Showing posts with label Sculpture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sculpture. Show all posts

Monday, November 23, 2009

The Strange Man Socrates - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. VII.66



Meditation VII.66 - The Strange Man Socrates - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil


How do we know if Telauges was not superior in character to Socrates?1 For it is not enough that Socrates died a more noble death,2 and disputed more skilfully with the sophists,3 and passed the night in the cold with more endurance,4 and that when he was bid to arrest Leon of Salamis, he considered it more noble to refuse,5 and that he walked in a swaggering way in the streets - though as to this fact one may have great doubts if it was true.6 But we ought to inquire, what kind of a soul it was that Socrates possessed,7 and if he was able to be content with being just towards men and women and pious toward the gods,8 neither idly vexed on account of human villainy,9 nor yet making himself a slave to anyone's ignorance,10 nor receiving as strange anything that fell to his share out of the universal, nor enduring it as intolerable,11 nor allowing his understanding to sympathize with the affects of the miserable flesh.12

Explanation

(1) Telauges (ca. 500 BC) was a Pythagorean philosopher and, according to tradition, the son of Pythagoras and Theano and a man of great virtue.

(2) The events leading up to the death of Socrates are chronicled in Plato's Apology.

(3) The sophists were professional teachers who charged for their services. In this era the term is used pejoratively in the same sense that we may refer today to "spin doctors."

(4) According to tradition Socrates once spent an entire cold night gazing out to sea engrossed in thought dressed in only a cloak.

(5) Leon of Salamis was a historical figure, mentioned in Plato's Apology. He was put to death for crimes he had not committed. In the Apology, Socrates argues that he fears committing injustice more than he fears death. In the Apology he accounts how he disobeyed orders to arrest Leon of Salamis who he knew to be innocent:

When the oligarchy was established, the Thirty summoned me to the Hall, along with four others, and ordered us to bring Leon from Salamis, that he might be executed. They gave many other orders to many people, in order to implicate as many as possible in their [i.e., the Thirty's] guilt. Then I showed again, not in words but in action, that, if it's not crude of me to say so, death is something I couldn't care less about, but that my whole concern is not to do anything unjust or impious. That government, as powerful as it was, did not frighten me into any wrongdoing. When we left the Hall, the other four went to Salamis and brought in Leon, but I went home. I might have been put to death for this, had not the government fallen shortly afterwards.

(6) The following extract from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes several elements of Socrates' "Strangeness" including a reference to his "swagger:"

Standards of beauty are different in different eras, and in Socrates' time beauty could easily be measured by the standard of the gods, stately, proportionate sculptures of whom had been adorning the Athenian acropolis since about the time Socrates reached the age of thirty. Good looks and proper bearing were important to a man's political prospects, for beauty and goodness were linked in the popular imagination. The extant sources agree that Socrates was profoundly ugly, resembling a satyr more than a man—and resembling not at all the statues that turned up later in ancient times and now grace Internet sites and the covers of books. He had wide-set, bulging eyes that darted sideways and enabled him, like a crab, to see not only what was straight ahead, but what was beside him as well; a flat, upturned nose with flaring nostrils; and large fleshy lips like an ass. Socrates let his hair grow long, Spartan-style (even while Athens and Sparta were at war), and went about barefoot and unwashed, carrying a stick and looking arrogant. He didn't change his clothes but efficiently wore in the daytime what he covered himself with at night. Something was peculiar about his gait as well, sometimes described as a swagger so intimidating that enemy soldiers kept their distance. He was impervious to the effects of alcohol and cold, but this made him an object of suspicion to his fellow soldiers on campaign.

(7) In Stoicism the soul is what makes us human. Stoics are indifferent toward the body and its affects.

(8) The phrase makes reference to both Stoic (justice) and Roman (piety toward the gods) virtues.

(9) Being "vexed" or annoyed with anyone is a violation of one of the so-called Stoic "commandments" discussed in Meditation VIII.08 (in the book).

(10) Ignorance generally refers to those who do not live according to nature and as a consequence commit injustices. The presumption is that anyone who was aware of the natural law - upon which the moral law is constructed - would act in the right way. The duty of the Stoic is to teach those who live in ignorance. Situations in which ignorance occur actually provide the Stoic with an opportunity to act virtuously by bringing truth to those who are unaware.

(11) the Stoic not only accepts what life brings, but presumes that what we are, and whatever situations we experience, are exactly what nature intends for us.

(12) Again the Stoic is indifferent to the "affects of the flesh." The body is not what defines us. We are defined rather by our innate intelligence which comes to us from the universal intelligence. This intelligence - identified with the soul - is impervious to harm, and invulnerable to mistake when unimpeded by the emotional and physical influences of the body. The purpose of meditation is to enter the mind in ways in which this process can occur.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Dying Contently - Unpublished Selections Explained, Med. VIII.47



Meditation VIII.47 - Dying Contently - Translated by George Long and rewritten by Russell McNeil


If you are pained by any external thing, it is not this thing that disturbs you, but your own judgment about it.1 And it is in your power to wipe out this judgment now.2 But if anything in your own disposition gives you pain, who hinders you from correcting your opinion?3 And even if you are pained because you are not doing some particular thing which seems to you to be right, why do you not rather act than complain?4 - But some insuperable obstacle is in the way? - Do not be grieved then, for the cause of its not being done depends not on you.5 - But it is not worth while to live if this cannot be done. - Take your departure then from life contently, just as he dies who is in full activity, and well pleased too with the things which are obstacles.6

Explanation

(1) Marcus mirrors the frustrations we so often feel around the many external forces in our lives over which we have little or no control. These forces - be they economic, bureaucratic, systemic or natural - are generally beyond the reach of anyone. Still, we often feel personally oppressed or injured by them - a state of affairs that can color our outlook on life. Our emotional reactions to these forces range from irritation to anger. But, such responses are really a useless expenditure of emotional energy which leave us depleted and unable to react to those forces that we can change.

(2) While Marcus seems to state the obvious here - that it is our judgment or opinion about injustice that causes us more harm than the injustice itself - few people realize this. Taking a "whatever will be will be" attitude requires little more than a mental shift - a power each of us has. What we gain in return is peace of mind, and of course the mental reserve to act on those things that we need to act on.

(3) The answer is clear. No one can ever hinder you from shifting your opinion. Opinion is a sovereign power and the source of enormous empowerment in our lives.

(4) Doing the right thing is another area where human beings have sovereign authority. If the way is clear for us to act rightly but we do not act, then we have only ourselves to blame. The pain and guilt we feel can be alleviated in any situation where opportunity for virtue presents itself. Act rightly in those situations and we will never feel the need to complain.

(5) If the way is not clear to acting rightly because there are unmovable impediments in the way - so too, we ought never feel upset about those situations. Those impediments are there for a reason, and the only healthy stance is to accept what is and move toward those things that are in our power.

(6) This advice seems strange, but is sage. Marcus refers here to obstacles that are not only not movable but unstoppable. These obstacles not only prevent us from doing what is right, they threaten our very existence. Marcus may be alluding here to battlefield situations with overwhelming enemy forces bearing down upon a weakened and spent defense. It could equally apply to another sort of battle - such as a death from terminal cancer. Even in these however, the Stoic response is to accept these situations with courage and equanimity. We can do only what we can do, and in the grand scheme of things these forces have a role to play in the realization of nature's plan. If we must die in this situation - we ought to die content, and in the full knowledge that we did all that we could do to live as nature intended.

Russell McNeil, PhD, is the author of The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: Selections Annotated and Explained by Skylight Paths Publishing. The unpublished selections presented in this Blog are provided as supplemental material to the published selections which are annotated and explained in the book. The published selections are referenced in this Blog by page number and section.

Monday, October 29, 2007

Albert Bertel Thorvaldsen (1770-1844)


Thorvaldsen (1770-1844), little known today, was the most famous European sculptor in the decades following Canova’s death (1822). In 1797 Thorvaldsen traveled on a fellowship from his native Denmark to Rome, and there he remained for over forty years. “Thorvaldsen quickly became Rome’s most admired artist,” wrote Rosenblum and Janson, “and his studio, with its display of original plasters, was a pilgrimage goal for countless prominent visitors as well as aspiring artists.” (Nineteenth-Century Art, p. 191).

Thorvaldsen produced more than 90 freestanding sculptures, over 150 portrait busts, and some 300 reliefs in marble and bronze. To classical archeologists (you know you’re out there), he’s familiar as the man who did the original restorations of the sculptures found at the Temple of Aphaia at Aegina. The restorations have since been removed, which is certainly better for the historical accuracy of the sculptures (Thorvaldsen was an artist, not a student of Archaic Greek art), but a loss for the history of classical studies and the history of 19th-century sculpture.

The plaster originals for many of the sculptor’s works are in the Thorvaldsen Museum in Copenhagen, whose website is regrettably short of images. For links to museums that do have his works, visit www.ArtCyclopedia.com and search for “Thorvaldsen.”

This sculpture shows Thorvaldsen as a sculptor, wearing a workman’s shirt, leggings, and slippers, and holding a chisel and mallet. His elbow rests on one of his own sculptures, a figure of Hope. On the pedestal appear copies of two of his best known reliefs, Night and Day.

The only other outdoor work by Thorvaldsen in Manhattan is a zinc copy of his Hebe (Youth) atop the Temperance Fountain in Tompkins Square Park.
- from "Forgotten Delights."

Classical Art

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Sculpture in Greece (c 100 BCE-c 300 CE)

Sierra Club

Summary

A broad review of ideas related to Greek sculpture from the classical and Hellenistic periods. From there the discussion examines the evolution of sculpture in other periods throughout the world.

Books

Please browse our Amazon list of titles about Sculpture in Greece. For rare and hard to find works we recommend our Alibris list of titles about Sculpture in Greece.

AlibrisResearch

Powerpoint: Greek Art
COPAC UK: Greek Sculpture
Library of Canada: Greek Sculpture
Library of Congress: Greek Sculpture
Other Library Catalogs: Greek Sculpture

Biographical

This entry offers a broad review of ideas related to Greek sculpture, its Spirit and its Principles from the classical and Hellenistic periods. From there the discussion examines the evolution of sculpture in other periods throughout the world.

