ID
stringlengths 6
8
| title
stringlengths 3
136
| question
stringlengths 33
235
| answer
stringlengths 51
15.3k
| image_url
stringlengths 57
817
| entities
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
14751_T | Still Life with Old Shoe | How does Still Life with Old Shoe elucidate its History? | At the start of the Spanish Civil War Miró spent some time at his house in Montroig del Camp but then left for France. On 16 December 1936 he arrived in Paris with his wife Pilar and daughter Maria Dolores. They lived in a very confined space with nowhere for Miró to work, so he simply noted down ideas on small cards. As he had done when he first went to Paris in 1920, Miró attended the drawing class at the Académie de la Grande Chaumiere.
As he still had no space of his own, Miró began to work in a corner of the gallery Pierre where, in the period January–May 1937, he produced one of his strangest and most important paintings, Still Life with Old Shoe, in which he expresses his anguish over the situation in Spain, with a detailed depiction of the rise of evil, invasion by monsters and the decline of the human figure.
Perhaps the events of the moment, especially the drama of the war in Spain, made me feel a need to penetrate reality. I worked from life every day at the Grande Chaumiere. At that time I felt a need to control things through realism
Miró sided with the Republicans. He showed his mural The Reaper at the Spanish pavilion of the Paris International Exhibition of 1937 where Picasso's famous Guernica was also exhibited. The Reaper, a large picture with a height of 5.5 m (18 ft), was lost after the pavilion was dismantled. In the same year Miró produced a poster with a powerful message in French: Aidez l'Espagne (Help Spain). | [
"The Reaper",
"Montroig del Camp",
"Picasso",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Guernica",
"Académie de la Grande Chaumiere",
"Paris International Exhibition of 1937"
] |
|
14751_NT | Still Life with Old Shoe | How does this artwork elucidate its History? | At the start of the Spanish Civil War Miró spent some time at his house in Montroig del Camp but then left for France. On 16 December 1936 he arrived in Paris with his wife Pilar and daughter Maria Dolores. They lived in a very confined space with nowhere for Miró to work, so he simply noted down ideas on small cards. As he had done when he first went to Paris in 1920, Miró attended the drawing class at the Académie de la Grande Chaumiere.
As he still had no space of his own, Miró began to work in a corner of the gallery Pierre where, in the period January–May 1937, he produced one of his strangest and most important paintings, Still Life with Old Shoe, in which he expresses his anguish over the situation in Spain, with a detailed depiction of the rise of evil, invasion by monsters and the decline of the human figure.
Perhaps the events of the moment, especially the drama of the war in Spain, made me feel a need to penetrate reality. I worked from life every day at the Grande Chaumiere. At that time I felt a need to control things through realism
Miró sided with the Republicans. He showed his mural The Reaper at the Spanish pavilion of the Paris International Exhibition of 1937 where Picasso's famous Guernica was also exhibited. The Reaper, a large picture with a height of 5.5 m (18 ft), was lost after the pavilion was dismantled. In the same year Miró produced a poster with a powerful message in French: Aidez l'Espagne (Help Spain). | [
"The Reaper",
"Montroig del Camp",
"Picasso",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Guernica",
"Académie de la Grande Chaumiere",
"Paris International Exhibition of 1937"
] |
|
14752_T | Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo) | Focus on Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo) and analyze the abstract. | The Madonna of the Rosary is an altarpiece painted in oil by Italian artist Carlo Maratta, located in the Oratory of San Cita for which it was painted, in Palermo, region of Sicily, Italy. | [
"oil",
"Carlo Maratta",
"Italy",
"Italian",
"Palermo",
"Oratory of San Cita"
] |
|
14752_NT | Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | The Madonna of the Rosary is an altarpiece painted in oil by Italian artist Carlo Maratta, located in the Oratory of San Cita for which it was painted, in Palermo, region of Sicily, Italy. | [
"oil",
"Carlo Maratta",
"Italy",
"Italian",
"Palermo",
"Oratory of San Cita"
] |
|
14753_T | Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo) | In Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo), how is the Description discussed? | The altarpiece depicts a somewhat aloof Madonna, dressed in a bright blue robe, sits on a gilded chair, with the child Jesus each dropping rosaries to their intermediaries: the Dominican saints Dominic (founder of order) and Catherine of Siena. Dominic, with a tonsure and nearest to the Virgin, passes on the rosary to the people. Catherine, holding a Lily and an early follower of Dominic, also stands and receives the rosary from a child Jesus. Both Dominic and Catherine claimed to have had visions of the Madonna and Jesus.
In the middle, below Jesus is another Dominican nun, holding roses to her chest and conversing with a young woman; this likely represents St Rose of Lima, but could be misinterpreted as Santa Rosalia. Rosalia, one of the female patron saints of Palermo, lived in paleochristian era, hence never a Dominican nun. To the right of Catherine, with a gilded sun on his chest, is Thomas Aquinas, one of the Doctors of the church and also a Dominican friar.
The confraternity of the oratory for which the painting was made, had split off from the confraternity of the Rosary of San Domenico, both affiliated with the Dominican order, which was powerful in Spain at the time. Maratta, then in Rome, was paid the princely sum of 1500 scudi for the painting. An etched mirror copy of this painting by the Flemish artist Robert van Audenaerde (1663–1743) is owned by the National Gallery of Scotland, where it is described as Madonna of the Rosary with Saints Thomas Aquinas, Rosalia, Catherine of Siena, Dominic and Oliva. | [
"Rose of Lima",
"National Gallery of Scotland",
"Robert van Audenaerde",
"Dominican",
"Dominican order",
"Dominic",
"Santa Rosalia",
"Palermo",
"Thomas Aquinas",
"Catherine of Siena"
] |
|
14753_NT | Madonna of the Rosary (Maratta, Palermo) | In this artwork, how is the Description discussed? | The altarpiece depicts a somewhat aloof Madonna, dressed in a bright blue robe, sits on a gilded chair, with the child Jesus each dropping rosaries to their intermediaries: the Dominican saints Dominic (founder of order) and Catherine of Siena. Dominic, with a tonsure and nearest to the Virgin, passes on the rosary to the people. Catherine, holding a Lily and an early follower of Dominic, also stands and receives the rosary from a child Jesus. Both Dominic and Catherine claimed to have had visions of the Madonna and Jesus.
In the middle, below Jesus is another Dominican nun, holding roses to her chest and conversing with a young woman; this likely represents St Rose of Lima, but could be misinterpreted as Santa Rosalia. Rosalia, one of the female patron saints of Palermo, lived in paleochristian era, hence never a Dominican nun. To the right of Catherine, with a gilded sun on his chest, is Thomas Aquinas, one of the Doctors of the church and also a Dominican friar.
The confraternity of the oratory for which the painting was made, had split off from the confraternity of the Rosary of San Domenico, both affiliated with the Dominican order, which was powerful in Spain at the time. Maratta, then in Rome, was paid the princely sum of 1500 scudi for the painting. An etched mirror copy of this painting by the Flemish artist Robert van Audenaerde (1663–1743) is owned by the National Gallery of Scotland, where it is described as Madonna of the Rosary with Saints Thomas Aquinas, Rosalia, Catherine of Siena, Dominic and Oliva. | [
"Rose of Lima",
"National Gallery of Scotland",
"Robert van Audenaerde",
"Dominican",
"Dominican order",
"Dominic",
"Santa Rosalia",
"Palermo",
"Thomas Aquinas",
"Catherine of Siena"
] |
|
14754_T | Madonna and Child (Bellini, Pavia) | Focus on Madonna and Child (Bellini, Pavia) and explore the abstract. | The Madonna and Child is a tempera-on-panel painting usually attributed to the Italian Renaissance artist Giovanni Bellini, dated to 1450–1460 or to 1450–1455 by Pignatti, though Olivari and others consider this to be too early. In the 1450s the painter was still heavily influenced by his father Jacopo and by Bartolomeo Vivarini. The strong line used for the Christ Child also shows the influence of Francesco Squarcione and his studio on the young Bellini. The general composition is based on a widely copied Byzantine icon in Venice, whilst the Christ Child holds a Flemish-style scroll bearing the artist's signature. The painting is closely linked to a similar work now in Philadelphia. It is now in the Pinacoteca Malaspina in Pavia. | [
"tempera",
"Francesco Squarcione",
"Giovanni Bellini",
"Philadelphia",
"Flemish-style",
"Pinacoteca Malaspina",
"Bartolomeo Vivarini",
"Jacopo",
"Pavia",
"Italian Renaissance"
] |
|
14754_NT | Madonna and Child (Bellini, Pavia) | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | The Madonna and Child is a tempera-on-panel painting usually attributed to the Italian Renaissance artist Giovanni Bellini, dated to 1450–1460 or to 1450–1455 by Pignatti, though Olivari and others consider this to be too early. In the 1450s the painter was still heavily influenced by his father Jacopo and by Bartolomeo Vivarini. The strong line used for the Christ Child also shows the influence of Francesco Squarcione and his studio on the young Bellini. The general composition is based on a widely copied Byzantine icon in Venice, whilst the Christ Child holds a Flemish-style scroll bearing the artist's signature. The painting is closely linked to a similar work now in Philadelphia. It is now in the Pinacoteca Malaspina in Pavia. | [
"tempera",
"Francesco Squarcione",
"Giovanni Bellini",
"Philadelphia",
"Flemish-style",
"Pinacoteca Malaspina",
"Bartolomeo Vivarini",
"Jacopo",
"Pavia",
"Italian Renaissance"
] |
|
14755_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.). | Joan of Arc is a 1922 cast of Paul Dubois's 1889 statue of Joan of Arc, located at Meridian Hill Park in Washington, D.C., United States of America. Joan of Arc was originally surveyed as part of the Smithsonian's Save Outdoor Sculpture! survey in 1994. | [
"Paul Dubois",
"Washington, D.C.",
"statue of Joan of Arc",
"Meridian Hill Park",
"Smithsonian's",
"Joan of Arc",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!"
