgment of it.
Above
Utamaro, ‘Lovers’, from Erotic Book: The
% ob
Poem ofthe Pillow, 1788 (detail).

Cn ee etn IEIIEIEI ESSE SSIESEISISSSIE SSE ad

Introduction: Making Masterpieces 11

 The images in this book were made for a number of different reasons: to
inform, to entertain, to commemorate, to educate, to reinforce beliefs, to
encourage reflection or devotion. As a result, their forms, materials and
subject matter differ widely: a manuscript designed for private devotion is
radically different from a programme of biblical exegesis in stained glass or
a statue of a warrior designed for public display. What they have in common,
however, is that they are all concerned with the fundamental issues of com-
position, technical handling and the clear transmission of a message. It is this
that makes them art.

CHRISTOPHER DELL
 Our selection ends in 1900 — the cusp of modernity in Western art, but
in fact a date of worldwide significance. Since that date humankind has found
itself in an increasingly globalized world, where local cultural identities are
eroded, and where international artistic currents increasingly mingle. It is
also true that the 20th century saw the final overthrow of technical virtuosity
as a prerequisite of a masterpiece: increasingly, it is ideas that count.
The works included in this book, regardless of when or where they were
made, are all undeniably great. As to what makes them so, the authors give us
seventy different answers. Some have decided to dismantle the composition of
the work they have chosen, others to explain the story behind it or its unique
significance, and others still to relate more personal accounts. Contemporary
artists such as Tom Phillips, Grayson Perry, Avigdor Arikha, Anthony Caro
and Antony Gormley offer penetrating insights into the art of the past,
while scholars such as Pierre Rosenberg and Roderick Whitfield draw on a
lifetime’s experience of looking. Germaine Greer explores the impact of the
artist’s life on her work, while Jas Elsner’s poetic essays on a kouros and the
sublime Sinai icon revive the Greco-Byzantine ekphrasis style. Philip Pullman
makes an intriguing comparison between the groundbreaking Bar at the
Folies Bergéres and a contemporary work, while Martin Kemp is himself
groundbreaking in his interpretation of Mona Lisa.
Claude Lantier, antihero of Zola’s 1886 novel L’CEuvre (translated into
English as His Masterpiece), is driven mad by his quest to create a master-
piece, believing that a triumph at the Salon will establish his career. Cézanne
had a hunch that he was the model for the Lantier character, which led to an
Opposite
argument between the two men that ended by destroying a childhood friend-
Giotto, Scrovegni Chapel frescoes, 1303-05 ship. It is understandable that Cézanne, hungry for recognition (and often
(detail). just hungry), would have made an attractive subject for a novelist. But we
Above
cannot help feeling that Zola was unkind to mock the artist for doing what all
Paul Cézanne, Apples and Oranges, c. 1899. artists naturally try to do: to surpass themselves, to produce something that is
oO
greater than the sum of its parts, and that will live on after they are gone.

Introduction: Making Masterpieces 13

:
gig
The Birth of Art
UP TO 500 BC
The Origins of Art
The Chauvet Cave, Artist unknown
JEAN CLOTTES

hen, on 29 December 1994, I reached the floor of

what would become known as the Chauvet Cave — having
painfully crawled through a twisting narrow passage and
The discovery of descended a shaft down a wavy ladder — little did I suspect
that the chambers discovered by the three cavers guiding
Chauvet Cave has me would be home to one of the greatest artistic masterpieces of all time.
Our torches picked a number of images out of the darkness. Any one
changed our conception of the panels that we saw would have been enough to make the cave famous.
In the first chambers were three superb cave bears, a panther, a hyena-type
of the evolution ofart. animal, big dots and mysterious images reminiscent of insects. There was
also an extensive panel with lions, rhinos and mammoths, handprints and
hand stencils — all painted in red.
After crossing another chamber, devoid of designs, we came to a huge
hall. Here the walls were covered with masterly engravings of horses, mam-
moths, aurochs, rhinos and an owl. From here on, most of the animals would >
be either engraved or black, with few of the red figures seen earlier.
Next we came upon a cave bear skull spectacularly deposited on a rock
in the middle of the chamber. The most important panels in this chamber
were on either side of a recess. An eight-legged bison appeared in front of a
large lion courting a female; these, in turn, appeared among beautiful horses.
Two rhinos seemed to be fighting and, above them, the wall was crowded
with four horses’ heads and a number of aurochs and rhinos. At right angles
to the recess was another panel with deer and reindeer, bison, horses and
ibex. The variety of animal species represented (fourteen in all in the Chauvet
Cave) was striking and unusual.
We then followed a narrower passage, where cave bears had. left
scratches on the walls. We found more black drawings, of megaloceros deer,
horses, rhinos and ibex. Large pieces of burnt wood littered the ground: fires
had been made here, probably to obtain the charcoal with which to draw. —
Above Finally, we reached what we would call the End Chamber. In this vast
A red hand stencil in the first chamber of hall, the artists had thought very carefully, deliberately, about where to paint.
the Chauvet Cave, and above it the sketchy At the very end, three big bison occupied an entire wall, while the walls next
outline of a black mammoth.
to the entrance bore lions, mammoths and bison, as well as strange W-shaped
Opposite geometric symbols.
In the End Chamber, the panel to the left But what struck us most strongly was a remarkable accumulation
of the central recess shows a closely packed
of animals, once again carefully arranged on either side of a recess. The
group of rhinoceroses, seven of which (top)
are depicted in spatial perspective as if they left-hand panel showed two distinct groups: four black lions’ heads and an
were standing side by side; to their left are engraved reindeer superimposed upon five fainter red lions; and a congrega-
several lions, superimposed with a reindeer. tion of seventeen rhinos, unique in Palaeolithic art. The central recess was a
30,000-25,000 Bc complex composition in itself, with a horse in its centre. The artist had ini-
Ardéche, France tially scraped the wall into the form of a horse’s body, but then had drawn the
oh

16 JEAN CLOTTES
Above
The so-called Panel of the Horses shows
four exceptional horses’ heads, with several
aurochs and rhinos, and a bison below them;
two of the rhinos are locked in combat.

Right
In a deep recess in the first chamber of the
cave three cave bears are outlined in red: the
artist captures their stance with startling
naturalism and a sure hand.

TY

18 JEAN CLOTTES
 Theconstant recurrence ofdetails and motifs ... suggests that most of
the art was the work of a single person — or at least a group working under
one great artist.

animal to the right, as though it were issuing from the wall. A large rhino on
the left and a bison above and to the right gave the same impression of animals
emerging from the depths. Two other rhinos and a mammoth topped the
recess, completed on its right by three more mammoths, the head of a bison, a
small rhino and a strange-looking animal.
The right-hand panel, the most spectacular in the entire cave, began
with four bison heads on its edge, facing us. The artist took advantage of two
slight concavities in the wall to draw two lions and five bison facing left. One
engraved rhino tops the panel and another stands below it. To the right, the
other, wider, concavity includes a very sketchy engraved mammoth at the top
and another bison. However, most striking of all are the fourteen lions and an
animal with an elongated body that could be a lion or a mustelid.
Today, we know more about this panel, as well as about the cave and
its art. Sophistication and expertise are the words that most readily spring to
mind to describe it. To the right is a pride of eager, tense male and female lions
hunting bison (when after big game, males join the females in the hunt). For
whatever reason — myths, perhaps, or special rites — the panels were carefully
thought out so that the recess was their focal point. The constant recurrence
of details and motifs (for example, the ears of the rhinos or the eyes of the
lions) suggests that most of the art was the work of a single person —or at least
a group working under one great artist.
The techniques used were simple but effective: charcoal for the blacks,
haematite for the reds, plus occasional engravings. The shading inside the
heads or bodies was done by spreading the pigment by hand or with a piece
of hide.
Two of the animals most commonly found in this cave —lions and rhinos
— are found only rarely elsewhere. Why this should be became clearer once
we got radiocarbon dates from some of the drawings and from the charcoal
on the ground: the cave contains work from two distinct periods, one around
26,000—27,000 years ago (Gravettian) and the other around 31,000-32,000
years ago (Aurignacian). Most of the works seem to belong to the earlier
period, a period when animals such as lions, rhinos, mammoths and bears
played a particularly important role in beliefs and ritual practices.
The discovery of Chauvet Cave has changed our conception of the
evolution of art. For most of the 20th century, specialists believed that art
originated in the Aurignacian period with crude figures and slowly improved
until it reached the apogee of Lascaux, less than 20,000 years ago. Yet now we
know that, at least as early as the Aurignacian, great artists were at work and
Above
had mastered most of the techniques and artistic concepts that would make
A bison in the Recess of the Horses, its bulky
proportions and characteristic gait perfectly Palaeolithic cave art famous.
captured.

ee

The Chauvet Cave 19

A Giant Leap for Art
The Mycerinus Triad, Artist unknown
TOM PHILLIPS

ven if you have never seen in actuality the endlessly pictured

pyramids of Giza you will know they come in different sizes.
Most people can identify the largest, that of Cheops, and some
that of Chephren: few, however, could put a name to the third
and smallest. The pyramid of Mycerinus is dwarfed by those of
his predecessors, yet it was in its complex that, just a hundred years ago, a
group of triadic sculptures was unearthed. They mark for me a vital instant
in the history of art, when virtuality and virtuosity achieved union in new-
minted perfection.
Of the four intact examples, three are in the great Egyptian Museum of
Cairo, whose arrangement, as I saw it a few years ago, recapitulated somehow
the experience of exploration. Its sparse labelling, and absence of hectoring
panels to preempt or condition personal reactions, left the visitor to make his
or her own discoveries. Aitd this was mine. In the dusty daylight of the huge
display, reminiscent in atmosphere of a sculptor’s studio, I found myself face ©
to face with this particular triad, the most intense of the set. In an epiphanic
moment I imagined its commandingly energetic figures, as if impatient of the
artist’s slow and arduous craft, bursting from the stone of their own accord,
eager to show themselves to the world they ruled.
Mycerinus, God on Earth, leads the way with the goddess Hathor on his
right and the demi-goddess of the Cynophilite nome, the region of the jackal,
on his left. Even without the crown of Upper Egypt, Mycerinus would be the
tallest with Hathor next in height; the minor goddess is appreciably shorter
than either. The rules of size are strict, which does not pose a great problem for
the sculptor but prevents perspective being of any use to the Egyptian painter
who has to develop an alternative code for his version of reality. (People still
assume that such artists did not understand perspective, could not ‘do’ it—as
if they simply had not noticed that a figure far away appears smaller than one
close by.) The only limitation this puts upon the sculptor is to urge him to
keep to frontal images, thereby ensuring certainty as to who the most impor-
tant is in any group, and also guaranteeing that no god turns his back on us.
An artist of genius, like the Mycerinus sculptor, will turn this constraint to his
Above
advantage by investing frontality with the frisson of confrontation.
The giant pyramids at Giza, seen from the Status is indicated literally from top to toe since the feet also conform to
south. From left to right: Mycerinus (with and confirm the relative station of each. The king moves confidently towards
two of its three Queens’ Pyramids), Chephren
us, his left leg forward in the pose that was to become fixed for many centuries
and Cheops.
as the convention for the upright male figure. Hathor also advances, though her
c. 2532-2504 Bc front foot is slightly behind the back foot of Mycerinus. The minor deity knows
Greywacke
her place and keeps her feet together in the passive stance customarily used for
63 cm x 47 cm/ 2 ft 1 in. x 1 ft 6% in.
From the pyramid of Mycerinus, Giza, Egypt, depicting female figures. All is therefore exactly as it should be, and yet the artist
now in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo has brilliantly managed to convey an advancing thrust of the group as a whole.
—_—_—_—_—_——_
OO

20 TOM PHILLIPS
 Syn, Dah:
eh en Bee
We ~ best

i? ro eens
 The command of human anatomy is especially impressive when one
realizes how sparing the artist has been with detail in order to convey the
idea of a supremely athletic young man: much animation is achieved by subtle
shifts of plane and much power conveyed without a catalogue of bulges.
The female figures are dressed in identical and improbably figure-hugging
linen shifts. This allows for yet further simplification, concentrating on the
all-important attributes of fertile readiness in the high ripe breasts and deep
pubic triangle.
Portraiture plays little part in the sacred sculpture of the Old Kingdom.
Enough characterization is given to distinguish one pharaoh from another
by selecting one or two features that, so to speak, depart from the standard
model. Here Mycerinus is identified by a roundness of face and an atypical
snub nose. The attendant deities take their physiognomical cue from the
God on Earth, with only mildly feminized versions of the face that for his
reign would stand as the iconic ideal. In all likelihood it was the maker of this
carving who devised the definitive image of Mycerinus for others to imitate.
After my initial shock of admiration for this work, a second amazement
was to realize its age and to think how much of the business of art, of material
facture, iconographic coherence, mathematical structure, anatomical sophis-
tication and sheer elegance had been so soon summated in a single work. It
almost calls for capital letters to state that it was made 4,500 years ago.
Even in the context of the huge time span of ancient Egyptian art it is an
early work dating from only the fourth dynasty. It is therefore one of those
vanguard artefacts that at key moments in the history of art asks the question,
‘Having proved that we can do everything, what is there now to do?’ The ques-
tion is tied to that most elusive of concepts, realism. For its original audience
it may have seemed on the verge of magical, a proto-Pygmalion phenomenon
where one more inch of reality would threaten to make the whole thing (like
the statue of Hermione in Shakespeare’s The Winter’s Tale) come alive.
In the great museums of the world Egyptian sculpture occupies as
substantial a place as that of ancient Greece, yet, whereas Greek sculpture
has always been revered as art and has been devoutly copied and drawn by
generations of students, work of Egyptian sculptors tends to be regarded as
of more historical than aesthetic interest. It is held to be exotic and, with its
outlandish gods, alien. The iconography of the gods of Greece and Rome is
well known as an antidote to the drabber Judaeo-Christian pantheon. Their
names (Venus, Mars, Dionysus, etc.) are still usefully invoked. Greek artists
are often identified by name even if, like the work of Zeuxis and Apelles,
nothing from their hand survives.
The maker of this triad remains anonymous and as in almost all
Egyptian art left no signature or identifying mark. It is a silly myth that, as
I was brought up to think, in ancient Egypt even the leading sculptors were
regarded as mere artisans. As well as being part of a necessary intellectual
elite they were important to the state as chief creators of prestige, and artifi-
cers of what we now call public relations. No doubt there were officials to
Above mediate between palace and studio. One imagines some high clerk of works
Another triad by the Mycerinus sculptor.
A closer examination of this group reveals
a gesture of unexpected tenderness shared
by Mycerinus, God on Earth, and the
goddess Hathor.

et

22 TOM PHILLIPS
 discussing with the sculptor what was needed. Could his workshop elicit from
a single piece of stone an amalgam of benign nobility and warlike energy?
Could he achieve an expression both stern and smiling, and could he, while
of course featuring all the necessary attributes, add a sense of the erotic? And
furthermore could he do all this in a new and forceful style? Luckily the offi-
cial would be talking to the only person who, with a glance at his assistants,
could cheerfully nod in assent.

... Limagined its

commandingly energetic

figures, as if impatient
of the artist’s slow and
arduous craft, bursting

from the stone of their

own accord ...

Right
In this triad, Mycerinus and Hathor are
accompanied by a figure representing a
nome (district of Egypt), identified by
the symbol above its head.

oo

The Mycerinus Triad 23

The Immortal King
SS |

Olmec Colossal Head 8 (Monument 61), Artist Unknown

MICHAEL D. COE

he Olmec culture of south-eastern Mexico, dating to about

1500-400 sc, is the oldest complex culture of Mesoamerica, and
is widely admired for its gigantic stone portrait heads, of which
seventeen are known. Ten of these were found at the site of San
Lorenzo, a massive, partly artificial plateau rising some 50 metres
above the surrounding swamps and farmland. On this mesa was constructed
Mesoamerica’s first urban complex, not of stone, but of earth and clay.
Monument 61 was excavated from San Lorenzo in 1970. Almost all
Colossal Heads, whether here or at other Olmec sites, have been discovered
out of their original context: moved by post-Olmec peoples, or else eroded
out of their original positions into ravines. In the case of Monument 61, it
was deliberately buried before about 1200 Bc — fortunately, since almost all
The frown at the top recorded San Lorenzo monuments (stone thrones, sculptures of gods and
man) were savagely mutilated or broken in about 900 Bc, when the site fell
of the nose, the carefully into ruin. In contrast, Monument 61 is pristine.
Though not the largest of the Colossal Heads, Monument 61 is enor-
delineated eyes, the mous. Probably weighing almost ten tons, it was carved from a basalt boulder
that had been found on the slopes of the Cerro Cintepec, a volcanic mountain
flaring nostrils ... impart some 50 kilometres (30 miles) north-west of San Lorenzo. It would have been
brought to the base of the plateau by river and seacoast on a huge raft of balsa
a sense of authority logs, then hauled up to the top of the mesa by ropes and log rollers. This was a
people without the wheel or draught animals, and completely bereft of metals.
tempered with dignity The precision and beauty of its carving is astonishing, considering that basalt
has the hardness of jade, and all work had to be carried out by stone-on-stone
and even serenity. hammering, pecking and grinding.
Like all others of its kind, this Colossal Head is the portrait of a king. On
his head he wears what surely was a protective helmet. A strap at its base has a
repeated low relief of either a claw, or (more likely) the beak of a raptorial bird
like an eagle, perhaps representing this unknown man’s personal name. His
facial features, sculpted with utmost sensitivity and with a full understanding
of muscular anatomy, convey an overwhelming impression of pure power.
The frown at the top of the nose, the carefully delineated eyes, the flaring
nostrils, the slightly open mouth and full lips, impart a sense of authority
tempered with dignity and even serenity. There can be no doubt that this was
a renowned Olmec potentate at the very dawn of Mesoamerican civilization.
1500-1200 Bc
It remains a mystery as to why this magnificent portrait was ‘decom-
Basalt missioned’ by being deeply buried shortly after the inception of San Lorenzo
H 220cm x W 160cm x D 165 cm / as the capital of a powerful state. The lack of mutilation suggests that this
Tat Z2y2 ing xo Ina sD fiSiline
act marked not a dynastic overthrow, but a more peaceful passing of power.
From San Lorenzo, Veracruz, Mexico,
now in the Museo de Antropologia, Regardless of what occurred almost three and a half millennia ago, one of the
Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico great masterpieces of antiquity has been preserved for us in all its glory.
a

24 MICHAEL D. COE
 —_
nn ee a
An Unfair Battle

Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt, Artist unknown

JULIAN READE

... this is not a real hunt ... but a ritual in which the lions symbolize
the forces of evil against which the king is pledged to protect his people.

n 646 Bc Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, commissioned a new palace

for his great capital city of Nineveh. The existing royal palaces, built
by his grandfather Sennacherib, were beginning to show their age, but
Ashurbanipal had at least one additional motive: he wished to commem-
orate his own achievements, as he had just completed two successful
wars. One had brought Babylon back under Assyrian control. The other had
culminated in the sack of Susa, a long-time rival in southern Iran.
In many ways Ashurbanipal’s new palace was a traditional structure.
Most of the walls were made of sun-dried brick, protected at the base with ~
alabaster panels. The panels in the main rooms were carved in low relief and
then, probably, brightly painted. Many carvings celebrated Ashurbanipal’s
triumphs as a military leader. One group of rooms, however, illustrated
another facet of the king’s personality — his role as a Mighty Hunter before
the Lord, killing lions.
The theme of the Royal Lion Hunt was well established in the ancient
Middle East, going back to before 3000 Bc. The Assyrian royal seal itself
represented the king in single combat with a lion. Most of these scenes were
relatively simple, showing just one dramatic moment in the struggle between
man and beast. In Ashurbanipal’s palace, however, the subject occupies long
Above stretches of wall, and the designer responsible for the work was one of the most
This small version of the royal seal shows imaginative ever to work at the Assyrian court. The drama of Ashurbanipal’s
the king gripping a lion’s mane and stabbing Lion Hunt unfolds, like a film moving through time and space, along a wide
it through the heart. Probably lions killed in
corridor that connected the domestic quarters with a private gateway.
this way had already been disabled. (8th—7th
century BC, 2.5 cm high, British Museum) Ina first episode the king’s chariot is ina screened enclosure. Armourers
attend to the royal weapons, busily checking the condition of bows and
Opposite
arrows. Grooms fasten the chariot horses in position. One horse stands wide-
Ashurbanipal, magnificently bearded and
wearing the royal uniform of tall hat and eyed but motionless as the groom tightens its harness; another shies away
embroidered clothes, calmly draws his bow as snorting, well aware of the dangers to come. There is a contrast between the
he is driven in a chariot round the arena. The anxious bustle of the attendants and the dignity of Ashurbanipal himself,
man beside him, represented as shorter and
who stands upright in his chariot, wearing an enormous hat. The king reaches
therefore less important, is his driver.
out one arm to receive his weapons. This contrast — between the dispassionate
645 Bc attitude of the king as supreme hero and the mundane chaos surrounding him
Alabaster
— grows wider and more prominent as the story proceeds.
c. 160 cm x c. 2,700 cm/c. 5 ft3 in. x c. 90 ft
From Nineveh, now in the British Museum, While the king prepares for battle, the lions are brought in cages to an
London arena ringed by soldiers. For this is not a real hunt in which the king has to
OO

26 JULIAN READE
Above
As the king rides to and fro, soldiers stationed
around the arena prevent the lions from
escaping, but spectators are still frightened.
Here a panicky crowd is running into a wood
and climbing a low hill, which is itself crowned
with a monument showing a royal hunt.

Right
A lion is brought to the arena in a cage.
A child releases the animal by raising a
trapdoor, and can take refuge in his own
smaller cage on top if the lion turns on
him instead of attacking the king.

—_———
OO

28 JULIAN READE
 search for lions, but a ritual in which the lions symbolize the forces of evil
against which the king is pledged to protect his people. Then he rides out in
his chariot, accompanied in the cab by a driver and two guards holding spears;
The sculptors have horsemen gallop around to assist. The lions are uncaged one by one. Crowds
of spectators rush up a hill for a good view, or panic in case a lion escapes.
created a set of images There are three separate episodes of the king performing. In one of them
he is holding the bow, imperturbably shooting the lions down. We see his
that conform entirely to arrows loose in the air. The lions collapse as they are struck again and again.
A wounded lion identifies its adversary and springs at the back of the cab, but
Assyrian requirements, the guards repel it. Then another lion throws itself at the chariot, and grabs a
wheel; the king hands his bow to one of the guards, takes a spear instead, and
showing the king drives it into the lion’s head. A third lion succeeds in grabbing the back of the
cab, but the king and his guards turn to dispatch it.
supremely calm and So the king triumphs, as usual. Good has defeated evil, the universe
is as it should be. The sculptors have created a set of images that conform
the lions comically entirely to Assyrian requirements, showing the king supremely calm and the
lions comically contorted in their death throes. That is how the Assyrians
contorted in their would have viewed these scenes, and they would have continued to do so until
enemy forces overran Nineveh in 612 Bc and left the place in ruins. Gradually
death throes. the alabaster panels were buried under the crumbling brick walls, and the
paint, if there ever was any, faded completely away. Ashurbanipal’s palace
was forgotten until 1853, when the Lion Hunt panels were discovered by the
archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam, who promptly sent them to the British
Museum in London.
Then something strange happened. The panels arrived in a city where
pompous Oriental monarchs were regarded with some contempt, but where
animal paintings with anthropomorphic connotations were all the fashion
(1851 had been the year in which Sir Edwin Landseer completed his Monarch
of the Glen). This sentimental attitude to wild animals is still common today.
So, in the eyes of many modern viewers, Ashurbanipal the lion hunter is not a
hero but a brutal stereotype. The dying lions, instead of being the evil enemy,
are tragic persecuted victims. It has even been suggested that the designer and
sculptors responsible for Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt were foreigners or prison-
ers, who despised their Assyrian masters and deliberately made the lions into
sympathetic figures.
There was no scope in ancient Assyria for interpretations of this kind,
but the artists can legitimately be praised as masters of dramatic tension,
as close observers of nature and as brilliant exponents of representational
art. At the same time the grand sweep of the composition is balanced by
close attention to detail and exquisite workmanship. So the sheer quality of
Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt means that it can be appreciated, like a painting
of animals in Chauvet Cave, regardless of its exact original significance. The
viewer, constantly discovering new felicities, can enjoy this masterpiece for its
own sake.

Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt 29

Staring into the Future
e———————————————— _ —— —

The ‘New York Kouros’, Artist unknown

JAS ELSNER

... With half-smile and a stare at once intense

and far away, he gazes .... Where are you looking,

marble man?

eet firmly planted between movement and rootedness, he

simultaneously stands and walks. Crisp-cut, almond eyes, such
beatitifully bobbled hair patterned against the skin-smooth stone
of flesh. Naked, but for that headband so deliciously tied and the
choker with its knot before his neck. Muscles marked, precise, not ~
natural but the sign of what it is to be a man. Not sexualized but archetypally
male, hands resting by his side or almost tensed for action, with half-smile
and a stare at once intense and far away, he gazes out of archaic eternity.
Where are you looking, marble man? Do you catch the glance of the
passers-by who admired your manhood once, in ancient times, and mourned
the lost youth above whose Attic tomb you stood or walked in the early years
of Greece? Or do you look at those who now observe your marble finish as
they saunter through the stone galleries that hug the east side of the park?
What do you see, stone aristocrat of Greece? The dying world of heroes, kings
and mythic monsters, whence you came? The democratic future when stone
would be smoothed to look like flesh and statues really seemed to walk, when
kings were overthrown and myths made subject to philosophy? Or the chaos
of New York where you have come — another immigrant to the melting pot, to
be the Ancient Greek amidst the teaming millions?
Brave youth caught in the morning of the world, poised naked at the
cusp of adulthood, your standing walk seems, motionless, to span the whole
expanse of what is past, and passing, and to come.

Above
The taut skin of the face betrays not a single
mark of age. Is this eternal youth a funerary
monument to a young aristocrat?

c. 600-575 Bc
Marble
H 184 cm/ 6 ft 0% in.
From Attica, Greece, now in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

pe - ae ney _

30 JAS ELSNER
 bee! ~~
Scobbeseceeanata
Fiefs ade cs TITS,
Sd Eis th de be ee Na he
CUEBBEMmDELE RIAA AA AT HT bilhg
LO!
i
PEARL Rap ap,
 .
?

nal
Deeg Po.ae oA o ete i ; esfey Soma
| ere SS
*
‘ ; eres
c, ae, we sehen PES AED 5S, se
;
ay rej yy

wus

TH ANG
¢

3 |
PY
The Art of Power
500 BC-AD I000
The Greek Diaspora
The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ Relief (Tydeus and Capaneus
at the Siege of Thebes), Unknown Etruscan artist
GIOVANNI COLONNA

mong the many masterpieces exhibited in the Museo

Nazionale Etrusco in Rome, the high-relief terracotta plaque
from Pyrgi showing two episodes from the “Seven Against
The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ saga stands out not only for its historical and cultural
significance, but also for its technical perfection. Depicting
Thebes’ saga relates the a scene set in the remote world of gods and heroes from a cycle popular
throughout Greece and philhellenic Etruria, it has been described by O. J.
tale ... of a siege ofthe Brendel as ‘one of the most spectacular discoveries of Etruscan art in recent
time’ and by Bianchi Bandinelli as ‘the most important example of Etruscan
city of Thebes by an art corresponding to the Greek “Severe Style”’.
The relief was discovered in fragments (partly due to ploughing)
army led by seven men. between 1956 and the early 1960s near Santa Severa, in a field next to the
ancient harbotir-of Caere, some 50 kilometres (30 miles) from Rome along
the Aurelia road. The excavations brought to light a huge sanctuary, almost
certainly the one Greek authors described as being dedicated to the goddess
Leucothea. This sanctuary was so wealthy that in 384 Bc it was plundered
by Dionysius the Elder, tyrant of Syracuse. The plaque belonged to the most
monumental building at Pyrgi (today known as Temple A), and was originally
placed at the top of its rear pediment, which overlooked the main entrance to
the sacred area. Both the plaque and the temple can be dated to 470—460 Bc.
After being modelled in terracotta, the plaque was cut into two pieces in
order to make transportation to the kiln and the firing process easier. It was
then fixed to the end of the ridge-pole (columen) of the temple with twelve
bronze nails. The two lateral beams (mutuli) also bore terracotta plaques
showing other episodes from the ‘Seven Against Thebes’ cycle; however, the
Above
small number of surviving fragments makes reconstruction of these impos-
Partial reconstruction of the original sible. The temple stood until the foundation of the Roman colony of Pyrgi
polychromy (elaboration by Barbara Belelli around 270-260 Bc, when it was dismantled and the three terracotta plaques
Marchesini), using different shades of the four
were hauled down and were carefully buried together with the many terra-
main colours (red, black, white and yellow);
in addition, light blue was originally used cotta revetments that had protected and decorated the roof of the building.
for decorative motifs and details, such as The plaque is about the same size as a metope from a great Greek temple
the volute pattern on Tydeus’ greaves. such as the Parthenon, where each metope usually includes two or three
Opposite figures. Here, however, there are six figures, represented at three-quarter
Tydeus’ and Capaneus’ deeds in the siege size. The master-sculptor has taken full advantage of the technical qualities
of Thebes: above, Zeus (left) confronts of clay, grading the depth of the figures from the almost flattened details at
Capaneus, and below, Tydeus (behind)
struggles with Melanippus.
the lower level to the full relief of the heads. He also has carefully arranged
the whole composition by placing the two foreground figures lying on the
470-460 Bc floor while the others stand in different poses in the background. This creates
Terracotta
the illusion of two different superimposed registers. However, all figures rest
132 cm x 137.5 cm/ 4 ft 6 in. x 4 ft 4 in.
From Temple A, Pyrgi, now in the Museo on the bottom frame of the plaque, unifying the scene in a single time and
Nazionale Etrusco di Villa Giulia, Rome space. The high relief is without precedent, and has been modelled entirely by
Sr |

34 GIOVANNI COLONNA
 hand, following a preliminary sketch on the surface of the plaque. No one had
ever been able to superimpose high-relief terracotta figures so that they could
overhang by almost a quarter of their height — a decision that would have
involved great difficulties and risks during the firing process.
The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ saga relates the tale (popularized by a play
produced by Aeschylus in 467 Bc) of a siege of the city of Thebes by an army
led by seven men. The saga culminates in a battle that pits two brothers,
Eteocles and Polynices, against each other. Apart from the final fratricide,
the Pyrgi felief scenes feature the most defiant and feared chiefs of the assail-
ants, Tydeus and Capaneus. Tydeus is shown in the lower register, locked in
a fight to the death with his Theban opponent Melanippus. They have both
been mortally wounded by javelins and lie stretched across the entire width
of the plaque; their bodies are interlaced, forming a wavy line. Tydeus drags
Opposite himself beyond Melanippus and seizes his neck; at the same time he hauls up
Front view and two sections of the same relief his right arm holding a sword (which has not survived). Melanippus tries to
(drawings by Barbara Belelli Marchesini). The draw his weapon out of the sheath, but to no avail. The intention of Tydeus
relief was brought to light in the excavations
is not to bite but to break his enemy’s skull in order to eat the brain. Greek
of Pyrgi by the Sapienza University of Rome,
under the supervision of Massimo Pallottino morality had rejected the practice of cannibalism of defeated enemies centu-
and Giovanni Colonna. ries before. In the corner of the plaque we see the goddess Athena, who bears

36 GIOVANNI COLONNA
 The master-sculptor has taken full advantage of the technical qualities of
clay, grading the depth of the figures from the almost flattened details at the
lower level to the full relief
of the heads.

a jug of athanasia-—the potion that could make her beloved Tydeus immortal.
However, because of his act of cruelty, Athena leaves the scene disgusted and
Tydeus will die.
The middle and the right side of the upper register depict the deeds of
another of the Seven, Capaneus. The protagonists are Capaneus, who has
just claimed that not even Zeus could prevent him from scaling the walls of
Thebes, and Zeus himself. Man and god face each other — with a Theban
warrior (probably Polyphon, who according to Aeschylus fought Capaneus)
cowering between them — and Zeus raises an arm to throw a bolt of lightning
(now lost) and punish Capaneus for his hubris. The head of Zeus and the jux-
taposed heads of Capaneus and Polyphon mark the vertical axis of the scene;
Capaneus opens his mouth in an expression of pain; his hair raised, he begins
to fall back, hauling up his sword in vain.
In terms of iconography, the work is highly original from both a Greek
and an Etruscan perspective. The representation of the dying Tydeus and
Melanippus is unique, whereas the denial of immortality to Tydeus and the
electrocution of Capaneus do appear elsewhere in later works. As regards
the selected episodes, the commissioning authority and the master-sculptor
took inspiration from ancient literary sources other than Aeschylus’ play:
for instance, the lost epic poems of the Theban cycle. The crime of Tydeus
may be derived from a lost epic-lyrical poem by Stesychorus, while the denial
of immortality to him was possibly suggested by poetry in praise of Athena
by Bacchylides (also lost). The main theme at Pyrgi Temple A, however, was
strictly linked to the political situation of the time: Caere had just got rid
of the tyrant Thefarie Velianas, the friend of the Carthaginians who wor-
shipped the goddess Astartes. Soon after the unsuccessful Etruscan attack
on Cumae, the polis was under constant threat of attack by the Syracusans
until Pyrgi was sacked by Dionysius the Elder, as told above. The same theme
is represented in Aeschylus’ play: the censure of hubris (the tyrants being the
personification of wantonness and insolence), and the hope of recovering
good morals and respect for the divinities.
The modelling of naked bodies and the rendering of expressions, such
as the perplexity of Athena and the fighting enemies grinding their teeth,
invite comparisons with the early Greek Severe Style (most obviously with
the painting of Polygnotus), in spite of the archaic rendering of drapery, eyes,
hair and beards. However, it is the moral inspiration permeating the whole
work that lifts it above archaism and makes the relief a unique monument in
Etruscan art.

The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ Relief 37

Beauty from the Sea
c

The Ludovisi ‘Throne’, Artist unknown

ROBIN OSBORNE

woman rises up, her lower body concealed behind a thick

cloth held by two flanking female attendants. They steady her
movements with hands gently placed behind her shoulders. She
turns her head sharply to her right, displaying a fine profile, a
keen gaze, and modestly closed lips. Her hair, prepared for this
special occasion, is tied with a headband that pulls it back to reveal the top of
her ear. The delicate fabric of her clothing (a chiton) clings sufficiently to her
body to reveal the contour of her breasts, the structure of her ribcage, anda
slim belly.
Damage to the gable of the relief has left the flanking figures headless,
but their bodies tell both of their gender and of their intent concern for the
woman they attend. Closely parallel in their stance, these two women are
... we desire to touch nevertheless distinct. Both wear garments whose overfold removes their
upper bodies from pryingsgaze: the figure on the left wears a side-fastened
these bodies, hear these woollen peplos, that on the right a linen chiton pinned along the arms and at
the shoulders. These garments fall quite differently from one another over
voices, smell the sea legs whose lines are revealed by the disturbance to the fall of the folds. Bare
feet upon pebbles hint that it is from a pool or the sea that the central figure
and the scent. rises, and provoke curiosity about the body concealed by the cloth screen the
attendants hold up.
‘But these three are not the only female figures on this object, for at either
end is a woman seated on the ground. One, wearing sandals, sits on a stiff
cushion, heavily cocooned in a cloak (himation) pulled up to veil her head.
From a box in one hand she feeds fragrant grains into an incense burner that
stands before her. The softness of the cushion on which the other woman sits
corresponds to the softness of her young and naked flesh; legs crossed, hair
bound up ina scarf, she plays the double pipes. The contrasts between the two
ends of this ‘throne’ are marked — clothed against unclothed, music against
perfume, pleasure against duty. Framed by these figures, the figures in the
main scene invite the viewer to grasp their sensuous distinction: we desire to
touch these bodies, hear these voices, smell the sea and the scent.
What are we to make of this array of women? In Greek myth various
Opposite female figures disappear into or emerge from earth or sea. Their stories are
The central figure, rising from the sea, ones of sexual desire: Pandora, the first woman, fashioned from earth to
probably represents Aphrodite. The unusual attract male attention; Persephone, taken off to the underworld by Hades to
treatment of her clothing not only reveals
the contours of her body but emphasizes the
be his wife and released for a season every spring; Aphrodite, born from the
effort as she stretches up her arms. sea foam. Yet these are three females of quite different character: Pandora,
wily and source of troubles, Persephone, an innocent young daughter close
470-450 sc
Marble
to nature, Aphrodite, smiling charmingly and bent on seduction. Whichever
Original H 108 cm/ 3 ft 6% in. figure we take to be central here — and this is another competition in which it
Now in the Palazzo Altemps, Rome is hard not to vote for Aphrodite — the exploration in the five figures of what
—_—______——_ ——~ : *

38 ROBIN OSBORNE
\ The attractions of the Ludovisi ‘Throne’ derive not merely from its beauty

and indisputable eroticism but also from the enigma that surrounds it.

it is to be female runs the whole gamut of these choices. The sculptor offers
us the full range of ways in which women present themselves, with nudity and
veiled modesty only the extremes.
The attractions of the Ludovisi ‘Throne’ derive not merely from its
beauty and indisputable eroticism but also from the enigma that surrounds
it. Although known to have been excavated in 1887 in Rome, in the grounds
of the Ludovisi Palace and most probably in the area that in antiquity was the
Gardens of Sallust, the precise site at which it was found is variously recorded.
When it was first published, no other object of this form was known and the
piece was identified as a throne for a cult statue. But without seat or legs it
seems more likely to be a fender of some sort — but what sort, and from where?
For this cannot have been an object made in Rome: its style identifies it as
Greek and from the Sth century Be.
Above The most plausible original provenance is Locri Epizephyrii in south-
Three aspects of the throne. The naked pipe-
player’s physical attractions are brought to life
ern Italy, a Greek city well known archaeologically for its cult buildings and
by the realistic volume of the creased cushion associated reliefs of sacred scenes of a date and style closely akin to the style
and her crossed thighs. of the ‘throne’. Locri’s rich cultic engagement with women, known both from

40 ROBIN OSBORNE
 archaeology and from ancient texts, offers a space in which the associations
of the imagery are most resonant. A possible site at which the ‘throne’ could
have been used as a balustrade around a sacred pit has even been identified.
Just two years after the first scholarly publication of the Ludovisi
‘Throne’ in 1892 another ‘throne’ came to light and was quickly bought by
an American collector and given to the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. Made
from the same Greek island marble, and with similarly contrasting characters
(a heavily draped old woman and a naked younger figure) on the two ends,
this appeared to be the twin of the Ludovisi ‘Throne’. Its main scene showed
the weighing of souls to determine their fate, and between them the two
‘thrones’ appeared to cover life and death, female and male. But the carving
and iconography of the Boston ‘Throne’ are dubious: is it a modern forgery?
A work of the Sth century Bc originating from the same place as the Ludovisi
Above ‘Throne’? Or a Roman copy of a genuine Sth-century work? The confidence
Genuinely ancient or not, the Boston ‘Throne’ with which we can embrace, or dismiss, complex theological interpretations
displays nothing like the same sensitivity to
different fabrics, textures and surfaces as the
of the Ludovisi ‘Throne’ depends upon these, currently unanswerable, ques-
Ludovisi ‘Throne’. tions. But the beauty of this enigmatic object does not.
o———

The Ludovisi ‘Throne’ 41

Men of Mystery
The Riace Bronzes, Artist unknown
ROBIN OSBORNE

hey stand with left leg advanced, and swing their torsos to
place their weight on the straight right leg. On their left arms they
carry what is now sadly just the strap-handle of the heavy hoplite
The urge to bring shield. The fingers of the right hand curl round a missing spear.
Something has caught the attention of each, as a turn of the head
these statues to life signifies. Described like this, these are brothers.
But even the most superficial glance shows these warriors to have few
is irresistible. common genes. The straitjacket of a common pose is only the basis for an
exploration of how different men can be. Warrior A is quivering with taut
life. His skin pulls tight over firm flesh. Look at his buttocks. Prominent and
firmly rounded, these point to a mature man whose life is dominated by hard
training. Age has certainly thickened him up from the days when he was a
wiry youth, but there is not an ounce of this body weight that cannot be put to
work, whether in the games or in the field of war. He is proud of his condition
—as proud to show it off in his springing curls and luxuriant beard as he is in |
his firm martial stance. Something catches his attention and he springs to life
to confront it: no one can doubt that he is looking at them.
Life impinges more slowly on Warrior B. He is somewhat listless, not
sure that what is going on in the world is worthy of his attention. He hasn’t
been sure for some time, nor that going to the gymnasium is worth his while
either. He has put on some weight and doesn’t feel as lively as he once did. In
an idle moment he notices how many veins now trace their progress across his
torso, his hands, his feet. He realizes that he has lost the firmness he once had;
the flesh lies thin and slack. Rather like his beard and hair. It is still a beard to
boast about, but it doesn’t have the same spring it once had, and the sweat on
the brow too easily plasters down the curls upon the forehead.
The urge to bring these statues to life is irresistible. When they are
Above viewed side by side the temptation to compare and contrast quickly turns into
The fine observation of the human body is
a need to explain difference. The impression that these two have been caught
manifested in the way these figures stand, as
well as in details (the veins of the hand) and at a particular moment stimulates our desire to tell the story of past moments,
skin textures. to construct a life history. Ever since their chance discovery by a scuba-diving
holidaymaker from Rome in the sea off Riace Marina in Calabria on 16
Opposite
The slightly downcast gaze of Warrior B August 1972, these statues have been attracting stories. In one reincarnation
combines with a body less fit than it once was they have taken the place of the saints Cosmas and Damian as the patrons of
to give an impression of reflective melancholy. Riace; in another, Warrior A has acquired an active heterosexual life in the
Mid-5th century sc world of the Italian pornographic comic. A survey by sociologists found that
Bronze Warrior A appealed to heterosexual visitors to the museum in Reggio, while
Warrior A: H 198 cm/ 6 ft 6 in. homosexual visitors responded to B.
Warrior B: H 197 cm/ 6 ft 5% in.
But what was their ancient story? The chances are that they spent
Found off Riace Marina, Reggio Calabria,
Italy, now in the Museo Nazionale della many centuries under the sea after the ship carrying them from a sanctuary
Magna Grecia, Reggio Calabria in Greece to adorn the public spaces of a Roman town or the private spaces
OO

42 ROBIN OSBORNE
hey
 of a Roman villa sank in stormy weather. But which sanctuary? And when
and why were they commissioned? Divorced from their original context, all
assessments of the date of these statues depend upon the internal evidence of
their technique and style. Although some scholars have demurred, the case
for their coming from a single monument and from the workshop of a single
sculptor is extremely strong — as is the temptation to identify that sculptor
with one of the great names known from ancient texts. Could these be works
of Phidias?
Whoever he was, he was certainly at work in the generation immediately
after the Persian War (480—479 Bc). These statues stand in the tradition of
the Kritian Boy and the Athenian images of Harmodios and Aristogeiton,
celebrated in the agora of that city as the men who ‘slew the tyrant’. They are
determined to evoke in the viewer not just the presence of mature men, but the
presence of mature men of a particular lifestyle. In contrast to classical sculp-
tures produced in the second half of the Sth century Bc, whose generalized
bodies avoided such particularizing and drew attention instead to what men
share, these bronze bodies impel the viewer to create a particular narrative to
justify their very particular appearance.
It is the emphasis on the particular self-contained body here that makes
these warriors so richly satisfying. No one viewing them conceives them to be
only a fragment of a larger whole, for they seem to need nothing more than
... Warrior A has each other. Yet it is likely that they come from a bigger monument, that these
were only two of a number of variations on the warrior theme. Whether the
acquired an active warriors belonged to the realm of history — a monument, for instance, cel-
ebrating the part played by individual generals in Greek success against Persia
heterosexual life in the — or of mythology — could they be two of the seven heroes who attacked the
city of Thebes, or is one of them Achilles? — we cannot know. But we are so
world ofthe Italian distracted by the details of their bodies that we do not feel the need to know.
Such lack of concern is perhaps one reason why no subsequent classical sculp-
pornographic comic. tures look quite like these.

Opposite
Some of the most powerful effects of these
sculptures derive from features — the massive
furrow that marks the spine — not given by
nature.

Right
Our ignorance of the original arrangement of
these sculptures is tantalizing: were they side
by side? Or did they eye each other up?

mn

The Riace Bronzes 45

Leading Lady
—— ——— —_——

The Lady of Elche, Artist unknown

RUBI SANZ GAMO

he Lady of Elche has fascinated all who have seen her since she
was found in 1897. From the moment of her discovery she was
associated with the Iberian people, of whom at that time little was
known — just a few references in classical texts and some curious
inscriptions. The most beautiful image of the period yet discovered,
she propelled the study of the ancient peoples of the Iberian Peninsula.
The sculpture combines idealized facial features with realistic jewelry
and stylized clothes. She wears a cloak and a tunic with rigid, schematic folds.
Her face and chest show an excess of jewelery: a pointy tiara covers her hair,
while on top of her veil we see a diadem covered in three rows of pearls; a
small clasp or brooch (known as an annular fibula) fastens the tunic around
her neck; on her chest are three thick necklaces from which amphorae and
wide tabs hang like amulets; her ears are hidden by plates decorated with
volutes — from these, hanging jewels spread out over her shoulders. Finally,
two large pearl-covered radiating roundels on either side of her face are held —
in place with ribbons that cross the top of her head. In 2005, the findings of
moive Lady of Elche institutes in Spain and France allowed us to recreate her original colouring,
with pink skin, red lips, Egyptian blue tunic, cinnabar red cloak and tiara.
is the product and Some of her jewelry would have been covered with a layer of gold.
The tiny gold particles that have been found in the pores of the stone
reflection of an urbane underline her royal or cultish character. Perhaps her gaze is that of agoddess,
to be admired and adored. Or maybe she represented a being that emerges
aristocratic class. from the earth; she may even be a copy in stone of an original wooden sculp-
ture, dressed and wearing real jewelery. Others have proposed that she was
designed to contain the ashes of a dead person, as the hollow space in her back
suggests. In any case, the Lady of Elche is the product and reflection of an
urbane aristocratic class.
Certain questions remain, of course. Pierre Paris first pointed out the
Greek heritage of the Lady of Elche in 1903, and today this is widely accepted,
though there may have been additional sources of inspiration. Some have
argued that she is a bust, others that she is the remaining piece of a full-body
statue. Goddess or mortal, she is unquestionably striking, an adaptation of
Pea Mediterranean classicism to Iberian taste.
This side view of the Lady of Elche shows the When the sculpture was found, the inhabitants of Elche (in Alicante,
astonishing pearl-covered radiating roundels south-eastern Spain) called her ‘the Moorish queen’, while the local scholar
that flank her head. : eens
Pedro Ibarra compared her to Apollo. G. Rochegrosse used her as inspiration
5th—4th century ac in his illustrations to Flaubert’s Salammb6, and in 1899 the city of Marseille
Stone, with traces of polychrome and gold helped spread her fame through a commemorative poster. She became a
H 56 cm x W 45 cm x D 37 cm/
aie (nee coe ME a symbol of the 19th-century regeneration in Spain and was seen as captur-
WMiseo Arauenioaico Naciohalde Eepaha, ing the essence of Spanish women. Since then she has remained integral to
Madrid Spanish culture, appearing in facades, sculptures, banknotes and textbooks.
e oe — _ a

46 RUBi SANZ GAMO

Forgotten Rites
The Villa of the Mysteries, Pompeii, Artist unknown
MARY BEARD

he most famous painting discovered in the buried city of

Pompeii — indeed the most famous surviving anywhere in the
Roman world — is the curious frieze that covers the walls of a large
room in the ‘Villa of the Mysteries’, a substantial property just
outside the boundary of the ancient city. Painted in the mid-Ist
century BC, its series of almost life-size figures, set against a luscious red
background, has become the modern icon of Pompeii, copied onto thousands
of posters and postcards, ashtrays and fridge magnets.
Unearthed in 1909 in one of the last ‘private’ excavations at Pompeii
(conducted by a local hotel-keeper eager for spectacular finds to boost his
trade) it was an immediate sensation. The frieze from the ‘Villa Item’ (as it
was then called, after its amateur excavator) was enthusiastically hailed in
press reports across Europe, and its intriguing subject matter was soon dis-
sected in scholarly articles. What was this strange collection of almost thirty
gods and mortals — from a winged ‘demon’ to a naked child— wrapped around
these walls? Was some ritual going on? If so, what?
... part of the pleasure But it was the lavishly illustrated publication of the paintings in 1931 by
Amadeo Maiuri (the Superintendent of Pompeii for almost forty years in the
of the frieze is the way mid-20th century) that secured their reputation as Roman masterpieces of the
first rank. By now, the Villa had taken its modern name, from the theme of the
that it repeatedly plays frieze itself: not merely ‘mysterious’ (though it is certainly that) but depicting,
as one interpretation suggests, the religious ‘Mysteries’ or initiation rites of
with our ability to the god Dionysus.
At one end of the room, opposite the main door, the first thing you
decode it. would have seen as you walked in was Dionysus, sprawling semi-naked in
the lap of his mother, Semele — or maybe his wife, Ariadne (the female figure
only partly survives). This divine couple is clearly the centrepiece of the whole
composition, with its exotic cast of characters. Leading up to the pair along
the left-hand wall is a relatively stately procession: the naked child reads out
words froma scroll; a woman carries a loaded tray, while looking out to catch
the viewer’s eye; a group of women cluster around some kind of container, as
one pours out water or wine from a jug.
Yet, as the figures get nearer to Dionysus, things become decidedly
stranger. Next to the figure of young Pan playing his pipes, his female partner
(a ‘Panisca’) appears to suckle a goat; a satyr, one of Dionysus’ mythical fol-
Opposite
A young woman buries her head in the lap of
lowers, holds up a cup into which his friends gaze intently (we cannot see
her companion, exposing her bare back for what they are looking at, but one of them holds up a theatrical mask over the
the lash of a whip. satyr’s head); at the corner of the room a woman seems to start back in horror
— but at what?
Before aD 79
Fresco The answer to that question is probably to be found on the other side of
Pompeii, near Naples, Italy the divine couple. For here a woman kneels as she begins to reveal something
a

48 MARY BEARD
 cee
aaa
LEE
OO
IO LAI

“7
a,
mare
"ee
y
ae

he Leta
~
>

ee g &,
" .

ee .

rman

arene

" ‘
°

°«
ws

«
‘
‘ Pl 4
ea
5

“_.

% “
~
of
J©—A
:

+ .’ .

5‘
 ) What was this
strange collection of
almost thirty gods and
mortals — from a winged
‘demon’ to a naked child
— wrapped around these
walls?

that has been concealed beneath a dark cloth (a phallus, it is usually imag-
ined), while the winged demon whips the bare back of a girl who buries her
face in her companion’s lap. Just next to her a naked woman dances and plays
the castanets.
What on earth is going on? And what kind of room was it that these
images decorated? Perhaps, as the Villa’s modern title has it, the frieze is
meant to depict an initiation into the cult of Dionysus: hence the revelation
of the phallus, and the flagellation. But the room itself is hardly the hidden
Top sanctuary of some esoteric cult. It is in fact one of the showrooms of this large
The frieze extends around the four walls house, opening onto a portico with a panoramic sea view. So this would be a
of the room — here ‘unfurled’. Is it a linear
scene of initiation intended not as the decoration of a shrine, but instead as an
narrative or a series of tableaux?
elegant backdrop to dining and entertainment. Others have preferred to see
Above the painting as an allegory of marriage and the preparation for a wedding.
A child reads from a script. In this and several
other scenes the characters are engrossed
The bride has been identified as a young woman shown seated to the right of
in something we viewers cannot see — here the main door and the central couple. On this interpretation, Dionysus and
perhaps a sacred text. his wife, Ariadne, would symbolize the divine nature of marriage.

50 MARY BEARD
 The truth is that we do not know exactly what is depicted here. Indeed
part of the pleasure of the frieze is the way that it repeatedly plays with our
ability to decode it. What is the naked boy reading? We cannot see. What is
being revealed from under the cloth? We can only guess. What are the satyr
and his friends studying so intently in the cup? They do not show us.
But there is a surprising sting in the tail. One reason for the impact of
this frieze is the way that it envelops anyone who steps into the room. We
become part of the strange world inhabited by these figures. Another is the
sheer lustre of the deep red background, against which the figures are set:
‘Pompeian red’ at its loveliest. This colour, however, cannot entirely be attrib-
uted to the original artist. When the paintings were first uncovered they were
so badly affected by damp that unsightly salts leeched through the paintwork.
In order to remove the salts and to prevent further seepage, petroleum wax
Above
was carefully and repeatedly rubbed into the painted surface. That memora-
In one of the strangest episodes in the fresco,
a female version of Pan, a Panisca, appears to ble sheen is, in other words, a 20th-century creation.
suckle a goat; her partner plays the pipes.

—_— _ — ————————————— |

The Villa of the Mysteries, Pompeii 51

The Reluctant Hero

The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius, Artist unknown

NANCY H. RAMAGE

Remarkable details abound ... the leather shoes that cling to the feet,
revealing the shape of the toes inside; or the open mouth of the horse, champing
at the bit, while his ears twitch in opposite directions.

his over life-size horse and rider, the only bronze equestrian
statue of an emperor to have survived from antiquity, has been
witness to almost 2,000 years of Rome’s history. Its survival is
little short of miraculous. Bronze statues were normally cut up
and*melted down for a secondary purpose, whether for cannon-
balls, doors, locks or other useful items. This practice had started already
in late antiquity, when bronze was needed especially for coins. Though four ~
ancient bronze horses from a chariot group in Constantinople survived, and
were later brought during the Crusades to San Marco in Venice, where they
remain today. How did this horse and rider escape the furnace? In the Middle
Ages it was popularly thought that the man on horseback was Constantine (r.
AD 306-37), the first Christian emperor — and therefore untouchable. However,
the figure actually represents the emperor Marcus Aurelius (r. AD 161-80), as
proven by comparison with coin portraits and marble statues and reliefs.
It is not known where it originally stood, but by the 10th century the
statue had been placed in front of one of the great basilicas in Rome, St John
Lateran. A painting in the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva by the
Renaissance artist Filippino Lippi, and a drawing by Martin van Heemskerck,
both show the statue in that location. But in 1538 Michelangelo was commis-
sioned by Pope Paul II to design a new square on top of the Capitoline Hill
in Rome, in anticipation of the impending visit of the Holy Roman Emperor
Charles V. Although Michelangelo wanted to leave the statue where it was,
he reluctantly used it as the centrepiece of his new trapezoidal piazza. This
square has buildings on three sides, and is open to a marvellous view of
papal Rome on the fourth. Here the statue stood on the pedestal designed by
Michelangelo for almost 450 years. But by 1981 the bronze was corroding so
badly from acid rain and air pollution that it was decided to remove the statue
from its pedestal and to clean and restore its surfaces. Only at that time was
it discovered that some of the original gilding, obscured over the centuries,
was still adhering to the bronze. Today, the cleaned and conserved statue
Later 2nd century aD
Bronze, with some gilt
is installed within the Capitoline Museums in a huge space that allows the
H 350 cm/ 11 ft 6in. viewer to experience the greatness of this sculpture from all angles. A replica
Capitoline Museums, Rome replaces it outdoors on Michelangelo’s piazza.
ee

52 NANCY H. RAMAGE
 CAP
[CAPITOL ScLoG RAPHIA-EX:IPSO+ EXEMPLA RI- MICHAELIS -ANGELT-BONARO The |
Tl -A:STEPHANO > DV PERAC -PARISTENST-ACCV RATE-DELINEATA _ i
| : :T:IN-LVCEM-AEDITA : ROMAE*ANNO + SALVTIS:CODL XIX
ans =

ees

Above
The Piazza del Campidoglio, Rome
(engraving by Etienne Dupérac, 1568). The
piazza on top of the Capitoline Hill, with the
statue of Marcus Aurelius in the centre, was
designed by Michelangelo.

Right
Coin portrait of Marcus Aurelius. The
emperor’s features (straight nose, heavy
eyelids, long thin face, curly hair and beard)
confirm the identification of the rider in the
equestrian statue as Marcus Aurelius.

54 NANCY H. RAMAGE
 A man on horseback seems like such a standard subject that we might
assume any example would look much like any other. This is not the case. In
this masterpiece, the unknown sculptor addresses the power of the rider in a
number of different ways. Marcus Aurelius was a sensitive man and a thinker
whose Meditations, written in Greek, summarize his stoic philosophy. The
emperor’s long, thin, thoughtful face, with heavy eyelids and curly hair and
beard, is accurately reflected in this bronze portrait. Although he fought
wars against the Marcomanni in Germany, the Pannonians in Hungary, and
others, he was haunted by the violence and destruction caused by warfare.
His 33-metre (100-ft) high commemorative column that still stands in Rome
is full of scenes sympathizing with the enemy, and shows images of women,
children and old men being abused, tortured and killed by the Romans —
scenes reflective of his philosophy.
Wearing a tunic and cloak (paludamentum), the emperor stretches out
his hand toward the crowd of soldiers he is addressing in a gesture known
as adlocutio. The great and noble horse is barrel-bellied, strong and power-
Wearing a tunic and ful. Its remarkably thick neck, with protruding veins and skin wrinkled into
folds, is pulled back by the reins, now missing, in Marcus Aurelius’ left hand.
cloak ... the emperor The emperor sitting astride the horse, with feet hanging loosely, is in complete
control of the animal. His relaxed position and generous, peaceful gesture
stretches out his hand add to the imposing appeal. Striking details abound, such as the leather shoes
that cling to the feet, revealing the shape of the toes inside; or the open mouth
toward the crowd of the horse, champing at the bit, while his ears twitch in opposite directions.
The sculpture is not symmetrical, suggesting that it was intended to be
of soldiers he is seen from the rider’s right side. The left side of both man and horse are larger
than the right, taking into account that the farther side would appear to be
addressing ... smaller if it were not in fact enlarged to compensate for this optical effect.
Other features too indicate an optimal view from the rider’s right: the man
and horse both turn slightly in that direction. It may be that this group was
originally paired with a second equestrian statue, probably representing
Marcus Aurelius’ son and co-ruler, Commodus. Such a statue would have
been similarly asymmetrical, but in the opposite direction. A figure of a sub-
missive barbarian captive may have been placed under the raised front leg of
the horse, according to the somewhat unreliable 12th-century Mirabilia urbis
Romae (Wonders of the City of Rome).
It would be difficult to exaggerate the influence that this bronze has had
on later equestrian statues. Among them, in the Renaissance, are Donatello’s
bronze statue known as the Gattamelata in Padua and Verrocchio’s Colleoni
in Venice; but well into the 19th century, many commemorations of soldiers
and rulers throughout the Western world were modelled on the equestrian
statue of Marcus Aurelius.

Above
Detail of the right hand of Marcus Aurelius,
making the gesture of address known as
adlocutio.