In the widest sense of the term, sculpture is the art of representing in bodily form men, animals, and other objects in stone, bronze, ivory, clay and similar materials, whether the objects represented actually exist in nature or are the creation of the imagination of the artist. A more concise and exact definition of sculpture is the art which represents beauty in bodily form by means of figures entirely or partly in the round. Sculpture therefore depicts the beauty of the corporeal world, not as does painting by means of an illusory representation upon a fiat coloured surface, but by imitating in a solid substance these bodies in their entirety, and achieving the effect by means of form alone. This effect is called plastic beauty. Sculpture therefore does not include landscape with its accompanying vegetation, nor the phenomena of light and shade, which play such an important part in painting. Inasmuch as sculpture represents bodies in their actual form and contours, its favourite subject, in contrast to painting, is the single figure. And as the single figure never appears in close relation with its surroundings the significance of its personality is presented in a more effective and powerful manner, particularly so because it is usually raised above its surroundings by means of a pedestal, and is placed in the most advantageous light by a suitable background. By these means the statue becomes a monument, in which the characteristic traits of a personality are perpetuated with artistic charm. These attributes of the statue render it difficult for sculpture to combine several figures in a group in which detail is necessarily subordinated to the whole. The most important principle of the group is that the figures should be as closely joined together as is possible, or as is compatible with the artistic effect. Such a juxtaposition is very much hindered by the material in the case of figures in the round.

These difficulties do not exist in the case of the relief, which should also be considered as sculpture, to which it belongs by reason both of the material used and of the technique. In certain characteristics, relief approaches so nearly to painting that it may be called the transitional art between painting and sculpture; it is, so to speak, pictorial sculpture. It prefers to represent several figures side by side, as for example, in the case of war scenes, festal processions, labour in the fields and at home; it therefore easily achieves what is hardly possible for sculpture in the round. There are two principal kinds of relief: Low Relief (bas-relief, basso-rilievo), the figures of which have only a limited thickness, and in which the appearance of solidity is achieved by the effect of light and shade; and High Relief (grand-relief, alto-rilievo), in which the figures sometimes appear entirely in the round. The chief demand which we make of a work of sculpture, whether it be a statue or a group, is artistic unity, that is to say, that all the parts should work together for the expression of a thought or an idea. In the case of the single statue it is not only the expression of the face which reveals the idea presented in the work of art, but the pose of the body and the posture of the limbs also contribute to the same end. For this reason everything irrelevant should, as far as possible, be avoided. This requirement has led to the principle first tersely enunciated by Lessing in his "Laocoon", and which has since been repeated innumerable times: that it is the purpose of sculpture (and also of painting) to represent human figures of great bodily beauty; from which Lessing made the further deduction, that the highest purpose of sculpture is not the representation of spiritual but of sensuous beauty, that is to say, the beauty of the human body free from all draperies. Modern aesthetes have gone so far as to maintain as a rule without exception, that sculpture should create only nude bodies. A scholar of such fine artistic perception as Schnaase went so far as to demand that sculpture, in order to give the most emphatic expression to its distinctive characteristics, and not to weaken the sensuous appeal of the nude, should reduce somewhat the expression of emotion in the countenance, which should, so to speak, be attuned a tone lower, in order that it may harmonize with the body. These views, however, are in accordance neither with the teachings of history nor with good morals.

Not even with the ancient Greeks at the time of their most perfect development, was the representation of the nude body the chief aim of sculpture, and only in the age of their decline do the representations of the nude prevail. The most perfect creations of Grecian plastic art, the "Zeus" and the "Athena" of Phidias, were draped figures of gold and ivory,, to which pilgrimages were made, not in order to enjoy their sensuous beauty of body, but to forget sorrow and suffering and to be fortified in religious belief. Draperies can and should be used to emphasize the spiritual significance of man. That Christian religion and morals have justly found objections to the representations of the nude is quite obvious, as is also the fact that such objections are removed when historical events or other valid reasons demand its representation, as, for example, in the case of Adam and Eve in Paradise. Another subject of wide importance demanding a few words is the tinting of statues, or polychromy. Until a few decades ago scholars generally were of the opinion that the ancient sculptors used no other tints than the original colour of the marble; but closer investigation of the antique monuments as well as of the accounts in ancient literature prove beyond doubt that the Greeks slightly tinted their statues, as was necessary when they placed them in richly decorated interiors. Since this has become known our judgment of the polychromy of medieval sculpture has become a more favourable one.

In accordance with the material used and the different methods of treatment sculpture is variously classified as follows:

(1) Stone sculpture, or sculpture in a restricted sense, which for its noblest and most excellent works made use of marble.

(2) Wood sculpture, which flourished especially in the Middle Ages; its success was much restricted by the practice of encasing the carved work with cloth covered with chalk, in order to facilitate polychromy.

(3) Sculpture in metals, which not only creates the most lasting works, but allows greater freedom in the treatment of the material. From the perfection which it attained in Antiquity metal sculpture degenerated greatly in the Middle Ages, when it was for the most part confined to relief. Not until the Italian Renaissance was the art of metal casting again resumed for monumental statues.

(4) Repousse sculpture, in which the metal was beaten into form by means of hammer and puncheon. In Antiquity and in the Middle Ages this process was used for smaller subjects only, but since the seventeenth century it is used for great statues as well, as for instance the colossal statue of Arminius in the Teutoburgerwald.

(5) Sculpture in clay or terra-cotta, in which the figure is moulded in a soft substance, which afterwards hardens either by drying or firing. In this art also the ancients created much that is important, and during the Renaissance the terra-cottas of Luca della Robbia and his followers acquired great celebrity.

(6) Sculpture in ivory was used by the Greeks in combination with gold for monumental works (chryselephantine technique). In the Middle Ages and in modern times ivory is often used for works of small proportions; it is particularly suitable for delicate and pathetic subjects.

(7) Glyptics, or the art of cutting gems, as well as the engraving of medals, coins, and seals, are varieties of sculpture which have a cultural rather than an artistic and aesthetic importance.

The sculpture of Babylonia and Assyria, the survivals of which have been excavated on the sites of ancient Nineveh and Babylon, has, notwithstanding its shortcomings, produced works of imperishable importance. It is imperfect in the representation of man, who is portrayed in a conventional and typical manner, but in the representation of animal combats and hunting scenes it reveals a surprisingly close observation of nature, free composition, and youthful energy. In its subjects it is greatly the inferior of the Egyptian, since it serves almost entirely for the glorification of the great and little deeds of the deified rulers. The sculpture of the Persians has become known particularly through the excavations at Perseopolis. It served the same purpose as the Babylonian, but the relief is more correct in perspective, and the human figure shows a touch of individuality.

Pre-Christian sculpture attained its zenith in Greece; its sculptures have in all times been considered as unrivalled masterpieces. We can only devote a few words to them here. The subjects of Greek Sculpture were taken particularly from the domain of religion, even in the times of the decline, when belief in the gods was rapidly disappearing. Numerous votive statues for deliverance from calamities or for victorious battles, as well as those erected in the temples and their vicinity by the victors of the athletic games, belong, in a wide sense, to what may be called religious sculpture. Besides religious subjects, portraits and genre statues were produced in great numbers. In accordance with the material used three classes of Greek Sculpture may be distinguished: chryselephantine statues, the nude parts of which were of ivory and the draperies of gold; marble (particularly Parian marble); bronze, in which material the Greeks achieved perfect mastery of solid casting as well as hollow casting in a fireproof mould. The excellences of Greek Sculpture are extraordinary simplicity and clearness in composition, plastic repose as well as pleasing action, wonderful charm, and conscientious technical execution. The great beauty of body which immediately impresses one at the sight of Greek sculpture is explained partly by the beauty of the Greek race, partly by the daily observation of naked youths and men as they appeared in the palestra. But they reveal no sensual beauty in the modern sense, and only during the period after Phidias did sculptors venture to depict female goddesses, for instance Aphrodite, entirely nude. In addition to the excellences just mentioned especial characteristics appear in each separate period. Three or four periods of Greek Sculpture are usually distinguished.

Works of the first period, or of the Archaic style (B. C. 775-449), show in the beginning a lifeless constraint, but later reveal an expression of physical power and agility. The second period, the golden age (B. C. 449-323), is characterized at first by an ideal trend, represented especially by Phidias of the Attic School in his gold-ivory statues of the deities; partly also by a tendency to emphasize the highest physical beauty, the most celebrated representative of which is Polycletus of the Argive School. The tendency during the last part of the second period was towards graceful, bewitching beauty, combined with the expression of the most tender sentiment, through which subjectivity, gained the upper hand, and through which the decline or third period (323-146) was ushered in. This age still produced a number of much admired works, such as the Laocoon group, the Farnese Bull, the Apollo Belvedere. The centres of art shifted to Pergamon and Rhodes. To the fourth period, the period of decay (B. C. 146- A.D. 397) are attributed the works, which partly originals, partly copies, were created by Greek and Roman Artists in Italy. Typical of this period is the prevalence of portraits, both busts and statues. Graeco-Roman sculpture was finally destroyed, not, as the Assyrian and Babylonian, by violent suppression or gradual absorption, but by the infusion of a new spirit and of new ideas.

In comparison with these delicate ivory carvings, the first attempts of Romanesque stone sculpture appear crude and clumsy, but they contain the germs of a new life, which in the thirteenth century occasioned the first flower of medieval sculpture. It is typical of this period that sculpture, especially in stone, was predominantly subordinated to architecture and served almost exclusively for ecclesiastical purposes. The reliefs are entirely of symbolic character, and express thoughts which to a great extent have not yet been completely fathomed. At the beginning of this period (llth-l2th centuries) there was an important development of sculpture in bronze, at Hildesheim under Bishop Bernward (d. 1022), and at Magdeburg in the works of Master Riquinus. In Dinant (Belgium) also works of imposing beauty originated at this time, the best known of which is the baptismal font at Liege (1112), resting upon twelve bronze oxen -- the work of Renier de Huy. Until the end of the twelfth century sculpture in stone was almost entirely confined to reliefs, which served as decorations of baptismal fonts, portals, and choir-screens. The centre of German sculpture during this period was in the North, especially in Saxony. South Germany and the Rhineland are not poor in works of sculpture, but they are rather of an iconographic than of historical importance; as, for instance, the reliefs of the Schottenkirche (Scots' Church) at Ratisbon. At the beginning of the thirteenth century German sculpture attained its first triumph, which was accelerated by Byzantine and French influence. Several important schools flourished at the same time. In place of the traditional types and conventional draperies a lively, naturalistic presentation appears. Sculpture in bronze yields the first place to stone sculpture, and even statuary assumes its proper rank. The portals especially become the scenes of the new plastic decoration. In the tympanum the Last Judgement is generally represented; at the sides stand the wise and foolish virgins, the apostles, saints, and donors. The most important school of this period is the Saxon with sculptures at Wechselburg, Freiberg, and Naumburg; the Frankish School with the reliefs of the choir-screens and statues in the cathedral of Bamberg, and the Romanesque sculptures of the cathedral of Strasburg, which in many respects rival the best works of antique art. The sculptures of the remaining European countries during this period cannot be compared with the German; next in importance are those of France. Here representations of devils and hobgoblins occur with remarkable frequency -- probably the consequence of the "Diableries", then so popular in the plays. The earliest development in France occurred in Provence (Arles, Toulouse), where ancient traditions were followed. The most perfect examples are m Central France, where the sculptures of the cathedrals of Chartres, Le Mans, and Bourges achieve an imposing effect by reason of their solemn dignity and silent repose. In Italy also the church portals are decorated with mythological, legendary, and symbolic reliefs, but they lack all naturalness and consequently all artistic value. In no other country, however, were there so many artists who felt it necessary to immortalize their names by inscribing them upon their works.