] |
|
14755_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | Joan of Arc is a 1922 cast of Paul Dubois's 1889 statue of Joan of Arc, located at Meridian Hill Park in Washington, D.C., United States of America. Joan of Arc was originally surveyed as part of the Smithsonian's Save Outdoor Sculpture! survey in 1994. | [
"Paul Dubois",
"Washington, D.C.",
"statue of Joan of Arc",
"Meridian Hill Park",
"Smithsonian's",
"Joan of Arc",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!"
] |
|
14756_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) and discuss the Description. | Joan of Arc is an equestrian statue, with Joan of Arc riding a trotting horse, resting upon a three-tiered granite base (H. 52 in. x W 11. ft.). Her body is twisted slightly, and her right arm is raised behind her. She is wearing a helmet with a raised visor and she looks skywards. In her left hand she holds the reins to her horse. The sword she originally held in her right hand was stolen in 1978, and not replaced until December 2011. The pedestal was designed by American artist H.L. Davis.The front of the base has the inscription:JEANNE D'ARC
LIBERATRICE1412–1431AUX FEMMES D'AMERIQUE
LES FEMMES DE FRANCEA NEW YORK
LE 6 January 1922 | [
"granite",
"equestrian statue",
"fr",
"left",
"Joan of Arc"
] |
|
14756_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Description. | Joan of Arc is an equestrian statue, with Joan of Arc riding a trotting horse, resting upon a three-tiered granite base (H. 52 in. x W 11. ft.). Her body is twisted slightly, and her right arm is raised behind her. She is wearing a helmet with a raised visor and she looks skywards. In her left hand she holds the reins to her horse. The sword she originally held in her right hand was stolen in 1978, and not replaced until December 2011. The pedestal was designed by American artist H.L. Davis.The front of the base has the inscription:JEANNE D'ARC
LIBERATRICE1412–1431AUX FEMMES D'AMERIQUE
LES FEMMES DE FRANCEA NEW YORK
LE 6 January 1922 | [
"granite",
"equestrian statue",
"fr",
"left",
"Joan of Arc"
] |
|
14757_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | How does Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) elucidate its Location? | In 1921 the United States Commission of Fine Arts suggested that the sculpture be placed at the terrace of Meridian Hill Park. | [
"United States Commission of Fine Arts",
"Meridian Hill Park"
] |
|
14757_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | How does this artwork elucidate its Location? | In 1921 the United States Commission of Fine Arts suggested that the sculpture be placed at the terrace of Meridian Hill Park. | [
"United States Commission of Fine Arts",
"Meridian Hill Park"
] |
|
14758_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) and analyze the Acquisition. | The piece was first proposed in May 1916 by Mme Polifème to the Commission of Fine Arts in order to celebrate the friendship between France and the United States. During its creation, DuBois worked closely with the French Minister of Education and Fine Arts in producing a credible representation of the peasant girl.The statue was completed in 1922 in Paris; the original (fr) was cast in three copies, currently located respectively in Reims (1890), Paris (1895) and Strasbourg (1897). The replica in Washington was donated by Le Lyceum Société des Femmes de France to the women of the United States of America. | [
"fr",
"Strasbourg",
"Reims",
"Polifème",
"Paris"
] |
|
14758_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Acquisition. | The piece was first proposed in May 1916 by Mme Polifème to the Commission of Fine Arts in order to celebrate the friendship between France and the United States. During its creation, DuBois worked closely with the French Minister of Education and Fine Arts in producing a credible representation of the peasant girl.The statue was completed in 1922 in Paris; the original (fr) was cast in three copies, currently located respectively in Reims (1890), Paris (1895) and Strasbourg (1897). The replica in Washington was donated by Le Lyceum Société des Femmes de France to the women of the United States of America. | [
"fr",
"Strasbourg",
"Reims",
"Polifème",
"Paris"
] |
|
14759_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | In Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.), how is the Dedication discussed? | On 6 January 1923 when the piece was dedicated, President Warren G. Harding and the French Ambassador were the guests of honor. Mrs. Harding and Mme Jusserand, who represented France, also attended. | [
"President Warren G. Harding",
"Mrs. Harding",
"Warren G. Harding"
] |
|
14759_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | In this artwork, how is the Dedication discussed? | On 6 January 1923 when the piece was dedicated, President Warren G. Harding and the French Ambassador were the guests of honor. Mrs. Harding and Mme Jusserand, who represented France, also attended. | [
"President Warren G. Harding",
"Mrs. Harding",
"Warren G. Harding"
] |
|
14760_T | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) and explore the Information. | It is the only equestrian statue of a woman in Washington, D.C.On the 500th anniversary of Joan's martyrdom, Paul Claudel, Ambassador of France, held a tribute to the Saint. | [
"Paul Claudel",
"Washington, D.C.",
"martyrdom",
"equestrian statue"
] |
|
14760_NT | Equestrian statue of Joan of Arc (Washington, D.C.) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Information. | It is the only equestrian statue of a woman in Washington, D.C.On the 500th anniversary of Joan's martyrdom, Paul Claudel, Ambassador of France, held a tribute to the Saint. | [
"Paul Claudel",
"Washington, D.C.",
"martyrdom",
"equestrian statue"
] |
|
14761_T | The Big Picture (painting) | Focus on The Big Picture (painting) and explain the abstract. | The Opening of the First Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia by H.R.H. The Duke of Cornwall and York (later H.M. King George V), May 9, 1901, more commonly known in Australia as The Big Picture, is a 1903 painting by the Australian artist Tom Roberts. The painting, measuring 304.5 by 509.2 centimetres (119.9 in × 200.5 in), or roughly 10 by 17 feet, depicts the opening of the first Parliament of Australia at the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne on 9 May 1901.
The painting is part of the Royal Collection but has been on permanent loan to the Parliament of Australia since 1957. The work, currently on display in Parliament House, Canberra, has been described by Andrew Mackenzie as "...undoubtedly the principal work of art recording Australia's Parliamentary History." | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Parliament House",
"Australia",
"Melbourne",
"1903",
"Tom Roberts",
"Duke of Cornwall and York",
"Royal Collection",
"Parliament House, Canberra",
"Parliament of Australia",
"Canberra"
] |
|
14761_NT | The Big Picture (painting) | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | The Opening of the First Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia by H.R.H. The Duke of Cornwall and York (later H.M. King George V), May 9, 1901, more commonly known in Australia as The Big Picture, is a 1903 painting by the Australian artist Tom Roberts. The painting, measuring 304.5 by 509.2 centimetres (119.9 in × 200.5 in), or roughly 10 by 17 feet, depicts the opening of the first Parliament of Australia at the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne on 9 May 1901.