The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius 55

Unearthly Beauty
Oe ———— a —— ——— —~S

The Buddha Preaching the First Sermon, Artist'unknown

JOHN GUY

epresentations of the Buddha account for some of the most

sublime images inthe history of art. This sculpture of the histori-
cal Buddha Sakyamuni, expounding his newly defined path to
The image 1S enlightenment, is not only among the most refined images of the
Buddha to have survived in India, but has also proved to be an
unrivalled in the h istory iconic form that has had a lasting impact and legacy in the lands beyond India
where Buddhism flourished.
O 7 Indian Buddhist art. The sculpture shows a supremely calm and reflective Buddha, seated in an
advanced yogic posture. His hands are raised in a specific gesture, representing
It is the embodiment of the ‘turning of the wheel’ of Buddhist law, dharma, so invoking the moment
when the Buddha shared the supreme wisdom he had attained after his recent
the Buddha message and Enlightenment at Bodhgaya. This event, often referred to as the Buddha’s First
Sermon, took place in the forest retreat at Sarnath, north ofthe ancient city of
of the Buddhist aesthetic. Varanasi, and was witnessed both by his immediate disciples and by the forest
animals. The devotees, together with two recumbent deer, are represented ~
in the frieze below the throne-seat, seated left and right of the dharmacakra
(‘law-wheel’). The dharmacakra is a spoked wheel, which emerged early in
Indian iconography, variously associated with Hinduism (as Vishnu’s weapon)
and adopted into Buddhism to denote the Buddha’s teachings. The worship-
pers raise their clasped hands in veneration (anjali) of the dharma. The
Buddha’s hands by contrast, are complexly configured in a double teaching
gesture, which conjoins by one finger, so evoking the ‘turning of the wheel’.
This image is the culmination of a lineage of representations of the
Buddha that has its beginnings around the Ist century AD at and in the area of
Mathura. The earliest works are of a more robust nature, showing powerful,
martial figure-types, associated with the cult of the hero (vira) in early Indian
religions. The monumental standing Buddha-vira, which was commissioned
according to its Brahmi inscription by the bhiksu (‘monk’) Bala, around the
year AD 130, epitomizes this style. Although this sculpture was discovered
within the monastic complex at Sarnath, it is carved in a sikri red sandstone
characteristic of Mathura, some kilometres to the west, suggesting that
even large-scale images were on occasions transported to distant locations.
Numerous seated Buddha sculptures survive from the centuries preceding
the Sarnath Preaching Buddha, and they almost universally display a raised
hand in abhaya-mudra, a gesture of protection to followers of the Buddha’s
teaching. In the early period, the ‘turning of the wheel’ gesture occurs most
frequently in the Buddhist art of the Gandharan region of north-western
Gupta period, c. 475 India (modern Pakistan), and it would appear that this iconography is a spe-
Chunar sandstone
cific revival by the Sarnath school in the Gupta period.
161 cm x 79 cm /5 ft 3% in. x 2 ft 7 in.
From Sarheih Witten Pradesh india The Sarnath Preaching Buddha carries within it these multiple lineages,
Now in the Archaeological Museum, Sarnath = and may be characterized as representing the distillation and apogee of
e — — —©

56 JOHN GUY
 Its stylistic legacy, in the form of a new
internationalism in Buddhist Asia, was without

precedent in the history of Asian art.

these traditions. For example, while the Mathuran and Gandharan versions
presented the Buddha flanked by two attending bodhisattvas, the Sarnath
Buddha is depicted alone, serving as a single focus of devotional attention.
Rearing winged leogryphs in foliage replace the bodhisattvas, and the nimbus,
typically a plain disc or one with a radiant-sun border, has evolved into a riot
of foliate meanders, embedded with lotus buds, ringed by registers of pearls
and encircled by a flame border. Celestial fly-whisk bearers adore the image
from above.
The resulting image is unrivalled in the history of Indian Buddhist art.
It is the embodiment of the Buddha message and of the Buddhist aesthetic.
The genius of the artist lay in capturing the inner meditative quietude of the
Buddha, achieved by the absolute symmetry of the figure in a yogic medita-
tion posture (padmasana), and in conveying a sense of his other-worldliness
through a non-naturalistic approach to form. Both are handled masterfully.
The robust musculature of preceding styles has surrendered to a softness
of form in which mass is conveyed by supple rounded contours. The result
is a highly stylized image of beauty, codified according to the rules of citra
(‘image-making’), as given sublime form in the murals at Ajanta, and, in the
secular realm, in the verses of the poet Kalidasa.
No longer does the artist seek to represent the Buddha with verisimili-
tude, as a spiritual ruler on earth; rather, he attempts to convey a sense of the
otherness of the Buddha-nature. This in part reflects a devotional realign-
ment in which the Buddha had been redefined as belonging to the realm of
the gods, no longer that of the Perfected Mortal. In theological terms, we are
witnessing a shift in emphasis from the Buddha as spiritual protector to the
Buddha as the embodiment of supreme knowledge (anuttara-jnana-vapti).
This sculpture is undated but can be assigned, by comparison to
inscribed examples, to the close of the Sth century. It would have served as one
of a number of Buddha icons for veneration and meditation by members of the
sangha, along with gilt-copper alloy images, some monumental, of which the
most spectacular survivor is the Sultanganj Buddha. The majority of inscribed Above
Standing Buddha, commissioned by the
Sarnath-school images indicate monastic patronage and it is reasonable to
senior monk Bala, dated to the third year
assume that this sublime Buddha was commissioned by senior members ofthe of the reign of Kanishka, equivalent to aD
sangha for installation within the principal monastery at Sarnath. 130. The inscription describes the patron as
The Sarnath style of Buddha-image went on to have an impact on a master of the Tripitaka, the ‘three baskets’
(collections) of Buddhist canonical texts. This
Buddhist art unforeseen in its day. It became both progenitor and prototype
monumental standing Buddha embodies the
for a Pan-Asian Buddha style, which extended north to Nepal and into Sui memory of yaksha images belonging to early
and Tang China, and east to mainland Southeast Asia, as vividly witnessed in Indian nature cults, united with the Vedic
the Buddhist art of the Dvaravati kingdoms of Thailand. Its stylistic legacy, in notion of the Bhagavata, the worshipped hero.
(Mathuran school, sandstone, height 289.5 cm
the form of a new internationalism in Buddhist Asia, was without precedent
/ 9ft 6 in. From Sarnath, Uttar Pradesh, India,
in the history of Asian art. now in the Archaeological Museum, Sarnath)

—
esesse=E"E

58 JOHN GUY
Above
Buddha attended by bodhisattvas, from
the Kushan period, late 2nd century aD.
This image embodies the finest attributes
of Kushan Buddhist art, notably a robust
musculature and an alert, engaging Buddha,
communing directly with his devotee. It
pays homage to the ancient Indian ascetic
preoccupation with yogic practices, seen
in the cross-legged posture of the Buddha,
and to the celebratory aspects of Buddha’s
veneration by attending bodhisattvas and
celestial adorers. (Mathuran school, sikri
sandstone, height 72 cm/2 ft 4% in. From
the Katra mound site, now in the Government
Museurh, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, India)

Right
Sultanganj Buddha. This copper alloy image,
cast in sections, is a rare reminder of the lost
tradition of monumental metal casting in
Buddhist India, the prevalence of which was
confirmed only by recent discoveries of large-
scale metal images at Buddhist monastic sites
in Bangladesh. (6th—8th century AD, copper
alloy, height 230 cm/7 ft 6% in. Excavated
at Sultanganj, Bihar, India, now in the
Birmingham Art Gallery and Museum, UK)

The Buddha Preaching the First Sermon 59

A Heavenly Hierarchy
The Virgin and Child with Angels and Two Saints, Artist unknown
JAS ELSNER

ady, why do you look away? The stern saints at your side look
straight at me, holding my gaze in theirs. The ethereal angels at
your back look up towards another world, whence peeps the hand
of God that blesses you on high. But you, it seems, choose to look
away. And likewise, the Son of God, your son, gold-robed and
golden-haloed, with golden hair, right hand raised in blessing and left clutch-
ing childlike at a scroll, he too looks aside and not at me.
Made of pigments cased in the encaustic medium of set wax, applied
impasto-thick and hot upon the wooden board, the icon is a window to a
heavenly world. Full-colour, fresh and lifelike are the seated lady and the
saints in courtly dress, their shadows claiming presence on the ground; more
monochrome, translucent, not of this world, the angelic company. And all
— angels, lady, saints, the curving niche wherein they stand — pierced by a
ground of holy gold which*penetrates the wax at the haloes, the throne and
the robe of the Incarnate Lord, seated with his head before her heart. Do we |
notice first the figures, flat but built of wax, or the glistening gold that cuts
through the painted forms? The colourless wax medium contains pigments
of crushed mineral and stone — as once the Virgin lady held inside herself the
child now seated on the blue-robed lap. This painterly matter where pigment
... lady, why do you rests in wax, figures too the double nature of the boy the lady bears, who sits
—an infant Word — before the saintly womb. Some called her Mother of God,
look away? Am I not some Mother of Christ — naming thus, but with brutally contested empha-
ses, the way He is both man and God. Others call her Queen of Heaven, the
worthy to catch your blessed Virgin, the pointer of the Way. All these she is, in this majestic vision
ofaheavenly court, ministered by angels and attended by saints, a golden star
gaze, nor that of your upon her covered head.
Lady, you sit enthroned at the onset of iconic art—the earliest point from
anointed son ...? which Christian icons survive. Your throne is guarded by warrior saints who
carry martyr crosses that testify to the life each once laid down in witness
Above
The Virgin enthroned between angels and to the Godhead of your son. Your back is guarded by angels bearing staffs.
two saints of uncertain identity, both of God’s blessing falls as a beam of gold-flecked light from above, and that star
whom carry crosses. upon your forehead flickers back as in response. So, lady, why do you look
Opposite away? Am I not worthy to catch your gaze, nor that of your anointed son who
The wax impasto technique gives a tactile also looks away? Is access to your sanctity offered only through the retinue of
quality to the cloaks of the Virgin and Jesus, saints, by facing one of your protectors, gaze for gaze? Or do you look away
but at the same time highlights the sketchiness
of the brushstrokes in the two angels.
from the sorrows and imperfections of the world, where few know fully how
to venerate your son? Does that glance aside disdain the history of candle-
Probably 6th century offerings, bows to the ground and kisses that have marked your worship in
Wax encaustic pigments on wood
this very icon for nearly fifteen hundred years? Surely, lady, you would not
68.5 cm x 49.7 cm / 2 ft 3 in. x 1 ft 7% in.
Possibly from Constantinople, now in the prefer the anodyne regulation of humidity and air in a museum to the rising
Monastery of St Catherine, Mount Sinai incense and the candle’s smoke, whose burning wax melts in homage to your
Oo wax-made potency?
60 JAS ELSNER
 hee

ee
etta he
SR oS ee
nS et
Ancient Portrait from Peru

Moche Portrait Vessel, Artist unknown

CHRISTOPHER B. DONNAN

he Moche civilization flourished on the north coast of Peru

between AD 100 and 800. Although the Moche had no writing
system, they left a vivid artistic record of their beliefs and activi-
ties in beautifully modelled and painted ceramic vessels. Among
the greatest achievements of Moche potters was the ability to
create true portraits of individuals — showing the anatomical features of a
person with such accuracy that the individual could be recognized without
relying on accompanying symbols or texts.
Moche portraits were made as portable ceramic vessels that could
contain liquid. The faces are usually somewhat smaller than life-size. They
include an astonishing range of facial types and expressions, and allow us not
only to meet Moche people who lived more than 1,500 years ago, but even to
sense the nuances of their individual personalities.
Although nearly all Moche portraits have been found in graves, they
Moche portraits ... were not made for funerary purposes. They were made to be used by the ~
Moche, and most show signs of wear — abrasion, chipping or mended breaks
allow us not only to — that occurred before they were put into graves. There is no evidence that
a portrait vessel was ever buried with the individual it depicted. Nearly all
meet ... people who are portraits of adult males, yet they are sometimes found in female burials.
Moreover, portraits of some individuals have been found in the graves of
lived more than 1,500 various people.
This splendid portrait vessel has a stirrup spout, a term derived from
years ago, but even to its shape. The individual is shown with most of his hair enveloped in a plain
cotton cloth, wrapped around his head. A tapestry weave band was then
sense the nuances of added, along with tassels that terminate in small metal discs. He wears
tubular ear ornaments, and has vertical black stripes painted on his cheeks.
their ... personalities. The geometric pattern painted on this individual’s neck is characteris-
tic of adult Moche males who engage in ceremonial combat, in which pairs
of warriors, elegantly dressed in elaborate clothing and ornaments, engage
in hand-to-hand combat. The objective was to capture rather than kill the
opponent. Once a warrior was captured, his weapons, clothing, headdress
and ornaments were removed, and a rope was put around his neck. He was
Opposite and above
The two vessels show the same individual,
then paraded to a ceremonial precinct, where he was sacrificed — his blood
(opposite) earlier and (above) later in life. In consumed by ritually dressed priests and priestesses.
the mature portrait, his ear ornaments and The distinctive facial features of this individual make it possible to rec-
headdress have been removed, indicating that
ognize four other portraits of him that are in various museum collections. All
he was captured in ceremonial combat and
was to be sacrificed. four show him somewhat older than he appears in this portrait. Three show
him with his headdress and ear ornaments removed, and one of those even
fommo}o}0)
depicts a rope around his neck. These imply that later in life he was captured
Ceramic
H 28 cm/ 11 in. in ceremonial combat and sacrificed. He leaves us with a fascinating portrait,
Museo Rafael Larco Herrera, Lima, Peru the artistic and technical quality of which ranks it among the most remark-
———
OO able of the ancient world.
62 CHRISTOPHER B. DONNAN
The Dancing King
The Relief of Ahkal Mo’ Nahb III, Ruler of Palenque, Artist unknown
MICHAEL D. COE

any archaeologists and art historians consider

Palenque the most beautiful of the Classic Maya cities.
Situated in the forested hills above the Gulf Coast plain
of south-eastern Mexico and watered by a network of
streams, its architecture and carved stucco reliefs are
unforgettable. The Maya of a millennium and a half ago may have thought
so, too, for they gave it the name Lakamha’, ‘Great Water’.
Apart from the aesthetic value of its art and architecture, Palenque was
also the densely urbanized capital of a powerful city-state. In 712, a new king
was inaugurated, Ahkal Mo’ Nahb. Though a warlike ruler, he was also a keen
patron of Palenque’s artists and architects, commissioning several temples in
the south-eastern part of the city, all apparently dedicated to his distinguished
ancestors, incltiding his grandfather Paka] and the progenitor deities.
Among these buildings was Palenque’s Temple XIX, dedicated on 14
June Ap 734, in a strange (to us) ceremony commemorated by this enormous
This is probably relief panel, which had been the facing of an interior pier supporting the
structure’s corbelled roof. Carved from lithographic-quality limestone, it
the most magnificent represents a standing and bejewelled Ahkal Mo’ Nahb being garbed with a
towering back rack apparently representing an enormous, red-feathered bird.
relief ever carved by Presumably the king would then have danced in public, with this improbable
apparatus and its waving macaw tail-feathers behind and above him.
a Maya artist, and an This is probably the most magnificent relief ever carved by a Maya
artist, and an outstanding work of portraiture. Take the profile of the king:
outstanding work of Ahkal Mo’ Nahb gazes to the left with startling immediacy. His eye fools us
into thinking that we may be looking at a real personage, but this is due to a
portraiture. sculptor’s trick: he has excavated the white of the eye, leaving a cup-shaped
protuberance to represent the iris, and a sharp depression within that cup to
stand for the pupil. Such bold invention to invoke the gaze of a real person in
cold stone would not be seen again until the last decades of the 18th century,
in the portrait heads of the Neoclassical sculptor Jean-Antoine Houdon.
Above How was the Temple XIX relief meant to be seen? Its position on an
The figure to the right of the ruler is the
interior supporting pier meant that what light reached it would have been flat-
king’s ajk’ubuun (an office that we do not
fully understand, but which probably entailed tened and diffuse. By torchlight, however, the carving would have appeared
overseeing tribute offerings, taking care more three-dimensional. Traces of pigment surviving on some surfaces show
of hieroglyphic manuscripts and perhaps that at least some areas were painted: the glyphic texts and some of the loin-
supervising rituals and other court affairs).
cloth ornamentation in ‘Maya Blue’, and red ochre for the background of
c. 730 glyphic texts, the ruler’s macaw headdress, the feathers of the back rack and
Limestone relief panel the simulated water lily flowers used as pompoms on the royal sandals.
H 340 cm/ 11 ft 2 in.
While the panel as we see it today has clearly suffered the vicissitudes
From Temple XIX, Palenque, Chiapas,
Mexico, now in the regional museum, of history, not all of Temple XIX has yet been excavated. Surely the missing
Palenque third of the panel will be found one day, and this great work ofart will be seen
oo in its complete majesty.
64 MICHAEL D. COE
te Mined ;
* AIC
%
Oe
x Pigeedegtiong,
eee
Woe ee
*
Ther
- The Blending of Cultures.
1000-1300.
Ba

pe eee
Travelling in Space and Time
Spring Festival on the River, Zhang Zeduan
RODERICK WHITFIELD

idden for many centuries until its rediscovery in Shenyang

in 1945, today this Song Dynasty handscroll painting enjoys
legendary fame, being as familiar in China as the Mona Lisa is
in the West. Not only do long queues form and wait for hours
to view it, but details, such as the one shown here, appear ina
host of books on Chinese history and culture, while longer sections adorn the
shop fronts and interiors of thousands of restaurants, and countless copies in
every kind of material — carpets, porcelain, boxwood and wallpaper — are on
sale everywhere. An unbroken series of colophons appended to it between the
12th and 18th centuries documents much of its collecting history, but little is
known of its author, and the exact date of its production is still debated.
Even the title allows for differing interpretations: the original Chinese,
Oingming Shanghe tu, is generally interpreted as Spring Festival on the
River, Qingming being the occasion on the one hundred and fourth day
after the winter solstice (around 4 April) when visits were made to ancestral.
graves. The fresh green of the willows and the sprigs of willow and plum on
sale in the street confirm the season. A more political interpretation relates
Qingming (literally ‘Clear and Bright’) to the reforms in government insti-
tuted by the second emperor of the Later Zhou Dynasty (r. 954-59), which
laid the foundation for the peaceful and prosperous period of the Northern
The scene is both Song dynasty (960-1126). Both dynasties had their capital at Bianjing, a city
of unparalleled splendour, on the Bian river. This river was actually a canal
dramatic and detailed ... that provided transport of grain from the lower Yangzi region for the needs
of the court and the civil and military administration. Drawing its water from
the Yellow River, this canal ran through the capital, and is the setting for over
a third of the composition in the central part of the scroll.
The painting, on finely woven silk, is over 5 metres (17 ft 3 in.) in length,
and only 25 centimetres (10 in.) high. It was intended to be unrolled from right
to left and viewed by no more than two or three persons at one time. Only as
much as was comfortable to hold between the hands would be visible at any
moment. This (to Western eyes) extreme format allows the artist to portray
events occurring over time — in this case from early morning in the deserted
countryside outside the city, to a crowded evening within the city walls—in an
Above unbroken sequence. The first surviving commentary on the painting, written
Scenes on the bridge: a porter with laden in 1186, sixty years after the fall of the capital, and citing a lost Northern Song
baskets, a wheelbarrow with side panniers,
a gentleman on a dappled horse, and a trader
text, tells us that the painter Zhang Zeduan was a native of Shandong prov-
touting for custom at his hardware stall. ince, a scholar who had gone on to study painting in the capital, specializing
in street scenes, boats and carts, and the like.
Northern Song Dynasty, 11th century
The mid-point of the scroll is marked by a massive wooden bridge
Handscroll, ink and colour on silk
25 cm xX 525 cm/ 10 in. x 17 ft 3 in. arching over the fast-flowing Bian. According to the Song History, the ear-
Palace Museum, Beijing liest bridge of similar rainbow construction was built in 1032. The scene
re

68 RODERICK WHITFIELD
 is both dramatic and detailed: in order for a vessel to pass upstream it was
necessary for the tracking mast to be lowered to the deck, so the crew battle
with poles against the swift current that threatens to carry the craft back
downstream. At the same time, another vessel, barely glimpsed beneath the
bridge, is preparing to lift anchor and run with the flow, guided by a massive
sweep at either end. A collision seems almost inevitable. Both the specta-
tors on the bridge and those on board are in thrall to this manoeuvre, which
represents the climax of a narrative that begins earlier, when two vessels on
a collision course first catch sight of one another, and that will conclude with
another pair of barges that have safely passed and are calmly continuing on
their respective journeys. The shifting perspective allows the person unroll-
ing the painting to see from a high viewpoint over the buildings on the near
bank as far as the towpath; then right underneath the bridge on the opposite
side, before moving a little farther to the left when the approach to the bridge
and the bustling scenes taking place on and around it fill almost the whole
height of the scroll. The elaborate construction at the left, a feature of com-
mercial establishments throughout the city, carries a banner and characters
identifying it as a wine-shop, second class, and customers can be glimpsed on
the upper floor. There were thousands of such establishments in the capital.
Above Although this painting was hidden from public sight for many centuries
Scenes above and below deck: the captain’s
wife and infant child watch as the crew
(it entered the imperial collections no later than the first year of the Qianlong
struggle to lower the mast and fight the Emperor’s reign, 1736), it was copied widely, the copyists drawing on the
swift current. detailed descriptions of the painting provided either in the colophons or by
eT |

70 RODERICK WHITFIELD
 ... this Song dynasty handscroll painting enjoys legendary fame, being as
familiar in China as the Mona Lisa is in the West.

those who had been lucky enough to view it. Yet none of them could have seen
the original, since without exception all the copies depict the rainbow bridge
as being made of stone, not wood, and show barges with sails instead of
tracking teams on the towpath: there is accordingly no drama of boats bound
upstream and downstream, encountering one another as they pass.
The Northern Song dynasty is best known in the West for subtly glazed
porcelain and monumental landscape paintings. The setting for this painting,
in the middle of the Central Plains, allows for no grandiose mountain views
(though the hapless authors of later versions never failed to include a range
of mountains in the opening section). Instead, the artist displays the thriving
urban economy that afforded the means for the creation of such unmatched
ceramics. Only one other painting, Carts at the Millin the Shanghai Museum,
depicts similar scenes: heavily laden ox-carts delivering grain to an impressive
state watermill. Carts at the Mill is generally held to be a 10th-century paint-
ing; the Oingming scroll is closely related: its vivid portrayal of life in the
capital in its heyday testifies to the personal experience of its author.

Spring Festival on the River 71

A Fresh Start

Vishnu Reclining on the Serpent Anantha, Unknown artist

JOHN GUY

Vishnu ... the great creator ... awakens from his cosmic sleep on the coils of
the giant serpent ... Anantha, ‘the infinite’.

his spectacular icon of Vishnu represents the moment when the

great creator of the Hindu universe awakens from his cosmic sleep
on the coils of the giant serpent Sesha (also known as Anantha,
‘the infinite’). Hindu cosmology is premised on a cyclical vision of
time, whereby in successive epochs the universe is consumed by a
great flood, becoming a formless ocean. Between each epoch, Vishnu enters
a cosmic sleep, floating onthe back of Sesha on the formless ocean, awaiting
the appropriate moment to intervene in worldly matters. Vishnu thus serves as
both the creative force and the restorer of order from chaos.
Depictions of this creation myth can be found as early as the Sth century
in Indian temple art — the earliest example is the monumental rock-cut relief at
Udayagiri, Madhya Pradesh, in central India, while a famous example exists
in the 6th-century Gupta temple at Deogarh. Perhaps the most powerful rep-
resentation, and the one closest to the tradition that emerged in Cambodia,
is the 7th-century rock-cut shrine dedicated to Vishnu Ananthashayana at
Mamallapuram. In Cambodia itself we find a near-contemporary version of
this subject in a lintel from a Pre-Angkorian temple in a style associated with
Above
Prei Khmeng, located near the Western Mebon, Angkor region. The fully
Vishnu Ananthashayana, depicted in a 7th-
century rock-cut shrine at Mamallapuram, elaborated subject depicts the four-armed Vishnu reclining in a deep cosmic
in the coastal state of Tamil Nadu. This relief sleep on the coils of the serpent with a lotus stem growing from his navel, upon
sculpture is among the earliest indications of which presides Brahma, here serving as Vishnu’s agent for change. In some
the importance of the Vishnu creation myth
in the art of southern India, from where it
representations, Vishnu’s consort Lakshmi massages his feet.
was probably transmitted to Cambodia. The The worship of Vishnu was imported early into Southeast Asia along-
heroic nature of the subject combines with the side other Indic cults. That this representation of the god should be chosen for
startling level of naturalism to create one of
a monumental cult image in a temple created by King Udayadityavarman II
the most inspired renderings of this subject
in Indian art. (r. 1050-66) is testimony to the power of the Vishnu creation myth and its inti-
mate associations with the life-giving powers of water. The siting of this cult
c. 1060
image on an artificial island in the heart of one of the two greatest reservoirs
Copper alloy, with traces of inlay, now
missing built in Angkorian history underscores the water symbolism — something
120 cm x 222 cm/3ft 11% in. x 7 ft 3 in. that also chimed with existing Khmer beliefs in the power of water and nagas
(estimated original length c. 6 metres / (snake-guardians of the subterranean realms). We may imagine this icon wor-
19 ft 8 in.)
From Western Mebon, Angkor, Siem Reap,
shipped in a manner not dissimilar to that still performed today at the Vishnu
Cambodia, now in the National Museum of pool-shrine at Budhanilakantha in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal, with lustra-
Cambodia, Phnom Penh tion pujas performed according to the temple calendar.
oe —

72 JOHN GUY
 This sculpture was rediscovered in 1936 by the French archaeologist
Maurice Glaize in the ruins of the Western Mebon temple on a man-made
island in the great reservoir (baray) west of the royal city of Angkor Thom.
In addition to the intact section seen here, consisting of head, upper torso and
the two right arms, further fragments were recovered. The complete figure
would have exceeded 6 metres (19 ft 8 in.) in length. It is clear from the joining
seams and the use of rivets that it was cast in sections; traces of such fixing are
still visible where the crown (probably a conical fixture of gold or gilt copper
sheet) was once secured. The other beautifying jewelry, such as the elaborate
torque, armbands and bracelets, are cast into the fabric of the image, where
instead there might have been spaces reserved for detachable jewelry. In all
likelihood the entire figure was gilded, and was further enhanced with inlays
of contrasting precious metals in the eyebrows, eyes and moustache — most
probably silver with the addition of rock crystal for the pupils.
This is the largest bronze image ever recorded from Cambodia, and
without rival in this period in all of Southeast Asia. Its importance however
transcends its scale. Aesthetically it is unmatched in the corpus of Angkorian
bronzes. The sculptor has created in the inclination of the head, the poise of
the two arms-— which do not actually support the head but rather rest in space
—an image of sublime ease. This is a god emerging from slumber— his eyes are
open, his face alert.

This is the largest bronze image ever recorded from Cambodia, and without
rival in this period in all of Southeast Asia.

74 JOHN GUY
 The full radiant beauty, gravitas and majesty of this figure, installed
in its tank of flowing water, would have been inspiring for all who saw it.
Its placement on a small temple-island in the Western Mebon would have
ensured, however, that this was only a select few — perhaps just the king, his
entourage and an elite corps of Brahman priests. Zhou Da-guan, member
of a Chinese delegation who resided at Yasodharaura (Angkor) in 1296-97,
described a shrine in a great lake that had a ‘bronze reclining Buddha with
water constantly flowing from its navel’. Could it be that Zhou Da-guan was
describing from hearsay the great Vishnu reclining on Sesha that had been
placed under worship some 230 years earlier? Certainly he referred to great
numbers of golden and bronze images at several major shines in and around
Above
Vishnu Ananthashayana (7th century), in the Angkor Thom area. In 1983 a life-sized silver-copper alloy bull was dis-
a temple tank, in situ at Budhanilakantha, covered in Tuol Kuthea in southern Cambodia, evidence of the widespread
Kathmandu, Nepal. This is perhaps the most making of monumental metal images in early Cambodia.
perfect realization of the myth of Vishnu’s
This shrine and its life-sustaining icon were undoubtedly conceived as
cosmic sleep, in which the three key elements,
the god, the serpent and the cosmic ocean, essential to ensuring the fertility and prosperity of a kingdom whose wealth
are in absolute harmony. In its pool setting, and power was built in large measure on the management of water. That this
this version comes closer than any other bronze was an image of sublime beauty and majesty capable of attracting the
South Asian rendering to the 11th-century
image from the Western Mebon in Cambodia.
god’s pleasure would have assured the image’s efficacy.
However, it differs profoundly in that Vishnu
is deep in his cosmic sleep and not, as in the
Angkorian bronze, alert and engaging.

Opposite top
The Western Mebon Vishnu, during
excavation in 1936. The sculpture was found
fragmented into numerous pieces, perhaps
broken up intentionally for scrap; substantial
portions of the figure have never been located.

oo

Vishnu Reclining on the Serpent Anantha 75

All Around the World

The Vézelay Tympanum, Artist unknown

JEAN-RENE GABORIT

he 12th century in France saw a remarkable campaign of

cathedral and abbey building in the style today known as the
Romanesque. Most of these buildings included high-quality and
In the centre, within a inventive sculpture, the most important element of which sat
about the main doorway — the tympanum. Typically, tympana
slightly concave almond- show didactic scenes, such as the Last Judgment. The example in the narthex
(porch) at Vézelay is altogether more puzzling.
shaped mandorla, Christ In the centre, within a slightly concave almond-shaped mandorla,
Christ sits enthroned with his arms open wide. From the tips of his fingers
sits enthroned with his (although one hand has been damaged), rays of flame shoot out and touch
the heads of the apostles, barefoot and holding books, who are seated around
arms open wide. him. The eight strictly compartmentalized reliefs that frame the central scene
have given rise to-various interpretations. The two seated figures on the left
have been identified as authors of antiquity or early Christianity (Aristotle?
Pliny? Isidore of Seville?) though their bare feet suggest instead that they are |
the evangelists Saint Luke and Saint Mark, who are not included among the
group of apostles. The next compartments show the many peoples of the
world: the Jews, personified by their king Jeroboam, with his ‘dried up’ right
hand; the Cappadocians, who according to a Byzantine legend were born
from Siamese twins; and in the compartment next to Christ’s head, Arabs
(in the form of a doctor tending to a crippled man) and the peoples of India
(including two with the heads of dogs). On the right, the lowest compart-
ment may represent Armenians, recognizable by their dress and their shoes
with pattens; above them is a Greek, armed with the fearsome ‘Greek fire’,
confronting a barbarian; in the next compartment, the remains of an inscrip-
tion have allowed the old man leaning on a crutch to be identified as King
Priam, admonishing the people of Troy; and in the topmost compartment,
closest to the head of Christ, two of the figures have flattened noses and may
be Ethiopians.
The ‘ethnological’ interpretation of these eight reliefs (although there
have also been attempts to identify them with episodes from Homeric tales,
particularly the story of Circe in the fourth compartment on the left) seems
to be confirmed by the figures on the lintel running under the central scene.
Above On the left-hand side we see a scene of pagan sacrifice (recalling, perhaps, the
The apostles gather around a huge Christ. Romans); behind the bearers of offerings, a group of archers may represent
From Christ’s fingertips emanate rays of
one of the barbarian peoples of the East (aside from the Parthian horse-
flame.
men). On the right-hand side we see (from left to right) a warlike crowd of
c. 1130 peoples from Europe, the Pygmies (using a ladder to mount a horse), the giant
Stone
W 600 cm/ 19 ft 8 in.
Macrobii of India, and the Panotii with their huge ears.
Abbey Church of La Madeleine, Vézelay, This exceptionally detailed representation of ‘all nations’ or ‘all people’
France (Psalm 72: 17; Luke 2: 31) moving in procession towards Christ the Redeemer
—
errr OO

76 JEAN-RENE GABORIT
Pr,

ealbiis iB
 provides the key to the iconography of the Vezelay tympanum, which is
neither a Last Judgment nor a Second Coming of Christ. It affirms the cosmic
power of the Son, whose shoulders are framed with the waters (or perhaps
> ... the sculptor gave clouds) and the plants of the Earth. The signs of the Zodiac and the Labours
of the Months in the roundels that make up the first archivolt portray his
the programme form mastery over passing time. Despite the rays that shine out to touch the heads
of the apostles, the tympanum is not a representation of the events of the
with such skill that the Pentecost (Acts 2: 1-4), nor of the ‘Mission of the Apostles’ (John 20: 21-23; a
Luke 24: 45-49); instead, it is a masterly interpretation of the conclusion of
power of the imagery is the gospel of Saint Mark: ‘And they went forth, and preached everywhere.’
Who was the creator of this exceptional programme, which testifies to
undeniable, even to those both deep theological understanding and a remarkable knowledge of secular
texts? Renaud de Semur, Abbot of Vézelay from 1106 to 1128, is the most
who cannot decipher its probable candidate, although the name of Peter the Venerable, future Abbot
of Cluny and Prior of Vézelay until 1120, has also been suggested.
multiple meanings. When construction of the present-day nave and its fagade was begun,
following a fire that ravaged the abbey in 1120, the plans probably included
only a broad and slightly raised portal, beneath a simple porch. However, the
former element was quickly replaced by the much more ambitious narthex,
with a central vault slightly higher than that of the church. The piers that had
already been built for the porch were surmounted by short fluted columns
and figures in very high relief (including an impressive group of the saints
Peter and Paul). To create*a link between the two levels, the central pillar
features a monumental figure of John the Baptist in front of a fluted column, |

78 JEAN-RENE GABORIT
 a possible holdover from the earlier plans. The desire to create a more fitting
setting for the grandiose iconography, which was developed after building
work had begun, may account for this radical modification.
But the originality of the iconography alone is not enough to explain
the exceptional quality of the Vézelay tympanum: the sculptor gave the pro-
gramme form with such skill that the power of the imagery is undeniable,
even to those who cannot decipher its multiple meanings. In the massive
figure of Christ, whose asymmetric pose is majestic without being static, it is
not so much his face (which is almost drowned in shadow and set outside the
semi-circular field of the tympanum) but his huge right hand that attracts our
gaze. The broad and flowing drapery of his long robe creates a dynamic that
animates the whole composition; the apparent indifference to proportions, as
well as the strongly expressive poses and the non-realistic but deliberate styli-
Opposite zation of the main figures, show that the Romanesque artist was not seeking
The ‘monstrous races’ who lived in far-flung
to transpose natural forms into stone but to give material form to the truths of
countries were a popular subject in medieval
art. Here a Pygmy mounts a horse with the
the faith in the eyes of worshippers.
help of a ladder. The principal master would certainly have required the aid of collabora-
tors to sculpt the six large blocks that form the tympanum itself; the group of
Above
The many peoples of the world, all of whom apostles on the left do seem to be of slightly lesser quality than their counter-
come under the sway of Christ, include the parts on the right. Nonetheless, the whole bears witness to a great conceptual
giant Macrobii of India, and, to the right, unity. This master, who perhaps trained in the workshops of Cluny, remains
the Panotii, with their enormous ears. Most
anonymous; the monastery chronicle from the time of the abbot Hugues de
of the information on these exotic races came
from Classical Greek and Roman authors, Poitiers (1161-65) makes mention of a sculptor by the name of Lambert, but
such as Pliny. at this date the portal had already been complete for some thirty years.
—————————————————————————

The Vézelay Tympanum 79

The Light of The World
The Cefalu Mosaics, Artist unknown
JOHN JULIUS NORWICH

... let your eyes adjust ... to the cathedral twilight and follow the march of
antique Roman columns .. ._ towards the sanctuary ... past the high altar and the
the great
saints, the angels and ... archangels ... until at last, high in the conch of
eastern apse, they are met by those of Christ.

ailing from Naples to Palermo in the summer of 1131, King

Roger II of Sicily was suddenly overtaken by a violent tempest.
Aftér two days, during which it seemed that all on board must
perish, he made a vow: if they were spared, then at whatever point
they should be brought safely to shore he would build a cathedral
to Christ the Saviour. The next day — it was the feast of the Transfiguration
— the wind dropped, and the vessel glided to a quiet anchorage in the bay of
Cefalt. At one time it had been a prosperous little town, the seat of a Greek
bishop in Byzantine days; but the king’s father, Roger I, had sacked it during
his conquest in 1063. Now it was for his son to make amends. Stepping
ashore, he called for measuring-rods and set to work at once. So, at least, runs
the legend. All we can know for certain is that on 14 September 1131 Cefalu
was once again given a bishop of its own — a Latin one this time — and that
already, by that date, the building had begun.
But the cathedral was only the beginning. Roger was the true creator of
the Sicilian kingdom, grafting as he did a relatively small Norman element
onto a population previously split between Greek and Arab; and in doing
so he became the only man ever to have almost single-handedly fused the
cultures of three of the great races of the Mediterranean into a single, harmo-
nious, trilingual state. True, there is little of the Arab in evidence here; to see
the influences of all three in happy coexistence you must go to Roger’s exqui-
site Palatine Chapel in Palermo, with its Latin plan, its Greek mosaics and its
purely Islamic stalactite roof; this too is a miracle of beauty, but it possesses
none of the sheer power of Cefalu.
Opposite Approach, if you can, from the west, along the old coast road from
The apse of Cefala Cathedral, built by
Palermo. A gently curving beach fringed with pine and prickly pear leads the
Roger II in the 1130s and 1140s. It shows
Christ Pantocrator (Ruler of All), with the eye along to a confusion of roofs, clustered at the far corner of a wide bay.
Virgin and archangels. Above and behind, but still very much part of the town, rises the Cathedral,
dominating the houses below as effortlessly as its sisters at Lincoln or
c. 1145-48
Mosaic Durham. Once arrived in the little central piazza, we are struck by the perfec-
Cefalu Cathedral, Sicily tion of the Cathedral’s placing. The slope of the rock sets it, a little obliquely,
—_—_—_———— eee

80 JOHN JULIUS NORWICH

 Re
SSS
\\A prcarmoroorens}
=2\)
 There is nothing soft or syrupy about him, yet the sorrow tn his eyes, the
his embrace, even the two stray locks of hair blown gently across
openness of
his forehead, speak of mercy, tenderness and compassion.

on a higher level than that of the square; it must be approached, like the
Parthenon, at a slight angle and from below. And so the realization grows
that here is one of the loveliest small cathedrals in the world. The facade with
its twin towers — fraternal rather than identical — dates from a century after
Roger’s time but is none the worse for that: a sunny, southern Romanesque,
uncluttered but never austere.
But the miracle is yet to come. Pass now through the municipal palm
trees, up the surprisingly steep staircase, between two rather endearing
Baroque bishops in stone, and across the upper courtyard. Once inside the
building, let your eyes adjust themselves to the cathedral twilight and follow
the march of antique Roman columns and their slender arches towards the
sanctuary. From there they are led up, past the high altar and the saints, the
angels and the archangels ranged above it; until at last, high in the conch of
the great eastern apse, they:are met by those of Christ.
He is the Pantocrator, the Ruler of All. His right hand is raised in bless-—
ing; in his left is a book, on which is written ‘I am the Light of the World’ in
both Latin and Greek — and rightly so, for this mosaic, the glory of a Roman
church, is of purest Byzantine style and workmanship. Of the master who
wrought it we know nothing, except that he was almost certainly summoned
by Roger himself from Constantinople and that he was unquestionably a
genius. And at Cefalu he produced the most sublime representation of Jesus
Christ in all Christian art. Only one other Pantocrator, at Daphni just outside
Athens, can be said even to rival it; near contemporaries though they are
however, the contrast between the two could hardly be greater. The Christ
of Daphni is dark, and heavy with menace; the Christ of Cefalu, for all his
strength and majesty, has not forgotten that his mission is to redeem. There is
nothing soft or syrupy about him, yet the sorrow in his eyes, the openness of
his embrace, even the two stray locks of hair blown gently across his forehead,
speak of mercy, tenderness and compassion. Byzantine theologians used to
insist that religious artists, when representing the Redeemer, should seek to
reflect the-image of God. It was no small demand, but here — perhaps like
nowhere else — the task has been triumphantly accomplished.
Beneath him, his Mother stands in prayer. Such is the splendour of her
son, the proximity of the four archangels flanking her and the glare from the
window below, that she can easily pass unnoticed: a pity, since if she were
standing in isolation amid the gold — as she does, for example, in the apse
at Torcello — she too would be hailed as a masterpiece. (The archangels are
Above dressed like Byzantine emperors, even to the point of carrying the orb and
A mosaic of Christ Pantocrator in the central
labarum of the imperial office.) Further down still are the twelve apostles,
cupola of the Church of Daphni, near Athens,
is almost exactly contemporary with the less frontal and formalized than they often appear in Eastern iconography,
mosaic at Cefalu. turning a little towards each other as if in conversation. Finally, on each side
ae]—$—

82 JOHN JULIUS NORWICH

 of the choir, stand two thrones of white marble, studded with Cosmatesque
inlays, red and green and gold. One is the bishop’s; the other was that of
the king.
Here King Roger must have sat during his last years, gazing up at the
magnificence that he had called into being; an inscription beneath the window
records that all these-apse mosaics were completed by 1148, six years before
his death. He always conceived of this cathedral as his own personal offering,
Above and had even built himself a palace in the town — traces of which still remain
The Christ Pantocrator in the apse of
Monreale Cathedral, Sicily, is obviously
— from which to superintend the building operations. And so it can have
inspired by the figure at Cefald. The cathedral come as no surprise to his subjects when, in April 1145, he designated it as his
was built by Roger II’s grandson William II in burial-place, endowing it at the same time with two porphyry sarcophagi —
the 1170s to the 1180s.
one for his own remains and the other, as he put it, ‘for the august memory of
Above right my name and the glory of the Church itself’. Alas, his wishes were disregarded
A mosaic in the Church of the Martorama, — he now lies amid the vacuous pomposities of Palermo Cathedral — and it is
Palermo, Sicily, shows Roger II being
hard to leave Cefalu without putting up a quick, silent prayer that the greatest
crowned by Christ. The Latin REX (‘king’)
is transliterated into the Greek alphabet to of the Sicilian kings may one day return to rest in the church which he loved,
either side of Christ’s head. and where he belongs.
——<

The Cefalu Mosaics 83

The Edge of Nothingness
The Reclining Buddha of Polonnaruwa, Artist unknown
ANTONY GORMLEY

arinirvana: the moment the Buddha passes from earthly exist-

ence into the state of conscious non-being. This concept, strange
to Western, monotheistic minds and transcendent expectations,
is not about the eternal soul but rather about the final realization
of the relation of being and non-being, matter and void.
This astonishing sculpture of the Buddha was carved in the mid-12th
century at the great city of Polonnaruwa in central Sri Lanka during the reign
of King Par kramab huI. Some fourteen metres long, the head alone measures
almost two metres in diameter. Traditionally, the West has been resistant to
the hyperbolic image, associating it with inflated egos and totalitarian monu-
ments. However, colossal Buddhist iconography, from the great Buddhas of
... colossal Buddhist Bamyan in Afghanistan and those of Luoyang in China to the more recent
example — some 416 metres long — being carved in Jiangxi Province, has
iconography ... has always embraced scale to‘reinforce the public and collective nature of this
philosophy of life. .
always embraced scale to The scale of the Polonnaruwa Buddha is monumental but conveys a
quiet joy and a sense of engagement and peace that has nothing to do with
reinforce the public and being dominated but everything to do with a precious sense of sharing
space and place. This feeling is the result of an acceptance of the earthly in an
collective nature of this image that is in and of the ground and is gently (and so differently from the
greatest Western treatment of this subject, the four pietas by Michelangelo)
philosophy oflife. returning to it.
The Buddha is carved from grey granite striated with white quartz lines.
This striation suggests two quite different things: the ‘dream’ of life that like a
river passes through names and forms (Namarupa), but also its very opposite:
the reinforcement of material reality, palpable, perceivable and bounded by
time and space.
The coexistence of image and landscape would be a brilliant conceptual
proposition by itself, but to have realized it with such grace and formal purity
is a miracle: literally an apparition in the real. Here is the abstract body of
Buddhism that has taught me so much — the body itself seen as a site, to be
with more than to show. It succeeds by the acute tension between precept and
Opposite
An unknown sculptor carved a subtle a feeling for form inherent in this Indian-influenced approach to sculpture.
depression in the pillow supporting the This approach manifests itself in four key ways. First, there is the sense
Buddha’s head. This optical illusion contrives of full volume shared by the works of the Gupta, Pala and Chola Indian
to make the vast stone head appear practically
empires: a convex, taut surface that, like the skin of an apple, conveys a sense
weightless.
of the fullness of life below it. Second, the forms of the body are based on
Mid-12th century proportional rules that are almost like preset algorithms: ‘long and slender
Granite
fingers and toes all the same length, feet with level treads’, in the words
Lc. 14 metres; H c. 4 metres /
c. 46 ft; c. 4 ft 3 in. of the Digha Nikaya, a collection of Buddhist dialogues. This has nothing
Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka to do with Greek, Classically idealized or anatomically accurate models of
—_—_—————
een OO

84 ANTONY GORMLEY
 representation. Third, the tracing of surface lines allude to the curls of hair,
the folds of skin or cloth but are less about representation than a play or ani-
Here is the abstract mation of surface. Finally, the reclining Buddha exhibits a notable grasp of
the underlying body, seen very powerfully in the subtle indentations of the
body of Buddhism that diaphragm and the solar plexus: the source of prana or breath.
It is this treatment ofvitality in mass that is this work’s most remarkable
has taught me so much feature. The feeling of mass at rest is clear. The shape and size of a beached
blue whale, there is a sense of a quiescent force in this object/place. Look at the
— the body itself seen as extraordinary curvature of the left arm that lies like a sleeping snake on the
upper thigh (‘arms long enough to touch and rub the knees without bending
a site, to be with more over’, stipulates the Digha Nikaya) exuding, like the whole sculpture, a sense
of vital peace hard to reconcile with its size.
than to show. And what about the head and the expression it carries? The bird-winged
eyebrows that echo the hovering smile and typically down-turned eyes that in
this vertical orientation do not simply express samadhi—concentrated medita-
tion — but the transition of consciousness in the final release of Nirvana. The
Buddha’s head is round like a globe, the eyes half-closed, the lips half-smiling.

86 ANTONY GORMLEY
 Look at the extraordinary curvature of the left
arm that lies like a sleeping snake on the upper thigh
... exuding, like the whole sculpture, a sense ofvital
peace hard to reconcile with its size.

What does the total image actually convey? The body is conscious but at
rest, the formal relation between a carved horizontal plane and the multiplic-
ity of curves, inscribed and volumetric. It conveys an acceptance of being over
doing, acceptance of dependency but also the celebration of being itself.
We in the Western world, lost in a tangle of obligation, work and duty,
are tied to doing — perhaps doing good, but achievement nevertheless. The
notion of discovering our nature in nature and our dependency on a geologi-
cal and telluric earth comes to us rarely. Perhaps sculpture is the only art form
—at least when fully integrated to site and exposed to the elements — that can
convey this dimension of the human condition. In rare moments of non-action
we might glimpse it; submerged half-awake in a warm bath with conscious-
ness at the horizon of its perception we might feel what this work conveys: a
Opposite closeness to the hard duration of things and our ability to escape it.
A saffron-robed monk stands only as high as
the toes of the Buddha.

Above
The great statue would originally have been
displayed in a wooden image-house. Though
now exposed to both the elements and the
tourists, the Buddha seems monumentally
unperturbed.

oo

The Reclining Buddha of Polonnaruwa_ 87

Revolutionary Realism
———E . —s

Muchaku and Seshin, Unkei

DONALD F. McCALLUM

ithin the corpus of Japanese Buddhist sculpture, no

category is more interesting than that of priest portraits,
even though representations of deities are generally better
The figures of known. While sculpted portraits are found in the Nara
(710-94) and Heian (794-1185) periods, the highpoint
Muchaku and Seshin of this genre is undoubtedly the Kamakura period (1185-1336), an era char-
acterized by an intense concern with realism. The figures of Muchaku and
... must rank among Seshin are perhaps the best examples of this tendency, and must rank among
the greatest portraits produced in any country or period.
the greatest portraits Definition is essential here — the two statues are putative depictions
of the ancient Indian theologians Asanga (known in Japan as Muchaku)
produced in any country and Vasubandhu (Seshin), but they cannot be considered literal portraits of
the historical individuals because the sculptor who produced them, Unkei
or period. (c. 1150—c. 1220), could have had no direct knowledge of their actual appear-
ances. Rather, Unkei has rendered the two sages as East Asians, not as
Indians, and yet the superb realism, especially in their faces, conveys a sense
of a living presence. In that regard, they should be seen as idealized portraits,
presumably based on people that Unkei either knew or had seen in Nara.
Kofukuji, where the statues have been housed since their creation, is one
of the most important of all Japanese temples; it belongs to the Hoss6 school,
and the brothers Muchaku and Seshin were the authors of that school’s foun-
dational texts. Consequently, although they are not worshipped they receive
the highest respect and veneration. Kofukuji, like many other important
temples in the city of Nara, had sustained major damage during the civil war
of 1180, and had to be rebuilt — giving Unkei and his studio the opportunity to
work on a commission of the highest importance.
Kamakura sculpture was strongly influenced by that of the earlier Nara
period, a time when realism also dominated, and certainly the two statues
look back to the 8th century rather than reflecting the more elegant styles of
the immediately preceding Late Heian period of the 11th and 12th centuries.
Of course, the strong sense of animation seen in the sculptures reflects the
Opposite
genius of Unkei, as he combined the earlier Nara style with his own vigorous,
Muchaku (right) is shown in deep
concentration. He holds in his hands a bag expressive mode. Efforts have been made to associate the realism and vitality
thought to contain a Buddhist ritual object. of the two statues with the spirit of the newly powerful warrior class but it is
Both priests wear robes of the kind worn by important to keep in mind that Kofukuji was a traditional temple, connected
contemporary prelates in Japan. The drapery
with the aristocratic Fujiwara clan— meaning that, on balance, it is likely that
folds show an extraordinary naturalism.
the representations of Muchaku and Seshin have more to do with sculptures
c. 1208-12 of the Nara period than they do with warrior culture. Either way, there is
Wood and polychromy
little disagreement among scholars that Unkei is the greatest sculptor of the
Muchaku: H 194.7 cm / 6 ft 4% in.
Seshin: H 191.6 cm / 6 ft 3% in. Japanese Buddhist tradition and that these two statues are the culmination of
Kofukuji, Hokuendo, Nara City, Japan his career.

88 DONALD F. McCALLUM
The Kingdom of Heaven
The Stained Glass of Chartres Cathedral, Artists unknown
PAINTON COWEN

he stained glass of the cathedral of Chartres is unique in many

ways. Nowhere else has so much medieval glass survived the
wars, storms, religious bigotry and neglect of the centuries. Of
173 original windows, 143 are still largely intact — in total there
are nearly 1,500 panels with scenes and figures that together
comprise a practically unrivalled library of images of medieval life and belief.
But apart from that, seen as a whole it constitutes an artistic programme
of a quality and ambition rarely found elsewhere — indeed, in iconographic
complexity and ambition it is comparable with Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel
Ceiling or Giotto’s Scrovegni Chapel.
The cathedral that we see today dates largely from after the fire of
1194, which destroyed all but the west end of the old Romanesque building.
The chance to build a bigger, better cathedral in the latest Gothic style must
have been seized upon by the clergy, and those responsible for the rebuild-
ing — almost certainly a combination of artists and priests — conceived of a
Miracles abound in programme that would unite stained glass, architecture and sculpture into
a ringing statement of the Church’s authority and dogma. One of the great
these scenes — reassuring, innovations of Gothic architecture was the flying buttress, which channelled
the load of the roof vaults away from the walls, which meant, in turn, that the
die for 13th-century windows could be larger. The increased area available for glass allowed for
an expanded iconography and even for a whole new vocabulary and means of
pilgrims, who had come expression through stained glass. This resulted in an explosion of creativity
during the second half of the 12th century that reached its peak in the High
to Chartres in search of Gothic cathedrals of the 13th century — at Bourges, Reims, Amiens, Paris and
above all at Chartres.
their own miracles. The installation of the glass at Chartres took place over thirty or so
years, beginning in about 1205. The impact on those making their first visit to
Opposite
the cathedral is often profound: many are surprised by how dark the interior
The south rose window, c. 1225. Christ of
ae a Sy ay is, even ona samny day. The deeply coloured glass — mostly red, blue, yellow
Hee eyeihol ont she Brancelistsandan the and green, with lesser amounts of purple, brown and pink — creates a magical
outer circle) the Twenty-Four Elders. Below, atmosphere. This was, at least in part, intentional; after all, the Gothic cathe-
the Evangelists appear on the shoulders of drals were in one sense an evocation of the Heavenly Jerusalem described in
the four major prophets: (left to right) Luke , : ; :
on Jeremiah, Matthew on Isaiah, John on the Revelation to Saint John, and the windows were seen as the jewels of the
Ezekiel and Mark on Daniel; in the centre celestial city.
is the Virgin Mary carrying the Christ Child The highlights are the three huge rose windows, placed at the north,
(detail above). At the bottom of the lancets south andavese cardia! ints of the build Th Ch inetiont
are the donors of the window, the Count of ; eee dase ‘ oe ese astonishing displays of
Didar Giese Maylene “aad miembera ee hie light, colour and geometry celebrate the lives of Jesus Christ and the Virgin
family. Mary (while also incorporating the arms of secular rulers — Blanche of Castile
Pennsse and a local duke), and set the tone for the rest of the glass. The high east
Gisined lass window in the choir again underlines what was important, for it shows the
Chartres Cathedral, France Virgin Mary holding the Christ Child. The prominence of the Virgin in the
-—_—_
OO

90 PAINTON COWEN
 oe et ee 4 " bend el
NE tliat;
eee Ay

AN
HOY
A &
a

®; N
7 @
‘¢
“Sig

ae Ca

G
N ‘,

S&Sso.
‘ss

noHw s rw
823Sed

{Pe SLi
HOS
te ae ga
he a a
itis Ea e sah

ae
of
Le rer be
So eit
coat
ache uFshah a
4 RORYwit
menyebl
ie
¢
Bee=.
> eo
as
GOME en a
=e &, Ds
oF
dso

=Ju
ate mayo
gto
v

Ries
est oapie resta
ee
se
=
ss.
nn | Se aie
re ia | A vt Se oyporns i
ie
r
ae
meee
ee
mow
a
ee zee
l
| |
a
By
S|
es
haia Sane
le
al eat SSS5eER shag ves :
in 6 af 4) i tail To ~ —y @. ‘ tre} — ores

Fee Geassat Iigins Sile

age
-—
7 iw
(Ps ous Poe
sits |
.
; ri
‘ ‘Gr
r
pie
Hae
ha i je “open eeé
eae Se
won ts Mog it a etit
“3 ii
Pte
Hb aes —
et: tiesno rl fe rar
ss
Se
es ae ei
a?Biakanarat x
ae
as a! ye
i
ors
Lace
b eS ts ia ae a
 . Se
Bakeage
2 a5SFA
a
. Ga
oa

ae)f
Ser ( a8 eoay : Dep *2 4
Le
ig <Qeg S
oe

%, e
Sa!
Sup
SBBES
= mnthes 1)
be aah
at fi vi SIZES
“Giz

onasoN peer Ys
ASS Ghé itat yz
Ny an
ran
BRS: aes).
=o MFaden is
: — ed i
waoe
SSL Jo: %
ee
es
ee
ee
ee
asee
a =
STN!
bh.
Ne Ne
._
.%

aeeS
Aad
7
aera hoe a ~~
pi ~
\ NF <3),
=~

2 —i———_——
===

I A
x
ga H\\ are | ie is wt Se
eee
1m
toes Ahne
Lee
aN, fara4
S ani Hh
hy
Wa
“2
faaieniat
oH
heTEAS eee A ed
sie? gece tae
NYS [i “ at rm"ee
2
Soe Nal ey
§
ReyStestee
ey = ag es —<Syane

sa
aes
eed
AtNyt
aT) 7 i
Evieeae ae
oN tePl LOM Be r
os ben eeeMe ON
Fn xy oa oat ae
Ser Wi Ae wast cede Po hd)4 rt
EAS on
N
a ITs He
SLT IO 3 Sy? ih
3)
Wi, onc ie Pe
ea We)
(rea
Talewen oF
§ ma Wt ee
iy
ASAD
ee pol Ede rpz
a
a ae Ly 1 01g
M}Hig?
*
*

EST WAVera a
ee ien RRGT es
Se ee Ml FOL
; Bes i
AN oe
\
Ups Hi Need Meer WO aNeS
me

a,
pl/p NOP.
aad Py af"
ax
ifr% rt
man
‘an v7
Cio
(ee

ee
Sette PA Si
te ime ai
een
ty
a
SSE
ns
~bi

OYwe eer=,
aeoH
|

SAS 2
“8 ithe

ee eB
oe< eden
4 wig s, at an iss
1
at
Nez f
Sn Ltt
SSey Saeed “exes! Re oe
WAN:
Meee
ey a
EX
SH >
SHAY a
cal Ne -_—
Oe
oy
se
2ans
ix

a @naes,oA On
24
me
Ss)
a 4
heeL fs,hgpwn
ET a Oy, ip!
°.
6 is i
4 te ecfad tyieg
Vee ePecan
s;Da
wea
SRE
ERP
REY
eee «ieexe mat
G a8Ge-
: ay vn ot <4} cea ies a
ope
epee
(atone
ean
oom
we
»
ve a - or 4b Ae pada PS = z x i

; sue akmelfea wi ine

* By xa

@e ey Nite Sek zin/GG

Ea et Be
Nem.
Py
a
eva MsSESE
AES =

iH ESS vy iS
Bsase
= iid —
i} Es
Fr Nig Aa pe
pe
i)
fl
a
* ols
es ee f
Cre 45 be am at
ete .
¢ os RNa
& re
4 a 5;
iiee, Le fs
aayHy a
iyi ies
imNG4 ER Nh
an! |Nake” G3 ey Mey ON
Fale Sra
res,
Bain
hee.
is
art Heca an Se NH NS
SSF: ) OSES
Meee ge $4ee.
2 Paes tlSKRat Be
Se eee
=

gun ee:
fe
a<
ered
- er
"OF at ea OH A

ae WeWe
a i|i ee? “een
)
Pew.
=
Mo) y (SeasFeira
: He,ned By ea ener Sas
eee
“ai
5 ee
ee MAG
Se
oS
esme
JS
—-
=

EH? CARING tigye tasers poise tis Ged

Tatas
=

sF ™
SAS
FIER GY DPE GF.
we ne Ne Em

a
 yes
e sigh oe
hee
ne ie vesS
aad! GE hspin SRE Tis .
ee <4

(BE a
aseASSS:
isz WN
Giies
ene? AW 1 ig

a Ni ANai Se)
sac 3 a
"Mevaa ‘ait: yaki ieac ae s

ls Loa we aawa
Mee th ie SS
SS Sap
d ieAeos
y Bes ann
ba NS
pare.
kegs” Wee ds iain)
“ee
(eF pr : Bey,pa ALS Bt *
a a ee *Y
istYr x)is
ry
B ni(i
opal fe é a & 'p.am t
ae a
Re iG aa
fh asa
/

1S jib. ab wi
ty ti

i
Wh

Va!
Mmd

Igansei
peNaor tie
ee

ait
=a
<
H ~

aie

a
2 ~ et *

=eat A
ees
ae
+
aSS
fl
pal

ry
{ on) Ht
ip

ue
Ue ee fla a, \ Se BL
au
: siCr Le a INY:
ern 5peep
i
‘ weyhwee ay
k ‘ DyA
ie ere rear gi Sut
Bis ys ee

eee
y

a
- / of
i Hietyaf
il
pall ai
Ve iy
“
hy td
3 ti (oy
4 De

\, } =P

iiss
PES
NG aS
\aes
9)
. b—

> Ral
=.
 ... nearly 1,500 panels with scenes and figures ... together comprise
a practically unrivalled library of images ofmedieval life and belief.

iconography at Chartres is not only due to the fact that the cathedral is dedi-
cated to her but also because its most precious relic was her tunic — the sancta
camisa — which had miraculously survived the fire of 1194, as had the famous
window known as ‘Notre-Dame de la Belle Verriére’. This particular devo-
tion coincided with a broader 12th-century interest in the Virgin.
The east window in the ambulatory beyond the high altar reflects the
concerns of the cathedral chapter. This important position was traditionally
occupied by either the Tree of Jesse (showing the ancestors of Christ) or the
Passion, but here at Chartres it is filled with the Lives of the Apostles. The
pp. 92-93
Four of the fifty-one lancet windows at the choice of this subject reveals the main change of emphasis that took place in
lower level of the cathedral. The stories they the Western Church at the beginning of the 13th century, away from great
tell generally unfold in sequence, running mystical themes and towards illustrations of the Christian life in action.
from bottom to top and left to right. The
Answering to the same trend, almost all the windows running round
lowest row often portrays the window’s
donors. (Left to right): Tree of Jesse, c. the cathedral at ground level — the most visible windows to the lay congrega-
1150. One of the Romanesque windows that tion — are filled with the lives and stories of saints and the parables. They are
survived the fire of 1194, it shows Christ’s
masterpieces of narrative, Organizing the stories in such a way as to draw
lineage as prophesied in Isaiah: above Jesse,
the father of King David, appear four kings theological parallels. Miracles abound in these scenes — reassuring, no doubt,
of Judah, with the Virgin Mary and Christ to 13th-century pilgrims, who had come to Chartres in search of their own
at the summit, surrounded by seven doves miracles. The high-up clearstory windows continue this theme, displaying
symbolizing the gifts of the Spirit and the
mostly giant and stately figures of saints.
embodiment of Wisdom; along the sides are
the prophets who foretold Christ’s mission. These accounts of the lives of the saints also tell us much about daily
The Story of Saint James, c. 1220. Given by medieval life: royalty, knights, peasants, boats, carts and transport, build-
the furriers, this window tells the story of the
saint’s life, focusing on the conversion of the
magician Almogenes and his demons. The
top nine scenes recount James’s death at the
hand of Herod. The Story of Saint Martin,
c. 1220. Martin was a popular saint in France
and he appears in a number of windows. In
this one, given by the shoemakers, the story
of his life and miracles are recounted in
thirty-eight scenes: his birth is in the lowest
central circle and his death in the highest
circle, with Christ receiving his soul at the
summit. The Good Samaritan, c.1210. The
story of the Good Samaritan occupies the
lower half of the window and the Fall of
Adam and Eve the upper part. Through
the Good Samaritan’s actions the Fall is
redeemed. This window was also given by
the shoemakers, who appear at the bottom.

Right
Detail from the Prodigal Son window,
c. 1210. Here he gambles away his inheritance
at a game with dice and a chequerboard. He
has been playing all night —the sun is rising —
and he has lost his shirt, which can be seen on
top of a pile of garments behind his adversary.

$$
ei —_ i

94 PAINTON COWEN
 © =i

8 fa

;
x

cade

Wet

SOR a OA re Ee a ge 2

ings, animals, birds and nature, mealtimes, clothing, ceremonies — all

these and more can be seen. Each panel expresses its scene with the utmost
economy so that what is going on can be discerned at a glance and the par-
Wee ... astonishing ticipants instantly recognized; thus saints have haloes, while trees, towns
and buildings are illustrated in a rudimentary fashion, and the attitudes and
displays oflight, colour ‘body language’ of people are depicted, so that their thoughts, words and
actions can be rapidly deciphered. And yet there is also a kind of ‘hidden lan-
and geometry ... guage’ at work as well, the full meaning of which may be lost to our age. This
is particularly noticeable in the gestures that certain figures make in their
Above conversation or activities. The frequent appearance of devils, angels and the
Detail of the bakers, donors of the Apostles
window, c. 1220. In the dough they are
hand of God demonstrate the activity and involvement of supernatural forces
working can be seen the face of Christ — an or divine intervention.
allusion to his presence in the bread of the An important social and cultural question about the stained glass at
Eucharist (that fragment of glass is a 14th-
Chartres relates to who commissioned and paid for it. In most of the windows,
century replacement). This and the detail
opposite show how the window is made up:
both high and low, can be seen the donors, who were members of the clergy or
coloured glass is painted on the inner surfaces the nobility, or associations of workers. The last category provides rare illus-
with the faces, folds of cloth and other trations of many trades, including bakers, water-carriers, masons, furriers,
decorative and textural details. The pieces
cobblers, moneychangers, drapers, armourers, metalworkers, butchers and
of glass are held together by thin strips of
lead (the black lines) and these assemblages barrel-makers — the last of whom, with some sense of humour, chose for their
are held in position by an iron armature. window the drunkenness of Noah.
° —_—__——_®

The Stained Glass of Chartres Cathedral 95

¥

p
er
Gods in the Family
ee

Ife Copper Mask, Artist unknown

SUZANNE PRESTON BLIER

fe’s remarkable corpus of copper and copper-alloy heads are among

Africa’s most technically accomplished and visually striking works of
art. These heads appear to have been commissioned by King Obalufon
II (the man credited with inventing casting in the region) to commemo-
rate a truce he brokered between feuding indigenous and new dynastic
families. All but one of the heads was unearthed at the Wunmonije royal
compound, about 150 metres from the palace rear wall — a site identified as
Obalufon II’s burial place. Most likely the heads were originally housed in a
shrine dedicated to the king and were used both in ceremonies honouring the
ancestors of local chief priests and in enthronement rites of family leaders.
Descriptions ofcast brass heads found in 20th-century Yoruba Obalufon
shrines seem to support this interpretation. In interviews that I conducted with
an Obalufon priest in the Ife area, he identified the bronze heads housed in his
temple — works presumably modelled on the ancient Ife heads — as represent-
ing ‘powerful human beings’ (imole, erunmole earth spirits). The same priest
was able to identify some of the deities and deified humans represented in
the metal Obalufon heads in his temple: Obalufon II, Oramfe (the early god
of thunder), Obatala (god of the autochthonous residents), Oluorogbo (the
ancient Ife messenger deity), Obameri (an early warrior), Ore (an early hunter)
and Oranmiyan (a famed military conqueror) —all key Ife historical, religious and
political figures. These references reinforce current views that the heads served
not only as portraits of leaders but also as symbols of office. Conceivably the
works were linked to the Ogboni political group sponsored by King Obalufon
II to promote the rights of indigenous chiefs and landowners.
The visual differences between the sculptures give us further clues as
to their identity and meaning. Some have vertical line face markings, while
others (including the Obalufon mask, shown opposite) have no marks: the
former probably represent autochthonous chiefs, the latter new dynasty elites.
Above
Most of the plain-faced works feature holes around the male facial hairline,
The vertical face marks on this sculpture
probably indicate that the subject was an though this is less frequent in heads with face marks; it may be an indication
autochthonous (indigenous) chief. A smooth- of age seniority. Many of the heads with vertical face marks are cast from
textured face is thought to represent a nearly pure copper (as is the Obalufon mask); all heads without marks are
member of new dynasty elites.
cast from a copper alloy, making a colour distinction (copper works being
Opposite more reddish). This, along with their greater technical complexity, suggests
This copper mask —the only metal mask from that the autochthonous elites had greater sacral authority. The likely combi-
Ife — is said to represent King Obalufon II, the
14th-century ruler, and was clearly intended
nation of life cast and free-hand sculpture techniques in the making of these
to be worn. heads adds to their iconic power. Rowland Abiodun has pointed out that in
the Owo Yoruba area moist clay was applied to the faces of deceased elites to
Early 14th century
create a posthumous sacral reference (called ako); in Ife this practice was used
Copper
Yoruba culture, Nigeria, now in the Nigerian for Ogboni elites. Similar ako clay models may have figured in the casting
National Museum, Ife process, though heavily reworked to convey Ife stylizations and aesthetics.
EY

98 SUZANNE PRESTON BLIER

A Bid for Glory
The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes, Giotto
GIUSEPPE BASILE

The broad message of this masterpiece is that if we meditate on and imitate

the example of Christ, who died on the cross to redeem humanity's sins, we can
avoid the horrors ofHell.

he decoration of the Scrovegni Chapel (also known as the

Arena Chapel) in Padua, northern Italy, is without doubt one of
the most important large-scale cycles in Western art. The painted
surface occupies an area of over 900 square metres (1,100 square
yards), covering the vault, the two side walls, the arch just in front
of the apse and the inner fagade. In total, more than one hundred subjects are
represented, including many busts of prophets and saints, and, in the lower ~
part of the side walls, trompe l’ceil statues representing the Virtues and Vices
that lead, respectively, to Heaven and Hell. However, the most important part
of the cycle are the forty scenes depicting episodes from the lives of the Virgin
Mary and Jesus (including his death and resurrection), while the culmination
of the entire programme, a depiction of the Last Judgment, can be found on
the wall by the entrance.
The broad message of this masterpiece is that if we meditate on and
imitate the example of Christ, who died on the cross to redeem human-
ity’s sins, we can avoid the horrors of Hell. Enrico Scrovegni, the man who
commissioned the work, has apparently already achieved this, since he has
had himself depicted on the side of the redeemed in the Last Judgment.
(Elsewhere, the patron appears offering the chapel to the Virgin.) However,
these frescoes also had a more concrete and earthly significance, constitut-
ing a sort of political manifesto: by commissioning the cycle from the most
celebrated Italian painter of that time, Giotto di Bondone (1267-1337), who
painted it between 1303 and 1305, Enrico, the richest man in Padua (indeed,
Above one of the richest men of his age), was underlining his intention to become
Detail of the Last Judgment, representing
the lord of the city. Things did not work out quite as planned (in the end
one of the damned, tormented by the devils
of Hell. Francesco da Carrara became lord of Padua, and Enrico was forced into exile
in Venice), but the decoration of this chapel was, and still is, considered one of
Opposite
the masterpieces that laid the foundations for Western post-medieval art.
The pictorial decoration of the Scrovegni
Chapel after its restoration, seen from one In the Scrovegni Chapel cycle the theme of salvation — a relatively
side of the apse. common subject at this time — is given a theological and philosophical base
1303-05
so complex and beautifully articulated that we may well detect the input
Fresco of a particularly knowledgeable theological ‘adviser’. Some have suggested
Scrovegni Chapel, Padua, Italy that this adviser was the priest responsible for the chapel, though this is not
————

100 GIUSEPPE BASILE

 completely certain. However, that Giotto was given some direction in the
cycle’s planning is the only explanation for several unusual scenes — for
example, God the Father ordering the Archangel Gabriel to go and announce
The novelty of to Mary her impending pregnancy, or the angels that fill the skies at the end
of the day of the Last Judgment. Another sign of a great coordinating mind at
Giotto’s work was work is the fact that every year on 25 March — the feast of the Annunciation
and the anniversary of the consecration of the building — the scene of the
instantly recognized donation of the chapel is struck by light from a particular window.
Nevertheless, it was Giotto alone who broke away from the dominant
by the most important Byzantine art tradition to create completely new forms and paint in a natu-
ralistic way. And it was Giotto who revived the expressive forms of antique
writers ofthe time, Roman art, as well as a more scientific and rational approach towards the
depiction of reality. In this way, the artist achieved a profound remodelling
beginning with Dante of traditional figurative themes, and to all intents and purposes anticipated,
with great intuition, the most important formal innovation of 15th-century
Alighieri. European art: geometrical perspective. These conceptual or theoretical
breakthroughs found an essential counterpart in the astonishing technical
knowledge that Giotto had accumulated, which we can see in the wide range
of techniques used in the chapel’s decoration. These include the use of oils
(a particularly rare technique in Italy at that time) and the antique stucco
romano fresco technique.
Above
Two tondi from the vault, depicting (left) an
The Scrovegni Chapel is the most important project in the Florentine
unidentified prophet, who has announced the master’s vast body of work, which also includes the frescoes depicting the life
future Incarnation of Christ, and (right) Saint of Saint Francis in the Upper Basilica of San Francesco in Assisi (though the
John the Baptist. extent of his involvement there is questioned), as well as later decoration of the
Opposite Peruzzi and Bardi chapels in Santa Croce, Florence. The novelty of Giotto’s
Detail of the Last Judgment (end wall), work was instantly recognized by the most important writers of the time,
showing the donation of the chapel on the
beginning with Dante Alighieri. Since then his genius has been acknowledged
part of Enrico Scrovegni, the mouth of Hell,
and Christ’s cross, carried by Simon of Cyrene
throughout the centuries, while his paintings remained a source of inspira-
and supported by two angels. tion for many of the great Italian painters: Masaccio, Piero della Francesca,
EE)

The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes 103

 ... the decoration of
this chapel was, and

still is, considered one

of the masterpieces
that laid the foundations
for Western post-
medieval art.