The transition to Gothic sculpture -- if, indeed, the expressions Romanesque and Gothic may be applied to sculpture -- is not sudden, but very gradual, as is always the case with the appearance of a new tendency in art and of all new ideals. As the ideal of the Romanesque sculptors was virility and a dignified naturalness, so the Gothic masters followed an ideal trend, which did not indeed do away immediately with naturalness, but gradually led to the conventionalization of figures, and a mechanical execution. The principal characteristics of the developed Gothic are that all persons have for the most part a youthful appearance, even though they are aged; their figures are slender and well-formed, with long and smoothly flowing draperies; finally, the countenances have a thoughtful, spiritual, and modest expression. As long as the Gothic sculptors practised moderation in the application of these characteristics, they created works of classic beauty; but when the later generations attempted to surpass their predecessors, they fell into mannerisms, and created works which to-day seem highly inartistic. We have only to recall many representations of the Crucified One, which are caricatures of a human figure. The so-called Gothic pose -- the exaggerated bend of the body towards one side and the constantly recurring smile, which almost becomes a grimace, are symptoms of the decline. The demand for Gothic statues was enormous, since architecture made the widest use of them in the decoration of the churches. A thousand statues and other sculptures were hardly sufficient for a cathedral; the cathedral of Milan possesses 6000. This necessitated great rapidity of execution, which indeed promoted manual dexterity, but did not promote artistic conscientiousness. The innumerable statues should not however, be examined and judged as individual works, but in relation to the buildings for which they were carved. From this point of view our only conclusion can be that it is hardly possible to conceive of anything more imposing than a Gothic cathedral with its wealth of decorative sculptures.

The favourite place for sculptural decorations remains the portals, of which there are usually three on the facade of a Gothic cathedral. The sculptures which are here grouped together depict the entire scholastic theology in stone. A favourite subject is the life of our Saviour during His sojourn upon earth. The place of honour on the principal pier of the chief portal is usually given to Our Lady with the Christ Child. The culmination of such theological representations in stone are the portals of the cathedrals of Paris, Chartres, and Strasburg.

The most perfect development of Gothic sculpture took place in France, where the style originated. The principal scene of this development is Central France, where the cathedrals of Amiens, Chartres, Paris, and Rheims display a large number of most excellent figures, not only on the portals, but covering the facade above the portals (the so-called royal gallery), and even the choir. The subjects of these representations are the Saviour of the World and its Supreme Judge, His Most Holy Mother, the apostles, saints, kings, prophets, and sybils, the Virtues and Vices, fables, and the occupations of man during each month of the year. This development began about 1150 at Chartres, and spread from there to St. Denis and Paris, attaining its highest development in the cathedral of Rheims with about 2500 statues, some of which indeed belong to the late Gothic period. The statues of the twelve apostles in the Ste Chapelle in Paris are gems of Gothic sculpture. About the same time (1400) able work was done by the Schools of Burgundy and the Netherlands, the most important monument of which is the tomb of Duke Philip the Bold at Dijon by Claus Sluter.

In England sculpture has always been a stepchild among the arts. There was practically none during the Romanesque period, and even the early Gothic architecture either completely excluded sculptural representations in its edifices, or else used them only as decorations as on the keystones and spandrils of the arches and in capitals. The finest examples are at Lincoln, Salisbury, and Westminster. Statuary first appears rather suddenly in southern England and its most important monuments are at Wells and Exeter. These sculptures are characterized by pleasing simplicity, free composition, and dramatic action. A new phase of Gothic sculpture began with the discovery of the quarries on Purbeck Island, Dorsetshire, which provided a shell-limestone of warm, pleasing colours. The sculptures carved on the island were so numerous that an individual style developed there (1175-1325). At a later period London supplied the chief demand of the country for sculpture, which consisted for the most part of sepulchral monuments. Deserving of a special mention is the School of the "Alabasters", which for several centuries made use of the rich English quarries of alabaster to carve small and large sculptures, rather in a mechanical than an artistic fashion. Among the bronze-workers the family of the Torels, active for almost a century in London, is especially noteworthy; of these William Torel in 1291 cast the well-known bronze figures of Queen Eleanor and Henry III in Westminster Abbey.

During the Gothic epoch Germany produced a great number of sculptural works, but until 1450 there is very little above mediocrity. About that year a new development began which lasted until 1550, and achieved such excellence that it may be termed the second flower of German medieval sculpture. Sculptures in bronze and wood rather than in stone, constitute the finest products of this period. While in the first period North Germany took the lead, in this second period the hegemony passed to Southern Germany, where the Frankish School culminated in the works of the three Nuremburg masters, Veit Stoss, Adam Kraft, and Peter Viseher, the Wurtzburg School in Dill Riemenschneider, the Swabian, in Hans Multscher and Jorg Syrlin, and the Tyrolese, in Michael Pacher. The causes of this change and its chief characteristics can be briefly stated. In contrast with the early Gothic idealism a powerful realism now began to permeate art. People were represented exactly as in reality, with all the accidents of nature and costume; even the ugly and repulsive features were represented. The change in the character of the patrons of art played no small part in promoting this difference. Whereas formerly wealthy prelates and haughty nobles almost exclusively gave occupation to the artists, now, under the development of the third estate, the wealthy merchants or peasants caused monuments of devotion to be erected in the churches. This also caused a change in material. Although the common people gladly contributed to the decoration of the churches, they avoided the great expense of stone sculptures and confined themselves to presenting sculptures in wood. Indeed, for many of these works, stone was hardly feasible as a material. We have only to recall the choir-stalls, pulpits, and almost innumerable altars. This frequent use of wood had also its effect on stone sculpture. There are in existence stone "sacrament houses" (tabernacles for the Blessed Sacrament) of this period which are as twisted and spiral as if they had been carved from wood. The treatment of the draperies is another characteristic of late medieval sculpture. While in the fourteenth century the draperies fell smoothly and simply, now they were puffed and bagged, bunched, and broken in such a manner as never again occurred. The subjects of sculpture were almost exclusively of a religious character. In statuary the most popular subjects were the Pieta, Our Lady of Sorrows, and St. Anne with the Madonna and the Christ Child (for the cult of St. Anne was more popular at the end of the Middle Ages than ever before or after).

The conditions for sculpture were especially favourable in Italy, where the chief attention was centred, not as in Germany or in France in the decoration of the portals and facade, but in pulpits, altars, and sepulchral monuments. Since it also had the finest of materials, marble, at its disposal, Italian art ultimately took the palm in sculpture. In the beginning relief was principally attempted; statuary was not used till later. The development of Italian sculpture begins in the thirteenth century in Tuscany, which for about three centuries plays the leading part. It was the time of the proto-Renaissance, which is identified with the names of Niccolo, Giovanni, Andrea Pisano (from Pisa), and Andrea Orcagua. The movement radiated from Pisa, but with Andrea Pisano, who was under the influence of Giotto, Florence became the centre and remained so throughout the entire early Renaissance. Siena which rivalled Florence in painting indeed produced a few able masters of sculpture, like Tino da Comaino (d. 1339), but it gradually lagged behind its rival. This circumstance, that the early Renaissance prospered above all in Florence, is of importance for the judgment of the Renaissance itself, which is still considered by many as a revival of antique art and therefore is designated anti-clerical, whereas in reality it is only an art which arose in the soul of the Italian people on the basis of ancient tradition. It was not Rome, therefore, where at that time the antique monuments were being brought to light and studied, but Florence which became the cradle of the early Renaissance.

The most important works of this period are to be found in the churches, or in connexion with them, and they owed their origin to princes of the Church and to Church organizations. They are so pure and chaste in sentiment, so sublime in conception, that they are not inferior to the best works of the Middle Ages -- which is also a proof that the early Renaissance may not be designated as anti-religious. True, it cannot be denied that the late Renaissance, by a too close imitation of the antique, lost many of these noble qualities, and therefore in most of its works leaves the spectator cold and unaffected. Among the numerous masters of the early Renaissance in Florence in the first half of the fifteenth century, the following three are especially prominent: Ghiberti, who has become celebrated as the sculptor of the Paradise Portals of the Baptistery of Florence; Donatello, the uncompromising realist and the sculptor of many statues, and Luca della Robbia, who in his terra-cottas attained an almost classical harmony and charm. With them were associated a large number of masters of the second rank, of whom at least a few should be mentioned. Among the sculptors in bronze Andrea Verrochio is known through his world-famous group of Christ and St. Thomas in the church of Or San Michele, Florence; among the sculptors in marble Desiderio da Settignano, Rosselino, Mino da Fiesole, and Benedetto da Majano are famous.

They exercised a wide-spread influence, and only Siena succeeded in maintaining an independent tendency in the art of Jacopo della Quercia (d. 1438). Lombardy and Venice also had important sculptors at their disposal, as may be seen in the sculptures of the Basilica of St. Anthony at Padua and many sepulchral monuments in the churches of City of Venice.

Modern sculpture outside of Italy is in the main dependent on the development of Italian art. In France, where the Renaissance entered towards the end of the fifteenth century, sculpture, while preserving national peculiarities, is characterized by a simple, sometimes crude naturalism. It attained an important development on the Loire, with Tours as a centre, and Michael Colombe (d. 1512) as chief master. Not until the middle of the sixteenth century did the Italian influence become so powerful that French sculpture may be said to have reached its zenith. The most important representatives are Jean Goujon, Bontemps, and Pierre Pilon. The work of these sculptors, notwithstanding great formal beauty and technical ability, reveals a certain coldness and smoothness; and since 1560 secular subjects are preferred. This is even more the case with the younger generation represented by Pierre Pujet, Francois Giradon, and Antoine Coysevox, whose works bear a specifically French imprint, a certain affected, stilted and theatrical quality, which in the eighteenth century degenerates into an insipid elegance.

In the Netherlands, as elsewhere, native and Italian influences contended with each other until the latter gained ascendency. Here besides some fine choir stalls were produced pulpits of a grandeur and magnificence unrivalled in other countries. The stairway, the body of the pulpit, and the sounding-board were treated as a single ornamental structure decorated with statues and carvings. Splendid examples of this sort are the pulpits of the cathedrals of Antwerp by the master, van der Voort, and the Church of St. Gudule in Brussels by Henri Francois Verbruggen (1655-1724). Other important Flemish sculptors are Francois Duquesnoy (d. 1646), who was a contemporary of Bernini, under whose influence he carved St. Andrew in the cupola of St. Peter's at Rome; his pupils Arthur Quellinus and Adrain de Fries must also be mentioned.

