Sonderdruck aus IL CORTILE DELLE STATUE

Bibliocheca Henziana (Max-Planck-lnscicut)
Deutsches Archaologisches Inscicuc Rom
Musei Vaticani
Sonderdruck aus
IL CORTILE DELLE STATUE
DER STATUENHOF DES BELVEDERE 1M VATIKAN
Akten des internationalen Kongresses
zu Ehren von Richard Krautheimer
Rom, 21.-23. Okcober 1992
herausgegeben von Matthias Winner,
Bernard Andreae, Carlo Pietrangeli (t)
1998
VERLAG PHILIPP VON ZABERN . GEGRUNDET 1785 . MAINZ
Ex Uno Lapide: The Renaissance Sculptor's Tour de Force
IRVING LAVIN
To Matthias Winner on his sixty·fifth binhday, with admiration and friendship.
In :l. paper published som~ fifteen years ago, in the context of a symposium devoted to artists and old age,
I tried to define what I thought W:lS an interesting aspect
of the new self·consciousness of the anist that arose in
haly in the Renaissance.' In the largest sense the phenomenon consisted in the visual artist providing for his
own commemoration, in the form of a lomb monument
or devotional image associated wilh his fmal resting
place. Although many artists' lombs and commemor:tLions are known from antiquity, and some from the
middle ages, artists of the Renaissance made such selfcommemorations on an unprecedented scale and with
unprecedcntcJ consistency, producing gr:md and noble
works at a time of life when one might have thought that
their creative energies were exhausted, or that they
might have rested on their laurels. In particular, some of
the most powerful works of Italian Renaissance sculpture were created under these circumstances: the Florentine Pieta of Michelangelo, which he intended for his
lOmb in Sa!1t<l Maria Maggiore in Rome (fig. I); Baccio
Bandinelli's Pieta, which he intended to vie with
Michelallljelo's <lnd placed on the altar of his funerary
chapel in Samissima Annunziata in Florence (fig. 2); and
the marble crucifix by Benvenuto Cellini, made to spite
Bandinelli and surpass Michelangelo, now at the Escorial
but originally intended for thc tomb he planned for
himself in Santa Maria Novella in Florcnce (fig. 3). Each
of these works was conceived as a supreme demonstration of its creator's pl'owess. The artists evidently
regarded their senescence and evcn death not as a motive
for retirement and withdr:l.wal but as a challenge to continue - indeed, to surpass - their earlier achievements.
Old age was no more, and no less, than an extension of
the Renaissance definition of the artist as an ambitious
and innovative creator.
In part, this way of defming the achievement of the
artist in what might be called "agonistic" terms, as a SOrt
of professional competition, was inherent in the Renaissance revival of antiquity - Pliny, in particular, is given
to describing this or that work or artist as the "first" of a
kind, with reference to technique, design or scale. The
Renaissance attitude differed from the c1.a..ssical in sevenll
important resp«ts, however, which were indebted to
medieval tnldition. Pliny appreciated "firstS" primarily
.-.,
:=:
Fig.
f
Michtlllllgtlo, ~til. Flomlct, C4thtdrt~1
in evolutionary terms, as witnesses to change and
progress in a given context, or a cause of wonderment at
an individual achievement; in the Renaissance these c1as·
sical notes of distinction engendered a conscious and
'.'
Irving Lnin
",
Jo
01
0'
0'
01
m
C
C
"
U>
m
..u,
u'
,I
e<
w
"tI
fig.
.1.
&rcio BallJinrlli. Pina. FfOF?nrr. 55. Annunziata
explicit spirit of competition, and not only with one's
predecessors and contemporaries, but also with one's
self. The second point of difference is that the very selfconsciousness of the :lniSI refleetw not only the vast
egoism, self-promotion and individualism of the Renaissance, but also an underlying spirit of humility and even
of sdf·almcb'alion. All these works were made ultimately
as :lctS of CXlrcmc devotion and the sheer effon of crcation, intellectual and physical, acquired a moral corollary
as a testimony to the artist's dedication and self-sacrifice.
Cellini said of his crucifix that he undertook it with the
thought that even if his attempt failed, he would at least
have shown his good intention.' It sounds like a mod-
-QUC5la diffieile opera io I'uevo desunala per un mio sepul·
em e meco medesimo mi seusavo ehe, se I'opera non mi fussi
riuseila in quel bel modo eli'era il mio desiderio, almaneo arei
rnQSlro]a mia buona volollli. Cited after LAVIN 1977-78,
p. 1.6, n. 1.9.
M
"c,
h
Ex VIIO !...I.lpide: The Renaissance Sculplor's «mT fie Forrt
h,
'"d-
ern, almost tragic version of the charming medieval
slOry bmiliar from Anawlc France and Massenet of the
)onl;leur de Notre Dame who, having no other gifts w
offer the Virgin on her feast day, approached the altar
srcretly that night and performed his juggling act with
such f~rvor and devotion that his prayer was heard. The
admir:ltion for antiquity may have inspired these grandiose endea\'ors, but they were conaived in the spirit of
the medieval notion of the creative work of the anist as a
di\'incly inspired, quasi-sacnl act of humble devotion.
My purpose in the present essay is to extend the
rxplor.ltion of this phenomenon of competitive self-real·
ixonion outside the domain of funerc21 :tn, by following
two imerrelaled but distinct lin~ of development that
MTlerged from the RenaiSS:lnce sculptor's response to
one of the major challenges posed by the 2chicvements
of dassial antiquity. It is no accidem th2t the 2utO-Commcmorati\'e sculptures of Michelangelo, Bandinelli and
ullini have onc thing in common, apart from their
Christologic:a.1 subject matter and the fact that they were
created in 2 spirit of competition with antiquity and with
eachOlhcr: they arc all monumental sculptures carved
from one piece of m2rble, and in each case this represented a conceptual and technic21 tour de force that was
unpn..'Cedemed - Michel2ngelo's multiple figures, Bandinelli's unsupported torso 2nd legs, and Cellini's reduc·
tion of the block to 2 slender figure with outstretched
3TmS. It is c1C:l.r from the sources that this was the measure of the 3rtist's labor, ingenuity and virtuosity) Vasari
alre.uly S3W the point of the Florentine Pieri in the first
edition of his life of Michelangelo, published in 1550,
written while the work was in progress: "One can suppose that this work, ifhe should le3ve it to the world finished, would oUlSlrip all his other works for the difficult)' of cxtracting from that block so many perfect
things." Ascanio Condivi, whose biography of Michel:ln~c1o was published in 15S4, caUs it a cosa rara, a "rare
thillg and among the most laborious works he has done
so far." Ultimately, indeed, it was this aspect of the
sculpture that "sanctified" it as a work of art; so Vasari
intimates in his second edition, published in 1568, after
Michelangelo's death: "A laborious work," he says,
~r3rc in' one block, and truly divine." We know that
~Iicheb.ngelo also planned, but never carried out two
monumental marble crucifixes (fig.4), and his failure
('cminly underlies Ihe terms of Cellini's conception of
hiJ own achievemcnt.~ '" have begun for pleasure to
ui
~,
'8,
Stt
LAVIN '977-]IJ, pp.
lj-6.
• On lht dnwing rc:product'd ht'rt', and a skl'tch for a
\'-sha~ cruciflx, S« C. dt' Tolnay, J,[ichtlangtfo, S vols.,
Princeton 19H-&O,IV, p. ISS, fig. ']4, V, p. 60, p. l}l; IV,
p. 'H, V, p. 2lj, no. IS].
Btm.Jt1llitO Ctllini, CrucifIX. EsaJri,,1
, '\
/,..., . ,
~
I
.j
,
... • ..... ~
I I;'r IhtSC' 50urcn quolw below,
,l-
Fig. J
'93
I
1
1
!:..-'-'
.;"
•, ~,
-
•
Fig. ., MichtLmgtlo, Jrtteh of blocks for "
Ftortnu. Cua BIiDnarrori
(Tllci/iYIOII
groNp.
'94
Irving Lavin
with my an surpass all my predecessors, who never
make one of the most laborious works that has ever
been made in this world: this is a crucifix of whitest
marble, on a cross of blackest Ilnrble. large as :l living
man ... no one has ever undertaken a work of such
extreme laboriousness; even I would never h:ave agreed
to do so far any patron, for fcar of shaming myself." - "I
made [the crucifix] of marble three and a quarter braccia
high on a cross of black marble, at my own expense 2nd
for my own satisfaction, $Oldy to see whether I could
attempted such a work; if they did, and as I morc than
once heard, they failed; whereas I succeeded, with the
Lord's hdp and my extreme l:abor, and also:l.t my great
expense, by the grace of God." The work w:as "among
the most difficult one can do in the an, that is, de30d
bodies. This W30S the image of Jesus Christ our S3ovior
hanging on the cross, to which I devoted the gre30test
study,I3oboring on this work with the 3offection proper to
the subject, 30nd the more eagerly for knowing that I W30S
the first to execme 3 crucifix in m30rble .... And I pl30ced
the body of the Crucified on 3 cross of black C3orr.ar.l.
marble, 3 stone most difficult to man30ge beC3oU~ it is
very hard and very prone to shaner."
The feu of arving 130rge monoliths, single statues as
well as multifigured groups, was in fact Olie of the
f3vorite topoi of c1assicalliter.l.ture on an. References to
works outstanding for their scale 30nd seamless perfection, carved ex uno idpide, occur freqently in Pliny, Diadorus Siculus, P3ouunius, 30nd Herodotus, as 3 source of
admintion but without reference to 30ny underlying
matter of theory or principle. Sculptors of the e30rly Renaissance responded to these allusions with a new passion
for monumenw scale 30nd the imegrity of the block. The
motivation, however, was now r.adicaJly different. The
integrity of the block became more than a cause for
admiration, more even than an aesthetic ideal; it bearne
a veritable ethical imper.ative, a testimony not only to
the bravura of the arnst but also to his person21 integrity.
For Vasari, p30tChing 3 work of stone sculpture by 2dding
pieces was a "most vile 2nd ugly thing 2nd gre2t..1y to be
blamed" ("rosa villissima e brutta e di grandissimo
biasimo").' The challenge of conceptual foresight and
technical n13stery with which the sculptor was con
fronted by this uncompromising principle of integrity,
a forerunner of the modernist fetish of "truth to materials," was what gave the carver of marble his claim to
superiority over 30nists in other, more forgiving materials.
The first evidence we have of the signific:ance and
value attached to the principle appears in Leon B2uist2
Albeni's treati~ on sculpture, composed probably
around t450. The text is mainly devoted to a system of
me2surement from 2 prototype, the value of which
Alberti illustrated by boasting th30t it would permit
unlimited reduction or enlargement from a model to any
desired size, and even allow twO sculptors working in
separate locations to make complementary sections of a
"d.
ill
C
'J
tf
n
d
h
u
•
"
"
"b
o
C
c,
h
ft
o
"
c·
~
"10
"tI
u
b
•
n
[
"c
}
h
n
•
,
n
,"
8
h
,
c
[
Sec v. B. Mockler, ColosuJ 50Ilpblrt of the cmqHfftnU> from
MichtLm~1o U> GUKltmn; BolognA, Ph. D. diu., Columbia
Univ. 1,tI7, pp. IS f.
b
I
(
,
Ex Uno Lapidt: The Renaissance SculptOr's Tom dt Foru
"
an
he
ng
ad
01
~t
to
as
,d
"
"
as
,e
to
cr
nf
Ig
,on
"Ie
"
"
to
y.