The painting is part of the Royal Collection but has been on permanent loan to the Parliament of Australia since 1957. The work, currently on display in Parliament House, Canberra, has been described by Andrew Mackenzie as "...undoubtedly the principal work of art recording Australia's Parliamentary History." | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Parliament House",
"Australia",
"Melbourne",
"1903",
"Tom Roberts",
"Duke of Cornwall and York",
"Royal Collection",
"Parliament House, Canberra",
"Parliament of Australia",
"Canberra"
] |
|
14762_T | The Big Picture (painting) | Explore the Background of this artwork, The Big Picture (painting). | On 31 July 1900, after decades of debates and negotiations, the colonies on the Australian continent formed a federation. While the new Constitution of Australia called for a new capital to be constructed, away from the major cities, Melbourne was chosen to act as the temporary seat of government. Elections were held for the first Parliament of Australia and on 9 May 1901, the new parliament was sworn in at the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne.The opening of the new parliament was seen as a historic and momentous occasion with King Edward VII's son, the Duke of Cornwall and York (later George V) coming to Australia to officially open the new parliament on behalf of the King. To appropriately capture the occasion, the "Australian Art Association", a consortium of private benefactors, sought to commission a painting of the event as a "gift to the nation". Their motives were not entirely altruistic; the consortium hoped to profit by selling prints. Roberts was not the consortium's first choice, with J. C. Waite initially preferred. | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Australia",
"Constitution of Australia",
"King Edward VII",
"Melbourne",
"J. C. Waite",
"Duke of Cornwall and York",
"federation",
"Parliament of Australia"
] |
|
14762_NT | The Big Picture (painting) | Explore the Background of this artwork. | On 31 July 1900, after decades of debates and negotiations, the colonies on the Australian continent formed a federation. While the new Constitution of Australia called for a new capital to be constructed, away from the major cities, Melbourne was chosen to act as the temporary seat of government. Elections were held for the first Parliament of Australia and on 9 May 1901, the new parliament was sworn in at the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne.The opening of the new parliament was seen as a historic and momentous occasion with King Edward VII's son, the Duke of Cornwall and York (later George V) coming to Australia to officially open the new parliament on behalf of the King. To appropriately capture the occasion, the "Australian Art Association", a consortium of private benefactors, sought to commission a painting of the event as a "gift to the nation". Their motives were not entirely altruistic; the consortium hoped to profit by selling prints. Roberts was not the consortium's first choice, with J. C. Waite initially preferred. | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Australia",
"Constitution of Australia",
"King Edward VII",
"Melbourne",
"J. C. Waite",
"Duke of Cornwall and York",
"federation",
"Parliament of Australia"
] |
|
14763_T | The Big Picture (painting) | Focus on The Big Picture (painting) and discuss the Composition. | Although not commissioned on the day of the opening, Roberts had received an approach from the consortium and so attended the ceremony to take photographs and sketches. Two weeks after the event, after the consortium were turned down by Waite, Roberts was formally commissioned to produce the painting. The contract initially was for 650 guineas but this was increased to 1000 guineas when the scope of the work was realised. Roberts was also paid one guinea for each subject's sketch plus expenses; in all he received over 2000 guineas for the work, the equivalent of some AUS$323,000 in 2020. The contract required Roberts to include at least 250 recognisable likenesses in the finished work, including the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York, the Governor General, each State Governor, Members of the new Commonwealth Parliament and other distinguished guests.
When the great day came your mother and I went to the hall of the Exhibition Building, and without getting seats, walked quietly at the very back, and climbing up some rails, I was able to see that immense gathering of people from Australia, and from so many parts of the world. It was very solemn and great. The heads on the floor looked like a landscape.
Roberts started to work on the painting in a room provided at the Royal Exhibition Building. He was supported by Carl Pinschof, who worked as a kind of secretary to Roberts in order to help him. The painting was made in three flax panels to enable it to be folded for transportation. He travelled to Sydney and many other places to make sketches of the attendees as well as working from photographs. He asked his subjects for "measurements" to ensure accuracy—age, height, weight, hat size and even place of birth. In all, the picture included 269 separate portraits. Rumours spread that Roberts was paid by some of these dignitaries to ensure they were placed in a more prominent location.Most of the delegates at the ceremony wore black, still observing a period of mourning after the recent death of Queen Victoria. To balance this Roberts gave some emphasis to the choir, who were dressed in white. A shaft of light focused on the Duke reading the King's proclamation also provides some colour; this phenomenon was remarked upon by contemporary newspaper reports. Artistic licence was taken with the dais shown as much higher that it actually was and some other architectural features of the building either downplayed or ignored. Roberts also honoured the "Father of Federation", Henry Parkes, who had died five years previous. He added a portrait of Parkes in the form of a painting above the dais, this painting was not there on the day.Roberts took the painting to London—where many of the attendees lived—to complete, using the South African Room of the Imperial Institute as his workspace. The painting was finished on 16 November 1903; in all, it took Roberts two and a half years to complete. It was then taken to Paris where photogravure reproductions were made for sale to the public, with Roberts signing 500 of them. Roberts did not sign the actual painting. | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Henry Parkes",
"Australia",
"hat size",
"1903",
"Imperial Institute",
"photogravure",
"Carl Pinschof",
"flax",
"Governor General",
"Queen Victoria",
"London",
"guineas"
] |
|
14763_NT | The Big Picture (painting) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Composition. | Although not commissioned on the day of the opening, Roberts had received an approach from the consortium and so attended the ceremony to take photographs and sketches. Two weeks after the event, after the consortium were turned down by Waite, Roberts was formally commissioned to produce the painting. The contract initially was for 650 guineas but this was increased to 1000 guineas when the scope of the work was realised. Roberts was also paid one guinea for each subject's sketch plus expenses; in all he received over 2000 guineas for the work, the equivalent of some AUS$323,000 in 2020. The contract required Roberts to include at least 250 recognisable likenesses in the finished work, including the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York, the Governor General, each State Governor, Members of the new Commonwealth Parliament and other distinguished guests.
When the great day came your mother and I went to the hall of the Exhibition Building, and without getting seats, walked quietly at the very back, and climbing up some rails, I was able to see that immense gathering of people from Australia, and from so many parts of the world. It was very solemn and great. The heads on the floor looked like a landscape.
Roberts started to work on the painting in a room provided at the Royal Exhibition Building. He was supported by Carl Pinschof, who worked as a kind of secretary to Roberts in order to help him. The painting was made in three flax panels to enable it to be folded for transportation. He travelled to Sydney and many other places to make sketches of the attendees as well as working from photographs. He asked his subjects for "measurements" to ensure accuracy—age, height, weight, hat size and even place of birth. In all, the picture included 269 separate portraits. Rumours spread that Roberts was paid by some of these dignitaries to ensure they were placed in a more prominent location.Most of the delegates at the ceremony wore black, still observing a period of mourning after the recent death of Queen Victoria. To balance this Roberts gave some emphasis to the choir, who were dressed in white. A shaft of light focused on the Duke reading the King's proclamation also provides some colour; this phenomenon was remarked upon by contemporary newspaper reports. Artistic licence was taken with the dais shown as much higher that it actually was and some other architectural features of the building either downplayed or ignored. Roberts also honoured the "Father of Federation", Henry Parkes, who had died five years previous. He added a portrait of Parkes in the form of a painting above the dais, this painting was not there on the day.Roberts took the painting to London—where many of the attendees lived—to complete, using the South African Room of the Imperial Institute as his workspace. The painting was finished on 16 November 1903; in all, it took Roberts two and a half years to complete. It was then taken to Paris where photogravure reproductions were made for sale to the public, with Roberts signing 500 of them. Roberts did not sign the actual painting. | [
"Royal Exhibition Building",
"Henry Parkes",
"Australia",
"hat size",
"1903",
"Imperial Institute",
"photogravure",
"Carl Pinschof",
"flax",
"Governor General",
"Queen Victoria",
"London",
"guineas"
] |
|
14764_T | The Family of Darius before Alexander | How does The Family of Darius before Alexander elucidate its Narrative? | In 333 BC Alexander defeated Darius III, the last king of the Achaemenid Empire, at the Battle of Issus. Darius escaped capture, but his wife Stateira I, his mother, Sisygambis, and his daughters Stateira II and Drypetis were taken by Alexander. Alexander displayed forgiveness in victory. According to Plutarch:
"[He] gave them leave to bury whom they pleased of the Persians, and to make use for this purpose what garments and furniture they thought fit out of the booty. He diminished nothing of their equipage, or of the attentions and respect formerly paid them, and allowed larger pensions for their maintenance than they had before. But the noblest and most royal part of their usage was, that he treated these illustrious prisoners according to their virtue and character."Although Darius's wife was renowned for her beauty, "Alexander, esteeming it more kingly to govern himself than to conquer his enemies, sought no intimacy with any of them." The painting focuses on a misunderstanding involving Sisygambis, Darius's mother, which was not mentioned by Plutarch, but was recounted by several late Classical writers, among them Arrian, Valerius Maximus and Quintus Curtius Rufus. According to Quintus Curtius's History of Alexander the Great, Alexander went to the women's tent accompanied only by Hephaestion, counselor to the king and his intimate friend since the two had been children. Sisygambis mistook the taller Hephaestion for Alexander, and knelt before him to plead for mercy. When her error was realized, Alexander magnanimously said that Hephaestion, too, was Alexander; this assuaged Sisygambis's embarrassment over her confusion, and served as a compliment to his friend. | [
"Stateira II",
"Achaemenid Empire",
"Arrian",
"Alexander the Great",
"Sisygambis",
"Battle of Issus",
"Plutarch",
"Drypetis",
"Stateira I",
"Quintus Curtius Rufus",
"Valerius Maximus",
"Hephaestion",
"Darius III",
"Persian"
] |
|
14764_NT | The Family of Darius before Alexander | How does this artwork elucidate its Narrative? | In 333 BC Alexander defeated Darius III, the last king of the Achaemenid Empire, at the Battle of Issus. Darius escaped capture, but his wife Stateira I, his mother, Sisygambis, and his daughters Stateira II and Drypetis were taken by Alexander. Alexander displayed forgiveness in victory. According to Plutarch:
"[He] gave them leave to bury whom they pleased of the Persians, and to make use for this purpose what garments and furniture they thought fit out of the booty. He diminished nothing of their equipage, or of the attentions and respect formerly paid them, and allowed larger pensions for their maintenance than they had before. But the noblest and most royal part of their usage was, that he treated these illustrious prisoners according to their virtue and character."Although Darius's wife was renowned for her beauty, "Alexander, esteeming it more kingly to govern himself than to conquer his enemies, sought no intimacy with any of them." The painting focuses on a misunderstanding involving Sisygambis, Darius's mother, which was not mentioned by Plutarch, but was recounted by several late Classical writers, among them Arrian, Valerius Maximus and Quintus Curtius Rufus. According to Quintus Curtius's History of Alexander the Great, Alexander went to the women's tent accompanied only by Hephaestion, counselor to the king and his intimate friend since the two had been children. Sisygambis mistook the taller Hephaestion for Alexander, and knelt before him to plead for mercy. When her error was realized, Alexander magnanimously said that Hephaestion, too, was Alexander; this assuaged Sisygambis's embarrassment over her confusion, and served as a compliment to his friend. | [
"Stateira II",
"Achaemenid Empire",
"Arrian",
"Alexander the Great",
"Sisygambis",
"Battle of Issus",
"Plutarch",
"Drypetis",
"Stateira I",
"Quintus Curtius Rufus",
"Valerius Maximus",
"Hephaestion",
"Darius III",
"Persian"
] |
|
14765_T | The Family of Darius before Alexander | Focus on The Family of Darius before Alexander and analyze the Painting. | The composition preserves this ambiguity, and reflects the confusion of Sisygambis. Generally the scholarship is in agreement that Alexander is the young man in red, who gestures as if in the act of speaking while referring to Hephaestion at his left, though some historians dispute that interpretation and reverse the two figures' identities. The continued uncertainty as to their correct identification is taken as evidence of Veronese's "pictorial intelligence".