During the Renaissance period Spanish sculpture was chiefly of a decorative character, and was displayed especially on the facades of the churches and palaces and in the towering gilded wooden pulpits (retablos). Favourable to its growth was the Spanish custom of erecting in the churches sculptured scenes from the Passion and carrying them in processions. One of the most interesting masters is Damian Forment (d. 1533), who considered himself the equal of Phidias and Praxiteles; one of his ablest works is a retablos in the Cathedral del Pilar at Zaragoza. During the late Renaissance Pedro de Mena (d. 1693) carved for the church of Malaga forty-two statuettes of such beauty and individuality that they must be numbered among the most important works of all modern sculpture. In England there was no native sculpture for several generations after the disappearance of the Gothic style. The first sculptor who was again able to create a living art was Nicholas Stone (1586-1647); the first to labour in the spirit of the Renaissance was Grinling Gibbons, whose finest decorative works are in St. Paul's, London, and in Trinity College, Oxford. From the complicated and affected traits which the works of this period show, sculpture at a later period went to the opposite extreme; the first artist to return to the supposed classical purity and severity was Thomas Banks (1735-1805).

It is not true that Germany until 1500 produced only unimportant works as has often been maintained. On the contrary the second flower of German Renaissance sculpture lasted till 1550, and many able masters date from that period. Contemporary with Peter Vischer flourished Pancraz Labewolf (d. 1563), Adolf Dauer (d. 1537), Gregor Erhardt (d. 1540), Hans Backofen (d. 1519), Heinrich and Johann Douvermann (d. 1540), and others. Two masters of the first rank belonging to a later period are Andreas Sluter (d. 1714) in Berlin and Raphael Donner (d. 1741) in Austria.

Under the impetus of the movement for the revival of classical Antiquity inspired by Winkelmann, sculpture in the nineteenth century achieved an unexpected development, but it produced but one master who was recognized by all nations as pre-eminent, the Dane, Bertel Thorwaldsen. His numerous works breathe the Classic spirit, and are to a great extent taken from antique subjects. Among his few Christian works "Christ and the Twelve Apostles" in the Frauenkirche at Copenhagen are especially celebrated. Thorwaldsen had many imitators, particularly in Germany. At Munich L. Schwanthaler represented the Classical tendencies under the patronage of the romantically inclined Ludwig I. In North Germany Schadow and particularly Rauch followed native tendencies, as did also Rietschl, whose "Pieta" is one of the most important modern works of a religious character. After the great wars and victories (1866-70) numerous sculptors filled the public places of German cities with monumental statues, but in these real art is far too frequently eclipsed by trivial and affected accessories. An artist who devoted himself exclusively to religious sculpture was the Westphalian Achtermann (d. 1885), who again created works of deep religious sentiment. Of the now living sculptors we mention Bolte in Munster, who is a follower of his countryman Achtermann, and George Busch in Munich, who is remarkable for the power and breadth of his creations.

Whereas sculpture in Italy is distinguished by its technical bravure rather than by its spiritual excellences, French sculpture has for a long time taken the lead in the modern development, not only by reason of its admirable treatment of the most varied materials, but also through its universality of thought. Lately indeed an unpleasant naturalism has made itself increasingly felt, even leading to the destruction of plastic form. A pioneer in this dangerous path was Rodin whose works have been admired by many as almost wonders of the world. At the same time a more ideal tendency flourishes, the chief representative of which is Bartholome, the sculptor of the celebrated tomb at Pere-Lachaise in Paris, which is perhaps the greatest achievement of French sculpture in the nineteenth century.

SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND

The principal representative of the classical tendency in English sculpture was John Flaxman (1755-1826), who found his inspiration in Greek rather than in Roman Art. He is chiefly known for his pure classical figures on Wedgwood pottery, but his marble reliefs are also of great beauty, Among the numerous classicists who followed were: Francis Chantrey, Sir Richard Westmacott, E. H. Bailey, and especially John Gibson (1790-1860), whose religious works include a relief of Christ blessing the little children. The classical tendency prevailed until the last quarter of the nineteenth century, but the later part of the period was marked by increasing naturalism. The chief representations of the transition include John Henry Foley (1818-74), whose statues of Goldsmith, Burke, and Grattan at Dublin are noteworthy; Thomas Brock, whose works include the O'Connell monument at Dublin and the Victoria Memorial in London, England's most ambitious monument of sculpture, seventy feet high, and containing many symbolic figures; George Armstead (1828-1905), who carved a St. Matthew and other marble figures for the reredos of the Church of St. Mary, Aberavon; Sir J. E. Boehm (1834-91); Thomas Woolner (1825-93), a member of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. The most important British sculptor of the nineteenth century was Alfred Stevens (1817-75), a pupil of Thorwaldsen, but whose classical training did not preclude great originality in all branches of sculpture. His Wellington monument in St. Paul's Cathedral is perhaps the most important that English sculpture has produced. Mention should also be made of Lord Leighton (1830-1896), whose sculpture excels his painting, and particularly of George Frederick Watts, in whose works great power and originality are united with a high spiritual significance.

The great change in English sculpture since about 1875 is due to French influence. For many years Jules Dalou, a French political exile of 1870, was in charge of the modelling classes in South Kensington Museum. His teachings substituted structure and movement for the previous haphazard methods, and inaugurated a sane and healthy naturalism. His pupils include Hamo Thorneycroft, whose finely-modelled Teucer inaugurated the new movement. Other important sculptors of the same tendencies are E. Onslow Ford, educated at Munich; J. M. Swan, the animal sculptor; and George Frampton, whose works are of a fine decorative quality and quite original (including a very attractive St. George). But the most original and influential figure of British art of the present day is Alfred Gilbert, who excels in all branches of sculpture, and whose very modern style unites the goldsmith's to the sculptor's art. His works include a beautiful high relief of Christ and Angels for the reredos of the St. Albaus' Cathedral. Nearly all of these men enjoyed French training, but their art possesses certain qualities which are distinctly national.

SCULPTURE IN THE UNITED STATES

Sculpture in the United States is a development of the last three quarters of the nineteenth century. It has developed in connexion with the schools of Western Europe, but without being less individual or national than they. Its history may be divided into three periods:

(1) The Classical Period, (1825-50);

(2) the Middle Period (1850-80), in which classicism still exists, but increasingly gives way to a more national development;

(3) the Contemporary or Cosmopolitan Period, developed as elsewhere, under French influence.

The Classical School

Neither the Puritan doctrines of the early settlers nor the other religious tendencies of the early nineteenth century were friendly to the development of sculpture. There were no facilities for technical training of any description, no monuments to study or inspire. Consequently, the few sculptors of colonial and early revolutionary periods were unimportant and formed no schools. The real development began in 1825 with the departure of Horatio Greenough of Boston (1805-52) for Rome. The character of his art is well known from his half-draped gigantic statue of Washington as the Olympian Zeus, which long stood before the Capitol at Washington. Hiram Powers (1805-73) did similar work, but of a more sentimental character, in such statues as his celebrated "Greek Slave", an example of the nude, chastely treated, and his "Eve Disconsolate". Thomas Crawford (1813-57), a pupil of Thorwaldsen, is known as the sculptor of the bronze "Liberty" surmounting the dome of the Capitol at Washington, the bronze portals of the Capitol, and the pedimental group of the Senate Chamber.

Middle or Native Period

Even during the classical period the transition to a more national art began. The pioneer was Henry Kirk Brown (1814-86), whose work, unaffected by his Italian study, is best typified in his remarkable equestrian statue of George Washington in Union Square, New York. Another important sculptor of native tendencies was Erastus Dow Palmer (1817-1904), who was practically self-trained and never left America. His ideal nude figures were the best executed up to that time, while his "Angel of the Sepulchre" shows his strength in religious subjects. Thomas Ball (1819) set a new standard in public monuments by such works as his equestrian statue of General Washington in Boston and his Lincoln monument in Washington. Representatives of the Classical School during the middle period include the many-sided W. W. Storey, Randolph Rogers, W. H. Rinehart, whose works may be best studied in Baltimore, and Harriet Hosmer. Mention may also be made of the statues of Civil War subjects by John Rogers (1824-1904), which enjoyed great popularity without being real art. The most distinguished artist of the later middle period was J. Q. A. Ward (1830-1910), a pupil of H. K. Brown, whose art is powerful, simple and sculpturesque. He was as successful in his public monuments as in his statues, such as the "Indian Hunter", which stands in Central Park, New York.

Contemporary Sculpture

The most recent development of American sculpture was ushered in by the Centennial Exposition at Philadelphia in 1876, which revealed the superiority of European, particularly of the French work. From that time Paris became the training school of American sculptors, with the result of an unprecedented improvement in the technique and content of their art and the gradual development of a national school of great promise. Among the first to show the Parisian influence was O. L. Warner (1844-96), but the most prominent figure thus far in American sculpture is Augustus St. Gaudens (1848-1907). To the highest technical efficiency he added remarkable powers of characterization. His Shaw memorial relief at Boston and the statue of Lincoln in Chicago were epoch-making, and his General Sherman in Central Park, New York, places him in the first rank of American sculptors. His religious works include a beautiful "Amor Caritas" in the Luxembourg Museum, Paris. Foreign influence is absent from the work of Daniel Chester French (1850-), whose art is characterized by restraint and a certain purity of conception. Among his most charming works are "Death and the Sculptor" (Art Institute, Chicago) and the O'Reilly memorial in Boston, with a beautiful figure of Erin mourning. Frederick Macmonnies is the most thoroughly French of all our sculptors, while Herbert Adams has found inspiration in the early Florentine masters.