'g
'"
.0
.d
,n
,.
'n
d
y
,f
h
it
y
n
a
Statue that would fit tOgether perfectly.' Alberti clearly
developed his idea for a measuring device as well as his
illustration about the twO sculptors, from a passage in
Diodorus Siculus's famous account of the proportion
system used by Egyptian sculptors, which permitted
them to execute .$Utues in separate Rctions/ In his trea·
tise on architecture, completed in 14P, Albeni repeated
the point, citing Diodorus Siculus explicitly, and added
high praise for ancient works of colossal size and grear
complexity carved from a single block.' I suspect that
Alberti's discussion, and perhaps his method of measurement, may lie behind the first documentary evidence
we have of an effort to give practical form to the new
ideal, an effort that in fact ultimately resulted in the first
colossal, monolithic, freestanding sculpture of the Ren·
aissance, the David of Michelangelo. This epochal Story
begins with the famous giant to be placed on the buttress
of Florence cathedral commissioned from Agostino di
Duccio in 1464.' The statue, which was to be nine braccia high, was to correspond to a model that Agostino
had made in wax. h was to have been constructed of
four pieces of white marble, one for the head and neck,
one for each arm, and one for the rest of the body. Had
it been carried out Agostino's would have been the first
colossal free.standing marble statue since antiquity.
When done deliberately to achieve spectacular results of
scale or dissimulation, this premeditated composition of
large and complex sculptures out of multiple blocks
could itSelf be a praiseworthy accomplishment, and in
this se~ Agostino's bold project should probably be
understood in the light of the ancient precedent recorded
by Diodorus Siculus, and followed by Albeni. One
wonders whether Albeni may also have inspired the
new, even more ambitious undemk.ing of Agostino di
Duccio who in 1466 contracted to execute his figure in a
single block, rather th:lO four. Most remarkable in this
cue is that the overseers of the cathedral agreed to pay
Agostino a premium because a figure in one piece is of
higher valuti et pretii than one of four pieces, requiring
not only more spendio et expensa but also greater TnlJgistmi. The fact that the overseers were willing to pay
more for the monolithic figure, and especially the rea·
sons given for doing so bear witness to a qualitative and
intellectual mind-set 2S novel as W2S the project itself.
We hear nothing more of Agostino's monolithic
gughante, but the echo of his clamorous failure must
have redounded to the greater glory of Michelangelo
when, nearly forty years later, in ISOI, he was given the
commission and succeeded in carving his heroic figure of
David - the first colossal, monolithic, free-standing mar·
ble starue since antiquity - from the same block thai
A£oStino had evidenl!y left male abbozatum et sculptum
(fig. S).
The developmental Strains I wish to trace, onc of
which might be call~d figurative, or sculptural, the other
'9S
spatial, or contextual, had their origin in the subsequent
rediscovery of twO of the most famous of all :anciem
sculptures, both of which Pliny reports to have been
made from a single block of stone. The first of these w:as
the Laocoon, whose :accidental discovery in IS06
brought to light the very work Pliny had extolled as the
supreme achievement of antiquity, and carved a uno
lapide (fig. 6). '0 Michelangelo was in Rome at the time
and was among the first to be summoned to view the
new wonder, which he promptly pronounced a "singular miracle of art," wherein we should admire rather
than try to imitate the "divine ingenuity of the artists.""
, "You will have no doubt of your ability to make something
like it [the model] of the same size or smaller or a hundred
cubiu la.rge, or even, I would say, as big as Mount CauaNs,
provided the material we use were surficient for such an enormous undertaking. What is more amaring is that, if you
liked, you could hew out and make haJf the statue on the
island of Paros and the other half in the Lunigiana, in such a
way that the ;ainu and connecting poinu of all the pans will
fit together to make the complete figure and correspond to
the models used.~ - ~Ut simillimam illius et minorem et tan·
tam et centicubitem, atque adee ut sic audeam dicere monti
Caucaso parem tuis posse, uti aiunt, auspiciis ficri non
duhites, modo ad open tam immania quihus utamur media
nobis suppeditent. Et quod magis Inirere, huius dimidiam ad
Paron insulam, si libuerit, dimidiam vero panem altenm in
Lunensibus excides atque facie pcrficies ita UI iunCliones el
cohaesiones panium omnium cum lotius simulacri facie conveniant exemplaribus eI correspondeant. ~ C. Gnyson (cd.),
Uon BattiJt4 AlMrti. On Painting and on Sculp!Jfrr, London
1971, paragnph f, pp. l1"f.; d. also the dedicatOry kuer
and pan.gnph II, ibid. pp. 1IJr., pp. l}l r.
1 I, 9S, 1-9.
, Bk. vn, ch. 16.
, For what follows, sec I. Lavin, ~Bo%.lel.li and Modelli. Notes
on Sculptural Procedure from the Early RenaiMance through
Bernini,~ in: Stil und Obnfitfmmg in dtT' Kunlt dl!l Abtnd/andel. Aitel! dtl J/. inttrnational('n Kongrtlltl fUr KunltgtlcbU.'blt in BOlin, 1964, Berlin 1967, m, pp. 93 -IO~, esp. pp.
97-9·
,. ~Nec deinde mullo plurium fama est, quorundam c1aritati in
operihus eximiis ohstame numero anificum, quoniam nec
unus occupat glorWn nec plures pariter nuncupari possum,
sicut in Laocoonte, qui en in Titi imperaloris domo, opus
omnibus et pieturae et statuanae anis pneferendum. ex uno
bpide eum ac liberos dnconumque minbiles nexus de consili
semenlia fecere summi anifices Hagesander eI Polydorus et
Athenodorus Rhodi. ~ - ~NOt many cdehraled anisu remain
to be named; in the case of cenain masterpieces Ihe very
number of Ihe collaborators is an obstacle to Iheir individual
fame, since neither can one man lale to himself the whole
glory, nor have a number so great a claim 10 honour. This is
the case with the Laokoon in the palace of Ihe Emperor
Titus, a work superior to all the pictures and hronzes in the
world. OUI of one block of marble did the illustrious anists
Hagesander, Polydoros, and Alhanadoros of Rhodes, after
taking counsel together, carve Laokoon, his children, and Ihe
wondrous coils of snakes. ~ Pliny, Mit. but., XXXVI, 37- 38;
JEX-B~K£ 1977, pp. lOS-II.
~Hanc Michael Angelus dicit esse miraculum ani! singulare:
in quo divinum anificum debeamus suspicere ingenium
Irving Lavin
Fig. 6 UOCOOti. Rome,
One wonders wherber Michelangelo's precisely defmed
appreciation for the work might have been formul:ued in
relation to the facl Ihat he 3.l1d his companion on the
visit, the sculptor GiancrislOforo Romano, had observed
that the sculpture w;'\s not in facl c3rved from a single
block, but was composed of some four pieces (we know
today that there arc at least seven). The piecing in this
case was a source for :;admiration because it w:;as so
adroitly done that only "expertS in the :;art" would
notice. "Hence either Pliny w:;as himself deceived or he
wished to deceive others to render the work more
Mu~;
Vat;c•.lII;
admirable, because it would be impossible to make
secure three large figures, joined in a single block with so
many and such wonderful tangles (mirabili grupp,) of
s-
U
u
o
e
poliU$ quam ad imit:;uionern nos accingere. ~ J. J. Boisnrd,
RomOllldt un,is topopphuu er "'ll~uitatum, : voI5., Frank-fun
1197-USCll, I, pp. I} f., cited after P. Barocchi (ed.), Giorgio
\{u"n. U fJ;W Jj MICIHl..nge/o ntlk rrd<JZioni del IJ10 t tkl
IJ68, s vols., Milan-Naples 1961-7:, IV, p. 1101.
b
p
Ex Uno lApide; The Renaissance Sculptor's 10Hr de Force
'97
Fig. 1 &ccio Bandinel/i, LAocoon. Ftormct, UfflZi
,
)
f
I,
serpents, without any son of devices."" The Laocoon
thus became a touchstone, a veritable pierra di paragone,
in the subsequent development of European culture, not
only in the most commonly understood sense of an
annp/um of the psychological expressiveness attained
by classical anists, but also as a chaUenge to the limits of
professional ingenuity and technique.')
,
o
.j
" MQuem. Statua, che insieme co' figliuoli, Plinio dice esser
luna d'un pezzo, Giovannangelo romano, e Michel Cristo-
IJ
fano fiorentino, che sono i primi scultori di Rom:a, negano
ch'ella sia d'un sol manno, e mostrano circa a quattro commeuiture; ma congiunte in luogo UOIO nascoso, e lanto bene
saldne e ristUCCale, che non si possono conoscere facilmente
se non da persone pcritissime di queSt':ane. Perb dicono che
Plinio s'inganno 0 volle ingannare altri, peT render l'optt:l piu
ammirabiJe. Poichl: non si potevano lener salde Ire statue di
statura giusta, collegata in un sol marmo, con t:l.nti, e tanto
mirabili gruppi di serpcnti, con nessun:a sort:!. di slromenti."
Letter of Cesare Trivulzio, June I, If06, G. Bottari and
S. Ticozzi, Ra«oltIJ di Imm sHlla pit/Hm, SCHltHra ed archiltl/11'-11, 8 vols., Milan 18H-5, III, p. 475.
It is notewonhy that, :l.S L. Ettlinger, MExemplum Doloris.
Reflections on Ihe Laocoon Group, Min: M. Meiss (ed.), De
, ,8
Irving Lavin
Following its discovery many artists made copies of
the sculpture, one of whom, Battio Bandinelli, had the
temerity to claim that he would surpass the original. His
full-size copy in the Vfrtz!, which dates from 151.0-25,
docs surpass the original in the sense that it consists of
only three pieces (fig. 7). Bandinclli seems to have been
the first to make the Laocoon the focal point of a medi-
tation on what might be called the exemplarity of
ancient art, initiating a tradition that would culminate
in Lessing's famous essay. 1 believe, in fact, that Bandinelli's attempt to vie with the sculpture had a profound
effect on Michelangelo, perhaps inspiring him later to
undertake the Florentine Pied, but certainly motivating
one of his most famous pronouncements on the precisely the subject of the exemplarity of antiquity. In a
thinly veiled reference to Bandinelli's boast, Vasari
reports the anecdote as follows: "A friend asked him
what he thought of onc who had copied some of the
most celebrated antique marble figures, boasting he had
imitated them, and had far surpassed the ancients. He
rcplied, 'One who follows others never surpasses them,
and a man who cannot do good original work is unable
to use that of others to advantage'. n'4
The discovery of the Laocoon also raised the challenge of creating original multifigured standing groups ex
uno /apide. This ambition must have conditioned the
project initiated in 1508 by the Republican governor of
Fig. 8 Baccio 8'lIldillelli,
FlQ~en,e,
H~ule$
Piazza Sig1/oria
fwd CacuJ.