Mantegna, Raphael, Michelangelo. Indeed, Giotto’s influence can even be

felt in the 20th century in the works of some of the Mexican muralists.
Unfortunately the frescoes have suffered serious damage over the centu-
Top
The Annunciation by the Archangel Gabriel
ries, especially due to the lack of care by the last private owners, the Foscari
to the Virgin Mary (details of the decoration Gradenigo family, who in 1824 decided to demolish the adjoining palace
of the triumphal arch). (built on the remains of a Roman arena), thus depriving the chapel of struc-
tural support and protection. In 1881 the chapel was acquired by the Paduan
Above
The Adoration ofthe Magi (scene from the local government, and the first, rather radical, restoration was undertaken
life of Christ, on the right wall). at the end of the 19th century by Guglielmo Botti and Antonio Bertolli.
oe

104 GIUSEPPE BASILE

 A second restoration was undertaken at the beginning of the 1960s by
Leonetto Tintori, and then finally, in 2001-02, another restoration by the
Istituto Centrale del Restauro brought this masterpiece as close as possible to
its original, magnificent condition.

Above
The Flight into Egypt (scene from the life of
Christ, on the right wall).

Nene)

The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes 105

Distant Shores

Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara, Kim U-mun and other artists

YOUNGSOOK PAK

Avalokiteshvara, meaning ‘He who hears all sounds’, is the embodiment

of compassion. He promises to delay his Buddhahood until he has rescued all

sentient beings from suffering, calamity and illness ...

he magnificent Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, the

Bodhisattva of Great Compassion who can rescue living beings
from all manner of calamities, attired in sumptuous garments
and jewelry, appears in the shimmering rocky environment of a
mysterious seashore. The saint, seated in a relaxed and graceful
posture, looks down to a boy in the lower right-hand corner, who appears
before him in a reverent attitude with folded hands. Though the painting is
damaged, we can still easily appreciate the noble features of the Bodhisattva,
and the attentive gaze of the boy. The image is articulated in fluid brush-
strokes, with radiant mineral colours in gold, red, white, green and lapis
lazuli, and delicate textures of silk brocade and embroidery. The body of
the saint is gold, while that of the boy is flesh pink; the halo and aureole
of the Bodhisattva, as well as the sturdy bamboo stems behind him, have
partly survived.
Within the halo and next to the Bodhisattva’s left hand, a gold-inlaid
bronze kundika (pure water bottle, used in purification ceremonies) holding
a willow branch — an attribute of the Bodhisattva — is just visible. Similar
kundikas with designs inlaid in silver on bronze are found among Buddhist
ceremonial vessels of the Kory6 period. The ornaments and patterns that
embellish the Bodhisattva’s garments from head to foot are subtle yet exqui-
sitely rendered: phoenixes flank the seated Amitabha Buddha (Buddha of
the Western Paradise, where all beings wished to be reborn) in the centre
of the crown; large, bejewelled lotuses fall from the chignon, golden floral
scrolls adorn the green and blue sashes and the hem, and honeycomb patterns
Opposite
The head of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara. superimposed with oval lotuses decorate the red skirt. The white silk lining
The face is painted in gold and the saint wears covering the right thigh is decorated with large gold medallions, while small
a high chignon, a transparent veil and a crown florets fill the intervening spaces. Phoenixes and clouds on the transparent
with two phoenixes, one on either side of the
seated Buddha Amitabha.
white veil are beautifully depicted in gold. On closer inspection, we can see
that the soft armrest and seat that protect the Bodhisattva from the rugged
1310 rocks are formed from individual blades of grass, while the blue lotus petals of
Pigment and gold on silk
419.5 cm x 254 cm/ 13 ft 9 in. x 8 ft 4 in.
the Bodhisattva’s footrest are finely delineated in gold. Gold dust and jewels
Kagami Jinja, Karatsu City, Saga Prefecture, are scattered along the shore beneath the Bodhisattva, where bright red and
Kyushu, Japan pink corals spring out of the water. Rocks and waves are painted in ink, in the
EEE |

106 YOUNGSOOK PAK

 traditional manner. This profusion of rich detail enhances our impression of
a visionary world. Considering the enormous size of the painting — the largest
surviving silk painting in East Asia — the composition, imposing presence of
Conside ring the the Bodhisattva, fine details and refinement of colouring are astounding.
The subject matter is Sudhana’s encounter with Avalokiteshvara in
EnOrmous size of his legendary abode of Mount Potalaka, on an island supposedly located
in south India. Avalokiteshvara, meaning ‘He who hears all sounds’, is the
the painting ... the embodiment of compassion. He promises to delay his Buddhahood until he \
has rescued all sentient beings from suffering, calamity and illness, brought
composition, imposing

presence of the
Bodhisattva, fine

details and refinement

of colouring are
astounding.

Above
The gossamer robes of the Bodhisattva,
falling over his rocky seat; the fabric is
decorated with a motif of a phoenix in flight,
painted in gold.

Right
The Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara, more
than 4 metres (13 ft) in height, is the largest
surviving Koryo painting.

108 YOUNGSOOK PAK

 happiness and comfort, and rescued people from danger (as described in
the seventh volume of the Lotus Sutra). The willow branch is the symbol of
fulfilling the wishes of devotees, and is also a symbol of healing. As a result,
he became the most popular Buddhist deity of all time. In the Avatamsaka
or Garland Sutra, a boy named Sudhana, following the instructions of
Manjushri (the Bodhisattva of Wisdom), embarked on a journey in search of
enlightenment by visiting fifty-three saints. He encountered Avalokiteshvara,
the twenty-eighth saint, in the grotto of Potalaka. The Bodhisattva’s appear-
ance is compared with the full moon, shining and complete. From this
description the name of the Bodhisattva Suw6l Kwantim or ‘Water-Moon
Avalokiteshvara’ is derived. Suw6l Kwaniim was venerated by the Korean
aristocracy during the Kory6 period, since it was believed that Potalaka was
actually Naksan (the Korean rendition of Potalaka) on the east coast of the
Korean peninsula. It is said Avalokiteshvara manifested himself in this place
and settled there facing the East Sea. Naksan became one of the most holy
Buddhist sites in Korea, frequented by royal devotees and the nobility.
The complete painting must have been even grander and more splendid
than it is today. It originally bore an inscription, undoubtedly written in gold,
by a royal patron in the large square space on the upper right corner, but this
must have been cut away at a later period. According to an 1812 Japanese
copy of this inscription, recently discovered by the Japanese scholar Hirata
Yutaka, the painting was commissioned by Queen Sukbi in the fifth month of
the second year of King Ch’ungson’s reign (1310), and was the work of several
court painters. The founder of the Kory6 dynasty established Buddhism as
the state religion in Korea, and the Koryo sa (History of the Koryé dynasty)
and various munjip (collections of writings by literati) record numerous state
and private Buddhist ceremonies that were held for the protection of the
nation in the face of foreign invasions by the Liao, Jin and Mongols, to quell
natural disasters, to remedy all human conditions by prolonging lifespan,
or to promote recovery from illness. Such ceremonies needed both sculp-
tures and paintings, which were displayed in temples and in prayer halls in
the palace and noble households. Around 140 Buddhist paintings from the
second half of the Koryé dynasty (13th—14th centuries) have survived, mostly
in Japanese and a few in Western collections. This monumental painting of
Avalokiteshvara is thus powerful testimony to the sophisticated court patron-
age of Buddhist culture in medieval Korea, as well as its highly refined artistic
tradition. More specifically, it reflects the fact that from the second half of the
13th century Korea fell under Mongol rule, leading Queen Sukbi, an ardent
Buddhist devotee, to attempt to ease the situation through particular devo-
tion to the all-compassionate Bodhisattva depicted here.
The painting still carries a second inscription in ink by the Japanese
monk Ryoken, faintly visible at the bottom in the space between the shore and
the white stem supporting the lotus pedestal. This inscription, dated 1391,
describes how this painting was brought from Korea and entered the Kagami
Jinja, a Shinto shrine where it is still kept today.

Above
Detail of the boy Sudhana, adoring the
Bodhisattva at the latter’s abode on the island
of Potalaka, believed to be located at Naksan
on the east coast of Korea.

eee

Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara 109

The Short-Sighted Prophet
The ‘Well of Moses’, Claus Sluter
SUSIE NASH

The drama and power of the highly individualized prophet figures, in

particular, have led to the [‘Well of Moses’] being celebrated as a harbinger
of the Renaissance ...

he ‘Well of Moses’, carved by Claus Sluter between 1395 and

1404, is among the most important works in Western sculpture.
The drama and power of the highly individualized prophet
figures, in particular, have led to the piece being celebrated as a har-
binger of the Renaissance, and linked into a tradition that leads
to Donatello, Michelangelo and Bernini. However, fully to understand and
appreciate the importance of the piece we need to consider its original context,
conception and construction, which are remarkably well documented.
Referred to in contemporary sources as ‘La grand croix’ (the ‘Well of
Moses’ is a 19th-century name), the surviving hexagonal pillar surrounded by
six life-sized prophets and six angels is only the base of what was originally a
monumental cross, a work of brilliant engineering as well as artistic invention
(see the reconstruction on page 113). It was designed for the centre of the large
cloister of the Carthusian monastery at Champmol near Dijon, founded by
Above
David is represented as an ancestor of the the most powerful and wealthy ruler of the period, Philip the Bold, Duke of
kings of France, with royal emblems on his Burgundy (who died in 1404). The monastery was intended as Philip’s burial
robe and a fleur-de-lis design on his crown, place, but also as an aid to the salvation of his soul, since the Carthusian
(restored in the 19th century, but now
recreated from fragments discovered at the
monks who lived here would spend their time praying for the duke and his
bottom of the well below the monument). family. The ‘Well of Moses’ was the central devotional element in the most
private and enclosed space in the whole complex. As such, much thought went
Opposite
This view with Daniel (left) and Isaiah (right)
into its planning, much effort was spent on its construction, and no expense
would have marked the back of the cross, was spared for its lavish decoration with gold and ultramarine (still visible on
which rose directly above it. The prophets its newly restored surface). The rest of the monastery was largely destroyed
act as exemplars for the monks. Isaiah’s
in the French Revolution and its artworks scattered — the ‘Well of Moses’ is
attitude, as he attends to Daniel, suggests the
monks’ duty to listen silently to readings from almost all that remains on the site today.
scripture, as represented by the text on his The challenge for Sluter in planning and executing this work was to
scroll: ‘as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, produce, in stone and on a difficult site (Champmol literally means ‘marshy
so he openeth not his mouth’.
field’), a monumental crucifix with complex, additional figurative elements
1395-1404 (the six prophets and angels) that would enrich its meaning and be legible
Asniéres stone, with traces of gilding and and visually interesting from every viewpoint. The scheme Sluter devised was
polychromy
H c. 3.5 metres / 11 ft 6 in., originally (with
visually and structurally astounding, apparently defying the constraints of
the monumental cross) c. 11 metres / 36 ft the available materials, standing around eleven metres (36 ft) high with a base
Champmol, near Dijon, France sunk another four metres (13 ft 1 in.) into the earth, creating a well around it.
nn eee

110 SUSIE NASH

 This has always been viewed as a fundamental iconographic feature, refer-
ring to the Waters of Life, but it may initially have been conceived as a sump: a
technical solution to the problem of the wet ground.
The six monumental prophets (David, Jeremiah, Zachariah, Daniel,
Isaiah and Moses) are set around the base, standing on small green mounds,
holding scrolls with texts relating to Christ’s Crucifixion. The architectural
setting of the pillar is almost obliterated by their oversized forms —a relation-
ship that enhances the immediacy of their presence, further emphasized by.
their heavy drapery falling in complex, often highly decorative, folds. In fact,
when originally finished, the pillar was painted black, giving the figures even
greater presence.
The prophets were conceived of in pairs, with the ‘principal’ pair — that
is, those set directly under the face of the cross — being David and Jeremiah.
This was the view that monks would have had as they entered the cloister
from the church. But approaching the monument, the viewer was encouraged
by the gestures of the angels and the prophets to move anticlockwise around
it. These two prophets have particular significance for the Carthusians —
David the composer of the Psalms, which the monks read constantly, and
Jeremiah a model for their contemplative life. However, they also had con-
temporary significance. King David stood for Philip’s nephew, the King of
France, since the robe is decorated with the royal emblems of sunbursts and
his crown with-the fleur-de-lis. Jeremiah, meanwhile, stands for the Duke
himself— an allusion made explicit by his being carved as a portrait of Philip,
evident not only from the physical resemblance but also from the purple-red
robes (a colour favoured by the Duke) and the presence of metal eyeglasses
(now lost), similar to Philip’s own (made by the ducal goldsmith). Jeremiah’s
unbearded face, and the open book from which he reads, both unusual for a
prophet, further mark the figure out as ‘contemporary’. Philip had intended
King David stood for to enter the Carthusian order (an ambition he did not achieve in life, though
he was buried in the robes of a Carthusian), and by having himself repre-
Philip’s nephew, the King sented on this monument he ensured that he was perpetually present at the
heart of his foundation. His scroll quotes from Lamentations: ‘all ye who
of France, since the robe pass by, behold, and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow’. This is,
in part, an allusion to the Duke’s own sorrow: in 1396, just as this monument
is decorated with the was being planned, disaster struck France, with the defeat at Nicopolis by the
Turks, in which the Duke lost many of his dearest friends and advisers, and
royal emblems of his son was held to ransom, plunging the nation into mourning.
Above and between the prophets, the angel dressed in (Carthusian)
sunbursts and his crown white, would also have had significance for the monastic viewer. Its crossed
arms are a gesture well known at the time as one of prayer, used specifically
with the fleur-de-lis. when contemplating the cross. All six angels have wings carved to seem
weightless from below, yet which (appear to) support the terrace and cross
Above above: they direct their attention downwards, however, interacting with the
David (left) and Jeremiah (right) form a kind
viewer, each performing other gestures of prayer and grief for the monks to
of diptych and present the main view of the
monument; their inscriptions refer to the imitate. Some of the angels also have ducal allusions: they were used as an
physical and mental suffering of Christ. David emblem by Philip and here they are dressed in the colours of the ducal arms
is shown with his harp, as composer of the — red, blue, white and gold, creating a type of heraldic framework around
Psalms, which the monks recited daily. The
the figures of David and Jeremiah. The ducal ownership of this work was
angel in (Carthusian) white makes a gesture
that the monks themselves would have made made explicit too: on the base of the monument, Philip’s coats of arms were
in their devotion to the cross. set below each prophet (traces of which are still visible); on the cornice above
—

112 SUSIE NASH

 were painted his initials and those of his wife, Margaret of Flanders; and even
on ends of the cross itself their arms were carved. The monks viewing this
monument from whatever angle would have emphatic reminders of whom
they were to pray for.
On the terrace above the monumental prophets, the Magdalene knelt
alone at the foot of the cross, her lone presence an innovative and dramatic
demonstration of the Carthusians’ dedication to this saint. She was painted
red, linking her to the blood of the crucified Christ above; indeed, the impact
of the monument, its meaning and its effectiveness as a memorial and focus of
devotion were significantly enhanced by its polychromed surface. The cross
Above itself was richly gilded with 3,100 reinforced gold leaves, and coloured with
This drawing reconstructs the lost top
the best-quality ultramarine and other pigments. These were applied by the
part of the monument, a very tall, very
thin column on which was set the cross, Duke’s painter, Jean Malouel, who must have collaborated closely with Sluter
with Mary Magdalene kneeling alone at its to achieve the desired finish. This surface treatment was not about lavish
foot, embracing its base. Only fragments of display, however, but about giving appropriate glory to God — a quality rec-
her arms, and of the legs of Christ survive,
found in the 19th century in the well below.
ognized in descriptions of the cross in 15th-century indulgences (guarantees
The cross was entirely gilded, and the of spiritual credit granted to those who prayed before it) as being ‘glorious’,
Magdalene was dressed in red and gold. ‘of honorific construction’, ‘of beautiful and wonderful workmanship’ and
‘wonderfully adorned’. Indeed, it was so lavishly decorated that, just three
Top right
Jeremiah, depicted with the features of Philip years after it was completed, a tent had to be erected to protect the paint and
the Bold, and originally equipped with metal gold from the wind and the rain. In thus protecting it, the monks irrevocably
eyeglasses, is the only prophet to read from
undermined its function as a constantly visible symbol and focus of venera-
a book, the now illegible text of which would
never have been visible to any viewer except
tion in the centre of the Carthusians’ enclosed world.
the stone figure himself.

The ‘Well of Moses’ 113

Silent Worship
The Ghent Altarpiece, Hubert and Jan van Eyck
CHRISTOPHER DELL

ucked away in a chapel in St Bavo Cathedral in the Belgian

city of Ghent is perhaps the defining masterpiece of 15th-century
Netherlandish art. A large multi-panelled structure, The Ghent
Altarpiece, played a vital part in revolutionizing painting north
of the Alps.
Today it is most often displayed open, but when it was originally made
it would have been kept closed almost all the time. When the hinged panels
are folded over the main image (as shown opposite), we see a depiction of the
Annunciation (rather awkwardly flanking two empty central panels), two
remarkable grisaille panels depicting illusionistic sculptures, and the two
donors in the lower tier to left and right. Whenever they saw the altarpiece
disposed like this, the passing congregation would have been reminded of the
couple who had-commissioned it — Joos Vijd and his wife, Elisabeth Borluut;
their desire to figure so prominently is perhaps understandable, considering
what the work would have cost them. The donors are depicted with a due sense
... ultimately, it was of decorum: they do not enter the space of the holy figures — indeed, they pray to
depictions of statues of the saints, not even depictions of the saints themselves.
the realism ... combined An inscription on the frame confirms that the painting was begun by
Hubert van Eyck, but completed by his brother Jan after Hubert’s death in
with the symbolism, 1426. Jan van Eyck soon eclipsed his brother, but clearly this work owed a
great deal to Hubert. The 16th-century Italian art historian Vasari attributed
that made The Ghent to Jan van Eyck the invention of oil paints; although this was almost certainly
unjustified, Van Eyck was instrumental in popularizing them. And The
Altarpiece so radical, Ghent Altarpiece was perhaps the work that did more than any other to con-
vince artists of the possibilities the new medium offered. The glossy surface
and so influential. must have intrigued rival artists at the time.
The exterior was probably deliberately muted in order to heighten the
Above effect of opening the wings. As they swing apart, we are confronted by a
A detail of the group of Jewish and pagan
barrage of fierce colour and figures at varying scales: it is difficult to know
writers from the central, Adoration ofthe
Mystic Lamb, panel. where to look when encountering this work for the first time. As on the
outside, there are essentially two tiers. In the upper tier, we see the naked
Opposite
Adam standing in a fictive niche; sumptuously dressed angels singing; the
The altarpiece in closed position: (bottom
to top) the donors praying to statues of John Virgin Mary; God the Father; Saint John the Baptist; angel musicians playing
the Baptist and John the Evangelist; the various instruments; and Eve, the counterpart to Adam. Adam and Eve are
Annunciation to the Virgin Mary; and the depicted after their expulsion from the Garden of Eden: they are aware of
prophets Zachariah and Micah, with two
their nakedness and attempt to hide it. Eve is already carrying a child, the
sibyls (prophetesses) between them.
pain of whose birth is part of her punishment for encouraging Adam to eat the
Before 1426-1432 forbidden fruit. Thus, this peripheral pair represents Original Sin. Their iso-
Oil on panel
lation from God is emphasized by the shallow, claustrophobic space in which
375 cm x 520 cm/ 12 ft 4 in. x 17 ft (open);
375 cm x 260 cm/ 12 ft 4 in. x 8 ft 6 in. (shut) they are situated. Above Eve is one of the results of their sin — the murder by
Ghent, St Bavo Cathedral Cain of his brother Abel.
EE
SEEIUEIEEIE SEEEREEEEEEEEEEnE

114 CHRISTOPHER DELL

 =aen |
vail

3k
~ ‘%
rc ont
> — "=?
2 v i ny ) el ee 2
alameda
el Se ei n
Eee eamtotmde eae oe
 The central figure dominates, of course, being raised above the others
on.a magnificent throne. Discussion continues as to who, precisely, this
represents: God the Father, or possibly Christ the King of Heaven? The
three-tiered tiara suggests that we could also read the figure as a personifi-
cation of the Holy Trinity. The inclusion of Saint John the Baptist is not a
surprise, since the church (elevated to a cathedral in the 16th century) was
originally dedicated to this saint. Yet the central figures, though grand (in the
Byzantine, hieratic style) and beautifully executed, are too static to hold our
attention. So instead our eyes drift down to the panel below, the most original
in the altarpiece: the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb itself. ‘
This extraordinary scene is set in an almost magical landscape, at
once of this earth (as the distant towns indicate), yet also of another place.
The impossibly verdant meadow is dotted with naturalistic flowers; some
bushes conveniently divide up the space and form a clearing. The heightened
colours border on the psychedelic.
Four groups approach the clearing, each identified by their costume
and attributes. The high viewing point — there is something almost cinematic ay

about the scene, as though we are observing it from a gantry — allows us

clearly to make out each group. From the top left come holy bishops and car- B ae
3a
dinals. From the top right, female martyrs carry palm leaves, symbols of their
martyrdom. At the bottom left isa group of Old Testament prophets and aha)>
(perhaps surprisingly) some Classical, pagan authors, including Virgil. And
at the bottom right is a group representing the Church, including the twelve
apostles (dressed simply), followed by the massed ranks of the contemporary
Church — bishops, popes, cardinals — in all their finery. Seen through modern
eyes, the stark contrast between the-early holy men and their modern-day
equivalents seems almost subversive. Van Eyck, however, was concerned to
give the hierarchy of the Church legitimacy by showing its origins.
Itis hard to avoid the feeling that this is a clandestine meeting outside city
walls. But the groups have stopped short of converging, for in the centre of the
clearing is an altar. And upon that altar is a lamb, the object of their devotion.
They dare not get closer, for something strange is happening. This surreal
scene captures all the power of a hallucination: the heightened colours, the
inverted rainbow of the Holy Spirit’s dazzling light, the sharp rays that shoot Top left

out, the lamb standing on the altar, waiting patiently as four congregations The female martyrs arrive. Each carries
a palm leaf as a symbol of her martyrdom.
file in. Bewilderingly, the lamb — the Lamb of God, symbol of the sacrificial Some also carry specific attributes that
lamb and emblem of Christ — has become real, just as the bread becomes the identify them.

————_—

116 CHRISTOPHER DELL

 iN
TO
TTT)

Above
With wings unfolded, the altarpiece measures
over 5 metres (17 ft) across. Although the
scenes across the bottom register are not . there is something almost cinematic about the
continuous, the horizon is: a curious effect.
The lower left-hand panel, known as ‘The
Just Judges’, was stolen in 1934, and replaced
scene, as though we are observing it froma gantry ...
by a copy finished in 1945 by J. Vanderveken.

Oo ———————_ B

The Ghent Altarpiece 117

 SS

RC WNES ice
gig UES Brees Page

7 °

ae

| |
|
i,
:
=
a q
t ‘i |
} ‘ j
: . % : ; aie 7
‘

a / Nn
|

& nN SE : > pt
{ { y ~ . fA f E
|

> =
: e 242
NC F
@os
eae a 4 , oe i \ 3 .: = .
:
| : 4 | 5 |

~~ © :
. pa
oe n
cA re :
5 ¢ ; aN f ;
-
m2
= 8
hy *
\/ $i SecA RO
, a
«al
‘, Hey |
a
:
( i Sy Ae€
5 thes
é. a aye
2 .}
«

:
.

S
> :

a
5
SAS > :
:

aes ‘ x a
‘ z ESA .x
es) we. os ~ 3
~ :
 body of Christ in the Eucharist. The stillness of the scene is undermined only
by the swinging censers, which hang in mid-air. Ranged around the altar like
celestial bodyguards is a ring of angels. Some of these hold the instruments of
the Passion — the column on which Christ was flagellated, the nails used to fix
him to the cross, the lance with the sponge dipped in vinegar that quenched
his final thirst. Blood pours from the lamb’s breast into a chalice. This is the
true meaning of the altarpiece — sacrifice, blood and the role of the priesthood
in administering the holy sacraments. The scene is not only still, it is silent: all
we might hear is the trickle of blood into the chalice, the sing-song splash of
the fountain, perhaps the gently creaking chains of the censers.
In front of the altar is a fountain — the Fountain of Life. It first flowed in
the Garden of Eden, which takes us back to Adam and Eve. The splashes of the
thin trickles of water are masterful — miraculous, even. Unlike the chalice on
the altar, which seems to continue to fill without ever overflowing, the water
from the fountain escapes the basin at the bottom, falls into a channel and
The message running flows out of the painting in the direction of the viewer. The message running
down the central axis of the picture is clear: it is the blood of Christ that gives
down the central axis of us life. A Latin inscription on the altar front reads: ‘Behold the Lamb of God
who takes away the sins of the world.’ In fact, the entire altarpiece is covered
the picture is clear: it is with inscriptions in Latin, which many scholars have taken as signs of Van
Eyck’s deep learning.
the blood of Christ that Although elements of the altarpiece had appeared elsewhere before —
for example, the Fountain of Life was a well-known symbol — the originality
gives us life. of the work as a whole cannot be overstated. There is no one explanation
for the choice of imagery, though there are strong references to the Book
of Revelation. Yet ultimately, it was the realism — the careful studies of the
animals, textures, plants, trees, landscape — combined with the symbolism,
that made The Ghent Altarpiece so radical, and so influential. It was widely
admired in its own time, and without doubt laid the foundations for much
that was to follow. Both Gerard David and (later) Albrecht Diirer made
careful studies of it.
Perhaps the greatest miracle surrounding this work is that we are able to
see it today almost in its entirety, and (almost) in its original location. It is a
work that has suffered more than most, and travelled extensively. The break-
up began in the early 19th century, when the cash-strapped diocese of Ghent
pawned some of the panels. Unable to pay off the loan, the diocese sold them
to an English collector, who in turn sold them on to the King of Prussia. From
the royal collection they migrated to the GemAldegalerie in Berlin. There they
were joined by other panels that had been taken by Germany during the First
World War. However, all the pieces of the work were returned to Belgium
under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. This remained a source of resent-
ment in Germany, and when the Second World War broke out, fearing
another seizure, the Belgian authorities decided in 1940 to send the panels
to the Vatican. When Italy’s entry into the war was announced, they were
diverted to Pau in the Pyrenees. There they were seized in 1942 on Hitler’s
Opposite orders, and sent to Bavaria, where they ended up ina salt mine for safekeep-
Christ is represented as a sacrificial lamb. He ing. It was only with the Allied victory that the panels once more saw the light
is placed on the same axis as God the Father,
of day, and were returned to St Bavo.
the Holy Spirit and the Fountain of Life. Only
the lamb directly addresses the viewer in this
scene.

OO

The Ghent Altarpiece 119

A Drama of Grief

The Brancacci Chapel Frescoes, Masaccio and Masolino

ORNELLA CASAZZA

he Brancacci Chapel is situated to the right of the transept in

the Church of Santa Maria del Carmine in Florence. The chapel
gets its name from the Brancacci family, who patronized it from
the second half of the 14th century until 1780, when it was trans-
ferred to the Riccardi family. It was Felice di Michele Brancacci,
a rich merchant and a key figure in Florence’s elite, who started the works in
the chapel, probably in 1424. Two artists were commissioned to execute the
frescoes: Masolino and Masaccio. They worked together until 1427 or 1428,
... all the pain in the at which point Masolino travelled to Hungary, leaving Masaccio to continue
work alone. After returning to Italy, Masolino stopped in Rome, where he
world is etched on [Eve’s] was joined by Masaccio, leaving the chapel unfinished. The cycle was finally
completed by Filippino Lippi in 1481-82.
face. The present-day appearance of the chapel is the result of a number of
modifications, undertakert between about 1435 (when Felice Brancacci was
exiled in disgrace) and the 19th century. Originally it had a simple crossed
vault with lunettes (decorated by Masaccio), and light came in through a single
circular window. Above the main altar there was originally the final scene
from the legend of Saint Peter, showing his crucifixion. This was destroyed to
make space for the venerated 13th-century ‘Madonna del Popolo’ altarpiece,
and only a few fragments remain. In 1670, wooden frames were installed
to divide up the two tiers of the frescoes, and shortly afterwards, in 1674,
the chapel was clad in marble, and the pavement and balustrade were refit-
ted. (Almost certainly it was at this time that leaves were added to hide the
modesty of the figures of Adam and Eve in Masolino’s Temptation of Adam
and Eve and Masaccio’s Expulsion from the Garden of Eden.) In 1746—48
the vault was raised, a process that destroying Masaccio’s lunettes (the new
ceiling was decorated with frescoes by Vincenzo Meucci). And then, during
the night of 28-29 January 1771, fire devastated the church. Although the
Opposite
chapel was largely spared, the fire did destroy the golden cornices that divided
‘Unto the woman [God] said: “I will greatly the paintings of the first and second tiers, burning and altering the colours
multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in around those areas and also affecting the plaster bearing the depictions of the
sorrow thou shalt bring forth children...”
Tribute Money and the Raising of Tabitha.
And unto Adam he said: “...Cursed is the
ground for your sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat With such an ill-fated history, by the end of the 20th century the chapel
of it all the days of your life.”...So he drove was in need of thorough restoration. This restoration, undertaken in the
out the man; and he placed at the east of the 1990s, removed various additions (including Adam and Eve’s leaves), along
Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming
with a ‘patina’ made with egg that had darkened and degraded (and which
sword...to keep the way of the tree of life.’
(Genesis 3: 16-17, 24) had probably been applied in around 1900 to ‘varnish’ and ‘nourish’ the
frescoes). Sadly, the restoration revealed no trace of the original lunette deco-
c. 1424-28
rations, but it did bring to light two preparatory drawings in sinopia dating
Fresco
Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, back to the 15th century and relating to the panels of the legend of Saint Peter
Florence by Masaccio and Masolino. These were discovered underneath the frescoes,
————
__________

120 ORNELLA CASAZZA

 on the far wall next to the window. Thanks to the discovery of these pre-
paratory drawings, in which we can clearly see the two distinct hands of the
painters, it is safe to assume that Masaccio was fully involved from the outset
... man, even though of the project, and that each of the artists was given particular scenes at the
very beginning, to avoid too much inconsistency.
he is a sinner, has not Nevertheless, there remain clear differences between the two painters.
For example, if we compare The Temptation with The Expulsion from the
lost his dignity ... Garden of Eden, we cansee that Masolino leans towards a more conventional,
traditional iconography, his two figures showing in their gestures a gentle and
courteous manner — quite the antithesis of the episode painted by Masaccio
on the opposite wall. The Expulsion manifests, to a singular and extraordi-
nary extent, a new cultural and formal approach, a spiritual ‘harmony’ and
technical ownership. It is an excellent example of the Renaissance ability
to dramatize real and complex emotions through the expressive depiction of
the body.
In Masaccio’s work, man, even though he is a sinner, has not lost
his dignity — he is not derided or made to look ugly; indeed, leaving aside
certain innovative expressions, his beauty takes us back to the archetypes
of Classical, ideal beauty. In characterizing Eve, it is obvious that Masaccio
had in mind the Greco-Roman ‘Venus pudica’, filtered through 14th-century
models, such as the figure of Temperance by Giovanni Pisano on the pulpit of
Pisa Cathedral. (Two of the figures of the damned on the Pisa pulpit, holding
their heads in their hands, may well have influenced Adam’s gesture.) Yet it
is only in her gesture that Masaccio’s Eve recalls a ‘Venus pudica’: her body is
not idealized, and all the pain in the world is etched on her face. Masaccio’s
conception of Eve also suggests comparison with the relief of the Expulsion
on the fountain at Perugia, by Niccolo and Giovanni Pisano, and the expres-
sion of her mouth, open in a cry of anguish, recalls that of Isaac, about to be
sacrificed by his father, Abraham, in Brunelleschi’s competition piece for the
Baptistery doors in Florence.
Masaccio’s Adam, too, seems to establish a relationship with the
Classical world, from the Laocéon to Marsyas, but at the same time shows
a contemporary approach to anatomy that perhaps owes something to
Donatello’s crucifix in Santa Croce in Florence. His reinterpretation of the
antique, cross-fertilized by recent innovations in Italian art, led to a flowering
of extraordinary originality in Masaccio’s art, which must have astounded
the first viewers. To appreciate the revolutionary nature of his work, one
has only to consider the foreshortened angel, flying freely, and caught at the
Above moment of landing in a cloud of fire as red as his robes.
Masolino’s conception of the Temptation Outside Paradise, the desolate landscape echoes the movement of the
focuses on the perfection and innocence of two figures and seems to reinforce their divinely ordered exile from the
Adam and Eve, whose sweet expressions give
no hint of the suffering that awaits them in
garden. On one side a steep, rocky slope follows the line of Adam’s left leg,
Masaccio’s Expulsion. while a gentler incline cuts a shallow diagonal behind Eve’s left leg. The cou-
ple’s shadows — now, thanks to the restoration, much easier to discern — trail
Opposite
behind them like a symbol of the burdens that await them in the terrestrial
View of the Brancacci Chapel showing two
scenes from the life of Saint Peter painted by world. The gravity of the event and the intensity of the drama influence every
Masaccio: (above) The Tribute Money and line and form: nothing is gratuitous, and the distillation of the image to the
(below) The Raising of the Son of Theophilus
bare essentials seems to bespeak the irrevocable fulfilment of the will of God.
and Saint Peter Enthroned. The Brancacci is
sometimes called the ‘Sistine Chapel of the
early Renaissance’.

————

The Brancacci Chapel Frescoes 123

A Tuscan Passion

The Deposition, Fra Angelico (and Lorenzo Monaco)

MAGNOLIA SCUDIERI

he fascination of writers and art historians with Fra Angelico’s

Deposition — which can be found as early as Vasari — does not
stem only from the fact that it is one of the artist’s greatest
masterpieces, but also from the mystery that surrounds its origins
and history, and its links to one of the most important Florentine
families of the time, the Strozzi. Although the painting is today displayed in
the museum in the former convent of San Marco, it was originally installed
in the sacristy of the church of Santa Trinita. The sacristy had been commis-
sioned by Noferi Strozzi before 1417 as a funerary chapel for him and his son
Fra Angelico has Niccolo, who had died young. After the death of Noferi, in 1418, another son,
Palla, was intended to continue the construction; this was more or less com-
arranged his composition plete by 1423, as may be inferred from surviving invoices and receipts. Sadly
none of these documents relate to Fra Angelico’s Deposition, though some of
around the shape of an the donations that Palla gave to the convent of San Domenico in 1429 could be
linked to this work, as may be a document from 1432 that mentions the layout —
X, the two diagonal lines of an altarpiece to go above the altar in the sacristy. These dates could be con-
gruent with this panel, but they still do not explain the origins of the work.
intersecting at the body In fact, although Fra Angelico executed the central panel with the
Deposition and the pillarets showing saints and prophets, he was not the sole
of Christ. author of this work. The three scenes in the pointed gables of the painting —
the Resurrection flanked by the ‘Noli me tangere’ and the Three Maries at the
Sepulchre — were painted by the slightly older Lorenzo Monaco. Lorenzo also
produced panels showing Saint Onophrius visited by the Abbot Pafnuzio, the
Nativity, and Saint Nicholas saving some sailors, which were incorporated
into the predella of the original altarpiece.
This raises many questions. When did Fra Angelico become involved in
this project? And why? In what state did he find the painting? Did he finish
it or modify it? Some have proposed that work could have begun as early as
1418, while others have recently suggested that it was started only shortly
before Lorenzo’s unexpected death in 1424. Either way, Palla Strozzi, a
true humanist, decided later to bring the work up to date and entrusted its
completion to Fra Angelico, the most ‘modern’ artist — in the humanistic,
Renaissance sense — that Florence had to offer now that Masaccio had died
Opposite and Gentile da Fabbriano and Masolino had departed.
Christ’s body is lowered from the cross by Fra Angelico achieved the desired transformation. He turned the panel
Joseph of Arimathea (top, with perspectival
with its three pointed arches — possibly intended to be divided into three sec-
halo), Nicodemus (right) and St John the
Evangelist (below, dressed in blue). tions, in the Gothic tradition — into a work with a single, three-dimensional
space, the main characters arranged in groups that reveal a familiarity with
1430-32?
Tempera and gold on panel
the work of Lorenzo Ghiberti, so as to give life to the sacred scene.
176 cm x 185 cm/5 ft 9% in. x 6 ft 1 in. At the very centre of the composition we find the cross, from which
Museo di San Marco, Florence Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea and others are lowering the lifeless body
oo - oy

124 MAGNOLIA SCUDIERI

 of Jesus. Fra Angelico has arranged his composition around the shape of an
X, the two diagonal lines intersecting at the body of Christ. Along these two
lines are arranged the key figures and elements in this scene, their organiza-
tion and proportions suggesting a new sensation of spatial depth, although
not yet of true perspective. Along one line we see Mary Magdalene (kissing
Christ’s feet), the body of Christ, Nicodemus and the weeping angels in the
top right-hand corner. Along the other line are a man kneeling on the ground
(Alesso degli Strozzi?), Saint John, the man with the black headgear and
the walls of the city in the background, with another group of angels flying
above. Other figures are arranged on lines parallel to these, as are many of the
Above elements in the distant landscape: the trees, the hills, the buildings.
Fra Angelico inherited the tripartite division
This landscape is completely novel in the way in which it blends elements
of the main scene from Lorenzo Monaco.
Monaco painted the three scenes in the of reality, history and imagination. The rocky soil of Calvary is confined to
gables. a tiny space directly underneath the cross; all the rest of the foreground is
eo

126 MAGNOLIA SCUDIERI

 covered by a verdant, flower-filled meadow. This seems to allude to the
Garden of Paradise reclaimed for humanity by Jesus’ sacrifice; the natural-
istic detail betrays the late Gothic taste. In the background, meanwhile, the
evocation of the Holy Land is fused with a desire to capture the Tuscan land-
scape, with its tiny villages and castles — the aim being to bring this sacred
scene closer to the world of the viewer.
Other elements in the painting reveal the same desire of the painter to
translate the extreme events of the Passion to the 15th century. Most impor-
tant of these are the possible inclusion of portraits and the contemporary
styles of dress. Vasari believed that he could discern a portrait of Michelozzo
Fra Angelico
... — probably the man with the black headgear — while it has also been supposed,
perhaps correctly, that underneath the cloak that Nicodemus wears (his name
turned
the panel with is inscribed on the edge), you could see the semblance of Palla Strozzi, as
revealed by another inscription (now partially lost): ‘magister P...L’. Others
its three pointed arches have identified Palla as the man who holds the crown of thorns and the nails,
and Palla’s son as the youth who kneels in the foreground; perhaps another
... into a work with a son stands on the far right wearing the most wonderful red headgear.

single, three-dimensional
SPAGEr«.

Right
This young man, wearing a typical Florentine Ke
red hat, may be identifiable as one of the sons
of the donor, Palla Strozzi.

——

The Deposition 127

A Mother's Grief

The Descent from the Cross, Rogier van der Weyden

GABRIELE FINALDI

ne has the suspicion that when the Tournai master

Rogier van der Weyden was commissioned to paint this
altarpiece for the Great Crossbowmen’s Guild of Louvain
(Leuven, in modern-day Belgium) he already knew he was
going to produce his first great masterpiece. He chose the
best Baltic oak to make the wooden support and lavished the surface with
gold and the finest lapis. He applied in concentrated form his genius for
pictorial design, for the representation of human emotion and for captur-
ing religious sentiment, to produce a painting that has always been held in
the greatest esteem. Within just a few years of being placed on the principal
altar of the guild’s Church of Our Lady Without the Walls in Louvain, the
Descent from the Cross had already been copied by an anonymous painter
in the Edelheer-Altarpiece (dated 1443); about a century later it was acquired
by Mary of Hungary, Governor of the Netherlands and sister to the Emperor
Charles V, for her palace at Binche (about 50 kilometres — 30 miles— south of
The elegant curve of Brussels), and in 1556 it was sent to Spain as a gift to her nephew, Philip II.
He duly placed it in the gigantic monastery—palace he was building at El
Christ’s body is echoed Escorial, near Madrid. Today it occupies a place of honour in the Prado
Museum. The magnificent state of conservation of the work attests both to
in that of the Virgin, its inherent technical qualities and to the high regard in which it has been held
ever since it was painted.
and their hands come The panel shows the moment when Christ’s lifeless body is removed
from the cross to be taken for burial. Nine figures, nearly all of them weeping
together just to the left profusely, are arranged in a frieze of composed but fathomless grief, around
the slim, pale corpse of the dead Saviour. Joseph of Arimathea, in red, who
of centre ... offered his own tomb for Christ’s interment, and Nicodemus, the Pharisee
who was a secret follower of the Messiah, support the body reverentially. The
Virgin, meanwhile, has fallen to the ground in a deathly white swoon, though
she is supported by the apostle Saint John and a green-clad woman (perhaps
Mary Salome). The elegant curve of Christ’s body is echoed in that of the
Virgin, and their hands come together just to the left of centre to manifest the
spiritual juxtaposition of Christ’s passio (or suffering) and the Virgin’s com-
Above and opposite passio (sharing of his suffering) — a notion central to the devotio moderna,
The juxtaposition of the hands of Christ and the affective, emotion-drenched spirituality of the 15th-century Netherlands.
the Virgin, and the matching contours of their Christ’s pose has recently been likened to the shape of a crossbow, supposedly
bodies, constitute points of intense emotional
in allusion to the patrons — a more concrete reference to whom can be seen
expression in Van der Weyden’s tragic
pictorial elegy. in the tiny crossbow pendants that hang in the Gothic corner traceries. On
the right, Mary Magdalene’s mannered, spiky stance reflects the particular
c. 1435
heartache of her loss, evidenced also by the paired names inscribed on her
Oil on oak panel
220.5 cm x 259.5 cm /7 ft 2% in. x 8 ft 6 in. girdle: ‘IhESVS MARIA’. Three other figures play their part in this theatre
Museo del Prado, Madrid of sorrow and devotion: the elegant youth on the ladder, perhaps an African,
oe

128 GABRIELE FINALDI

c= 2) oO O <x (aa)~ eZ = Ww a Zz <x — fa
 Nine figures, nearly all of them weeping profusely, are arranged in a frieze of
composed but fathomless grief, around the slim, pale corpse of the dead Saviour.

who holds Christ’s arm with one hand and the nails that fastened him to the
cross in the other; the balding, bearded man who holds a jar of ointment — the
Magi’s myrrh for burial — and the weeping woman on the left, her headdress
a cascade of sharp angular folds that seems to make of her an ancestor of
Picasso’s screwed up, howling women of the Guernica years. Erwin Panofsky
noted in 1953 that ‘Rogier’s intention was not focused on action nor even on
“drama” but on the fundamental problem of compressing a maximum of
passion into a form as rigorously disciplined as a Shakespearean sonnet.’
Historians have wondered if Van der Weyden, who was still relatively
young when he painted this work, was seeking to reproduce the appearance
of a tableau vivant or of a sculpted altarpiece come to life. What is clear is
that the sophisticated handling of natural appearances (from Nicodemus’s
stubble to the saxifrages that grow beside Adam’s skull), combined with the
non-natural setting of the shallow golden box, enable the artist to represent a
scene that is both real and sacramental, historical and mystical. In its original
setting above an altar, at the moment that the officiating priest elevated the
host at the Consecration, sacrament and painting would have fallen into a
related visual configuration — for the devout viewer, the Eucharistic body of
Christ and the represented body of Christ would have met in an alignment of
mutual illumination and exegesis. Thus the artist’s goal in this work is not
just aesthetic innovation, but also a visual theology. Yet he is also greatly con-
cerned with the convincing representation of a huge variety of textures and
objects: sable and silk, gold thread embroidery and linen, rope and leather,
skin and hair, congealed blood, and the astounding, crumpled, inexhaustible
folds of the Virgin’s blue dress.
It is rare in Netherlandish painting of this date for a painted altar panel
to be so large. The Descent from the Cross may originally have had wing
panels, although since these are not mentioned in the early sources, it is
more likely that it did not. Philip I] commissioned wing panels from the mute
painter Juan Fernandez Navarrete, showing the four Evangelists and the
Resurrection, but these are lost. An early 16th-century Netherlandish copy of
the painting, probably made when the original was still in Louvain, is in the
Prado’s collection, as is another copy commissioned by Philip II from Michel
Coxcie in 1567, so that the king could have the image in two of his palaces.
It is curious to note that the former of these two copies probably arrived in
Spain some decades before the original. The fame of Rogier’s Descent from
Above the Cross had preceded it.
Van der Weyden conceived the composition
in terms of a subtle equilibrium of forms and
colours, employing symmetry and asymmetry,
abstraction and detailed realistic rendition, to
achieve expressive ends.

——O

The Descent from the Cross 131

The Tyrant Killer
David, Donatello
ULRICH PFISTERER

onatello’s statue of the shepherd David with the head

... the theme of only the expectations of his contemporaries but also any art-
historical categorization. The first freestanding bronze figure
David and Goliath bore of the Renaissance, the upright nude alludes to the honorary
statues on top of columns in antiquity, while depicting a scene from the Old
a political significance in Testament. Yet more than this, it is a sensual and lifelike depiction of youth.
Criticism has dealt with this apparent paradox in different ways:
Renaissance Florence, Cristoforo Landino recognized Donatello’s antique influence in 1481, and
Vasari claimed that while Donatello belonged to the second wave of
which was under Renaissance artists, his work — and certainly this statue — was on a par with
that of the later Michelangelo. And in 1895, André Gide fantasized about the
constant threat from ‘amazing preference for the male body’, and the ‘ornamented nudity of his
David; the flavour of the flesh’, which gives this work a homoerotic charge
powerful enemies. that it has never lost. (It should be remembered that the Hebraic etymology of
the name David is ‘worth desiring’.
Though no primary source concerning the statue has survived, its
context can convincingly be reconstructed. The innovative pose and the
wreath below it, for example, can be found in other contemporary works, and
we know that the statue was originally erected in the (old) palace of Cosimo
de’ Medici. We know, too, that the plinth’s original inscription, written by
Gentile de’ Becchi (the humanist tutor of the Medici), read: ‘The Victor is
he who guards the land of his fathers. God dashes to pieces the anger of the
overpowering enemy. Surely, did not a youth subdue the tyrant. Prevail citi-
zens!’ From this it is clear that the theme of David and Goliath bore a political
significance in Renaissance Florence, which was under constant threat from
powerful enemies. Later examples im the same tradition include Verrocchio’s
bronze David (c. 1473-75) and Michelangelo’s 1504 marble figure.
Yet there is more to this sensual nude than iconography. Indeed, the
figure embodies the early Renaissance search for a true contrapposto, as well
as the ways in which sculptures could be made more lifelike. In this, Donatello
seems to have set himself against the great antique sculptor Polycleitus, who
Above was said to have created the ideal male nude with his statue of Doryphoros.
The striking contrast between the adolescent’s The only preserved standing nude attributed to Polycleitus in 15th-century
elegant leg and foot and the bearded giant’s Italy was the figure of Apollo displayed on a well-known gem. The jewel
decapitated head, with its weighty helmet,
could have inspired the expansive hip of Donatello’s David.
emphasizes the miraculous victory
of David. If Donatello created his David to rival or even surpass the art of antiq-
uity, it would have been to the greater glory and benefit of Cosimo de’ Medici,
c. 1440
Bronze
since the statue would have served to prove that benevolent government
H 158 cm/5 ft 2% in. results in the prosperity of the arts. And so Cosimo erected the statue as a
Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence symbol of the divinely protected, prospering city of Florence — in the court-
0
yard of his private palace.
132 ULRICH PFISTERER
Guardians of the Sun

Aztec Eagle Knight, Artist unknown

SUSAN TOBY EVANS

he Eagle Knight is a life-size ceramic sculpture, a naturalis-

tic representation of a member of an Aztec elite warrior cadre,
dressed in battle costume. Dating to 1440-69, it is one of two
The Eagle Knight nearly identical figures that once flanked the entrance to the
House of the Eagles, thought to have been a sanctuary for the
sculpture is a masterwork Eagle Knights — warriors for whom the eagle, an avatar of the life-giving sun,
served as a totemic patron. This building is located just north of the Great
of stylistic expression Temple (Templo Mayor) of Tenochtitlan, the very pivot point of the Aztec
axis mundi, anchoring heaven and the underworld to the plane of the earth.
and technical skill. The Eagle Knight sculpture is a masterwork of stylistic expression and
technical skill. The figure reflects the Aztec ideal of young manhood. It shows
either the brave and noble warrior dedicated to securing war captives for sac-
rifice to the sun or that warrior’s immortal transformation after death into
a companion of the sun god in his daily circuit. His earlobes are perforated,
indicating the honours in insignia that would have been bestowed on the
knight and would have adorned his effigy. The face emerges from the open
beak of a dramatic eagle head mask. This headdress as worn by the actual
Eagle Knights would have been constructed as a framework of wood or reeds
over which fabric was stretched, and then feathers attached.
He stands 170 cm (5 ft 7 in.) tall, with erect posture, arms extended for-
wards. The hands have been shaped to accommodate a standard, or perhaps
weapons. The Eagle Knight costume, worn in battle, was a fitted full-length
suit appliquéd with feathers. On the ceramic figure, these feathers are indi-
cated by thin flat ceramic ovals, secured to the figure during manufacture,
and also by the volute shapes edging the wings extending back from the arms.
The power of eagles is further conveyed by the claws at the figure’s knees. The
figure’s sandals represent a singular honour in Aztec society, where such foot-
wear was a privilege of rank under strict sumptuary rules.
Made up of five large components, the sculpture would have required
considerable expertise to manufacture. It and the five other large anthropo-
morphic ceramic sculptures in this compound were probably the products
Above
of a specialist studio in Tenochtitlan. The figure was stuccoed and painted,
The encyclopaedic General History ofthe
Things of New Spain (the Florentine Codex, but little remains of these surface embellishments because the House of the
c. 1569) includes this illustration of two Eagles was destroyed by the Spaniards in their siege of Tenochtitlan in the
Eagle Knights flanking a Jaguar Knight and summer of 1521. When Aztec warriors took refuge there, Spanish guns were
brandishing shields and clubs, edged with
razor-sharp obsidian blades.
levelled at the structure and all the courage of eagles could not save it or its
guardian figures. The shattered sculptures became part of the fill underlying
Mid-15th century the capital of colonial New Spain; the weight of four-and-a-half centuries
Ceramic
of burial and superimposed construction left them in fragments. It was only
H 170 cm/5 ft 7 in.
Museo del Templo Mayor, Mexico City, in the early 1980s that excavation retrieved the remains of this remarkable
Mexico sculpture and its companion pieces.
|

134 SUSAN TOBY EVANS

A Dream Come True

The Montefeltro Altarpiece, Piero della Francesca

MARILYN ARONBERG LAVIN

ne night, many years ago, | had a dream. In this dream

I saw Federico, Duke of Urbino, wearing a full suit of lami-
nated steel, excluding his helmet and gauntlets, which lay on
One night, many the ground before him. And then I heard a voice: ‘Federico
da Montefeltro changed his armour.’ Perplexed, the next
years ago, I had a morning I sought out a book on Piero della Francesca and studied a reproduc-
tion of the Virgin and Child with Saints (commonly knownas the Montefeltro
dream. In this dream Altarpiece) that had appeared to me in the night. There was Federico, kneel-
ing in prayer before an august company of the Virgin Mary with her son
I saw Federico, Duke lying asleep (dreaming?) on her lap, six male saints, and four smartly dressed
angels. These twelve figures, physically overlapping in a tightly knit group,
of Urbino ... filled every millimetre of the width of the panel. At the same time, the empty
upper part of the splendid building they were standing in occupied a good
half of the panel’s height. Within this vast architectural space, and seemingly
above Mary’s head, an egg dangled from a thin gold chain, suspended from
the tip of a large shell filling the semi-dome of an apse at the end of a barrel
vault. Federico was occupying the same space as the intercessors, but he did
not address them. On the contrary, kneeling in strict profile, he was staring
fixedly before him.
My dream had led me to look anew at this remarkable painting, and in
describing it to myself, I realized what made the image unique. Aside from
Piero’s painterly brilliance, and the work’s conceptual solemnity — a stark
contrast with the fairly rigid early Renaissance sacre conversazioni — this is
probably one of the most mysterious works of art of the 15th century.
Before I could ask how Federico had ‘changed his armour’, I had to ask
what in the world was he doing in church in full battle regalia?
One of the first works Piero did primarily in oil, the Montefeltro
Altarpiece abounds in stunning pictorial refinements: the gold palmettes
embroidered on the edge of the Baptist’s cloak; the pearls that decorate the
neckline and hem of the Madonna’s mantle; the transparent gown of the angel
Above on her right; the fragile crystal cross proffered by Saint Francis; the reflection
Detail of Federico’s breast and arm, clad in
of the lighted window on Federico’s breastplate; the gold flecks that brighten
armour. The fitments include: a reinforcing
plate bolted onto the bent-forward breast- the rosettes in the coffered ceiling. Piero has represented a spiritual realm with
plate; a hook to hold a lance; butterfly-shaped Renaissance realism and naturalism. But simultaneously, he has provided a
elbow guards; and a velvet-covered strap with world of symbols that belie the realistic details. If the Virgin were to stand up,
external hinge at the wrist. On his hands are
she would tower over her sacred cohorts. With this irrational leap of scale, he
wedding and insignia rings and he wears the
knotted belt of Saint Francis. recalls the age-old metaphor of Mary as Ecclesia, the personification of the
universal Church. If you look carefully, you will see that Piero has placed us
1472
in the nave of a huge basilica; the figures are in the transept and behind them
Oil, mixed with some tempera, on panel
248 cm x 170 cm/ 8 ft 1¥2 in. x 5 ft 7 in. there is a deep space leading to the apse where the egg hangs. With his stunning
Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan skill in the art of perspective, he has created a complete illusion. The saints
OO

136 MARILYN ARONBERG LAVIN

“py
 3
i‘2

BOWS:
BI s
ret YY ua WHE

é
DY
 Piero «.. created ... an image of harmonious balance between immediacy
and timelessness — one that still calls out in the night; and insists we keep
looking day by day.

surrounding the Virgin like a theological guard of honour stand for the Church
—in fact, the many churches of Urbino that bear their names. The presence of
the gorgeously inscrutable angels sanctifies the figures and the building.
Mary prays over her divine infant, nude to verify his status as the ‘word
made flesh’. With sunken eyes and down-turned mouth, he sleeps in an
uncomfortable position, setting up a major diagonal in the composition. As
he stretches across his mother’s ample lap, his somnolence itself is a symbol
of his future sacrifice. Around his neck is a chain of coral beads from which
hang two amulets, one a crystal ball, the other an uncut branch of coral.
These semi-precious stones are meant, magically, to ward off evil. But the
coral branch, resembling a miniature pulmonary tree, also symbolizes the
lungs from which Christ will breathe his last but which yet hold the vital
spirit that will live for all eternity. This allusion to death and resurrection, in
turn, explains the egg — most probably an ostrich egg — often found in Italian
churches suspended in just this fashion. It refers both to Mary’s fertility and to
Christ’s regeneration. What is out of the ordinary is its geometric perfection,
its purity of form. In a typical manner, Piero has used the lack of decoration
to assist in reading the egg, as a volume both within the depth of space and on
the surface of the painting, to relate to the mother and child, thereby reinforc-
ing the optical illusion. Asa result, in the vertical path from shell to egg, egg
to the holy couple and back again, the full cycle of salvation is housed within
the authority of Ecclesia.
In the foreground, the armoured Federico kneels to pray. He had
ascended to the noble rank of count in 1444, and during his long and success-
ful reign waged many battles while engaged as a condottiere, or paid general.
In the early 1470s — precisely when this altarpiece was executed — he enjoyed
his greatest victories and as a result was heaped with honours; one of his
daughters was even engaged to a nephew of the pope. Although these honours
carried visible signs in the form of seals, tags and jewelry, only two indicators
of his new position are shown: a sword wrapped in red velvet, and the spurs
of steel and gold — both gifts of the pope. This, then, was how he ‘changed his
armour’. As we begin to understand his pose (and his armour), the final clue
is his air of emotional isolation. Federico has not come to pray in the usual
manner as suppliant, begging for help from his heavenly mentors. He is not
presented by a patron. Instead, he appears as a strong, self-sufficient agent,
offering, not asking for, protection. He is a new kind of Christian knight
boldly pledging to the Church, along with his piety, his entire physical force
and military prowess. Piero changed the nature of the altarpiece and created
Above for Federico a visual oath of fidelity in an image of harmonious balance
Detail of the coral amulet and the crystal ball
suspended on a string of coral beads round
between immediacy and timelessness — one that still calls out in the night, and
Christ’s neck. insists we keep looking day by day.
FFs

The Montefeltro Altarpiece 139

Borne on Wind and Wave

The Birth of Venus, Alessandro Botticelli

PAUL JOANNIDES

here is no record of the Birth of Venus before 1550, when it was

described by Vasari; it was then in the Medici villa at Castello,
just outside Florence. The painting was long believed to have
been commissioned by Lorenzo the Magnificent in the 1480s as
a wedding gift to his young cousin, Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’
Medici. But it is absent from the latter’s inventories and the picture’s patron,
early owners and planned location — the unusual dimensions indicate a site-
specific project — remain conjectural. The Medici were active as collectors
Bewitching in her as well as patrons in the later 15th and early 16th centuries and the Birth of
Venus could just as well have been a later acquisition as a contemporary com-
combination of beauty mission. But if not for a Medici, it was probably painted for someone in their
circle, and almost certainly to celebrate a marriage.
and freshness, the Earlier critics assumed the Birth of Venus to be a pendant to Botticelli’s
Primavera, which does appear in Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco’s 1499 inventory,
goddess looks shyly but in his house on the Via Larga, not at Castello. The two paintings are the ©
earliest known — and certainly the earliest surviving — large-scale treatments
outwards, not yet of mythological divinities in Italian art (excluding examples of heroic virtue
such as Hercules) and it is natural to associate them with each other. They
conscious of her power are similar — but far from identical — in size, and although the Primavera is
primarily an allegorical evocation of Spring, its protagonist is Venus and it
or in possession of might plausibly accompany a representation of her birth. However, several
facts count against a pairing: the Primavera is usually dated c. 1478, the Birth
her realm. of Venus up to a decade later; the Primavera is on wood, the Birth on canvas;
and their principles of design and complement of forms and textures are very
different. None of these facts is decisive, but taken together they strongly
suggest that notwithstanding their continuities of cast — as well as Venus,
Zephyr and Chloris appear in both — they were separate commissions. The
Primavera is based on a text from Ovid’s Fasti, with erudite additions, and
a complex narrative of transformation and association unrolls in time and
space from right to left. Its proliferation of spring flowers gives it the air of
a transposed mille-fleurs tapestry, and its visual precedents are largely to be
found in tapestries of the months. The Birth of Venus, in contrast, depicts a
Opposite single moment and its story and meaning are instantly grasped.
Venus’ abundant hair responds to Zephyr’s The Birth of Venus was a subject frequent in antique and — very occa-
breath, but also takes on independent life sionally — medieval art. It is also found in Renaissance literature, notably by
caressing her shoulders and neck; her right
Agnolo Poliziano (a friend of Botticelli), who wrote verses on the subject in his
eyelid, slightly heavier than the left, hints at
sensuality. Stanze per la giostra. But Botticelli’s treatment is quite new and demonstrates
a powerful visual intelligence. The painting’s size demanded breadth and
1480s
clarity and the flexible support a generous breadth of treatment. Botticelli
Tempera on canvas
172.5 cm x 278.5cm/5 ft 8 in. x 9 ft 1% in. extends to a private and secular commission the grand simplicity developed
Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence in his large-scale mural paintings in the Sistine Chapel in Rome in 1483.
OT

140 PAUL JOANNIDES

 ... the compositional structure is a transposed
Baptism, with Venus — like Christ — in the centre ...

The light tonality and dry surface of the tempera medium are texturally
similar to fresco and the precise, elaborate detail of the Primavera gives way to
simplified and stylized forms — the repeated Vs of waves, the stage-flat vegeta-
tion and the highlights in gold. The patterning of the image, and its denial of
perspective, from one of the most dynamic perspectivists of the period, evince
a rigorous control of means. The narrative is shot frontally, as if through a long
lens that compresses the space, tips the scallop shell, and arrests the action in
iconic stasis — a technique plundered by legions of fashion photographers
and film-makers. While the Primavera is a formal dance, the Birth of Venus
is magical theatre: at the left Zephyr and Chloris’ conjoined silhouette is
that of a looped-up canopy and the receptive cloak on the right doubles as a
curtain withdrawn to reveal Venus’ beauty. Botticelli’s display, inspired by
the curtaining of altarpieces, may, in turn, have prompted Raphael’s exploi-
tation of the motif in the Sistine Madonna, with its majestic vision of the
cloud-borne Virgin.
Paler against pale, Botticelli’s Venus floats against a high sky that seems
a condensation of ether rather than transparent. Her contours are slightly
shadowed to make her stand out against the sky and the interior of her body
lightened and unemphatically modelled to bring it forward. This was a prin-
ciple absorbed by Michelangelo, who employed it in the central histories of
the Sistine Chapel ceiling. It is a gamble saved from crudity only by draughts-
manly accomplishment: in Botticelli, as in Michelangelo, the intensity of
the line, elastic and rhythmical, animates the figures and keeps the eye in

Left
The Primavera might have been intended
as part of an unexecuted seasonal cycle —
Botticelli certainly designed an Autumn.
More formal than the Birth of Venus, its
tapestry-like detail gives way in the later work
to simplified, pared-down patterning.

142 PAUL JOANNIDES

 The narrative is shot frontally, as if through a long lens that compresses
the space, tips the scallop shell, and arrests the action in iconic stasis ...

The Birth of Venus 143

 “Sy

“tang Duden ms
constant exercise around them. Botticelli’s ‘colour field’ technique was also
to affect Michelangelo: warm and cold colours are, as it were, cross-fertilized
as the cool body of Venus is drawn towards the warmth of the cloak and
the foliage.
Appropriately for a mythological scene, Botticelli drew on Classical
sculpture: Zephyr and Chloris were inspired by flying figures in one of the
il Magnifico’s sardonyx cameos, while Venus is an elongated and willowy
interpretation of the Medici Venus, undulating with the breeze that wafts
her to shore amid roses. But these references function within a scheme — and
theme — inspired by religious imagery. It is well-known that the composi-
tional structure is a transposed Baptism, with Venus — like Christ — in the
centre, the nymph who receives her occupying the place of the Baptist, and
Zephyr and Chloris (whose first union is seen at the right of the Primavera)
replacing angelic witnesses. But this scheme is much more than formal scaf-
folding; it subtly transfuses the meaning of baptism from the spiritual to the
erotic: Venus is born from liquid as the soul is reborn in baptism. And since
she sprang fully grown from the severed genitals of Saturn thrown into the
Mediterranean, Venus’ birth is divine. This explains another transposition,
the equivalence of her face to those of Botticelli’s immaculate Virgins and it
may also have inspired the drift of roses, widely associated with the Virgin.
Bewitching in her combination of beauty and freshness, the goddess
looks shyly outwards, not yet conscious of her power or in possession of her
realm. The Birth of Venus is sometimes interpreted as an evocation of the
celestial (as opposed to the terrestrial) Venus, embodying divine rather than
earthly love, acommon Neo-Platonic trope. But there is no reason to confine
the painting to philosophy. Venus personifies and expresses physical beauty
and modesty; but if at the moment innocence reigns, physical love is immanent
— and perhaps imminent: the painting might be a bridegroom’s vision on his
wedding night. No painter was to achieve such equilibrium between eroticism
and innocence until Burne-Jones, an artist obsessed with Botticelli’s work.
Notwithstanding the uncertain origins of the Birth of Venus, the com-
pelling force of Botticelli’s vision was appreciated within his own lifetime: he
and his studio repeated the Venus with slight modifications in paintings now
in Berlin and Turin. There is no previous example of a single mythological
figure being extracted from a larger composition and it foreshadows later
practices: it is the full-length close-up that follows the long shot and it brings
Venus into still more immediate relation to the viewer. She emerges modestly
from a dark setting into the bedchamber — and the bridegroom’s presence.