Other prominent sculptors of the Cosmopolitan period include Bela L. Pratt, of Boston, Charles Grafly, of Philadelphia, Lorado Taft, of Chicago, and Douglas Tilden, of San Francisco, whose art is the most radical of all. But the centre of American sculpture is New York. Mention should be made of Charles H. Niehaus, a master of modelling, who represents the German influence, of F. W. Ruckstuhl, and Carl Bitter, whose decorative work is celebrated, and of Paul Bartlett, the sculptor of the La Fayette statue in Paris. The most important of the animal sculptors are the late Edward Kemys, whose specialty was native American wild animals, E. C. Potter, and A. C. Proctor, who has also portrayed the American Indian; but the most powerful sculptor of the Indian is Cyrus E. Dallin, The two most characteristically American of the younger men are both from the West; Solon H. Borglum, the sculptor of the Indian, the cowboy, and the bronco, and George Gray Barnard, whose strong and simple art unites great breadth with an ideal characterization. There has been little opportunity for Ecclesiastical sculpture in the United States; the most important commission was the three portals of St. Bartholomew's Church, New York, completed in 1904; the central portal and frieze by D. C. French and Andrew O'Connor, the others by Herbert Adams and Philip Martiny. These very profuse decorations are excellent from the modern point of view, but too little subordinated to the architecture to be monumental. The sculptures of the Anglican Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, by Gutzon Borglum are noteworthy. [Adapted from Catholic Encyclopedia (1912)]

Books from Alibris: Greek Sculpture

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Andrea Contucci del Sansovino (1460-1529)


Born at Monte San Sovino, Arezzo, 1460; died 1529. He was a sculptor of the transition period at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century, and showed the qualities of the transition in his style. He worked at first in his native town and in Florence, then for about eight years in Portugal. His best sculptures were produced in Florence and Rome after his return. The Baptism of Christ, a marble group in the baptistery of Florence, contains very effective figures finely contrasted. The monuments of Cardinals Basso and Sforza Visconti in the Church of Santa Maria del Popolo at Rome are also striking. They prove that he was able to combine what he had fully learned from Antiquity with the art of the mature early Renaissance. The central and chief niche stands upon a high pedestal between Corinthian pillars; above the round arch of this niche is an attic, that supports the figure of God the Father upon a shell throne with a genius at each side. In the central niche the dead are represented asleep, their heads resting upon their arms, awaiting resurrection; above them in the vault of the niche is a figure of the Blessed Virgin, on a smaller scale. In and above side niches are the cardinal virtues, which rise upwards towards the genii just mentioned. The unity in the conception of the structure and the rich decoration of the details show great skill in art. It has been often asserted that there is a touch of the spirit of Raphael in the combination of dignified repose and subdued movement in the figures. Sansovino had a great task given him in the Casa Santa of Loreto, where he was to produce nine reliefs and twenty-two statues. Bramante had encased the Casa with a marble covering, architecturally very fine, which was designed to have rich plastic ornament. Sansovino was only able to make a few of the reliefs, such as the Annunciation and the Birth of Christ, the other reliefs and statuettes were made by his assistants and successors.

Among these pupils was Andrea Tatti (about 1480-1570) of Florence, who took the name of his master Sansovino. During the forty later years of his long life he was, next to Titian, one of the most distinguished artists of Venice. In Venice he represents the second epoch of the grand style in art, and was the head of a clearly defined school. Among his first works were a statue of St. James, at Florence, which, with the exception of a somewhat unnatural pose, has striking qualities, and a Bacchus entirely in the antique style, also at Florence. Among his works at Rome is the celebrated Madonna del Prato in the Church of San Agostino. At Venice he adopted a style more akin to painting, which is pleasant in small works, especially if movement and animation are expressed. Among works of this class are the statuettes of Pallas, Apollo, Mercury, Pax, the relief of Phrixos and Helle which adorns the small loggia he built on the campanile, a terra-cotta Madonna, formerly gilded, placed within the campanile, a statue of Hope, and a group containing the Madonna in the palace of the Doges. The colossal statues of Mars and Neptune in front of this palace are less successful. The bronze reliefs around the choir of San Marco, and the bronze doors of the sacristy of the same, however, show pictorial beauty. Sansovino made for the Chapel of St. Anthony at Padua a marble relief in the grand style; it represents the bringing back to life of one who had been drowned, and contains extraordinary contrasts of graceful and repellent figures. As an architect, Jacopo adopted much from the style of Bramante, and in architecture as well as in sculpture brought much of the Roman Cinquecento to Venice. His chief architectural work, the public library, has always been greatly admired on account of its classic form, rich decoration, and wholly pictorial arrangement. It displays a double order of columns, Tuscan and Ionic, over which is a rich frieze and a balustrade with statues. One of his most beautiful decorative works is the small loggia mentioned before. The best of the churches he built is San Georgio de' Greci; it has always been greatly admired for its fine work in marble. Another building of tasteful construction that is ascribed to Sansovino is the Palazzo Corner della Cà Grande. Sansovino gathered about him a large number of assistants, who executed the decorations of the buildings he erected. These buildings were architecturally entirely in accordance with Venetian taste. Thus he was universally regarded in Venice as a master of the first rank, and felt himself completely at home there, although at first he had thought of going to France.
- Malaspina Biography


Books from Alibris: Andrea Sansovino

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Giovanni Francesco Rustici (c 1494-1554)


Italian renaissance sculptor. A terracotta relief by Rustici, Noli me tangere, glazed by Giovanni dellaa Robbia, can be found at the Bargello in Florence. But his work is more importantly connected with the marble groups above the doors at the Baptistery in Florence. His Preaching of the Baptist and Francesco Danti's Beheading of the Baptist define the context of this world famous landmark.

The work was commisioned in 1506 to replace a trecento sculpture of the same subject by Tino das Camaino. Rustici, of noble birth, was considered by his contemporaries as one of the major sculptors in Tuscany. During the commission Rustici and Leonardo da Vinci shared a house so it is natural that the older man's influence should be felt, although his exact role in the work is unknown.In the group each statue has its own pedestal and is separated by a column. However, St John (in center abd shown here), the patron saint of the city and building, is emphasized by his central placement and the poses and gazes of the flanking figures, rather like a triptych in the round. Rustici has them looking down to engage with the viewers below. In the Pharisee, whose huge hand clutches his beard, Rustici's surface treatment is decorative, almost an enlargement of Ghiberti's. It is really the bald Levite that departs from the slighter, idealized figures of the Quattrocento. His powerful arms resemble those of Michelangelo's figures on the Sistine ceiling and the bulges and rolls on his forehead extend Verrocchio's expressive anatomy and reflect Leonardo da Vinci's studies of the grotesque. The groups intensity recalls Donatello.

The Baptistery

So far it has been impossible to date beginnings of the Baptistery, one of the oldest architectural monuments of the city. At one time thought to have been a pagan temple dedicated to Mars, modern research tends to date its origins to the fourth century. Its geometrical decoration in green and white Prato marble results from a happy combination of Paleochristian and Romanesque architecture of the eleventh to thirteenth centuries. The exterior with its three-arched facades punctuated by pedimented windows and small series of three arches corresponds exactly to the interior articulation; this is accentuated by the marble decoration. The basreliefs and sculptures around the external doors are among the most important created in Tuscany. Their gilded bronze doors are by Andrea Pisano (present south door: 1336) and Lorenzo Ghiberti (north and east doors: 1427 and 1452). The latter is the famous "Gates of Paradise", one of the greatest achievements in Western sculpture uniting late Gothic rhythmic elegance with the newly learned classical language. The original has been removed for restoration and there is a copy in its place. Inside, apart from the inlaid pavement of the turn of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, are the wonderful large apse and vault mosaics on a gold background which were executed between 1266 and the beginning of the fourteenth century. The artists were Bizantine, trained from Venice, who worked with the more vigorous Tuscans like Meliore, Coppo di Marcovaldo and above all Cimabue (recorder 1272-1302), Giotto's master. Other works of sculpture here include the tomb of John XXIII, the anti-Pope who died in Florence in 1426. This was designed by Donatello and Michelozzo and the striking wooden Magdalen by Donatello from it is now in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo. As a result of the restoration carried out after the damage of the 1996 flood, the gold highlights on this figure were revealed.
- Malaspina Biography


Books from Alibris: Florentine Sculpture

Thursday, October 4, 2007

Pharoah Rameses II (1314 BCE-1224 BCE)


(Gen. xlvii. 11; Exod. xii. 37; Num. xxxiii. 3), or, with a slight change in the vowel points, RAAMSES (Exod. i. II), the name of a district and town in Lower Egypt, is notable as affording the mainstay of the current theory that King Rameses II. was the pharaoh of the oppression and his successor Minephthas the pharaoh of the exodus. The actual facts, however, hardly justify so large an inference. The first three passages cited above are all by the priestly (post-exile) author and go together. Jacob is settled by his son Joseph in the land of Rameses and from the same Rameses the exodus naturally takes place. The older narrative speaks not of the land of Rameses but of the land of Goshen; it seems probable, therefore, that the later author interprets an obsolete term by one current in his own day, just as the Septuagint in Gen.. xlvi. 28 names instead of Goshen Heroopolis and the land of Rameses. Heroopolis lay on the canal connecting the Nile and the Red Sea, and not far from the head of the latter, so that the land of Rameses must be sought in Wadi Tuthilat near the line of the modern fresh-water canal. In Exod. i. II, again, the store cities or arsenals which the Hebrews built for Pharaoh are specified as Pithom and Raamses, to which the Septuagint adds Heliopolis. Pithom also takes us to the Wadi Tumilat. But did the Israelites maintain a continuous recollection of the names of the cities on which they were forced to build, or were these names rather added by a writer who knew what fortified places were in his own time to be seen in Wadi TflmIlat? The latter is far the more likely case, when we consider that the old form of the story of the Hebrews in Egypt is throughout deficient in precise geographical data, as might be expected in a history not committed to writing till the Israelites had resided for centuries in another and distant land. The post-exile or priestly author indeed gives a detailed route for the exodus (which is lacking in the older story), but he, we know, was a student of geography and might supplement tradition by what he could gather from traders as to the caravan routes and at all events to argue that, because the Hebrews worked at a city named after Rameses, they did so in the reign of the founder, is false reasoning, for the Hebrew expression might equally be used of repairs or new works of any kind.

It appears, however, from remains and inscriptions that Rameses II did build in Wadi TumIlgt, especially at Tell Maskhuta, which Lepsius therefore identified with the Raamses of Exodus. This identification is commemorated in the name of the adjacent railway station. But Naville's excavations found that the ruins were those of Pithom and that Pithom was identical with the later Heroopolis. Petrie found sculptures of the age of Rameses II at Tel Rotab, in the Wgdi TfimIlgt west of Pithom, and concludes that this was Rameses. The Biblical city is probably one of those named Prameses, "House of Ramesses," in the Egyptian texts.
- Malaspina Biography


Books from Alibris: Pharoah Rameses II

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Praxiteles of Athens (c 364 BCE-)


Praxiteles of Athens, the son of Cephissodotus, the greatest of the Attic sculptors of the 4th century B.C., who has left an imperishable mark on the history of art. It has been maintained by some writers that there were two sculptors of the name, one, a contemporary of Pheidias, the other, more celebrated, of two generations later. This duplication is defended in Furtwangler's Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture (pp. 99, 102, seq.) but on insufficient grounds. There is, however, no reason why the great Praxiteles should not have had a grandfather of the same name: all that we can say is that at present we have no certain evidence that this was the case. Though Praxiteles may be considered as in some ways well known to us, yet we have no means for fixing his date accurately. It seems clear that he was no longer working in the time of Alexander the Great, or that king would have employed him. Pliny's date, 364 B.C., is probably that of one of his most noted works.