Artibus Opuscula XL. EssAys in Honor of Erwin PallofsJ...-y, New
York 1961, pp. 11I-6, p. n6) points out, Counterreformation writers later in the century recommended the L!,ocoon
u a model for portraying the Pusion of Christ :lnd suffering
saints and martyrs: "Ma da Ie statue chiaro argomento cavar
potiamo d:l la perizi:l degli :lntiehi pittori e scultori, il ehe
ciascuno di yoi pub aver veduto in Roma in molte statue e
scpcialmente nel Loacoome di Belvedere, il quale par ehe
con suoi figliuoli dimostri, eosi annodato dai serpenti, I'angustia, il dolore et il tormento che scntiva in quell':luo. Certo
sarebbc cou nova c bella veder un Cristo in croce per Ie
piaghe per i sputi, per i seherni e per il sangue trasformato
... ~ G. A. Giglio, Due dialogbi, Camerino IJ64, in: P. Baroceh; (ed.), Traltati d'arte del Cillquecelllo. ITa malliemmo e COIltroriforma, 3 vols., Bari 1960-2,11, p. 42; ~S:me vero quando
in vcterum gentilium statuis aeerbitas illa doloris exprimi
potuit, quemadmodum in Vatieano Laocoontc cernitur, t:lntum non expirante, :Ie prae dolore se filiosque serpemibus
vinctos dirissime IOrquente, quis ncget id effiei posse in eo
[Cristo], in quem omnium dolorurn ae diritatum genera
omnia irruperunt?~ A. Possevino, Tracliltio de poesi et piaura
emm'ca, bumalla et fabulma wll.Jta cum vera, bOllesta et Ulcra,
Lyons IS 95, cited after Barocehi, op. cit., vol. II, p. J 87·
" G. Vasari, 11Je Lroes of the Painters, Sculpton and Arr;hirects,
ed. W. Gaunt, " vok, London and New York 196}, IV,
p. 176: "DomandalO da uno arnica suo quel che gli paresse
d'uno che avcva contrafatto di marmo figure antiche delle piu
celebrate, vantandosi 10 immitatore che di gran lungo aveva
superato gli amichi, rispose: 'Chi va dictro a altri, mai non Ii
pun innanzi; e chi non sa far bene <la se, non pub servirsi
bene delle case d'allri'.~ Barocchi (see note II), pp. 127f.
7
.~
.(
1\
Fig.
Flo
001
'0'
bl,
001
anc
,alt("
enc
anc
Mi,
>t"
(0<
me.
ov,
pm
deli
5101
rno
inte
'0"
Ex Uno !..lIpide: The Rena~nce Sculptor's TOHT de Fora
,f
r~volutionized the tuatmem of sculptural narrative. This
approach to human relationships and sculptural fonn
was inherent in Michelangelo's an from th~ beginning witness the early reli~f of the Battle of the Centaurs; but
here in a monum~mal fr~~standing two-figured group it
se~ms clear that Mich~langelo had in mind anoth~r classical sculptural topos which, as far as I know, has been
compl~tely overlooked by modem critics; 1 ref~r to th~
formula for groups of interwoven figures, the symp/egma, or interlac~, the term used on more than one occasion by Pliny presumably to describe sculptures depicting couples in erotic embn.ce, but which might also
apply to struggling figures lik~ the famous p;lir of H~I­
lenistic wrestlers discover~d later in the sixteenth century (figs. 11, U).'llt is important to notc thal in each
case Pliny qualifies the noun symplegma with the adjective nobile, a point that has been dismissed as senseless
by modem editors but which I think must have
seemed very significant indeed for Renaissance readers
e
•
"
"
.f
J
n
,-
.f
e
,-
d
o
g
,
I
I
~, 't
n
n
(
e
d
e
"e
'J
1-
,
T
•
")f
\
,
!
'-•,-
"
Fig. 9 Michelnngtlo, sketch", for HtT'CHles and
.,
AntatHS
group,
detail, Oxford, Ashmole/l1l Museum
,i
'0
"
",
",'0
I,
'",-
,-
10
"',-
"
~
n
n
'"
u,
v.
.."
iu
"
·si
f.
'99
Florence, Piera Soderini, for Michelangelo to carve a
colossal figure of Hercules :lS a cQunterp3.n and pendant
10 the David. for which Sodcrini had also been responsi-
ble. Together the statues would provide Florence with
colossal signs, insegna is the word Vasari uses, of itS
ancient heroes, biblical and pagan. 'I The project had
a tumultuous history until 15 H when, under the very
altered political circumstances of Medici rule in Florence, Baccio Bandinelli finally installed his Hercules
and Cacus group, with which he sought to "outdo"
Michelangelo's David (fig. 8). (In (:let Bandinelli found
it necessary to add pieces at a should~r and leg of Cacus,
for which h~ was roundly criticiz.~d by Vasari"). Bandin~lIi's group is nOt only a risposra to th~ David, how~ver; itS rigid poses and strictly planar composition seem
positively archaic and contrast markedly, and sur~ly
deliberately, with Michelangelo's id~as for the commission, which ar~ known from various drawings and
models (figs. 9, 10).'7 With th~ sinuous motion and
int~rtwining actions of th~ figures Michelangelo created
coherent - onc is tempted to say, intimate - groups that
'7
,I
-In qUe$to marmo Michelagnolo Buonarroti avev;:a fano pcnsiero di far un gigante in persona d'Ercok che ucidcssc
Cacco, per menerlo in Piazu a camo I'uno e "allro, e Davitte
ed Ercole, inscgna del palauo.- V,\.S,\.RI-MlIJ\"IES'. VI, p. , ..8.
Vasari uses the same word in describing Michelangelo's
colossal figure of David u the prOieCtor of the eity: "bontle
Michelagnolo, fatto un modello di eer.l, finse in queUo, per b
insegna del Palazzo, un Davil giovane con una frombob. in
mano, accio che, Sl come egli aveva difeso il SilO popolo e
govematolo con giuSlizia. COS! chi govn-nava quelL! '"bna
dovessc anUnOS:tmente difenderb e giusumente governarb. Barocchi (see nOle II), I, pp. '9-13 .
"Nel gigante in piu;:u, come si vede, rimessc a Cacco cd
appico due pczzi. cioe una spalla ed una gamba; cd in molti
allri woi lavon feee il medesimo. lencndo eOlali modi, i quali
sogIiono grandcmeme dann;lre gli $Cultori.- VAS...RI-MII.....NESI, VI, p. '71.
Tolnay (sec nole ..), m, pp. 98-1°3, pp. 183-7-Praxitelis filius Cephisodotus et anis heres fuil. cuius laudatum cst Pergami symplegma nobile digitis corpori vuius
quam marmori inpressis. ~ - ~Kephisodotos, the S()n of Pr.lXiteles, was also the heir to his genius. Gre;Jtly admired is his
celebrated group al Pergamon of figures imerlaccd, in which
the fingcn seem 10 press on flesh rather than on marbk.Pliny XXXVI, 1 ... -Idem Polycles el Dionysius Timarehidis
fili lovem qui eSi in proxima acde fcecrunt, Pana el Olympum luctantes codem loco Heliodorus, quod eSI alterum in
(emS symplegma nobile ... ~ - "The same Jlolykles and
Dionysios, the sons of Timarchides. made the Zeus in the
adjoining lemple, where are also the Pan and Olympos interlaced by Hcliodoros, second in renown among such groups
in all the world." Pliny XXXVI. 3S; JEX-Bun H)77. pp.
194 fr., pp. 106 If. The pass:r.ge aboul Cephislodotus was cited
in relation to the impressed fingers of Bernini's Pluto and
Proserpine by R. Preimesberger, "Zu Berninis BorghcseSkulpturen-, in: H. Beck and S. Schulze (cds.), Amiknl1tUption im Hochbarodt, Berlin 1989, p. 11 t. On Ihe symplegma
sec M. Bieber, The Scwlpl~ of the Hellnfiltir Agc, New York
196', p. 1.. 7. The wrcnlers had an imponam rcccplKtn in the
IS70'S through Ihe work of Pirro Ligorio, for which see
D. Coffin, -Pirro Ligorio and Decorations of the Late Sixleenth Century at Perrara, ~ 111'1 Bul/crill, 37 ('9S I), pp. 177 f.
Irving Lavin
'00
Fig.
/0
Mjc:h~L:,ngtlo,
day modd for
mt Ht"f04ks
IUId
C.OIS
group.
'.
of thl
nobik
Mich
mOnt
conc(
Fig.
II
Satyr ntld Nympb. Romt',
M~
arour
Nuovo Capiwlino
Fig.
1.1.
]1,t Uttstkn. Harmer, C..llnia dq)i
Uf{a;;
overc
E:c Uno upidt; The Renaissance SculplOr's Tour dt force
of three interlocking, struggling bodies alludes specifically to the very feature of the Laocoon that had earlier
seemed, even to Michelangelo himself, impossible to
achieve without artificial devices. Although the symplegma groups are not directly connected in Pliny's text,
the reference to one of them occurs within a few sentences of the references to groups carved ex uno lapide,
including the Laocoon. Michelangelo was never able to
complete the work for the Piazza Signoria. but the problems he set for himself in the project became a very per~
sonal challenge for him - a challenge that he finally met
in the Florentine Pied, which is indeed the first monumental, monolithic multifigured group since antiquity.'~
Michelangelo's studies for the Piazza Signoria commission might be described as poised between the ho~ns
of the sculptor's dilemma. The early idea for a Hercules
and Antaeus suggested a double sympfegma supported
by one figure, while the Samson with tWO Philistines
offered a modern solution to the challenge of a monolithic three-figured group represented by the Laocoon.
In his entry into the great ex uno lapide competition Giovanni Bologna set himself Ihe task of combining both
these approaches. Giambologna's Rape of the Sabine, in
many respects the culminating work in the Renaissance
tradition of monumental monolithic tour de force sculpture, went through essentially the same evolmion from
a two-figure to a three-figure composition as had
Michelangelo's (figs. 14, 15). The great difference is that
Giambologna replaced Michelangelo's essentially closed
and earthbound knots by vertically oriented, gravity~
defying and open-ended flames - no doubt an exrrapolation from the flame-like composition that Michelangelo
himself was reponed to have recommended!O The
sources repeatedly emphasize that Giambologna's main
ambition in life was to emulate and surpass the record of
Fig.
I)
Copy after Mi(btlangtlo, Samson and two Pbilistinl's,
bronze. Flortlu:t, Museo Nazionalt del Bargt/lo
of the text. I suspect that the concept of the symplegma
nobile played a critical role in the development of
Michelangelo's early, two-figured projects for the
monument, and that he subsequently combined this
concept with the challenge of the Laocoon to produce,
around I5 }O, his final solution representing Samson
overcoming two Philistines (fig. I}). Here the complex
" It is interesting, and probably nOI coincidental, that the
St. Peter's Piet~ was also appreciated as a monolith at Ihe
time Michalengdo took up the Florentine, in the inscription
on the engraving of the work by Bealrizet, which bears the
date 1547: MICHELANGELVS BONAROTVS FLORENT. DIVI PETRI IN VATICANO EX VNO LAPIDE
MATREJ AC FILlVM DIVINE FECITI ANTONIVS
SALAMANCA QVOD POTVIT !MITATVS EXCVLPSIT
1547/ NB (ll pn'mato dd disegno, Milan-Florence 1980,
p. 1}6). This point was noted by W. Wallace, "Mil;helangelo's Rome Piel11.: Alt:upiece or Gr2Ve Memorial,· in: S. Bule,
A. P. Darr, F. Superbi Gioffredi (cds.), Vemxcbio alld Late
QuattroUT/tO l/illian &ulpllm~, Florence 1991, pp. 24}-51,
p. 254, n.•p.