Above
Alessandro Botticelli (and studio), Venus,
1480s?, tempera on canvas, 157 cm x 68 cm
(5 ft 1% in. X 2 ft 2% in.), Gemaldegalerie,
Berlin. The main change to the single figure
is the hair, which, no longer blown by the
wind and also plaited into two strands, makes
Venus more immediate and accessible.

Opposite
Zephyr and Chloris, as well as wafting
Venus to the shores of Paphos, foreshadow
in their conjunction what is to be Venus’
primary activity.

I
cD

The Birth of Venus 145

In God's Image
Self-Portrait, Albrecht Durer
ULRICH PFISTERER

or humanists north of the Alps such as Conrad Celtis the year

1500 represented ‘a chance to celebrate the renewed ‘Germanic’
culture under the rule of Maximilian I. It is likely that this self-
portrait by Albrecht Diirer, dated to the same year, was produced in
this spirit, to demonstrate German rivalry of Italian painting. Sadly,
no contemporary evidence can verify this: the earliest reference to this painting
dates from the time of its sale to the Kurfiirstliche Gemaldegalerie Miinchen
in 1805. And though a poem by Celtis from the year 1500 mentions a Durer
self-portrait, it is far from certain that he is referring to the Munich panel.
However, the gilt inscriptions on the image itself offer a clue. Diirer’s
familiar ‘AD’ monogram and the date 1500 can be seen on the left, while
on the right appears a four-line inscription in Latin that translates as: ‘I,
Albrecht Diirer from Nuremberg, have painted myself with my own paints at
the age of 28.’ Diirer turned 29 on 21 May, 1500, but whether he was actually
28 when he painted this remains debatable — after all, ever since Saint Isidore ;
Durer grasps the 28 had been perceived as the age of a man’s utmost beauty and strength. What
is particularly interesting, however, is that the inscription uses a humanistic
fur trim with his right chancery script not found in any other work by Diirer— pointing again to the
circle around Celtis.
hand, his index finger In this, his third independent self-portrait, Direr presents himself
almost life-size in a frontal pose, though his eyes avoid the gaze of the viewer.
pointing to himself and The beard is finely trimmed, the magnificent head of brown curls meticu-
lously draped on the shoulders. Over a white shirt he wears a sumptuous
emphasizing the ‘divine coat—a symbol of prosperity and social status — trimmed with marten fur and
with a fashionable vent in the sleeve. Diirer grasps the fur trim with his right
hand’ of the artist ... hand, his index finger pointing to himself and emphasizing the ‘divine hand’
of the artist — very subtly, he seems to hint that he owes his social position to
the marten hairs of his paintbrush.
The most striking feature of the portrait, however, is its close resem-
blance to depictions of Christ, in particular as they appear in the work of Jan
van Eyck. Diirer’s carefully parted auburn curls correspond to the descrip-
tion of Christ in the letter supposedly written by Pontius Pilate’s predecessor,
Lentulus. Furthermore, Diirer’s head adheres to the ideal proportions dic-
Above tated by the painter himself, underlining the perfection of God’s creation. As
The superbly executed detail of the fur is early as 1600, painters would adopt this self-portrait as the image of Christ.
made all the more realistic and tactile by the
However, Diirer’s image should not be construed either as heretical hubris or
artist’s decision to present himself as touching
it, as the viewer instinctively desires to do. as an affirmation of faith. Rather, the image is a statement of the artist’s own
ability to depict a human being created ‘after the image of God’. The fact that
1500
Diirer restricted his palette to black, brown, red and white — the same four
Oil on panel
66.3 cm x 49 cm /2 ft 2 in. x 1 ft 7% in. colours used by the ancient painter Apelles, whom Diirer sought to emulate —
Alte Pinakothek, Munich seems to support the reading of this painting as a virtuoso work.
FFF

148 ULRICH PFISTERER

 TT
: —

aS - = Ss2 uw
_
UTES Noncus
VP hin Wie propriys fre cthin.
ge bart coloribus atatis.
5 Soe

— = <>, 4
%

!
5 ¥
SS

ts,
.
‘
“a
i & epee om,
;
Sin
oe See
ae :
The Human Landscape
Portrait of Lisa del Giocondo, formerly Lisa Gherardini (Mona Lisa), Leonardo da Vinci
MARTIN KEMP S

he famed mystery of the Mona Lisa no longer involves the

=

identity of the sitter. She was Lisa Gherardini, born in Florence

on 15 June 1479 to an old Tuscan landowning family, no longer
at the height of their prosperity. On 5 March 1494 she married a
rising silk merchant, Francesco del Giocondo. Leonardo’s father,
the important notary Ser Piero da Vinci, knew Francesco and was probably
responsible for his son agreeing to paint his friend’s wife. Francesco’s will,
written in 1537, two years before his death, testifies to ‘the affection and love
of the testator towards Mona Lisa, his beloved wife.’ Furthermore, “in con-
Leonardo saw the sideration of the fact that Lisa has always acted with a noble spirit and as a
faithful wife, Francesco decrees that, ‘she shall have all she needs.’
eyes as the windows Nor is there any mystery about the date at which Leonardo began her
portrait. In 1503-Agostino Vespucci, cousin of the famous Amerigo and sec-
of the soul. Lisa’s retary to Niccolo Machiavelli, noted in the margins of his printed edition of
Cicero’s letters that a portrait of “Lisa del Giocondo’ was among the paintings ~
windows are glazed on which Leonardo was engaged. It is likely that Lisa was pregnant with one
of her five children. This does not mean that the painting was finished and
with smoked glass. ready to be handed over. Leonardo was a slow painter, and the portrait never
left his possession.
After Leonardo’s death in 1519 the painting passed into the hands of the
master’s rather disreputable pupil, Salai, who himself died five years later.
It was among the late Salai’s possessions when a list was drawn up for the
division of his assets between his sisters. At some date it was acquired by the
French king Francis I, for whom Leonardo had worked in the last three years
of his life, and eventually passed to the Louvre-
The mystery is why this portrait of an apparently unremarkable
Florentine bourgeois woman should have become the world’s most famous
picture. The answer is that the painting, having begun life as a standard com-
mission, came to transcend its function as a portrait ina very radical way.
Even as a portrait, the Mona Lisa was very innovatory. The Florentine
sitter is surprisingly shown sitting on a balcony high above a landscape. She
looks at the spectator and reacts to our presence with an elusive smile. The
smile may serve as an emblem of her name: ‘La Gioconda’ (the cheerful one).
It was very daring for a woman to make eye contact in this way, and could
Opposite even be regarded as bad manners. None of Leonardo’s earlier portraits of
Glazed subtleties and teasing ambiguities in
the Portrait of Lisa de] Giocondo, formerly
women do this. It is likely that the very private nature of the commission gave
Lisa Gherardini (known as the Mona Lisa). Leonardo the licence to innovate in this way.
But its originality goes beyond these formal and emotional novelties. It
c. 1503-06
translates the image of the “beloved lady’ that permeated Italian Renaissance
Oil on canvas
77 cm « 53 am / 2 ft 6% im. x 1 ££ 9 in. poetry into a new visual form. Dante had written:
Musée du Louvre, Paris, France

— *

150 MARTIN KEMP

 Me
ety.
¥
Sines
ce tla
at ,

ey »

. ; : rest f
 The soul operates very largely in two places, because in these two
places all the three natures of the soul have jurisdiction, that is
to say in the eyes and mouth. ... These two places, by a beautiful
simile, may be called the balconies of the lady who dwells in the
architecture of the body, that is to say the soul, because she often
shows herself there as if under a veil.

A veiled portrait of the soul — this is precisely what Leonardo was proposing.
His miraculously fine layers of pigment, applied in countless tinted glazes,
leave the surfaces elusive. Our eye seeks the certainty of defined contours, but
is drawn into an imaginative play with her expression. Leonardo saw the eyes
as the windows of the soul. Lisa’s windows are glazed with smoked glass.
The ‘architecture of the body’ for Leonardo profoundly mirrored the
architecture of the body of the earth. The human body was a microcosm, or
‘lesser world’, reflecting the forms and functioning of the macrocosm of the
world as a whole. As Leonardo wrote:

By the ancients man was termed a lesser world.... In that man is

composed of water, earth, air and fire, his body is an analogue
for the world: just as man has in himself bones, the supports and
armature of his flesh, the world has the rocks; just as man has
in himself the lake of the blood, in which the lungs increase and
decrease during breathing, so the body of the earth has its oceanic
seas which likewise increase and decrease every six hours with
Lisa’s hair and the breathing of the world; just as in that lake of blood the veins
originate, which make ramifications throughout the human body,
drapery flow in curving similarly the oceanic sea fills the body of the earth with infinite
veins of water.
rivulets, echoing the
Lisa’s hair and drapery flow in curving rivulets, echoing the watercourses in
watercourses in the the valley below. Leonardo describes blood as ‘vivifying’ the human body just
as the ‘veins of water’ nourish the earth. The landscape is permeated with
valley below. motions of life in the terrestrial body. A high lake on the right feeds a lower
lake to the left. This will change over time, just as the human body changes.
A portrait has become a philosophical mediation on human nature in
the context of the life of the body of the world. Leonardo uses his subtle visual
magic to entice us into his meditation, but he teases us. He does not tell us
what to think. We, like earlier generations, are seduced into making of it what
we will.

Above
A seemingly dry meander in an old water
course. It will eventually receive water from
the lake as the earth undergoes its vast
transformations.

Cee
EEE)

Portrait of Lisa del Giocondo (Mona Lisa) 153

Trick of the Light
The San Zaccaria Altarpiece, Giovanni Bellini
PETER HUMFREY

... the painting ... offers the worshipper a glimpse into the majesty and
serenity of heaven, where the saints eternally contemplate the glory of God to
the sound of celestial music.

ust inside the marble-clad church of San Zaccaria in Venice,

in its original position above the second altar in the left aisle, is a
richly glowing masterpiece by one of the great painters of the Italian
Renaissance, Giovanni Bellini. The painting shows the Virgin
Mary seated on a tall throne against the apse of what appears to
be a small chapel. She lightly supports the Christ Child on her left knee, and
presents him to the spectator for worship. At the foot of the throne sits an
angel playing a lira da braccio (an instrument not dissimilar to a modern-day
violin) and to his left, affixed to the red marble of the step, is an unfolded slip
of paper bearing the artist’s signature and the date 1505. Standing like senti-
nels on either side are four saints: Peter, with his Bible and keys; Catherine of
Alexandria, with her palm of martyrdom and shattered wheel; Lucy, with her
own palm and glass lamp; and Jerome, dressed in the robes of a cardinal and
reading his Bible. Architecturally, the chapel-like structure, with its delicately
carved foliate ornament on the faces of the supporting piers, is in the style of
the early Renaissance; the mosaic decoration of the half-dome, meanwhile,
harks back to Byzantine art and the state church of Venice, San Marco. It
is clear from this combination that the architecture is not that of any real
chapel; furthermore, it is open at the extreme left and right to glimpses of
verdant landscape, with trees in a meadow leading to distant blue mountains
and a luminous sky. For all its command of Renaissance realism, the painting
does not depict any actual scene, but instead offers the worshipper a glimpse
into the majesty and serenity of heaven, where the saints eternally contem-
plate the glory of God to the sound of celestial music.
Above
Bellini painted several so-called sacra Other details provide symbols of the divine nature and redemptive love
conversazione altarpieces during the course of Christ and his mother: the carved head of Solomon at the top of the throne
of his long career. Typically, however, the holy (referring to divine wisdom); the crystal lamp and ostrich egg hanging above
figures do not converse with one another, or
even meet one another’s gazes, but are rapt in
it (referring respectively to purity and the virgin birth); the fig tree to the
inner meditation, like Saint Peter. left (a well-established messianic symbol). But Bellini’s evocation of divine
immanence is achieved even more powerfully through pictorial means. In
1505
the first two decades of his long career he had mastered the essential innova-
Oil on canvas, transferred from panel
402 cm x 273 cm/ 13 ft 2% in. x 8 ft 11% in. tions of early Renaissance Florence: the representation of rounded form in
San Zaccaria, Venice three-dimensional space, by means of geometric perspective, consistency of
oe

154 PETER HUMFREY

 “
i;
ae

ee

ie
——Ew—

|\ \ven!
MD
\4
)
 The voluminous draperies of the San Zaccaria altarpiece appear to glow as
if from within, and set up a harmonious pattern of shapes and colours on the
picture surface.

lighting, and understanding of human anatomy. Until about 1475, Bellini

combined these achievements with a metallic sharpness of outline, an enam-
elled hardness of surface, and a cool austerity of colour, all of which were the
consequence of his continuing employment of the traditional technique of egg
tempera. But his growing mastery from the 1480s of the Flemish technique
of oil painting stimulated him to soften edges and tonal transitions, and to
employ a new depth and richness of colour. The voluminous draperies of
the San Zaccaria altarpiece appear to glow as if from within, and set up a
harmonious pattern of shapes and colours on the picture surface. Bellini was
never particularly interested in Florentine experiments with dramatic action,
but whereas his earlier figures show some gesture and movement, here they
are absolutely still, absorbed in inner meditation. This effect of stillness is
emphasized by the deliberately archaic symmetry of the composition, with
a strongly pronounced central axis running down through the lamp, the
Virgin’s throne and the tiled floor, and the saints posed in contrasting profile
and strict frontality.
Bellini’s painting is still enclosed in its original, monumental frame,
in which smooth marble columns are paired with richly carved pilasters.
The Classical forms of the frame closely match and link up with those of the
painted architecture to create the illusion that the church wall has dissolved
to reveal the holy figures in a sacred precinct immediately above and beyond
the altar. This effect remains vivid, despite the fact that it has been compro-
mised ever since the Napoleonic period. In 1797 the painting was carried off
by French troops as war booty, and while it was in Paris areas of architecture
Above
above and floor below were vandalously amputated, so that on its return to
Bellini, Madonna ofthe Pomegranate,
c. 1486-89 (oil on panel, 91 cm x 65 cm/
Venice in 1816 it no longer filled its original frame.
2 ft 11% in. x 2 ft 1% in. National Gallery, It is not known who commissioned Bellini’s painting and its magnificent
London). One of Bellini’s most characteristic (and certainly very expensive) frame, but it is a fair guess that the patron was
types of production, apart from his majestic
a member of Venice’s ruling patriciate. In this connection, it is worth remem-
series of altarpieces, was the image of
the Virgin and Child alone, seen in half bering that the Benedictine nuns’ church of San Zaccaria was the destination
length and on a scale more suitable for of an annual Easter procession by the doge and his retinue, and the site was
contemplation in private. Although it one of exceptional prestige. The ducal associations with the church may also
precedes the San Zaccaria altarpiece by some
two decades, this example already shows a
account for the evocation of San Marco in the apse mosaic.
full mastery of the oil technique. The rapid pace of developments in Venetian painting meant that the art
of Bellini quickly came to appear old-fashioned after his death in 1516, and
Opposite
the meditative stillness and spiritual depth of the San Zaccaria altarpiece were
Bellini’s altarpiece in its original frame in the
church of San Zaccaria. As well as enhancing replaced by the extrovert rhetoric of Titian. Its removal to Paris by the French
the illusion that the near-life-size holy figures was a compliment of sorts, but the modern appreciation of Bellini really only
occupy a space just beyond an opening in the began in the mid-19th century. Leading this revival was John Ruskin, who in
church wall, the frame reinforces the link with
the altar below, where daily masses would
a lecture at Oxford in 1871, called the San Zaccaria altarpiece one of ‘the two
have been said for the donor and his family. best pictures in the world’ — the other being Bellini’s Frari triptych of 1488.
Oo _

The San Zaccaria Altarpiece 157

Unknown Pleasures
—__

The Garden of Earthly Delights, Hieronymus Bosch

GRAYSON PERRY

magine the scene: it is about 1517 and you are a guest of Hendrick III,
Count of Nassau-Breda, at his elaborate palace in Brussels. It is a house
of pleasure and visual wonders, natural and man-made: there is a bed
large enough to hold fifty drunken revellers and a meteorite that once
almost landed on your host. He takes you to see one of his famous
treasures, a large painted altarpiece, most probably commissioned by him a
decade or so previously. At first you are mystified by the scene on the exterior
of the closed doors, a desolate monochrome landscape contained in a glass
sphere. A tiny God, Bible in hand is depicted hovering above. He is on his
Over the past century third day of creation, and below him is the world before humankind arrived,
overcast and empty. Then the huge doors are thrown open and you are over-
this dazzling enigma has whelmed by what is the most provocatively inventive fantasy in all Gothic
and Renaissancé painting. You are drawn into a complex maze of hallucina-
been interpreted as being tory colour and incident—fou are in Hieronymus Bosch’s greatest work, The
Garden of Earthly Delights.
about the sin of luxury, The origins and meaning, even the true title of this work, are lost to
history. Over the past century this dazzling enigma has been interpreted
the rebirth of the world as being about the sin of luxury, the rebirth of the world after the Flood,
alchemy, heresy, astrology and a ‘paradisiac marriage’ rite performed by a
after the Flood, alchemy, religious sect to which Bosch belonged. Some or all of these things may have
influenced Bosch’s vision. From his output it is clear that Bosch was a moral-
heresy, astrology and a ist as much as an individualist. The fact that it is in the traditional form of a
winged altarpiece and can be read from the exterior then inside from left to
‘paradisiac marriage’ right suggests that it is meant at least as a commentary on contemporary reli-
gion or maybe as a highly unusual devotional work.
file &. The interior left-hand panel shows a relatively conventional vision of
Paradise. In the foreground we see God (in the form of Jesus) introducing
a waking Adam to Eve, having fashioned her from his rib while Adam was
asleep. They are surrounded by flora and fauna, both real and imagined.
The pink phallic crustacean form in the centre of the panel is the Fountain of
Paradise that irrigates all the land. In a round aperture in the fountain’s base
sits an owl, a predator of the night, wise and yet brutal —a hint perhaps thar
Opposite nature is far from innocent and a sign of the Fall of man that is to come.
It is impossible to take in all the minutiae of The central panel appears to depict a weird orgy. In 1517 you might
The Garden ofEarthly Delights, let alone perhaps have turned away, fearful that you had been exposed to a heretical
make sense of them. In this detail from the
central panel we see bizarre acrobatics,
image — after all, the Inquisition, with its detestation of all physical pleasures,
cavorting couples and swimmers. was in progress. But your host could quell your fears with his interpretation.
You are staring at an earthly Paradise that never was and never will be. On
1505
Oil on wood
closer inspection it turns out to be a strangely innocent scene, one of harmony
220 cm x 390 cm/7 ft 2% in. x 12 ft 9% in. between humans and nature and between different races. Giant birds feed
Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid berries to men and women, couples of different races embrace in boats.
a

158 GRAYSON PERRY

yet
4 é
Bs y
oaSr
 ... an earthly paradise that never was and
never will be ... a strangely innocent scene, one
of harmony between humans and nature ...

Everyone is naked. It is a celebration of natural fecundity full of unsettling

juxtapositions and distortions of scale. Hieronymus Bosch’s imagination 1s
one of surreal darkness, so that even this scene of unfettered pleasure and
carnival is suffused with an air of threat.
In the background four huge biomorphic structures represent the four
regions of the world. Each one straddles a river, and the rivers come together
in the centre, where a futuristic minaret of cosmic fertility rears up out of
the lake surrounded by frolicking couples. Throughout the panel men and
women enjoy each other’s bodies — only in the middle ground, where a cer-
emonial courtship display seems to be taking place, are the sexes segregated.
The men, riding animals, parade around the pool where women disport
themselves; some hold fruits as if taking part in a ritualized mass version of
the Original Sin.
The striking dreamlike imagery of Bosch seems to our eyes to be a com-
pletely original eruption of bizarre genius. Bosch was unusual, even unique,
in the way he painted his own fictions. As well as his imaginative inventions,
Bosch also brought into the biblical context the contemporary popular visual
idioms of proverb and parable. The wry parodic style, if not the content,
of these myriad scenes of erotic and bestial acts would have been familiar
to a contemporary audience from the popular art of their day — especially
from the tin, lead or pewter ‘pilgrim badges’ that were bought like modern-
day T-shirts at festivals and feast days, and depicted satirical proverbs,
erotic jokes and fantastic hybrid creatures, as well as more conventional reli-
gious imagery.
Here in the central panel Bosch has illustrated an ideal world that is not
the celestial Christian Heaven but an earthly Paradise of his own invention.
It is without death or children, populated by ageless unindividualized figures
that seem childlike in their effortless enjoyment of bodily pleasures. Bosch
the moralist shows us Heaven on Earth as a gorgeous nightmare. The concept
of imaginary ideal societies must have been very much in the air, for this was
the age of discovery. Columbus’s first reports of the New World were filter-
ing through, and the idea of Paradise as a real geographical place (as often
depicted in medieval world maps) was in some ways made more real but also

pp. 160-61
In the left-hand panel we see paradise; in the
central panel, a mass of figures, apparently
showing harmony between humanity and
nature; and in the right-hand panel, hell.

162 GRAYSON PERRY

less likely to be found. The year of Bosch’s death, 1516, saw the publication of
a literary counterpoint to his vision, Thomas More’s Utopia.
The right-hand panel shows Hell. There is no nature here: all the tor-
ments are man-made. Musical instruments made for pleasure have become
instruments of torture. The contemporary audience might also have drawn
a sharp intake of breath at the image in the bottom right-hand corner. A pig
dressed as a nun is trying to get a man to sign away his fortune to the Church —
too late, since he is in Hell anyway. What would have kept him out would have
been a good moral life rather than faith in a corrupt Church. In the centre of
this panel is perhaps one of Bosch’s most famous images, a tree man with a
tavern in his belly and his legs ending in boats. Many scholars think this strik-
ing figure looking askance at the viewer is a self-portrait.
The Garden of Earthly Delights was famous and much admired in
Bosch’s lifetime for probably the same reasons it is loved today. High-quality
copies were made up to a generation after his death. Later facsimiles took the
form of tapestries, some of which made their way into the royal collections
of France and Spain. In the 20th century, echoes of this work can be seen in
the art of Surrealists like Max Ernst, in psychedelic popular art of the late
1960s and in the tormented, orgiastic figures trapped in transparent boxes by
Francis Bacon.
Perhaps what Bosch shows us in this wondrous painting is that Paradise
is not found in the traditions of the Bible of the left-hand panel nor in the
real, corrupt world of the right but only in the centre, the artist’s own
imagination.

Above
Above left Late 14th-century pilgrim badge from
The tree man is at the centre of Bosch’s vision Canterbury. The badge depicts a peacock
of hell, a phantasmagoric scene in which (a Christian symbol of immortality and
everyday objects become instruments of resurrection) being ridden by Thomas Becket.
torture. Unfortunately the saint’s head has been lost.

The Garden of Earthly Delights 163

‘Painting is Not my Art’

The Sistine Chapel Ceiling, Michelangelo

WILLIAM E. WALLACE

The astonishing energy of God contrasts strikingly with the passive Adam,
who looks longingly towards his creator. In the few centimetres that separate
their fingertips, Michelangelo has created the greatest suspension of time and
narrative in the history ofart.

n 1505, the newly elected Pope Julius II called Michelangelo

Buonarroti to Rome. With unparalleled energy, Julius was re-estab-
lishing papal authority through bold military action and a sweeping
programme of artistic patronage. As the ‘warrior Pope’ he led the papal
army; as patron he employed the architects Giuliano da Sangallo and
Donato Bramante to build a new Rome, Raphael Sanzio to decorate the
Vatican apartments, and Michelangelo to carve his tomb — envisioned as the
most grandiose funerary monument since Classical antiquity. After eight
months quarrying marble for the tomb, Michelangelo returned to Rome only
to discover that the Pope’s attention had turned to war and the rebuilding of
St Peter’s. Incensed that papal interest and resources had been diverted from
his project, Michelangelo departed for Florence. Not until 1508 was the artist
lured back to Rome, not to renew work on the tomb, as he had hoped, but
rather to undertake a task ill-suited to a marble sculptor: the painting of the
Sistine Chapel ceiling. Michelangelo’s objection that ‘painting is not my art’
proved ineffectual against the will of the imperious Pope. However, like other
commissions that Michelangelo initially resisted, once reconciled to the task,
he devoted enormous energy to creating a masterpiece.
For four years, between 1508 and 1512, Michelangelo struggled with
the manifold difficulties of painting the ceiling. The commission presented
formidable obstacles but it also unleashed the artist’s imagination. He
began with his usual concentrated fury, neglectful of health and sociability.
Above and opposite
God the Father creating Adam. Boldly, and Michelangelo’s father worried: ‘It seems to me you are doing too much, and
in contravention of the second commandment, it upsets me that you are not well, and are discontented.’ Michelangelo com-
Michelangelo has imagined the face of God pounded his father’s concerns when he confessed that he had no money but
the Father.
was ‘still obliged to live and pay rent’.
1508-12 Despite a brief stint in Domenico Ghirlandaio’s workshop, Michelangelo
Fresco had no experience directing a large-scale campaign in the demanding
c. 14 metres x c. 40.5 metres/
medium of fresco. To assist him in the gigantic undertaking, he hired
c. 46 ft x c. 133 ft
Sistine Chapel, Vatican Museums, a number of Florentine compatriots, including long-time painter friends
Vatican City Francesco Granacci and Giuliano Bugiardini, as well as the talented young
OO

164 WILLIAM E. WALLACE

 artist Aristotile da Sangallo. Others assisted with the technical problems of
building the scaffold and preparing the highly irregular vault for painting.
Altogether, at least a dozen people helped in carrying out the numerous tasks
associated with fresco: hauling water, slaking lime for plaster, grinding and
mixing pigments, pricking and transferring cartoons. Several worked along-
side Michelangelo, painting minor figures and ornament, as well as acres of
architectural decoration. Michelangelo, however, reserved the most impor-
tant figures and narratives for himself. When his biographer Ascanio Condivi
wrote that the artist finished the job in twenty months ‘without any help
whatever, not even someone to grind his colours for him’, he was grossly exag-
gerating in an effort to praise what was already a superhuman achievement.
‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth....’ The stately
words of Genesis come to mind as one looks at the ceiling—one of the greatest
works of art ever created. Like a handful of timeless monuments the Sistine
Chapel never fails to excite wonder. No one forgets the experience of stepping
through the small doorway into the vast expanse of the Sistine Chapel and
having one’s eyes drawn inexorably to Heaven.

166 WILLIAM E. WALLACE

 Although visitors generally enter the chapel under the Last Judgment,
we properly should begin with the scene of the Drunkenness of Noah at the
opposite end and proceed in reverse chronological order towards creation
Michelangelo’s — and, by analogy, from our present sinful state to a renewal of faith at the
altar. In a total of nine main scenes — four large and five smaller rectangular
objection that “painting fields — Michelangelo imagined the beginning of time, and the face of divin-
ity. This was not the first or only depiction of the subject, yet, like Leonardo’s
is not my art’ proved Last Supper, it has become the canonical representation; we visualize the first
book of the Bible according to Michelangelo.
ineffectual against the Visitors to the chapel find it difficult to focus on a linear narrative since
many parts of the densely populated vault compete for their attention. Rather
will of the imperious than viewing the ceiling in an orderly fashion, most visitors tend to look dis-
cursively, fastening upon large figures and familiar scenes. Towards the centre
Pope. of the ceiling is the famous scene of God creating Adam. The astonishing
energy of God contrasts strikingly with the passive Adam, who looks long-
ingly towards his creator. In the few centimetres that separate their fingertips,
Michelangelo has created the greatest suspension of time and narrative in the

The Sistine Chapel Ceiling 167

 history of art. That magnetic gesture is the focal point of the entire ceiling,
perhaps the most universally recognized and one of the most frequently imi-
Like Verdi’s Requiem tated images of all time. As God created Adam, so Michelangelo has forged
the image of the deity for all of Western Christianity.
or Milton’s Paradise Flanking the nine Genesis scenes are seven Old Testament Prophets
as well as five Sibyls, female seers of pagan antiquity who were thought to
Lost, the Sistine ceiling have foretold the coming of the Messiah. These alternating male and female
figures are seated on broad marble thrones, and each is accompanied by two
is a transcendent work companions or genii who, like visible thoughts, assist the majestic Prophets
and Sibyls in their scholarly labours of reading, writing and cogitating.
of genius that will never Between the narrative scenes, and frequently overlapping them, are twenty
nude youths or ignudi. They belong to a different realm — and perhaps an
be exhausted through antecedent time. They are intermediaries between narrative and decora-
tion, the pagan and Christian worlds, flesh and spirit. Like living sculptures,
looking or describing. the ignudi are animated bodies without precise narrative justification or
meaning. Arranged in every conceivable manner, they appear natural, even
comfortable, even though most of their poses are physically impossible. As
with his figures in marble, Michelangelo suggests languor from unlikely

168 WILLIAM E. WALLACE

 bodily contortions. In these figures — twenty painted reconstructions of
ancient marbles — Michelangelo invented a repertoire of poses that subse-
quent centuries repeatedly plundered.
In the lunettes (semi-circular fields linking the ceiling and chapel walls)
Michelangelo represented the ancestors of Christ, thereby creating a visual
genealogy that begins with Genesis and continues through the Prophets and
Sibyls to the 15th-century frescoes below. Michelangelo painted each of the
lunettes in two or three days and without the aid of cartoons, revealing his
complete mastery of the fresco technique. And framing the entire ensemble,
the four corner spandrels depict scenes of triumph over oppression, serving as
Old Testament prefigurations of the triumph of Christ.
In many ways the ceiling is a compendium: of Michelangelo’s art, of the
Renaissance, and of Christian theology. Like Verdi’s Requiem or Milton’s
Paradise Lost, the Sistine ceiling is a transcendent work of genius that will
Opposite never be exhausted through looking or describing. In the words of Johann
(Clockwise from top left): The Drunkenness Goethe: ‘Until you have seen the Sistine Chapel, you can have no adequate
of Noah. Noah, seen in the background conception of what man is capable of accomplishing.’ Michelangelo was just
cultivating the soil, is found by his sons in a
drunken stupor. The Libyan Sibyl, one of five
37 years old when he completed the ceiling. Had he died in 1512, the carver of
female seers from pagan antiquity, who were the Bacchus, Pieta and-David would still have been judged a great artist. As it
said to have foretold the birth of Christ. An was, he still had 52 more years to live, the Last Judgment to paint, Moses to
ignudo, one of twenty nude youths framing carve and St Peter’s to build.
the Genesis. Ancestors of Christ, one of sixteen
lunettes offering a visual genealogy of Christ:
the lunette of Jacob and Joseph, the earthly
father of Christ.

Above
God the Father creating Adam. One of the
most recognizable images of Western art
and Christianity, the first of four episodes
from the story of Adam and Eve shows God
reaching out to touch the newly created
Adam.

oe

The Sistine Chapel Ceiling 169

A Well-Read Patron

The School of Athens, Raphael

ING RID D. ROWLAND

The paintings of the Stanza della Segnatura are all about books, and
about their authors; it is as if the volumes of the Vatican Library have suddenly
come to life ...

y every account we have of him, Pope Julius II (r. 1503-13)

was a force of nature, a man of furious energy who obtained
his high office through a combination of bribery and the sheer
power of his implacable will. He craved the papacy because he
had-plans for the Church and its place in the modern world —
visionary plans that begar¥ from his own view of Christianity as a universal
religion, available now to the New World as well as the Old. Julius used every —
means at his disposal to spread his ideas: books, sermons, art, city planning,
diplomacy, money and, when all else failed, his army (he was also the Pope
who first hired a protective corps of Swiss guards). Fortunately, he also had
exceptional taste, in people and in art. It was Julius who told Michelangelo
to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, over Michelangelo’s protests that he
was only a sculptor, not a painter. And it was Julius who set a team of painters
to work on the walls and ceilings of his private apartments in the Vatican, at
least until a look at Raphael’s School of Athens (painted between 1509 and
Above 1511) inspired him to fire all the rest.
Tommaso Inghirami as Epicurus (detail,
Raphael is the artist, then, that this extraordinary Pope chose to deco-
left-hand side). Fat, flamboyant Tommaso
Inghirami was the greatest actor in rate the spaces where he lived, and in Raphael’s School of Athens we therefore
Renais sance Rome, as well as being the come as close as we can to the heart of Julius II, and to the heart of the city
Vatican librarian, and is the probable that he created: Renaissance Rome. The Sistine Chapel paints a large, cosmic
collaborator with Raphael for the design
picture of that Rome, but The School of Athens takes us into more intimate
of the School of Athens.
spaces, the working world of the Pope and the Church. Furthermore, Raphael
Opposite proved to be a painter of almost uncanny technical skill; here he transforms
Although not all the figures in Raphael’s
the difficult medium of fresco into chill marble statues, warm, living faces,
allegor ical fresco can be named with certainty,
the identification of the central figures is velvety cloth, transparent skies, wisps of beard. This complex, densely signi-
indisputable. Plato and Aristotle dominate ficant painting is a joy to look at no matter how little, or how much, we know
the picture, each carrying one of his own about its subject matter.
works. The figure in the foreground on the
left is generally accepted to be a portrait of
The School of Athens occupies one of four walls in a room that has
Michelangelo. been called the Stanza della Segnatura (the ‘Signature Room’) since the
1
16th century. The central room in the papal suite, this is where later popes
1509-1
put signed mountains of bureaucratic documents drafted on parchment or
Fresco
500 cm x 770 cm/ 16 ft 5 in. x 25 ft 3 in. paper and often sealed with ‘bulls’ of wax or lead. Either in this room or
Apostolic Palace, Vatican, Vatican City nearby, Julius kept a private library of 200-odd books; two floors below
OO

170 INGRID D. ROWLAND

 were the 5,000 books of the Vatican Library, an institution with which the
Pope had been connected since the mid-1470s. The paintings of the Stanza
della Segnatura are all about books, and about their authors; it is as if the
This complex, volumes of the Vatican Library have suddenly come to life, with characters
from the Bible, ancient philosophers, legal scholars and contemporary poets
densely significant all talking, reading, discussing, or lost in thought. Surprisingly for this hyper-
active Pope, most surviving portraits of Julius II (including Raphael’s own)
painting is a joy to look show him thinking, his terrifying gaze directed slightly downward and his
head cocked at a quizzical angle.
at no matter how little, The thoughts behind The School of Athens have to do with the connec-
tion between ancient wisdom and modern Christianity, between Classical
or how much, we know Greece and Renaissance Rome, and these connections played out against a
dramatic political background: in 1453, Constantinople, the great capital city
about its subject matter. of the Byzantine Empire, had fallen in a brutal siege to the Islamic forces of the
Ottoman Turks. Many of the Greek manuscripts in the Vatican Library had
been brought to Rome by refugees from that conflict, and Julius, the militant
Pope, was resolved to defend the whole written heritage of the West, classical,
Hebrew and Christian — including Arab astronomers and commentators on
Aristotle. Books were extremely expensive in the early 16th century, but they
were even more precious for what they contained: for their wisdom, their rev-
Above elations, and that miracle of human contact that can survive even death itself.
The School of Athens celebrates the
Just as the books in the Vatican Library were written in different scripts, at
wisdom of the ancient world as an essential
foundation for the Christianity different times, in different places, so, too, there are people from every period
of Renaissance Rome. of human civilization and several different cultures gathered beneath the
neem)

172 INGRID D. ROWLAND

 vaults of Raphael’s magnificent building. This setting could be a Roman bath
(where philosophers often conducted their schools in the ancient world), or a
Temple of Philosophy — though the design would also have reminded contem-
poraries of the plans for St Peter’s basilica, which Julius was in the middle of
constructing, having torn down most of the old church.
The period from 1509 to 1511 marked the moment when Raphael began
to reach full maturity as an artist, simplifying and schematizing forms while
still managing to make them look totally natural. The painting is divided
into a whole series of threes and twos: three large windows, three small, two
main groups of people, two floor levels separated by a flight of stairs. The
composition reflects a careful intellectual programme that was drawn up
for, or perhaps with, Raphael — most probably by the flamboyant librarian
of the Vatican, Tommaso Inghirami (whose sturdy, jolly figure appears in
the painting’s lower left, balancing Raphael’s self-portrait on the right). The
threes represent the Holy Trinity; Greek philosophers first posited the idea
of one god with three different natures, and Raphael’s painting suggests that
without the Greeks there would be no Christian theology. The twos set up
contrasts: between Plato and Aristotle, between music to the left and astron-
omy to the right. Two figures defy the careful construction: bald, bearded
Diogenes, always a contrarian, reclines on the steps, oblivious of everyone,
and in the centre, in suede boots, Raphael portrays a sulky Michelangelo
as the dour philosopher Heraclitus, cleverly mimicking the strange colours
and muscular style of his rival’s Sistine Chapel ceiling. And like the Sistine
Chapel, The School of Athens was an immediate success, an acknowledged
masterpiece from the moment of its painting, and one of the most influential
works in the history of European art.

Above
Raphael’s self-portrait gazes out at the viewer,
between the heads of other figures on the far
right of the work. He was 25 when he began
painting The School of Athens, a precocious
artist whose work changed and matured with
astonishing rapidity.

Right
Minerva and the astronomers (detail, right
side). Minerva, born from the head of her
father, was a Christ symbol in Renaissance
Rome. She presides over astronomy. The
bald-headed figure of the geometer Euclid is
thought to be a portrait of Raphael’s relative
Donato Bramante, the architect of Saint
Peter’s basilica.

—_—_—_—_—_—_————

The School of Athens 173

Terrible Beauty
The Isenheim Altarpiece, Matthias Grunewald '
JOSEPH LEO KOERNER

t is the most beautiful painting of ugliness in the history of art,

the ugliest beautiful painting. On two wooden panels, the join down
the middle barely perceptible, Christ’s corpse hangs on the cross, a
surface all of wounds. Up close, flesh bristles with splinters, and paint
catalogues the sepsis and necrosis caused by each. Seen from slightly
further away, the violated skin remains eerily cohesive, undulating with the
battered tissue underneath, stretching under the dead weight of muscle and
bone, describing in chiaroscuro the suffocation that the crucifixion brings.
The body draws its paradoxical liveliness from death, as Christ’s nail-pierced
hands seem to gain movement through postmortem rigor, and as the death
rattle mimes a massive next breath.
... the violated Modern admirers rescued this painting from oblivion by celebrating
its ‘expressivenéss’. They championed how feeling — the unspeakable pain of
skin remains eerily Christ’s slow, violent death and the inner suffering his death should cause in
Christians — breaks form. Yet the work’s uncanny power lies in the compo-
cohesive, undulating sure of the painting, from the shadow-casting trompe-l’cil thorns sticking
from Christ’s flesh to the palpable volume of each ruined member and the
with the battered tissue calligraphic outline of the body’s edge. And yet again, in restless paradox,
what this painting (beyond its own awesome capabilities) shows is that which
underneath, stretching definitively lies wholly concealed and therefore wholly unpaintable: Christ’s
divinity, his being, even in ruin, the true, perfect and beautiful image of God.
under the dead weight In tune with the background darkness, but antithetical to its own spectacular
display, this painting visualizes Christ as the total eclipse of the visible. An
of muscle and bone ... ultimate masterpiece of art, it places its own ultimate categorically beyond
art’s reach.
Although everything begins and ends with the Crucifixion, this abject
image belongs to a larger ensemble that explains how it began and where it
is bound. Opening the Crucifixion scene down the middle, three new panels
are revealed. On the left, Christ enters the world through the Virgin Mary,
who sways away from the angel as if buffeted by the non-corporeal entrance
here announced. In the right panel, his human existence come and gone,
Christ rises from the tomb, a sublimated being all of light. And in between,
Opposite an enigmatic orchestra of angels serenades the mystery of God’s birth as man.
The pervasive darkness shows two eclipses: And if we continue to open the panels, we find more images: Saint Sebastian,
that of the sun and that of Christ’s divinity. paradigm of martyrdom; the hermit-saint Paul in the wilderness; and thrice
Sheer ugliness conceals the perfect ‘image of
repeated, the founder of monasticism and Christ’s exemplary imitator, Saint
God’ that Christ is.
Anthony. Originally, all these panels enclosed a further Saint Anthony carved
1515 in wood. Enthroned and flanked by Saints Augustine and Jerome, he receives
Oil on panel
269 cm x 307 cm/8 ft 10 in. x 10 ft 1 in.
gifts of a pig and chicken from suppliant peasants.
(central panel) Today all these images stand displayed in Colmar, in an old convent
Musée d’‘Unterlinden, Colmar, France later (after the French Revolution) turned into the Musée d’Unterlinden.
ey

174 JOSEPH LEO KOERNER

CIO
—
Se ee
|
Originally, though, they stood in the church of a nearby monastic hospital
complex at Isenheim. Secularization brought that monastery to ruin, but
Ww While we cannot it also brought the altarpiece — and its maker — back to light. The Isenheim
Altarpiece had its admirers during the 16th century. These referred to its
penetrate the painter’s creator as the painter ‘Mathis’ of Aschaffenburg, and one early commentator
compared him to the two leading German masters, Albrecht Diirer and Lucas
faith, his Christ suggests Cranach. The first historian of German art, Joachim Sandrart, writing in
1675, knew dimly of the altarpiece and cited the name ‘Matthaeus’ in his text.
that, before Protestant But he introduced the spurious surname, still used today, to which no surviy-
ing document attests: Griinewald. By the time the French dismantled The
iconoclasts smashed Isenheim Altarpiece in 1793-94, destroying its carved superstructure, it had
been misattributed to Albrecht Diirer. Historical research soon linked it to
church pictures as Sandrart’s ‘“Griinewald’ and, much later, in 1938, to the painter (and hydrau-
lic engineer) Mathis Gothardt Neithardt, active chiefly in Aschaffenburg.
idols, Christian images What else was lost besides the artist’s name in the centuries between 1515,
when ‘Master Mathis’ (as the documents call him) inscribed that date on
had iconoclasm built Mary Magdalene’s ointment jar, and today, when this masterpiece is appreci-
ated as the supreme painting of the German Renaissance?
into them. Most obviously, museum display severs the work’s original link to
sacred ritual. As an altarpiece, the various panels — all movable wings that
opened and closed according to liturgical needs — served the Eucharistic rite.
When a priest celebrated Mass before the image of Christ crucified, when he

176 JOSEPH LEO KOERNER

 announced that the bread and wine were Christ’s flesh and blood, the gory
painting of that body transported celebrants visually to the divinity they orally
received. Divorced from the cult, the panels also lose their connection to moti-
vating beliefs. In the eyes of users for whom Christ’s death brings the promise
of salvation, that saving corpse would have been both terrible and sweet.
With The Isenheim Altarpiece, though, another quite specific context
has been lost. The work stood in a hospital, built to treat a single, specific
illness: St Anthony’s fire, named for the pains and visions experienced by suf-
ferers, which linked them to the demon-tormented saint who now served as
their protector. Modern medicine terms the disease ‘ergotism’, a long-term
poisoning caused by eating grain infected by ergot fungus. Symptoms include
dementia (the toxin resembles LSD) and painful and disfiguring gangrene.
Treatment for St Anthony’s fire, which raged during bad harvests,
especially among the poor, involved herbal remedies made from plants actu-
ally depicted in the altarpiece. However, since it was deemed to be a spiritual
malady, caused by individual or collective sin, the disease called mainly for
spiritual medicine aiming less to eliminate the symptoms than to impel
Opposite
repentance. Here the altarpiece helped. Forced to dress in peasants’ garb (like
The Crucifixion, with John the Evangelist,
the Virgin, Mary Magdalene and John the the monstrous hooded figure in the Saint Anthony panel, lower right), new
Baptist beside the cross, is flanked by the arrivals swore oaths before the painted Crucifixion. For the ill, the painting
plague saints Sebastian and Anthony, while helped to convert pain into the experience of a saving sacrifice, like Christ’s.
the supporting, coffin-shaped predella
features Christ’s entombment. (The Isenheim
For unscathed members of the Antonite Order who ran the hospital, the altar-
Altarpiece, closed state) piece’s spectacle of ugliness merged with the living tableau of abjection enacted
by the inmates. Such ugliness formed the necessary gateway to the divine
Above left
comedy of images that followed. In crucifying Christ, humanity made their
This grand sweep of imagery carries
Christ’s story from the Annunciation (left) God into a ‘man of sorrows’ with ‘no form nor comeliness’ (Isaiah 53: 2-3).
through the mysterious Nativity, with its When Master Mathis died in 1528, his possessions included tracts by
orchestra of ambiguous angels (centre), to
Martin Luther. While we cannot penetrate the painter’s faith, his Christ sug-
the Resurrection (right). (The Isenheim
Altarpiece, first open state)
gests that, before Protestant iconoclasts smashed church pictures as idols,
Christian images had iconoclasm built into them. The Isenheim Altarpiece
Above right assaults us with the negation of what it displays. Like the scapegoat Christ,
Sculpted effigies of Saints Augustine, Anthony
and Jerome (with Christ and the apostles in
the artwork is both sickness and cure.
the predella’s shrine) are flanked by paintings
of the Temptation of Saint Anthony and Saint
Anthony and the Hermit Paul. (The Isenheim
Altarpiece, second open state; sculpted shrine
by Nicolas Hagenau, c. 1515; painted wings
1512-16. Polychromed wood and oil on panel)

The Isenheim Altarpiece 177

 High Drama
The Assumption of the Virgin, Titian
FRANCESCO DA MOSTO

y first encounter with Titian’s genius was this paint-

ing of the Assumption that hangs above the high altar of
To me, [the Virgin] the basilica of Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, not far from
where I grew up. A large work — in fact, the largest altar-
didn’t just symbolize piece ever painted in Venice, almost seven metres high — its
unveiling in May 1518 cemented the young Titian’s place as the pre-eminent
salvation ... but also master of Venetian painting. It wasn’t just large, however, it was artistically
groundbreaking. Whereas earlier altarpieces in Venice had been relatively
seemed to stand for the static, with statue-like saints and regal Virgins, Titian’s figures are ecstatic
and full of life, giving the work incredible emotional charge and drama. And
city of Venice itself ... while a lesser artist might have turned and fled from the vast expanse of panel
in front of them, Titian divided the composition into three sections — terres-
trial at the bottom, heavenly at the top, and the Virgin, the intercessor, in the
middle—and so made sense of the massive area.
Curiously, what touched me most deeply was one of the less obvious
parts of the work, the image of God at the very top, heavily foreshortened and
lost in shadow. The creator’s face is painted in an almost impressionistic style;
from behind a grey beard, he looks with a stern yet forlorn expression at the
state of his children — almost as though he is thinking that the human experi-
ment has proved a disappointment. The true focus of the canvas, of course, is
the Virgin Mary who is represented as a heroic figure with upraised arms and
a whirl of drapery, elevated on a solid-seeming cloud supported by armies of
cherubs. This is the moment that, according to Roman Catholic dogma, she
is assumed into heaven — in fact, this is probably the most famous depiction
of the Assumption in Western art. To me she didn’t just symbolize salvation,
however, but also seemed to stand for the city of Venice itself, which at the
time of the painting still enjoyed considerable power and glory. The cloud
curves up at the edges to form a near circle with the rounded head of the panel;
this heavenly part of the canvas is suffused with a miraculous golden light. In
contrast the disciples, distraught at losing the mother of their saviour, implore
the Virgin not to leave them, but her eyes are already directed heavenwards,
and they are left in shadow under a grey sky. The Venetian sculptor Antonio
Opposite
Titian’s masterpiece was kept in the Canova — whose heart is buried in this church — referred to this masterpiece as
Accademia galleries of Venice for almost a the most beautiful painting in the world.
century before being returned to its rightful Today, Titian is best known for his rich, sensual use of colour and his
place over the high altar of Santa Maria
radical painting technique: energetic brushloads of pigment seem to float
Gloriosa dei Frari in the early 20th century.
across the canvas. His clever use of colour can be seen in the Assumption:
c. 1516-18 look at how the two apostles clad in red form a pyramid with the Virgin,
Oil on panel
drawing our eyes up to the similarly red-clad God. Soon after completing
690 cm x 360 cm/ 22 ft 8 in. x 11 ft 10 in.
Basilica di Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, the Assumption, Titian painted another large-scale altarpiece in the Frari,
Venice known as The Madonna of the Pesaro Family. This shows even better his
HO

178 FRANCESCO DA MOSTO

 ¢
{1
te

skilful evocation of the luxurious velvets and silks that Venice was famed for.
He achieved this particularly rich effect by gradually rubbing his fingers at
the edges of the light colours, smudging one shade into another. More than
any other Renaissance artist to date, Titian’s use of light in particular seemed
to bring his figures to life, giving them an unrivalled realism.
Titian was born Tiziano Vecellio around 1490 in the Dolomites, which
at that point came under the control of the Venetian Republic. He was sent to
Venice as-a child and trained under first Gentile and then Giovanni Bellini.
While working with Bellini, he came under the influence of the painter
Giorgione. Official commissions soon followed, and just a couple of years
before painting the Assumption Titian was awarded the sinecure previously
held by Giovanni Bellini, ensuring that the rest of his long life would be
Above relatively comfortable. Most of his work was executed in Venice, where he
The main altar, seen through the marble choir took Venetian painting to a new level of beauty and sensuality (and some-
screen, is a Gothic masterpiece. The only times ungodly eroticism). His canvases brought him fame not just in Italy but
surviving monks’ choir in all Venice that is in
across Europe.
its original location and in its original form,
it was already there when Titian’s work was Titian’s long and colourful life coincided with Venice’s ‘golden age’, a
commissioned. time when ungodly acts were rife and Venice itself had taken its relationship

180 FRANCESCO DA MOSTO

 with the Catholic Church to the limit. As the city’s population climbed to
its all-time high, Titian and his friends may have gone too far. In June 1575
vengeance of a most biblical kind was delivered on the city in the form of a
Ee ) Titian is best known virulent plague. The population plummeted by nearly half from a peak of
190,000 and La Serenissima began its slow decline. Among the victims of the
for his rich, sensual use plague was Titian, who the following year died at his home in Cannaregio,
where he had lived for forty-five years. He was buried in the same church
of colour and his radical where this masterpiece hangs.
Almost four centuries later Titian’s early masterpiece is still remembered
painting technique: in unexpected ways. In 1984 the English band Frankie Goes to Hollywood,
moved on from sex and war to touch the theme of love and redemption in
energetic brushloads of their song ‘The Power of Love’ — the record cover featuring the Assumption.
Above right
pigment seem to float A second Titian altarpiece in Santa Maria
dei Frari, known as The Madonna ofthe
Pesaro Family (1519-26), is also a striking
across the canvas. Above left composition: diagonal lines lead the eye
Titian’s self-portrait, c. 1562, painted when up to the Madonna and Child, and on ina
he was about 80 years old. seemingly unlimited perspective.

The Assumption of the Virgin 181

On the Brink of Tragedy
nn AY

The Court of Gayumars from Shah Tahmasp’s Shahnama |

(‘Book of Kings’), Sultan Muhammad
DAVID J. ROXBURGH

Sultan Muhammad loses nothing in miniaturizing his forms because the

execution is so refined ... as to render everything legible.

bu al-Qasim Firdawsi completed his Shahnama (‘Book of

Kings’) in c. 1010, an epic poem of some 50,000 couplets about
the lives and exploits of the kings of Iran up to the Arab con-
quests of the mid-7th century. Ideally suited as a vehicle for
propounding royal ideology (both as history and as a mirror
for princes), by the early 14th century Firdawsi’s epic had become the subject
matter of artists who fashioned programmes of paintings to accompany its
poetry. Although the poém was relatively overlooked in the 15th century,
the situation changed in the 1520s when the Safavid ruler Shah Isma’il
(r. 1501-24) initiated a project to create an illustrated luxury manuscript of it
for his son Tahmasp. Shah Tahmasp (r. 1524-76) supported the project after
his father’s death. Although the final Shahnama represented an extraordi-
nary investment, in 1568 Shah Tahmasp gave his precious manuscript as a gift
to the Ottoman Sultan Selim II (r. 1566-74). In the modern era, it passed to
Baron Edmund de Rothschild and then Arthur A. Houghton Jr., who broke
the manuscript up for sale.
At its completion, Shah Tahmasp’s Shahnama included 258 paintings
set in gold-sprinkled borders, with coloured rulings dividing paintings from
borders and the Persian text copied in nasta’liq script. Intricate illumina-
tions of geometric and biomorphic designs in gold and polychrome pigment
marked transitions in the text and encased explanatory captions set above
paintings. The entire manuscript, estimated to have taken twenty years to
complete, required a workforce of artists, calligraphers, illuminators, ruling-
makers, binders and experts in the production of materials» Human and
material resources were gathered in the royal workshop in Tabriz.
Following the prefatory matter, the first painting illustrating the
Shahnama depicts ‘The Court of Gayumars’. This is the painting assigned
Above and opposite to artist Sultan Muhammad by the contemporary writer—calligrapher—art
Members osOPS EES, community gather historian Dust Muhammad. Gayumars, Iran’s first king, enthroned by an
round their king, who sits enthroned ona . ; : :
outcrop of rock, presides over a fledgling human community gathered in a
mountaintop.
circle. Gayumars’s son Siyamak sits to his left and his grandson Hushang
c. 1522-25 stands to his right. It was during Gayumars’s enlightened reign that human-
Watercolour and gold on paper
kind learned how to make food and fashion clothes from animal skins.
47 cm x 31.8. cm/1 ft 6% in. x 1 ft 0% in.
Golleaden of Ping <adnuddinkgs Khaty Standing at the opening of the Shahnama, the image is already charged with
Geneva a sense of tragedy that is carried through the epic poem as a constant play
ee

182 DAVID J. ROXBURGH

 between the forces of good and evil. Although Gayumars fulfilled his role as
just and wise king, causing society to prosper, the Black Div, son of the Devil
Ahriman, would kill his designated heir Siyamak. The painting shows social
equilibrium but at a moment after the angel Surush has warned Gayumars of
Ahriman’s intentions.
To heighten the pathos and imminent loss of this story, Sultan
Muhammad locates his figures in an environment apparently prefabricated
to contain them — nature anticipates this human order and finds a space for it.
A broad circle of rock opens to embrace fur-clad men of various ages and
races, arranged around a broad swathe of foliage at the painting’s centre
watered by a mountain stream of silver water (now blackened by oxidiza-
tion). Craggy rocks of blue, pink, green and other colours rise upwards, while
wizened trees, some in bloom, are scattered throughout the geological spec-
tacle. Closer scrutiny turns up animals — deer, foxes, lions, monkeys. Moving
closer still, we see rock striations, textures of clothing, and anthropomorphic
faces camouflaged amid the rocks.
[The artist] locates For its size the painting delivers a staggering complexity. It is no wonder
that Dust Muhammad, writing a history of art in 1544—45, had this to say
his figures in an about Sultan Muhammad and The Court of Gayumars:

environment apparently First there is the rarity of the age...Sultan Muhammad, who has
developed depiction to such a degree that, although it has a thou-
prefabricated to contain sand eyes, the celestial sphere has not seen his like. Among his
creations depicted in His Majesty’s Shahnama is a scene of people
them — nature anticipates wearing leopard skins: it is such that the lion-hearted of the jungle of
depiction and the leopards and crocodiles of the workshop of orna-
this human order and mentation quail at the fangs of his pen and bend their necks before
the awesomeness of his pictures. (Trans. Wheeler Thackston)
finds a space for it.
Such an assessment of painting is unusual, evidence of the profound impres-
sion it made. Dust Muhammad’s metaphor of the celestial sphere and its
‘thousand eyes’ — the night sky’s stars — places Sultan Muhammad in the
span of creation, emphasizing his eternal status as artistic ‘rarity’. More than
this, however, by invoking the sensory faculty of vision, it implies that even a
thousand eyes would be insufficient to take in Sultan Muhammad’s oeuvre.
The metaphor of sight is expanded in the next passage, where even the bravest
among Sultan Muhammad’s peers — who are likened to lions, leopards and
crocodiles — are cowed, brought up short before his paintings.
It is easy to understand the response. Sultan Muhammad loses nothing
in miniaturizing his forms because the execution is so refined (described
by contemporaries as ‘hair-splitting’) as to render everything legible. The
pigment does not break down into brushstrokes that would give evidence
Above of the painting’s manufacture. The composition enhances the impression of
Quarrelling monkeys embedded in the highly clarity. But legibility and clarity are a mirage — the density of painted forms
complex matrix of the painting.
and their scale work in the opposite direction. By overwhelming our capac-
Opposite ity to see, these features deny us total knowledge of the painting and let it
The painting is a masterful performance, keep secrets that will be revealed in subsequent viewings. In this way, Sultan
from compositional design and colour
Muhammad exploited the constraints of book painting and lent the medium
harmonies to the execution of its most minute
details, all of which create the impression of a phenomenological power equal to the text’s capacity to convey political,
effortless artistry. social and cultural meanings.
oe
SB

The Court of Gayumars 185

 Between Heaven and Earth

Pavilions in the Mountains of the Immortals, Qiu Ying and Lu Shidao

CRAIG CLUNAS

he elongated mountains of this painting represent no real place

on this earth. The meticulously drawn terraces and palaces that
nestle beneath them are not such as we will ever actually inhabit.
Instead, the artist has created a realm of deathless beauty, one that
the viewer may yearn for in the knowledge that this yearning will
never be satisfied. Some may even have been there long ago, in dreams or in
visions — but on waking they could never find their way there again.
The subject matter is not original to this picture — indeed, these magic
mountains are one of the longest established themes in Chinese painting, with
at least a millennium of practice before this example. But here the tension
between the intangible and the believable is balanced to an exquisite degree.
At the same time, the presence of writing, and the seals of subsequent owners
(an emperor anrong them) reminds us that a painting is not a window into a
‘real’ world. Marks on paper are all we have.
Part of what makes Pavilions in the Mountains of the Immortals an~
... the artist has outstanding work of art is technical skill. It is painted in watercolour on
paper, a surface on which it is extremely hard to control the layers of mineral
created a realm of pigment and prevent the bleeding of strokes. As in the calligraphy, there is
no scope for mistakes, erasures or second thoughts. Only total control of the
deathless beauty, medium, achieved through a lifetime’s practice, will enable writer and painter
to achieve a surface of image and text that appears so effortless. |
one that the viewer Pavilions in the Mountains of the Immortals was painted in 1550 by
the greatest professional artist of Ming dynasty China, Qiu Ying (c. 1494-c.
may yearn for in the 1552) — a man around whom fables clustered even in his lifetime, though
today we know very little about him. We do know he associated with the
knowledge that this cultural elite of the great commercial city of Suzhou, where he lived and ee
a
a

worked — for example, the agents behind the inscription, which is an integral
yearning will never part of the composition. The poem’s author, Cai Yu (before 1470-1541), and
its writer, Lu Shidao (1517-80), were everything that Qiu Ying was not —edu-
be satisfied. cated gentlemen with private means and potential access to careers in the
official bureaucracy. The work’s production would have involved the patron,
too, since it was most probably created as a birthday gift, an elegant wish for
Above longevity bestowed on its recipient, who might have been either a woman ora
A glimpse through a crevasse indicates the man of the upper classes. The network of connections that bound such people,
idea of spaces beyond the spaces we can see, named and unnamed, together was for the original viewers an integral part of
and the dwellings of beings yet more powerful
and mysterious than those who inhabit the
the work’s status. The idea of the autonomous ‘masterpiece’, unconnected to
palaces in the painting’s foreground. the art of the past or the social life of the present, would have had no meaning
for them, though its beauty and exquisite execution would have been more
1550
Watercolour on paper
than apparent. Like the Mountains of the Immortals themselves, it hovers just
110.5 cm x 42.1 cm/3 ft 7% in. x 1 ft 4% in. out of our line of sight, hard to see properly.
National Palace Museum, Taipei, Taiwan

es

186 CRAIG CLUNAS

 The Folly of the World
The Proverbs, Pieter Bruegel the Elder
STEPHAN KEMPERDICK

ustle and bustle prevail in a village setting, populated by

countless figures that fill every room, shack and square, as
well as every dark corner. They are all totally focused on their
tasks, most of which seem, on closer inspection, to be rather
peculiar. In fact they are acting out more than 120 proverbs
and sayings, the metaphors turned into literal depictions. One man is banging
his head against a brick wall while another is throwing roses (in lieu ofpearls)
before swine; a woman is tying the Devil to a pillow (showing that she is stub-
born and spiteful) while a man is carrying daylight in a basket out of the house
(doing something useless). Even odder is the sight of a beggar stooping to
crawl into the world (being devious to ensure success), which is rolling on the
ground in the form of a glass sphere with a cross sticking out at the top.
The strange and sometimes absurd concept of taking proverbs literally
was not of Bruegel’s own devising. It was already known in the 15th century,
and in 1558 Frans Hogenberg in Antwerp produced an engraving that por-
trayed forty-three proverbs in the form of figures in a landscape. This image
may have been a direct stimulus for Bruegel’s work, begun the following year.
Unlike the engraver, however, Bruegel monumentalizes the subject, not only
through the medium of panel painting, but by joining the individual scenes
together to form a convincing whole. This stringing together of elements
Bruegel also makes has created a genre painting whose particular appeal lies in the fact that it
appears both real and unreal at the same time. Despite the apparent isola-
it absolutely plain who tion of the figures from one another, they all fit together quite naturally to
make up the scene, and the accurate observation of gestures, postures and
is to blame for this-state expressions brings the composition to life. This liveliness is enhanced by the
artist’s vibrant brushwork, with paint applied in thin, transparent layers, and
ofaffairs: the Devil ... shapes and structures fashioned in an almost draughtsmanlike way. Endless
variations on green and brown and nuanced, often murky, shades, mark the
painting’s refined treatment of colours. Blue and red stand out powerfully,
Above giving emphasis to certain areas and motifs.
To light a candle to the Devil and to confess Bruegel’s composition is based on a broad, slightly curved, diagonal that
to the Devil (respectively to flatter, and to runs from the bottom left of the image to the top right, carrying the gaze from
betray secrets to the enemy).
the close-up details in the foreground to the distant horizon. This drawing of
Opposite the eye into the work gives the image dynamism and binds its individual ele-
The world turned upside down (everything ments together. At the same time, it underlines that the bustle of the village
is the opposite of what should be); to bite the
pillar (to be hypocritically religious); and to
is actually the bustle of broader society, that the village represents the entire
carry fire and water (to be insincere). world. But its inhabitants are behaving foolishly, enthusiastically engaging
in pointless, painful or ridiculous activities. Bruegel also makes it absolutely
1559
Oil on oak
plain who is to blame for this state of affairs: the Devil, who sits in a small
117 cm x 163 cm /3 ft 10 in. x 5 ft 2 in. chapel with a delicate marble column and a blue and red roof at the centre
Gemaldegalerie, Staatliche Museen, Berlin of the picture. One man lights a candle to him while another goes to
Satan
OO
_—

188 STEPHAN KEMPERDICK

"
DR
RRR CSRS
Roe,
 at

for confession — read as proverbs, these actions mean to flatter and to reveal
secrets to an enemy, but at the same time they are the perverted parodies of

[The] figures ... are

acting out more than 120 thful to him. Hogenberg’s aforementioned engraving of 1558
bears the title The Blue Cloak, and Constantijn Huygens the Younger used the
proverbs and sayings, the same name to describe Bruegel’s painting when he saw it in 1676 in Antwerp.
Collections of proverbs enjoyed great popularity in 16th-century human-
metaphors turned into istic circles. A notable early example was Erasmus of Rotterdam’s Adagia
(published in 1500), a collection of around 800 adages. Other anthologies in
literal depictions. Latin and-vernacular languages followed. In addition, the world of folly had
already been portrayed in Sebastian Brandt’s Ship of Fools, published in 1494
in Basel, and Erasmus’s The Praise of Folly of 1508, both of which had become
classics. Bruegel was therefore working within a great tradition that was
artistic but also, primarily, literary. His painting is directed at an educated
audience, the proverbs stemming less from folk wisdom than from literature—
most of them existed in Latin as well as in Dutch. In accordance with Classical
ideals, the painting was intended both to instruct and to entertain, offering
both contemporary viewers and us today the enormous fun of untangling
individual scenes. More so than almost any other painting, it encourages us to
peer into the darkest corners or seek multiple meanings in the same motif.