Our knowledge of Praxiteles has received a great addition, and has been placed on a satisfactory basis, by the discovery at Olympia in 1877 of his statue of Hermes bearing the infant Dionysus, a statue which has become famous throughout the world. Hermes is represented as in the act of carrying the child Dionysus to the nymphs who were charged with his rearing. He pauses on the way, and holds out to the child a bunch of grapes to excite his desire. The young child can hardly be regarded as a success; he is not really childlike. But the figure of the Hermes, full and solid without being fleshy, at once strong and active, is a masterpiece, and the play of surface is astonishing. In the head we have a remarkably rounded and intelligent shape, and the face expresses the perfection of health and enjoyment. This statue must for the future be our best evidence for the style of Praxiteles. It altogether confirms and interprets the statements as to Praxiteles made by Pliny and other ancient critics. Gracefulness in repose, and an indefinable charm are also the attributes of works in. our museums which appear to be copies of statues by Praxiteles. Perhaps the most notable of these are the Apollo Sauroctonus, or the lizard-slayer, a youth leaning against a tree and idly striking with an arrow at a lizard, and the Aphrodite at the bath of the Vatican, which is a copy of the statue made by Praxiteles for the people of Cnidus, and by them valued so highly that they refused to sell it to King Nicomedes, who was willing in return to discharge the whole debt of the city, which, says Pliny, was enormous.

The Satyr of the Capitol at Rome has commonly been regarded as a copy of one of the Satyrs of Praxiteles; but we cannot identify it in the list of his works. Moreover, the style is hard and poor; a far superior replica exists in a torso in the Louvre. The attitude and character of the work are certainly of Praxitelean school. Excavations at Mantineia in Arcadia have brought to light the basis of a group of Leto Apollo and Artemis by Praxiteles. This basis was doubtless not the work of the great sculptor himself, but of one of his assistants. Nevertheless it is pleasing and historically valuable. Pausanias (viii. 9, I) thus describes the base, "on the base which supports the statues there are sculptured the Muses and Marsyas playing the flutes." Three slabs which have survived represent Apollo, Marsyas, a slave, and six of the Muses, the slab which held the other three having disappeared.

A head of Aphrodite at Petworth in England, and a head of Hermes in the British Museum (Aberdeen. Hermes), have lately been claimed by competent authorities as actual works of Praxiteles. Both are charming works, but rather by the successors of Praxiteles than by himself.

Besides these works, connected with Praxiteles on definite evidence, there are in our museums works without number of the Roman age, statues of Hermes, of Dionysus, of Aphrodite of Satyrs and Nymphs and the like, in which a varied amount of Praxitelean style may be discerned. Four points of composi tion may be mentioned, which appear to be in origin Praxitelean (1) a very flexible line divides the figures if drawn down the midst from top to bottom; they all tend to lounging; (2) they are adapted to front and back view rather than to being seer from one side or the other; (3) trees, drapery and the like an used for supports to the marble figures, and included in this design, instead of being extraneous to it; (4) the faces are presented in three-quarter view.

The subjects chosen by Praxiteles were either human beings or the less elderly and dignified deities. It is Apollo, Hermes and Aphrodite who attract him rather than Zeus, Poseidon or Athena. And in his hands the deities sink to the human level, or, indeed, sometimes almost below it. They have grace and charm in a supreme degree, but the element of awe and reverence is wanting.

Praxiteles and his school worked almost entirely in marble. At the time the marble quarries of Paros were at their best; nor could any marble be finer for the purposes of the sculptor than that of which the Hermes is made. Some of the statues of Praxiteles were coloured by the painter Nicias, and in the opinion of the sculptor they gained greatly by this treatment.
- Malaspina Biography


Books from Alibris: Praxiteles

Polyclitus (c 450 BCE-420 BCE)


The name of two Greek sculptors of the school of Argos; the first belonging to the fifth century, the second to the early part of the fourth. The elder and best known Polyclitus was a contemporary of Pheidias, and in the opinion of the Greeks his equal. He made a figure of an Amazon for Ephesus which was regarded ai superior to the Amazon of Pheidias made at the same time; and his colossal Hera of gold and ivory which stood in the temple neal Argos was considered as worthy to rank with the Zeus of Pheiclias.

Books from Alibris: Greek Sculpture

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Michelangelo (Buonarroti) (1475-1564)

Sierra Club

Quotation

Every block of stone has a statue inside it and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it.

Books

Please browse our Amazon list of titles about Michelangelo. For rare and hard to find works we recommend our Alibris list of titles about Michelangelo.


AlibrisResearch

COPAC UK: Michelangelo
Library of Canada Search Form
Library of Congress: Michelangelo
Other Library Catalogs: Michelangelo

Biographical

Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475 - 1564) was a Renaissance painter, sculptor, poet and architect.

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni was born on March 6th, 1475, in Caprese, Tuscany, Italy. Michelangelo's father, Lodovico, was the resident magistrate in Caprese. However, Michelangelo was raised in Florence and later lived with a sculptor and his wife in the town of Settignano where his father owned a marble quarry and a small farm.

Against his father's wishes, Michelangelo chose to be the apprentice of Domenico Ghirlandaio for three years starting in 1488. Impressed, Domenico recommended him to the ruler of Florence, Lorenzo de' Medici. From 1490 to 1492, Michelangelo attended Lorenzo's school and during his stay, Michelangelo would be influenced by many prominent people who modified and expanded his ideas on art and even his feelings about sexuality. It was during this period that Michelangelo created two reliefs: Battle of the Centaurs and Madonna of the Steps. After the death of Lorenzo in 1492, Piero de' Medici (Lorenzo's oldest son and new head of the Medici family), refused to support Michelangelo's artwork. Also at this time, the ideas of Savonarola became popular in Florence. Under these two pressures, Michelangelo decided to leave Florence and stay in Bologna for three years. Soon afterwards, Cardinal San Giorgio purchased Michelangelo's marble Cupid and decided to summon him to Rome in 1496. Influenced by Roman Antiquity, he produced the Bacchus and the Pieta.

Four years later, Michelangelo returned to Florence where he produced arguably his most famous work, the marble David. He also painted the Holy Family of the Tribune. Michelangelo was summoned back to Rome in 1503 by the newly appointed Pope Julius II and was commissioned to build the Pope's tomb. However, under the patronage of Julius II, Michelangelo had to constantly stop work on the tomb in order to accomplish numerous other tasks. The most famous of which was the monumental paintings on the ceiling of the Vatican's Sistine Chapel which took four years (1508 - 1512). Due to these and later interruptions, Michelangelo would work on the tomb for 40 years without ever finishing it. In 1513 Pope Julius II died and his successor Pope Leo X, a Medici, commissioned Michelangelo to reconstruct the exterior of the church of San Lorenzo in Florence and to adorn it with sculptures. Michelangelo agreed reluctantly, but was unable to accomplish this feat (the church's exterior is unadorned to this day). Michelangelo came to the aid of his beloved Florence by working on the city's fortifications from 1528 to 1529 while the city was under siege. His fresco of the Last Judgment on the altar wall of the the Sistine Chapel was commissioned by Pope Paul III almost 20 years later (1534-1541). Then in 1547, Michelangelo was appointed architect of St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican. Seven years later, on February 18th, 1564, Michelangelo died in Rome at the age of 89.

Controversy, Censorship and the 'Fig-Leaf Campaign'

When the work was finished on the Last Judgment in (October1541), Michelangelo was accused of intolerable obscenity for his depictions of naked figures showing genitals (and inside a church, and in St.Peter's, the most important one). A violent censorship campaign was organized by Cardinal Carafa and Monsignor Sernini (Mantua's ambassador) to remove the frescoes, but the Pope resisted. In coincidence with Michelangelo's death, a law was issued to cover genitals (Pictura in Cappella Ap.ca coopriantur). So Daniele da Volterra, an apprentice of Michelangelo, covered with sort of perizomas (briefs) the genitals, leaving unaltered the complex of bodies. When the work was restored in 1993, the restorers chose not to remove the perizomas of Daniele; however, a faithful uncensored copy of the original, by Marcello Venusti, is now in Naples, at the Capodimonte Museum.

Censorship always followed Michelangelo, once described as "inventor delle porcherie" (inventor of obscenities, in a sense that in Italian sounds like as if he had also created the form of... indecent organs).

The "fig-leaf campaign" of the Counter Reformation to cover all representations of human genitals in paintings and sculptures started with Michelangelo's works. To give two examples, the bronze statue of Cristo della Minerva was covered, as it remains today, and the statue of the naked child Jesus in Madonna of Bruges (Belgium) remained covered for several decades. In the 1970s, the Pietà , in St. Peter's first chapel at right, was assaulted by a mentally ill man, who seriously damaged it with a hammer.

Michelangelo the Man

Michelangelo, who was often arrogant with others and constantly unsatisfied with himself, thought that art originated from inner inspiration and from culture. In contradiction to the ideas of his rival, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo saw nature as an enemy that had to be overcome. The figures that he created are therefore in forceful movement; each is in its own space apart from the outside world. For Michelangelo, the job of the sculptor is too free the forms that, he believed, were already inside the stone. This can most vividly be seen in his unfinished statuary figures, which to many appear to be struggling to free themselves from the stone. He also instilled into his figures a sense of moral cause for action. A good example of this can be seen in the facial expression of his marble statue David. Arguably his second most famous work (after David) is the fresco on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel which is a synthesis of architecture, sculpture & painting. His Last Judgement, also in the Sistine Chapel, is a depiction of extreme crisis. Several anecdotes reveal that Michelangelo's skill, especially in sculpture, was deeply appreciated in his own time. It is said that when still a young apprentice, he had made a neoclassical statue (Il Putto Dormiente, the sleeping child) of such beauty and perfection, that it was later sold in Rome as an ancient Roman original. Another better-known anecdote claims that when finishing the Moses (Rome, San Pietro in Vincoli), Michelangelo violently hit the knee of the statue with a hammer, shouting: "why don't you speak to me?".

It has been claimed that Michelangelo was an abstinent bisexual that had very intense attraction for male beauty. In fact, Michelangelo developed romantic but apparently non-sexual relationships with at least one man, Tommaso de' Cavalieri, who was 23 years old when he met Michelangelo in 1532. Michelangelo wrote a series of romantic sonnets as a result of this apparent infatuation.

The homoeroticism of Michelangelo's poetry was obscured when his grand nephew, Michelangelo the Younger, published an edition of the poetry in 1623 with the gender of pronouns changed. John Addington Symonds undid this change by translating the original sonnets into English and writing a two-volume biography, published in 1893.