While honoring the spirit of the story, Veronese took liberties with his interpretation of the narrative, which in the painting occurs in a palatial hall, not a tent. The splendid wardrobe is that of the Venice in which Veronese lived, rather than ancient Greece or the Far East. It has long been supposed that Veronese inserted portraits of his contemporaries into the painting, as was customary in Venetian history painting. While it has been suggested that the figures were modeled after members of the Pisani family, for whose estate the picture was made, it has alternatively been proposed that the kneeling girls are Veronese's daughters, and the courtier who presents them is the artist's self-portrait. Another interpretation has Veronese appearing in the form of the man standing behind Alexander, while it has been suggested that it is the patron, Francesco Pisani, who presents the family to Alexander. Recently art historian Nicholas Penny has written that the painting's characterizations of cultivated nobility were based on no particular models, and were products of the artist's imagination.The picture's theatrical design places the most prominent figures in a shallow foreground stage. Immediately behind them are a diverting company of pages, halberdiers, dwarfs, dogs and monkeys, and in the further distance looms an architectural screen, an arched promenade parallel to the picture plane and supporting more spectators. These are pictorial preferences typical of Veronese, with the placement of figures and edifices reinforcing a processional character. The curves of the distant arches echo the movement of the supplicant figures in the foreground, while the gesture of Sisygambis corresponds to and is reinforced by the verticals of the central fountain; the architectural geometry organizes the movement of the figures.Analysis of the canvas has shown that it was a type favored by Veronese, with an arrangement of threads creating a diagonal twill pattern. While he often preferred to paint on lightly colored grounds, for The Family of Darius before Alexander, as with many of his larger paintings, Veronese prepared the canvas only with plain gesso. Though he routinely made numerous preparatory sketches, Veronese made major revisions while working on The Family of Darius before Alexander, including painting out a balcony with figures directly behind the main group, and adding lightly sketched horses and figures to the left background, perhaps as an afterthought. | [
"Pisani family",
"Sisygambis",
"Francesco Pisani",
"left",
"Hephaestion",
"halberd",
"Nicholas Penny"
] |
|
14765_NT | The Family of Darius before Alexander | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Painting. | The composition preserves this ambiguity, and reflects the confusion of Sisygambis. Generally the scholarship is in agreement that Alexander is the young man in red, who gestures as if in the act of speaking while referring to Hephaestion at his left, though some historians dispute that interpretation and reverse the two figures' identities. The continued uncertainty as to their correct identification is taken as evidence of Veronese's "pictorial intelligence".
While honoring the spirit of the story, Veronese took liberties with his interpretation of the narrative, which in the painting occurs in a palatial hall, not a tent. The splendid wardrobe is that of the Venice in which Veronese lived, rather than ancient Greece or the Far East. It has long been supposed that Veronese inserted portraits of his contemporaries into the painting, as was customary in Venetian history painting. While it has been suggested that the figures were modeled after members of the Pisani family, for whose estate the picture was made, it has alternatively been proposed that the kneeling girls are Veronese's daughters, and the courtier who presents them is the artist's self-portrait. Another interpretation has Veronese appearing in the form of the man standing behind Alexander, while it has been suggested that it is the patron, Francesco Pisani, who presents the family to Alexander. Recently art historian Nicholas Penny has written that the painting's characterizations of cultivated nobility were based on no particular models, and were products of the artist's imagination.The picture's theatrical design places the most prominent figures in a shallow foreground stage. Immediately behind them are a diverting company of pages, halberdiers, dwarfs, dogs and monkeys, and in the further distance looms an architectural screen, an arched promenade parallel to the picture plane and supporting more spectators. These are pictorial preferences typical of Veronese, with the placement of figures and edifices reinforcing a processional character. The curves of the distant arches echo the movement of the supplicant figures in the foreground, while the gesture of Sisygambis corresponds to and is reinforced by the verticals of the central fountain; the architectural geometry organizes the movement of the figures.Analysis of the canvas has shown that it was a type favored by Veronese, with an arrangement of threads creating a diagonal twill pattern. While he often preferred to paint on lightly colored grounds, for The Family of Darius before Alexander, as with many of his larger paintings, Veronese prepared the canvas only with plain gesso. Though he routinely made numerous preparatory sketches, Veronese made major revisions while working on The Family of Darius before Alexander, including painting out a balcony with figures directly behind the main group, and adding lightly sketched horses and figures to the left background, perhaps as an afterthought. | [
"Pisani family",
"Sisygambis",
"Francesco Pisani",
"left",
"Hephaestion",
"halberd",
"Nicholas Penny"
] |
|
14766_T | The Family of Darius before Alexander | In The Family of Darius before Alexander, how is the Provenance and assessment discussed? | The Family of Darius before Alexander was the only painting mentioned by Goethe in the account of his 1786 visit to Venice. He admired the painting during his stay at the Palazzo Pisani Moretta, and repeated the legend that the picture was painted by Veronese in gratitude for the Pisanis' hospitality. Supposedly the enormous canvas was painted at the villa in secret, and rolled up and left under a bed when the artist departed; the account has since been regarded as fanciful.According to recent scholarship, the painting was first owned by Francesco Pisani, and housed at the Villa Pisani in Montagnana, a building designed by Palladio. The canvas was probably moved to Venice after 1629, when the Pisani family purchased a palace on the Grand Canal. It was so esteemed that in 1664 agents of Christina, Queen of Sweden attempted to negotiate its purchase with the Venetian ambassador to Rome. The asking price of 5,000 ducats was considered excessive, and effectively discouraged all prospective buyers. As a result, copies of the painting were in demand, one of which was valued by its owner at 80 ducats.Charles Lock Eastlake, the director of the National Gallery, examined the painting in Venice on October 14, 1856. At a time when the British Empire would have found the painting's idealizations reflective of its presumptions, and after four years of negotiations, the museum bought the painting for 13,650 pounds. The price was thought exorbitant, and in July 1857 the purchase was debated in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, when Lord Elcho attacked the painting as a "second- rate specimen".John Ruskin called it "the most precious Paul Veronese in the world". Henry James wrote in 1882:You may walk out of the noon-day dusk of Trafalgar Square in November, and in one of the chambers of the National Gallery see the family of Darius rustling and pleading and weeping at the feet of Alexander. Alexander is a beautiful young Venetian in crimson pantaloons, and the picture sends a glow into the cold London twilight. | [
"Henry James",
"Pisani family",
"Villa Pisani",
"Grand Canal",
"Goethe",
"Palladio",
"Christina, Queen of Sweden",
"Lord Elcho",
"Francesco Pisani",
"John Ruskin",
"left",
"National Gallery",
"Palazzo Pisani Moretta",
"House of Commons of the United Kingdom",
"London",
"Charles Lock Eastlake"
] |
|
14766_NT | The Family of Darius before Alexander | In this artwork, how is the Provenance and assessment discussed? | The Family of Darius before Alexander was the only painting mentioned by Goethe in the account of his 1786 visit to Venice. He admired the painting during his stay at the Palazzo Pisani Moretta, and repeated the legend that the picture was painted by Veronese in gratitude for the Pisanis' hospitality. Supposedly the enormous canvas was painted at the villa in secret, and rolled up and left under a bed when the artist departed; the account has since been regarded as fanciful.According to recent scholarship, the painting was first owned by Francesco Pisani, and housed at the Villa Pisani in Montagnana, a building designed by Palladio. The canvas was probably moved to Venice after 1629, when the Pisani family purchased a palace on the Grand Canal. It was so esteemed that in 1664 agents of Christina, Queen of Sweden attempted to negotiate its purchase with the Venetian ambassador to Rome. The asking price of 5,000 ducats was considered excessive, and effectively discouraged all prospective buyers. As a result, copies of the painting were in demand, one of which was valued by its owner at 80 ducats.Charles Lock Eastlake, the director of the National Gallery, examined the painting in Venice on October 14, 1856. At a time when the British Empire would have found the painting's idealizations reflective of its presumptions, and after four years of negotiations, the museum bought the painting for 13,650 pounds. The price was thought exorbitant, and in July 1857 the purchase was debated in the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, when Lord Elcho attacked the painting as a "second- rate specimen".John Ruskin called it "the most precious Paul Veronese in the world". Henry James wrote in 1882:You may walk out of the noon-day dusk of Trafalgar Square in November, and in one of the chambers of the National Gallery see the family of Darius rustling and pleading and weeping at the feet of Alexander. Alexander is a beautiful young Venetian in crimson pantaloons, and the picture sends a glow into the cold London twilight. | [
"Henry James",
"Pisani family",
"Villa Pisani",
"Grand Canal",
"Goethe",
"Palladio",
"Christina, Queen of Sweden",
"Lord Elcho",
"Francesco Pisani",
"John Ruskin",
"left",
"National Gallery",
"Palazzo Pisani Moretta",
"House of Commons of the United Kingdom",
"London",
"Charles Lock Eastlake"
] |
|
14767_T | The Defence of Cádiz Against the English | Focus on The Defence of Cádiz Against the English and explore the abstract. | The Defence of Cádiz (full title: The Defence of Cádiz Against the English or The Hostile Landing of the English near Cádiz in 1625 Under the Command of the Earl of Leicester) is an painting in oils on canvas by Francisco de Zurbarán, now in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.