'G As noted in this connection by C. Avery, Giambol()gna. Thl'
Compll'le S(UlptUTt, Oxford 1987, p. 109. The reference is 10 a
passage in Lomnzo's treatise on painting, 1584, c(lnterning
which see D. Summers, MManiera and Movemem: The Figura Serpentinata,· Art QuarterlY,}5 (1971), pp. z69-}OI;
D. Summers, Mid,elAngdo and the umguage ofArt, Princeton
1981, pp. 81- 83.
Irving Lavin
fig- I <f
Gi.JmboJog1lA, R-FH
V"Jnlna,
of ... StWiM,
/non%t.
Kl4l1Jlh~ AfI4SeIU1l
Michelangelo, and the Rape of the Sabine, unJike the
Laocoon, was indeed carved from a single block, without precedent; it seemed to one observer, who echot.-d
Michelangelo's description of the Laocoon, "miracu·
lous. "" Contemporaries particularly admired lhe
ligures' "beautiful inlerlacc" (bcllissimo intrccciamento),
which might well serve as a translation of symp/egma
Fig. I J GUunbolofllol' ~ of d Wine.
Flormu, LoggioI tki LJmi
nobile, and recalls the mirabiln nexus as well as the tdllli e
tanto mirabili gruppi of serpents admired in the Laocoon
" -Fu poStO nel luogo dov'e:r:l
Piazza i1 mir:lcoloso gruppo di
Gio Bologna.- Diary entry of
E. Dhanens, JCIl/l BOllfo8t1e,
Brussels 1956, p. 135, 11. I.
la Giuditta [of DonateiloJ in
tre statue di mumo fatto ... da
F. Sc:ttimani, August 18, ISh;
Girwam,i BolQg/la [""mmi"80,
Ex Uno Lnpidt: The Renaissance SculptOr's Tour de Foru
Fig. /6 Dtt4il of Figure
If
by Pliny, Michelangelo and Cristofano Romano." On
specific poinrs, however, Giambologna's work
makes explicit reference to one of the other classical
groups to which Pliny gives special praise. This was the
twO
:i,
on
on
d,
11;
go.
Fig. 17 GUlmbologna, Rapt of tht Sabint$.
f1orma, Loggia dti La1lzi
'"J
"noble symplegma" carved by Cephisodotus, the son
and artistic heir of Praxileles, in which "the fingers
seemed to press on the flesh rather th2n on marble"
(fig. t6). If Michelangelo was a modem Praxiteles then
Giambologna was his Cephisodotus. The second point
of interest in Pliny's text is th:n it emphasizes the artistic
virtUes of Cephisodotus' masterpiece but does not mention the subject. This point, tOO, seems to find an echo in
the faCt that, as Giambologna himself reported, he did
not initially give a specific name to his sculpture, but
chose it "to give scope to the knowledge and study of
an."') Paniclarly admired was the "be3.utiful interlace"
of the figures, as if in reference to lhe L3.ocoon's
"wondrous coils of snakes" admired by Pliny and
Michelangelo himself.'. A noteworthy testimony to
Giambologna's ambition 2nd subLlety of thought is provided by the relief representing the Rape of the Sabines
which he affixed to the pedesul when the name for the
work was finally established (fig. 17). Taken together
with the marble sculpture itself, it seems to illustrate an
artistic progression embracing the original rwo·figured
group at the left, the three-figured marble sculpture at
the eeRIer, and a[ the right a mullifigured, pyramidal
group that clearly alludes to the Famese Bull, the second
great masterpiece of ancient sculprure to be rediscovered
and intum.lely associ.ned with Michelangelo!'
This famous work, mentioned by Plmy, representing
the Fable of Dirce, was found in early January 1546, in
excavations in the Baths of Caracalla in Rome sponsored
by Pope Paul m Farnese (figs. IS, (9).'6 First identified
as depiCting a Labor of Hercules, the heroic ancestor of
the Famese family, the significance of the sculpture was
partly a matter of scale and technique - a huge "mountain of marble", as it was called, with multiple figures
carved, as Pliny agam reported, again falsely, from a sin-
" MLe quali [Giambologna's figures called the SabinesJ furono
vedute con molto piacere e menviglia di cia5C\lno pel bellissimo intrecciamento loro. MScttimani diary, January I", 1581,
cited by Dhanens, 1«. cit.
'I MLe due pt"edeue Figure che possono infenre i1 raplO d'Elena
el forse Proserpine o. d'una delle Sabine; dello per dar
campo alia sagezu tt Studio dell'arte ... ~; leiter ttl 0navio
Farnese,June Ij, 1579, cited after J. Pope-Hennessy, Iraliall
High Rtnaissana and Baroque Sculpturt!, London-New York
1970, p. 383. According to Borghini (1\8,,), Giamhologna
undertook the work "solo per mOStr.lr I'eccellenza dell'arle, e
senn proporsi alcun' inoria- (soldy to prove his excellence
in his art, and wilhout selecting any subtea): ibid.., 38".
" Sec notes 10 and II above.
" Avery (sec nme 10), pp. n f., also nOIC'S Ihe reference 10 Ihe
Famesc Bull in Ihis relief.
'f For the facts presented here see fuSKI!U./ PJ!Nr.rT 1981, pp.
165 -67, with references, and the imponant results of the
recent restoration of the group in: Jl Toro Famt5t. LII "m01llaglla di mamlO· tra Romll t Napoli, Naples 1991. The Punese Bull measures em )7oh x 1911 x 193W • 31.98m'.
Irving yvin
h:lve in<
ture to I
unfinish
with thf
th:lt tim
in each
holding
ing him
:lnd V:lri
figures
pieces.
Michd:l
se<:ond
g:lve gel
it c:lrefl
directcc
another
thepru
str.light
bridge;
door in
the
POj
Michel:
scult
se ne
cui e
simo
mm
cib (
verit
'0 G
u),
ofP;
tiont
I, PI
., Vasa
que!
p"
Fig. /8 Farnese 81411. Nllples, Museo Naziolla/e Arcbeologico
ErC(
un'a
ure,
nan:
se02
Mid
,on
gle block (ex eodem lapjde).·7 10 this case we have no
direct evidence that Micheb,ngdo himsdf realized it was
pieced together, but we do know that the overseer of
papal fonifications, whom Michelangelo knew well, was
perfectly aware of ilS true nature.'- Thus, the heroic
claim of antiquity to have created freestanding, multifigured monolithic sculpture, received another serious
blow. Michelangelo muSt also have noticed mat the
sculpture served in antiquiry as a founuin, a f;act that has
been confirmed in the recent restoration when the interior hole for thc watcr was found. This realization may
'] "Ztthus et Ampmon ac Dirce et taurus vinClllumque ex
eodem lapide, a Rhodo adveeu opera Apolloni et Taurisci. ~­
MZcthos and Amphion, with Dirke, the bull and the cord, all
carved out of one block,M JEX-Bl.'KI! 1977, pp. 10,.-6. MQuei
marauiglioso monte di marmo, ~ Federico Zuccaro 1184, cited
after D. Heikamp (ed.), Scrim' a'ane ai f"taeriro Zu«a1O,
Florence 1,961, p. 119.
•• ·CirOl il Toro Famesc ... diro una rosa, che siroramente Ie
riesciri nuova, e molto Stroma, ed c che detto gruppo non c
ahrimemi d'un pezza solo, come si crede, rna di piu pe:u.i, in
aleuni luoghi oommessi a perfezione, tale che diffici1issimamente si pub riconoscere. Cib io ho sicuramente leno, non
sono due anni, in una lettera. stampata di scrittore del secolo
XVI, il quale avvisava come nuova tale scopena da eccellenti
=,
0,",
.,1,
que!
Tev,
""'
pon
~cl
dell'
diT
giuc
I, p.
bilit
teo.
Ex U"o Lapide: The Renaissance SculplOr's ToIIT'de FOTU
,os
have induced Michelangelo to restore the ancient sculpture to its ancient use, as the focal point of another great
unfinished project which Vasari describes in connection
with the artist's work on the Faroese palace (fig. 20): "At
that time an ancient Hercules, of marble, seven braccia
in each direction, was found in the Amonine baths,
holding the bull by the horns, with another figure helping him, surrounded by numerous shepherds, nymphs
and various animals, a work of extraordinary beauty, the
figures being perfect, made from one block without
pieces. It was thought it would do for a fountain, and
Michebgnolo advised that it should be taken into the
second court and restored for that purpose. This advice
gave general satisfaction, and the Faroese have lately had
it carefully restored with this idea. Michelagnolo then
directed the construction of a bridge over the Tiber to
another palace and garden of the Fame~, so that from
the principal door of the Campo di Fiore one looked
straight through the coun, fountain, Strada Julia, the
bridge and the other beautiful garden, right to the other
door into the Strada di Tr:mevere, a rare thing wonhy of
the Pope, and of the genius, judgment and design of
Michelagnolo... "
t'
,II
ud
"d
,ro,
.
: Ie
",m
",,on
010
:nli
Stullari di quei tempi Catta ad un suo corrispondente, il quale,
se non erro, si era sig. Gabrio Sorbellone; pur delb persona,
cui era diretta qut.lb leuera, non m'acceno: bensl $Ono ceni,sima deU'uscn.ione che deno gruppo dt.l Taro rom commesso: onde fam vie-ne ad essere b commune credenza. Oi
cib con diligenle eume di uOrna pento Ii puO .scoprire b
vend., sernpre che Ii voglia." Letter from Gucomo Carnn.
10 Giovanni Bonari, June 19, t761, BoturilTicozzi (see note
11), VI, pp. .1 31 f.; Gabrio Serbdloni (tsol-Io) was a cousin
of Pius IV and overseer of Ihe Papal fonifications; he is mentioned in Vasan's life of Michelangelo, Barocchi (see nOle II),
l,pp·1I4f.
Vasari (see note 14), IV, p. 148. "E percM s'era trovato in
quell'anno aile Terme Amoniniane un marmo di braccia sctte
per ogni verso, nd quale era stato dagli antichi imaglialo
Ercole che sopra un monte leneva il taro per Ie coma can
un'altra figura in aiulO suo, et imorno a quel mOnle vatic figure di paslOri, ninfe el allri animali - opera ceno di straordinaria bellC'Z.Za per vedere SI perfene figure in un sasso sodo e
senza pezzi, che fu giudiollo servire per una foniana -,
MicheWigelo consigliO che si dovcssi condurre nel secondo
conile e quivi restaurarlo per fargli ne1 medesimo modo geture acque; che IUItO piacque. La quale opera ~ stato fino a
oggi dOlo que' signori Famesi fana restaurare con diligenza p«
laic effClto. EI allora Michebgnolo ordinb che si dove5si a
quelb dirinura fare un ponte che allraversassi il fiume del
revere, acciO si polessi andare da que! palazzo in TraSlevere a
un allro lor giardino e palazzo, perch~, per la diriuura della
pam principale che valla in Campo di Fiore, si vedessi a una
occhiata i1 conile,la fome, strada lulia et it ponte e 1010 bellezza
dell'altro giardino, fino all'altra pona che riuscin nella Slnda
di Trastevere; cosa r;tr:!. e degna di que! pomefice e della vinu,
giudizio e disegno <Ii Michdagnolo~ (Barocchi [see note II),
I, p. 17). For a discussion of Ihe project (doublS as to its feasibililY do nOI affect the argumenl here) see Le P~laiJ F~mhe.
£coJe fmnfdig de Rome, Rome 1981, vol. I, pp. "9-11.
Fig.