190 STEPHAN KEMPERDICK

 The moral message of the work goes hand in hand with a deliberately
humorous distancing, an ironic attitude to the follies that are portrayed within
it. The topsy-turvy world is predominantly populated with simple peasant
q
The topsy-turvy folk, but its contemporary viewers would certainly not have been peasants.
However, the upper classes are also included, with three figures being par-
world is predominantly ticularly notable. It is rarely commented upon that these three are shown
wearing very old-fashioned clothing: the garments of the man throwing his
populated with simple money into the water (that is, wasting it) date from the early 16th century; the
young nobleman in the right foreground, who has the world spinning on his
peasant folk, but its thumb (at his command), is dressed in the style of the late Middle Ages; and
the prosperous man throwing roses before swine is wearing a costume from
contemporary viewers around 1440. Perhaps Bruegel wanted to use these anachronisms to stress
the timeless significance of the imagery. Perhaps also his clients, the wealthy
would certainly not have people of 1559, were not keen to see their own kind, dressed in the fashions of
the day, engaging in ridiculous antics, but felt better able to laugh if the scene
been peasants. was set in an indeterminate past.
It is not recorded for whom Bruegel painted the picture. It is first docu-
mented in 1668 in the estate of the Antwerp collector Peeter Stevens. Then
it remained lost for centuries, until in 1913 it was discovered at an English
country house and came into the possession of the Gemaldegalerie in Berlin
the following year. This marked the rediscovery of the original of a compo-
sition that was already well known from a number of 17th-century copies.
Around twenty-four such copies are still in existence, some of them created
by Pieter Brueghel the Younger, who was working from his father’s original
cartoon, which is now lost. The number of surviving copies shows the high
regard in which this peculiar invention of Bruegel was held.

Above
To make the world spin on one’s thumb
(to be in control); to crawl through the world
(to succeed by deception); and to throw roses
before swine (to waste precious things on the
unappreciative).

Right
To have an eye on the sail (to keep a good
watch); to shit on the gallows (to fear
nothing).
e Sa + eee

The Proverbs 191

Centre Stage
The Crucifixion, Tintoretto
QUENTIN BLAKE

liating from Christ’s head almost has physic«

wings, ana though the head leans forwardit is not «oama O rat af =oie) bend = = ian}ee oa"a Ny on ney° a

but rather looking ...

$ Py ey | Pe “«

he Crucifixion is the keystone, though by no means the culmi-

nation, of the great series of paintings that Tintoretto produced
for the Scuola di Sam Rocco in Venice. The Scuola is not actually
a school (as the name might suggest) but a sort of guildhall or
ied siaprer for a lay but pious confraternity — one in this case
devoted to combating theplague (2 repeated scourge of the city) by practical
and religious means.
The painting is wide, almost panoramic, and hung high in the albergo,
the meeting room of the Sci <a t is divided in half by the strong vertical of
Christ on the cross; at the foor of the cross is a group of mourners, beautifully
painted and brought together in a dignified and rhythmic movement. To
either side, under a clouded sky that somehow manages to be at the same time
calm and apocalyptic, is a huge cast of onlookers and participants. Unusually,
the two thieves are not n their crosses to left and to right. One is
already attached to a cross, peers half a dozen men are heaving and pulling
to get upright; on the right, deeper into the picture, the other is still being
put onto the cross. In a perceptive essay on the picture, Brian Robb added a
personal observation that the man is securing the second thief’s cross with the
same techniques and same type of gimlet that he had seen used by a Venetian
carpenter constructing a jetty. The:is not simply a curiosity — it underlines
the extent to which Tintoretto’s work drew on the life around him, not least
Above and opposite the balance and lean and thrust of gondoliers, whose gestures surely inspired
Tintoretto’s pai sa re in the many of the figures’ tenuous relation to gravity.
f body in strenuous
In the foreground, on the right, is a man with his back to us, digging;
i of the digger
are ae ¥ visible bbem is clothes. Only
perhaps he is preparing a hole for the stake of the cross, but more particu-
the attitude of Chri ests stillness, but it larly he serves as a striking example of the energy being expressed across
is the stillness ty. not death: the light the painting. It is an energy that is also present in the handling of the paint—
emanating from his head obscures the cross,
robust enough to make the forms convincingly and weightily present, yet free
and ft is not wat eye reaches the nails that
one is suddenly reminded of his suffering. enough not to turn the image into still life, nor to limit the man’s possibility
of further movement. There is the same energy and reality in the painting of
1565
the stakes and crosses, and the ladder which starts at the base of the picture
Oil on canvas
518 cm * 1,224 om / 17 ft x 40 ft 2 in. and which (in a typical Tintoretto move) sets us off into a grid of perspective
Scuola di San Rocco, Venice taking us deeper into the picture.
——

192 QUENTIN BLAKE

 Assembled about the cross is an astonishingly varied throng with all
kinds of reactions expressed in posture, all kinds of aura and authority. We
are helped to move about among them, because the whole work is an aston-
ishing weave and balance of directions, and of patterns of light and dark. As
the design of the painting takes us into deep perspective, the figures become
more hallucinatory; fantasy architecture glitters against the dark sky on the
left of the picture, while to the right hurrying figures make their way across a
wooden bridge that itself has an almost insect-like urgency.
To return to the Crucifixion: Christ is placed very high on the cross,
almost at the top of the scene before us. The nails piercing his hands and feet
are visible, but there is little here about agony or suffering. The light radiat-
ing from Christ’s head almost has physical substance, like wings, and though
the head leans forward it is not drooping with exhaustion but rather looking;
looking at a scene that one can almost feel it owns. As Eric Newton observes
in his study of Tintoretto, this isolated figure ‘pales against the threatening
sky, watches; and by doing so, enables us to watch’. The gesture of the arms is
powerful. To call it one of acceptance sounds too passive; it seems almost as
though it were a gesture of showing. And this is where the siting of the picture
adds to the power of its theatre. The painting is wide, and the room not deep
enough for it all to be seen at once, so that you find yourself, opposite the
presiding Christ figure, looking to left and right to read this array of human
life. Newton talks of it as a tragic drama of a scale and poignancy that is
Shakespearian, and surely he is right to do so. s
Newton also describes his experience, no doubt comparable to John
Ruskin’s, of discovering Tintoretto. Brought about first, no doubt, by
viewing the paintings themselves, it also requires the sensibility of the viewer
to become open to visual narrative of a drama and profundity unusual at any
time in the history of painting.

Left
The dramatic use in this self-portrait of light
and shadow (a hallmark of the artist’s style),
combined with the frontal pose, underscores
Tintoretto’s.energy. (Self-Portrait, 1588, oil
on canvas, 65 cm x 52cm/25% in. x 20% in.
Musée du Louvre, Paris)

Above right
The imposing canvas of The Crucifixion
covers an entire wall of the Sala dell’Albergo
in the Scuola di San Rocco in Venice. It
was just one work ina collection of scenes
depicting the biblical narrative. Owing to
the ongoing nature of the commission, the
sequencing of the events was frequently
disjointed. Viewers are forced to interpret
and reorder the events for themselves.

OO

194 QUENTIN BLAKE

 c f = ne
‘a
SSWi kk
a ih
| ,
see i =
A
| hil 4 ry J
}

oe at

nS
k,
.
i

he,
a
: tl
\
So
a
A *: DS y i
Z : a 1 a4
r a ¢ h 9
s if
ghey:
nei
ey
Nd
; ihe

& E
ae

pt) So

nN Se ee
ws ee
aX
€ 9
\ as :

The painting ... is divided in half by the strong vertical of Christ on the cross;
at the foot of the cross is a group of mourners, beautifully painted and brought
together in a dignified and rhythmic movement.

The Crucifixion 195

Heavenly Visitors
The Burial of the Count of Orgaz, El Greco
XAVIER BRAY

ccording to local legend, the funeral of the Count of

Orgaz in 1323 had some unexpected guests: Saints Stephen
and Augustine, who appeared miraculously to help lower the
count’s body into his tomb. The count had been extremely
generous to Toledo’s religious institutions and the privilege
of saintly attendance at his funeral was in recognition of this (it would also
hopefully ensure that his soul be fast-tracked into heaven). The count stipu-
lated in his will that a yearly donation be collected from the citizens of Orgaz,
a small town outside Toledo in his seigniorial possession, and be given to the
parish church of Santo Tomé in Toledo. The count had been a parishioner
El Greco ... divided of that church and had his private chapel there. But in 1562 the townspeople
decided to stop making the donation, hoping the bequest would be forgotten.
the composition into two They could not have been more mistaken. The parish priest of Santo
Tomé, Andréz Nufiez de‘Madrid, immediately instigated legal proceedings
equal parts: the world against the town and in 1569 the royal chancellery in Valladolid ruled in
the priest’s favour. To mark this legal victory, as well as to immortalize the
of mortals in the lower count’s generosity, Nufiez refurbished the count’s chapel and commissioned
E] Greco to paint an exceptionally large canvas to be placed directly above his
half and the celestial tomb. The contract that El Greco signed on 18 March 1586 included among its
conditions a description of the subject: ‘[The artist] agrees to paint a picture
vision above. that goes from the top of the arch to the bottom. The painting is to be done
on canvas...he is to paint the scene in which the parish priest and other clerics
were reciting the office for the burial of Don Gonzalo de Ruiz, Count of
Orgaz, when Saint Augustine and Saint Stephen descended to bury the body
of this gentleman, one holding the head, the other the feet, and placing him in
the sepulchre. Around the scene should be many people who are looking at it
and, above all this, there is to be an open sky showing heaven in glory.’
El Greco followed these specifications closely. He divided the compo-
sition into two equal parts: the world of mortals in the lower half and the
celestial vision above. It would appear that he has set the funeral scene at
night, as was increasingly fashionable for funerals of the nobility in 16th-
century Spain. Mortuary torches have been lit and a solemn gathering of men
has formed around the miracle. One can almost hear the whispering between
a Franciscan friar and an Augustinian friar on the left. Saints Stephen and
Augustine, young and old, clean-shaven and bearded, are dressed in richly
embroidered liturgical vestments. They solemnly hold the count’s body, clad
in shining armour, the textures of their fabrics contrasting evocatively with
the metallic polish of the steel. Seen close up, El Greco’s brushwork is spirited
1586-88
and descriptive — Saint Stephen’s reflection can be seen in the armour.
Oil on canvas
480 cm x 360 cm/ 15 ft 9 in. x 11 ft 10 in. What is unusual about El Greco’s representation, however, is that he sets
Parish church of Santo Tomé, Toledo, Spain the scene in Toledo of the 1580s: the black garments, white ruffs and goatee
EEE
| EEE EEEEEEEEEEEEE

196 XAVIER BRAY

 ... the most moving detail is just visible ..
a small translucent figure, which the Virgin and
Saint John plead to have admitted into heaven.

beards belong to the fashionable attire of late 16th-century Spain and not the
14th century in which Orgaz died. Each individual appears to be a real por-
trait, and some of the figures are members of the military Order of Santiago,
identifiable by the red crosses on their chests. Although their identities are
largely uncertain, the priest on the right holding a book and reciting the
funeral rites must be Nufiez de Madrid. The man with a white beard, behind
Saint Augustine, is Antonio de Covarrubias, a scholar fluent in Greek and a
close friend ofElGreco, who would also paint his bust portrait years later. El
Greco may be identified as the figure looking directly at us, positioned above
Saint Stephen’s head. And the young boy looking out at us and pointing to
Orgaz’s body is El Greco’s son, Jorge Manuel. He is there not only to lead us
into the picture but to emphasize El Greco’s role as the creator of the composi-
tion. On the boy’s handkerchief, El Greco has signed in Greek cursive letters:
‘domenikos theotokopolis [sic] e’potei 1578’ ((Domenikos Theotokopoulos
made this 1578’). The date refers not to the painting, but rather to the year of
the birth ofElGreco’s son—a charming conceit.
‘E] Greco’ means ‘the Greek’, since although the artist found fame in
Spain he had been born on the island of Crete in 1541. He first trained as

Above Above right

An angel propels the soul of the Count of The 8-year-old boy is Jorge Manuel,
Orgaz, in the form of a small translucent El Greco’s son. He trained as a painter and
human figure, through a gap in the clouds. practised as an architect. Although El Greco
While the Virgin is preparing to receive the had hoped he would take over the studio on
Count’s soul, Saint John the Baptist speaks his death, Jorge was not such a skilful painter
to Christ, asking him to consider the Count’s as his father, and El Greco’s style very quickly
entry into heaven. went out fashion.

198 XAVIER BRAY

 a painter of icons, an art form favoured by the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Rather than representing natural phenomena as perceived by the senses, icons
are designed to give a glimpse into the transcendental world of the divine.
Figures are typically two-dimensional, elongated and uniform in size and pro-
portion. One of El Greco’s earliest signed icons is the Dormition ofthe Virgin,
which shows the mother of Christ ‘asleep’ surrounded by the apostles. Christ
has miraculously appeared and takes her soul in the form of a swaddled baby
in his hands. Above, the heavens have opened, the Holy Spirit appears and the
Virgin sits enthroned as she is assumed into heaven.
The visual connections between this icon and The Burial of the Count
of Orgaz are intriguing. It is as if El Greco were consciously referring back to
his earlier work but inserting a newly acquired skill: that of being able to paint
the natural world realistically. On the one hand, we are drawn into the com-
position by the realism of the black-clad men gathered around the count; yet,
on the other, we are witnessing both a miracle and a celestial vision. In order
to depict the men, El Greco draws on the examples of Titian and Tintoretto,
whose works he had studied while in Venice; but to capture the abstract visual
world of paradise, El Greco has resorted to his training as an icon painter. The
medley of elongated figures in heaven, dressed in brightly coloured drapery as
if lit by neon lights, are not so removed from the figures that appear in his
icon. As in scenes of a ‘private judgment’, El Greco also introduces an element
of hierarchy, favoured by the Orthodox Church: Christ sits at the top, sur-
Above right rounded by the saints in heaven; Saint Peter with the keys and the rest of the
The discovery of The Dormition, which is saints sit behind in tiers, as though at the theatre. But the most moving detail
signed by the artist, in 1982, in a monastery is just visible through a gap in the clouds — it is a small translucent figure,
on the island of Syros, Greece, confirmed that
El Greco had first trained as an icon painter.
which the Virgin and Saint John plead to have admitted into heaven. That
The icon is still venerated today. figure signifies the Count of Orgaz’s immaterial and immortal soul.

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz 199

 tant
Sead
Revelations

The Supper at Emmaus, Caravaggio

HELEN LANGDON

he Supper at Emmaus was painted in 1601, at the height of

Caravaggio’s success in Rome, just as he was becoming known
for his challenging pictures. He had already enchanted his con-
Beardless and young, temporaries with the naturalism of his still lifes, rooted in the art
of his native Lombardy; he painted fruit and flowers so fresh and
with a fleshy face, Jesus bright that vine leaves seem to wilt before our eyes, and dewdrops to catch
on the petals of flowers. But the naturalism of his religious art was more pro-
is not immediately vocative; he shocked Roman artists, long trained in draughtsmanship and in
study of the antique, by painting directly from the life model onto the canvas.
recognizable, as he He posed his models carefully, perhaps in a below street-level studio, and
observed the fall of light from high windows or single lanterns.
had not been to the In Caravaggio’s works the stories of the Bible are given new and com-
pelling urgency;for he sets them in the contemporary world. The disciples
disciples ... become travellers, with torn clothes and heavy, workmen’s faces with
wrinkled brows; martyrdoms take place in the dark Roman streets, where
young swordsmen brawl and fight. Caravaggio’s pictures have a strong feel
of the studio; models, young boys and old men, and props — a majolica jug, a
wooden chair — recur from painting to painting. The cellar lighting enhances
the three-dimensionality of the figures, so that they seem, in a way entirely
new, to be present before our eyes. It is this heightened realism, so evident in
the painting shown here, that is unique to Caravaggio’s art.
The Supper at Emmaus was a gallery painting. Unusually highly fin-
ished and brightly coloured, it has a virtuoso quality, as though Caravaggio
intended it to be a showcase of these illusionistic skills. He shows the most
dramatic moment in the story of Christ’s appearance to the disciples after the
Resurrection. Cleophas and an unnamed companion, fearful and despairing,
Above are journeying to Emmaus, and as they travel Christ draws close and walks
Titian’s Supper at Emmaus, with Christ with them. They do not recognize him, but he comforts them, and they invite
seated behind the table, the two disciples
one on either side, and the innkeeper apart,
him to stay with them at the inn. As they ate, ‘he took bread, and blessed it,
his hands on his belt, is the forerunner of and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him:
Caravaggio’s painting. But where Titian and he vanished out of their sight’ (Luke 24: 30-31).
tells the story with subtlety and restraint,
The subject was common in art, and Caravaggio’s painting is close to
Caravaggio, through lighting, perspective and
theatrical gesture, creates a moment of intense paintings by Moretto and Titian, with Christ framed by two disciples, the
drama, of the sudden and overwhelming innkeeper, and the elaborate still life, white tablecloth and rug. But he has
recognition of the divine. (Titian, Supper at utterly transformed this muted story into an intense drama of sudden rec-
Emmaus, c. 1535, oil on canvas, 169 cm x
ognition. His aim is to involve the spectator, almost physically, and he uses
244 cm/5 ft 6% in. x 8 ft. Musée du Louvre,
Paris) a variety of devices to break down the barriers between painted space and
the world of the viewer. A chair is cut off by the frame, so that the disciple
1601
Cleophas is thrust towards us, and we seem to share his taut pose. A basket of
Oil and egg on canvas
141 cm x 196 cm/ 4 ft 7% in. x 6 ft 5 in. fruit perches unsteadily on the edge of the table, as though inviting the viewer
National Gallery, London to move forward. The great gesture of the right-hand disciple, traditionally
———O

202 HELEN LANGDON

 identified as Peter, seems to break through the picture plane, and echoes
the swift perspective lines of the table — all of which lead to Christ. The still
lifeexplores the beauty of surface and texture, of cast shadows dark on the
white cloth, of chunky, solid bread, a chicken, plucked and roasted, and light
passing through water to create a bright centre in the shadow of the carafe.
Yet this is not an ordinary meal, but a moment of divine revelation, and
it is the fall of unnaturally bright light that endows Christ with the radiance
of a vision; this symbolic use of light is perhaps Caravaggio’s most important
innovation. Beardless and young, with a fleshy face, Jesus is not immediately
recognizable, as he had not been to the disciples, and this adds to our sense
of wonder-at the resurrected Christ, restored to youth, and freed from suf-
fering. He seems posed between light and dark, framed by the shadow of
the innkeeper, who, uncomprehending, stands still in darkness. Christ leans
forward, but only for a moment — shortly, he will lean back into the shadows,
and ‘vanish out of their sight’. His sacramental gesture is a direct quota-
tion from Michelangelo, from the Christ (also beardless) at the centre of his
Sistine Chapel Last Judgment. In this way Caravaggio invests his scene, so
immediate and fresh, with the weight of a traditional language of gesture and
expression. The sense of the divine is underpinned by the symbolism of bread
and wine, the elements of the Eucharist, while the fruits also suggest the
Eucharist and Resurrection.

204 HELEN LANGDON

 This painting was bought from Caravaggio by Ciriaco Mattei, in whose
family palace Caravaggio lived from 1601 until 1602—03. The Mattei were an
ancient Roman family, and two of the brothers, Asdrubale and Ciriaco, were
In Caravaggio’s avid collectors. They played an active role in the Roman art world, and, well
versed in aesthetic debate, would have appreciated Caravaggio’s provocative
works the stories of the display of his naturalistic gifts. A year later Ciriaco bought the Taking of
Christ (Dublin, National Gallery of Ireland). He paid high prices for these
Bible are given new and works; Baglione, an early biographer and rival of Caravaggio, remarked spite-
fully that ‘Caravaggio pocketed many hundred scudi from this gentleman.’
compelling urgency, The two paintings formed a striking contrast, the Supper at Emmaus opening
up a deep space, the Taking of Christ a night scene with a semi-circle of figures
for he sets them in the massed across the foreground. But by 1616 Ciriaco no longer owned the Supper
at Emmaus; it had passed into the collection of Cardinal Scipione Borghese,
contemporary world. where, in 1657, it was admired for its ‘tremendous naturalism’ by Francesco
Scanelli. Scanelli, an amateur of painting, wrote in wonder of Caravaggio’s
The disciples become ‘astonishing deceptions, which attracted and ravished human sight’.
But Caravaggio’s fame was by now in decline. To Giovanni Pietro
travellers, with torn Bellori, antiquarian and theorist, Caravaggio was a threat, whose rejection
of drawing and of ideal beauty challenged the very bases of Italian art. He
clothes and heavy, praised his colour, but in the Supper at Emmaus disliked the ‘vulgar concep-
tion of the two Apostles and of the Lord, who is shown young and without a
workmen's faces with beard’. He objected to the autumnal fruits, so obviously out of season. In the
18th century, the age of Neoclassicism, Caravaggio’s reputation remained
wrinkled brows ... low, and, astonishingly, the picture was unsold at a Christie’s sale in 1831. It
has been in the National Gallery in London since 1839, and, with the present
immense popularity of Caravaggio, perhaps now the most feted of all old
master painters, it has become one of the most famous paintings in the world.

Right
This painting was executed for the same patron
as the Supper at Emmaus. The figure on the
right, holding up the lantern, is a self-portrait;
Caravaggio seems to summon young painters
to follow him, and to celebrate his naturalism,
rooted in the dramatic use of light and dark.
(Caravaggio, The Taking of Christ, late 1602,
133.5 cm x 169.5 cm/4 ft 4% in. x 5 ft 6% in.
National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin)

oO

The Supper at Emmaus 205

Sleeves Rolled Up
Judith Slaying Holofernes, Artemisia Gentileschi
GERMAINE GREER

Gentileschi’s virtuosity is pitiless. The horror. of the scene takes second place
to a dazzling range ofpaint textures, built up by the gradual application ofglaze
upon glaze over rich pigments.

n 1612 the painter Orazio Gentileschi brought an action in the

Tribunale del Governatore in Rome against his friend and collaborator
Agostino Tassi for raping his daughter Artemisia and stealing a large
painting ofJudith. For three years he had been training Artemisia, born
in 1593, as'a painter, having found her more gifted than any of his three
sons. The situation was confused; Gentileschi may have tolerated Tassi’s rela-
tionship with his daughter because he believed that Tassi intended to marry ~
her, and Tassi may have come by the picture on the same understanding; but
he was already married. Tassi was eventually found guilty but Artemisia
was tortured and humiliated in the process, as Tassi’s cronies did their best
to prove that she was a whore. Tassi, meanwhile, never served his sentence,
because the Grand Duke of Tuscany intervened on his behalf. The Judith
Slaying Holofernes that is now in the Museum of Capodimonte in Naples
may be the picture Gentileschi was referring to; it is generally thought to have
been painted eight or nine years before the most famous version of the com-
position, which is the one in the Uffizi and dated nowadays to as late as 1620.
By then Artemisia was married, and living and working in Florence under the
protection of the Grand Duchess of Tuscany. When Anna Jameson saw this
‘dreadful picture’ in 1822, she declared that it was proof of both ‘her genius
and its atrocious misdirection’.
According to scripture, Judith was a widow living in mourning in
Bethulia when the city was besieged by the Assyrians. With the assistance
of her maidservant Abra, Judith secretly planned the assassination of their
general, Holofernes. To that end she bathed and dressed herself in her finest
clothes and ‘put about her her bracelets, and her chains, and her rings, and her
earrings and all her ornaments’ (Judith 10: 4) and took fine food and drink
with her to Holofernes’ camp. ‘And Holofernes took great delight in her, and
drank more wine than he had drunk at any time in one day since he was born’
(Judith 12: 20). As he lay on his canopied bed in a stupor, Judith took his
sword and with two blows struck off his head. Abra then smuggled the head
c. 1614-20
back to the city where Judith displayed it to the Hebrews.
Oil on canvas
199 cm x 162 cm / 6 ft Gin. x 5 ft 4 in. One pictorial tradition treats Judith simply as a magnificently dressed
Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence beauty, for whom Holofernes’ head is a kind of bizarre fashion accessory.
| 2: EEEeeeeeneee eee)

206 GERMAINE GREER

 The versions of this subject by Titian, Alessandro Allori and Cranach are
well known. A less well-known version by a woman is Fede Galizia’s Judith
of 1596. A year or two later Lavinia Fontana portrayed Judith stepping down
from the canopied bed and handing the severed head of Holofernes to her
maidservant, as Tintoretto did. Artemisia chose to show her Judith in the act
of hacking off Holofernes’ head.
The precedent for this had been set in about 1599 by her father’s long-
time friend and associate Caravaggio. In his Judith Slaying Holofernes, now ,
in the Galeria Nazionale d’Arte Antica in Rome, Caravaggio shows us the
very moment when Holofernes is roused from his stupor by the impact of cold
steel on his jugular. Judith, bathed in celestial light, approaches her victim
with revulsion and trepidation, her arms outstretched as much to ward him
off as to behead him. Caravaggio makes quite clear that Judith is no mur-
derer, but simply the instrument of divine power.
In Gentileschi’s version there is no suggestion of a religious dimen-
sion; we see only two young women using their combined strength to attack
a drunken man. The distance between Judith and her victim has been
telescoped; the angle is swung round so that the play of the arms of the mur-
deress, her maidservant and their victim intersects in a knotted, see-saw
movement, mimicking Judith’s physical struggle to work the heavy sword
through the man’s neck. Everybody is struggling, the victim, the perpetrator
and her accomplice.
Gentileschi’s virtuosity is pitiless. The horror of the scene takes second
place to a dazzling range of paint textures, built up by the gradual application
of glaze upon glaze over rich pigments. Everything is gorgeous, from the warm
flesh tones of the murdering arms to the lush crimson velvet of the coverlet,
to the figured gold brocade of Judith’s spectacular dress, and the intricacy of
the bracelet on the arm she uses to hold down her victim’s head. The fulcrum
of the composition is the burst of blood that sprays from Holofernes’ throat,
showing against the rose-white of Judith’s bosom like so many flying rubies.
It is a mistake to treat this picture as Artemisia’s revenge on Tassi, and
an even bigger mistake to regard it as a precursor of the SCUM Manifesto.

Above
This bravura self-portrait, now in Hampton
Court Palace, shows Artemisia as La Pittura,
the Art of Painting, wearing a gown of
color cangiante and a mask pendant round
her neck. (La Pittura / Self-Portrait as the
Allegory ofPainting. 1638-39, oil on canvas,
96.5 cm x 73.7 cm/3 ft 2 in. x 2 ft Sin. Royal
Collection, London)

Right
In Caravaggio’s early painting, Judith holds
her victim’s head at arm’s length in a mixture
of fear and repugnance. By her stance and
expression, the artist suggests that she is
not implicated in the deed but is the tool of
God’s vengeance. (Caravaggio, Judith Slaying
Holofernes, 1599, oil on canvas, 145 cm x 195
cm/4ft9 in. x 5 ft7 in. Galeria Nazionale
d’Arte Antica, Rome)

208 GERMAINE GREER

 In Gentileschi’s
version there is no

suggestion of a religious

dimension; we see only

two young women

using their combined

strength to attack a

drunken man.
As a professional artist living under grand-ducal patronage, Artemisia had
to paint the subjects demanded by her patrons. The earlier version of the
composition is journeyman work compared to the Uffizi painting that shows,
as nothing else could have, how far Artemisia had come in the intervening
years. She was to return to the Judith theme but never again to the murder
of Holofernes. Instead she chose to show Judith and Abra collaborating in a
dangerous enterprise. Women were her preferred subjects, perhaps because
she was often limited to female models, including her daughters and members
Above of her household, but she painted them on a scale that was verily heroic. Her
In this version of the composition, usually treatment is never sentimental or sentimentalized. Her female figures are the
dated before 1612, Judith’s grasp is weaker,
first in Western iconography to have heft and weight and bones.
and her face shows none of the strain visible
in the Uffizi version. Judith, who bears a
strong resemblance to Artemisia herself, also
seems rather younger. (Judith Beheading
Holofernes, c. 1612, oil on canvas, 159 cm
x 125cm/5 ft 2% in. x 4 ft 1%. Museo
Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples)

Judith Slaying Holofernes 209

Greater Things in Mind
Portrait of Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to’Kings, Bichitr
DEBORAH SWALLOW

he Mughal emperor Akbar (r. 1556-1605), seeking a male

heir, made a pilgrimage to the shrine of Shaikh Salim Chishti,
at Sikri near Agra. The concern to secure his lineage was well
founded. His grandfather Babur, of Turko-Mongol ancestry
and a descendant of both Timurlang and Chinggiz Khan, had
died soon after establishing a foothold in north India. His father Humayun
lost Delhi, spent four years wandering Rajasthan, sheltered for a short time
as guest of the Persian ruler Shah Tahmasp, regained Kabul and later Delhi,
For those interested and then died in an accidental fall some six months later. Akbar, a man of
extraordinary ability, both expanded and consolidated Mughal rule in India.
in the ways in which This painting of his son, born auspiciously in Sikri and named Salim after the
saint, depicts Salim towards the end of his life, when he was better known as
India and Europe viewed the emperor Jahangir — the ‘world seizer’ (r. 1605-27).
One of a string of masterpieces produced by the Mughal court atelier,
each other in this Portrait of Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to Kings is a magnificent and
rich work, both visually and in terms of its meaning — a superb demonstra-
period, the painting tion of the innovatory practices inspired by the liberal artistic patronage of
the great sequence of Mughal emperors who so significantly transformed the
is particularly visual horizons of India in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. This image
too allows us to argue the case for greater attention to the artistic record for
fascinating ... the better understanding of social custom and political ideology.
Mughal painting and the other Mughal arts are intimately associated
with imperial patronage of an exceptional quality. Over his fifty-year rule,
Akbar fundamentally changed the aims and aesthetics of artistic production
in India. Vigorous in every activity he engaged in, froma very early age Akbar
assembled a large atelier of native Indian artists under the supervision of two
great Safavid masters — Mir Sayyid ’Ali and Abd us-Samad, whom his father
Humayun had brought from exile in Persia. Under Akbar’s close supervision,
the studio rapidly evolved a distinctive style of epic, literary and historical
Opposite manuscript illustration, which combined the technical refinement of Persian
Jahangir offers a book to Shaikh Husain, art with the colour intensity of indigenous Indian, mostly religious, painting.
ignoring the rulers of the world who are
It also added a growing naturalism and feeling for nature, introduced through
gathered on the left. Above, cupids turn away
from the refulgent sun, overwhelmed by the prints and pictures brought to court by merchants, envoys and missionaries.
powerful rays or distressed by the knowledge Jahangir, the eldest and favourite son, the ‘heir apparent’ and ultimately
that the emperor is not immortal. the inheritor of a very substantial and relatively stable empire, was more con-
c. 1615-18 noisseur than soldier. Before acceding to the throne, while rebelliously setting
Opaque watercolour, gold and ink on paper up a rival court in Allahabad, he developed his own atelier, employing leading
25.3 cm x 18 cm/ 10 in. x 7 in. (46.9 cm x artists such as Aqa Riza, trained in the Persian style at the Safavid court and
30.7 cm /1 ft 6% in. x 1 ft with border)
father of the equally renowned painter Abu’l Hasan. Jahangir’s commis-
From the St Petersburg Album,
Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, sions moved away from the illustration of manuscripts to a greater focus on
Washington, DC individual images. He was deeply curious about the natural world and the
$e

210 DEBORAH SWALLOW

 artistic techniques that could best render it in painting. Portraiture, studies
of animals or flowers and genre scenes, now often mounted in decorative
borders, were brought together in beautiful albums. Artists were encouraged
to develop further their individual talents and distinctive styles.
We know more about the artists of the Mughal court through the
histories, biographies and autobiographies of the emperors than about any
earlier Indian artists, even though the fragmentary references still leave us
with tantalizing questions. It is yet more difficult to determine the emperors’
artistic intentions from written sources. However, the analysis of literary
sources and architecture along with painting through Jahangir’s reign does
provide a fascinating picture of increasingly formalized court etiquette and
imperial self-congratulation. The depiction of formal court durbars, which
provide group portraits of key courtiers and document significant events,
becomes more frequent, and in his later life Jahangir commissioned a series
of imperial portraits that are rich with allegorical reference drawn primarily
from the European tradition. Hashim was probably the first artist to establish
the visual conventions for the most important subject of Mughal imperial
portraiture — the emperors themselves. Subsequently, Abu’l Hasan, who col-
laborated with Hashim in early developments of this iconography and then
became one of its greatest exponents, undoubtedly influenced Bichitr, the
author of this painting.
Bichitr was a brilliant young follower of Abu’l Hasan, and later also
became one of the principal court artists of emperor Shah Jahan (r. 1628-58).
Like Abu’l Hasan, he was prolific, highly skilled and able to paint the full
range of subjects required by his patron — from sensitive individual portraits
and animals to complex historical subjects and inventive ornament.
This particular painting depicts the emperor, as always in profile, his
head framed with a golden sun, itself framed in a crescent moon, enthroned
on an hourglass that in turn sits on a richly decorated carpet. Angels have
inscribed the hourglass with the wish that the emperor might live a thousand
years, but it is clear that the sands of time are running out. Cupids turn their
faces away from the refulgent sun — one with broken arrow, the other hiding
his face in his hands — overwhelmed by the powerful rays or saddened by the
implied age of the ruler. The main inscription — ‘Though outwardly shahs
stand before him, he fixes his gaze on darvishes’ — focuses our attention on
the figures below the emperor. The ‘darvish’ towards whom Jahangir gazes
with sad expression, and who leans towards him to take a book, is Shaikh
Husain of the Chishti shrine, a spiritual descendant of Shaikh Salim to whom
Jahangir ‘owed’ his birth — the book perhaps the book of his life. Below the
Shaikh, another figure in profile, a generalized image of the Ottoman ruler
(along with Persia one of the Mughals’ great imperial competitors), holds his
hands deferentially towards Jahangir. Below him, looking out at the viewer, is
the recognizable face of King James I of England. The bottom figure, holding
Above
a small painting, whose identity is debated, could be either a central Indian
Squirrels in a Plane Tree (with detail),
probably by Abu’! Hasan, known as Nadir ruler or the artist himself. The overall message, however, is clear. Jahangir
al-Zaman (‘Wonder of the Age’), perhaps offers his life to the saint, to the faith, rather than to the rulers of the world
with the help of Ustad Mansur, known as — or, if this is the artist, to the arts which he has so enjoyed and encouraged
Nadir al-Asr (‘Miracle of the Age’), c. 1610.
throughout his reign.
(36.5 cm x 22.5 cm/ 14% in. x 8% in. From
Johnson album 1, no 15, India Office Library For those interested in the ways in which India and Europe viewed
and Records, British Library, London) each other in this period the painting is particularly fascinating, because its
LL

212 DEBORAH SWALLOW

 This ... painting
depicts the emperor, ...
his head framed with a
golden sun, ... enthroned

on an hourglass ...

hieratic, allegorical structure and adoption of European devices reflect so

tellingly how India saw Europe at the time. The Portuguese had been operat-
ing in India since the end of the 15th century and it was Jesuit priests from
Goa who first gave the illustrated Antwerp Polyglot Bible to Akbar in the
1570s. By the early 17th century, the English had joined the Portuguese and
the Dutch, the French and the Danish in the competition to establish direct
trade relations with India. Sir Thomas Roe, the envoy of King James I of
England, spent some two years (1616-18) at Jahangir’s court and left a rich
account, and we know that Jahangir was more fascinated by English mini-
atures than by any of the other crude gifts uncouth northerners had brought
him. But of that visit, of King James himself, or of the remote island off the
northern coast of the European mainland, there is no mention in Jahangir’s
Above
A detail from the exquisite floral border of the own autobiography!
painting, including narcissus, iris and rose.

oo

Portrait of Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to Kings 213

A Plea for Peace

Minerva Protects Pax from War (‘Peace and War’), Peter Paul Rubens
DAVID JAFFE

ubens’s Minerva Protects Pax from War- commonly known

as Peace and War—has long been recognized as one of the great-
est displays of the Baroque artist’s skill. On 1 October 1802 an
agent for the art dealer William Buchanan excitedly wrote of the
painting:

It contains almost everything in which Rubens excelled — women,

children, a man in armour, a satyr, a tiger, fruit and furies; making
altogether a composition wonderfully rich and pleasing. It is
known in Genoa by the name of Rubens’s family, and has always
been a well known and celebrated picture, esteemed the best or
second best by him in his city. It is in the collection of George
Doria, a branch of the celebrated family of that name.

The following year the painting was bought by the (future) Duke of
The painting is a Sutherland and was later given to the newly formed National Gallery in 1827.
In the work the figure representing Peace is shown seated and express-
plea for the return ofthe ing milk towards a baby, while a band of children led by a boy holding a torch
approach in a grouping suggestive of nuptials. A kneeling satyr assisted by a
mythical Golden Age of cupid with his back towards us offers the assembled group a horn overflowing
with fruits, and the little girl looking out has taken a grape. Behind this group
early man, when wild a helmeted Minerva, the Roman Goddess of Wisdom, is pushing away Mars,
the God of War. The canvas was enlarged by Rubens after he had painted this
beasts were tame and central group. The additions included more full-length figures and were liter-
ally sewn around the edges of the original canvas, expanding the image of a
children thrived. nurtured family benefiting from the suppression of war. On the right, beyond
Mars, is a fury, his expelled companion; a further harpy flies above in the sky.
On the left-hand side, two women enter carrying gold and playing a tambou-
Above
rine. The addition of a strip above the figures of Mars and Minerva inserts a
The woman playing tambourine and castanets
is suggestive of an ancient Bacchic party. flying putto holding a wreath of Peace; below these figures Rubens has added
a leopard playfully reaching up to catch grapes.
Right
We know that the children in the painting are those of Balthazar
The central scene was Rubens’s original
design for the painting, except for the docile Gerbier: the infant is James, the child eating grapes is Susanne, the bride is
leopard (a royal beast), which was added Elizabeth and the torch-bearer acting as Hymen, the God of Marriage, is
to enlarge the canvas and to reinforce the the eldest son, George. The figure representing Peace may even be Gerbier’s
message of the Carolingian Golden Age.
The flashy brushwork consciously imitates
wife, Deborah Kip. Gerbier was a courtier employed first by the Duke of
the great Titians in the king’s collection. Buckingham and later by Charles I, and Rubens (who served as a diplomat
as well as an artist) and Gerbier worked together for many years to achieve
1629-30
a peace between England and Spain. Rubens probably included Gerbier’s
Oil on canvas
203.5 cm x 298 cm/6 ft 6 in. x 9 ft F in. family in the painting because of this close connection; we know that Rubens
National Gallery, London stayed with Gerbier during his visit to England from May 1629 to March 1630
oT

214 DAVID JAFFE

 ... the figure representing Peace is shown seated and expressing milk towards
a baby .... Behind this group a helmeted Minerva, the Roman Goddess of
Wisdom, is pushing away Mars, the God of War.

and so could have got the young Gerbier children to model for him. Rubens
painted Peace and War during this London visit and presented it to Charles I.
Gerbier’s involvement in the truce between England and Spain was a
consequence of his serving the Duke of Buckingham, first as his curator and
later as his Master of Horse; Gerbier later served as English representative to
the Court of Brussels and Charles I’s Master of Ceremonies. As Buckingham’s
art agent, Gerbier was a useful conduit for furthering English foreign policy
without arousing suspicion. In 1625 Rubens and Gerbier met in Paris. Gerbier
was ostensibly engaged in purchasing Rubens’s antiquities collection and some
paintings by Rubens for the duke, as well as commissioning a portrait and a
ceiling showing the Apotheosis of Buckingham. While in Paris, Gerbier was
Above
also discreetly making peace overtures. When these diplomatic efforts failed
Minerva banishes War and his stormy
companions, and starts a festive party, and England attacked the Spanish port of Cadiz, Rubens was devastated as he
supplied by a mythical horn of plenty. had dedicated much time and effort to pursuing peace through diplomacy.
OO

216 DAVID JAFFE

 This painting, Peace and War, along with the Glorious Reign of James I
(a ceiling decoration celebrating the achievements of James I, which Rubens
later sent to the king for his Banqueting Hall in the Palace of Whitehall), were
emphatic statements of the importance of peace for the kingdom. Rubens
believed that only under a peaceful reign could the arts and family flourish.
The painting is a plea for the return of the mythical Golden Age ofearly man,
when wild beasts were tame and children thrived. While the mythological
imagery is drawn from the Roman writer Virgil, the inclusion of the family of
one of Charles I’s courtiers made the message much more direct and personal.
Charles I was apparently godfather to Charles Gerbier, who was christened
in March 1630, just after the exchange of ambassadors between Spain and
England, so the painting may be viewed as a reminder of the obligations for
peace inherent in that diplomatic exchange. Rubens’s scheme for the Glorious
Reign of James I also stood as a reminder that Charles’s father, James I, had
already undertaken this noble path to Peace through the Union of the Crowns
of Scotland and England.
Rubens knew from personal experience the horrors of war. 1648 marked
the end of the Thirty Years War and also, for Rubens’s native city of Antwerp,
the end of eighty years of war between the United Provinces and the Spanish
Netherlands (broken only by a twelve-year truce from 1609 to 1621). In 1638
he was to paint the Horrors of War (Pitti Palace, Florence) for the Grand
Duke of Tuscany — clearly the ravages of war and the imperative of peace were
recurring themes in Rubens’s paintings.
Rubens couched the painting in the format and style of an artist that
both he and the king admired: Titian. It is no coincidence that Peace the nur-
turer looks like a close relation of Rubens’s copy of Titian’s Girl in a Fur Wrap
(Queensland Art Gallery, Brisbane), even down to the glistening earring.
Charles owned this work by Titian as well as some twenty-two others. The
core design of Peace and War in the central group around the figure of Peace
also recalls the format of many half-length Titians. Furthermore, a black
chalk study of the Gerbier children is drawn on the back of a quick sketch
after the great Titian painting Ecce Homo, which Gerbier had bought for the
Duke of Buckingham. One wonders whether Rubens conceived the idea for
the painting after seeing that work in Buckingham’s collection with Gerbier;
perhaps it was, like the peace itself, a further collaboration between the two
painter-diplomats.
Top By 1640 Rubens’s Peace and War was hanging beside the artist’s Daniel
The ‘Apotheosis of James I’ and a panel
in the Lions’ Den (National Gallery, Washington) in the Bear Gallery at the
showing putti cavorting with tame leopards,
rams and other creatures symbolize the wise Palace of Westminster. Rubens may have wished his ‘emblem of the conse-
and peaceful reign of James I. They are part of quences of Peace and War’ to serve as a pictorial appeal in a Privy Council
the ceiling Rubens had painted (by 1634) for room but its function may have been far more mundane — as a reminder that
James’s son Charles, to decorate Inigo Jones’s
leopards and lions were the monopoly of the crown and their royal keeper.
new Banqueting Hall in Whitehall Palace.
Peace and War may have been the sampler The painting is a rare plea for peace by an artist who was committed to that
which secured him this prize commission. cause and inventive enough cleverly to visualize this message. His royal recip-
ient was less receptive.
Above
Rubens’s Horrors of War, painted in 1638 for
the Grand Duke of Tuscany, is a pessimistic
sequel to Peace and War, showing the dire
consequences for motherhood and the arts
if Mars is allowed to vent his fury. (Horrors
of War, oil on canvas, Palazzo Pitti, Florence)

ae

Minerva Protects Pax from War (‘Peace and War’) 217

Civic Pride

The Night Watch, Rembrandt van Rijn

CHRISTOPHER DELL

he history of the Low Countries in the late 16th and early 17th
centuries is in large part one of sporadic warfare, which history
groups together (for convenience) as the Eighty Years’ War. This
stop-start conflict pitted the Spanish (Catholic) Habsburgs
against the (largely Protestant) Dutch Republic, which had grown
out of a union of rebel city-states; each of the cities in the union had its own
civic militia, dedicated to both defending and keeping order in the city.
When we speak of militias we might imagine highly trained armies, but
this was far from the case. The Dutch militias had first been formed in the
early 16th century, but from their inception had more closely resembled con-
fraternities than fighting forces. This is underlined by the tradition of militia
portraits, which began in 1529 with a work by Dirck Jacobsz. Over the course
of the 16th century such portraits became increasingly popular, and were
often prominently hung instown halls and other civic spaces. Most of these
works did not show full-length figures, however. That particular tradition
originated in 1588 with Cornelis Ketel’s The Company of Captain Rosecrans,
in which the men stand in a more or less straight line, facing the viewer.
So, when Rembrandt was commissioned to address this subject in about
Along with 1640, not long before the end of the Eighty Years’ War, he was presented with
a well-defined tradition. However, the resulting work, which he completed in
Caravaggio, Rembrandt 1642 — The Company of Frans Banning Cocq and Willem van Ruytenburch,
more commonly known as The Night Watch — was unlike any previous
was the greatest militia scene. Although The Night Watch was originally hung alongside
works by four other painters, including Jacob Backer and Nicolaes Eliasz.,
proponent of in the Kloveniersdoelen (Arquebusiers’ Hall) in Amsterdam, today the other
works all languish in the vaults of the Rijksmuseum, while Rembrandt’s
chiaroscuro. takes pride of place in the collection. What, besides the simple fact of
Rembrandt’s superiority as an artist, can account for this outcome? What
Above
makes Rembrandt’s militia portrait so great, so memorable, so universally
This self-portrait was begun at about
the same time as The Night Watch, when celebrated and admired?
Rembrandt was just 34. The answer is twofold. First, the distinctiveness of his conception arises
from what Rembrandt does (and does not do) with his figures. The militia-
Opposite
The central figures are the captain and his men are not seated in a row, facing out at us. Nor are they on parade. Rather,
lieutenant. The captain’s extended arm is a the painting is characterized by a sense of informality as if the men are just
masterpiece of foreshortening, though the assembling for duty. They are ranged casually in the space, preparing their
lieutenant’s hooked partisan is less successful
weapons, talking. Each of them wears a different hat or helmet and there is
and was repainted several times before
Rembrandt was satisfied. little uniformity in their dress (which conveniently reveals their social status).
At the back is an untidy criss-cross of pikes, far removed from the parallel
1642
lines seen in Velazquez’s comparable work The Surrender of Breda (or The
Oil on canvas
363 cm x 437 cm/ 11 ft 11 in. x 14 ft 4 in. Lances, 1635), which tackles an episode from the Eighty Years’ War seen
Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam from a Spanish perspective. Few of the subjects look directly at the viewer.
oO

218 CHRISTOPHER DELL

Above
Militia portraits were not cheap to
commission, and each person depicted made
a financial contribution. Those who appear
in the work are recorded for posterity in the
shield at the top, which was added in 1715.
However, in the same year three unfortunate
members were cut out when the canvas was
trimmed on the left-hand side. The drummer
was not a member of the militia, but was
allowed to pose for free.

Right
A young girl adds a note of urgency in her
luminescent gold dress. The helmet just to
her right bears the oakleaf symbol of the
arquebusiers.

OO

220 CHRISTOPHER DELL

 The relaxed disposition of the figures gives the scene a remarkable natu-
ralism, even to the point of obscuring some of them (we know that a number
of the sitters were disgruntled at being eclipsed). Yet the informality is not
random and Rembrandt has carefully contrived to give due prominence to
the most important people — not only by depicting them in the foreground
but also by training a strong light on them. They are Frans Banning Cocq, the
captain, and Willem van Ruytenburch, the lieutenant. Cocq looks as though
he is explaining some new strategy to his (significantly shorter) deputy. This
is a leader of men — even if the men, for the moment, aren’t following. The
result is something more akin to a history painting than portraiture, since we
have a real sense that the band is on the verge of action.
The second way in which The Night Watch differs from previous militia
portraits is in Rembrandt’s handling of the paint and his masterly use of tone
and colour. Along with Caravaggio, Rembrandt was the greatest proponent
of chiaroscuro. Although the canvas appears to be black, most of it is made up
of dark browns and greys. A true black is saved for the clothes of the captain,
which as a result have the completely flat, saturated colour and rich texture
of velvet. The presence of the bright light streaming from the left should
also alert us to the fact that the scene does not take place at night. Indeed,
the name The Night Watch was given not by Rembrandt but by Sir Joshua
Reynolds (so the story goes), largely on account of the painting’s darkness.
Much of the light bounces off the figure of Cocq’s lieutenant, who is dressed
in pale colours. The shimmering gold fabric — which Rembrandt magics into
life with his usual economy — shows up the shadow of Cocq’s hand, depicted
in a virtuoso display of foreshortening.
The other pool of light falls on the form of a young girl who dashes in
The militiamen ... from the left. While her inclusion may surprise us, she carries symbols relat-
ing to the militia. On her belt she wears the claws of a chicken, a play on
are ranged casually in ‘Clauweniers’, meaning ‘arquebusiers’, or the men who carry the arquebus
gun. She also holds the goblet of the militia. (In front of her, a man wears a
the space, preparing their helmet decorated with an oakleaf, the traditional symbol of the arquebusiers.)
The contrast of light and dark is further accentuated by Rembrandt’s usual
weapons, talking ... we variation between minutely studied phrases and broad patches that are filled
in with rough brushstrokes. Compare, for example, the detail of the drum on
have a real sense that the right and the roughly sketched dog just to the left of it. Rembrandt is mim-
icking in paint the effects of poor light on sight.
[they] are on the verge The result of these two innovations — a new naturalism of composition
and an astonishingly accomplished control of light and paint — is to imbue
of action. the scene with a profound gravity and dignity — indeed, the same gravity and
dignity that Rembrandt gave to biblical and Classical scenes. The limited
palette unifies everything — it makes everyday life more aesthetic. This is
where Rembrandt excels. He takes some rather well-fed part-time soldiers
Above and gives them a sense of purpose and nobility in a work that is both a narra-
This masterpiece by Velazquez, The tive of its period and a timeless study in the art of portraiture.
Surrender of Breda (or The Lances, 1635),
commemorates one of the occasional truces in
the Eighty Years’ War, at Breda. The parallel,
orderly lances of the Spanish on the right are
contrasted with the disorder of the Dutch
troops on the left. (Diego Velazquez, 1635, oil
on canvas, 307 cm X 370 cm/ 10 ft 1 in. x 12
ft 1% in. Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid)

oo _

The Night Watch 221

Spirit Made Visible
The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa, Gianlorenzo Bernini
MARINA WARNER

aint Teresa of Avila (1515-82), one of the few female Doctors

of the Church, was a redoubtable reformer, highly active in public
life in spite of her enclosed state as a Carmelite. She combined these
... one of the most organizational abilities with mystical experiences to an unusual
degree even among saints. In her remarkable autobiography, she
passionate and innocent gives many memorable accounts of her visionary experiences — for example,
how she would find herself levitating while at prayer and plead with God to
monuments ever created spare her such embarrassing moments. But above all, no other saint’s account
of an encounter with an angel can surpass hers. The celebrated passage opens,
to convey a state ofbliss. ‘Beside me...appeared an angel in bodily form, such as am not in the habit of
seeing except very rarely...’. She goes on to guess that he must have been one
of ‘the cherubim who seem to be all of fire’ and then expands to evoke the full
experience that Bernini depicts:
~
In his hands I saw a great golden spear, and at the iron tip there
appeared to be a point of fire. This he plunged into my heart
several times so that it penetrated to my entrails. When he pulled
it out, I felt that he took them with it, and left me utterly consumed
by the great love of God. The pain was so severe that it made me
utter several moans. The sweetness caused by this intense pain is
so extreme that one cannot possibly wish it to cease... This is not
a physical, but a spiritual pain, though the body has some share in
it— even a considerable share. (Life, chapter 29)

Readers have always smiled to themselves reading this and nodded inwardly,
sometimes even mockingly, as they recognize something here that St Teresa
herself appears too guileless to understand. But if she was innocent — igno-
rant — of what she was saying, does that not make her more of a mystic and a
saint? Perhaps that degree of difference from ordinary human circumstances
defines the very nature of holiness?
If today, in the post-Freudian era, we have forfeited all innocence and
have become too knowing to lose ourselves with Saint Teresa and her angel,
Above this was not the case for Gianlorenzo Bernini, himself a profound believer.
Even Teresa’s toes seem to curl up with Consequently through his art it is possible to experience her rapture again, to
excitement and anticipation. The intuit the feelings she felt and empathize — almost enviously — with the state
rough-hewn rocks behind her accentuate
she knew.
the sculpted smoothness of her skin.
The angelic encounter is placed centre stage and above eye-level in the
1647-52 Cornaro Chapel of Santa Maria della Vittoria, a Carmelite church in Rome.
Marble
Bernini had been commissioned to decorate the chapel by the Patriarch of
H 150 cm/ 4 ft 11 in.
Cornaro Chapel, Santa Maria della Vittoria, Venice, Cardinal Federigo Cornaro, who had decided he would be buried
Rome there. The shallowness of the side chapel did not give the artist much room
OO

222 MARINA WARNER

 [Bernini] treated the mystical heights of Saint Teresa’s experience as a
theatrical scene: raised up above the altar, lit from above in a shower of golden
rays, the angel inflicts his blissful wound on the woman ...

for manoeuvre, a difficulty he overcame through brilliant illusory use of

the central alcove and raked. perspective on the side walls. Bernini was not
usually given to praising his own work, but in this case he thought he had
indeed made something beautiful.
Bernini’s religious art was informed by theJesuits’ Counter-Reformation
programme for a vigorous political aesthetic. He treated the mystical heights
of Saint Teresa’s experience as a theatrical scene: raised up above the altar, lit
from above in a shower of golden rays, the angel inflicts his blissful wound
on the woman, whose head is flung back, her lips parted in pain/pleasure.
A glorious shower of rays bursts above the two figures to add to the gleam and
play of light from concealed windows; all around the sculpture, the marble
pilasters, columns and revetments on the walls and plinth of the chapel
display biomorphic whorls and striations, stirring connections to flesh,
Visual rhymes on metaphers that communicate mystical rapture infuse every
element: light, air and the rushing wind that accompany the arrival of spirits;
the rhythm of the angel’s strokes that find form in the tossing folds of Teresa’s
habit; the fluttering, crisper rills of the angel’s tunic, his sash, his curls and
his pinions — each of the feathers individually defined, quivering with vital-
ity. The clouds scud beneath them; it is almost impossible not to imagine that
they are both in motion.
Yet the spectacle is not of this world at all, but utterly fantastic, wrought
out of heightened imagination. Bernini gives the visitor to the church the taste
and feel of an exclusive, privileged vision: nobody else in the scene can see
the angel and the saint. The prelates and potentates gathered on the sides of
the altarpiece, like cardinals at a conclave, include the patron’s father, Doge
Giovanni Cornaro, but they are not privy to the vision as we are — they are
talking among themselves and some are even turned away from the scene.
The great Bernini scholar Irving Lavin aptly entitled his collected essays
on the artist Visible Spirit, and it is Bernini’s significant achievement that
through a virtuoso architectural mise-en-scéne, his consummately sensitive
carving and an impassioned involvement with the subject, he renders the
vision entirely persuasive. The sweetly smiling angelic visitor, neither boy nor
girl, adult nor child, embodies a synthesis of celestial axioms — the ‘corpus
sed non caro’ (body but not flesh) as Augustine defined angelic beings. The
oceanic sensation of rapture also takes material form in the tumble of Teresa’s
clothes, her responses conveyed by the flux and vortices of her habit, a convent
equivalent of a crinoline, under which her legs are bare — her naked left foot
dangles off the edge of her couch of clouds, suggesting that the experience she
Above
is having reaches to the tips of her toes.
Teresa’s head is thrown back in ecstasy, while
the hand of the angel delicately grasps the The drapery’s movements also stir associations with touch: the fold, as
edge of her garment. Gilles Deleuze has described in his book of that title, Le Pli (1988), implies
———————

224 MARINA WARNER

 doubling, with one element moving against another in ripples. The ‘pleats of
matter’, juxtaposed and touching, speak like lips. There are many such lips and
openings, dips and hollows in Teresa’s clothes, like a multiplication of the entry
points or even wounds that the angel’s iron-tipped spear is inflicting on her.
Seeing a work of art in its original setting gives a very special and dif-
ferent pleasure, but it is becoming less and less frequent, as threats of damage
or theft bring beautiful things under firmer lock and key: the Madonna
del Parto, for example, no longer lives in the inconspicuous little shrine at
Montaperti where she was painted by Piero della Francesca. But Bernini’s
great sculpture still occupies the side chapel where he installed it, in an ordi-
nary Roman church, one of countless others like it. Because Bernini was out
of favour with the Popeat the time (Innocent X), Cardinal Cornaro was able
to command the artist’s services, and the commission inspired Bernini to
Above left
make one of the most passionate and innocent monuments ever created to
The Cornaro Chapel in Santa Maria della
Vittoria. Bernini revelled in the challenge convey a state of bliss.
presented by the shallow space, creating
a dramatic frame for his sculpture with
an imposing broken pediment supported
by dark marble columns.

Above right
One of Bernini’s early sketches for the figure
of Teresa, executed in soft red chalk. Already
we can see where Bernini intended the areas of
shadow to fall, to add drama to his carving.

ee |

The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa 225

Mortal Remains
o———

The Phocion Paintings, Nicolas Poussin

PIERRE ROSENBERG

t is impossible to dissociate these two great landscapes by Poussin,

one of which depicts the funeral of the Greek general Phocion and the
other of which portrays his widow gathering the ashes after his crema-
One by one, each tion. Poussin was 54 years old when he painted these two images, by
which time he was permanently based in Rome and his reputation was
detail is crafted and formidable. It appears that no previous painter had tackled these subjects,
which were inspired by a text from Plutarch’s Parallel Lives (late 1st century
takes on its own Ap). Phocion, victorious Athenian general of the 4th century BC, was known
for the austerity of his politics and became unpopular among his fellow
meaning. Nothing ts citizens. Accused of serious crimes, he was condemned to death and forced
to drink hemlock. His enemies ordered that his body should be banished
left to chance. and carried out of the Attic region: this is the subject of the Cardiff painting.
Taken to Megara, the body of Phocion was burned and the ashes gathered by
his widow and a female servant (as shown in the Walker Art Gallery paint-
ing). Phocion’s wife took his ashes to Athens in the hope that the Athenians
would admit their mistake and restore the general’s reputation, which they
soon did, recognizing ‘that they had put to death him who had upheld justice
and honesty in Athens’.
Is it essential to know the subjects in order to admire these paintings?
Is it necessary to have read Plutarch? Ought we to question Poussin’s inter-
pretation of the Greek text? What were the artist’s intentions? What was he
trying to say, and how was he able to say it using only his brushes? It must be
admitted that Poussin set the bar high for himself.
In the foreground of the first work, two men are carrying a stretcher.
A white shroud covers the body of Phocion. The two stretcher-bearers are
leaving Athens and have their backs to the city. In the middle ground, a shep-
herd is watching his sheep. Further away we see an ox cart. A horseman and
Above some passers-by go about their daily business, indifferent to the events in the
The procession that was held in Athens on
foreground. On the right, a tall tree grows up beside stone blocks with sharp
19 March — the day of Phocion’s death by
drinking hemlock (detail from Landscape edges. To the left are an embankment, more trees and two lakes, one of which
with the Funeral of Phocion). reflects the tree trunks. In the distance are mountains, under a huge milky
blue sky, a morning sky. Some austere buildings, a tomb, a temple and a tower
1648
Oil on canvas inspired by the architecture of Palladio punctuate the scene. In the distance,
in front of the portico of a basilica, a long procession can be seen: Phocion
Landscape with the Funeral of Phocion was put to death on 19 March, a day on which Athenians held a procession in
116.8 cm x 178.1 cm/3 ft 10 in. x 5 ft 10 in.
National Museum of Wales, Cardiff (on loan
honour of Zeus.
from the Earl of Plymouth, Oakley Park, The second picture shows the town of Megara. As in the first picture,
Shropshire) the road and the passers-by, set at varying distances — on the road of life
itself — occupy the central section of the composition. In the background
Landscape with the Ashes of Phocion
116 cm x 178.5 cm / 3 ft 9% in. x 5 ft 10% in. we see a woman playing the flute, a group of archers with their target, and
Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool some bathers, one of whom has taken off his shirt and is preparing to dive.
oO

226 PIERRE ROSENBERG

 ‘

ee Se IEEG
rs
ws
nt NaeJK cn
ye Reed
See: ernie as

wt
 ... the eternal and idealized qualities ofthe
natural world are seen in opposition to the lowly
condition of man and the insignificance ofhis
fleeting existence.

Nature — the trees dotted around the landscape, the large rocks in the centre
under a cloudy sky of bright blue — fills most of the canvas. Alone in the fore-
ground, standing out against the shadow of the tall trees, the two women are
defying the proclamation and gathering the ashes of the hero, thus ensuring
his passage to the afterlife. The servant has turned around for fear of being
watched; Phocion’s widow is bent humbly over the ashes that she is gathering
with her hands.
The two pictures cleverly combine the countryside and the city. Was
Poussin simply content to paint landscapes, as many other painters in Rome
at the time — Claude Lorrain, Gaspard Dughet, Salvator Rosa, Pietro da
Cortona — were? Or was he perhaps trying to depict something more specific,
an idealized and sublime version of nature, luxuriant and constantly renewed,
a calm and timeless nature, lush with vegetation, amid which the funeral rites
of the hero unfold to general indifference? In these two works the eternal and
idealized qualities of the natural world are seen in opposition to the lowly
condition of man and the insignificance of his fleeting existence.
One by one, each detail is crafted and takes on its own meaning.
Nothing is left to chance. There is human ingratitude, the drama of adversity
and injustice; there is compassion, faithfulness and piety; there is a meditation
on human destiny and a moral message; and there is the great and immutable
spectacle of the natural world, which dwarfs all human actions. Above all,
there is the ambition of the artist, who transforms what he sees into a medita-
tion on the fragile existence of humanity and our place in nature. Man passes
on, nature abides.
When Bernini (1598-1680) came to Paris in 1665 on the express request
of Louis XIV, he wished to visit collectors who owned works by Poussin.
The greatest architect and sculptor of his century was then at the peak of his
powers, and had long been an admirer of the painter’s oeuvre. Bernini visited
the home of Sérizier, a Lyon silk-maker, who owned both Phocion paintings.
Opposite
He gazed at the pictures for a long time, and then, tapping his own forehead,
Poussin did not consider himself a portraitist.
In 1650, however, he acquiesced to the pleas exclaimed: ‘Signor Poussin is a painter who works from here.’ Poussin’s
of his chief patron (Paul Fréart de Chantelou) work sprang from the thoughts in his head, of course, but even more so from
and executed this superb self-portrait for him emotion and the immense power of painting.
(Musée du Louvre, Paris).

Above
The widow of Phocion, the unjustly accused
Athenian general, surreptitiously gathers the
ashes of her husband, while a servant keeps
watch beside her (detail from Landscape with
the Ashes of Phocion).

eee

The Phocion Paintings 229

Growing Up in Public
Las Meninas, Diego Velazquez
AVIGDOR ARIKHA

elazquez painted Las Meninas (‘the maids of honour’) or

The Family of Philip IV in 1656, towards the end of his life.
Unprecedented in the artist’s oeuvre, it is undoubtedly his most
haunting masterpiece, hitting our senses like nothing else — and
we do not quite grasp why. Though painted as a royal portrait,
it is actually a huge genre scene: one wonders what Vermeer — the supreme
master of genre painting —would have thought of it, had he seen it.
Arranged like a stage with its actors, the picture’s principal role is played
by the young infanta (princess). The setting is the cuarto bajo del Principe,
the apartment once occupied by the beloved and much missed crown prince
Don Baltasar Carlos (who had died in 1646). On the walls we see copies
by Juan Bautista Martinez del Mazo (Velazquez’s son-in-law) of various
works by Rubens, including, on the rear wall, Pallas and Arachne and The
Judgment of Midas. The sitters are (from left to right): Diego Velazquez
behind his canvas, painting the scene; the menina (lady-in-waiting) Maria-
Velazquez’s brush- Augustina Sarmiento, handing a goblet of water to the future empress; the
five-year-old Infanta Margarita; the menina Isabel de Velasco, curtsying;
strokes are lively and and the dwarfs Maribarbola and Nicolasito Pertusato (and the sleepy dog).
Behind them is the ladies’ governess Marcela de Ulloa, and an usher; stand-
swift, and baffle ing in the open doorway is Don José de Nieto Velazquez, ‘Aposentador de la
Reina’ (usher to the queen); and finally, in the mirror, we see the reflections of
because of their the king and queen.
One is tricked by the ideas one has of perspective, which in this paint-
impeccable precision. ing is multipoint. Our sensation of being pulled into the picture, beyond the
figures of the infanta and her maids, is provoked not so much by the pecu-
liarities of the perspective as by the tension between the two rectangles at
the centre: the deflecting figure of José de Nieto in the open doorway, and
the reflected half-figures of the king and queen in the mirror. The positive—
pee negative bonds of light on dark (mirror) and dark on light (the open door),
Geese caine cites eoblccok waterts reflection (mirror) and deflection (door), interlock, and as if by a magnetic
the Infanta Margarita. force draw our eyes. The picture was painted quite rapidly, with some subse-
quent modifications: Velazquez’s right hand, Maria-Augustina’s profile, and
Opposite a ae : :
The llnfanes WMargacita Teresa (16S1273) was the position of Marcela de Ulloa (whose original placing, behind the usher,
depicted here at the age of five years. She was was an affront to etiquette).
the daughter of Philip IV, King of Spain, and Although Velazquez must have studied conventional perspective with
Maria Anna of Austria. By her marriage to
Pee oe nee ree Pacheco, and presumably read the essential treatises on the subject, such as
ur the died ar the due of ewentyeue. those by Vitelo, Alberti and Daniele Barbaro (all of which were in his library),
he did largely without it in his paintings, as is obvious in The Surrender of
1656 :
a Breda (1635, Prado, Madrid). However, he is: not the only painter
:
of the 17th
318 cy 6276 em 10 1S a9 Fi century to have replaced the perspective pyramid with a bifocal or multifocal
Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid perspective, which transforms depth into rhythm, bringing all perspective
CUTE EIEEEE ERE EEEEEE ee

230 AVIGDOR ARIKHA

anh gare
WE al isbi he
Eig biea
 ... painted as a royal portrait, it is actually a huge genre scene: one wonders

what Vermeer ... would have thought of it ...