It shows the Spanish preparing their defences just before the arrival of Edward Cecil's Cádiz expedition of 1625. In the left foreground is the city's governor Fernando Girón giving orders to his subordinates, including the deputy field commander Diego Ruiz. In the background are the English troops landing in front of the El Puntal fort in the Bay of Cádiz.
Initially attributed to Eugenio Caxés, it is now known to have been painted by Zurbarán as part of a decorative scheme for the Hall of Realms at the Buen Retiro Palace in Madrid which also included Velázquez's The Surrender of Breda and Maino's The Recovery of Bahía de Todos los Santos. Zurbarán also produced ten paintings of the Labours of Hercules for the Hall of Realms; these are also now in the Prado. | [
"Labours of Hercules",
"Maino",
"The Recovery of Bahía de Todos los Santos",
"Edward Cecil",
"Fernando Girón",
"Museo del Prado",
"The Surrender of Breda",
"Velázquez",
"Buen Retiro Palace",
"Eugenio Caxés",
"Cádiz expedition",
"Francisco de Zurbarán",
"Hall of Realms"
] |
|
14767_NT | The Defence of Cádiz Against the English | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | The Defence of Cádiz (full title: The Defence of Cádiz Against the English or The Hostile Landing of the English near Cádiz in 1625 Under the Command of the Earl of Leicester) is an painting in oils on canvas by Francisco de Zurbarán, now in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.
It shows the Spanish preparing their defences just before the arrival of Edward Cecil's Cádiz expedition of 1625. In the left foreground is the city's governor Fernando Girón giving orders to his subordinates, including the deputy field commander Diego Ruiz. In the background are the English troops landing in front of the El Puntal fort in the Bay of Cádiz.
Initially attributed to Eugenio Caxés, it is now known to have been painted by Zurbarán as part of a decorative scheme for the Hall of Realms at the Buen Retiro Palace in Madrid which also included Velázquez's The Surrender of Breda and Maino's The Recovery of Bahía de Todos los Santos. Zurbarán also produced ten paintings of the Labours of Hercules for the Hall of Realms; these are also now in the Prado. | [
"Labours of Hercules",
"Maino",
"The Recovery of Bahía de Todos los Santos",
"Edward Cecil",
"Fernando Girón",
"Museo del Prado",
"The Surrender of Breda",
"Velázquez",
"Buen Retiro Palace",
"Eugenio Caxés",
"Cádiz expedition",
"Francisco de Zurbarán",
"Hall of Realms"
] |
|
14768_T | Madras Rouge | Focus on Madras Rouge and explain the abstract. | Madras Rouge (The Red Madras Headdress) is a painting by Henri Matisse from 1907. The woman depicted is the painter's wife, Amélie Noellie Parayre Matisse.
The painting was illustrated in Gelett Burgess, "The Wild Men of Paris", The Architectural Record, May 1910, New York. | [
"Henri Matisse",
"Gelett Burgess"
] |
|
14768_NT | Madras Rouge | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Madras Rouge (The Red Madras Headdress) is a painting by Henri Matisse from 1907. The woman depicted is the painter's wife, Amélie Noellie Parayre Matisse.
The painting was illustrated in Gelett Burgess, "The Wild Men of Paris", The Architectural Record, May 1910, New York. | [
"Henri Matisse",
"Gelett Burgess"
] |
|
14769_T | The Harlequin's Carnival | Explore the abstract of this artwork, The Harlequin's Carnival. | The Harlequin's Carnival (Spanish: Carnaval de Arlequín) is an oil painting painted by Joan Miró between 1924 and 1925. It is one of the most outstanding surrealist paintings of the artist, and it is preserved in the Albright–Knox Art Gallery in Buffalo, New York.Created between 1924 and 1925, Harlequin’s Carnival is one of Joan Miró's best-known pieces. Harlequin is the name of a well-known Italian comic theater character that is generally identified by his checkered costume. The ‘carnival’ in the title of the painting may refer to Mardi Gras, the celebration that occurs before the fasting of Lent begins.
In 1924, poet André Breton formed the Surrealist movement. Around the time of the group's formation, Miró started to paint in the surrealist style. Surrealism focused on dreams and the subconscious as artistic material, and Miró was able to draw from these ideas. He painted the subconscious, but also his own life experiences and memories. To combine these two sources he draws on his imagination to create magical elements in his paintings. This can even be seen in his early work, for instance in his 1922 detailist painting The Farm. | [
"André Breton",
"Buffalo, New York",
"surrealist",
"Surrealism",
"The Farm",
"Joan Miró",
"Albright–Knox Art Gallery",
"oil painting",
"Mardi Gras",
"Harlequin"
] |
|
14769_NT | The Harlequin's Carnival | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | The Harlequin's Carnival (Spanish: Carnaval de Arlequín) is an oil painting painted by Joan Miró between 1924 and 1925. It is one of the most outstanding surrealist paintings of the artist, and it is preserved in the Albright–Knox Art Gallery in Buffalo, New York.Created between 1924 and 1925, Harlequin’s Carnival is one of Joan Miró's best-known pieces. Harlequin is the name of a well-known Italian comic theater character that is generally identified by his checkered costume. The ‘carnival’ in the title of the painting may refer to Mardi Gras, the celebration that occurs before the fasting of Lent begins.
In 1924, poet André Breton formed the Surrealist movement. Around the time of the group's formation, Miró started to paint in the surrealist style. Surrealism focused on dreams and the subconscious as artistic material, and Miró was able to draw from these ideas. He painted the subconscious, but also his own life experiences and memories. To combine these two sources he draws on his imagination to create magical elements in his paintings. This can even be seen in his early work, for instance in his 1922 detailist painting The Farm. | [
"André Breton",
"Buffalo, New York",
"surrealist",
"Surrealism",
"The Farm",
"Joan Miró",
"Albright–Knox Art Gallery",
"oil painting",
"Mardi Gras",
"Harlequin"
] |
|
14770_T | The Harlequin's Carnival | Focus on The Harlequin's Carnival and discuss the Description. | This specific painting is centered on a harlequin at a carnival. Although the harlequin resembles a guitar, he still retains some of his harlequin characteristics such as a checkered costume, a mustache, an admiral's hat, and a pipe. The harlequin in this painting is sad, which could be due to the hole in his stomach. This detail may refer to Miró's personal life experiences because at this point in his life he did not have much money for food and was on the brink of starvation. This is a painting of a celebration; all the characters seem to be happy due to the fact they are playing, singing, and dancing. Some of the objects in the painting are anthropomorphized, and some seem to be moving and dancing as well. One example is the ladder to the left of the painting, which has an ear and an eye (Albright-Knox Art Gallery). According to Miró, the ladder is a symbol of flight, evasion, and elevation. The green sphere to the right of the painting represents the globe because Miró, according to him, was obsessed with the idea of “conquering the world” (Albright-Knox Art Gallery). The cat in the bottom right of the painting represents Miró's actual cat, who was always next to him as he painted. The black triangle in the window in the top right corner represents the Eiffel Tower. The painting includes many other fantastical and magical elements such as mermaids, fish out of water, dancing cats, shooting stars, a creature with wings in a box resembling a die, floating musical notes, and a floating hand. There are many strange forms and squiggly shapes that seem to be moving or floating around the canvas.