H)
Cross SMion
Fig. .10 Plan
P~lazzo
of the
F<anne BHll (4ter II Toro 1991)
of Michelangelo's projm for the garden Jide
Famne, Rome (after Lc P1ll:lis Farn~se 1981)
of
Irving Lavin
...
..
,
• • • • •
un
oJ,
Rc
I c
co,
Gi
am
gn:
rat
wf
,he
goo
,~
"ng
"I
Sir
pol:
illS
art
tar
Fig. u
Gi4mb%gna, Hrrf:Jlln owrroming
Rortnt't, Loggi. dri /..JUrxi
II
Ullllufr.
The significance of Michelangelo's project as a revolutionary exercise in axial planning and the spatial extension of a building from itS innermost fabric far out into
the urban environment, has often been noted. This is the
second, spatial or contextual strain of development I
defined at the outset. The nature of the project's influence has not been fully appreciated, however, and in
order to do so, we must return to the theme of monumental, monolithic two-figured sculpture and pursue it
into a domain with which it is not generally associated,
namely the equestrian monument)O The equestian
monument was, to be sure, a major theme of monumental sculpture in the Renaissance, but always in the fonn
of bronze. That is, umil the year 1600 when Giambologna compleled his second great work for the Loggia
dei Lanz.i in Florence. His Hercules overcoming a Centaur (fig. 21) has a specific subject, indeed it had a specific
ideological mission from the outset, intended to glorlfy
Ferdinanda I and the Medici dynasty of Tuscany, which
set the direction for the European monarchic style that
would foUow. The relevance of the work lay panty in its
fonn and material and partly in the way the Herculean
theme was interpreted - not simply u a viCtory but as a
labor, an obstacle overcome on the road to glory. This
Fig.
lJ
CommDl1emUM mfll.l 0{ GUunb%gtul'S HtTCllks
OW7COming • Unllufr. P.ris. BibliothiqHt N.tiotulk
message was spelled out on a commemorative medal,
inscribed Sic itur ad astra, "thus onc reaches the stars"
(fig. 12). With a little good will the sculpture might qualify as the first monumental, monolithic, free-standing
equestrian monument since antiquity, and the inscription on the medal may be said [0 apply to the artist no
less than to the patron. To be sure, it does require a certain imagination to see the Hercules overcoming a Centaur as an equestrian group, but this is precisely what I
believe Bernini pe:rceived in 166S as he passed through
Florence on his way to design the Louvre for Louis XIV.
While in Paris, he conceived the famous equestrian portrait of the King, which was indeed, without qualification, the first monumental equestrian group carved from
jO
For what follows concerning Giambologna's sculpture,
Bernini's Constantine :lnd equestri= Louis XIV, and the Farnese Bull, see I. Lavin, P<IJt-PrtHnL &.says em Historicism in
Artfrom DoPUlttllo ro PictWO, Berkeley, etc. 199), pp. 171-J.
On Bernini's debt to Aorentine sculpture of this period s«
uvin (as in notc 9), p. 101, and I. Lavin, "Fife Youthful
Xulptures by Gian Lorenzo Bernini and a Revised Chronology of his Ea.rly Works·, Art BHllttin, SO (1961), p. 1.1,
n. u6.
Ex Uno Lapidt: The Renaissance S<:ulptor's Tour dt Fmu
a single block (fig.2.}). Indeed, the block itself was
unprecedented: Bernini's biographers describe it as
"larger than the ConSl:l.ntinc", "the largest ever seen in
Rome", "the largest ever Struck by chisel", However,
I doubt that Bernini would have achieved his triumph,
conceprually or technically, without the suggeStion of
Giambologna's rocky base, which serves to suppon the
animal's belly. What proves the relevance of Giambolo·
gna's work for Bernini's is a medal issued to commemo·
rate in Rome to celebrate the Louis XIV monuments,
which bears an analogous inscrip[ion carrying essentially
the same meaning, Hac iter ad superos, "this way to the
gods" (fig. 24)' This was a preemincntly Herculean scn·
timent, associ:ned especially with the theme of Hercules
at the Crossroads; the hero chooses the difficult path of
righteousness over the easy rood to pleasure, thereby
expressing the supreme Stoic vinue, conquest of the ~If.
Since Bernini's sculpture was specifically vaunted as sur·
passing even his own equestrian Constantine, the
inscription on the medal may again apply to his own
artistic achievement no less than to the political and mili·
tary achievement of his hero.
'°7
Fig. l<f CommnnomtNt mttLJ/ of Btmini', t'1J1turilJlI port'filit
l.cJIis XIV, BAV
of
The conccptual circle I wish to draw comes to a close
when one considers tWO other aspects of Bernini's
project for an equestrian Louis XIV. One of these is the
huge cn.ggy peak on which he intended to place the
group (fig. 2S). The pe:lk rcpre~nted the Mount:lin of
Vinue to whose summit only the most vinuous, following the arduous path chosen by Hercules, may accede.
Completely unprecedented as an equestrian monument,
the basic concept, including the m:lmmoth scale :lnd
monolithic ideal, clearly evokes the Farnese Bull, the
mountain of marble, which had been installed in the I)alazzo Farnesc and :llso been thought to rcfer to Hercules.
Bernini's reference to the Farnese Bull was surely deliberate, and no doubt reflected Louis XIV's cffons on scv·
eral occ:lsions in the months preceding Bernini's visit to
Paris to acquire me sculpture for himself)' The second
aspect of Bernini's project I think significant here con·
cerns the location he imagined for his equestrian monu·
menl. for I am convlnced it was based on Michelangelo's
project for the Palazzo Farnese. Bernini intended to
place his sculpture on the main axis of the palace of the
I,
g
,
,
,
d
Fig.
1)
&mini, tql4ntri4n porrroJiJ of Louis XlV. VtnailkJ
I' As noted by H.... SKEI.I.I PeNNY 1981, p. 165. In a discus.~ion of
important antiquities during Bernini'~ Slay at the I:rench
court the Farnese Bull was said 10 be remarkable only for its
size and Ihe number of figures carved from a single block,
P. Fr~art de Chantdou,joJlmal du tIOyage du Cal.lalitr Btmin
m France, ed. L Lalanne, Paris t88J, p. 26; idem, Dkl? oftht
CmJaliC"t Btmin;', Visit to France, td. A. Blum, annomed by
G. C. Bauer, Inns!. M. Corbet, rrinCtlOn. N.J., 1\l8J, p. 26.
w8
Fig.
- --_._-...
2J
Irving Lavin
~---
Semi'li, drawing for equestrW.1I portrait of Louis XIV,
8=no, Musf!O Civico
SUll King in the area between the west, or rear facade,
and lile Palace of the Tuilcrics (fig. 26). There would
thus have been created one continuous line of sight, following the path of the sun, from Place Saint-Germain
before the main, cast facade of the Louvre, through the
entire building with its two courts, one closed the other
open, and culminating with the vision of the mountainous sculpture at the west end of the axis. Michelangelo's
plan to integrate the greatest sculpture from antiquity
into the fabric of modern Rome on the banks of the
Tiber had its most majestic and influential, but equally
frustrated sequel in Paris, on the bank of the Seine.
...
The force of these traditions was such that the Laocoon
came to be the very embodiment of classical art. In lhe
matter of expression Ihe development culminated in
Lessing's essay of 1766, called Laocoon, the theme of
which was a compar;nive analysis of the nature of the
arts, visual and litcralY, in the tradition of the Renais-
sance paragone. But the status of the work as a sculpture
was perhaps best illustrated by Hubert Robert. In '773
during his stay in Rome at the French Academy Robert
painted one of his most grandiose and evocative pictures, depicting the discovery of the Laocoon, when the
work which Pliny described as "superior to all the pictures and bronzes in the world" was brought forth in all
its glory (fig. 27).3' Robert shows this momentous event
in the history of European culture taking place in a colonnaded gallery, the palace of Titus, which evokes Ihe
sacral and aulic character of such monuments of Roman
ceremonial architecture as Raphael's Disputa, and
Bernini's Scala Regia.)) The vast structure suggests not
only the physical grandeur but also the great distance of
time paSl from which the ancient masterpiece is transported into the present. The brilliant light at the end of
the tunnel seems to portend the birth of a new age in
which the three arts defmed in the Renaissance as the
arts of design and in the eighteenth century as the Fine
ArtS - sculpture epitomized by the Laocoon, architecture epitomized by the great gallery, and painting epitomized by Robert's visionary incorporation of alllhree would reign supreme.H The discovery of the Laocoon is
a metaphor for Robert's own inventive meditation on
art. Fate had it that Robert was given the opportunity to
realize his vision: under the Revolution, he was in
charge of rrasforming the Grande Galerie of the Louvre
into a museum, his depictions of which strongly recall
the Discovery of the Laocoon; under Napoleon, he
installed the expropriated statue itself nearby in the Salle
du Laocoon)l
Not the least remarkable feature of the Discovery is
the fact that lhe Laocoon is shown fully intact, although
)' See j. f/. r.,.agonard e f/. Robert a Romd, e"hib. cat., Rome
'990, pp. a09f., no. 146.
" The architecture is discussed, in a differenl sense, by A. Corboz, PeintuTr miiitdnie et architecture miliwire. A propos du
thrme du tumlei chez Hubert Robert, Basel and Stutlgan 1978,
p. 8.
H On the Renaissance paragone and the ani del disegno see
1. Lavin, Bernini and the Um'ty of the Visual Arts, New York
and London 1980, pp. 6-13; on the development of a comprehensive notion of the Fine Arts at Ihis period in France,
P. O. Kristeller, ~The Modern System of the Ans,~ in his
RrnaiWlIlce 7110ugbl 11. Papers OIl Humallism and the Am,
New York 1965, pp. 163-117. Robert's engagement with this
theme is aniculated e"pressis verbis in his famous view of the
Grande Galcrie as a museum displaying paintings and sculptures, with the vault opened through a series of light wells.
The faces of the wells are decorated with pain of winged vicIOries carrying three wreaths and the inscription glorifying
the Ihree arlS, Trium par artium honos. The pendant painting
shows the Grande Galerie in ruins and despoiled of paintings.
See M.-C. Sahut, Le LOUVTr d'Hubm Robert, Paris 1979,
pp. a8ff., no. 58, pp. )1 ff., no. 8l.
II Sahut, op. cit.
Ex Uno LIpide: The Renaissance Sculptor's WHr tie Force
Fig. 16 Plan
of Bnnini's proj«! fur the LOII't1J? (kft)
ManJl. Paris,
with Plilais dn Tlti!mn (right), engr<nJing by Jelln
8iblicthtqlt~ Nationa/~
Fig. 17 HltbM Robm, Finding of the I.aocoon. Richmond, ViTginilf Mltstltm of Fillt Am
Roben must have known th:u it was made of several
pieces and that the raised arms of Laocoon and his older
son were restorations. I suspect that the integrity of the
work served to suggeSt not only its formal perfection but
also the technical vinuosity it incorpor:ued by vinue of
being carved toT uno lap;d~.
ADDENDUM
Tommaso dell:\ Pona's Deposition from the Cross
I want to call :mention in this context to an important
but linle·known work that I had overlooked in my
Irving Lavin
"0
figure suspeoded from it inevit2bly recalls Cellini's "Bel
CriStO"; and the multi.figured, pyramidal composition
emulates the Famese Bull (fommaso was a professiona.l
dealer in antiquities, and his names:ake, Guglielmo della
Port:1l, h:1ld panicipated in the restoruion of the Bulll l).