232 AVIGDOR ARIKHA

 lines back to the flat plane. The understanding of the flat plane, the piano,
was not a discovery of Modernism.
Velazquez’s use Looking closely at his canvases, I think we can see that Velazquez
painted directly, without drawing first, without ‘calculating’; it seems clear
of colour is based on that he started directly with the brush, sketching with a burnt umber, going
from dark to light often alla prima (‘wet-on-wet’), and when possible finish-
his perception of the ing in one session — as is the case with the Portrait of Francesco II d’Este,
Duke of Modena (1638, Galleria Estense, Modena) or the Portrait of aMan
differences between (presumably ofJosé de Nieto, c. 1649, Apsley House, London). In most cases,
of course, he could not finish a painting in one session, but often, even in Las
cool and warm colours, Meninas, completed most of the figures alla prima, and later retouched here
and there (as in the shadow under the dress of the infanta and her right arm).
and the possibility Velazquez’s use of colour is based on his perception of the differences
between cool and warm colours, and the possibility of modifying hues by
of modifying hues | contrast. He rarely used primary colours, and instead of using a brilliant red,
he preferred to create an optical illusion of it. A good example is the red ribbon
by contrast. in the dress of the Infanta Margarita in Las Meninas. The pigment used by
Velazquez is not vermilion, as one may think, but red ochre. The redness we
perceive derives only from the contrast: the cool grey surrounding it and the
point of yellow in it enhance the redness, and so transform red ochre into
something redder than it is. On the other hand, vermilion was used, mixed
with white, in the Infanta’s face to produce the cool light pink of the cheeks.
The masterly chromatic modulation seen in Velazquez’s mature and late
paintings is, as in musical modulation, based on juxtapositions and reversals.
His pictorial idiom, essentially concerned with expressing the visible
by means of the brush, is in fact anti-illusionistic insofar as the painting is
reduced to a limited pictorial language of brushstrokes. This language is
not unusual; Guercino and Rembrandt used it in the 17th century, as had
Titian in the 16th. In fact, spontaneity in painting is as old as painting itself.
Velazquez’s brushstrokes are lively and swift, and baffle because of their
impeccable precision. They bring to mind the ‘artless art’ described in Eugen
Herrigel’s Zen in the Art of Archery. Velazquez let himself be carried along
by his inner voice, which he may have perceived as his source of truth. The
wonder is that a king could have perceived its greatness.
Few others had a chance to do so. Only a handful of artists and connois-
seurs who had access to the Spanish royal court and to the king’s quarters
could see Las Meninas. Luca Giordano, who saw it there upon his arrival
at the court in 1692, said to Charles II: ‘This is the theology of painting.’ He
became more and more infatuated with Velazquez, even if other painters did
not share his enthusiasm. The general public, however, had no access to the
royal collections, and so Velazquez remained private until the opening of
the Prado Museum in 1819. Since then, and particularly in the 19th century,
Velazquez’s work has grown in stature, and has had an enormous impact —
most notably on Manet, for whom Velazquez was ‘le peintre des peintres’.

Above
The menina in profile, wearing the butterfly
hair decoration, is Dofia Maria-Augustina
Sarmiento, the daughter of Don Diego
Sarmiento de Sotomayor (a member of the
Spanish War Council).

——_——_—_“—_
nn eer

Las Meninas 233

The Domestic Goddess

The Art of Painting, Johannes Vermeer

ARTHUR K. WHEELOCK JR.

he Art of Painting holds a special place within Johannes

Vermeer’s oeuvre: While it displays all the captivating charac-
teristics of his artistic genius — a carefully observed 17th-century
Dutch interior illuminated by softly diffused light, exquisitely
painted details, and a frozen moment imbued with psychological
depth — it stands apart in its imposing scale and pronounced allegorical char-
acter. The painting must have had special meaning for the artist: he kept it in
Vermeer’s title his possession from the late 1660s, when he painted it, until his death in 1675.
And though he left his family in dire financial straits, Vermeer’s widow still
indicates that he refused to sell it. Instead, identifying the work as ‘The Art of Painting’ (De
Schilderkunst), she transferred ownership to her mother to keep it out of the
intended the picture hands of creditors.
Unlike the-descriptive titles usually given to 17th-century paintings,
to convey an abstract Vermeer’s title indicates that he intended the picture to convey an abstract
idea about the nature of painting. His concerns belonged to a long tradition
idea about the nature in which artists and theorists had sought to define the fundamental charac-
teristics of painting, and the significance they held for human understanding.
of painting. Vermeer’s interpretation of these intellectual ideas was innovative. He pre-
sented his allegory in the guise of an everyday scene, an artist painting a model
dressed as Clio, the muse of history. Clio’s crown of laurel denotes honour,
glory and eternal life; her trumpet stands for fame, and the thick folio she
clasps, perhaps a volume of Thucydides, symbolizes history. Vermeer would
have learned of these attributes from Cesare Ripa’s 16th-century emblem
book, Iconologia. The mask on the table in front of Clio was an established
symbol of imitation and the attribute that Ripa gave to his personification
of Painting.
By placing the muse of history at the centre of his allegory, Vermeer
stressed the importance of history to the visual arts. 17th-century theorists
argued that the noblest and most highly regarded form of artistic expression
was history painting, a term that encompassed biblical, mythological and
historical subjects, as well as allegories. By creating such paintings, artists
demonstrated their knowledge and originality of thought, qualities that
raised painting to the elevated status of a liberal art. Indeed, in Vermeer’s
Opposite painting the artist is not so much the recipient of the muse’s inspiration as the
The crisp brushstrokes describing the pleats agent through whom she takes on life and significance.
on the back of the painter’s jacket stand in
stark contrast to the wall and map, which
The large map of the Netherlands hanging on the back wall also con-
appear softened by the sunlight. notes history. The map was made by Claes Jansz. Visscher, whose Latinized
name, Nicolaum Piscatorem, Vermeer inscribed along the map’s upper right
c. 1666-67
Oil on canvas
edge. While faithfully recording the map’s features, Vermeer also repre-
120
cm x 100 cm/ 3 ft 11 in. x 3 ft 3 in. sented its patina, including the folds and creases that had formed over time.
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna Interestingly, the map, which Visscher executed in 1638, and which depicts
OO

234 ARTHUR K. WHEELOCK JR.

Above
The curtain pulled away to the left reminds us
that we are the observers of a scene that feels
as personal as it does allegorical or historical.

236 ARTHUR K. WHEELOCK JR.

 The notion that a painting should deceive the eye with its illusionism
dates back to antiquity and the competition between the artists Parrhasius
and Zeuxis ...

the seventeen provinces flanked by their major cities, was outdated by the
time Vermeer executed this painting. Reclamation of lands from the sea
had changed the physical character of the Netherlands, and political changes
had occurred after 1648 following the signing of the Treaty of Miinster.
At that time the territory was divided into two distinct entities, the Dutch
Republic in the north, and the southern provinces remaining under Spanish
control. The intricate brass chandelier, decorated with an image of a double-
headed eagle, the imperial symbol of the Habsburgs, also alludes to the
Netherlands’ recent past.
In his painting Vermeer carefully integrated the symbolic associations
of fame, history and the Dutch Republic. He positioned Clio so that she holds
her trumpet, symbol of fame, directly beneath a view of The Hague, seat of
the Dutch government. The artist, wearing an elegant doublet decorated with
slits across its back and arms, is seen from the back, his anonymity asserting
the universality of the allegory. He is not dressed like an ordinary craftsman,
but as an elegant gentleman, one with an awareness of the abstract ideals of
art and history. Significantly, he has begun his painting by depicting Clio’s
laurel wreath, symbol of honour and glory.
Vermeer enhanced the realism of his scene through his sophisticated
knowledge of linear perspective, which he used to create a logical and con-
vincing sense of space. Equally important was his masterful observation of
light, as in the sunlight reflecting off the brass chandelier’s polished surface
—an effect he achieved with sure brushstrokes ranging from thick impastos
of lead-tin yellow in the highlights to darker and thinner strokes of ochre in
the shadows. Perhaps with an optical awareness stimulated by the camera
obscura, Vermeer occasionally altered his painting techniques to create dif-
ferent pictorial effects. He softly modelled his paint, for example, to create
the diffused appearance of the cloth hanging over the edge of the table, while
he used broad, crisp strokes to render the bold image of the artist at his easel.
The apparent realism of this allegory is a quality fundamental to
Vermeer’s concept of the art of painting. The notion that a painting should
deceive the eye with its illusionism dates back to antiquity and the competition
between the artists Parrhasius and Zeuxis that Pliny described in his Natural
History. Parrhasius won when he painted a curtain so skilfully that Zeuxis
tried to lift it to see the image beneath. We are reminded of this story by the
large tapestry in Vermeer’s painting, which seems to have been drawn aside to
reveal the allegorical scene. Nevertheless, unlike Parrhasius’ illusionism, the
thematic culmination of Vermeer’s work exists not on the painting’s surface,
Above but behind the curtain where the full meaning of the allegory unfolds.
The chandelier prominently displays a
two-headed eagle, similar to the Habsburgs’
imperial style.

Oo _

The Art of Painting 237

Suspended Animation
The Jar of Olives, Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin
PIERRE ROSENBERG

What Chardin was seeking ... through keen and constant observation of what
lay before his eyes ... was contemplation and silence, absorption and emotion.

laced on a stone table that forms a horizontal bar across

the composition, a varied collection of fruits, glasses and other
objects stands out against a wall (or is it?) of indeterminate colour
— somewhere between grey, bistre and brown. Beginning at the
left-hand side, we see a paté on a wooden board and, beneath it,
the blade of a knife with a wooden or metal handle. Next is a bigarade, a type
of bitter orangeused in 18th-century patisserie; two glasses apparently made
of potash glass and partially filled with red wine; a porcelain plate holding
three pears and an apple. In front of the plate is a crab apple, two macaroons,
a biscuit, and the large glass jar of brine, half full of green olives, which gives
its name to the painting. Finally, on the right-hand side, is a decorative lidded
bowl in Meissen porcelain. The artist’s signature and the date of the painting
can be read on the edge of the tabletop, which has joins in two places and is
broken only by the green stalk of the orange.
Why this disparate grouping? Is there some significance to be sought
in it? Drinking, eating, sight, touch, even smell: are these an allusion to the
five senses that so many 17th-century painters across Europe depicted? This
would be a misreading of Chardin’s ambitions: he shunned the anecdotal, the
painterly, anything of a narrative nature, anything that could lend itself to
interpretation or to storytelling. It is true that the picture has a festive look
— some of the items are luxuries, and the fruits, the wine and the pate look
appetizing — but Chardin’s intentions are of an entirely different nature.
In 1760 Chardin was over 60. He no longer had anything to prove. He
began his career by painting still lifes of fruit and poultry, which he composed
Above and executed with great skill. He used colour contrasts, alternating cool and
According to a common practice dear to the warm tones, shunning straight lines and seeking simplicity. These filled the
artist, Chardin leaves the handle of a knife
overhanging the edge of the table.
entire surface of the composition. Then, from around 1735, he turned to
genre scenes, small-scale compositions that were calm and dreamlike, warm
Opposite
and modest. He depicted the world of children and adolescents with great
The open space between objects on the right
delicacy. His return to still-life painting marked a step forward. From this
evokes a sensation of airiness, and gives
prominence to the jar of olives. point, his still lifes could breathe, they fade into space; air circulates between
the objects, bringing together the harmony of colours, and connecting the
1760
reflections, repetitions and references. Of course, as in the past, the pains-
Oil on canvas
71cm x 98 cm/ 2 ft 4 in. x 3 ft 2% in. taking nature of Chardin’s work remains hidden. Everything seems obvious
Musée du Louvre, Paris and straightforward, but his virtuosity is no longer in question — proof of the
A

238 PIERRE ROSENBERG

 [Chardin’s] still lifes ... breathe, they fade into
space; air circulates between the objects, bringing
together the harmony of colours ...

artist’s attention to the smallest details can be found in the pentimenti (which
can be seen with the naked eye on the olive jar), the leaves of the orange and
the plate of pears. What Chardin was seeking instead, through keen and
constant observation of what lay before his eyes, and through the power and
concentration of his gaze, was contemplation and silence, absorption and
Opposite emotion. He allows us to escape from the everyday world and forget.
Towards the end of his life, Chardin’s Denis Diderot (1713-84) made The Jar of Olives, exhibited at the Salon
eyesight weakened and he turned to pastel
as a medium. The artist stares proudly out
of 1763, the subject of one of the finest and most famous pages in the history
at the viewer from this self-portrait. He is of art criticism. Like his successors, though at a loss to describe this appar-
wearing a strange costume later described ently incomprehensible ‘magic’ that defies words, Diderot did understand
by Marcel Proust as that of an ‘old English
that Chardin not only painted what he could see, but also that which could
tourist’. (Self-Portrait, detail, 1775,
Department of Graphic Arts, Musée not be seen.
du Louvre, Paris)

————————

The Jar of Olives 241

Utamaro’s Pillow Book

‘Lovers’ from Erotic Book: The Poem of the Pillow (Ehon Utamakura), Utamaro
JULIE NELSON DAVIS

he lovers embrace on the second-floor verandah — her hand

gently strokes his chin, his hand grasps her shoulder, their eyes
are locked in a gaze. The artist, Kitagawa Utamaro, has rendered
the intimacy of this moment so completely that it has become one
of the signature examples of late 18th-century Japanese art.
Utamaro (1753?-1806) is well known today, as he was in his own day,
for his pictures of beautiful women, including professional courtesans from
the licensed pleasure districts, teahouse waitresses, shopgirls, servants, mer-
chants’ wives, mothers and daughters, among many others. These images
participated in a contemporary dialogue on female occupations, accomplish-
... her hand gently ments, activities and the appraisal of feminine beauty and behaviour. Like all
artists in the genre known as ukiyo-e — meaning ‘the pictures of the floating
strokes his chin, his hand world’ — Utamaro was trained as a painter. But for him, as for many others,
his primary occupation was designing woodblock prints that depicted the lei-
grasps her shoulder, their sures and pleasures of urban life, as it might be experienced in the city of Edo.
(modern-day Tokyo).
eyes are locked in a gaze. As such, Utamaro was employed on commission by publishers, who then
hired the block carvers and printers to transform the artist’s sketch into its
printed form. A picture such as ‘Lovers’ demonstrates the extremely high skill
of each of these craftsmen, in a process whereby each colour was printed with
a separately carved block onto the sheet of paper. The block carvers’ mastery
is particularly well displayed in his transferral from sketch to woodblock of
the wide range of marks the artist has used — from the delicate lines of the hair
to the attenuated contour lines of the faces to the calligraphic lines describing
the folds and play of the textiles. The same skill is also evident in the separa-
tion of the different colours into individual blocks that together would create
the final image. The printers’ skill is equally remarkable, particularly in their
treatment of various visual effects — the play of saturated colours against the
white of the paper, suggesting fabric against skin; the translucent gauze fabric
draping over the leg, the deepening colour suggesting increasing opacity;
and patterns replicated without fault. Clearly for this work the commission-
Opposite
ing publisher spared no expense in hiring the finest artisans to replicate the
Utamaro, like other ukiyo-e artists, made
designs for books, including poetry albums, artist’s design.
popular volumes and erotica. His total This image is the first page in an album of erotic images, titled Ehon
output numbers some thirty paintings and Utamakura or Erotic Book: The Poem ofthe Pillow, dated to 1788. Like many
about 2,000 designs for printed formats.
such works produced at this time, it is unsigned. Restrictions on ‘floating
He made twelve designs for the album Ehon
Utamakura. world’ publishing promulgated by the shogunal regime prohibited ‘licentious’
materials, and although these were not being actively enforced at the time this
1788
image was made, it must have seemed prudent not to include the artist’s or
Woodblock print on paper
25.5 cm x 36.9.cm/ 10 in. x 1 ft 2% in. publisher’s information. Rather — and in a manner consistent with mores for
Various collections sophistication at the time —the name of the artist and publisher are alluded to
a

242 JULIE NELSON DAVIS

 s(t ty
ay 2

yl

in the book itself. In this image, the crest on the man’s robe resembles that of
Tsutaya Juzaburo, the publisher with whom Utamaro was most closely asso-
ciated at this time; Tsutaya was well known for producing some of the finest
printed works in ukiyo-e. Utamaro’s identity is alluded to in the preface to the
album, where the book’s title is said to be like that of the artist: ‘even coming
close to the name of the painter, I call it Ehon Utamakura’. Utamakura (Poem
of the Pillow) is just a short step away from Utamaro. In any case, stylistically,
there is no doubt that this work was done by Utamaro.
Looking from right to left across the image (as is the custom in East
Asian art), the viewer’s attention is drawn first to consider the lovers’ rapt
engagement with one another, the man’s eye just visible to the left of the
woman’s hair. Our attention proceeds across the bodies, pausing to note the
inscribed fan, then considering the intimacy of the postures. The poem on the
fan suggests the nature of this encounter:

In the clamshell
Its beak caught fast
The snipe
Cannot fly away
Into the autumn dusk.

244 JULIE NELSON DAVIS

 [The publisher’s] strategy for distinguishing Utamaro in that competitive
field relied upon presenting him as a kind of connoisseur of women: not just as a
close observer, but also as a kind of expert in matters even more intimate.

Unlike the album itself, this is signed by the poet Yadoya no Meshimori
(1753-1830), a member of the publisher’s literary circle. It not only alludes to
the sexual engagement between the lovers, but also to well-known classical
poems on the ‘autumn dusk’ dating to the late 12th and 13th centuries.
By this stage of his career, Utamaro was being actively supported
through commissions by Tsutaya, their most significant productions being
in the form of poetry albums and erotica. In the 1790s, Utamaro emerged as
the leader in the genre of ‘images of beauties’ (bijinga), in large part through
the continued sponsorship of the publisher. Their strategy for distinguishing
Utamaro in that competitive field relied upon presenting him as a kind of con-
noisseur of women: not just as a close observer, but also as a kind of expert in
matters even more intimate. Thus the preface to this album proclaims that,
for Utamaro, using the brush was like ‘using the hips’, for one with ‘skill in the
art of love...moves the hearts of everyone’. Given that this representation of
the artist appears in the preface to an album of erotica, this statement clearly
served as a rhetorical device in service to the themes of the book. Whether or
not Utamaro was indeed such a man cannot be verified by his biography, but
it certainly worked wonders for his career.

Right
Two of Utamaro’s portraits (39 cm x 26 cm/
15% in. X 10% in.) from A Collection of
Reigning Beauties, published by Wakasaya
Yoichi c. 1794: (left) Takigawa of the Ogiya
and (right) Komurasaki of the Tamaya.

Se ilg

‘Lovers’ 245
 :
aa a) o aen gah B)
WwW S ge) 4 S 5 ceee,

AFTER I800
A Revolution in Paint

The Third of May, 1808, Francisco de Goya

MANUELA MENA MARQUES

n The Third of May, 1808 Goya presented, for the first time in the
history of art, the real, perverse nature of war, stripped of all heroism
and honour. In so doing, he created an image of such universal sig-
nificance that it has become — perhaps even more so than Picasso’s
Guernica — the defining symbol of the atrocities of war and the horror
of its victims. The Third of May, 1808 is actually the right-hand panel of a
diptych, the other panel of which (The Second of May, 1808, also known as
The Charge of the Mamelukes) shows the events of the previous day. The very
modern war presented here by Goya is reinforced with a new technique, one
that turns its back on the grandiose, epic, heroic and classical representations
popular with Napoleon. If we look closely at The Third of May, 1808, with its
beguiling yet realistic corpses in the foreground, we notice an unusual feroc-
ity in the brushmarks, an expressive abstraction of forms, at once impetuous
and streamlined, and a selective, symbolic use of colour: white, yellow, grey,
ochre, black and red (always distinct from the blood) stand out in the fore--
... an image ofsuch ground, at once attractive and repulsive in their affirmation of the violence.
These paintings were begun in 1814, after Goya was asked by the
universal significance Supreme Council (who had coordinated resistance against the French since
1808) to immortalize the heroic deeds of the people of Madrid when they
that it has become ... rebelled and attacked the French troops— who until 2 May 1808, had been the
allies of Spain. The people’s revolt, provoked by the sight of the last infantes
the defining symbol of of the House of Bourbon being taken from the palace, resulted in the death
of many French soldiers, and Marshal Murat, the French leader, managed to
the atrocities of war and contain the situation only through savage suppression and relentless execu-
tions that started in the early afternoon and continued through the night and
the horror ofits victims. well into the morning of 3 May.
By 1814 the events of 2 May 1808 had crystallized in the collective
memory into four ‘scenes’ that were repeated in prints and in the theatre: the
detention at the palace of the carriages carrying the infantes; the charge of the
Mamelukes in the Puerta del Sol; the defence of the barracks of Monteleén;
and the executions by firing squad in the Paseo del Prado. Goya’s focus on
just two of these episodes suggests that he was not especially interested in
presenting an official, commemorative and nationalistic version of events. In
The Second of May, 1808 only the horses look at the spectator, their expres-
Above and opposite sions of terror reflecting the madness of the men. The Third of May, 1808,
Goya’s groundbreaking work exposes the
meanwhile, does not simply pit the heroism or self-sacrifice of ‘innocent’
true horrors of war by combining realism
with a radically new approach to painting. Spanish victims against the cruelty of the ‘merciless’ French oppressors but
rather places both sides in the moral balance. ‘If you kill with iron you will die
1814
by iron,’ exclaimed Murat to a priest who begged for mercy; the gestures of
Oil on canvas
266 cm x 345 cm/ 8 ft 9 in. x 11 ft 4 in. fear, desperation, anguish and remorse tell us that it is those facing execution
Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid who are repentant of their deeds — and it is they whom Goya chose to depict
OO

248 MANUELA MENA MARQUES

 dressed in field aie pantie fromie cold morning air by chickcoats.
They fire at the jumbled up, shirt-clad country people. The scene is i
nated by the soldiers’ lamp, the light dispersing into the humid air of the -nighe
with scientific perfection. The figures that arrive to face the firing squad
the bodies of the dead; one of them has his head blown off after bein
close range, while the others are covered in their own blood. Other ae
emerge from the gates of their city, the city whose ancient walls havere. = }
protect its citizens.
The Second of May, 1808 and The Third of May, 1808 were both. 4

painted in the months following the entrance of Ferdinand VII into Madrid
in May 1814. Goya had just finished the Disasters of War etchings, wh
showed with neutral and righteous harshness the confrontations between the
Spanish population and the French army. His modern, almost photographic.
compositions share none of the optimism of the final victory. They were
certainly not suitable for hanging in the palace, where Ferdinand was busy
abolishing the liberal constitution of 1812. The two paintings share the etch-
ings’ madness, inhumanity, terror and desolation. Goya’s i hea 8
of t

in terms of tragedy, devoid of the intellectual (and very 18th-century sian of

his earlier The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters.
The initial impact of these masterworks, if they were ever shown toothe
Above
The canvases of the diptych give two
public, is not known. There is no reference to them in contemporary writ ngs,
different, but equally horrifying, accounts and only one sentence, in the liberal newspaper El Conservador (from 13
of death in war. The frenzied action of battle April 1820), indicates any knowledge of them. The Museo del Prado showed 2
in The Second of May, 1808, epitomized
similar lack of interest: in 1834 the two paintings were valued at 8,000 reales.
perfectly by the terrified eyes of the horses,
leads inexorably to the execution scene, in compared with 80,000 reales for a painting of Charles IV’s family. In 1840
which death is stripped of both reason and the traveller Theophile Gautier saw them hanging in the museum and men-
glory. (Left: The Second of May, 1808, known tioned them in his Voyage en Espagne (1843) as ‘Massacre of the 2nd May,
as The Charge of the Mamelukes, 1814, oil on
invasion scene’; he expands on this in the 1858 edition of his book, describing
canvas, 266 cm x 345 cm/8 ft 9in. x 11 ft 4 in.
Museo del Prado, Madrid. Right: The Third the remarkable technique used by Goya: ‘he executes, with a spoon instead of
of May, 1808) brushes, a scene of 2May, where you see some French shooting some Spanish.

250 MANUELA MENA MARQUES

 lon FAZO?RN Oo Sort ella.

» ... madness, inhumanity, terror and desolation. Goya’s conception of

the reality of war, his pessimistic view of the human condition, is here
expressed in terms of tragedy ...

It is a work of incredible verve and fury. This curious painting is relegated,

without honour, to the antichambers of the museum.’ The historian Charles
Yriarte, in his 1867 monograph on Goya (which features the first reproduc-
tion of the painting, a poor quality woodcut), turns Gautier’s spoon into a
Above
knife, in the process compounding one of the greatest obstacles to our under-
In this engraving, related to The Third of standing of the real Goya: ‘the artist executes [The Third of May, 1808] with
May, 1808, the French soldiers are faceless, the help of only a palette knife’. Neither Gautier nor Yriarte was able to see the
anonymous, as they aim their rifles. Goya’s
mutation that Goya had achieved with his modern use of the classical brush.
mastery of line, combined with his ability to
tell a story in a few strokes, earned him the The best description is that of Edouard Manet, who unconditionally appreci-
admiration of later artists such as Edouard ated the painting. In his visit to the Prado in 1865 he was dazzled by Goya’s
Manet. (‘Con razon o sin ella’ / ‘Rightly or ‘technical imagination’, his composition and his political message; all of this
wrongly’, from the series The Disasters of
War, 1810-12, engraving. Museo del Grabado
Manet then translated into his 1867 Execution of the Emperor Maximilian
de Goya, Fuendetodos, near Zaragoza) (Kunsthalle, Mannheim).
@ |
The Third of May, 1808 251
 Into the Void

The Wanderer above the Sea of Mist, Caspar David Friedrich

WERNER BUSCH

tis often difficult to achieve consensus on whether or not a work

of art is a masterpiece. What can be said with more certainty, however,
is whether a work has achieved iconic status, since this is decided by the
public. Caspar David Friedrich’s The Wanderer above the Sea of Mist
is a work that has grown into an icon, and remains recognizable even in
the most unusual of contexts. The Wanderer can appear on the cover of the
news magazine Der Spiegel, gazing out over the horrors of German history; or
can feature on a box of teabags, embodying the longing for a nice cup of tea;
or can even be shown wearing Levi’s jeans. So what is it about the work itself
... the image seems that makes it so iconic? In the case of the Mona Lisa, it is its androgynous
quality, which was underlined by Marcel Duchamp. In Friedrich’s Wanderer,
literally boundless, and it is, perhaps, the intangible sense of pathos. The man, seen from behind and
positioned on the vertical central axis of the painting, is very upright and
so can be viewed as a seemingly proud and self-possessed as he stands on a rocky hilltop and looks
out onto a sea of dissolving mist, through which other rocky peaks can be
representation of ‘the seen rising in the distance. Through the cloudy fog, the spatial relationships
between these peaks is impossible to judge, so from the point of view of the
sublime’. The painting Wanderer and for us, they appear to be stacked not only behind each other,
but on top of one another too. In this way, the image seems literally bound-
remains a vision of a less, and so can be viewed as a representation of ‘the sublime’. The painting
remains a vision of a subject that cannot really be objectified.
subject that cannot really While the image of the landscape is far from concrete, the abstract
aspects of the picture’s construction can be clearly identified. Not only does
be objectified. the Wanderer stand on the central axis of the painting, but the horizontal
and vertical axes intersect at the figure’s navel. This recalls the ‘Vitruvian
Man’ from Cesarino’s 1521 edition of De architectura, whose navel marks
the centre of the world in an abstract universe, and which turns man, made
in God’s image, into the measure of all things. In Friedrich’s painting, the
geometric ordering of orderless phenomena is also absolute, and the con-
nection of the figure to the landscape must surely be intended to abolish
any idea of alienation between mankind and nature. In countless pictures,
Friedrich makes use of the Golden Section, the aesthetically pleasing division
of space expounded in Luca Pacioli’s Divina proportione of 1509. Here, the
two vertical lines of the Golden Section frame the figure, passing through his
foot on the left and the tip of his cane on the right. The upper horizontal of
the Golden Section serves a double function: it cuts through the collar of the
figure (the head rising above it), and on the right-hand edge of the picture it
almost exactly marks the top of one of the two mountain ridges, which slope
c. 1818
Oil on canvas
softly down on both sides to meet at the Wanderer’s heart. This geometric
94.8 cm x 74.8 cm /3 ft 1% in. x 2 ft 5% in. precision is only revealed by taking exact measurements; so the fact that on
Kunsthalle, Hamburg one hand the painting is made up of disparate elements, and yet on the other
OO

252 WERNER BUSCH

 has evidently been carefully constructed is something that every viewer expe-
riences when faced with a Friedrich painting, and even more so if it is based
around a central axis.
What does this signify? How should the abstract pictorial composition,
with its aesthetic power, be understood in relation to the apparently uncon-
nected landscape elements? Friedrich’s studies for the work can be given firm
times and places, since he always noted the date and location on each sketch.
In this case, every detail of the rocky hilltop on which the Wanderer is stand- ,
ing can be traced back to a drawing of 3 June 1813. On the left-hand edge of
this drawing, Friedrich drew a long line, marked with short horizontal strokes
at the top and bottom, and wrote next to it: ‘The horizon is this far above the
highest point of the rocks.’ If this information from the sketch is applied to
\
hh
TTT
the proportions of the painting, the Wanderer’s gaze is fixed precisely on the
horizon. This rocky outcrop and the other mountain peaks are demonstrably
taken from different parts of Saxon Switzerland: the Kaiserkrone, Gamrich
near Rathen, the view of Wolfsberg from Krippen. The oddly flattened rock
ASOTURTANLEASRERERNT formation in the distance on the right is an image of the Zirkelstein, its height
also exactly matching the top of the Wanderer’s head.
As techniques of abstract construction and the montage-like assembly of
the image from natural elements are recognized to be fundamental principles
of Friedrich’s paintings, so the way that they are used must be reconsidered
for every single-picture. One early source suggests that the figure could be
Colonel Friedrich Gotthard von Brincken, who fought in the Saxon Infantry
in the wars of liberation against Napoleon, and who was killed in around
1813 or 1814. Friedrich was a resolute supporter of the wars: he witnessed the

whi ae

254 WERNER BUSCH

Opposite top
Caspar David Friedrich, Self-Portrait in
Profile, c. 1802, indian ink, 13.1 cm x 9.2 cm/
5¥% in. x 3% in. Kunsthalle, Hamburg. issuing of the Karlsbad Decrees and the dissent that followed, paid for equip-
Opposite below ment for his young artist colleague Kersting to join the Liitzow Free Corps
The contours of the rocky outcrops captured (which put him into debt), left Dresden during the French occupation, and
in this drawing are minutely repeated in the spent a month living with a friend’s family in Krippen in Saxon Switzerland,
mist-shrouded mountains of The Wanderer.
to escape the famine and disease that were rife in Dresden. Napoleon’s long-
(Rocky Hilltop, 3 June 1813, pencil, 11.1 cm
x 18.5cm/4% in. x 7% in. Kupferstich- held superior strength paralysed Friedrich’s creative abilities, but as soon as
Kabinett der Staatlichen Kunstsammlungen, his hope returned, he started to draw from nature, including the sketch of
Dresden) the rocks on which the Wanderer stands, which could almost be a memo-
Above right rial plinth. The Wanderer painting has been firmly dated to around 1818, so
In one of two portraits by the German could well be a tribute to Colonel von Brincken. This would explain the oth-
artist Georg Friedrich Kersting, Friedrich is erwise atypical sublime sense of pathos. Normally Friedrich tackled subjects
shown wholly absorbed in the painting of a
mountain landscape. The bare, empty studio,
of Protestant humility, avoiding the awe-inspiring themes that here can be
from which all distracting comforts have been heard echoing from the hills. We must therefore imagine von Brincken facing
banished, suggest his total dedication to his this amazing mountain realm as if standing before the throne of God. His
art. (Georg Friedrich Kersting, Friedrich’s
head, fixed on the vanishing point of the horizon and rising above the upper
Studio, 1811, oil on canvas, 54 cm x 42 cm/
1ft9% in. x 1ft 4% in. Kunsthalle, horizontal of the Golden Section, seems to be seeking the hope of redemption.
Hamburg) Only for a dead man was Friedrich able to formulate such things.
earn

The Wanderer above the Sea of Mist 255

Long Live Life!
a
EL

Liberty Leading the People, Eugene Delacroix

BARTHELEMY JOBERT

n 1981 the newly elected French president, the Socialist Francois

Mitterrand, decided to.change the figure of Marianne that featured on
postage stamps. And so the head of Hersilia from Jacques-Louis David’s
Sabine Women (which had been the personal choice of his right-wing
predecessor, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing) was replaced by the heroic figure
from Delacroix’s Liberty Leading the People. Some pundits remarked that
David’s figure was oriented to the right and Delacroix’s to the left; however,
it is also true that the 100 franc banknote introduced in 1978 had already
featured the Liberty alongside a superimposed Delacroix self-portrait with
palette and brushes. Indeed, by the late 20th century, the identification
of Delacroix’s Liberty with Marianne — and with France itself — had been
common for a century and a half (since the work’s first exhibition, at the
1831 Salon), and the painting had gained the status of republican icon both in
France and abroad. s
Delacroix painted his Liberty between October and December 1830;
... Delacroix’s stroke in the aftermath of the ‘Three Glorious Days’ of 27-29 July in the same year.
During these three days, a Parisian uprising defeated the regular army and
of genius was to use the overthrew the eldest line of the reigning Bourbons, replacing it with the
younger branch of the family: the Duke of Orléans, the cousin of now exiled
naturalistic posture lof King Charles X, who ascended the throne as Louis-Philippe I. The new July
Monarchy took as its emblem the revolutionary and republican Tricolour
the woman] to inject instead of the white flag of the Bourbons, thereby clearly signalling that the
new regime would accept the changes introduced by the Revolution and the
allegory into the realistic Empire, rather than seek a return to pre-1789 France (which had been Charles
. X’s intention). The political background was as clear to those who first
setting of a barricade ... saw Delacroix’s Liberty as it had been essential in the painter’s decision to
undertake such a significant canvas. This was made yet more explicit by the
full title chosen by the artist: 28th July. Liberty Leading the People —a direct
Ab
axe reference to the second of the ‘Three Glorious Days’, when the insurrection
‘ . . =

The factory worker sports a sash and sabre, ee ; ‘ : : ;

Di aereed) Jedd colin thay pean res ad taken control of the Paris streets with the aim not only of forcing the king
depicted that they can be identified with items to withdraw his latest decrees suppressing press freedom and dissolving the
from the 1816 ordinance (réglement). Chamber of Deputies, but also of abolishing the Bourbon monarchy alto-
Opecate gether. Hence the recurring presence of the Tricolour in the painting: on the
Near the Liberty, Gavroche, wearing the left as a makeshift flag at the end of a pike, on the right flying from the towers
black beret traditionally associated with of the cathedral of Notre-Dame and in the centre, at the summit of the com-
university
mustudents, waves two E pistols taken ae ; :
position, proudly waved by the figure of Liberty.
from a cavalry soldier. His stance was Laity : ie
inspired by Giovanni da Bologna’s Mercury. The painting is a realistic depiction of a Parisian riot scene. Despite the
typical houses and the silhouette of Notre-Dame on the right, it is impos-
1830
Rane ye Wei
sible to locate precisely. The clothing of the principal characters identifies
DEO CN 205 cra STE ee OF Gant them as specific types of rioter: the man brandishing a sabre is a factory
Musée du Louvre, Paris worker, the figure holding a gun is a bourgeois (a student, perhaps, or an
—_——
OO

256 BARTHELEMY JOBERT

 Above
‘Important reasons argue against the
exhibition of a painting representing Liberty
in a red bonnet atop a barricade, with French
soldiers trampled under rioters’ feet’, wrote an
official in 1855, when Delacroix wanted the
painting shown at the Exposition Universelle.

Left
This sketch was submitted by Delacroix for
the competition for the decoration of the
Chambre des Députes in Paris; it was not
chosen, perhaps because its political message
was too liberal. (Boissy d’Anglas at the
National Convention, 1831, oil on canvas,
79 cm X 104 cm/2 ft7 in. x 3 ft 5in. Musée
des Beaux-Arts, Bordeaux)

Opposite
Greece on the Ruins of Missolonghi is
Delacroix’s first significant political painting.
As in Liberty, he mixes allegory, the use of the
nude and realism, heightened by the splashes
of blood on the rock. (1826, oil on canvas,
209 cm X 147 cm/6 ft 10% in. x 4 ft 9% in.
Musée des Beaux-Arts, Bordeaux)
i

258 BARTHELEMY JOBERT

 artisan or foreman), and the man on his knees — who sports the three colours
—is a worker from the countryside, probably a builder. In the background, a
... by the late Polytechnicien, whose school distinguished itself in the rebellion, is wearing
his typical cocked hat. And the two dead soldiers in the foreground are
20th century, the wearing the uniforms of the regiments of royal troops fighting the insurrec-
tion, a Swiss guard and a cavalryman. As for the small boy, he is frequently
identification of associated with Victor Hugo’s Gavroche in Les Misérables, although the
book was published more than twenty years after the painting was produced.
Delacroix’s Liberty The most important figure —the one that gives the painting its full signif-
icance—is the semi-naked woman in the centre. Contemporaries undoubtedly
with Marianne — and saw her as modelled on one of the real rioters; critics at the time described her
as a working-class woman, a fishwife or even a prostitute. But Delacroix’s
with France itself— stroke of genius was to use the naturalistic posture to inject allegory into the
realistic setting of a barricade; visually characteristic of the allegory, the nude
had been common for — especially the female nude — gives the principal figure (remarkably, the only
woman in the painting) a double significance.
a century and a half... Delacroix had already blended realism and allegory in a large canvas
painted in 1826, Greece on the Ruins of Missolonghi, in which a Greek
woman in national costume, palms outstretched and bare-breasted, per-
sonifies the fight of her country against its Turkish oppressors. It has been
suggested that Delacroix drew his inspiration for the bust of his Liberty from
the Venus de Milo, which at the time had only recently been discovered and
was on display in the Louvre. This would certainly underline the Classical
aspect of the composition’s central figure, which is already reinforced by both
the Tricolor in Liberty’s hand and the red bonnet on her head, a reference to
Greek antiquity (and the French Revolution) and to the emancipation of the
slaves. (Technical analysis has shown that the cap was originally a brighter
red, but was toned down by Delacroix, probably for political reasons.)
One of the most intelligent and penetrating contemporary critics of
Delacroix’s work, Théophile Thoré, well understood the dual nature of the
central figure when he wrote in 1837 that Liberty Leading the People

is both history and allegory. Is this a young woman of the people?

Is it the spirit of liberty? It is both; it is, if you wish, liberty incar-
nated in a young woman. True allegory should possess the quality
of being at the same time a living type and a symbol, unlike the
old pagan allegories which are no more than dead forms.... Here
again, Mr Delacroix is the first to use a new allegorical language.

Delacroix was evolving from the peak of his Romantic period, symbolized by
the universally rejected Death of Sardanapalus exhibited at the 1827 Salon, to
a more Classical style that would be enriched by six months in Morocco the
following year. Thus, while Liberty Leading the People is almost certainly
Delacroix’s most universal and best-known painting, it is also a turning point
in his career and art.

Liberty Leading the People 259

Witness to History

The Burning of the Houses of Lords and Commons, October 16, 1834,
Joseph Mallord William Turner
ANDREW WILTON

_ this occasion provided [Turner] with a subject that enabled him to express
the two great themes ofhis art — the visual grandeur of the world and the
multifarious lives of the people who inhabit that world ...

he huge fire that destroyed the old Houses of Parliament

on the night of 16 October 1834 was more than a great London
spectacle. It was a national event with immense political and
social resonance. The Reform Bill, passed two years earlier, had
consigned to history the old, corrupt electoral system of bribery
and rotten boroughs, andthe blaze was seen by many as a moral bonfire. a
symbolic purging of the body politic. The convergence of sublime spectacle
and historical significance was a chance that Turner, in all his long life, rarely
witnessed at first hand, and this occasion provided him with a subject that
enabled him to express the two great themes of his art — the visual grandeur of
the world and the multifarious lives of the people who inhabit that world —in
a uniquely arresting manner.
A Londoner, living im Queen Anne Street, Marylebone, Turner was, of
course, one of the thousands who watched the fire from the opposite bank
Above of the Thames, and also took the opportunity to use one of the craft that
The Burning of the Houses of Parliament, swarmed out on to the river giving sightseers a closer view. It was his habit to
1934 (warercolour, 23.3 cm x 32.5 cm/ draw on all possible occasions when travelling, but no pencil sketches of the
9% im. x 12% im. Turner Bequest, Tate,
London)_This sheet is hardly a fully finished
fire have been identified with any certainty. A sketchbook full of magnifi-
watercolour — rather an almost expressionist cent watercolour studies of a big fire has been supposed to be an on-the-spot
exercise in the evocation of the nocturnal record, but it is highly unlikely that he could have produced such work in the
scene in Old Palace Yard, with amazed
dark and among demse crowds. Perhaps he made these rapid notes the fol-
crowds and august buildings glimpsed fitfully
in the light of the fire. lowing morning, or ewen as a record of another of the innumerable fires that
happened so often in London: there is no conclusive evidence in the sketches,
Opposite which include details of buildings that do not seem to relate to the Palace of
Turner shows 2 steam vessel towing the
floating fire engine up river, something Westminster. In any case, Turner made no obvious use of any of them in the
witnessed by the Times reporter, among pictures that he made of the subject.
others. Becamse the tide was low when the At all events, he looked, and in the following days supplemented the
fire broke out at 7.00 p.m., the boat could not
visual] information he had gleaned by reading circumstantial details in newspa-
reach the scene until 2.30 the next morning,
by which time it was no longer needed. pers and journals, collecting as much practical information as he could. One of
the popular prints that appeared shortly after the fire, an engraved View of the
1835
Conflagration of the Houses of Lords and Commons, shows the scene more or
Oil om canvas
92.5 om *« 123 om / 3 ft 0% in. x 4 ft O% in. less as Turner presents it in one of his pictures, from the opposite bank of the
Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio Thames with Westminster Bridge in steep perspective at the extreme right.
ao

260 ANDREW WILTON

S
sow
f

—ie
2h
= 4
be
sew?
 Over the following winter he painted not one but two substantial oil
paintings of the subject, which he showed in two separate exhibitions in
London in 1835. One, now in the Philadelphia Museum of Art, he sent to
the British Institution, and the other, now in the Cleveland Museum of Art,
he submitted to the Royal Academy’s summer exhibition. The sheer drama
of the scene would have been enough to prompt the double response; but he
may have had other motives. One of his dearest friends, and his most gener-
ous patron, Walter Ramsden Fawkes of Farnley Hall in Wharfedale, West
Yorkshire, had died in 1825 after a lifetime of campaigning for electoral
reform. On his account alone the passing of the Reform Bill must have had

The Cleveland

version, where we
observe the fire in the

distance, from a height

above the river, is more

akin to cinema, the

camera hovering high

above the scene ...

ke Out it became impossible to

nearer to the scene of the disaster
st of Westminster Bridge on the
Surrey side’ That is Turner’s viewpoint here.

Right
The Burning of the Houses of Lords and
Commons, 16th October, 1834, 1835 (oil on
canvas, 92.5 cm x 123 cm/3 ft 0% in. x
4 ft 0% im. Philadelphia Museum of Art).
This vi w of the conflagration is taken from
the far a nd i of Westminster Bridge; a great
at WW.

crowd has gathered on the riverbank like an

audience at a theatrical spectacle.

262 ANDREW WILTON

 great significance for Turner, and the fire will have seemed a perfect oppor-
tunity for him to pay tribute to Fawkes’s memory. We might see the pictures
as a pair, one as it were for Fawkes, the other for Turner himself, the citizen
of London.
The sense that this was an occasion with deep meaning for the ordinary
people of London is vividly presented in the picture, now in Philadelphia, that
shows the fire from the other end of Westminster Bridge: the foreground is
heaped with crowds of people like the stage of a theatre during the finale of a
grand opera (Turner was an avid follower of the musical theatre). At the same
time, the crowd seems to be warming itself at the blaze, which is palpably
very hot. The cool creamy masonry of Westminster Bridge on the right, seen
in steep perspective, plunges the eye into the depth of the picture space and
seems to melt in the heat as it approaches the far bank.
The Cleveland version, where we observe the fire in the distance, from a
height above the river, is more akin to cinema, the camera hovering high above
the scene, and seeing everything in long shot: the flames leaping skywards in
the distance, at the end of a great tunnel of darkness. The exalted viewpoint
might even suggest the experience of the disembodied spirit of Fawkes, sur-
veying the scene from ‘the seventh sphere’, as Troilus looks down on ‘this little
spot of earth’ after his death at the end of Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde.
In that broad scene, Westminster Bridge is a line of arches on the left
horizon, while movement into the deep picture space is supplied by a steam-
boat towing a firefighting engine up the broad river towards the blaze. The
composition anticipates another famous subject, of a decade later, Rain,
steam, and speed — the Great Western Railway (1844). There, the movement
of the railway train towards the viewer replaces the movement of the steam-
boat into the picture: the centripetal power of the fire that destroys the old
world gives way to the centrifugal energy of a new age.

Right
Rain, steam, and speed — the Great Western
Railway, 1844 (oil on canvas, 91 cm x 122 cm
/3 ft x 4 ft. Turner Bequest, National Gallery,
London). This famous image celebrates
Turner’s fascination with the modern world
that was emerging during the last decade of
his career. But it suggests that old and new
can perhaps coexist meaningfully: the bridge
over which the train hurtles is a medieval
stone structure, not the modern span of the
bridge at Maidenhead that actually carried
this stretch of the Great Western Railway
across the Thames between Maidenhead and
Taplow.

SO

The Burning of the Houses of Lords and Commons, October 16, 1834 263
 The Price of Progress
The Oxbow, Thomas Cole
MICHAEL J. LEWIS

The view of landscape that it presents — fraught by the contradictory lessons

religion and science, simultaneo usly enthralled by the beauty of nature and

complicit in its destruction — is ultimately

= oer |
trTAZIC .

t is a strange artist indeed who can find the stuff of high drama in
one of nature’s slowest events. And few things are as leisurely as the
forming of an oxbow. An elderly river passing over a flat landscape
will in time begin to meander as its bottom silts up and its banks erode.
Curves emerge, which gradually coil into loops, and which sometimes
swing back on themselves to complete the circle. When this happens, the river
can abruptly straighten itself out and return to its original course, leaving
behind a ringlet of water known as an oxbow lake. This protracted process
is at the heart of the painting that Thomas Cole titled View from Mount
Holyoke, Northampton, Massachusetts, after a Thunderstorm and that
everyone else calls The Oxbow.
‘T have alrready commenced a view from Mt. Holyoke,’ Cole wrote to
his patron Lumman Reed in March 1836; ‘it is about the finest scene I have in
my sketchbook & is well known — it will be novel and I think effective” A
month later he showed it at the annual exhibition of the National Academy of
Design. It was indeed effective: it sold immediately and was repeatedly exhib-
ited, remaining in private hands until 1908 when the Metropolitan Museum
of Art acquired it. It remains one of the museum’s most popular objects for it
captures with peculiar clarity the paradox of American landscape art, which
is that the American landscape was not seen as something sublime and lov. ely
until the moment it was doomed. To 18th-century America, nature was still
are im the foreground with paintbox
ol stands for both Thomas Cole and the site of hardship and peril, the ‘howling wilderness’. But by the time Cole
ves, as though the artist is asking us painted The Oxbow, railroads, canals and the other artifacts of industrial
Th a ide the painting and see The Oxbow
civilization were well along in the process of ruthlessly subduing the conti-
his eyes.
nent and banishing its wilderness. His works are not so much a celebration of
that wilderness as its stately and melancholy recessional.
The Oxbow celebrate the clearing of the Like all of Cole’s works, The Oxbow is a studio performance, an
land. or violently condemn it? Capable of
by read either way, it seems to have pleased
elaboration of a careful pencil sketch made on site. He invariably made minor
adjustments in order to work in his repertoire of familiar props and devices,
and each of them appears in The Oxbow: the sharp juxtaposition of wild and
cultivated scenery, the solitary witness contemplating the scene, the blasted
130.8 am x 193 em/4 ft 3%in. x 6 ft 4 in. tree that bodes of mortality. Yet he deploys them in a composition of excep-
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York tional, almost schematic purity, neatly bisected into opposites. To the left all
OO

264 MICHAEL J. LEWIS

 is darkness, storm and wilderness; to the right sunshine, calm and pasture.
Even the lines and outlines of the landscape show a different calligraphy:
jagged angularity on one side and easy curves on the other, like a painting
that is one half Poussin and one half Ruysdael.
Cole’s meaning is clear: two storms are sweeping relentlessly across
the landscape. The advancing atmospheric storm will darken the skies,
pummel the mountains with rain and lightning, and then pass; the human
storm will fell the trees and clear the underbrush, leaving tidy geometric ,
fields in its wake. It is this second, slower-moving storm that is the more
[Cole’s] works are not destructive, for in due time it will traverse the country, bringing all that it
touches under the sway of America’s industrial civilization; we can already
so much a celebration discern little wisps of smoke issuing from numerous settlers’ cabins. One
might grieve or one might rejoice at the prospect, Cole tells us, but such
of ... wilderness as its is the decree of fate. And as if to confirm that is nothing less than divine
judgment, the Hebrew letters *1w are inscribed on the distant mountain,
stately and melancholy spelling out shaddai — ‘the Almighty’. The letters are upside down, as they
would be if written by God. (Oddly, although in plain sight, they were not
recessional. noticed for a century.)

266 MICHAEL J. LEWIS

 The critics of Shakespeare sometimes refer to Hamlet as having ‘two
clocks’: there is the actual span of several months over which the action of
the play takes place and then there is the apparent time, which seems to be
a continuous stream of action and events. It is the great idiosyncrasy of The
Oxbow to have three kinds of time and three advancing clocks, which in turn
count out the minutes, the centuries and the millennia. The storm is a fleeting
event, and we see it passing before our eyes. The clearing of the continent is
the work of centuries, although we know that its course is inevitable. These
two tempos are counted against a slower, massive tempo, the great grinding
wheel of geological time.
Here Cole was responding to the intellectual sensation of his day,
the publication of Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology (1830-33), which
demonstrated that the earth was shaped by mighty but slow-acting forces,
working incrementally over millions of years. The creation of the earth was
not an accomplished fact, as had traditionally been believed, but land and sea
continued to churn, caught up in violent but slow-motion upheaval. To Cole’s
generation, these were shocking revelations, and The Oxbow is the first major
work to apply them to art. The view of landscape that it presents — fraught by
the contradictory lessons of religion and science, simultaneously enthralled
by the beauty of nature and complicit in its destruction — is ultimately tragic,
but it has helped awaken generation after generation to the fragile dignity of
nature. For all of its pious moralizing — and Cole was as full of platitude and
formula as an opera — The Oxbow remains one of the least dated paintings of
the 19th century.
Above left
Cole’s Self-Portrait, c. 1836 (oil on canvas, Above
45 cm X 56cm/1 ft 5% in. x 1 ft 10 in. New- The enigmatic Hebrew inscription of
York Historical Society) suggests a quiet and The Oxbow warns that even landscape is
thoughtful observer. His concern with the subject to divine judgment, but whether that
fragility of nature began in his boyhood in judgment will be Eden or Noah’s Flood, Cole
Lancashire, in the Industrial Revolution, leaves tantalizingly open.

The Oxbow 267

Change on the Horizon
Wild Poppies, Claude Monet
JOHN HOUSE

The brushwork is variegated and informal, suggesting the diverse shapes and
textures of figures, flowers, grasses, foliage and clouds without recourse to detail
... we register the delicacy and finesse of the nuances of colour and touch that

suggest the receding space of the meadow.

woman and a child walk through a meadow of thick grasses;

red poppies cloak a bank that rises to the left; and another
woman and child appear atop this bank. There is no hint of any
link betweemthe two pairs of figures, and no clue as to why the
woman in the foreground has lowered her parasol. A ragged
line of trees closes off the field in the background, with, at the centre, a single
red-roofed house. The sun is not shining, and an even light is spread over the
whole landscape.
This is a very ordinary scene. The site is not obviously picturesque;
neither the lie of the land nor the line of trees offers any particular interest.
Indeed, there are suggestions that we are near a town, rather than in the deep
countryside; the figures are middle class rather than peasants, and the house
in the background is a substantial villa, not a rural cottage. The scene pre-
sumably represents a meadow near Argenteuil, the town on the River Seine
just north-west of Paris where Monet lived and painted in these years.
The treatment of the subject, too, gives no special focus to any of the
elements in the scene. The brushwork is variegated and informal, suggesting
the diverse shapes and textures of figures, flowers, grasses, foliage and clouds
without recourse to detail. At first sight, the viewer’s eye is attracted by the
dark jacket of the woman on the right and the sharp tonal contrasts in her
hat, and by the array of loose red dabs that suggest the poppies that give the
picture its title, set against the grey-green of the grasses. As we look further,
Opposite
A woman and a boy stroll through fields of we see the boy, seemingly holding a bunch of poppies and waist deep in the
poppies, while on the horizon a house hints grasses, and the other figures to the left, and we register the delicacy and
at the encroaching city. This small work was finesse of the nuances of colour and touch that suggest the receding space of
painted in rapid brushstrokes, and yet close
study of the composition and handling of
the meadow.
colour reveals the eye of a true master. Wild Poppies was first exhibited in 1874. It appeared in the independently
organized group exhibition in Paris that first prompted art critics to name the
1873
group the ‘Impressionists’, focusing on their sketch-like technique and every-
Oil on canvas
60 cm x 65cm/ 1 ft 11% in. x 2 ft 1% in. day subject matter, which seemed to privilege the immediate impression of a
Musée d'Orsay, Paris scene over any further meanings and significance. In many ways, this approach
ee

268 JOHN HOUSE

=r ee,

we
 to painting challenged contemporary expectations about the purpose of the
fine arts — that they should convey values and beliefs beyond the mere surface
appearance of the work itself. The vision of the countryside that was current
in the art exhibitions of the period, notably at the vast annual exhibitions of
the Salon in Paris, focused either on the spectacular scenery of coasts and hills
or on the fruitfulness of France’s agricultural lands. In this hermetically sealed
world, there was no place for middle-class figures or hints of the proximity
of the city — no room for signs of material change or social distinctions. Wild
Poppies posed a direct challenge to these expectations; its figures strolling in
the meadow suggest nothing beyond the pleasures of a summer day, and their
setting displays none of the markers of the true countryside.
Charles-Francois Daubigny’s Fields in the Month ofJune, exhibited at
the Salon in 1874 while Poppies was on view in the group exhibition, makes a
revealing comparison with Monet’s canvas. The foreground in both pictures
is dominated by poppies, and the primary pictorial effect is created by the
contrast of the red touches against the complementary green behind them;
and in both the paint handling is broad and informal. But Daubigny’s canvas
is huge —its surface area is nine times as big as Wild Poppies —and it represents
a vast panorama of agricultural land, with open fields and haystacks beyond
the poppies, and small peasant figures embedded in the landscape. This is a
totalizing vision of the essence of rural France. Monet’s picture, by contrast,
shows figures strolling in a trivial corner of the countryside, with no indica-
tion that there is any significance to the scene beyond the here and now.
The imagery of the French countryside had a special resonance in the
early 1870s, when these canvases were exhibited. France had recently suffered
the dual trauma of catastrophic defeat by the Prussians in the Franco-Prussian
War of 1870-71 and the civil insurrection of the Paris Commune in the spring
of 1871 and its brutal suppression. In the aftermath of these events, a special
value was placed on the image of the French countryside as a fertile and serene
realm, visibly untouched by recent events and implicitly the cradle of future
national recovery. Daubigny’s canvas celebrates this reparative vision, while
Monet’s does not.
What the Impressionists’ art offered, as seen so vividly in Wild Poppies,
was a modern view of the world, one that accepted and celebrated all its

Above
This painting by John Singer Sargent shows
Monet painting in the open, a radical
departure that allowed him to capture the
effects of light more accurately than earlier
artists. (Claude Monet Painting by the Edge
of aWood, c. 1885, oil on canvas, 540 cm
x 648 cm/17 ft 8% in. x 21 ft 3 in. Tate,
London)

Right
Charles-Frangois Daubigny, Fields in the
Month ofJune, 1874 (oil on canvas, 135 cm
x 224 cm/4 ft Sin. x 7 ft 4 in. Herbert F.
Johnson Museum of Art, Cornell University)

een)

270 JOHN HOUSE

 ) This is avery ordinary scene ... its figures strolling in the meadow suggest
nothing beyond the pleasures of asummer day.

contingencies. This view is expressed in both the technique and the subject
matter of the picture. The informal brushwork gives a sense of the overall
effect of the scene, as if caught by a rapid glance, and gives no special status to
the figures or any other element in it, though there is remarkable subtlety and
sophistication in this seemingly impromptu paint surface. Moreover, the title
that Monet chose for the picture diverts attention from the figures, focusing
instead on the purely visual effect of the red flowers scattered across the bank
Above
— there is no hint of flower symbolism here. At the same time, the view itself
Whereas contemporary painters such as is quintessentially modern, depicting middle-class leisure in a setting where
Daubigny gave their landscapes a heroic the natural world meets the suburban villa. By exhibiting Wild Poppies in the
feel (opposite), Monet’s works retain a
group exhibition in 1874, Monet was at one and the same time presenting a
more intimate, casual air. The real subject
here is the relaxation and enjoyment of the new vision of landscape and a new notion of the finished picture.
middle classes.

Wild Poppies 271

Life Begins
La Petite Danseuse de quatorze ans, Edgar Degas
QUENTIN BLAKE

Not beautiful in any conventional sense, but alert and full ofstory;
and the strange half-closing of the eyes seems to assert a sort of privacy
and independence of this young person in relation to her situation.

tanding in front of some of Degas’s more richly decorative scenes

of the ballet, it can be easy to forget that they are also a depiction
of working girls; there is no such problem, however, with La Petite
Danseuse de quatorze ans. The little fourteen-year-old dancer
as we are used to seeing her is a two-thirds life-size bronze cast,
depicting one of those ‘rats de l’opéra’ employed in the 19th-century Parisian
theatre. She is in a formal pose, one leg extended forward, the arms stretched
and hands joined behind her back.
What strikes us on first view, I suppose, is the fact that the dancer is
wearing a real tutu anda real hair-ribbon. If that surprises us, we nevertheless
have to remember that what is before us is not what was seen by the visitors
to the sixth Exhibition of Indépendants in Paris in 1881 when the work was
first exhibited. J.-_K. Huysmans in his review of the exhibition described both
the sculpture as it then was and the public reaction to it. It was in wax, the
corsage coloured, the flesh coloured, with real hair, a real skirt, real ribbons.
Another, less sympathetic account by Paul Mantz in Le Temps of this ‘disa-
greeable figurine’ even suggests that Degas had added spots and maculations
to indicate that his dancer was none too clean. To add to what the art critic
Theodore Reff refers to as its ‘ambiguous reality’, the figure was shown in a
glass case. (Strangely, this case had itself been put on show, empty, in the pre-
vious year’s exhibition, as the sculpture it was to contain wasn’t yet ready.) At
the time, as Huysmans recorded, the average Parisian spectator fled offended:
ngs
} show (often very young) dancers at “The terrible reality of this statuette produces [in them] an evident distress; all
rsal. These images, compared to those of their ideas about sculpture, those lifeless cold blanched never-forgotten stere-
TS OM stage, are portraits imbued with a
of individuality and informality, rather
otypes repeated for centuries, are overturned.’ Huysmans claimed La Petite
tham occasion. Danseuse as the only truly modern experiment in sculpture that he knew of.
As we attempt to recreate a mental picture of the work as originally shown
Opposite
The thirty or so recastings of the original
we are conscious of Degas making a sort of exploratory skirmish along the
dancer retain the tutu and hair-ribbon. borders of the artificial and the real. With what we know of later developments
we can see him anticipating that self-conscious, self-referential awareness of art
1381 (cast 1922)
that has become, post-Duchamp, common currency; and a provocation surely
a ronze,
we with material
a 97 om / 3 ft 2 in. more interesting than that of the (all-too-often lame) followers of Duchamp
various collections who still go on, as they hope, challenging our sense of what is and isn’t art.
BB

272 QUENTIN BLAKE

274 QUENTIN BLAKE
 ... We are conscious of Degas making a sort
of exploratory skirmish along the borders of the

artificial and the real.

Not least because even when most of its multimedia characteristics fall
away, the work retains its strength. It’s a strength that prompted the negative
reactions vividly expressed by Paul Mantz in his contemporary account: ‘You
walk around this little dancer, and you are not moved,’ he says, before going
on to ask: ‘Why is she so ugly?’ and to talk about the ‘natural ugliness of aface
where all the vices have imprinted their detestable promises’.
Mantz finds, perhaps disingenuously, that Degas is a moralist, who
knows things that we don’t know about the future of such dancers. Of course,
this is not the morality of Degas, and it is not hard for us now to see that what
was unbearable to Mantz was the artist’s capacity to see not the accepted
cliche but what was actually in front of him.
However, the power of the work comes from more than that accuracy
of gaze; it comes also from an inner tension. The tension is between another
artificiality — that of the pose that the dancer holds — and the potential energy
implied in the real tension of the limbs.
Whatever Degas’s reputation for misogyny, it never seems to have inter-
fered with the concentration of his eye and hand at work, so that his portraits
of women must be among the most realized, the most intelligent, of the 19th
century. A similar degree of attention is given to the head of the little dancer,
its planes and forms and weight; firmer and more authoritative than any of
the preparatory drawings, it manages to be young but to show how it will
develop later. Not beautiful in any conventional sense, but alert and full of
story; and the strange half-closing of the eyes seems to assert a sort of privacy
and independence of this young person in relation to her situation. This work
gives me the sense of something genuinely authoritative, achieved; and as
Opposite such works can do, it begins to take on some of the force of metaphor — not the
These undated studies show Degas intent ready-made metaphors of status labelled Virtue, Charity, Victory, Paris — but
on recording the tension in the little dancer’s a real metaphor of human determination; perhaps even courage.
head, neck and torso caused by the contortion
of the arms and the unnatural pulling back of
the shoulders. (Musée d’Orsay, Paris)

Top
‘A face where all the vices have imprinted their
detestable promises’ (Paul Mantz). Whether
the dancer’s physiognomy seems criminal or
courageous, the intensity of the statue resides
in its expression of potential energy.

Above
The right leg and foot are held at an
unnatural angle by pure poise and control.
It is perhaps this strength that caused some
critics to compare the dancer unfavourably
to more established ideals of beauty.