The Catholic Biography (1908)

Italian sculptor, painter, and architect, b. at Caprese in the valley of the upper Arno, 6 March, 1475; d. at Rome, 18 February, 1564. Michelangelo, one of the greatest artists of all times, came from a noble Florentine family of small means, and in 1488 was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandajo. While apprentice, he excited the admiration of his master by the life-like animation of this drawings, and upon Ghirlandajo's recommendation, and a the wish of Lorenzo the Magnificent, he received further training (1489-92) in the palace of the Medici, at the school of sculpture then under the direction of Bertoldo, one of Donatello's pupils. As student and resident of the palace, Michelangelo lived with Lorenzo's sons in the most distinguished society of Florence, and at this time was introduced by the poet Politian into the circle of the scholars of the Academy and to their learned pursuits. Meanwhile, Michelangelo was studying with marked success the frescoes in the Branacci chapel. After Lorenzo's death he passed his time partly at home, partly at the monastery of Santo Spirito, where he busied himself with anatomical studies, and partly in the house of Pietro de' Medici, who, however, was banished in 1494. About the same time Michelangelo left Florence for Bologna. He returned in 1495, and began to work as a sculptor, taking as his model the works of his predecessors and the masterpieces of classical Antiquity, without, however, sacrificing his individuality. In 1496 he went to Rome, whither his fame had preceded him, and remained there working as a sculptor until 1501. Returning to Florence, he occupied himself with his painting and sculpture until 1505, when Pope Julius II called him to enter his service. After this, Michelangelo was employed alternately in Rome and Florence by Julius and his successors, Leo X, Clement VII, and Paul III being his special patrons. In 1534, shortly after the death of his father, Michelangelo left Florence never to return. The further events of his life are closely connected with his artistic labours. Some weeks after his death his body was brought back to Florence and a few months later a stately memorial service was held in the church of San Lorenzo. His nephew, Leonardo Buonarroti, erected a monument over his tomb in Santa Croce, for which Vasari, his well known pupil and biographer, furnished the design, and Duke Cosimo de' Medici the marble. The three arts are represented as mourning over the sarcophagus, above which is a niche containing a bust of Michelangelo. A monument was erected in his memory in the church of the Santi Apostoli, at Rome, representing him as an artist in working garb, with an inscription: Tanto nomini nullum par elogium. (No praise is sufficient for so great a man.)

Michelangelo was a man of many-sided character, independent and persistent in his views and his endeavours. His most striking characteristic was a sturdy determination, guided by a lofty ideal. Untiring, he worked until far advanced in years, at the cost of great personal sacrifices. He was not, however, unyielding to the point of obstinancy. His productions in all departments of art show the great fertility of his mind. In literature he was a devoted student and admirer of Dante. A copy of the Divine Comedy, ornamented by him with marginal drawings, has unfortunately been lost. Imitating the style of Dante and Petrarch, he wrote verses, canzoni, and especially sonnets, which are not without value, and excite surprise by their warmth of feeling. Some of his poems give expression to an ideally pure affection. He never married. A stern earnestness is characteristic of the sculptor, but the tenderness of his heart is shown in his touching love and solicitude for his father and brothers. Although seemingly absorbed in his art, and often straitened in circumstances, he was ever ready to aid them by word and deed. "I will send you what you demand of me", he wrote, "even if I have to sell myself as a slave". After the death of his father he conceived a deep affection for a young Roman, Tommaso de' Cavalieri, and also entered into intimate friendship with the noble-minded poetess, Vittoria Colonna, then past her youth. With his pupils, Vasari and Condivi, he was on the most cordial terms, and a servant who was twenty-six years in his employ experienced his bounty. The biographies we have from the pupils just mentiond and the letters of Michelangelo himself testify to the gentler traits of his character. He gave younger artists generous aid by suggestions, sketches, and designs, among others to Sebastiano del Poimbo, Daniele da Volterra, and Jacopo da Pontormo. Michelangelo had few personal wants and was unusually self-denying in dress and diet. Savonarola's sermons, which he recalled even in his old age, probably influenced him in some degree to adopt this austerity of life. Moreover, the seriousness of his own mind caused him to realize the vanity of earthly ideals. His spirit was always absorbed in a struggle to attain perfection. Yet with all this he was not haughty; many of his sayings that have come down to us show him to have been unusually unassuming. The explanation of his unwillingness to have the aid of assistants must be sought in the peculiarity of his artistic methods. Michelangelo's life was one of incessant trials, yet in spite of an imperious temper and many bodily infirmities he showed remarkable composure and forbearance. No matter how much trouble was caused him by his distinguished patrons he seldom failed in loyalty to them. He was equally faithful to his native city, Florence, although the political confusion which reigned there wrung from him many complaints. It obliged him to spend half of his life elsewhere, yet he wished to lie after death in Florentine earth; nor could the most enticing offers induce him to leave Italy. A contemporary bestows praise which seems merited, when he says that Michelangelo in all the ninety years of his life never gave any grounds for suspecting the integrity of his moral virtue.

Sculpture - First Period

If the years before 1505, that is, before the summons by Julius II, be taken as Michelangelo's youth, it may be said that, even when a pupil in Bertoldo's school, he attracted attention not only by his work in clay and by the head of a faun in marble after a classical model, but especially by two marble bas-reliefs of his own design. The Madonna Seated on a Step, pressing the Child to her breast under her mantle, shows, it is true, but little individuality, grace, and tenderness, though perhaps for this very reason all the more dignity. Michelangelo's later style is more easily recognized in the Battle of the Centaurs, which represents a large group of figures, anatomically well drawn, engaged in a passionate struggle. It is said that in after years the artist, in referring to this group, expressed regret that he had not devoted himself exclusively to sculpture. He appears to have taken the conception for this work from a bronze relief of Bertoldo and to have imitated the style of Donatello. Michelangelo's work certainly recalls Donatello in the drapery of the Madonna above mentioned and in the realistic way in which the sentiment of this composition is expressed. After Lorenzo's death Michelangelo produced a marble Hercules of heroic size that was taken to Fontainebleau and has since disappeared. Thode, however, appears to have found the Crucifix which Michelangelo carved for the church of Santo Spirito. The body in this is almost entirely free from the cross; there is no intense pain expressed on the youthful face, and the hands and hair are not completely worked out. The St. John in the Wilderness, with the honeycomb, now at Berlin, is probably the San Giovannino that Michelangelo executed in Florence in 1495. The realistic modelling of the head and the beautiful lines of the body show a study of both classic and modern models. Shortly after this Michelangelo completed several figures for the shrine of St. Dominic which Niccolo dell' Arca had left unfinished. A figure of a pagan deity was the occasion of Michelangelo's first visit to Rome, and a statue of Bacchus carved by him on that occasion is extant at Florence. This work, which is the result of study of the antique, is merely a beautiful and somewhat intoxicated youth.

Far more important is the Pieta executed in 1499 for the French chapel in St. Peter's. A calm, peaceful expression of grief rests on all the figures of the group. The face of the mother has youthful beauty; the head is bowed but slightly, yet expressive of holy sorrow. Her drapery lies in magnificent folds under the body of the Saviour. The latter is not yet stiff and reveals but slight traces of the suffering endured, especially the noble countenance so full of Divine peace. Not the lips but the hand shows the intensity of the grief into which the mother's soul is plunged. When sixty years old Michelangelo desired to execute a Pieta, or, more properly, a Lamentation of Christ for his own tomb. The unfinished group is now in the Cathedral of Florence, and is throughout less ideally conceived than the Pieta just mentioned. The body of Christ is too limp, and Nicodemus and Mary Magdalen are somewhat hard in modelling. This Pieta was broken into pieces by the master, but was afterwards put together by other hands. Two circular reliefs of the Virgin and Child, one now in London and one in Florence, belong to the sculptor's youthful period. In the Florentine relief, especially, intensity of feeling is combined with a graceful charm. Mother and Child are evidently pondering a passage in Scripture which fills them with sorrow; the arms and head of the Boy rest on the book. A life-sized group of about the same date in the church of Our Lady (Eglise Notre-Dame) at Bruges shows the Madonna again, full of dignity and with lofty seriousness of mien, while the Child, somewhat larger than the one just mentioned, is absorbed in intense thought. In contrast to Raphael, Michelangelo sought to express Divine greatness and exalted grief rather than human charm. He worked entirely according to his own ideals. His creations recall classical Antiquity by a certain coldness, as well as by the strain of superhuman power that characterizes them.

Sculpture - Second Period

To Michelangelo's second creative period (beginning 1505) belongs the statue of Christ which he carved for the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva. It was sent to Rome in 1521 in charge of an assistant who was to add some last touches to the statue when it was put in position. The Saviour, a life-sized marble figure, holds the cross, sponge, and rod of hyssop. The face, earnest, almost hard, is turned to the left, as if saying: "My people, what have ye done to Me?" Properly however, the figure is not that of the suffering Saviour, but of the risen Saviour and therefore nude, according to the desire of the patron who have the commission. The age of the Renaissance, in its ardour for the nude, paid no regard to decorum. At a later date a bronze loin cloth, unfortunately too long, was placed on the statue. In conformity with the spirit in which the whole composition is conceived, the figure of Christ is not stiff and severe like the statue of an antique god, but expresses a resigned humanity. A youthful Apollo produced at about the same time has also little of the classic in its design. A dying Adonis comes nearer to classic models in its conception. But the gigantic David, the embodiment of fresh young daring, in reality a representation of a noble boy, resembles an antique god or hero. It can hardly be said that the colossal size, over twelve and a half feet, is suitable for a youth; however, the deed for which David is preparing, or more probably, the action which he has just completed, is a deed of courage. The right hand is half closed, the left hand with the sling seems to be going back to the shoulder, while the gaze follows the stone. The figure resembles that of an ancient athlete. The body is nude, and the full beauty of the lines of the human form is strikingly brought out. In 1508 Michelangelo agreed to carve the twelve Apostles in heroic size (about nine and a half feet high) for the church of Santa Maria del Fiore, but of the whole number only the figure of St. Matthew, a great and daring design, was hewn in the rough. Similarly, he executed but four of the saints which were to decorate the memorial chapel to Pius II and left the rest of the work unfinished. A bronze statue of David with the head of Goliath under his feet was sent to France and has since disappeared. A pen-and-ink sketch of this statue is still in the Louvre.