To be sure, Tommaso origin:1llly undenook the project
not for his own tomb ch:1lpel, but for a great patron.
Moreover, Tommaso stipulated that the work was to be
displayed in a flat niche, rather than free-standing. (The
marble, which has been badly damaged and repaired at
various places, is fully finished at the front; at the back
the cross and mound arc flat and the figures are left
rough.) But the sculptor's personal act of reverence and
devotion was expressed by the inscription he prescribed
bearing his name: "Ad honore e gloria di Nostro Signor
Giesu ChristO Crocifisso Thomasino della PorU scultore
in memoria de messer Thomasa suo z.io e de messer
Giovanni Battista suo fratello fece questa opera."" And I
have no doubt that this· extravagantly idiosyncratic artist,
whom Baglione, who knew him well, regarded as somewhat pathetic, oblUse and unbalanced - "lennesi il maggior' huorno del mondo e commincio (come si suot dire)
a far castelli in aria"; "credo, che p:l.tisse di cervello"; "di
poco cervello"; "disgratiatO" - sought deliberately to
combine and supersede in a single masterpiece the pro·
fessional exploits of all four of its great predecessors.
Fig_
~8
Torl'ltn.lSO thU... Pc1rt4, Dtposilwn
from rhr
Crou.
Romt, S. AmbrogIO ...1 Cono
S. Prusouyre, NiaJLu Con/in. Rtcbtrehn Ufr /a JallptJf1'C ,;
Rome .."tOHr tk 1600, Rome 1984, p. 111, gives a fine apprecialKln of the work, which has also been the sub}ect of an
ell;emplary Study by G. Paoofsky, ~Tomm:uo della Porta's
'Castles in the Air',· jWel, f6 (1993), pp. 119-67.
17 As noted by Panofsky, op.cit., p. 139.
JI Jl "loro (see nOte 26), p. 48.
" An ClI;traordinary iconographical feature of the composilion
is the fifth figure, the angel lowering the body of Christ from
the cross. I suspea that Tomma.so 50ught to combine in this
motif the traditional theme of the Angel-Pied, in which an
angel suppons and displays the dead body of Christ, d. Panofsky (5« note 36), p. t 39, and that of Joseph of Arimethea,
in whose tomb Christ was buned, or Nicodemus, reputedly
the sculptor of the famous Volto SantO crucifIX at Lucca, who
are often shown in the rote here performed by the angel.
(fomm:uo's subStitution of the third Mary for the male
figure in Michelangelo's Pieti would encourage this bivalent
understanding of the angel.) If 50, the figure might allude to
the intermediary role of the :lr'tist himsclf - a frequent allusion
in sculptors' tombs, d. LAVIN 1977-78.
I'
surveys of Renaissance sculptors' lomb monuments and
repercussions of the ex uno /apide topos. This is the
extraordinary Deposition from the Cross by Tommaso
della Porta thal serves as the altarpiece of the chapel of
S. Ambrogio adjoining S. urlo 301 Corso in Rome
(fig. z8),J' Having begun the project sometime between
1586 and 1596, at his death in 1606 Tammaso
bequeathed the Deposition, along with two :accompanying figures representing the Old Law and the New, to
S. Ambrogio. The sculptures were to be used to deco-
rate Ihe high alt<lof of the church. where he was to be
buried. (rhe present structure, where tlte work was
installed only after 192), is a late seventeenth-century
replacement (or the original building.) In his biography
of Tommaso, Baglionc nOtes dt:u the work consists in
"diverse figure tutte in un groppo di marmo, e sono di
un peno." In fact, the carving is an astonishing technical
and expressive lour de force: with its five, life·size figures
forming a group it surpasses Michelangelo's feat in the
Florentine Pieta;J7 the daring display of perforated,
interlocking forms and delicate limbs and dra~ries sus·
peoded "in aria" rivals the Laocoon; the cross with the
Phow credib: A..Iin:an I, 2, S-8, IZ, I}, I~, 17, 18; Bibliothea
Hen:ziana IOi DAJ II i Gin.udon, 13 j MAS 3 i Pans, Bib\.
Nat. 16; Sopnmendenza, Florence 4, 11; Soprintendenza ai
Monumenti del Laz.io 18; Virginia MUR'Om of Fine Am 27.
I
Abkiirzungen unci haufiger zitierte Literatur
AA
ACXI!.RMAN 19S'I
AWROVANDI IS62
Archiiologischv Anzeiger
s. A,kc:rman, The Corti/e def
Btlvtdt7t, Cilt~ del Vaticano 19S4
James
Dtlk St4t~ anriche, ,be p" MtA Roma,
in divrm lMoghi, t (4H si 'V~o"o. di
/time- UIW AIJ'fOil1ldi, in: LUClo
Mauro, U tln/;o,it4 del!4 ciu4 di Rorrua,
Venedig IJ62, "J-,Pl (R~r. HildesAunTiNI IJI Q
ANDREA!! 1982
ANnREAE 1988
ANI)Jl;!!A£
I
JUNG 1977
ASR
ASTo
BAV
BIJNI:!NIlEllG 191]
hcim 1975)
Francesco Albertini,
OpJ4S0IMm dt
mirabilJn.s nOt/ac & wtnis IfJ'bis
Romile, Roma 1110 (Rist'ampa a cura
di Peter Murray, Wtstmcad. Farnbo·
rough 1972)
Walther Amdung, Die S04lpturen dn
valic,mis,hen Mlilcums, Band I, Berlin
(903; Band 2, Berlin 1908
Bernard Andreae, Die romischen Jagdsarlwpbage, Berlin 1,80 (ASR. Bd, I, :)
8. Andreae, OdysJtl4J., Fr:mkfurt 1981
B. Andreae, ~n Hnd die Gl'IfndMJIg Roms, Mainz 1,88
B. Andreolc, lAoJtoon und die KIUISt'VOn
P"Kamon, Frankfurt 1"1
B. Andreae, PmetorUun ~bmaJe.
TIbrmu und OrJid in ~ng", Stungan 19lI4
B. Andreae, PrtutoriMm SptumaJt.
L '"ntn) di T~ " SptTlong" td Ovidie, Cosenza 19lIS
B. Andreae u. H. Jung, ,. Vorl:iufige
tabellarische Obersicht tiber die Zeitsr.ellung und Werkstanzugehorigkeit
von zso romischen Pnmksarkophagen
des }. Jahrhundens n. Chr._, AA
(1'77), 4P-4}6
Die "mikrn S<trkoph"K'"lieft
Archivio di StatO di Torino
Bihlioteca Apostolica Vaticana
C. Blinkenbe:rg, -Zur Laokoongruppe-, RM, 41 (1917), 177-191
Gustave: Blum, .. Numismatique: d'Antinoos_, jOKmlJl inttrtllJtionAl d'~
Iogie munism"riqut, 16 (1914), n-70
PhyUis Pny Bober u. Ruth Rubinste:in,
Rrnaiswnce Anists "nd Antiqut hlplurt. A H"ndboole of Sourcts, London
Mscm;NSTEIN 1986
1986
Bernhard Boschenstein, ,.Apoll und
seine Schatten. WinckeJmann in der
DichlUng der beiden Jahrhundenwenden_, in:johannjO<Jchim Winc!etlm"nn
1717-1768, hg. v. Thoma.'! W. Gaehtgens, Hamburg 1986, P7-Hl
BunO£NSIEC
Ct.NOVA
CENSUS
IlI6,
19.19
Amonio Bosio, Roma soUaanea, Rama
16}l
Dc:bonh Brown, ..The Apollo Belve:de:re: and the: Garden of Giuliano della
Rovere at 55. Apostoli-, jWa, 49
(1916), llS-l}1
Ham: He:nrik Brummer, "1"M Statue
Co.rr in the V"tiun BtNNrrr, Stockholm 1970
Arnaldo Bruschi, Bramanu "rchiutto,
Bari 1,6,
Tilman Buddensieg, ~Zum Slatuenprognmm im Kapitolsplan Pauls 111._,
Uinchrifi flit Kunstgeschichtt, }l (llI69),
177- u8
Antonio Canova, I Quademi di Viaggio
(1779-1780), a Clin di Elena Bassi,
Venezia e Roma I,S'
Ct71SJ4S of A ntiq~ Wbrks of A nand
Archiactu," Known in the Rrnaiswnct.
Ele:knonische Date:nb;lnk, konsultierbar z.Zt. im Warburg Institute, london, in der Bihliotheca l-Iem~na,
Rom, am Getty Information Institute:
und :1m Kunstge:schichtlichen InStitul
der Humboldt-Univef'Sit:it zu Berlin
Giovanni Pietro Chattard, NU(}'IJa descrizione del \~ru-"no 0 sia ekl pa!4zzo
apostolico di San Pietro, Roma 1761-67
Corpus InKriprionum Latu/arllm
Marco Collareta, _Miche:langdo e: Ie
statue antiche: un probabile ifilerVefilO
di restauro_, Proipt'tlwa, 43 (19I1j),
Sl-U
David R. Coffin, ·The 'Lex I-Ionorum'
and Access 10 Gardens of Latiuln
During the Renaissance_, joumal of
Garekn History, 1 (1,&1), 101-1P
D. R. Coffin, GdrdtnS /lnd Gtmiming
in P"P"I Rome, Pnnmon 1"1
Georg Oaltrop, _Zur Oberlieferung
und Re:staurie:rung des Apoll vom Belvedere:_, Ani della PontiflCia A«"demia
Romana di Arrbtologia. RrnJironti., 411
(l,nI76), 117-140
G. Dahrop, Dit LaokoongrNppe im
Varikan. Ein Kapittl aus dtT romiJc/)en
MusellmsgeJchicbu und dt'T" AntikenErklllJdung, Konstanz 1,112
G. Daltrop, ·Zur Aufsu:Uung afilikcr
St<ltuCn in der VilletI:l eli Belvedere: des
Vatikans_, BortlJ1, !tfunstOlChe Beimige
ZMr Archiiologie, 6 (I,ll}), 1I7-2ll
Abklirzungcn und haufiger r.itierte LiteralUr
47'
DBI
DE FRANCESCIHNl 1990
DUCHMANN 1967
DENKER NI'.S5J::lRATH
.,'"
DI!UBNER 1')79
G. Daltrop, Amikl.' Giitttntdlutn im
Vatikan. Die 'fIatiLnisch-romische Yr..dition der klaSJischen Archa"owgie, Basel
19 11 7
G. Daltrop, -Nascita c significato della
~ccolta delle Sfatut antiche in Vuicano~, in: Roma Q"ntro ideate della cultum dell'.mtico 71ei stcoli XV e XVI,
Milano 1989, 111-129
Dizwnano Biografu:o degli 1taliani
Marina De Franceschini, Villa Adria7la.