In the international peer-reviewed journal JAMA Psychiatry, James C. Harris, MD, writes that for Miró, “painting was a means to express his inner life through visionary art” (p 226). This is a reference to Miró's style of painting, automatism, essentially painting without planning the subject or composition. In this process the artist paints whatever comes to mind, thereby painting his subconscious thoughts. Once the shapes are on the canvas, the artist is able to create images out of the forms based on his imagination. In 1931, Miró said, “I’m only interested in anonymous art, the kind that springs from the collective unconscious” (JAMA Psychiatry). | [
"JAMA Psychiatry"
] |
|
14770_NT | The Harlequin's Carnival | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Description. | This specific painting is centered on a harlequin at a carnival. Although the harlequin resembles a guitar, he still retains some of his harlequin characteristics such as a checkered costume, a mustache, an admiral's hat, and a pipe. The harlequin in this painting is sad, which could be due to the hole in his stomach. This detail may refer to Miró's personal life experiences because at this point in his life he did not have much money for food and was on the brink of starvation. This is a painting of a celebration; all the characters seem to be happy due to the fact they are playing, singing, and dancing. Some of the objects in the painting are anthropomorphized, and some seem to be moving and dancing as well. One example is the ladder to the left of the painting, which has an ear and an eye (Albright-Knox Art Gallery). According to Miró, the ladder is a symbol of flight, evasion, and elevation. The green sphere to the right of the painting represents the globe because Miró, according to him, was obsessed with the idea of “conquering the world” (Albright-Knox Art Gallery). The cat in the bottom right of the painting represents Miró's actual cat, who was always next to him as he painted. The black triangle in the window in the top right corner represents the Eiffel Tower. The painting includes many other fantastical and magical elements such as mermaids, fish out of water, dancing cats, shooting stars, a creature with wings in a box resembling a die, floating musical notes, and a floating hand. There are many strange forms and squiggly shapes that seem to be moving or floating around the canvas.
In the international peer-reviewed journal JAMA Psychiatry, James C. Harris, MD, writes that for Miró, “painting was a means to express his inner life through visionary art” (p 226). This is a reference to Miró's style of painting, automatism, essentially painting without planning the subject or composition. In this process the artist paints whatever comes to mind, thereby painting his subconscious thoughts. Once the shapes are on the canvas, the artist is able to create images out of the forms based on his imagination. In 1931, Miró said, “I’m only interested in anonymous art, the kind that springs from the collective unconscious” (JAMA Psychiatry). | [
"JAMA Psychiatry"
] |
|
14771_T | Bust of Charlemagne | How does Bust of Charlemagne elucidate its abstract? | The Bust of Charlemagne (de: Karlsbüste) is a reliquary from around 1350 which contains the top part of Charlemagne's skull. The reliquary is part of the treasure kept in the Aachen Cathedral Treasury. Made in the Mosan region (the valley of the River Meuse), long a centre of high-quality metalwork, the bust is a masterpiece both of late Gothic metalwork and of figural sculpture.
The Bust of Charlemagne, as a masterpiece of Mosan goldwork, initiated a height of silver-gilt naturalistic reliquary busts. | [
"top part",
"silver",
"Aachen",
"Aachen Cathedral",
"naturalistic",
"silver-gilt",
"Meuse",
"Aachen Cathedral Treasury",
"de",
"reliquary",
"Mosan goldwork",
"metalwork",
"Charlemagne",
"sculpture",
"Gothic"
] |
|
14771_NT | Bust of Charlemagne | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | The Bust of Charlemagne (de: Karlsbüste) is a reliquary from around 1350 which contains the top part of Charlemagne's skull. The reliquary is part of the treasure kept in the Aachen Cathedral Treasury. Made in the Mosan region (the valley of the River Meuse), long a centre of high-quality metalwork, the bust is a masterpiece both of late Gothic metalwork and of figural sculpture.
The Bust of Charlemagne, as a masterpiece of Mosan goldwork, initiated a height of silver-gilt naturalistic reliquary busts. | [
"top part",
"silver",
"Aachen",
"Aachen Cathedral",
"naturalistic",
"silver-gilt",
"Meuse",
"Aachen Cathedral Treasury",
"de",
"reliquary",
"Mosan goldwork",
"metalwork",
"Charlemagne",
"sculpture",
"Gothic"
] |
|
14772_T | Bust of Charlemagne | Focus on Bust of Charlemagne and analyze the Description. | Created 500 years after the death of Charlemagne, the bust is an idealized representation, the facial structure, hair style and fleur-de-lys crown of which reflect 14th-century, not 9th-century fashion style. The skin is chased with silver and partially gilt; hair and beard are gilt. Damascened silver Reichsadler, the heraldic charge of the Holy Roman Empire signifying Charlemagne's imperial dignity, decorate the tunic. The eagles are surrounded by a border of filigree and precious stones, some of which are ancient intaglios. The bust stands on an octagonal pedestal equipped with an opening on either side for a wooden carrying frame and is decorated with fleurs-de-lis, the historical coat of arms of France. | [
"Holy Roman Empire",
"imperial dignity",
"fleurs-de-lis",
"silver",
"Damascened",
"intaglios",
"heraldic charge",
"historical coat of arms of France",
"chased",
"coat of arms of France",
"ancient",
"de",
"Charlemagne",
"filigree"
] |
|
14772_NT | Bust of Charlemagne | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Description. | Created 500 years after the death of Charlemagne, the bust is an idealized representation, the facial structure, hair style and fleur-de-lys crown of which reflect 14th-century, not 9th-century fashion style. The skin is chased with silver and partially gilt; hair and beard are gilt. Damascened silver Reichsadler, the heraldic charge of the Holy Roman Empire signifying Charlemagne's imperial dignity, decorate the tunic. The eagles are surrounded by a border of filigree and precious stones, some of which are ancient intaglios. The bust stands on an octagonal pedestal equipped with an opening on either side for a wooden carrying frame and is decorated with fleurs-de-lis, the historical coat of arms of France. | [
"Holy Roman Empire",
"imperial dignity",
"fleurs-de-lis",
"silver",
"Damascened",
"intaglios",
"heraldic charge",
"historical coat of arms of France",
"chased",
"coat of arms of France",
"ancient",
"de",
"Charlemagne",
"filigree"
] |
|
14773_T | Bust of Charlemagne | In Bust of Charlemagne, how is the History discussed? | According to the Aachen tradition, the Bust of Charlemagne was a donation from Charles IV, who was crowned king in Aachen Cathedral on 25 July 1349. This donation is not mentioned in documentary evidence, but it is considered probable, given Charles IV's deep veneration for Charlemagne. The reliquary is a part of the thirteenth-century French tradition of royal images and depicts an idealised portrait of the Frankish King, although it also has some rather individualised features. These are noticeably similar to a portrait of King John II of France. It is possible that the creator of the reliquary bust, a goldsmith in Aachen, had been trained in his art in France. The reliquary was carried in processions and placed opposite the king at coronations, who was spiritually affirmed in this way as a legitimate successor of Charlemagne. The use of ancient intaglios and cameos on the reliquary indicates the special significance of Ancient Rome to the medieval imperial ideology – both Charlemagne and Charles IV saw their rule as part of that tradition.
Recent historical research holds that it is very probable that Charles IV was crowned with the same crown which is worn by the reliquary – since the Imperial Crown was then in the possession of Charles' rival Louis IV. It is probable that the hoop with its cross was added on the occasion of his coronation. Sigismund of Luxemburg was crowned with the same crown in 1414. A parallel to this crown is seen in the Crown of Saint Wenceslas in Prague, which decorated the reliquary containing the skullcap of St. Wenceslas and was used at Charles IV's coronation as King of Bohemia in 1347. | [
"Frankish",
"King of Bohemia",
"St. Wenceslas",
"Charles IV",
"Sigismund of Luxemburg",
"Aachen",
"hoop",
"Ancient Rome",
"Aachen Cathedral",
"Crown of Saint Wenceslas",
"Imperial Crown",
"crowned",
"intaglios",
"John II of France",
"procession",
"ancient",
"de",
"reliquary",
"Prague",
"Charlemagne",
"cameo",
"Louis IV"
] |
|
14773_NT | Bust of Charlemagne | In this artwork, how is the History discussed? | According to the Aachen tradition, the Bust of Charlemagne was a donation from Charles IV, who was crowned king in Aachen Cathedral on 25 July 1349. This donation is not mentioned in documentary evidence, but it is considered probable, given Charles IV's deep veneration for Charlemagne. The reliquary is a part of the thirteenth-century French tradition of royal images and depicts an idealised portrait of the Frankish King, although it also has some rather individualised features. These are noticeably similar to a portrait of King John II of France. It is possible that the creator of the reliquary bust, a goldsmith in Aachen, had been trained in his art in France. The reliquary was carried in processions and placed opposite the king at coronations, who was spiritually affirmed in this way as a legitimate successor of Charlemagne. The use of ancient intaglios and cameos on the reliquary indicates the special significance of Ancient Rome to the medieval imperial ideology – both Charlemagne and Charles IV saw their rule as part of that tradition.