———

La Petite Danseuse de quatorze ans 275

Puzzling Reflections
A Bar at the Folies-Bergere, Edouard Manet
PHILIP PULLMAN

his painting is full of mystery, ambiguity, doubt. At first sight

it seems to do exactly what the title implies, and show a vivid life-
like view of a bar at the popular music-hall. There is the marble
... reflections on counter with bottles and a dish of oranges; there is a barmaid
behind it waiting to serve us; there is a mirror behind her...but
reality ... are right at the here the mysteries begin.
Because what’s in the mirror cannot be a reflection of what we see in
heart of Modernism ... front of it. Things are displaced; the barmaid’s reflection is too far off to the
right, when we can see that the mirror is parallel with the plane of the picture
itself; there is a man in front of her reflection in the mirror, and there isn’t one
in the ‘reality’ in front of it; there is a whole balcony front missing —and so on.
Furthermore, there are perplexing passages in the paint itself—patches
of light that might be the leg of the counter, or a drift of tobacco smoke, or
simply an effect of light on the surface of the mirror. It’s full of ambiguity.
Now at about the same time that Manet was painting A Bar at the
Folies-Bergére, in the early 1880s, an English artist called Frederick Yeames
was painting a picture called And When Did You Last See Your Father? It
shows a scene from the English Civil War: a young boy from a Royalist family
is being interrogated by a Roundhead officer, while his anxious mother and
sisters wait behind him, hoping the honest little chap won’t betray his father.
Yeames was a competent draughtsman, and the scene is effectively composed;
the handling of the paint is immaculate; the characterization of the individu-
als in the scene is vivid and convincing.
But here’s a thought-experiment. Let’s imagine a full description of that
Civil War scene in words. It would be perfectly possible. There are no puzzles
about mirrors and reflections and things in the wrong place: everything is
easily and immediately readable.
Then let’s imagine we give that description to another artist, of equiva-
lent skill in draughtsmanship and composition and the handling of paint, one
Above
whose ability to convey character through facial expression was the equal
Frederick Yeames, And When Did You Last of Yeames’s, and let him or her paint a picture on a canvas of the same size
See Your Father? (detail), 1878, 103 cm x and shape. It would be a different painting, but would it differ substantially
251.5 cm/3 ft 4% in. x 8 ft 3 in. Walker Art
in ways that are important to the way the painting works? I don’t think so.
Gallery, Liverpool.
Effectively, functionally, it would be the same picture. What the Yeames did,
Opposite this would do. What excited admiration for the skill of the artist or arouses
Manet’s barmaid at the Folies-Bergere is one
compassion or empathy for the people in one picture would do just the same
of the most enigmatic figures in all art, the
subject of a visual and psychological puzzle. in the other.
Now imagine the same process carried out with the Manet.
1882
But would that be possible at all? Long before we get to the difficulty of
Oil on canvas
96 cm x 130 cm / 3 ft 1% in. x 4 ft 3% in. painting an equivalent picture by reading a description of this one, we can’t
Courtauld Institute of Art, London even say exactly what’s being represented. Then there’s the appearance of the
OO

276 PHILIP PULLMAN

 painted surface, which is so important a part of our experience of the picture:
the way the paint is scumbled in the handling of the flowers in the barmaid’s
corsage, and in the great chandelier, and in the massing of the spectators on
the balcony. It’s Manet’s particular touch, his hand, his brushstrokes, that
matter in passages like these. The things that matter about the Yeames can be
put into words quite easily: the things that matter about the Manet cannot.
But I still haven’t mentioned the greatest mystery of all, an enigma
so profound that even if we managed to describe the rest of the painting in
words, we’d still have to throw up our hands in despair at the impossibility
of resolving it, and it’s this: what does the barmaid’s expression mean? How
on earth would we describe that? It is the most unreadable face I know in any
painting. She is far more mysterious than that smirking Florentine we know
as the Mona Lisa. At the heart of this scene of glittering light and the sensu-
ous richness of a dozen different textures, at the very centre of this world of
brilliant surfaces, there is this pretty young face expressing a profound, inex-
plicable...what is it, sadness? Regret? Unease? Alienation? Her face is flushed;
it might be simply that she’s warm under all those lights; it might be the flush
that suffuses the cheeks of a young child kept too long from her bed. She’s by
no means a child, but for all the corseted fullness of her figure, she does look
young; she looks innocent; at the same time, we wouldn’t be surprised to
learn that the conversation in the mirror between her reflection and the man
in the top hat concerns her availability for quite other purposes than pouring
glasses of wine and selling-oranges.
But perhaps there’s a clue in that. Which is the real girl, this one, or
the one in the mirror? Is she two people, one whose character is as shallow
as that of the man in the hat, as shallow as everything else in the mirror,
only as deep as the glass itself, no more truly there than anything else in that
glittering surface, because it’s all surface — and the other who is as complex

Right
Manet’s study for the painting shows that the
barmaid’s facial expression was part of his
conception from the start. However, her
reflection in the mirror is true to life, an effect
that Manet deliberately distorted in the
finished work. (Edouard Manet, study for A
Bar at the Folies-Bergére, 1881. Stedlijk
Museum, Amsterdam)

EEE
EERIE
EE

278 PHILIP PULLMAN

 and profound as the expression on her face, a look that defies all description?
The one in the mirror is not really there, and the one who is really there is not
there either. She’s somewhere else, thinking of her lover, or her debts, or her
... there is a mirror parents in the village she comes from, who haven’t heard from her for months;
or her little sister who has consumption...or thinking of nothing. And of
behind her ... but here course she can’t think really, she’s not real at all—she’s a painted surface, just
like the reflection that isn’t a reflection.
the mysteries begin. But these reflections on reality (we can’t get away from reflections) are
right at the heart of Modernism, that astonishing movement in all the arts
that was fertilized by Baudelaire, germinated with the Impressionists, and
grew throughout the latter part of the 19th century to burst into a brilliant
and fertile flowering with Picasso and Braque, with Stravinsky, with Joyce.
That’s the real difference between A Bar at the Folies-Bergére and And
When Did You Last See Your Father? Yeames and all the other Victorian nar-
rative painters were only interested in half of what there was to be interested
about. Manet was interested in all of it. That’s why they belonged to the past,
and Manet belonged to the future. A Bar at the Folies-Bergére is about a bar
at the Folies-Bergere, it’s about the mystery of that ordinary young woman’s
unfathomable expression, it’s about champagne and oranges and tobacco
smoke and chandeliers and fashionable dress; but it’s also about seeing, and
about recording the way the light glistens on those surfaces, and the way things
in a mirror are different from things in front of our eyes; it’s about the sensa-
tion of sight and the mysteries of representation; it’s about painting itself.

Above
The barmaids themselves were part of
the allure of the Folies-Bergere. The
reflection of the young woman and the
man in the top hat has an air of intensity
that suggests something more than a
client asking for a drink.

oo —_

A Bar at the Folies-Bergére 279

Fading Blooms
Sunflowers, Vincent Van Gogh
LOUIS VAN TILBORGH

Still-life painters always showed blooms in their full glory, but [Van Gogh]
painted sunflowers past their prime .... The bloom with its wilted petals has the
endless charm of what Van Gogh called ‘that slight fadedness, that something
over which life has passed’.

an Gogh's Sunflowers is today regarded as an icon of his art.

As it happens, he painted not one version but eleven — four in
1887, five in 1888, and two in 1889— but when one reads the words
‘the Sunflowers’ one thinks of the painting now in the National
Gallery, London. It was made in August 1888 with (to quote Van
Gogh himself) ‘the enthusiasm of a Marseillais eating bouillabaisse’. He
painted two more versions, which are now in the Seiji Togo Memorial Sompo
Japan Museum of Art in Tokyo and the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.
The original version was kept by the family until 1924, when the widow
of Vincent’s brother Theo, Jo Van Gogh-Bonger, sold it to the trustees of
the Courtauld Fund in London. Realizing that ‘no picture would represent
Vincent in your Gallery ina more worthy manner than the “Sunflowers”’, she
decided, reluctantly, to part with it: ‘It is a sacrifice for the sake of Vincent’s
glory.’ Even the critic and painter Roger Fry, who disparaged Van Gogh in
favour of Cézanne, was impressed by the work: ‘It has supreme exuberance,
vitality, and vehemence of attack.... It belongs to a moment of fortunate self-
confidence ... when the feverish intensity of his emotional reaction to nature
put no undue strain upon his powers of realisation.’
The still life was painted by Van Gogh to impress Gauguin, who had
promised to join him in Arles. Gauguin owned two of the 1887 paintings
of sunflowers, so Van Gogh hit on the idea of decorating the studio in his
Opposite and Above
so-called Yellow House with ‘nothing but large sunflowers’. Sparkling from
This still life is a display of technical
virtuosity. Van Gogh demonstrated that walls, they would symbolize the direction he felt their art should take. He
he was able to use many variants of yellow thought of painting six, then twelve, but managed only four, of which only
without losing pictorial richness and form. two were attempts at mature paintings — the work in London and the preced-
The main colours are ‘the three chrome
yellows, yellow ochre and malachite green,
ing one, with a bluish background, now in the Neue Pinakothek in Munich.
and nothing else’. But the two paintings did not end up in the studio. Van Gogh decided to
decorate the whole apartment and placed the two still lifes in the guest-room.
1888
Oil on canvas
When Gauguin arrived at the end of October, he liked both of them, but pre-
93 x 73 cm/ 3 ft O% in. x 2 ft 4% in. ferred the yellow version, describing it later as ‘a perfect example of a style
National Gallery, London that is completely Vincent’s’.
a ,

280 LOUIS VAN TILBORGH

 Considering this judgment, it is no surprise that during their creative
competition the still life was taken up as a challenge. They decided jointly to
study ‘the orchestration of a pure colour by all the derivatives of that colour’,
as Gauguin later put it. He painted a still life of a pumpkin with a yellow
background and foreground, and Van Gogh made a free repetition of the sun-
flowers with the yellow background (the work now in Tokyo). This artistic
dialogue was paralleled in the portraits they painted of each other. Van Gogh
showed his companion at work in front of the pumpkin still life, and Gauguin
depicted Van Gogh painting sunflowers. For him, Van Gogh’s art was sym-
bolized by this particular picture, and after his departure from Arles at the
end of 1888, he impertinently asked his colleague to send it to him. Van Gogh
categorically refused Gauguin’s ‘right to the canvas in question’, but instead
made a new version (the work now in Amsterdam). However, since Gauguin
did not propose a specific work in exchange it was never sent to him.
This tug-of-war reflects the importance of the picture. Van Gogh was
proud of it because he had ‘taken the sunflower before others’, as he wrote in
1889. Henri Fantin-Latour excelled in violets, Ernest Quost in hollyhocks, but
he was the first to specialize in the Helianthus annuus. His interpretation of
. a perfect example the sunflower was also truly original. Still-life painters always showed blooms
in their full glory, but he painted sunflowers past their prime, displaying seeds
of a style that is and withered ray flowers. Van Gogh thus showed his debt to the Realists, who
had celebrated the beauty of old, everyday objects. He had a preference for
completely Vincent’s. elderly ladies rather than young ones, down-at-heel and muddy shoes, and

(Paul Gauguin)

Right
Gauguin’s painting of Van Gogh at work
on Sunflowers is not true to life. Van Gogh
is shown with a vase of sunflowers in front
of him, but as they had long since finished
flowering, it was an invention by Gauguin.
He wanted to portray his friend as a realist:
somebody who needed to work from life and
not the imagination.

———— —_ B

282 LOUIS VAN TILBORGH

 tumbledown cottages — the sunflowers belonged in the same category. The
bloom with its wilted petals has the endless charm of what Van Gogh called
‘that slight fadedness, that something over which life has passed’.
This kind of humanist poetry was lost on Gauguin, but he must have
been intrigued by the modern way his friend had painted the plants. Rather
than following their morphological form (as he had done in his 1887 still
lifes) Van Gogh now preferred a naive and more schematic presentation;
for instance, he depicted the faded sunflowers with green instead of brown
hearts. This primitive interpretation was in harmony with Gauguin’s recent
determination, arrived at with Emile Bernard, to ‘paint like children’; Van
Gogh wanted to show his friend — a true genius in his eyes — that he himself
was a trustworthy partner in the battle for modern art, his contribution to
which he believed lay in the use of bold and simple colours. However, the sun-
flowers were not meant simply to please the eye. He was seeking a higher goal.
In a painting he wanted ‘to say something comforting, as music is comfort-
ing’, and he was hoping to convey this ‘by the actual radiance and vibrancy’
of the colouring. As applied to the Sunflowers, this suggests that Van Gogh
regarded its successful colouring as comforting ‘music’, and perhaps for
many of us it still is. Although the colours have darkened a little, the still life
is radiant, and charms us with its many shades of yellow. It was obviously
Above painted with a matching sense of pleasure. It dates from the happiest period
Two of the eleven versions of Sunflowers that of Van Gogh’s life, when he was eagerly awaiting Gauguin’s arrival, and it
Van Gogh painted. Left, the version preferred
really looked as if he would finally satisfy his ‘need for gaiety and happiness,
by Gauguin, today in the National Gallery,
London; and right, the version now in the for hope and love’.
Neue Pinakothek, Munich.

oo |

Sunflowers 283
Potential Energy
Iris, Messenger of the Gods, Auguste Rodin
ANTHONY CARO

aillol’s sculptures lie back, waiting to be discovered.

Rodin’s sculptures reach out and grab you. It is assertive.
Rodin transmits his feelings direct. Nothing comes between
the emotion and the sculpture. Iris, Messenger of the Gods
is a flying figure, a small masterpiece. Without being lit-
erally in mid-air, the work captures the feeling of flight. Rodin has left out
whatever is irrelevant, whatever distracts. There is one arm only, no head, no
clothes on the body. It is not an illustration. In the Summer Exhibition of the
Royal Academy one used to see, year after year in the old days, little statues
of dancers. They were correct in every detail, but were tired, lifeless illustra-
tions of dancers posing. Rodin’s small sculptures of dance movements on the
other hand are nothing like these. They are all about energy, the energy of the
dance expressed-in three dimensions. So also, Iris, Messenger of the Gods is
the embodiment, the sculptural equivalent of flying. It says ‘flying’ and it says
‘sculpture’. It is almost abstract.
What an understanding of sculpture Rodin had! His oeuvre was very
Rodin has left out wide ranging. His portrait heads and his full-length statues marry the char-
acter of the sitter with the intensity and strength that Rodin brings to all his
whatever is irrelevant, work. The great statues of Victor Hugo and of Balzac in his dressing-gown,
give us the whole man, blemishes as well as strengths, there is no prettify-
whatever distracts. There ing, the hair uncombed, the stomach distended. In fact, the figure of Iris was
originally intended to be part of his Monument to Victor Hugo, but Iris,
is one arm only, no head, Messenger of the Gods is complete in itself. Rodin makes us focus on the
expression of energy.
no Clothes on the body. This is a relatively small work, but neither did Rodin shy away from the
monumental. The Gates of Hell and the Burghers of Calais are great vision-
It is not an illustration. ary works though they are never bombastic. At the Rodin Museum in Paris
one can see the loose way in which he worked. Photos of Rodin’s studio show
unfinished work marked up in pencil, limbs to be removed or altered. Just as
Iris was developed from a figure for another project, so he would-cut off parts
of his plaster models and collage on pieces of the other sculptures. He was a
modeller, not a carver. He loved the malleability of clay and the look of the
white plaster casts.
Although Rodin had some pieces translated by craftsmen into white
Above
Carrara marble, the works that are cast from the clay are what we are most
Rodin’s crowded studio in Meudon, which
familiar with. The dark tone of the patina unifies the work, even if itobscures
would later become a museum. The sculpture
of Balzac is clearly visible on the right. the working method. That unconstrained way of working pointed the way
for Picasso’s sculpture and for many succeeding generations. It placed the
c. 1895
emphasis squarely on feeling, which has been inherited by sculptors right up
Bronze
H. 48.6 cm / 1 ft 7 in. until the present time and which marks sculpture once again as high art.
Various collections

eee)

284 ANTHONY CARO

The Art of Arrangement
Apples and Oranges, Paul Cézanne
CHRISTOPHER DELL

pples and Oranges has long been recognized as a pivotal

work in Cézanne’s output. Painted in his Paris studio, it was
one of a series of works that showed the same rather mundane
objects: apples, oranges, gaily painted earthenware, tablecloth,
heavily patterned curtains, simple, dark furniture. Artists have
always taken liberties with their subjects, adding here, subtracting there,
nudging a tree to the left or introducing a ship on the horizon to suit the com-
position. That is the essence of art. But ina still life the artist can control the
subject in the flesh as well as on the canvas. Cézanne seems to have acknowl-
edged this when he said that he wanted to ‘re-do Poussin, but from nature’.
Poussin famously modelled his compositions with miniature wax figures — for
Cézanne it was apples and oranges.
He exploits the freedom offered by still life to the full, devising peculiar
Has Cezanne arrangements of fruit, fabric and furniture that defy immediate explanation.
While we could, at a stretch, believe that Chardin had genuinely chanced
turned this still life upon a random group of pots and fruit in his pantry, Cézanne’s composition
is clearly the product of a very particular vision: we can imagine him poring
into a landscape? over the disposition of the items, minutely adjusting the composition before
seizing his brush to immortalize the contents of his kitchen. We can even
imagine him bending down to retrieve the apples and oranges as the careful
but precarious display succumbed to gravity.
Perspective is deliberately played with here. The assortment of cloths
hung and crumpled, combined with the deliberately listing ceramic plate,
merely mask the central issue: that under the white tablecloth there are (at
least) two plausible positions for the table. Ata first glance the horizontal line
of loose fruit, and the nearly upright ceramic jug and compotier, suggest that
the table stands parallel to the viewer. What confuses the eye is the twisted
table-leg on the right hand side: bewilderingly, the light picks out the inside
of the leg, something which would not be visible if the table were indeed hori-
zontal. The twist suggests that the tabletop actually dives down vertiginously
to the left, leaving the objects themselves defying gravity, and the viewer
stranded between two perspectives.
The disorientation continues in the backdrop, which consists of two
pieces of fabric of different patterns: on the left a jaunty diagonal pattern, and
on the right a more conventional floral one. This contrast between geometric
and natural forms embodies a tension that runs through the entire work. The
material to the right, in particular, is folded into crevasses and peaks — for
a fleeting moment we might even discern the outline of the artist’s beloved
c. 1899
Oil on canvas
Mont Sainte-Victoire in Provence. Has Cézanne turned this still life into a
74 cm x 93. cm/2 ft 5 in. x 3 ft O% in. landscape? The fold to the left forms dark caves that make the oranges on
Musée d'Orsay, Paris their stand glow all the more brightly.
ese

286 CHRISTOPHER DELL

Above
Apples and Oranges is dominated by circles
and clashing diagonals. The stark contrast
between the white tablecloth and the dark
material behind introduces a note of drama.

Right
In this earlier work, Compotier, Pitcher
and Fruit, the fruit is loosely dispersed and
appears in the lower part of the canvas. In
the later work it is arranged into coherent
groups towards the top, the bottom being
filled with the lavish folds of the tablecloth.
(Compotier, Pitcher and Fruit, 1892-94, oil
on canvas, 72.5 cm x 91.8 cm/2 ft 4% in. x
3 ft 0% in. The Barnes Foundation, Merion,
Pennsylvania)

288 CHRISTOPHER DELL

 On top of this dark backdrop is draped the white tablecloth. So starched
and artificial are the folds that it could almost be from a 15th-century
Netherlandish painting. In fact, it is not remotely white, but a mixture of
... apples evoke dirty yellows and blue-greys, an effect Cézanne may have imitated from the
work of Monet. Now look more closely still: in a startling touch of realism
Eve, Original Sin, the Cézanne has represented earlier creases, where the tablecloth was neatly
doubled and stowed away. It seems as though, while looking for props, he has
Judgment ofParis. raided the linen cupboard.
The tablecloth serves as the stage for the stars of the piece — the apples
Oranges conjure up and oranges. Both come charged with meaning: apples evoke Eve, Original
Sin, the Judgment of Paris. Oranges conjure up the south of France, Provence,
the south ofFrance, sunshine. Yet Cézanne seems more interested in their form than their sig-
nificance. The artist’s fascination with geometrical shapes is well known, and
Provence, sunshine. grew more pronounced as he got older. Here he clearly revels in the spheres
of the fruit set against the angles of the background. One of the apples — the
lead apple — sits at the precise centre of the picture. The youthful Cézanne,
never one for understatement, exclaimed: ‘I am going to conquer Paris with
an apple!’ Many years later he did.
To appreciate fully how radical this work was, we may compare it with
an earlier painting by Cézanne, the Compotier, Pitcher and Fruit (1892-94),
today in the Barnes Collection in Philadelphia. The elements are almost iden-
tical, but the treatment is very different. The backdrop is sombre and sober,
and the draped materials (all bland monotones) are gathered up in a single
sweep that consumes the less animated top third of the painting. Apples and
Oranges is, quite simply, more dramatic. Firstly the point of view is much
closer to the objects; the frame forms fractured negative shapes around the
periphery, imparting energy to the scene. The apples are also much closer
together, and grouped so that they occupy only the centre of the canvas,
whereas in Compotier, Pitcher and Fruit they spill haphazardly into the
corners. One senses that Cézanne painted these apples with such zesty hues to
compensate for the power they lost to the loose composition. And while in the
earlier work we can still see the edge of the table, in the later it has been oblit-
erated, cast into doubt by the shining white cloth. The effect in the later work
is of a unified, integrated composition that effortlessly blends the decorative
with the figural, filling every inch of the canvas.
Originally owned by the art critic Gustave Geffroy, who had written
about Cézanne’s work as early as 1895, Apples and Oranges entered the
collection of the Louvre in 1911, just five years after the artist’s death. Even
then it was recognized as one of the most important still lifes of the late 19th
century, not only great in its own right, but also important in the broader
development of art. Its legacy, in the compression of background and fore-
ground, sharp diagonals and limited tonal range, was Cubism. It was not for
nothing that Picasso described Cézanne as ‘the father of us all’.

Above
Although Cézanne is thought of principally
as working in oils, he was also a master of
watercolour painting, as can be seen from this
self-portrait. (c. 1895, 28 cm X 26 cm/ 11 in.
x 10% in. Feilchenfeldt Collection, Zurich)

oo |

Apples and Oranges 289

Down to Earth
<= —*

Dust Motes Dancing in the Sunbeams (Sunbeams), Vilhelm Hammershgi

ANNE-BIRGITTE FONSMARK

ust Motes Dancing in the Sunbeams is one of the

best-known works by Danish artist Vilhelm Hammershoi
(1864-1916). The title is poetic, perhaps an attempt to incor-
porate a human dimension into a painting that is striking not
for the presence of people, but for their absence. The room
depicted in the image is empty, the only ‘living’ element being the encounter
between the dust motes and the rays of light streaming in through a window,
beaming past a door and then on down and across the floor. However, this
poetic title was added later; Hammershgi himself used the rather less senti-
mental title Sunbeams (or Sunshine) when he exhibited the work.
Hammershgi would spend his entire life returning to a fairly small
number of motifs, but is particularly known for his interiors. These are
painted in low-key greys inspired by the Dutch painters of the 17th century.
The rooms are often empty, but occasionally we see a woman dressed in black;
this was Ida, Hammershgi’s wife. Behind the external peace and harmony of
his paintings there is often a sense of impending dissonance.
Sunbeams was painted in Hammershoi’s apartment in an old building
at Strandgade 30 in Christianshavn (now part of Copenhagen). He repeated
Sunbeams pores this motif time and time again, with and without furniture, with and without
people, but in Sunbeams it was at its most convincing, with an almost crystal-
up a disquieting line clarity. And yet the painting is something of an enigma. It does not depict
the life lived in this home — despite the emptiness of the room, there is nothing
atmosphere of to indicate that the bailiffs have just walked off with furniture belonging to a
poor family (a popular theme among Danish artists of the 19th century).
strangeness. The The content is far subtler than that, and the light takes centre stage. Light
was central to the works of Hammershgi, but in contrast to the Impressionists
ego is alone. and the Danish painters of the early 19th century, this is not a light that
reveals. Instead, it is used to disturb. In Sunbeams it takes on an almost
physical tangibility, while by comparison the floor seems peculiarly ethereal
and insubstantial. The light is depicted as a scientific phenomenon: this is
the light of the sun, a light that, having travelled through the cosmos, finally
reaches this Copenhagen home and ends its journey abruptly on the floor. It is
Above a ‘heavenly’ light, but nothing like the divine light found in the Annunciation
This silent, half-lit room seems devoid of scenes ofBotticelli or Piero della Francesca. The light in Hammershai’s paint-
significance. The viewer is compelled to ing creates a sense of doubt; doubt about our world, about Providence, about
examine the image entirely unaided, without
the existence of God.
the comforting interpretative structures of
symbolism, history or religion. Sunbeams conjures up a disquieting atmosphere of strangeness. The
ego is alone. This painting depicts not only a physical room, but also a
1900
Oil on canvas
mental space; and more than anything else, it shows the existential loneliness
70 cm x 59 cm / 2 ft 3% in. x 1 ft 11% in. of modern man. As such, it can be seen as one of the first depictions in the
Ordrupgaard, Copenhagen history of art of a state of mind, a full stop in the human psyche.
——_—_______—___———_ nen —~s

290 ANNE-BIRGITTE FONSMARK

me
ES OEM SSRIS

ea%
Further Reading
——— D000 Te

History (London, 2000), 179-81, fig. 154 the Image Before the Era of Art (Chicago, 1994),
PART 1 THE BIRTH OF ART: UP TO 500 Bc
E. Paribeni, ‘La perplessita di Athena. Per 129-32
una corretta lettura del frontone di Pyrgi’, R. Cormack, ‘Reading Icons’, Valér:
The Chauvet Cave
J.-M. Chauvet, E. B. Deschamps and C. Hillaire, Archeologia Classica, 21/1 (1969), 53-57, Konstvetenskapliga Studier, 4 (1991) 1-28, esp.
Chauvet Cave: Discovery of the World’s Oldest plates XVII-XIX 8-16

Paintings (London, 1996) R. Cormack, in M. Vassilaki, ed., Mother of God:

J. Clottes, Chauvet Cave: The Art of Earliest The Ludovisi ‘Throne’ Representations ofthe Virgin in Byzantine Art
Times, trans. P. G. Bahn (Salt Lake City, L. Costamagna and C. Sabbione, Una citta in (Milan, 2000), 262—63

Utah, 2003) Magna Grecia Locri Epizefiri (Reggio Calabria, G. Sotiriou and M. Sotiriou, Ic6nes du Mont Sinai,
J. Clottes, ed., Return to Chauvet Cave, trans. 1990), 187-210, esp. 198 2 vols (Athens, 1956-58), vol. 1, 21-22
P. G. Bahn (London, 2003) K. J. Hartswick, The Gardens ofSallust: K. Weitzmann, 1, vol. 1: From the Sixth to the
A Changing Landscape (Austin, Texas, 2004), Tenth Century (Princeton, NJ, 1976), 18-21
The Mycerinus Triad 119-30
D. Arnold, Egyptian Art in the Age ofthe J. M. Redfield, The Locrian Maidens: Love and Moche Portrait Vessel
Pyramids (New York and London, 1999) Death in Greek Italy (Princeton, NJ, 2003) C.B. Donnan, Moche Art of Peru: PreColumbian
[exhibition catalogue] Symbolic Communication (Los Angeles, 1978)
B. von Bothmer, ‘Notes on the Mycerinus Triad’, The Riace Bronzes C.B. Donnan, Moche Portraits from Ancient Peru
Bulletin of the Museum ofFine Arts, 48 (1950) J. Boardman, Greek Sculpture: The Classical (Austin, Texas, 2004)
M. Lehner, The Complete Pyramids (London and Period (London, 1985) J. W. Verano, ‘Moche ceramic portraits’, in
New York, 1997) A. Busignani, The Bronzes of Riace (Florence, J. Pillsbury, ed., Moche Art and Archaeology
1981) in Ancient Peru (Washington, DC, 2001)
Olmec Colossal Head 8 ‘Coming of age in Moche portraits’, Minerva:
J. Briigemann and M. A. Hers, “Exploraciones The Lady of Elche The International Review of Ancient Art and
arqueologicas en San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan’, Cien anos de una dama (Madrid, 1997) [exhibition Archaeology, 16/2 (2005)
Boletin del Instituto Nacional de Antropologia catalogue]
e Historia, 39 (1970), 18-23 R. Olmos and T. Tortosa, eds, La Dama de Elche: The Relief of Ahkal Mo’ Nahb III
M.D. Coeand R. A. Diehl, In the Land ofthe Lecturas desde la diversidad (Madrid, 1997) D. Stuart, The Inscriptions from Temple XIX at
Olmec, 2 vols (Austin, Texas, 1980) S. Rovira Llorens, ed., La Dama de Elche Palenque: A Commentary (San Francisco, 2005)
R. A. Diehl, The Olmecs: America’s First (Madrid, 2006) D. Stuart and G. Stuart, Palenque: Eternal City of
Civilization (London and New York, 2004) the Maya (London and New York, 2008)
B. de la Fuente, Escultura monumental olmeca The Villa of the Mysteries
(Mexico City, 1973), 238-39 M. Beard, Pompeii: the life of aRoman town
(London, 2008) PART 3 THE BLENDING OF CULTURES:
B. Bergmann, ‘Seeing women in the Villa of 1000-1300
Ashurbanipal’s Lion Hunt
R. D. Barnett, Sculptures from the North Palace the Mysteries: a modern excavation of the
Dionysiac murals’, in V. C. Gardner Coates Zhang Zeduan, Spring Festival on the River
of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (London, 1976)
and J. L. Seydl, eds, Antiquity Recovered: J. Cahill, The Painter’s Practice: How Artists
J.E. Reade, Assyrian Sculpture (London, 1983)
The legacy of Pompeii and Herculaneum Lived and Worked in Traditional China
E. Weissert, ‘Royal hunt and royal triumph ina
(Los Angeles, 2007), 231-69 (New York, 1994)
prism fragment of Ashurbanipal’, in S. Parpola
R. Ling, Roman Painting (Cambridge, 1991) M. K. Hearn, How to Read Chinese Paintings
and R. M. Whiting, eds, Assyria 1995 (Helsinki,
A. Maiuri, La Villa dei Misteri (Rome, 1931) (New York, 2008)
1997), 339-58
A. Murck, Poetry and Painting in Song China:
The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius The Subtle Art of Dissent. Cambridge, Mass.,
The ‘New York Kouros’
J. Falus, ‘Some iconographic questions of the 2000)
G. Richter, Kouroi: Archaic Greek Youths. A
equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius’, Acta Yang Xin, Richard M. Barnhart and others,
Study of the Development of the Kouros Type
Historiae Artium Academiae Scientiarum Three Thousand Years of Chinese Painting
in Greek Sculpture (London, 1960), 41-42
Hungaricae, 26 (1980) (New Haven, Conn., and London, 1997)
A. Stewart, Greek Sculpture: An Exploration
P. P. Fehl, ‘The placement of the equestrian
(New Haven, 1990), 111-13
statue of Marcus Aurelius in the Middle Ages’, Vishnu Reclining on the Serpent Anantha
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld J. Boisselier, ‘Notes sur l’art du bronze dans
PART 2 THE ART OF POWER: Institutes, 36 (1974) Pancien Cambodge’, Artibus Asiae, 29 (1968),
500 sc—ap 1000 C. P. Presicce; The Equestrian Statue of Marcus 275-334
Aurelius in Campidoglio, ed. A. M. Sommella J. Guy, ‘Angkorian metalwork in the temple
The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ Relief (Milan, 1990) setting: icons, architectural adornment and
R. Bianchi Bandinelli and A. Giuliano, Etruschi ritual paraphernalia’, in L. Cort and P. Jett (eds),
e Italici prima del dominio di Roma (Milan, The Buddha Preaching the First Sermon Gods of Angkor: Bronzes from the National
1973), 170-71, fig. 196 Musée Guimet, The Golden Age of Classical Museum of Cambodia, (Washington, DC,
O. J. Brendel, Etruscan Art (Harmondsworth, India: The Gupta Empire (Paris, 2007) 2010), 88-129
1978), 234-37, figs 163-64 J. Guy, Indian Temple Sculpture (London, V&A H. I. Jessup and T. Zephir, eds, Sculpture of
G. Colonna, ‘Il santuario di Pyrgi dalle origini Publications, 2007) Angkor and Ancient Cambodia (Washington,
mitistoriche agli altorilievi frontonali dei Sette J.C. Harle, Gupta Sculpture (London, 1974) DC, and London, 1997)
e di Leucotea’, Scienze dell’Antichita, 10 (2000), J.G. Williams, The Art of Gupta India
309-25, figs 35-44 (Princeton, 1982) The Vézelay Tympanum
G. Colonna, ed., Laltorilievo di Pyrgi: Dei ed C. Picard, ‘Le mythe de Circé au tympan du grand
eroi greci in Etruria (Rome, 1996) The Virgin and Child with Angels and Two Saints portail de Vézelay’, Bulletin Monumental
S. Haynes, Etruscan Civilization: A Cultural H. Belting, Likeness and Presence: A History of (1945), 213-29

292 FURTHER READING

F. Salet, La Madeleine de Vézelay: étude Giotto, The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes M. Eisenberg, Lorenzo Monaco (Princeton, NJ,
iconographique par Jean Adhémar (Melun, G. Basile, ed., Giotto: The Frescoes ofthe 1989)
1948) Scrovegni Chapel in Padua (Milan, 2002) R. Jones, ‘Palla Strozzi e la sagrestia di Santa
L. Saulnier-Pernuitand N. Stratford, La Sculpture B. Cole, Giotto: The Scrovegni Chapel, Padua, Trinita’, Rivista d’Arte, 37 (1984), 9-106
oubliée de Vézelay (Paris, 1984) Great Fresco Cycles of the Renaissance L. B. Kanter, ‘A decade of transition, 1422 -1432’,
E. Vergnolle, L’Art roman en France (Paris, 1994), (New York, 1993) in L. B. Kanter and P, Palladino, Fra Angelico
253-54 A. Derbes and M. Sandona, eds, The Cambridge (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art,
Companion to Giotto (Cambridge, 2004) 2005), 79-87
The Cefali: Mosaics A. Padoa Rizzo, ‘Dal Gotico estremo al
A. Cilento, Byzantine Mosaics in Norman Sicily: Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara Rinascimento: la “Deposizione di croce”
Palermo, Monreale, Cefalt (Udine, 2009) K. P. Kim, ed., Goryeo Dynasty: Korea’s Age of per Palla Strozzi di Lorenzo Monaco e del Beato
O. Demus, Byzantine Mosaic and Decoration: Enlightenment, 918-1392 (San Francisco: Asian Angelico’, in G. Marchini and E. Micheletti, eds,
Aspects of Monumental Art in Byzantium Art Museum, 2003) La Chiesa di Santa Trinita a Firenze (Florence,
(London, 1947) Y. Pak, ‘Naksan legend and Water-Moon 1987), 125-32
J. J. Norwich, The Normans in Sicily Avalokiteshvara (Suwol Kwanitim) of the Kory J. T. Spike, Fra Angelico (New York, 1996)
(Harmondsworth, 1992) period’, in N. N. Richard and D. E. Brix, eds, C.B. Strehlke, Angelico (Milan, 1998)
The History of Painting in East Asia (Taipei, G. Vasari, Lives ofthe Artists, trans. J. C.
The Reclining Buddha of Polonnaruwa 2008), 198-222 Bondanella and P. Bondanella (Oxford, 1991)
J. Balasooriya, The Glory of Ancient Polonnaruva J. Smith, ed., Arts of Korea (New York:
(Polonnaruwa, 2004) Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1998) Rogier van der Weyden, The Descent from
S. Jos, ‘Discovering Polonnaruwa’, The Hindu the Cross
(25 June 2006) Claus Sluter, The ‘Well of Moses’ L. Campbell, Van der Weyden (New York,
S. Nash, ‘Claus Sluter’s “Well of Moses” for 1980), 7-9
K. M. de Silva, A History ofSri Lanka
the Chartreuse de Champmol reconsidered’, L. Campbell and J. van der Stock, Rogier van
(London, 1981)
pts I-III, Burlington Magazine, 147 (2005), der Weyden, 1400-1464: Master of Passions
UNESCO, The Cultural Triangle of Sri Lanka
798-809; 148 (2006), 456-69; 150 (2008), (Leuven, 2009), 18-21, 32—47
(Paris, 1993)
pp. 724=41. D. De Vos, Rogier van der Weyden: The Complete
S. Nash, ‘Collaboration, colour and meaning: Works (New York, 1999), 10—41
Unkei, Muchaku and Seshin :
Claus Sluter, Jean Malouel and the polychromy V. Nieto Alcalde, El “‘Descendimiento’ de Van der
P. Mason, History of Japanese Art (New York,
of the Great Cross (the Well of Moses) at the Weyden (Madrid, 2003)
1993)
Chartreuse de Champmol’, in V. Brinkmann,
S. Moran, ‘The statue of Muchaku, Hokuend6o
M. Hollein and O. Primavesi (eds), Circumlito: Donatello, David
Kofukuji: a detailed study,’ Arts Asiatiques, 5
The Polychromy of Antique and Medieval F. Caglioti, Donatello ei Medici: storia del David
(1958), 49-64
Sculpture (Frankfurt am Main, 2010) e della Giuditta, 2 vols (Florence, 2000)
H. Mori, Japanese Portrait Sculpture (Tokyo, S. Nash, Northern Renaissance Art (Oxford, V. Herzner, ‘David Florentinus’, Jahrbuch der
New York and San Francisco, 1977) 2008) Berliner Museen, new series, 24 (1982), 63-142
H. Mori, Sculpture of the Kamakura Period
H. Kauffmann, Donatello: eine Einftihrung in sein
(New York and Tokyo, 1974) Hubert and Jan Van Eyck, The Ghent Altarpiece Bilden und Denken (Berlin, 1935)
E. Dhanens, Van Eyck: The Ghent Altarpiece S.B. McHam, ‘Donatello’s bronze David and
The Stained Glass of Chartres Cathedral (New York, 1973) Judith as metaphors of Medici rule in Florence’,
P. Ball, Universe of Stone: Chartres Cathedral A. Dierick, The Ghent Altarpiece: Van Eyck’s Art Bulletin, 83 (2001), 32—47
and the Triumph ofthe Medieval Mind Masterpiece Revisited, trans. H. Brondeel U. Pfisterer, Donatello und die Entdeckung der
(London, 2008) (Ghent, 1996) Stile (Munich, 2002)
C. Manhes-Deremble, Les Vitraux narratifs L. B. Philip, The Ghent Altarpiece and the Art of A. W. B. Randolph, Engaging Symbols: Gender,
de la Cathédrale de Chartres (Paris, 1993) Jan van Eyck (Princeton, NJ, 1971) Politics, and Public Art in Fifteenth-century
M. Miller, Chartres Cathedral: The Medieval W.H. J. Weale, Hubert and John Van Eyck Florence (New Haven, Conn., and London,
Stained Glass and Sculpture (London, 1980) (London, 1908) 2002)

Masaccio and Masolino, The Brancacci Chapel Aztec Eagle Knight ,

PART 4 A NEW BEGINNING: 1300-1500
Frescoes C.F. Klein, ‘The ideology of autosacrifice at
D. Amory, ‘Masaccio’s Expulsion from Paradise: the Templo Mayor’, in E. H. Boone, ed., The
Ife Copper Mask
a recollection of antiquity’, Marsyas, 20 Aztec Templo Mayor (Washington, DC, 1987),
L. Aronson, ‘Ijebu Yoruba Aso Olona:
(1979-80), 7-10 293-370
a contextual and historical overview’,
U. Baldini and O. Casazza, La capella Brancacci L. Lopez Lujan, La Casa de las Aguilas (Mexico
African Arts, 25/3 (1992), 57
(Milan, 1990) City, 2006)
S. Blier, Ancient Ife: Art, Dynasty, and the
O. Casazza, ‘Il ciclo delle storie di San Pietro e Fray B. de Sahagun, The Conquest of Mexico,
Birthplace of the Yoruba (forthcoming) la Historia salutatis’, Critica d’Arte, 9 (1985), Florentine Codex, book 12, 1569, trans. A. J. O.
S. Blier, ‘Kings, crowns, and rights of succession: 77-82 Anderson and C. E. Dibble (Santa Fe, 1975)
Obalufon arts at Ife and other Yoruba centers’, K. Christiansen, ‘Some observations on the
Art Bulletin, 67/3 (1985), 73-91 Brancacci Chapel frescoes after their Piero della Francesca, The Montefeltro Altarpiece
H. J. Drewal and E. Schildkrout, Kingdom ofIfe: cleaning’, Burlington Magazine, 133 J. V. Field. Piero della Francesca: A
Sculptures from West Africa (London, 2010) (1991), 5-20 Mathematician’s Art (New Haven, Conn., 2005)
[exhibition catalogue] A. Molho, ‘The Brancacci Chapel: studies in M. A. Lavin, Piero della Francesca (new edn,
E. Eyo, Highlights of 2000 Years of Nigerian Art its iconography and history’, Journal ofthe London, 2002)
(Lagos, 1976), pl. 15 Warburg and Courtauld Institute, 40 (1977), M. Meiss with T. G. Jones, ‘Once again Piero
E. G. Parrinder, Religion in an African City 40-58 della Francesca’s Montefeltro Altarpiece’, Art
(London, 1953), 30F. Bulletin, 48 (1966), 203-06
Willett, The Art of Ife: A Descriptive Catalogue Fra Angelico (and Lorenzo Monaco),
and Database (Glasgow: Hunterian Museum The Deposition Alessandro Botticelli, The Birth of Venus
and Art Gallery, 2004) [CD-ROM] G. Bonsanti, Beato Angelico: Catalogo completo A. Cecchi, Botticelli (Milan, 2005)
(Florence, 1998) C. Dempsey, The Portrayal of Love: Botticelli’s

FURTHER READING 293

 Primavera and Humanist Culture at the Time of B. Kempers, ‘Words, images, and all the Pope’s M. A. Sullivan, ‘Bruegel’s Proverbs: art and
Lorenzo the Magnificent (Princeton, NJ, 1992) men: Raphael’s Stanza della Segnatura and the audience in the northern Renaissance’,
H. P. Horne, Alessandro Filipepi, commonly synthesis of divine wisdom’, in I. Hampsher- Art Bulletin, 73 (1991), 431-66

called Sandro Botticelli, Painter of Florence Monk, Karin Tilmans and Frank van Vree, eds,
(London, 1908; repr. 1980) History of Concepts: A Comparative Perspective Tintoretto, The Crucifixion
R. Lightbown, Sandro Botticelli, vol. 1: Life and (Amsterdam, 1998), 131-65 E. Newton, Tintoretto (London and New
Work (2nd edn, London and New York, 1989) York, 1952)
Matthias Griinewald, The Isenheim Altarpiece B. Robb, Brian Robb on Tintoretto’s San Rocco
PART 5 PERFECTING THE ART: 1500-1600 Griinewald und seine Zeit (Berlin, 2007) ‘Crucifixion’, Painters on Painting, (London,
{exhibition catalogue] 1969)
Albrecht Diirer, Self-Portrait A. Hayum, The Isenheim Altarpiece: God’s
G. Goldberg, B. Heimberg and M. Schawe, Medicine and the Painter’s Vision (Princeton, El Greco, The Funeral of the Count of Orgaz
Albrecht Diirer: die Gemdlde in der Alten 1989) X. Bray, El Greco: The Greek of Toledo (London,
Pinakothek (Heidelberg, 1998), 314—53 R. Mellinkoff, The Devil at Isenbeim: Reflections 2004)
L. J. Koerner, The Moment ofSelf-Portraiture in ofPopular BeliefinGriinewald’s Altarpiece D. Davies, El Greco (Oxford, 1976)
German Renaissance Art (Chicago, 1993) (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1988) D. Davies, ed., El Greco (London, 2003;
G. Kopp-Schmidt: ‘Mit den Farben des Apelles: W. K. Ziilch, Der historische Griinewald New York, 2004) [exhibition catalogue]
antikes Kiinstlerlob in Diirers Selbstbildnis (Munich, 1938)
von 1500’, Wolfenbiitteler Renaissance-
PART 6 PAST AND PRESENT: 1600-1800
Mitteilungen, 28 (2004), 1-24 Titian, The Assumption ofthe Virgin
E. Panofsky, The Life and Art of Albrecht Diirer, F. da Mosto, Francesco’s Venice (London, 2004)
Caravaggio, The Supper at Emmaus
2 vols (Princeton, NJ, 1943) C. Hope and others, Titian, ed. D. Jaffe
H. Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life (London, 1999)
D. Wuttke, ‘Diirer und Celtis: von der Bedeutung (London, 2004) [exhibition catalogue]
C. Puglisi, Caravaggio (London, 1998)
des Jahres 1500 fiir den deutschen Humanismus’, P. Humfrey, Titian: The Complete Paintings
J. T. Spike, Caravaggio (New York and London,
Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, (Ghent, 2007)
2001) [with CD-ROM catalogue]
10 (1980), 73-129
P. Zitzlsperger, Diirers Pelz und das Recht im Bild: Sultan Muhammad, The Court of Gayumars
Artemisia Gentileschi, Judith Slaying Holofernes
Kleiderkunde als Methode der Kunstgeschichte Abu al-Qasim Firdawsi, Shahnameh: The Persian
K. Christiansen andJ.Mann, Orazio and
(Berlin, 2008) Book ofKings, trans. D. Davis (New York, 2006)
Artemisia Gentileschi: Father and Daughter,
S.R. Canby, Persian Painting (London and New
Painters in Baroque Italy (New York, New
Leonardo da Vinci, Portrait of Lisa del Giocondo York, 1993) ~
Haven, Conn., and London, 2001) [exhibition
(Mona Lisa) M.B. Dickson and S. C. Welch, The Houghton
Shahnameh, 2 vols (Cambridge, Mass., 1981) catalogue]
S. Bramly, Mona Lisa (London, 1996)
M. D. Garrard, Artemisia Gentileschi (New York,
M. Kempo, Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Dust Muhammad, ‘Preface to the Bahram
Mirza Album’, in Album Prefaces and Other 1993)
Works of Nature and Man (rev. edn, Oxford
Documents on the History of Calligraphers and G. Greer, The Obstacle Race: The Fortunes of
and New York, 2006)
Painters, trans. W. M. Thackston (Leiden, 2001) Women Painters and their Work (London, 1979)
R. McMullen, Mona Lisa: The Picture and the
Myth (Boston, 1975) R. Hillenbrand, ‘The iconography of the Shah-
nama-yi Shahi’, Pembroke Papers, 4 (1996), Bichitr, Portrait ofJahangir Preferring a Sufi
Giovanni Bellini, The San Zaccaria Altarpiece 53-78 Shaikh to Kings
O. Batschmann, Giovanni Bellini (London, 2008) D. J. Roxburgh, ‘Micrographia: toward a visual J. Guy and D. Swallow, Arts of India, 1550-1900
P. Humfrey, The Altarpiece in Renaissance Venice logic of Persianate painting’, RES: Anthropology (London, 1990)
(New Haven and London, 1993) and Aesthetics, 43 (spring 2003), 13-30 F. S. Kleiner and C. J. Mamiya, Gardner’s Art
G. Robertson, Giovanni Bellini (Oxford, 1968) Through the Ages: Non-Western Perspectives
Qiu Ying and Lu Shidao, Pavilions in the (13th edn, Boston, 2009)
Hieronymus Bosch, The Garden of Earthly Delights Mountains of the Immortals S. C. Welch, Imperial Mughal Painting (New
H. Belting, Hieronymous Bosch, Garden of C. Clunas, Empire of Great Brightness: Visual and York, 1978)
Earthly Delights, trans. 1. Flett (New York, Material Cultures of Ming China, 1368-1644
2005) (London, 2007) Peter Paul Rubens, Minerva Protects Pax from War
C. D. Cuttler, Northern Painting from Pucelle to Wen C. Fong andJ. C. Y. Watt, Possessing the M. Lamster, Master of Shadows (New York, 2009)
Bruegel (New York and London, 1968; rev. repr. Past: Treasures from the National Palace G. Martin, Rubens: The Ceiling Decoration ofthe
1991) Museum, Taipei (New York and Taipei, 1996) Banqueting Hall (London, 2005)
C. L. Virdis and M. Pietrogiovanna, Gothic and {exhibition catalogue]
Renaissance Altarpieces (London, 2002) E. J. Laing, ‘Qiu Ying’s late landscapes’, Oriental Rembrandt van Rijn, The Night Watch
Art, 43/1 (1997), 28-36 H. Berger Jr., Manhood, Marriage and Mischief:
Michelangelo, The Sistine Chapel Ceiling Rembrandt’s ‘Night Watch’ and Other Dutch
R. King, Michelangelo and the Pope’s Ceiling Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Proverbs Group Portraits (New York, 2006)
(New York, 2003) A. Dundes and C. Stibbe, The Art of Mixing G. Schwartz, Rembrandt’s Universe:
P. de Vecchi, ed., The Sistine Chapel: A Glorious Metaphors: A Folkloristic Interpretation of the His Art, his Life, his World (London, 2006)
Restoration (New York, 1994) ‘Netherlandish Proverbs’ by Pieter Bruegel the
W.E. Wallace, Michelangelo: The Complete Elder (Helsinki, 1981) Gianlorenzo Bernini, The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa
Sculpture, Painting, Architecture (New York, W. Fraenger, Der Bauern-Bruegel und das G. Careri, Bernini: Flights of Love, the Art of
1998) deutsche Sprichwort (Zurich, 1923) Devotion, trans. L. Lappin (Chicago, 1995)
R. Grosshans, Pieter Bruegel d. A: die G. Deleuze, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque,
Raphael, The School of Athens niederlindischen Sprichworter (Berlin, 2003) trans. T. Conley (Minneapolis, 1993)
M.B. Hall, ed., Raphael's School of Athens, R. H. Marijnissen and others, Bruegel: tout H. Hibbard, Bernini (Harmondsworth, 1965)
Masterpieces of Western Art (Cambridge and Veeuvre peint et dessiné (Antwerp and Paris, I. Lavin, Bernini and the Unity ofthe Visual Arts
New York, 1997) 1988), 133-45 (New York, 1980)
C. L. Joost-Gaugier, Raphael’s Stanza della M. A. Meadow, Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s I. Lavin, ed., Gianlorenzo Bernini: New Aspects
Segnatura: Meaning and Invention (Cambridge ‘Netherlandish Proverbs’ and the Practice of his Art and Thought: A Commemorative
and New York, 2002) of Rhetoric (Zwolle, 2002) Volume (Pennsylvania, 1986)

294 FURTHER READING

J. Pope-Hennessy, An Introduction to Italian (London, 1972) Reception (London, 2000)
Sculpture, vol. 3: Italian High Renaissance and C. Yriarte, Goya: sa biographie, les fresques,
Baroque Sculpture (4th edn, London, 1996) les toiles, les tapisseries, les eaux-fortes et le Edgar Degas, La Petite Danseuse de quatorze ans
The Life of Saint Teresa of Avila, trans. J. M. catalogue de l’ceuvre avec cinquante planches P. Cabanne, Edgar Degas (Paris, 1957); Eng. trans.
Cohen (London, 1957) inédites (Paris, 1867) M. L. Landa (Paris and New York, n.d. [1958])
R. Wittkower, Bernini: The Sculptor ofthe Roman J.-K. Huysmans, Ecrits sur l'art: 1867-1905
Baroque (4th edn, London, 1955) Caspar David Friedrich, The Wanderer above the (Paris, 2006)
Sea of Mist T. Reff, Degas: The Artist’s Mind (London and
Nicolas Poussin, The Phocion Paintings H. Bérsch-Supan and K. W. Jahnig, Caspar New York, 1976)
A. Blunt, The Paintings of Nicolas Poussin David Friedrich: Gemdlde, Druckgraphik und
(London, 1966) bildmdssige Zeichnungen (Munich, 1973) Edouard Manet, The Bar at the Folies-Bergére
R. Verdi and P. Rosenberg, Nicolas Poussin, W. Busch, Caspar David Friedrich: Asthetik und F. Cachin, Manet: Painter of Modern Life
1594-1665 (London, 1995) [exhibition catalogue] Religion (Munich, 2003) (London, 1995)
W. Hofmann, ed., Caspar David Friedrich, T. J. Clark, The Painting of Modern Life: Paris in
Diego Velazquez, Las Meninas 1774-1840 (Munich, 1974) [exhibition catalogue] the Art of Manet and his Followers (Princeton,
A. de Beruete, Velazquez (Paris, 1898) J. L. Koerner, Caspar David Friedrich and the NJ, 1985)
E. Harris, Complete Studies on Velazquez Subject of Landscape (London, 1990) J. Cuno and J. Kaak, eds, Manet: Face to Face
(Madrid, 2006) H. Gassner, Caspar David Friedrich: die (Munich, 2004) [exhibition catalogue]
J. Lopez-Rey, Velazquez, 2 vols (Cologne, 1996) Erfindung der Romantik (Munich, 2006) R. King, The Judgment ofParis:
[exhibition catalogue] The Revolutionary Decade that Gave the
Johannes Vermeer, The Art of Painting World Impressionism (New York, 2006)
I. Gaskell and M. Jonker, eds, Vermeer Studies Eugéne Delacroix, Liberty Leading the People
(Washington, DC, and New Haven, Conn., 1998) B. Jobert, Delacroix (Princeton, 1998) Vincent Van Gogh, Sunflowers
W. A. Liedtke, Vermeer: The Complete Paintings A. Serullaz and V. Pomaréde, Eugéne Delacroix, R. Dorn, Décoration: Vincent van Goghs
(Antwerp and New York, 2008) [exhibition ‘La Liberté guidant le peuple’ (Paris, 2004) Werkreihe fiir das Gelbe Haus in Arles
catalogue] H. Toussaint, ‘La Liberté guidant le peuple’ de (Hildesheim, Ziirich and New York, 1990)
W. A. Liedtke, with M. C. Plomp and A. Riiger, Delacroix (Paris, 1982) R. Dorn, ‘Van Gogh’s Sunflowers series’, Van
Vermeer and the Delft School (New Haven, Gogh Museum Journal (1999), 42-61
Conn., 2001) [exhibition catalogue] J. M. W. Turner, The Burning of the Houses L. van Tilborgh, Van Gogh and the Sunflowers
J. M. Montias, Vermeer and his Milieu: A Web of Lords and Commons, October 16, 1834 (Amsterdam, 2008)
ofSocial History (Princeton, NJ, 1989) M. Butlin and E. Joll, The Paintings ofJ].M. W. L. van Tilborgh and E. Hendriks, ‘The Tokyo
A. K. Wheelock, Jr., Johannes Vermeer: The Art Turner (rey. edn, New Haven, Conn., and Sunflowers: a genuine repetition by Van Gogh
of Painting (Washington, DC, 1999) [exhibition London, 1984), nos 359, 364 or a Schuffenecker forgery?’, Van Gogh Museum
catalogue] R. Dorment, British Painting in the Philadelphia Journal (2001), 16-43
A.K. Wheelock, Jr., Vermeer and the Art of Museum ofArt from the Seventeenth through
Painting (New Haven, CT, 1995) the Nineteenth Century (Philadelphia, 1986), Auguste Rodin, Iris, Messenger of the Gods
396-405 M. Busco and D. Finn, Rodin and his

Jean-Baptiste-Simeon Chardin, The Jar of Olives K. Solender, Dreadful Fire! Burning ofthe Contemporaries: The Iris & B. Gerald Cantor
Houses ofParliament (Cleveland, Ohio, 1984) Collection (New York, 1991)
P. Rosenberg, Chardin, 1699-1779, trans. E. P.
[exhibition catalogue] Metropolitan Museum of Art, Auguste Rodin: Iris,
Kadish and U. Korneitchouk (Cleveland, Ohio,
Messenger of the Gods, also known as Another
1979) [exhibition catalogue]
Thomas Cole, The Oxbow Voice, Called Iris, Heilbrunn Timeline of Art
P. Rosenberg and others, Chardin, trans. C.
M. Baigell and A. Kaufman, ‘Thomas Cole’s History (New York, 2006)
Beamish (New Haven, Conn., 2000) [exhibition
“Oxbow”: a critique of American civilization’, W. Tucker, The Language ofSculpture (2nd edn,
catalogue]
Arts Magazine, 55/5 (1981), 136-39 London, 1974)

Utamaro, ‘Lovers’ from the Poem of the Pillow D. Bjelajac, ‘Thomas Cole’s Oxbow and the
American Zion divided’, American Art, 20 Paul Cézanne, Apples and Oranges
S. Asano and T. Clark, eds., The Passionate Art
(2006), 60-83 J. Rewald, Cézanne: A Biography (New York,
of Kitagawa Utamaro (Tokyo and London,
T. Cole, ‘Essay on American Scenery’, American 1996)
1995),.279
Monthly Magazine, 1 (January 1836), 1-12 D. Sylvester, About Modern Art: Critical Essays
J. N. Davis, Utamaro and the Spectacle of Beauty
B. Novak, American Painting of the Nineteenth 1948—96 (London, 1996)
(London and Honolulu, 2007)
Century: Realism, Idealism, and the American
Experience (3rd edn, Oxford, 2006) Vilhelm Hammershoi, Dust Motes Dancing in the
PART 7 TOWARDS THE MODERN WORLD: E. C. Parry, ‘Overlooking the Oxbow: Thomas Sunbeams (Sunbeams)
AFTER 1800 Cole’s “View from Mount Holyoke” revisited’, Hammershoi (London, 2008) [exhibition
American Art Journal, 34(2003), 6—61 catalogue]
Francisco de Goya, The Third of May, 1808 O.R. Roque, ‘“The Oxbow” by Thomas Cole: Hammershoi, Dreyer: The Magic of Images
J. M. Alia Plana, Dos dias de mayo de 1808 en iconography of an American landscape painting’, (Copenhagen, 2006) [exhibition catalogue]
Madrid, pintados por Goya (Madrid, 2004) Metropolitan Museum Journal, 17 (1982), 63-74 P. Vad, Vilhelm Hammershoi and Danish Art
R. Andioc, ‘Algo mas (o menos?) sobre el Tres de A. Wallach, ‘Making a picture of the view from at the Turn of the Century (New Haven and
mayo de Goya’, Goya, 265—66 (1998), 194-203 Mt. Holyoke’, in D. C. Miller, ed., American London, 1992)
R. Andioc, ‘En torno a los cuadros del Dos de Iconology: New Approaches to Nineteenth- Vilhelm Hammershoi, 1864-1916: Danish Painter
Mayo’, Boletin del Museo e Instituto Camon Century Art and Literature (New Haven, Conn., ofSolitude and Light (Copenhagen, 1998)
Aznar, 51 (1993), 133-66 1995), 80-91, 310-12 [exhibition catalogue]
J. Baticle, ‘Le 2 et le 3 Mai 1808 a Madrid:
Recherche sur les épisodes choisis par Claude Monet, Wild Poppies
Goya’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 116 J. House, Impressionism: Paint and Politics
(1990), 185-200 (New Haven, CT, 2004)
M. Mena Marques and others, Goya en tiempos P. Smith, Impressionism: Beneath the Surface
de guerra (Madrid, 2008) [exhibition catalogue] (London, 1995)
H. Thomas, Goya: The Third of May 1808 B. Thomson, Impressionism: Origins, Practice,

FURTHER READING 295

Contributors

AVIGDOR ARIKHA is an Israeli and French ‘El Greco’ (2004), ‘Caravaggio’ (2005), ‘Velazquez’ and has received the Order of the Quetzal from the
citizen, who survived the Holocaust and studied (2006) and ‘The Sacred Made Real: Spanish government of Guatemala.
art at the Bezalel Academy in Jerusalem. During Painting and Sculpture, 1600-1700’ (2009). He is
his career as an artist he has painted commissioned now working on an exhibition of Goya’s portraits. GIOVANNI COLONNA is Professor Emeritus
portraits of, among others, Queen Elizabeth, the of Etruscology and Italic Archaeology at the
Queen Mother. Recent retrospectives of his work WERNER BUSCH holds the Chair in Art History University of Rome La Sapienza, where he has
have taken place at the Museo Thyssen Bornemisza at the Freie Universitat, Berlin. He studied in taught since 1980. He has excavated in Pyrgi,
(2008) and the British Museum (2006). He has Tiibingen, Freiburg, Vienna and London, and then Veii and other Etruscan sites around Viterbo.
lectured on art at the Louvre, the Prado and the taught at the universities of Bonn and Bochum. His publications include a selection of his essays,
Frick Collection. He is a Member of the Berlin-Brandenburg entitled Italia ante Romanum Imperium (2005).
Academy of Sciences and Humanities. His many A Fellow of the Accademia dei Lincei, the Swedish
GIUSEPPE BASILE was a student of the pioneer of publications on European art include studies of Royal Academy, the Institut de France and the
art conservation and restoration Cesare Brandi. He Netherlandish art of the 16th and 17th centuries, Archaeological Institute of America, he is also
was director of the Istituto Centrale del Restauro and English art of the 18th and 19th centuries. Vice-President of the Istituto Nazionale di Studi
in Rome (1976-2008), and is now Professor of the Etruschi e Italici.
Theory and History of Restoration at the Sapienza The sculptor ANTHONY CARO worked as a part-
University. His restoration projects include the time assistant to Henry Moore during the 1950s. PAINTON COWEN is an expert on the history
Scrovegni Chapel, the basilica of San Francesco at He began in the 1960s to create abstract metal and iconography of stained glass, and his interest
Assisi, the Palazzo del Te in Mantua and Leonardo sculptures and his work has been the subject of in Chartres dates from 1973, since when he has
da Vinci’s Last Supper at Santa Maria delle Grazie numerous exhibitions and retrospectives at (among been visiting and photographing the cathedral and
in Milan. He has published widely on conservation other galleries) the Whitechapel Art Gallery, the its windows. His publications include The Rose
and restoration. Rijksmuseum, the Hayward Gallery, Tate Britain Window (2005) and English Stained Glass (2008),
and the Museum of Modern Art in New York. both for Thames & Hudson, A Guide to Stained
MARY BEARD is Professor of Classics at the With the architect Norman Foster and the engineer Glass in Britain (1984) and Six Days: The Story
University of Cambridge, where she has taught Chris Wise, he designed the Millennium Bridge, of the Making ofthe Chester Cathedral Creation
for the last twenty-five years. She has written which spans the Thames from St Paul’s Cathedral Window (2003).
numerous books on the ancient world, including to Tate Modern.
The Roman Triumph: Classical Art from Greece JULIE NELSON DAVIS is Associate Professor
to Rome (2007) and the Wolfson Prize-winning ORNELLA CASAZZA works in the of Modern East Asian Art at the University of
Pompeit: The Life of aRoman Town (2008). She Superintendency of Artistic and Historical Pennsylvania. She received her PhD from the
is Classics editor of the Time Literary Supplement Heritage of Florence, where she heads the University of Washington, studied at Gakushiin
and writes an engaging, often provocative, blog, Department for the Study and Application University, and was a Fellow of the Sainsbury
‘A Don’s Life’. In 2008 she was visiting Sather of Advanced Technologies. She directed the Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts and
Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, restoration of the frescoes by Masaccio, Masolino Cultures. She is the author of Utamaro and the
where she lectured on Roman laughter, one of her and Filippo Lippi in the Brancacci Chapel of the Spectacle of Beauty (2007) and numerous articles
current research interests. Carmine church in Florence. She has produced on ukiyo-e.
various important studies on conservation and
QUENTIN BLAKE is one of the world’s most especially iconography, and currently teaches at CHRISTOPHER DELL is a writer and art historian
beloved illustrators. Perhaps best known for his the International University of Art Restoration in based in Barcelona. He studied at Winchester
children’s books and collaborations with Roald Florence and theory and techniques of restoration School of Art and the Courtauld Institute of Art,
Dahl, he has recently worked extensively for the at the University of Pisa. She is the co-author of and has worked at the National Gallery, London,
wards of hospitals in England and France. Since The Brancacci Chapel (1992). and the Architectural Association, for the Corpus
2000 he has also curated exhibitions at, among Vitrearum Medii Aevi (a medieval stained glass
other places, the National Gallery, London, the JEAN CLOTTES is an internationally acclaimed research project), and in art publishing.
British Library and the Musée du Petit Palais expert on cave painting and world rock art. He
in Paris. researched the Chauvet Cave and has served CHRISTOPHER B. DONNAN is Emeritus
as a scientific adviser to the French Ministry of Professor of Anthropology at the University of
SUZANNE PRESTON BLIER is Allen Whitehill Culture. He is the former chairman of ICOMOS’s California, Los Angeles. Considered one of the
Clowers Professor of Fine Art and African and International Committee of Rock Art and the word’s foremost authorities on the Moche, he
African American Studies at Harvard University. honorary president of the Société Préhistorique has studied Moche civilization for more than
She has done extensive research in the West Frangaise. four decades, combining the systematic analysis
African countries of Benin and Togo and has been of Moche art with numerous archaeological
active in bringing African art into the mainstream CRAIG CLUNAS is Professor of the History of excavations in Peru.
of art historical study. She has published numerous Art at the University of Oxford. He has worked at
articles and books, curated exhibitions, and is the University of Sussex, at the School of Oriental JAS ELSNER is the Humfry Payne Senior Research
editor-in-chief of ‘Baobab: Visual Sources in and African Studies, University of London, and as Fellow in Classical Art at Corpus Christi College,
African Visual Culture’, an interactive database a curator at the Victoria and Albert Museum. His Oxford, and Visiting Professor of Art History at
of images on African art and material culture. most recent book is Empire of Great Brightness: the University of Chicago. His books include Art
Visual and Material Cultures of Ming China, and the Roman Viewer (1995), Imperial Rome
XAVIER BRAY is Assistant Curator of 17th- and 1368-1644 (2007). and Christian Triumph (1998) and Roman Eyes:
18th-century European Painting at the National Visuality and Subjectivity in Art and Text (2007).
Gallery, London, where he has co-curated and MICHAEL D. COE is Professor of Anthropology,
curated a number of exhibitions, including ‘Orazio Emeritus, at Yale University. He has specialized SUSAN TOBY EVANS is an archaeologist at the
Gentileschi at the Court of Charles I’ (1998-99), in the archaeology of the Maya civilization and Pennsylvania State University, specializing in the
‘The Image of Christ: Seeing Salvation’ (2000), the Olmec culture of southern Mexico. He is a Aztecs of Mexico. Her recent publications include
“Goya’s Family of the Infante Don Luis’ (2001-02), Member of the National Academy of Sciences, Art of Ancient Mexico (2010) and Ancient Mexico