Mosaici, pavimenti, edifu:i, Roma 1990
RqJenorium der christlichen-a/ltike71
Sarkophage, hg. v. P. W. Deichmann,
Bd. I, Rom ulld Ostia, Wiesbaden 1967
Chrisliane Denker Nessdruh, Die
SiiulenOTdnungen bei Bramante, Worms
.,'"
O. R. Deubner,
~Der GOtt mit dem
Bogen. Das Problem des Apollo im
Bdve<!ere~, jd1, 94 (1979), 22)-244
Aquiles
Estao;:o
[Achilles
hRNOlI' 11106
I'ROMME.uRAY!I.... FURI
1')84
GDSU
GESeH!> 197'
Archarology, 9S (1991), 669-681
GRISEBACH 1976
GUNTHER 1988
Gabinetto Oisegni e Stampe degli
uffizi
Uwe Geese, ... Antike als Programm Der Statuenhof des Belvedere im
Vatikan«, in: Natur mid Anlike ill
Jer RenaWlIce, Ausstellungskaulog
Frankfurt 1985, 24-JO
Peter Gerlach, .Ein 'Antinous' des
Guglielmo della Porta? Zum Datum
einer Restaurierung des 'Hermes-Andros' des Belvedere«, StJidel jahrbuch,
NF. 12 (1989), 151-178
Inga Gesche, Neuaufttellullg amikey
Statuell ulld ihr £illflufl auf die romiJche
RellaisSflncearchitekmr, Mannheim 1971
Lucius Grisebach, .. Baugeschichtlichc
Notiz l.um Statuenhof Julius' II im
Vatikanischen Belvedere«, Zeitscbrift
fitr KI/.7IStgen:bichte, 39 (1976), 209-20
Hubertus Gunther, DIU Suu/ium der
anlike'l Architektur in den ZeidmuIIgcn
Jer HQchrernlWallfe, Tubingcn 1988
HAFNER 1991.
HASKELL 1980
German Hafner, Die LaokQQ1I-Grup~
pen. Ein gordiJcher Xnatell, Stuttgarl
1992
Fr.tncis Haskell, RediJcovmeJ in Art.
Some Aspero of Taste, Fashi01l alld Collectillg ill Englalld alld r-,-allce, Oxford
HASKElL I PENNY 1981
1980
Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny,
Tmte alld the Antique; The Lure of
ClasJical xulpture 1}00-(900, New
HEIKAMP
1990
The Diary ofjw:ph Farington, edited by
K. Garlick and A. Macimyre, Vol. 5,
August IBot - March IBoj, New Haven
and London 1979
Carl L. Femow, Ober den Bildhauer
umwa ulld deuell Werke, Zurich 1806
Claudio Fr:tnzoni, .'Rimemhranze
d'infinite cose'. Le collezioni rinascimentali di antichita«, in: Memoria del·
l'amico nell'arte italiana, hg. v. S. Settis, Bd. I, L'uSQ dei cJ.mici, Torino
1981 ,299-)60
Christoph Luitpold Frommel, _Die
Peterskirche unter Papst Julius II. im
Licht neuer Dokumente«, RomiJcheJ
jahrbuch flir KUlIJtgeJehichl/!, 16 (1976),
57- l )6
C. L. Fromme1, _II Palazzo Vaticano
sotto Giulio II e Leone X. Strutture e
funzioni«, in: Raffae/lQ in Vaticano,
catalogo deUa mostra Ciu:l. del Vaticano, Milano 1984, 118-135
C. L. Frommel, .San Pietro«, in;
RillaJcimento 1994, 399-423
C. L. Frommel, Stefano Ray, Manfredo Tafuri, Raffilello archiuuo, Mhno
198 4
Virginia C. Goodlett, _Rhodian Sculplure Workshops«, Ammcan Joun/al of
Statius],
1nlustrium virorum ut I!XStallt in uroe
rxpressi vultuJ, Roma 1569
FARINGTON 1')79
GooOI..E1T 1991
HEL81G 196}
H£I.liIG 1966
Haven 1981
Detlef Heikamp, ... Oie Laokoongruppe
des Vinccnzo dc' Rossi«, Mitteilullge1l
del KumthiJtorUchell ImtituteJ in 1-10renz,34 (1990), S. 34}-378
Wolfgang Helbig, Fuilrer durch die
iiffemlichen Sammlungell klauiJcher
Altertiimerin Rom, 4. Aufl., Bd. I, Die
P.ipJt/ichen Sd,mll!uIlgen im Vatikall
und Lalerall, bcarbeitet von B. Andreae
u. a., Tubingen '96}
Wolfgang Helbig, Fuhrer durch die
offentliehell Samm/ungt:ll kJ.miJeher
Altmumer ill Rom, 4. Aufl., Bd. 2, Die
StiidtiJchen Sammlullgen ... , bearbeitct
HEl.liIG 1972
von B. Andreae u. a., Tubingen 1966
Wolfgang Helbig, fuhrer durch die
offellllichen SammlulIgen klalSiJcher
Altertiimer ill Rom, 4. Aufl., Bd. 4, Die
Staat/ichell Sammlungell. Museo OJtieme ill OJtia Alltica, Museo der Villa
Hadrialla in Tivoli, Villa Alballl~ bearbeitet von B. Andreae u. a., Tubingen
197.1
High Renamallce '993
High Renaissam:... in th... Vatican: The
Agt of julillJ /I ,md Leo X (catalogue],
The National Museum of Western Art,
Tokyo 199)
High RellaiJsallee 1994
HIMMEUtANN 19.59
HiMMEu.iANN 1991
HINT7.EN-BoIlLEN 1990
High RellaiJsallCt' in the Vaticall: 7JJe
Age ofjulius 11 and Lto X, E1Iglish lext
Supplement, edited by Michiaki
Kosbikawa and Martha J. McClintock,
Tokyo 1994
Nikolaus Himmelmann, by £igellart
des klassiJchen Golterbi/des, Muncben
1959
N. Himmelmann, ... Laokoon_, Antike
KUIISt, 34 (1991), 97-115
Brigitte Hintzen-Bohlen, ... Zum ApolIon vom Belvedere. 'Oelphiscbes' in
Pergamon?«, in: 1collographia. AlIlei-
mllg zum LeJen von Bilaem (FestKhnft
DOllat de Chapeaurvuge), Muncben
HOLo\NDA 1984
1990, 11-25
Francisco de Holanda, Da Pimuya
AlltiglUl, ed. d' Angel Gonzalez Garcia,
Lisboa 1984
I
Ahkunungen untl haufiger zi,ierte LiteralUf
Hih.sEN 1901
Christian HUlsen, ~Die Henneninschriften beriihmtu Griechen und die
ikonographischen Sammlungen dcs
16. J:dtrhunderu~. Rltl, 16 (1901),
ill-loS
C. HUlsen, R6miscJn Antikmgirrm dn
16. JahrlllUldms., HeiddMrg 1917
C. Hulsen u. Hermann Egger, Die
F. Mal1;, Die dionyJiJChm Sarkophagt',
Berlin 1968 (ASR, Bd. rv, 1)
Hugo Meyer, AntinooJ, Munchen 1991
Adolf Michaelis, _Gcsc:hichtt des Sta·
tucnhofcs im vaticanischen Be:lvtdtre~,
jdl, 5 (1190), f-71
Mansa
Elisa
Micheli,
Giovanni
Colonna dA TIVOli; IJl4, Roma 19h
Amaldo Momigliano, _Ancient HislOry and the Antiquarian~, jWO, IJ
(1950), 18'-JI5; repro in: A. M., Sill·
d~ in HiJtoriography, London 1966,
J ff.
romi.schm S/tine"bikMr lIOn Manni
van Humsltnclt, Berlin 1913-16
leUR
InKrptiQnn Christianae Urbis Ronl<lt!
a71tmOrtl, N.S. II,
Roma 1935
sqJtimo kliCu/a
Arnold Nesselrath, _The Venus Belvedere: an EpidJodf' in Restor.ttion.,
JWO, 50 (1987), 10S-1I4
A. Nessdr.tlh, "Simboli di Roma_, in:
Da I'Wne/1o alfa 1IlJJ€i~ de; MH~i Capiro/ini - L 'Ami«! a RQI1JQ "IL:. vigilia dt'l
Ri1lMCimmto, c;lIalogo deUa moura
Roma 1988, 194-10S, 1I0-UI,
1jl-1J8
A~biiologis(ben
]dl
Jahrbllch des DcutJf:hen
JENKINS 1992
Ian Jenkins (Ed.), GlSSwno d41 Pozzo's
Pap~ MUjlIml, vol. I, 1991 (Quaderni
Puloni 1)
K. Jex-Blake and E. Sellers, The E/J~
lnsti/JftN
]WCl
Jum 19S6
Pliny's Chapt", on 1M HisuTry of An,
London I'J77
jOUT'fl41 of 1M Warbwx and ~ld
ImtitMus
Carl Justi. Wind-elm",nn und Kinc Ui,grnonm. Koln 19S6
Hanna Koch,]ohaml}oochim Winclulmann. Sprache Imd Kumtwm Oahresgabe der Winckelmann-Gesellschafl
Stendal 19f6/7), Berlin 19~7
G. Koch u. H. Sichtermann, mil einem
Beilrag von F. Sinn-Henningf'T, Die
rCimisdnn Sarltophage, Munchen 1981
(Handbuch der Archaologie)
UNCJANI 1901-11
Hans Ladf'ndorf, Antiltmso-dilmf lind
Antihnlropie, Berlin 1911
Rodolfo Lanciani, StDria d~1i Sowi di
R0nJ4 e notUw intumo alk roIltzioni
romant' di "ntichit4, 4 'loll., Roma
1901 - 11
R. Lanciani, Stw degli Scat/i di Rom"
e noti:zw intomo aile (Q/laioni rom"ne
di "niKhit4, 1. M., " 'loll., Roma
19 89-94
ChriSla Landwehr, Die amiken GipS<lb·
gUsJe "UJ B"iae. GritchiJche Bro'IUJt,,·
tum in AbgiiJJm riimiJchn- Zf'it, Berlin
198~
Irving Lavin, _The Sculplor's 'LaSt
Will and Teslamf'nt'~, Allm MnnDriaI
An MURIIm B"l/etin, JI (1977-71),
S. "-39
lzr"aoulll.Y 18h
UMC
MANDQWSKy!MlTCHP.I.l.
1963
MAIlCONl 1913
u
Paul LturouiJIy,
Varian, Paris 18h
Lccicon Ironogr"Phiaim Mytholcgu,e
Classiae, Zurich u. Miinchf'n 1911 ff.
Filippo Magi, II ripristino thl uocoonu,
Roma 1960 (Alii della Pontificia Accademia Romana <Ii Archeologia. Memoric, 9.1)
Erna Mandowsky and Charles Mitchell, Pirro Ligon'o'J Roman Antiquitit'J,
London I96J
Pirro Marconi, _Antinoo, Saggio sulI'ane deU'eta adrianea-, Monlmfellti
antichi, 19 (19H), col. 161-j01
471
P""USI Pll.E.5ICCI! 1994
PU.TRANGELI 1985
PtETRANGEU 1990
Beatrice Pa.lma Venelucci (a Cllra dil,
Uomini ill"Jln' dell'alltichit.i, vol. 1.1,
Pirro Ligorio e It! emIt tiburtint!, Roma
1991
Rita Paris (a cura di), Pt!rstma, IAl
maschera neluiltro antiro (C:lI. mOSlra
SpolelO), Roma 1990
Claudio Parisi Prf'sicct', -Le sutlle
$Olle balaustre dei Palazzi Oapitolini.,
in: La jacriara dt'l PaL:.zl.O Snlatorib in
CunpiJoglio. Mom",ti di Jt~ Hrb"'Ja
Ji Roma, a cura di M. E. Tilloni,
Osptdaletlo (pin) '994, IJS-I7J
Arcangela M. Penosa, MaJelmT del
repm.orio tt'"tr"/t' grtCO nt'lla Jrcrmrzione "rrhirrrro"iu di t't4 romanQ, Icsi
di laure.1o Urbino 1985
A. M. Penon, ·Maschere leatrali in
marmo nelle collczioni rnmane di antichita~, SIHdi Urbin"ti/B J, (,0 (1987),
77-97
Carlo Pietrangtli, I Musei Vaticani, cinqut' seco/i di Jtona, Rom:l 1985
C. Piemngdi, .Le antichita Cesi dei
Musei Vaticani e San Lorenzo 'in piscibus'~, in: Sen'lIi ill mt'moria tli G. MareMrtl Longhi, vol. I, Anagni 1990,
1J- JS
Antonio Pinelli, .. 11 P~ del
Canova-, in: Pirallm t fa P<IIHm ami·
q/ll"ri.:I. Gli Ifnl«t'dmh t il COflttJlO. Attl
del Convt'gl'IO 14-ll nowm/nr '979.