His powers fully matured, Michelangelo now entered the service of the popes and was entrusted with the carrying out of two great undertakings. In 1505 Julius II called him to Rome to design and erect for the pope a stately sepulchral monument. The monument was to be a four-sided marble structure in two curses, decorated with some forty figures of heroic size. Michelangelo spent eight months in Carrara superintending the sending of the marble to Rome. He hoped in carrying out this commission to execute a work worthy of classic times, one containing figures that would bear comparison with the then newly discovered Lacoon. His plans, however, were brought to nought by a sudden change of mind on the part of Julius, who now began to consider the rebuilding of St. Peter's after the designs of Bramante. Julius may be said to have driven Michelangelo from the Roman court. Fearful of the malice of enemies, Buonarroti fled in despair to Florence and, turning a deaf ear to the pope's entreaties to return to Rome, offered to go on with the work for the monument at Florence. To this, however, Julius would not listen. In his exasperation Michelangelo was on the point of going to Constantinople. However, at the invitation of the pope, in the latter part of 1506, he went to Bologna, where, amid the greatest difficulties and in straitened circumstances, he cast a bronze statue of Julius II, of heroic size. This effigy was destroyed during a revolt against Julius in 1511. Once more in Rome, he was obliged for the time being to abandon the scheme for the monument to Julius and, against his will, to decorate the Sistine Chapel with frescoes. Julius II lived only long enough after the completion of the frescoes to arrange for his monument in his will. After his death in 1513 a formal contract was made for the construction of the memorial. According to this new agreement the monument was no longer to be an independent structure, but was to be placed against the church wall in the form of a chapel. The plan for the structure was even more magnificent than the original design, but was in the end abandoned, both on account of its size and of other circumstances which arose. The new pope, Leo X, of the Medici family, was a friend of Michelangelo's youth and looked on him with much favour, but had new designs in reference to him. After Michelangelo had laboured for two years on the monument to Julius, Pope Leo, during a visit to Florence, commanded him, to construct a stately new facade for the church of San Lorenzo, the family burial place of the Medici. With tears in his eyes, Michelangelo agreed to this interruption of his great design. The building of the new facade was abandoned in 1520, but the sculptor returned to his former work for a time only. The short reign of Adrian VI was followed by the election to the papal throne of another early friend of Michelangelo, Giulio de' Medici, who took the name of Clement VII. Since 1520 Giulio de' Medici had desired to erect a family mortuary chapel in San Lorenzo. When be became pope he obliged Michelangelo to take up this task. The new commission was not unworthy of the sculptor's powers, yet an evil fate prevented this undertaking also from reaching its full completion. Michelangelo suffered unspeakably from the constant alteration of his plans; he was, moreover, beset by many detractors; the political disorders in his native city filled him with grief, and the years brought with them constantly increasing infirmities.

In 1545 the designs, some of which still exist, for the monument of Julius II were carried out on a much reduced scale. The monument is in the church of San Pietro in Vincoli; in the centre of the lower course of the monument between two smaller figures is placed the gigantic statue of Moses, which was originally intended for the upper course, where it would have made a much more powerful impression. When seen close by, the criticism may be made that the expression is too violent, there is no sufficient reason for the swollen veins in the left arm, the shoulders are too massive in comparison with the neck, the chin, and the forehead; that even the folds of the robe are unnatural. Yet, seen from a distance, it is precisely these features that produce the desired effect. The great statue, which is double life size, was intended to express the painfully restrained and mighty wrath of the leader of a stiff-necked people. It is plain that an allusion to the warlike prowess of Julius II was intended and that the sculptor here, as in many of his other undertakings, has embodied his own tremendous conception of force. The way in which the Tables of the Law are grasped, the bare arm and right knee, the heavy beard and the "horns" heighten the effect that is aimed at. The flanking figures of Rachel and Leah, symbols respectively of contemplative and active life, were carved by Michelangelo himself, but they are not as satisfactory as the Moses. The monument itself and the figures on the upper course were not executed by the great master, though they were worked out according to his suggestions. On the other hand, two shackled figures out of the series planned by the sculptor are in the Louvre, though incomplete. The Slaves were intended to typify the power of the pope in the domains of war and art, and were to stand in front of the hermae pillars, where the inverted consoles now are. In the Slaves in the Louvre the antithesis between resistance to the fetters and submission to the inevitable is expressed with remarkable skill. There are also in Florence some unfinished figures belonging to this monument, namely a victor kneeling on a fallen foe, and four other figures, which are merely blocked out. About the time of the completion of this monument Michelangelo carved a striking bust of Brutus as the hero of liberty. Michelangelo regarded the freedom of his native city as lost after the second return of the Medici from exile and the assumption of the control of affairs by Alessandro and Cosmo de' Medici. The sorrow this caused him suggested the bust of Brutus, and cast a shadow on the tombs of Giuliano and Lorenzo de' Medici in the chapel spoken of above. The greater part of the work in the chapel, however, had been done before this time, and so the expression of embittered sorrow must be explained by the general depression of the artist not less than by his failure to realize his highest ideal, which also accounts for the gloom characteristic of his other creations.

Twelve figures included in the original design for the sepulchral monument of the Medici were never carved. According to Vasari's arrangement in 1563, a seated figure of Giuliano is placed in an upper niche of one of the monuments, while symbolical figures representing Day and Night recline on a sarcophagus below. If Michelangelo's words have been rightly understood, these symbolical figures are to be regarded as mourning for the untimely death of the duke, and as grieving that life for him had not been worth the living. "Not to see, nor to hear must be happiness for me", are the words attributed to Night, which is represented as a giantess sunk in heavy and uneasy slumber, and symbolized by a mask, an owl, and a bunch of poppy-heads. The other allegorical figure, Day, a man, is represented as having no desire to rouse himself to action. The plan of the second monument is similar to that of the one just described; the figures of Evening and Dawn make the same impression as those of Night and Day. The two Medicean dukes are ideally treated as ancient warriors, rather than portrayed as in life. In the statue of Giuliano it is the superb modelling of the different parts that delights the eye; in the statue of Lorenzo the charm lies in the pose and the way in which the face is shadowed by the helmet. This figure of Lorenzo bears the name of Il Penseroso (the Meditative). Against the wall of the chapel stands the unfinished and really unsuccessful Madonna and Child; the pose of the Madonna is unique.

Michelangelo once said that he was no painter; on another occasion he declared he was no architect, but in reality he was both. About 1503 he painted a Holy Family, now in Florence in which the Madonna holds the Child over her shoulder to St. Joseph who stands behind. In this canvas Michelangelo departs from the traditional representation of the Holy Family, by the quaint grouping of nude figures in the background even more than by the entirely new pose of the Mother and Child. An Entombment of Christ:, now in London, is unfinished. Like Leonardo da Vinci, the greatest painter of that period, Michelangelo made a large number of sketches. He also entered into competition with that famous artist by undertaking (1504) a battle-piece which was to adorn the wall opposite Leonardo da Vinci's Battle of Anghiari in the great council chamber of the palace of the Signory, called the Palazzo del Priori, and now the Town-hall of Florence. As Michelangelo just at this date entered the service of the popes, the cartoon he prepared was never carried out and is now lost. After years of disagreement with Julius II the painting of the Sistine Chapel was begun in 1508, and in 1512 the ceiling was uncovered. Michelangelo, who was not a fesco-painter, exerted all his powers of mind and body, abandoning his preference for the effects of sculpture in order to express without assistance and in defiance of the envious, the full ideal of his conceptions in this unwonted medium. Creation, the Fall, and the preparation for the coming of the Redeemer form the subject of the fresco. The painter first divided and enclosed the ceiling with painted architecture which formed a fame for the frescoes; the cornice for this frame on the broad side of the chapel is adorned with the figures of naked youths. The nine fields of the smooth vault contain the history of the sinful human race as far as Noe. Around the dome, between the lunettes, are vaulted triangular spaces or pendentives; in these are placed prophets and sibyls, together with boy-angels, all pointing to the approaching redemption. In the lunettes over the windows and in the vaulted triangular spaces over the lunettes are represented the ancestors of Christ. The subject, arrangement, and technical excellence of these frescoes have always excited the greatest admiration. The Divine, the prophetic, and the human are here most happily expressed; the conception of the first is original; the prophets and sibyls have wonderful individuality, and great skill is shown in handling the drapery, while human beings are represented in animated action. The architect created the beautiful division of the space and the exact proportions, the sculptor produced the anatomically correct figures, and the painter knew how to blend forms and colours into perfect harmony. After the completion of the work Michelangelo could no longer regret that it had been forced upon him against his will. Equally famous is the great fresco of the Last Judgment which he painted upon the altar-wall of the chapel (1535-41). In this fresco, however, the nudity of the figures aroused objection, and they have been painted over by various hands. The Last Judgment has been more blackened and disfigured by time than the painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Architecture

The commission given by Leo X for the rebuilding of the facade of the church of San Lorenzo, which has been already mentioned, ended in a bitter disappointment for Michelangelo. He produced very rapidly a fine design for the front and made the first preparations for the work. After four years (in 1520) the contract was rescinded without anything having been accomplished. However, the commission that Michelangelo received from Giulio de' Medidi, afterwards Clement VII, for a mortuary chapel for the Medici family was not revoked, and the chapel was completed in 1524. It is a simple building surmounted by a dome. Its only purpose is to hold the monuments. Michelangelos design for the enlargement of San Giovanni de' Fiorentini at Rome was never used. He also produced designs for the Piazza of the Campidoglio (Capitol) and the Porta Pia. It is a remarkable fact that the citizens of Florence in 1529 appointed him engineer-in-chief of the fortifications of the city. Of more importance was his appointment as chief architect for the reconstruction of St. Peter's by Pope Paul III, after the death of Sangallo (1546). He held this position seventeen years. Michelangelo carried out, with some changes, Bramante's plans for the new building and rejected those of Sangallo. His own work is notably the magnificent dome. He completed the drum, but not, however the upper dome. The clay model made by his own hands is still to be seen at the Vatican.

Death brought to an end a life filled with fame and success, but also replete with suffering and sorrow; a life on which a great genius made demands which could not be satisfied. The ambitions of Michelangelo were insatiable, not so much owing to his desire for renown, as to his almost gigantic striving after the absolute ideal of art. For this reason Michelangelo's creations bear the stamp of his subjectivity and of his restless efforts to attain the loftiest ideals by new methods. He accomplished much that was extraordinary in three or four departments of art, but at the same time broke through many limitations prescribed by the laws of beauty in all arts, wilfully disregarding, at times, in his modelling of the human figure, even that fidelity to nature which he esteemed so highly. The way he pointed was dangerous, inasmuch as it led directly to extravagance, which, though perhaps endurable in Michelangelo obscured even the fame of Raphael; he swayed not only his own age, but succeeding generations. [This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License and uses material adapted in whole or in part from the Wikipedia article on Michelangelo (Buonarroti). and Catholic Encyclopedia (1908)]


Books from Alibris: Michelangelo