296 CONTRIBUTORS
and Central America: Archaeology and Culture at the University of Oxford in 1987. He has been HELEN LANGDON is an art historian and
History (2004; 2nd edn 2008), winner of the involved in the organization of many exhibitions, biographer with a special interest in the art of
Society for American Archaeology’s book award. most recently ‘Impressionism by the Sea’ (Royal the Italian Baroque. She was formerly Assistant
Academy of Arts, Phillips Collection, and Director of the British School in Rome. She has
GABRIELE FINALDI gained his doctorate from Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford, 2007-8). written on Claude Lorrain and Salvator Rosa, and
the Courtauld Institute of Art while working at His many publications on French art of the mid- her Caravaggio: A Life was published in 1998. She
the National Gallery, London, as Curator of Later to late 19th century include Monet: Nature into was the curator of the Dulwich Picture Gallery’s
Italian and Spanish Painting. He is now Deputy Art (1986). exhibition ‘Salvator Rosa: Bandits, Wilderness and
Director for Collections and Research at the Magic’ (2010).
Museo del Prado, Madrid. He is the co-author of PETER HUMFREY is Professor of Art History
the exhibition catalogues Discovering the Italian at the University of St Andrews and a Fellow MARILYN ARONBERG LAVIN specializes in
Baroque (1997) and The Image of Christ (2000), of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. His many Italian painting of the 13th—16th centuries, with an
and has curated exhibitions on Genoese Baroque publications on Venetian art of the 15th and 16th emphasis on the work of Piero della Francesca. She
painting, Orazio Gentileschi and Jusepe de Ribera. centuries include Cima da Conegliano (1983), has been a pioneer in two areas: ‘Collectionism’
The Altarpiece in Renaissance Venice (1993) and (Seventeenth-Century Barberini Documents
ANNE-BIRGITTE FONSMARK is Director of the Titian (2007). and Inventories of Art, 1975), and computers
Ordrupgaard, Copenhagen, the Danish museum used for research, teaching and publication (The
of French Impressionism and Danish nineteenth- DAVID JAFFE was educated in Australia, went Place of Narrative: Mural Painting in Italian
century art. As an art historian she has specialized on to lecture at the University of Queensland, and Churches, 431-1600, 1990). Her 3-D computer
in French art of the 19th century, Impressionism later became a curator at the Australian National model (2008) of Piero’s fresco cycle The Legend of
and the early works of Paul Gauguin in particular, Galley, Canberra. He worked at the Getty in Los the True Cross in the basilica of San Francesco in
as well as in Danish art of the 19th century. Angeles, before being appointed Senior Curator Arezzo is available on line (http://projects.ias.edu/
at the National Gallery, London, where he has pierotruecross).
JEAN-RENE GABORIT is a distinguished scholar curated exhibitions on Rubens and Titian. He is
of Italian and French sculpture, and has published a contributor to the Burlington Magazine, and MICHAEL J. LEWIS is Faison-Pierson-Stoddard
widely on the Romanesque and Gothic periods his other publications include a book on Rubens’s Professor of Art at Williams College in
in France. He worked for many years for the Massacre ofthe Innocents (2003). Williamstown, Massachusetts. He writes on art
Department of Sculpture at the Louvre, latterly and culture for a variety of publications, and his
as its head, where he was also responsible for the PAUL JOANNIDES is Professor of Art History in books include Frank Furness: Architecture and the
conservation of the collection. He organized a the Department of History of Art at the University Violent Mind (2001), The Gothic Revival (2002)
number of exhibitions for the museum, including of Cambridge. He has published widely on topics and American Art and Architecture (2006).
the landmark ‘La France Roman’ in 2005. He from the Italian Renaissance, including books and
is now Conservateur Général Honoraire du catalogues on Michelangelo, Raphael and Titian DONALD F. McCALLUM is a Professor of
Patrimoine. and articles on a wide variety of related subjects, Japanese Art History at the University of
among them an essay on Botticelli’s late work. California, Los Angeles, where he has taught
Over the last twenty-five years, ANTONY since 1969. He specializes in Buddhist art, and
GORMLEY has revitalized the human image in BARTHELEMY JOBERT is Professor of Modern his publications include Zenkoji and its Icon: A
sculpture through a radical investigation of the and Contemporary Art at the University of Paris Study of Medieval Japanese Religious Art (1994),
body as a place of memory and transformation, Sorbonne. He formerly worked in the Print and The Four Great Temples: Buddhist Archaeology,
evident in large-scale installations like Another Photography Department of the Bibliothéque Architecture, and Icons of Seventh-Century Japan
Place, Domain Field and Inside Australia, and Nationale de France. A specialist in the work (2009) and numerous articles and reviews. He has
more recent works, such as Clearing, Blind Light of Eugéne Delacroix, he is currently preparing spent many years in Japan studying all aspects of
and Another Singularity. a new, electronic, edition of the artist’s the Japanese Buddhist tradition, and he is currently
correspondence — a collaboration between the working on a major study of Hakuho sculpture.
GERMAINE GREER is the author of The Obstacle Sorbonne and the Musée du Louvre / Musée
Race: The Fortunes of Women Painters and their Delacroix — and writing a general history of MANUELA MENA MARQUES has been working
Work (1979, reissued 2001) and The Boy (2003), 19th-century French painting. at the Prado Gallery in Madrid since 1980. She is
a study of the iconography of the adolescent male currently Head Curator of 18th-century paintings
in Western art. She writes a fortnightly column on MARTIN KEMP FBA is Emeritus Professor in the there. She has organized a number of major
art and related issues for The Guardian. Her latest History of Art at Trinity College, Oxford. He has exhibitions on Goya’s work, including ‘Goya en
full-length book is Shakespeare’s Wife (2007). written, broadcast and curated exhibitions on Tiempos de Guerra’ on his wartime paintings
imagery in art and science from the Renaissance (2008), and has written a number of guides to his
JOHN GUY is Curator of South and Southeast to the present day. He has published extensively on work. She holds a doctorate from the Universidad
Asian Art at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Leonardo da Vinci, including the prize-winning Complutense in Madrid.
New York, and an elected Fellow of the Society of Leonardo da Vinci: The Marvellous Works of
Antiquaries, London. He has worked on a number Nature and Man (1981; rev..edn 2006). FRANCESCO DA MOSTO is a Venetian architect,
of archaeological excavations and served as an writer and broadcaster. While running his
adviser to UNESCO on historical sites in Southeast STEPHAN KEMPERDICK is Curator of Early professional practice, he has published books on
Asia. He has curated a number of exhibitions — for Netherlandish and Early German Paintings at the history of Venice, the culture of Italy, and the
the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Royal the Gemaldegalerie in Berlin. He has published Mediterranean, each of which accompanied a BBC
Academy in London, La Caixa Foundation in important works on the Master of Flémalle and television series, and a cookbook of the authentic
Barcelona and the Metropolitan Museum, among Rogier van der Weyden (1997), Martin Schongauer flavours of the region.
others — and his many publications include Arts (2004) and early portraiture (2006).
of
India: 1550-1900 (1990), Indian Art and SUSIE NASH is a Senior Lecturer at the Courtauld
Connoisseurship (1995), Indian Temple Sculpture JOSEPH LEO KOERNER is the Thomas Professor Institute of Art, where she has taught since
(2007) and Indian Textiles in the East (2009). of the History of Art at Harvard University. His 1993. She has published on a wide range of
books include Caspar David Friedrich and the northern European art from the period c. 1350
JOHN HOUSE studied at the Courtauld Institute Subject of Landscape (1990), The Moment ofSelf- —1520,including illuminated manuscripts, panel
of Art, where he retired as Walter H. Annenberg Portraiture (1993) and The Reformation ofthe paintings, textiles, sculpture and sculptural
Professor in 2010. He taught at the University of Image (2004). He is currently completing a book polychromy. Her recent publications include a
East Anglia (1969-76) and was Slade Professor on Hieronymus Bosch and Pieter Bruegel. series of articles in the Burlington Magazine on the

CONTRIBUTORS 297
‘Well of Moses’, Northern Renaissance Art (2008) to Ancient Rome (2008), both co-authored with LOUIS VAN TILBORGH, studied art history at
and (as co-editor) Trade in Artists Materials Andrew Ramage. the Rijksuniversiteit, Utrecht, where he afterwards
to 1700 (2010), to which she has contributed an worked as a researcher; he was appointed a curator
extensive discussion of the purchase, cost and use JULIAN READE, formerly Assistant Keeper at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam in 1986.
of painters’ materials at the Burgundian court, in the Ancient Near East Department at the He has curated a number of exhibitions, including
c. 1370-1420. British Museum and now Honorary Professor ‘In Search of the Dutch Golden Age: Dutch
in the University of Copenhagen, has directed Paintings 1800-1850’ (1986, with Guido Jensen:
JOHN JULIUS NORWICH has written histories excavations in Iraq and Oman, and written Haarlem, Vienna, Munich), ‘Van Gogh and Millet’
of Norman Sicily, the Venetian Republic, the extensively on the history, art and archaeology of (1988, Van Gogh Museum; 1998, Musée d’Orsay,
Byzantine Empire and the Mediterranean; A Assyria and Babylonia. His books include Assyrian Paris) and the major Van Gogh retrospective in
History ofthe Papacy is shortly to be published. Sculpture (1983; 2nd edn 1998) and Mesopotamia 1990. He has written extensively on Van Gogh,
He has also written books on architecture, music (1991; 2nd edn 2000). and his recent publications include Van Gogh and
and travel, and has made some 30 historical the Sunflowers (2008). He is co-editor of Simiolus,
documentaries for BBC television. PIERRE ROSENBERG, Member of the Académie the Dutch art history journal, and writes regularly
Frangaise since 1995, worked in the Department for the Burlington Magazine.
ROBIN OSBORNE is Professor of Ancient of Paintings at the Louvre, and was President and
History, Fellow and Senior Tutor at King’s College, Director of the museum from 1994 to 2001. A WILLIAM E. WALLACE is an internationally
Cambridge. He has been president of the Society specialist in French and Italian painting of the 17th recognized authority on Michelangelo
for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, and in 2006 and 18th centuries, he has organized exhibitions of Buonarroti. His books include the award-winning
was elected a Fellow of the British Academy. He work by Poussin, and authored books and articles Michelangelo: The Complete Sculpture, Painting
is the author of several influential monographs, on Chardin and La Tour. and Architecture (1998), Michelangelo at San
including Greece in the Making, 1200-479 Bc Lorenzo: The Genius as Entrepreneur (1994) and
(1996; 2nd edn 2009) and Archaic and Classical INGRID D. ROWLAND holds a doctorate in the biography Michelangelo: The Artist, the Man
Greek Art (1998). ancient Greek and Classical archaeology, and has and his Times (2010).
specialized in Classical influences on the Italian
YOUNGSOOK PAK studied for her doctorate in Renaissance. She lives in Rome, where she is MARINA WARNER’s writings embrace criticism,
the history of art at the University of Heidelberg, professor at the University of Notre Dame School cultural history and fiction. Her books include
and then taught at School of Oriental and African of Architecture, and is a contributor to the New Alone ofAll Her Sex: The Myth and the Cult
Studies, University of London. In 2007—08 she York Review of Books and the New Republic. She ofthe Virgin Mary (1976), Monuments and
was Korea Foundation Distinguished Visiting is the author of many books, including The Culture Maidens (1985) and Phantasmagoria: Spirit
Professor at Yale University. She is the author of of the High Renaissance (1998), The Scarith of Visions, Metaphors, and Media (2006), a study
several books and articles on Korean art history Scornello: A Tale of Renaissance Forgery (2004) of phantasms and modern technologies. She has
and Buddhist art. and Giordano Bruno: Philosopher /Fteretic (2008). curated exhibitions, including ‘The Inner Eye’
(1996), ‘Metamorphing’ (2002—03) and ‘Only
The artist GRAYSON PERRY is best known for DAVID J. ROXBURGH is Prince Alwaleed Bin Make-Believe: Ways of Playing’ (2005). She is
his elaborate ceramic vases, but also works in cast Talal Professor of Islamic Art History at Harvard a Trustee of the National Portrait Gallery, and
metal, etching, tapestry and embroidery. He was University, where he has taught since 1996. He Professor of Literature, Film and Theatre Studies
the winner of the 2003 Turner Prize. He appears in is the author of books and articles on the art of at the University of Essex.
the media as a commentator on cultural issues and the book, albums and the practice of collecting,
for a time wrote an arts column for The Times. calligraphy, aesthetics and art historical writing. ARTHUR K. WHEELOCK JR. is curator of
Northern Baroque painting at the National
ULRICH PFISTERER holds a doctorate in art RUBI SANZ GAMO is the Director of the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC and Professor
history from the University of Géttingen (1997) Archaeological Museum in Madrid. Holding a of Art History at the University of Maryland.
and is now Professor of Art History at the Ludwig- doctorate in history, she was formerly director He has organized many exhibitions, including
Maximilians-Universitat, Munich. His research of the Museum of Albacete. She is also a member Johannes Vermeer (1995) and Jan Lievens (2009),
focuses on the art and art theory of the Renaissance of the Cuerpo Facultativo de Conservadores de and has written a number of books, including
and Baroque, and on questions of methodology and Museos. She has published a number of books on Vermeer and the Art of Painting (1995). Wheelock
the disciplinary history of art history. the Iberian people and Spain under Roman rule. has been named Knight Officer in the Order of
Orange Nassau by the Dutch government, and is
TOM PHILLIPS has lived and worked in London MAGNOLIA SCUDIERI is an art historian, the recipient of the Johannes Vermeer Prize for
all his life. Although best known as an artist, born and resident in Florence, where she Outstanding Achievement in Dutch Art.
whose work is represented in museum collections directs the Museo di San Marco and the Office
all over the world, he also has a reputation as a of Conservation and Restoration. Her studies RODERICK WHITFIELD is Percival David
writer and composer. His pioneering artist’s book are focused on the history of the miniature, the Professor Emeritus in the School of Oriental and
A Humument (1970) is now in its fourth edition. restoration process and the art of the 15th century African Studies, University of London. Formerly
(particularly the work of Fra Angelico), She is the Assistant Keeper in the Department of Oriental
PHILIP PULLMAN is the author of the trilogy His author-of several essays and papers published in Antiquities at the British Museum, he is the
Dark Materials, and recipient of the Carnegie specialist magazines, books and the catalogues author of numerous books on Chinese painting,
Medal, the Guardian Children’s Fiction Award of exhibitions held in Italy and abroad. Chinese Buddhist art and, with Youngsook Pak,
and the Whitbread Book of the Year Award Korean art.
(among other honours). He has recently delivered DEBORAH SWALLOW is Marit Rausing Director
a series of talks on his favourite paintings at the at the Courtauld Institute of Art, London. She has ANDREW WILTON is a leading Turner scholar.
Courtauld Gallery, London. also held curatorial positions at the Victoria and He was the first curator of the Turner Collection
Albert Museum and at the University Museum of in the Clore Gallery at what is now Tate Britain,
NANCY H. RAMAGE is Charles A. Dana Archaeology and Anthropology in Cambridge. and has been responsible for many books and
Professor Emerita at Ithaca College, New York. Her academic career has focused on Hindu art, exhibitions about the artist. He was Keeper of
She is a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, Indian and Southeast Asian textiles, South Asian the British Collection at the Tate, 1989-98, and is
London, and a life member of Clare Hall, contemporary art, and the history of museums currently Visiting Research Fellow there, working
Cambridge University. Her publications and collections. She holds a number of executive on the drawings in the Turner Bequest.
include Roman Art (1991; 3rd edn 2000) positions, and is a Fellow of the Royal Society for
and The British Museum Concise Introduction the Arts.

298 CONTRIBUTORS
Sources of Illustrations
a

a=above, b=below, r=right, l=left Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence; 143 akg-images/ Lessing; 270b The Herbert F. Johnson Museum,
Erich Lessing; 144 Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence; Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; 271 Tate,
2 Museo Arqueologico Nacional de Espana, 145 Gemaldegalerie, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin; London; 272 Philadelphia Museum of Art; 273
Madrid; 4 Giovanni Caselli; 5 Aga Khan Trust 146 Aga Khan Trust for Culture, Geneva; 149 Getty Images; 274 Musée d’ Orsay, Paris; 275a
for Culture, Geneva; 6 akg-images/Erich Lessing; Alte Pinakothek, Munich; 151 The Gallery akg-images; 275b Nasjonalgalleriet, Oslo; 276
7 Neue Pinakothek, Munich; 8 The Gallery Collection/Corbis; 152 Musée du Louvre, Paris; National Museums, Liverpool; 277 Courtauld
Collection/Corbis; 91 Musei Capitolini, Rome; 155 Osvaldo Bohm; 156 Mimmo Jodice/Corbis; Institute of Art, London; 278 Stedelijk Museum,
10a Museo del Prado, Madrid; 10b Christopher 157 National Gallery, London; 159-62 Museo del Amsterdam; 279 Courtauld Institute of Art,
Donan; 11 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 12 Photo Prado, Madrid; 163 British Museum, London; London; 280-81 National Gallery, London; 282
Angelo Rubino, Ministero per i Beni e le Attivita 164—65 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 166-67 I Musei Van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam; 2831 National
Culturala Istituto Centrale per il Restauro; 13 Vaticani, Vatican City; 168 Takashi Okamura © Gallery, London; 283r Neue Pinakothek, Munich;
Barnes Foundation, Merion, PA; 14 British NTV, Tokyo; 169 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 1701 284-87, 288a Photo Scala, Florence; 288b The
Museum, London; 16-17, 18a French Ministry Musei Vaticani, Vatican City; 171-72 akg-images/ Barnes Foundation, Merion, PA; 289 Sammlung
of Culture and Communication, Regional Erich Lessing; 173 I Musei Vaticani, Vatican Feilchenfeldt, Zurich; 290-91 Ordrupgaard,
Direction for Cultural Affairs, Rhones-Alpes City; 175-77 Unterlinden Museum, Colmar; 179 Copenhagen
Region, Regional Department of Archaeology; Bridgeman Art Library, London; 180 akg-images/
18b Jean Clottes; 19 French Ministry‘of Culture Erich Lessing; 1811 Gemaldegalerie, Staatliche TEXT CREDITS
and Communication, Regional Direction for Museen zu Berlin; 181r Archivio RCS Libri,
The following serves as an extension ofthe
Cultural Affairs, Rhones-Alpes Region, Regional Milan; 182-85 Aga Khan Trust for Culture,
information on p. 4:
Department of Archaeology; 20 Heidi Grassley, © Geneva; 186-87 National Palace Museum,
Thames & Hudson Ltd., London; 21-23 Egyptian Taipei; 189 bpk/Gemaldegalerie, Staatliche pp. 192-95, 272-75 copyright © 2010 Quentin
Museum, Cairo; 25 Museo de Antropologia de Museen-zu Berlin/Photo Jérg P. Anders; 190-91 Blake; pp. 276-79 copyright © 2010 Philip
Xalapa, Universidad Veracruz; 26-28 British Gemaldegalerie, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin; Pullman; pp. 222-25 copyright © 2010 Marina
Museum, London; 30-31 Metropolitan Museum 192 Photo Scala, Florence; 193 akg-images/ Warner
of Art/Art Resource/Scala, Florence; 32, 34 Cameraphoto; 194 Musée du Louvre, Paris; 195
The essays listed here have been translated
Giovanni Caselli; 35-36 Photo Scala, Florence; Photo Scala, Florence; 197-98 National Gallery,
by the following:
37 Giovanni Caselli; 39 Gianni Dagli Orti/ London; 199 Holy Cathedral of the Dormition
Corbis; 40 Museo Nazionale Romano-Palazzo of the Virgin, Ermoupolis; 200 akg-images/Erich Barbara Belelli Marchesini:
Altemps, Rome; 41a akg-images/Nimatallah; 41b Lessing; 202 National Museums, Liverpool; The ‘Seven Against Thebes’ Relief, Unknown
Burstein Collection/Corbis; 43—44 Photo Scala, 203-04 National Gallery, London/Scala, Florence; Etruscan artist
Florence, Courtesy of the Ministero per i Beni 205 National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin; 207
Rosa Dell-Niella:
e le Attivita Culturala Istituto Centrale per il Summerfield Press/Corbis; 208a H.M. Queen
The Scrovegni Chapel Frescoes, Giotto; The
Restauro; 46-47 Museo Arqueologico Nacional Elizabeth II, The Royal Collection; 208b Galleria
Lady ofElche, Artist unknown; The Brancacci
de Espana, Madrid; 49-51 Giovanni Caselli; Nazionale d’Arte Antica, Rome; 209 Museo
Chapel Frescoes, Masaccio and Masolino; The
53 I Musei Capitolini, Rome; 54a Gabinetto di Capodimonte, Naples; 210 Freer Gallery of
Deposition, Fra Angelico (and Lorenzo Monaco);
Fotografico Nazionale, Rome; 54b Private Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.;
The Third of May, 1808, Francisco de Goya
Collection; 57 Alamy; 58 Sarnath Museum, 212 British Library, London; 213 Freer Gallery
Bihar; 591 Government Museum, Mathura; 59r of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, Michael Hoyle: Sunflowers, Vincent Van Gogh
Birmingham Art Gallery & Museum; 60-61 akg- D.C.; 215-16 National Gallery, London/Scala, Sian Marlow: Dust Motes Dancing in the Sunlight
images/Erich Lessing; 62—63 Christopher Donan; Florence; 217a Photo Spectrum/Heritage Images/ (Sunbeams), Wilhelm Hammershoi
64-65 Jorge Perez de Lara; 66 akg-images/Yvan Scala, Florence; 217b National Gallery, London/
Travert; 69 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 68 Neil Scala, Florence; 218 National Gallery, London; ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Stewart; 70a Archives photographiques du mus¢e 219-20 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 221 Museo del
national des Arts Asiatiques-Guimet, Paris; 70b- Prado, Madrid; 222-24 Photo Scala, Florence; Christopher Dell would like to thank everybody
akg images/Erich Lessing; 71 John Guy; 72-75 2251 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 225r akg-images; who has helped to prepare this book, in particular
Palace Museum, Beijing; 76-77 akg-images/Herve 227a National Museum of Wales, Cardiff; 227b Rosa Dell-Niella.
Champollion; 78-79 akg-images/Yvan Travert; National Museums, Liverpool; 228 Musée du
81 akg-images; 83l akg-images/Andrea Jemolo; Louvre, Paris; 230-31 Museo del Prado, Madrid;
82 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 83r Photo Scala, 235-36 Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna; 239
Florence; 85 akg-images/Yvan Travert; 86 Hugh akg-images/Erich Lessing; 240 Musée du Louvre,
Sitton/Corbis; 87 akg-images/Bildarchiv Steffens; Paris; 241-44 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 245
881 Sakamoto Photo Research Laboratory/Corbis; National Museum, Tokyo; 246 Neue Pinakothek,
88r Hokuendo, Kofukuji, Nara; 91-95 Painton Munich; 249 akg-images/Erich Lessing; 2501
Cowen; 96-97 akg images/Erich Lessing; 98-99 Museo del Prado, Madrid; 250r akg-images/
© Frank Willett. Licensor www.scran.ac.uk; Erich Lessing; 251 British Museum, London; 253,
100-105 Photo Angelo Rubino, Ministerio peri 254a Kunsthalle, Hamburg; 254b Kupferstich-
Benie le Attivita Culturala Istituto Centrale per il kabinett, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden;
Restauro; 108-09 Kagami Shrine, Saga Prefecture; 255 Kunsthalle, Hamburg; 257-58 Photo Scala,
110-13 Susie Nash; 115-21 Photo Scala, Florence; Florence; 259 akg-images; 260 Tate, London;
122 Sandro Vannini/Corbis; 123 Photo Scala, 261, 262a Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio;
Florence; 125-26 Nicolo Orsi-Battaglini; 128-30 262b Philadelphia Museum of Art: The John
Museo del Prado, Madrid; 133 Photo Scala, Howard McFadden Collection, 1928; 263 Tate,
Florence; 134 Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, London; 265 Francis G. Meyer/Corbis; 266a
Florence; 135 South American Pictures; 136-38 National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.,
Alinari Archives/Corbis; 139 Pinacoteca di Brera, Andrew W. Mellon Fund; 266b, 267 Francis
Milan; 141 akg-images/Rabatti-Domingie; 142 G, Meyer/Corbis; 269, 270a akg-images/Erich

SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS 299

 Index

Illustrations are indexed by page number, indicated Backer, Jacob 218 Cadiz 216
by italics. Captions are also indicated by italics. Bacon, Francis 163 Cain 114
Baltasar Carlos, Don 230 Cairo: Egyptian Museum 20-23, 21, 22, 23
Abel 114 Balzac, Honoré de 284, 284 Cai Yu (poet) 186
Abiodun, Rowland 98 Bangladesh 59 calligraphy 186, 187
Abra (Biblical figure) 206-209, 207, 209 Baudelaire, Charles 279 Calvary 127
Abraham 123 Becchi, Gentile de’ 132 Cambodia 72-75
Achilles 45 Beijng: Palace Museum (Zhang Zeduan, Canova, Antonio 178
Acts of the Apostles (New Testament book) 78 Spring Festival on the River) 68-71, 68, Capaneus (Ancient Greek warrior) 34, 35, 36,
Adam 93, 114, 119, 120, 121, 123, 130-31, 131, 69, 70, 71 36, 37
158, 160, 164, 165, 167, 169 Belgium 119; see also individual cities Cappadocians 76, 77
Aeschylus 36 Bellini, Gentile 180 Caravaggio 221; Judith Slaying Holofernes 208,
Afghanistan: Bamyan Buddhas 84 Bellini, Giovanni 180; San Zaccaria Altarpiece 208; Supper at Emmaus 202-205, 203, 204;
Aga Khan, Prince Sadruddin: collection of 182-85 154-57, 154, 155, 156; Madonna ofthe Taking of Christ 205, 205
Agra 210 Pomegranate 157 Cardiff: National Museum of Wales (Nicolas
Ajanta 58 Bellori, Giovanni Pietro 205 Poussin, Landscape with the Funeral of Phocion)
Ahkal Mo’ Nahb III (Maya king) 64, 65 Berlin: Gemaldegalerie 119, 191 (Alessandro 226-27, 226, 227
Akbar (Mughal emperor) 210, 213 Botticelli, Venus) 145 (Pieter Bruegel the Elder, Carmelites 222
alabaster 26-29, 27, 28, 29 The Proverbs) 188-91, 188, 189, 190, 191 Carthusian order 110-13
Ali, Mir Sayyid 210 Bernard, Emile 283 Castello: Medici Villa 140
Allahabad 210 Bernini, Gianlorenzo 110; The Ecstasy of Saint Catherine of Alexandria, Saint 154, 155, 156
al-Qasim Firdawsi, Abu: Shahnama (‘Book of Teresa 222-25, 222, 223, 224, 225
Cefalu: Cathedral 80-83, 81, 83
Kings’) 182 Celtis, Conrad 148
Bian river 68-71, 68, 69, 70, 71
Allori, Alessandro 208 ceramic 62, 63, 134, 135
Bichitr: Portrait of Jahangir Preferring a Suft
al-Zaman, Nadir see Hasan, Abu’! Cesarino, Cesare 252
Shaikh to Kings 210-13, 211, 212, 213
Amiens Cathedral 90 Cézanne, Paul 280; Apples and Oranges 13,
Bihar 59 .
Amsterdam: 286-89, 287, 288; Self-Portrait 289
Birmingham: Birmingham Art Gallery and
Kloveniersdoelen 218 Champmol: The ‘Well of Moses’ 110-13, 110,
Museum 59
Rijksmuseum 11 (Rembrandt, The Night Watch LT IAS:
Blanche of Castile 90
(The Company of Frans Banning Cocq and Chardin, Jean-Baptiste-Siméon 286; The Jar
bodhisattvas 58, 59, 106-109
Willem van Ruytenburch)) 8, 11, 218-221, of Olives 238—41, 239, 241
Bordeaux: Musée des Beaux-Arts (Eugéne
220, 219, 220 Charles I, King of England 214, 216
Delacroix, Greece on the Ruins of Missolonghi
Stedlijk Museum (Edouard Manet, study for A Charles I, King of Spain 233
259, 259)
Bar at the Folies-Bergére) 278 Charles IV, King of Spain 250
Borghese, Cardinal Scipione 205
Van Gogh Museum (Paul Gauguin, The Painter Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor 52, 128
Borluut, Elisabeth 114, 115
of Sunflowers) 282 (Vincent Van Gogh, Charles X, King of France 256
Bosch, Hieronymus: The Garden of Earthly
Sunflowers) 280 Chartres: Cathedral 90-95, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95
Delights 158-63, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163
Anantha (mythical serpent) 72 Chaucer, Geoffrey 263
Boston: Boston Museum of Fine Arts (The Boston
angels 60, 61, 81, 82, 91, 95, 102, 111, 112, 112, Chauvet Cave, Ardéche: paintings at 8, 16-19, 16,
‘Throne’) 41, 41
116-17, 118, 137, 138, 139, 154, 155, 174, 177, 185, 1718519, 29
198, 211, 212, 213, 222-25, 222, 223, 224, 225 Botticelli, Alessandro 11,290; The Birth of Venus
chiaroscuro 174, 175, 194, 204, 218, 219, 221
Angkor: statues at 8, 72-75, 73, 74, 75 8, 11, 140—45, 141, 142-43, 144, 145; Primavera
China 10, 58, 68-71, 84
Anthony, Saint 174-77, 176, 177 140, 142, 142; Venus 145, 145
Chinggiz Khan 210
Antwerp 188, 190, 191, 213 Bourbon dynasty 248
Chloris 140, 142-43, 144, 145
Apelles 22, 148 Bourges Cathedral 90
Chola Empire (India) 84
Aphrodite 38-41, 39, 40, 41; see also Venus Brahma 72
Christ, Jesus 9, 60, 61, 76-79, 76, 77, 80-83, 81, 82,
Apocalypse 91 Bramante, Donato 164, 173
83, 90, 91, 100, 148, 149; ancestry of 92, 94, 169;
Apollo 46, 132 Brancacci family 120-23; for the chapel, see
asachild 60, 61, 136-39, 137, 138, 139, 155, 156,
apostles 76-79, 76, 77, 81, 82, 94, 95, 116, 116-17, Florence: Santa Maria del Carmine
157; Passion of 94, 100, 112, 119, 124-27, 125,
178, 179, 199, 199; see also names ofindividual Brancacci, Felice di Michele 120
126, 127, 174-77, 1755-176, 192-95, 193, 194-95
apostles Brandt, Sebastian 190
(instruments of) 118, 119, 127; Resurrection of
Argenteuil 268, 269 Brendel, O. J. 34
131, 174, 177, 204; at Emmaus 202-205, 202,
Ariadne 48, 50 bronze 8, 42-45, 42, 43, 44, 45, 52, 53, 54, 55,
203, 204; as King of Heaven 114, 116-17
Aristogeiton 45 TDI 3,13, TAL) 95 905 Oo koey LSoy Ll Dy 203, Ch’ungson, King 109
Aristotle 76, 172, 172 284, 285
Clark, Kenneth 8
Arles 280 Bruegel, Pieter, the Elder: The Proverbs 188-91, Classical beauty 123
Armenia 76, 77 188, 189, 190, 191
Cleophas (disciple of Christ) 202
Ashurbanipal, King of Assyria 26-29, 27, 28, 29 Brueghel, Pieter, the Younger 191 Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of Art (Joseph
Assisi: Upper Basilica of San Francesco 103 Brussels 158, 216
Mallord William Turner, The Burning of
the
Assyria 26-29 Buckingham, Duke of 216 Houses of Lords and Commons, October 16,
Athena 34, 35, 36, 36, 37, 37 Buddha 56, 84-87, 85, 86, 87, 106-109 1834) 260-63, 261, 262
Athens 82,226; Parthenon 34, 82 Buddhism 10, 56-59, 57, 58, 59, 106-109, 107, 108 > Clio (Muse) 234-37, 235, 236
Augustine, Saint 174, 177, 196, 197 109; see also Buddha Cluny Abbey 79
Augustinian order 196, 197 Bugiardini, Giuliano 164 Cocq, Frans Banning 218-21, 219, 220
Aurelius, Marcus: Equestrian statue of 8,9 Byzantine Empire 60, 61, 76, 80; influence of 81, Cole, Thomas: The Oxbow 264-67, 264, 265,
Aztec culture 134, 134, 135 82, 103, 116, 154 266-67; Self-Portrait 267

300 INDEX
Colmar: Musée d’Unterlinden (Matthias Egypt 10, 20-23, 20, 21, 22, 23 Gautier, Théophile 250
Griinewald, The Isenheim Altarpiece) 174-77, Eighty Years’ War 218 Gayumars (first king of Iran) 182-85, 183, 184
LES L765 Wee Elche (Valencia) 46 Geffroy, Gustave 289
Colossal Head (Olmec) 24, 25 El Escorial 128 General History of the Things of New Spain 134
Columbus, Christopher 162 El Greco: The Burial of the Count of Orgaz Genesis (Old Testament book) 120, 165, 166, 169
Commodus 55 196-99, 197, 198, 199; Dormition ofthe Gentile da Fabbriano 124
Condivi, Ascanio: 166 Virgin 199, 199 Gentileschi, Artemisia: Judith Slaying Holofernes
Constantinople 52, 60, 82, 172 Eliasz., Nicolaes 218 206-209, 207, 209
contrapposto 42, 43, 132, 133 Emerson, Ralph Waldo 9 Gentileschi, Orazio 206
Copenhagen 290: Ordrupgaard (Vilhelm Epicurus 170 Gerbier, Balthazier 214
Hammershoi, Dust Motes Dancing in the Erasmus of Rotterdam 190 Giotto di Bondone: Scrovegni Chapel frescoes 12,
Sunbeams) 290, 291 Ernst, Max 163 90, 100-105, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105
copper 98 Eteocles 36 Ghent; St Bavo Cathedral (The Ghent Altarpiece)
copper alloy 59, 72-75, 72, 73, 74, 75, 75; see also Ethiopia 76 114-19, 114, 115, 116-17, 118
bronze Etruscan civilization 34-37, 34, 35, 36, 37 Gherardini, Lisa 150-53, 151, 152, 153
Cornaro, Cardinal Federigo 222, 225 Eucharist 95, 119, 131, 176, 204 Ghiberti, Lorenzo 124
Cornaro, Doge Giovanni 224 Euclid 172, 173 Ghirlandaio, Domenico 164
Cortona, Pietro da 229 Eve 93, 114, 119, 120, 121, 123, 158, 160, 289 Gide, André 132
Cosmas, Saint 42 Eyck, Hubert van, see Eyck, Jan van Giocondo, Francesco del 150
Counter-Reformation 224 Eyck, Jan van 148; The Ghent Altarpiece 114-19, Giordano, Luca 233
Coxcie, Michel 131 114, 115, 116-17, 118 Giscard d’Estaing, Valéry 256
Cranach, Lucas 176, 208 Ezekiel (Prophet) 91 Giza 20, 20
Cubism 289 Glaize, Maurice 74
Fantin-Latour, Henri 282 Goethe, Johann 169
Damian, Saint 42 Fawkes, Guy 263 gold 46, 60, 61, 74, 82, 106, 113, 124, 128, 182, 210
Dante Alighieri 103, 150-53 Ferdinand VII 250 Golden Section 252,255
Daphni 82 First World War 118 Goliath 132, 133
Daniel (Prophet) 91, 111, 112 = Flaubert 46 Gothic (style) 90-95, 124, 127, 180
Daubigny, Charles-Francois: Fields in the Flood (Biblical event) 158 Goya, Francisco de: Disasters
of War 250, 251;
Month of June 270, 270 Florence 11, 124=27, 132, 150, 164, 206; The Second of May, 1808 248-S1, 250;
David, Gerard 119 Santa Croce 103, 123 The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters 250;
David, Jacques-Louis: Rape of the Sabine Convent of San Domenico 124 The Third of May, 1808 248-51, 248, 249, 250
Women 256 Medici Palace 132 Granacci, Francesco 164
David, King (Old Testament figure) 92, 110, 112, Museo Nazionale del Bargello (Donatello, granite 84-87, 85, 86, 87
112, 132, 133 David) 132, 133 Greece 8, 22, 34, 37, 40, 76, 77, 84, 170-73,
Degas, Edgar: La Petite Danseuse de quatorze ans Pitti Palace (Peter Paul Rubens, Horrors 199, 226-29, 259, 259; Attica 30, 31; Greek
DIZ TY) 2035.27) of War) 217, 217 influence and colonies 34, 37, 40, 42—45, 46,
Delacroix, Eugene: Greece on the Ruins of Santa Maria del Carmine (Brancacci Chapel 80; mythology of 34-7, 38, 45, 76; ‘Severe Style’
Missolonghi 258; Liberty Leading the People frescoes) 120-23, 121, 122, 123 34, 37
11, 256—59, 256, 257, 258 Santa Trinita 124 grisaille 114, 115
Deleuze, Gilles: Le Pli 224 Museo di San Marco (Fra Angelico and Lorenzo Grtinewald, Matthias 174-77, 174, 175, 176, 177
Delhi 210 Monaco, The Deposition) 124-27, 125, 126, Gupta Empire (India) 56-59, 72, 84
demons 50, 92, 95, 100, 185, 188, 188 127
Denmark 10, 290 Galeria degli Uffizi (Alessandro Botticelli, The Habsburgs 237
Deogarh: Gupta temple 72 Birth of Venus) 8, 11, 140-45, 141, 142-43, Hades 38
Der Spiegel 252 144, 145 (Artemisia Gentileschi, Judith Slaying Hamburg: Kunsthalle (Caspar David Friedrich,
destruction of art 34, 52, 64, 75, 90, 110, 157, 176; Holofernes 206-209, 207) Self-Portrait in Profile) 255 (Caspar David
see also iconoclasm Fontana, Lavinia 208 Friedrich, The Wanderer Above the Sea of
Diderot, Denis 241 foreshortening 121, 123, 218 Mist) 252-55, 253 (Georg Friedrich Kersting,
Digha Nikaya 84, 86 Fountain of Life 116-17, 118 Friedrich’s Studio) 254
Dijon 110 Fra Angelico: The Deposition 124-27, 125, Hammershgi, Vilhelm: Dust Motes Dancing
Diogenes 172, 173 126, 127 in the Sunbeams 10,290, 291
Dionysius the Elder, Tyrant of Syracuse 34, 37 Francis, Saint 136, 136, 137, 138 Harmodios 45
Dionysus 48, 50 Franciscan order 196 Hasan, Abu’! 210, 212; Squirrels in a Plane
Donatello 110,123; David 132, 133; Francis I, King of France 150 Tree 212
Gattamelata 55 Franco-Prussian War 270 Heaven 100
donors 91, 92, 93, 100, 136-39, 136, 138, 196 French Revolution 110, 174, 176, 256, 259 Hebrews 206, 266, 266
Dresden: Kupferstich-Kabinett der Staatlichen fresco 100-105, 120-23, 164-69, 170-73 Heian period (Japan) 88
Kunstsammlungen (Caspar David Friedrich, Friedrich, Caspar David: Rocky Hilltop 255; Self- Hell 100, 100, 102, 160-61, 163
Rocky Hilltop) 255 Portrait in Profile 255; The Wanderer Above the Hendrick III, Count of Nassau-Breda 158
Dublin: National Gallery of Ireland (Caravaggio, Sea of Mist 252-55, 253 Heraclitus 172, 173
The Taking of Christ) 205, 205 Fry, Roger 280 Hercules 140
Duchamp, Marcel 252, 272 Fuendetodos: Museo del Grabado de Goya Herrigel, Eugen 233
Diirer, Albrecht 119, 176; Self-Portrait 148, 149 (Francisco de Goya: Horrors of War 251) Hinduism 72-75
Dughet, Gaspard 229 Fujiwara clan 88 Hitler, Adolf 119
Dupeérac, Etienne 54 Hogenbeg, Frans 188, 190
Dust Muhammad 182, 185 Gabriel, Archangel 103, 115 Holy Land 127
Dutch Republic 213, 218, 234-37 Galizia, Fede: Judith 208 Holy Spirit 116, 116-17, 118
Garden of Eden 114, 119, 267 Houdon, Jean-Antoine 64
Ecclesia 136 Gauguin, Paul 280, 282, 283; The Painter Hugo, Victor 259, 284
Edo 242; see also Tokyo of Sunflowers 282 Hugues de Poitiers 79

INDEX 301
humanism 124, 148, 283 Labours of the Months 77, 78 Bosch, The Garden ofEarthly Delights)
Humayun (Mughal emperor) 210 Lakshmi 72 158-63, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163 (Francisco

Hungary 120 Lamb of God 116, 117, 118 de Goya, The Second of May, 1808) 248-51,
Husain, Shaikh 210-13, 211, 213 Lamentations (Old Testament book) 112 250 (Francisco de Goya, The Third of May,
Huygens, Constantijn, the Younger 190 Landino, Cristoforo 132 1808) 248-51, 248, 249, 250 (Diego Velazquez,
Huysmans, J.-K. 272 landscape 116, 116-17, 126-7, 126, 150-53, 152, Las Meninas) 8, 230-33, 230, 231, 232, 233
Hymen (God of Marriage) 214, 215, 216 153, 154, 155, 186, 187, 226-29, 227, 252, 253, (Diego Velazquez, The Surrender at Breda
264-67, 264, 265, 266-67, 268-71, 269, 270, 271 (The Lances)) 218, 221 (Rogier van der
Iberian culture 46, 47 Landseer, Sir Edwin: The Monarch of the Glen 29 Weyden, The Descent from the Cross 9, 10,
icons 60, 61, 199, 199 Laocéon sculpture 123 128-31, 128-29, 130-31
iconoclasm 24, 177 Last Judgment 76,78, 100, 100, 102 Maillol, Aristide 284
Ife: sculptures from 98, 98, 99 Lavin, Irving 224 Maiuri, Amadeo 48
ignudi 168, 168 Leonardo da Vinci 11; Last Supper 167; Portrait Malouel, Jean 113
Impressionism 268-71, 269, 270, 271, 279 ofLisa del Giacondo, formerly Lisa Gherardini Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu: rock-cut shrine
India 56, 72, 76, 79, 84, 88, 108, 210-13; views (Mona Lisa) 8, 8, 11, 68, 150-53, 151, 152, 153, TE Ie
of Europe 212-13; see also individual towns 252, 278 Mamelukes 248, 249
and states Leopold 1, Holy Roman Emperor 230 Manet, Edouard 233, 251; A Bar at the Folies-
Industrial Revolution 264—67 Lima: Bergere 276-79, 277, 278, 279; Execution of
Inghirami, Tommaso 170, 173 Museo Rafael Larco Herrera (Moche Portrait the Emperor Maximilian 251
Inquisition 158 Vessel) 62, 63 Manjushri 109
Innocent X, Pope 225 Lippi, Filippino 52, 120 Mantz, Paul 272,275
inscriptions 115, 116—17, 118, 119, 128, 148, 149, Liverpool: Walker Art Gallery (Nicolas Poussin, marble 30, 31, 38—41, 39, 40, 41, 222-27, 222, 223,
176, 266, 266 Landscape with the Ashes of Phocion) 226-29, 224, 225, 284
Iran 182-85 227 (Frederick Yeames, And When Did You Last Marcus Aurelius 52-55, 53, 54, 55: Meditations
Isaac 123 See Your Father?) 276, 276, 279 55
Isaiah (Prophet) 91, 94, 111, 112 Locri Epizephyrii (Greek city in southern Italy) 40 Margaret of Flanders 113
Isenheim 176 Lombardy 202 Margarita Teresa, Infanta 230-33, 230, 231, 232
Isidore, Saint 148 London 260; Marianne (French symbol) 256
Isidore of Seville 76 Banqueting House, Whitehall (Peter Paul Mark, Saint 76, 76,77, 78, 91
Isma’il, Shah 182 Rubens, Apotheosis of James 1 217, 217 Mars (God of War) 214-17, 215, 217
Ithaca: Cornell University (Charles-Francois British Library (Abu’l Hasan, Squirrels Marseille 46
Daubigny, Fields in the Month of June) 270, 270 in a Plane Tree) 212 Martin, Saint 93
British Museum (Lion Hunt panels from Martinez del Mazo, Juan Bautista 230
Jacob. 168 Nineveh 26-29) martyrs 116, 116, 116—17, 154, 155
Jacobsz., Dirck 218 Courtauld Institute (Edouard Manet, A Bar Mary, Virgin (mother of Christ) 9, 60, 60, 61,
Jahangir, Emperor 210-13, 211, 213 at the Folies-Bergére) 276-79, 277, 278, 279 81, 82, 90—94, 90, 91, 92, 100, 103, 114, 124,
James, Saint 92 Houses of Parliament 260-63, 260, 261, 262 128-31, 128, 129, 130-31, 136-39, 137, 138, 142,
James I, King of England 211, 212, 213, 213, National Gallery (Giovanni Bellini, Madonna 154-57, 155, 156, 157, 174, 198; Annunciation
DMG, Lae of the Pomegranate) 157 (Caravaggio, The to 103, 115, 177, 290; Dormition of 199, 199;
Jameson, Anna 206 Supper at Emmaus) 202-205, 203, 204 (Peter Assumption of 178-81, 179
Japan 10, 88, 89 Paul Rubens, Minerva Protects Pax from Mary Magdalene 113, 113, 124, 126, 126, 176, 176
Jeremiah (Prophet) 91, 112, 112 War (‘Peace and War’)) 214-17, 214, 215, 216 Mary Salome 128, 129, 130-31
Jeroboam, King 76,77 (Joseph Mallord William Turner, Rain, steam, Mary of Hungary 128
Jerome, Saint 154, 155, 156, 177 and speed —the Great Western Railway) 263, Masaccio 8; Brancacci Chapel frescoes 120-23,
John, Saint: Gospel of 78, 91, 128 263 (Vincent van Gogh, Sunflowers) 280-83, 121, 122
John the Baptist, Saint 78, 114, 115, 116, 145, 198 280, 281, 282, 283 Masolino 120-23, 122, 123
John the Evangelist, Saint 115, 125, 176 Royal Academy 284 Mathura 56, 59; Government Museum 59
Joseph (husband of Mary) 168 Tate Britain (Joseph Mallord William Mattei, Ciriaco 205
Joseph of Arimathea 125, 126, 126, 128, 130-31 Turner, The Burning of the Houses of Matthew, Saint 91
Judaism 76, 76, 77, 115 Parliament, 1834) 260 (John Singer Sargeant, Mauclerc, Pierre (Count of Dreux) 91
Judith (Biblical figure) 206-209, 207, 208, 209 Claude Monet Painting by the Edge ofa Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor 148
(Old Testament book) 206 Wood) 270 Maya civilization 11, 64, 65
Julius II, Pope 164, 170-73 Lorenzo, Monaco: The Deposition 124-27, 125, Medici family 11, 140
126, 127 Medici, Cosimo de’ 132
Kabul 210 Lorrain, Claude 229 Medici, Lorenzo de’ (the Magnificent) 140, 145
Kalidasa 58 Louis XIV, King of France 229 Medici, Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ 140
Kamakura period (Japan) 88 Louis-Philippe I, King of France 256 Megara 226
Karatsu City: Kagami Jinja (Water-Moon Louvain: Great Crossbowmen’s Guild of 128 Melanippus 34, 35, 36, 36, 37, 37
Avalokiteshvara) 106-109, 107, 108, 109 Lucy, Saint 154, 155, 156 Mexico 24, 64, 134; see also Palenque;
Karlsbad Decrees 255 Ludovisi ‘Throne’ 38—41, 39, 40, 41 San Lorenzo
Kathmandu 72,75 Luke, Saint 76, 76, 91; Gospel of 76, 202 Mexico City: Museo del Templo Mayor (Aztec
Ketel, Cornelis: The Company of Captain Luoyang: Buddhas of 84 Eagle Knight) 134, 135
Rosecrans 218 Lu Shidao 186, 187 Micah (Old Testament prophet) 115
Khmer civilization 72-75 Luther, Martin 177 Michelangelo Buonarroti 52, 53, 110, 132, 145,
Kip, Deborah 214, 215, 216 172, 173; David 132, 169; The Last Judgment
Komurasaki of the Tamaya 245 Machiavelli, Niccolo 150 167, 169; Pieta 84, 169; Sistine Chapel ceiling 11 >
Korea 10, 106-109 Macrobii 76, 77, 79 90, 142, 164-69, 164, 165-66, 167, 168, 169, 170,
Koryé period 106, 109 Madrid 248—51; 204; tomb for Julius II 164
kouroi 8 Museo Arqueologico Nacional de Espana Michelozzo di Bartolomeo 127
Kritian Boy 45 (The Lady of Elche) 46, 47 Middle Ages 52, 76-79
Museo Nacional del Prado 250 (Hieronymus Milan: Pinacoteca di Brera (Piero della Francesca,

302 INDEX
 The Montefeltro Altarpiece) 136-139, 136, 137, Pacioli, Luca 252 Pisano, Niccolo 123
138, 139 Padua: Gattamelata 55; Scrovegni Chapel 12, Plato: 172, 1/73
Minerva 173,214, 215, 216 90, 100-105, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105 Pliny 76, 79, 237
Ming dynasty 10, 186 Pakistan 56 Plutarch 226
miniatures 11, 182-85, 182, 183, 184, 185, 210-13 > Pala Empire (India) 84 Poliziano, Agnolo 140
Zit 212. 213 Palenque 64, 65 Polonnaruwa: Reclining Buddha 84-87, 85, 86, 87
Mitterand, Francois, President of France 256 Palermo 80; Church of the Martorama 83 polychrome: on sculpture 26, 34, 46, 64, 88,
Moche culture 10, 10, 62, 63 Palladio, Andrea 226 110, 113
Monet, Claude 11, 289; Wild Poppies 268-71, Pan 48, 51 Polycleitus 132
269, 271 Panisca 48, 51 Polygnotus 37
Monreale: Cathedral 83 Pandora 38 Polynices 36
Montefeltro, Federico da, Duke of Urbino 136-39, Panofsky, Erwin 131 Pompeii: The Villa of the Mysteries 48-51, 49,
136, 137, 138 Panotii 76, 79 50, 51
More, Sir Thomas 163 Paphos 145 portraiture 22, 24, 25, 62, 62, 63, 64, 65, 88, 89,
Moretto da Brescia 202 Paradise 158-63 150-53, 151, 152, 153, 212, 218-221; inclusion of
Morocco 259 Paris 270; 127, 170-73, 172, 173; self-portraiture 148, 149,
mosaic 80-83, 81, 82, 83, 157 Exhibition of Indépendants 271, 272 163, 163, 173, 194, 228, 240
Moses 110-13 Exposition Universelle 258 Potalaka 106, 109
Mount Sinai: Monastery of St Catherine (The Louvre 8, 150, 289 (Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Poussin, Nicolas 11, 266, 286; Landscape with
Virgin and Child with Angels and Two Saints) Chardin, The Jar ofOlives) 238-41, 239, the Ashes of Phocion 226-29, 227, Landscape
60, 61 241 (Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin, Self- with the Funeral of Phocion 226-29, 226, 227;
Muchaku (also known as Asanga) 88,.89 Portrait) 240 (Eugéne Delacroix, Liberty Self-Portrait 228
Mughal dynasty 210-13 Leading the People) 11, 256-59, 256, 257, Prei Khmeng 72
Munich: 258 (Leonardo da Vinci, Portrait of Lisa del Priam, King 76
Alte Pinakothek (Albrecht Diirer, Self-Portrait) Giacondo, formerly Lisa Gherardini (Mona Prophets 90, 92, 100, 102 110-13, 114, 116, 124
148, 149; Lisa)) 8,8, 11, 68, 150-53, 151, 152, 153, 168-69; see also names ofindividual prophets
Kurfiirstliche Gemaldegalerie Miinchen 148 252, 278 (Nicolas Poussin, Self-Portrait) 228 Proust, Marcel 241
Neue Pinakothek (Vincent Van Gogh, ~ (Tintoretto, Self-Portrait) 194 (Titian, The Prophets
Sunflowers) 280, 283 Supper at Emmaus) 202 (Venus de Milo) 259 Provence 286, 289
Murat, Marshal 242 Musée d’Orsay 274 (Paul Cézanne, Apples and Psalms (Old Testament book) 76, 112
music 38, 40, 154, 155, 163, 226, 227 Oranges) 13, 286-89, 287, 288 (Claude Monet, Pygmalion 22
Mycerinus 20-23, 20, 21, 22,23 Wild Poppies) 268-71, 269, 271 Pyrgi: Temple A 34-37, 34, 35, 36, 37
Musée Rodin 284
Naples 80; Museo di Capodimonte (Artemisia Notre-Dame Cathedral 90, 256, 257, 258 Qianlong, Emperor 70
Gentileschi, Judith Slaying Holofernes 206, Salon 256, 259, 270 Qiu Ying 186, 187
209) Paris, Pierre 46 Quost, Ernest 282
Napoleon 157, 248-51, 254 Parkramabhu I, King 84
Nara City (Japan): Kofukuji 88, 89 Parrhasius 237 Raphael 164; Sistine Madonna 142; The School
Navarrete, Juan Fernandez 131 patronage 22-23, 95, 157, 264; royal 26; of Athens 170-73, 170, 171, 172, 173
Neo-Platonism 145 see also donors Rassam, Hormuzd 29
Nepal 58,72, 75 Paul, Saint 78, 174, 177 Reed, Luman 264
Newton, Eric 194 Paul III, Pope 52 Reff, Theodore 272
New York: Persephone 38 : Reggio Calabria: Museo Nazionale della Magna
New-York Historical Society (Thomas Cole, Persia 11, 45, 210; see also Iran Grecia (The Riace Bronzes) 42-45, 42, 43, 44, 45
Self-Portrait) 267 Persian War (early Sth century) 45 Reims Cathedral 90
Metropolitan Museum (The ‘New York’ Kouros) perspective 8—9, 20, 103, 126, 192, 194; Rembrandt van Rijn: The Night Watch
30 (Thomas Cole, The Oxbow) 264-67, 264, geometric 154 (The Company of Frans Banning Cocq and
265, 266-67 Peru 10, 10, 62, 63; see also Moche culture Willem van Ruytenburch) 8, 11, 218-21, 220,
Nicholas, Saint 124 Peter, Saint 78, 120, 122, 154, 154, 199, 199, 219, 220
Nicodemus 125, 126, 126, 127, 128, 130-31 203, 204, 204 Renaissance 9; Italy 11,55, 100; Northern 9,
Nicopolis 112 Peter the Venerable (Prior of Vézelay) 78 110-13, 148, 149
Nieto, José de 230, 232, 233 Phidias 43 Renaud de Semur (Abbot of Vézelay) 78
Nigeria 98, 98, 99 Philadelphia: reproductions 11, 46, 48, 68, 252
Nineveh 26-29 The Barnes Foundation (Paul Cézanne, Revelation to Saint John (New Testament
Nirvana 86 Compotier, Pitcher and Fruit) 288,289 book) 90
Noah (Old Testament figure) 95, 167, 168, 267 Philadelphia Museum of Art(Joseph Mallord Reynolds, Sir Joshua 221
Northern Song Dynasty 68-71, 68, 69, 70, 71 William Turner, The Burning of the Houses Riace Bronzes 42—45, 42, 43, 44, 45
nude: female 38, 140—45, 256-59, 257, 258; male of Lords and Commons, 16th October, 1834) Riccardi family 120
30, 31, 34, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42—45, 42, 43, 44, 45, 262, 262 Ripa, Cesare: Iconologia 234
132, 133, 168 Philip II, King of Spain 128, 131 Riza, Aqa 210
Numez de Madrid, Andréz 196-98 Philip IV, King of Spain 230, 230 Robb, Brian 192
Nuremberg 149 Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy 110-13, 113 Rochegrosse, G. 46
Phnom Penh: National Museum of Cambodia Rodin, Auguste: Iris, Messenger of the Gods
Obalufon II, King 98 (Vishnu Reclining on the Serpent Anantha) 284, 285
Olmec culture 24-25, 25 72-75, 72,73, 74,75 Roe, Sir Thomas 213
Onophrius, Saint 124 Phocion (Greek general) 226-29, 227 Roger I, King of Sicily 80
Original Sin 114, 123, 123, 162, 289 Picasso, Pablo 131, 289; Guernica 248 Roger II, King ofSicily 80-83
Orléans, Duke of 256 Piero della Francesca 290; The Montefeltro Roman Empire 9, 22, 48, 76; influence of
Ottoman dynasty 212, 259, 259 Altarpiece 136-39, 136, 137, 138, 139 Classical art 145
Ovid 140 Pisa: Cathedral 123 Romanesque (style) 76-79, 76, 77, 78, 79, 82, 90, 92
Pisano, Giovanni 123 Rome 34, 120, 202;

INDEX 303
 Capitoline Museums (Equestrian statue of Sukbi, Queen 109 Vatican 119; Library 172; Sistine Chapel (murals
Marcus Aurelius) 8, 52-55, 53, 54, 54 Sultan Muhammad: The Court of Gayumars by Botticelli) 140 (ceiling by Michelangelo) 11,
182-85, 182, 183, 184, 185 90, 142, 164-69, 164, 165-66, 167, 168, 169, 170,
Column of Marcus Aurelius 55
Suzhou (city) 186 204; St Peter’s 164, 169, 173 (The Last Judgment
Galeria Nazionale d’Arte Antica (Caravaggio,
Judith Slaying Holofernes 208, 208) Switzerland 254 by Michelangelo) 167; Stanze 170-73, 170, 171,
172,173.
Gardens of Sallust 40
tableau vivant 131 Vecellio, Tiziano see Titian
Ludovisi Palace 40
Tabriz 11, 182 Velazquez, Diego: The Surrender at Breda (The
Museo Nazionale Etrusco (‘Seven Against
Tahmasp, Shah 182, 210 Lances) 218, 221, 230; Las Meninas 230-33,
Thebes’ relief) 34
Takigawa of the Ogiya 245 230, 231, 232, 233
Palazzo Altemps (The Ludovisi ‘Throne’)
Tang dynasty 58 Venice 100, 199;
38-41, 39, 40, 41
Tassi, Agostino 206 San Marco 52, 154, 157 me
Piazza del Campidoglio 54
tempera 136, 140 San Zaccaria (Giovanni Bellini, San Zaccaria
St John Lateran 52
Tenochtitlan: House of the Eagles 134, 135 Altarpiece) 154-57, 154, 155, 156;
Santa Maria della Vittoria, Cornaro Chapel
(Gianlorenzo Bernini 110; The Ecstasy of Teresa of Avila, Saint 222-25, 222, 223, 224, 225 Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari
Saint Teresa) 222-25, 222, 223, 224, 225 terracotta 34-37, 35, 36, 37 Scuola di San Rocco (Tintoretto, The
Thailand 58 Crucifixion) 192-95, 192, 193, 194-95
Santa Maria sopra Minerva 52
Thebes 34-37, 45 Venus 140-45, 141, 142-43, 144, 145
Sapienza University 36
Rosa, Salvator 229 The Hague 237 ‘Venus pudica’ 123
Rubens, Peter Paul 230; ‘Apotheosis of James I’ Thoré, Théophile 259 Vermeer, Johannes: The Art of Painting 234-37,
217; Horrors of War 217, 217; Minerva Protects Timurlang 210 235, 236, 237
Pax from War (‘Peace and War’) 214-17, 214, Tintoretto (Jacopo Robusti) 199; The Crucifixion Verrocchio, Andrea del: Colleoni monument 55;
215, 216 192-95, 192, 193, 194-95 David 132
Ruskin, John 157, 194 Titian (Tiziano Vecellio) 157, 199, 208, 214; The Vespucci, Agostino 150
Ruysdael, Jacob van 266 Assumption ofthe Virgin 178-81, 178, 179, 180; Vézelay: Abbey Church of La Madeleine 76-79,
Madonna ofthe Pesaro Family 181; Self-Portrait TOs 1/705 To
sacra conversazione 136-39, 137, 154 181; The Supper at Emmaus 202, 202 Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum (Johannes
Safavid dynasty 182-85, 210 Tokyo 242; Seiji Togo Memorial Sompo Japan Vermeer, The Art of Painting) 234-37, 235,
saints 60, 61, 82, 94, 100, 106; see also names Museum of Art (Vincent Van Gogh, Sunflowers) 236, 237
ofindividual saints 280, 282 Vijd, Joos 114, 115
Sandrart, Joachim 176 Toledo: Santo Tomé (El Greco, The Burial of the Virgil 116, 217
Sangallo, Aristotileda 166 Count of Orgaz) 196-99, 197, 198, 199 Vishnu 72-75, 72, 73, 74, 75
Sangallo, Giuliano da 164 Treaty of Miinster 237 be Visscher, Claes Jansz. 234
San Lorenzo, Veracruz 24 Tree of Jesse 92, 94 Von Brincken, Colonal Friedrich Gotthard
Sargeant, John Singer: Claude Monet Painting Troy 76 253,254
by the Edge of aWood 270 Turner, Joseph Mallord William: The Burning
Sarmiento, Maria-Augustina 230 of the Houses of Lords and Commons, 16th Washington, D.C.:
Sarnath 56; Archaeological Museum (The Buddha October, 1834 262, 262; The Burning ofthe Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution
Preaching the First Sermon) 56-59, 57, 58, 59 Houses of Lords and Commons, October 16, (Bichitr, Portrait of Jahangir Preferring a Sufi
Saturn 145 1834 260-63, 261, 262; The Burning ofthe Shaikh to Kings) 210-13, 211, 212, 213
Scanelli, Francesco 205 Houses of Parliament, 1834 (watercolour) 260; National Gallery of Art (Peter Paul Rubens,
Scrovegni, Enrico 100-105, 102 Rain, steam, and speed —the Great Western Daniel in the Lions’ Den) 217
Sebastian, Saint 174, 176 Railway 263, 263 watercolour 186, 187, 210—13, 211, 212, 213,
Second World War 119 Tuscany 124-27, 150; see also individual cities 260, 260
Selim II, Ottoman Sultan 182 in Tuscany wax encaustic 60, 61
Semele 48 Tsutaya Jazaburo 244 William II, King of Sicily 83
Sesha 72 Tydeus (Ancient Greek warrior) 34-37, 34, 35,
Seshin (also known as Vasubandhu) 88, 89 36, 37 Xalapa, Veracruz: Museo de Antropologia 24, 25
Shah Jahan, Emperor 212
Shakespeare, William 267 Udayadityavarman II, King 72 Yadoya no Meshimori (poet) 245
Shanghai: Shanghai Museum (Carts at the Mill) Udayagiri: reliefs at 72 Yeames, Frederick: And When Did You Last
70 ukiyo-e 242, 243, 244, 244 See Your Father? 276, 276, 279
Shenyang 68 U-mun, Kim: Water-Moon Avalokiteshvara 10, Yoruba culture 98, 98, 99
Sibyls 114, 168, 169 106-109, 107, 108, 109 Yriarte, Charles 251
Sicily 80-83 Unkei 88, 89 Yuan Dynasty 10
signature 148, 149, 154, 155, 176, 198 Urbino 136, 139 Yutaka, Hirata 109
Simon of Cyrene 102 us-Samad, Abd 210
Sluter, Claus: The ‘Well of Moses’ 110-113, 110, Utamaro, Kitagawa 11; ‘Lovers’ from Erotic Book: Zachariah (Old Testament prophet) 112, 115
Li 112. 113 The Poem ofthe Pillow (Ehon Utamakura) 11, Zeduan, Zhang: Spring Festival on the River
Solomon, King (Old Testament figure) 154, 155 242-45, 243, 244, 245 (Qingming Shanghe tu) 10, 68-71, 68, 69, 70, 71
Spain 46, 47, 128, 134, 216 Uttar Pradesh 58 Zephyr 140, 140, 142-43, 144, 145
Sri Lanka 8, 84-87 Zeus 34, 35, 36, 37, 37, 226
stained glass 12, 90-95, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 Vanderveken, Jef 117 Zeuxis 22,237
Stephen, Saint 192, 193 Van der Weyden, Rogier: The Descent from Zhou Dynasty 68
Stesychorus 37 the Cross 9, 10, 128-31, 128, 129, 130-31 Zhou Da-guan 75
Stevens, Peeter 191 Van Gogh, Theo 10, 280 Zola, Emile 13
still lifes 202, 238-41, 238, 239, 241, 280-83, 281, Van Gogh, Vincent 10; Sunflowers 11, 280-83, Zurich: Feilchenfeldt Collection (Paul Cézanne:
286-89, 287, 288, 289 280, 281, 282, 283 Self-Portrait) 289
Strozzi family 124, 126, 126, 127, 127 Van Heemskerck, Martin 52
Sudhana 108, 109 Van Ruytenburch, Willem 218-21, 219, 220
Sufism 210-13 Vasari, Giorgio 114, 124, 127, 132, 140

304 INDEX
 esi ay! + are oa) he
he MCR pe
a: Boe a a . ave
Chris\<.)\\\~y ‘Yell is a writer and art historian based
in Bares \\\:. He studied at Winchester School of Art
and the Courtauld Institute of Art, and has worked
at the National Gallery, London, the Architectural
Association, for the Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aevi
(a medieval stained glass research project) and in
art publishing.

Thames &« Hudson

500 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10110

thamesendhudsonusa.com

Printed in Coina
 oy;
ts
ae be ta a 174Sas ae
ne i

ey [

*
ISBN 978-0-500-23879-0

| 54500
YW || |
| | <

' /
;, 9"780500"238790 } ;
:

Ae
ih .
we, |