Roma 198j, .PI-4j9
Inge Mana Podbrecky, &;trigt' 7.11
t'inn Biogr..r~ Pirro LigorioJ fIJI)
biJ 158)), much. schrifll. Diu., Wien
198 J
Alexander POlIS, .Greek Sculpture
and Roman Copies. I. AnIOn Raphael
Mengs and Ihe 18th Cemur)'., jwel,
4j (1980), ISO-t7j
Adriano Prandi, .. La fomma del LaoCoonte dalla sua scopen:! ndle Terme
di Tito', R;viJtJJ dtll'lstil"'O Mlzionale
474
Abkurzungen una haufiger zitiene Literatur
di Archeologia e Storia dell' Ant, N.5.
3 (19S4), 78-[°7
Bettina PreiB, Die wissenschaftliche
Besehiiftigung mit der Laokoongruppe.
Die Btdeulung Christum Gotflab HryIll'S flir die Arrha"ologie dl's /8. }ahrhllll-
I'II.EISS 1~9~
Praxis der bildenden Kunst, Bern u.
Frankfurt 1973
H. Stuan Jones, A CatJ.wgue of the
Ancient Sculptures Preseroed in the
Municipal Colfectiom of Rome. nle
Sculptures ill the MlISeo CapiUllino,
Oxford 1911
H. Stuan Jones, A Catalogue of the
Ancient Sculptures ~Jeroed in the
Munu:ipal Collectlom of Rome. 71Je
Sculptures in the P<llazzo Comervatorio,
Oxford 1916
aerts, Bonn 1992
QUATII.f.M~RE DE
QUINCY 18}4
QUONI"'~I/GUINAM"'lW
A.C. Quatremere de Quincy, CIIlQtl.:l
et SfS out/rages au Mimaires bistoriques
sur w Vie et ies Tr<lvaux de ct dlebre
Artiste, Paris 1834
Le Pa&.is m. Lou1Jrl!, Paris 1988
19 88
Agostino Taja, Descrizio/le del Palazzo
Apostolir:o V<lticmlo, Rom 1750
R. Tolle, _Zum Apollon des Leochares". jdJ, 81 (1966), 142-172
Joachim Raeder, Die JUllU<J.rische AuslUlUung ,ler Villa Adriana be; Tivoli,
Frankfurt a. M. 198}
R£
Paulys Realellcydopadie Jer cLmischell
VASARI-Mn..ANESI
Altertumffllwenschaft, Stuttgart
.",
Rf.DIG DE W1>\I'OS
RICE 1986
RM
Rinau:imelllo 1994
Deodecio Redig de Campos, / p'llazz.i
Vatic.wi, Bologna 1967
Ellen E. Rice, -Prosopographika Rhodiaka", Ammal of the British School at
Athem, 81 (1986), 109-159
Gisela M. A. Richter, The POrlraUs of
the Greek, London 1965
Brunhilde Sismondo Ridgway, Ronum
Copies of Greek Scuplture: The Problem
of the OriginalI, Ann Arbor 1984
MUfti/ullgen des Deut.schen Archiiologischell hmiluts, R6muche AbteiLmg
Rinascimelllo da Bruntd/eschi a MKhelangew. La rappresentaziolle delf'archileltura, a CUr:i di H. Millon e V,
Magnago Lampugnani, catalogo della
mosua VenezIa, 1, edizione, Milano
1994
SIIEhR.MAN 1'J72
Bruno Sauer, DCT Torso tlQll Belvedere,
Giessen 1894
John Shearman, 71Je Valican Stanze:
FunC/iom and Decoration, London 1972
(Proceedings of the Brilish Academy,
VISCONTI 1818
WEIlER
WEISS
1979
1959
1977
163-182
19P-19S7
WINCKELMANN 1968
J, J, Winckelmann, Kleine Sooriften,
Vorrea'ell, ElItwiirjf'. hg. v. Walther
Rehm, Berlin 1968
H. Winnefeld, Die Vil/4 des Hadria,l
bei Tivoli, jdJ, j. Erg. H" Berlin 1895
Matthias Winner, _Zum Apoll vom
Belvedere". jahrbuch der Berliner
SoiMllT 1970
WINNER 1974
Matthias Winner, _Zum Nachlcben
des Laokoon in der Renaissance«,
jahrbuch der Bcrlhler MlISeell, 16 (1974),
J. Shearman, - Raphael, Rome and the
Codex Escurialensis" Master Drawings,
15 (1977), S. 107-140
Bernhard Schmaltz, _Zum Apollon im
Belvedere«, Marburger Winckebnanll'
Avgramm (19h), j-24
Annegrit Schmitt, -Romische Ancikensammlungen im Spiegel cines Musterbuchs der Renaissance«, Miinchncr
jahrbuch dcr hiMellden Kumt, 11
!HuSet,t, 10 (1968), 181-199
83- 121
(1970), 99-118
Lorenz Schrader, MOtlumentorum Italiae qU<le hoc nostro 5aeculo & a ChmtunlS posita sum, libri quatuor, Hdmstedt
159 2
ScHWINN
1973
Elisabeth Schroter. -Der Vatikan als
Hugel Apollons und der Musen. Kunst
und Panegyrik von Nikolaus V. bis
Julius 11.", Romuche Quart4{jchrift fu'r
cbristlUhe Altertumskunde una Kirchengeschichte, n (1980), 208-240
ChriSla Schwinn, Die Bedeutung des
Torso vorn Btdvedere {iir 71Jeon'e und
Wilhelm Weber, Orei UnteTSMt:hungell
zur grieoouch~aeKYPtuchen Religioll,
Heidelberg 1911
Ekkehard Weber, _Hostilius Marcellus
- Priester des Antinoos_, in: Lilter<le
numismaticae Villdobonemes (Roberto
Goebl dedu:atae), Wien 1979, 65-70
Roberto Weiss, -Andrea Fulvio Antiquario Romano", Annali del/4 Scuo/4
Noml<lle Superiore di Pila, lettere, sroria
e lilosolia, ser. 2, 28 (19S9), 1-44
R, Weiss, _The Medals of Pope Julius II (1503-1513)«,jWCI, 18 (196S),
Johann Joachim Winckdmann, Geschichte aer KUIlJI des AltertJ<ms, Dresden 1764
WINCKELMANN 1952-57 J. J. Winckelmann, Briefe, hg, v, Walter
Rehm u. Hans Diepolder, Berlin
57)
SHEARMAN
Giorgio Vasari, Opere, ;( cura di
G, Milanesi, Pirenze 1906
E. Q. Viscomi, II MlIStQ Pio Clemelltino, Milano 1818
WONSCIII! 1993
F. Winter, _Der Apoll von Belvedere~,
jd/, 7 (1892). 164-177
Henning Wrede u. Richard Harpr:ith,
Dcr Codex Coburgemu, Ausstellungskatalog Coburg 1986
Raimund WunsclJe. _Der Torso vom
Belvedere - Denkmal des sinnenden
Aias", Miinooncr jahrbut:h der bilden·
den Kumt, 44 (1993), 7-46
Hans Zeller, Winckelmanm Bnchreibung des Apolfo im Belvedere, Zurich
19H
Inhalt
Vorwon
VII
Einleitung.•1I COI"tile delle Statue nel Belvedere..
Matthias Winner
DC
Ex. Uno Lapide: The RenaisS<lnce Sculptor's
TOIIr de Force
lroing Lavin
'9'
Apoll vom Belvedere
Nikolmn Himmelmann
",
227
'7
Paragone mit dem Belvederischen Apoll. Kleine
Wirkungsgeschichte von Antico bis c."\nova
Mauhias \Vinner
67
Begegnung mit Apollo. Zur Rezeptionsgeschichte
des Apollo vom Belvedere im 18. Jahrhundert
Steffi Rotttgen
2 S3
On the Julian Program of the Conile delle
Statue in the Vatican Belvedere
Hans Henrik Brummer
Zum Verstandnis cler antiken Statuen m dem
Opuseulum von Francesco Albertini
Georg Daltrop
The Statue of the River God Tigris or Amo
Ruth Rubinstein
'75
77
II Cortile delle Statue: luogo e sroria
Arnold Nesselrath
I tre progeui bramanteschi per il Cortile dd
Belvedere
Christoph Luitpold Fromme!
Torso vom Belvedere
Raimund Wiinsche
Romische Antikenprogramme des
16. Jahrhundens
Henning \Vrtde
La collocazione degli dei fluviali nel Cortile
delle Statue e il restauro del Laocoonte del
Momorsoli
Matthias \Vinner
Der Torso im (ruhen 16. Jahrhunden:
Versundnis, Studium. Aufstellung
Gunter Schweikhart
"7
Laocoonte di bronzo, Laocoonte di marmo
Sa/vat~
II cicio di maschere del Cortile delle Statue
Carlo Gasparri
3'7
Una sculmra del Belvedere ritrovata. 101 'Zitella'
A Imandra Uncini
}}9
&ttis
.. Archa marmorea, che ha in se scolpita di mezzo HS
rilievo 101 caccia di Meleagro vaghissimamenlc.
Paolo Uverani
Das Laokoon-Problem
Bernard Andreae
161
Momorsolis Vorzeichnung fUr seine Erganzung
des Laokoon
Amold Nesselrath
165
Warum hieB der 'Hermes-Andros' des
vatikanischen Belvedere •AntinOliS'?
Peter Gerlach
3S 5
Die Arme des Laokoon
Birgit Laschke
'75
Die Sarkophage im Staruenhof des Belvedere
Bnnard Andreae
379
Due nuove rappresentazioni del Laocoonte
Antonio Giuliano
,87
Francisco de Holanda et Ie COr1i/e de! Belvedere 389
Sylvie Derwaru-Rofa
Die Umwandlung des Antikenganens
zum Statuenhof durch das architekwnische
Ornament Pirro Ligorios
4"
T"it£-Eugell Ketler
Johann Joachim Winckelmanns Beschreibungcn
der Statuen im Belvedere in der
Gescbicbte der Kunst des Alterrums: Text und
443
KOnlext
EnlSt Osterkamp
II Cortile delle Statue nel Senecellto
CarlQ PielTangeli
4"
-Gods without Alurs«: The Belvedere in Paris
459
fall Jenkins
Winckelmanns Beschreibungen der Statuen
iIll Belvedere-Hof im Lichte des Florentiner
Nachlal1heftes
Max Kunze
43'
Abklirzungen
und haufiger zitiene Liter3tur
Xl, 474 Seiten mit fl8 Abbildungen und J Falualeln
rc 1998 by Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein
ISBN 3-8053-13+9-1
47'