Recent historical research holds that it is very probable that Charles IV was crowned with the same crown which is worn by the reliquary – since the Imperial Crown was then in the possession of Charles' rival Louis IV. It is probable that the hoop with its cross was added on the occasion of his coronation. Sigismund of Luxemburg was crowned with the same crown in 1414. A parallel to this crown is seen in the Crown of Saint Wenceslas in Prague, which decorated the reliquary containing the skullcap of St. Wenceslas and was used at Charles IV's coronation as King of Bohemia in 1347. | [
"Frankish",
"King of Bohemia",
"St. Wenceslas",
"Charles IV",
"Sigismund of Luxemburg",
"Aachen",
"hoop",
"Ancient Rome",
"Aachen Cathedral",
"Crown of Saint Wenceslas",
"Imperial Crown",
"crowned",
"intaglios",
"John II of France",
"procession",
"ancient",
"de",
"reliquary",
"Prague",
"Charlemagne",
"cameo",
"Louis IV"
] |
|
14774_T | Bust of Charlemagne | Focus on Bust of Charlemagne and explore the Symbolic significance and use. | On account of its wide recognition value for the City of Aachen and its ideological and artistic significance, a stylised version of the Bust of Charlemagne serves as the central element in the signet of the Foundation of the International Charlemagne Prize of Aachen. | [
"Aachen",
"de",
"Charlemagne",
"Charlemagne Prize",
"International Charlemagne Prize of Aachen"
] |
|
14774_NT | Bust of Charlemagne | Focus on this artwork and explore the Symbolic significance and use. | On account of its wide recognition value for the City of Aachen and its ideological and artistic significance, a stylised version of the Bust of Charlemagne serves as the central element in the signet of the Foundation of the International Charlemagne Prize of Aachen. | [
"Aachen",
"de",
"Charlemagne",
"Charlemagne Prize",
"International Charlemagne Prize of Aachen"
] |
|
14775_T | Dada-Review | Focus on Dada-Review and explain the abstract. | Dada - Review (German: Dada-Rundschau) is a photomontage created by the German artist Hannah Höch in 1919. | [
"Dada",
"Hannah Höch",
"photomontage"
] |
|
14775_NT | Dada-Review | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Dada - Review (German: Dada-Rundschau) is a photomontage created by the German artist Hannah Höch in 1919. | [
"Dada",
"Hannah Höch",
"photomontage"
] |
|
14776_T | Dada-Review | Explore the Description of this artwork, Dada-Review. | The work measures 43.7 × 34.6 cm and is in the collection of the Berlinische Galerie in Berlin, Germany. | [
"Berlinische Galerie",
"Germany",
"Berlin"
] |
|
14776_NT | Dada-Review | Explore the Description of this artwork. | The work measures 43.7 × 34.6 cm and is in the collection of the Berlinische Galerie in Berlin, Germany. | [
"Berlinische Galerie",
"Germany",
"Berlin"
] |
|
14777_T | Dada-Review | Focus on Dada-Review and discuss the Analysis. | In 1919, Hannah Höch began to use photomontage technique in Dada. Despite her traditional artistic education, she continued until the end of life to create her works using a collage technique that combined clippings of print media. In "Dada - review" different fragments of text and images depict a grotesque political kaleidoscope.
The collage is a sectional view of the period after World War I. It is possible to recognize faces of German President Friedrich Ebert in a swimsuit and US President Woodrow Wilson as an angel of peace. There is ridicule, changing perspectives and proportions, and between them words and letters. Höch is the only female Berlin Dadaist who used photomontage to parody "giant global absurdities" using photos, headlines and advertisements from magazines. | [
"Friedrich Ebert",
"Woodrow Wilson",
"Dada",
"World War I",
"Hannah Höch",
"Berlin",
"photomontage"
] |
|
14777_NT | Dada-Review | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Analysis. | In 1919, Hannah Höch began to use photomontage technique in Dada. Despite her traditional artistic education, she continued until the end of life to create her works using a collage technique that combined clippings of print media. In "Dada - review" different fragments of text and images depict a grotesque political kaleidoscope.
The collage is a sectional view of the period after World War I. It is possible to recognize faces of German President Friedrich Ebert in a swimsuit and US President Woodrow Wilson as an angel of peace. There is ridicule, changing perspectives and proportions, and between them words and letters. Höch is the only female Berlin Dadaist who used photomontage to parody "giant global absurdities" using photos, headlines and advertisements from magazines. | [
"Friedrich Ebert",
"Woodrow Wilson",
"Dada",
"World War I",
"Hannah Höch",
"Berlin",
"photomontage"
] |
|
14778_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | How does The Princess from the Land of Porcelain elucidate its abstract? | Rose and Silver: The Princess from the Land of Porcelain (better known as The Princess from the Land of Porcelain; also known by the French title La Princesse du pays de la porcelaine) is an oil painting on canvas by American-born artist James McNeill Whistler. It was painted between 1863 and 1865. It currently hangs above the fireplace in The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. | [
"Freer Gallery of Art",
"The Peacock Room",
"Washington, D.C.",
"James McNeill Whistler"
] |
|
14778_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | Rose and Silver: The Princess from the Land of Porcelain (better known as The Princess from the Land of Porcelain; also known by the French title La Princesse du pays de la porcelaine) is an oil painting on canvas by American-born artist James McNeill Whistler. It was painted between 1863 and 1865. It currently hangs above the fireplace in The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. | [
"Freer Gallery of Art",
"The Peacock Room",
"Washington, D.C.",
"James McNeill Whistler"
] |
|
14779_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on The Princess from the Land of Porcelain and analyze the Description. | Princess depicts a European woman wearing a kimono worn in a Western manner, standing amidst numerous Asian art objects, including a rug, Japanese folding screen and a large decorative porcelain vase. She holds a hand fan and looks ahead "wistfully". The entirety is rendered in an impressionistic manner. The painting‘s frame is decorated with a similar motif to the painting, with interlocking circles and numerous rectangles.At the time Whistler painted Princess, he often used large amounts of gold in his work, such as in his similarly themed Caprice in Purple and Gold No.2: The Gold Screen. Although the painting itself does not include gold or gold pigments, its yellow and ochre shades complement the gold and blue interior of its original setting while displayed at the home of British shipping magnate Frederick Leyland. | [
"shipping magnate",
"Japanese folding screen",
"pigments",
"ochre",
"impressionistic",
"hand fan",
"motif",
"Frederick Leyland",
"kimono",
"folding screen"
] |
|
14779_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Description. | Princess depicts a European woman wearing a kimono worn in a Western manner, standing amidst numerous Asian art objects, including a rug, Japanese folding screen and a large decorative porcelain vase. She holds a hand fan and looks ahead "wistfully". The entirety is rendered in an impressionistic manner. The painting‘s frame is decorated with a similar motif to the painting, with interlocking circles and numerous rectangles.At the time Whistler painted Princess, he often used large amounts of gold in his work, such as in his similarly themed Caprice in Purple and Gold No.2: The Gold Screen. Although the painting itself does not include gold or gold pigments, its yellow and ochre shades complement the gold and blue interior of its original setting while displayed at the home of British shipping magnate Frederick Leyland. | [
"shipping magnate",
"Japanese folding screen",
"pigments",
"ochre",
"impressionistic",
"hand fan",
"motif",
"Frederick Leyland",
"kimono",
"folding screen"
] |
|
14780_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | In The Princess from the Land of Porcelain, how is the Production discussed? | Princess was painted between 1863 and 1865 by James Abbott McNeill Whistler, with Christine Spartali, the sister of Pre-Raphaelite artist Marie Spartali Stillman, serving as the model; Owen Edwards of Smithsonian Magazine describes Spartali as "an Anglo-Greek beauty whom all the artists of the day were clamoring to paint". Princess is one of several of Whistler's works painted during this period that depict a Western woman in Asian-styled surroundings and Asian-styled costume, a reflection of the current Anglo-Japanese trend and Art Nouveau aesthetic. As in several other of his works, Whistler used sketches to prepare the general layout of the composition. Other details were added in later. A surviving sketch depicts flowers, which were later eliminated from the work. The white Japanese folding screen in the background may have been one owned by Whistler. | [
"Smithsonian",
"Japanese folding screen",
"Anglo-Japanese",
"Marie Spartali Stillman",
"folding screen",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"James Abbott McNeill Whistler",
"Smithsonian Magazine",
"Art Nouveau"
] |
|
14780_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | In this artwork, how is the Production discussed? | Princess was painted between 1863 and 1865 by James Abbott McNeill Whistler, with Christine Spartali, the sister of Pre-Raphaelite artist Marie Spartali Stillman, serving as the model; Owen Edwards of Smithsonian Magazine describes Spartali as "an Anglo-Greek beauty whom all the artists of the day were clamoring to paint". Princess is one of several of Whistler's works painted during this period that depict a Western woman in Asian-styled surroundings and Asian-styled costume, a reflection of the current Anglo-Japanese trend and Art Nouveau aesthetic. As in several other of his works, Whistler used sketches to prepare the general layout of the composition. Other details were added in later. A surviving sketch depicts flowers, which were later eliminated from the work. The white Japanese folding screen in the background may have been one owned by Whistler. | [
"Smithsonian",
"Japanese folding screen",
"Anglo-Japanese",
"Marie Spartali Stillman",
"folding screen",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"James Abbott McNeill Whistler",
"Smithsonian Magazine",
"Art Nouveau"
] |
|
14781_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on The Princess from the Land of Porcelain and explore the History. | When the portrait was completed, Spartali's father refused to purchase it; Whistler's large signature at the top led another would-be buyer to withdraw. This may have led Whistler to develop his later butterfly-style signature.The early history of the painting afterwards is fairly uncertain. In 1865 Princess was displayed at the Paris Salon. The following year, it was displayed at Gambart's French Gallery in London; when the exhibition finished, his friend Dante Gabriel Rossetti received the painting as Whistler was in South America at the time. It was then sold by either Rossetti or Joanna Hiffernan, Whistler's muse and lover, to an art collector thought to be Frederick Huth. Princess was returned to Whistler in 1867.Several years later, the portrait was bought by Leyland He displayed Princess in a dining room filled with Kangxi ceramics, but was displeased how it had been decorated by a previous artist, Thomas Jeckyll. Whistler suggested that Leyland modify the coloring of the room to better accent his new acquisition; the redesign was later handled by Whistler himself, as Jeckyll was ill. The result was The Peacock Room. However, Whistler's modifications were more in-depth than those wished for by Leyland, resulting in a quarrel between the two.In 1892, after Leyland's death, Princess was sold at Christie's in London to Alexander Reid for 420 guineas. Reid was a Glasgow art dealer who sold it to William Burrell a few years later.Princess was acquired by Charles Lang Freer on August 20, 1903, under the title The Princess of Porcelain for £3,750 (US$18,240) on Bond Street, in London. He kept it in his home in Detroit, Michigan; the following year he acquired The Peacock Room. In 1906 he donated both to the Smithsonian.
After Freer's death in 1919, both Princess and The Peacock Room were moved to the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., a Smithsonian museum established by Freer. Princess continues to be housed in The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery, shown hung above the fireplace amidst a rotating stock of Asian ceramics. In 2011, the Princess was digitized with over one gigapixel of resolution by the Google Art Project; this was achieved by assembling numerous smaller digital mosaics. | [
"Smithsonian",
"Bond Street",
"Detroit",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Freer Gallery of Art",
"The Peacock Room",
"gigapixel",
"Paris Salon",
"Washington, D.C.",
"William Burrell",
"Kangxi ceramics",
"Gambart",
"Alexander Reid",
"Google Art Project",
"Christie's",
"Joanna Hiffernan",
"digital mosaics",
"Frederick Huth",
"resolution",
"muse",
"Charles Lang Freer",
"Thomas Jeckyll",
"Michigan"
] |
|
14781_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on this artwork and explore the History. | When the portrait was completed, Spartali's father refused to purchase it; Whistler's large signature at the top led another would-be buyer to withdraw. This may have led Whistler to develop his later butterfly-style signature.The early history of the painting afterwards is fairly uncertain. In 1865 Princess was displayed at the Paris Salon. The following year, it was displayed at Gambart's French Gallery in London; when the exhibition finished, his friend Dante Gabriel Rossetti received the painting as Whistler was in South America at the time. It was then sold by either Rossetti or Joanna Hiffernan, Whistler's muse and lover, to an art collector thought to be Frederick Huth. Princess was returned to Whistler in 1867.Several years later, the portrait was bought by Leyland He displayed Princess in a dining room filled with Kangxi ceramics, but was displeased how it had been decorated by a previous artist, Thomas Jeckyll. Whistler suggested that Leyland modify the coloring of the room to better accent his new acquisition; the redesign was later handled by Whistler himself, as Jeckyll was ill. The result was The Peacock Room. However, Whistler's modifications were more in-depth than those wished for by Leyland, resulting in a quarrel between the two.In 1892, after Leyland's death, Princess was sold at Christie's in London to Alexander Reid for 420 guineas. Reid was a Glasgow art dealer who sold it to William Burrell a few years later.Princess was acquired by Charles Lang Freer on August 20, 1903, under the title The Princess of Porcelain for £3,750 (US$18,240) on Bond Street, in London. He kept it in his home in Detroit, Michigan; the following year he acquired The Peacock Room. In 1906 he donated both to the Smithsonian.
After Freer's death in 1919, both Princess and The Peacock Room were moved to the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., a Smithsonian museum established by Freer. Princess continues to be housed in The Peacock Room at the Freer Gallery, shown hung above the fireplace amidst a rotating stock of Asian ceramics. In 2011, the Princess was digitized with over one gigapixel of resolution by the Google Art Project; this was achieved by assembling numerous smaller digital mosaics. | [
"Smithsonian",
"Bond Street",
"Detroit",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Freer Gallery of Art",
"The Peacock Room",
"gigapixel",
"Paris Salon",
"Washington, D.C.",
"William Burrell",
"Kangxi ceramics",
"Gambart",
"Alexander Reid",
"Google Art Project",
"Christie's",
"Joanna Hiffernan",
"digital mosaics",
"Frederick Huth",
"resolution",
"muse",
"Charles Lang Freer",
"Thomas Jeckyll",
"Michigan"
] |
|
14782_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on The Princess from the Land of Porcelain and explain the Influences. | Critics have seen influences of Japanese woodblock maker Kitagawa Utamaro in the painting, as well as 18th-century French chinoiserie stylings. | [
"woodblock",
"Kitagawa Utamaro",
"chinoiserie",
"Utamaro"
] |
|
14782_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Focus on this artwork and explain the Influences. | Critics have seen influences of Japanese woodblock maker Kitagawa Utamaro in the painting, as well as 18th-century French chinoiserie stylings. | [
"woodblock",
"Kitagawa Utamaro",
"chinoiserie",
"Utamaro"
] |
|
14783_T | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Explore the Reception of this artwork, The Princess from the Land of Porcelain. | In a review for the 1865 Paris Salon, Gustave Vattier wrote that the painting was not ready for display, saying that "a child's breath could blow it over"; he also disagreed with the belief that Whistler was representing reality, writing that the painting was nothing but "whim and fantasy".In her doctoral dissertation, Caroline Doswell Older wrote that, when viewed without its frame, Princess came across as a being like a closely cropped, carelessly taken photograph which seems as if it would be swallowed up by The Peacock Room. However, with its frame, she finds it an "aesthetic object with enough presence to hold its own" in the heavily decorated room. | [
"The Peacock Room",
"Paris Salon"
] |
|
14783_NT | The Princess from the Land of Porcelain | Explore the Reception of this artwork. | In a review for the 1865 Paris Salon, Gustave Vattier wrote that the painting was not ready for display, saying that "a child's breath could blow it over"; he also disagreed with the belief that Whistler was representing reality, writing that the painting was nothing but "whim and fantasy".In her doctoral dissertation, Caroline Doswell Older wrote that, when viewed without its frame, Princess came across as a being like a closely cropped, carelessly taken photograph which seems as if it would be swallowed up by The Peacock Room. However, with its frame, she finds it an "aesthetic object with enough presence to hold its own" in the heavily decorated room. | [
"The Peacock Room",
"Paris Salon"
] |
|
14784_T | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on Numbers 1-0 and discuss the Historical information. | The numbers were conceived as a 1980 drawing made in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of Melvin Simon & Associates (now called Simon Property Group). Indiana accepted the commission to make the drawing specifically because it was attached to the creation of a series of corresponding, three-dimensional sculptures. At the time they were largest and most important commission of Indiana's career. They were made with the artist's stipulation that they eventually be donated to the IMA.
Indiana's original concept was inspired by a 19th-century print “The Life and age of man, stages of man's life from the cradle to the grave” which was given to Indiana in the 1970s. In the 2002 New York Times preview of several Indiana exhibits that took place in 2003, the numbers and their colors were identified to represent the stages of man in this way: 1, red and green: birth;
2, blue and green: infancy
3, orange and blue: youth
4, red and yellow: adolescence
5, blue and white: pre-prime of life
6, red and green: prime of life
7, blue and orange: early autumn
8, orange and purple: autumn
9, yellow and black: warning
0, shades of gray: death.Indiana had been working with the 10 numbers two-dimensionally since the late 1950s, but Numbers 1-0 was his first opportunity to realize them in sculptural form. He sees each number as being both an abstract idea and a representation of the physical presence of numbers in life; he associates many significant memories from his own life with numbers. | [
"New York Times",
"Simon Property Group",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14784_NT | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Historical information. | The numbers were conceived as a 1980 drawing made in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of Melvin Simon & Associates (now called Simon Property Group). Indiana accepted the commission to make the drawing specifically because it was attached to the creation of a series of corresponding, three-dimensional sculptures. At the time they were largest and most important commission of Indiana's career. They were made with the artist's stipulation that they eventually be donated to the IMA.
Indiana's original concept was inspired by a 19th-century print “The Life and age of man, stages of man's life from the cradle to the grave” which was given to Indiana in the 1970s. In the 2002 New York Times preview of several Indiana exhibits that took place in 2003, the numbers and their colors were identified to represent the stages of man in this way: 1, red and green: birth;
2, blue and green: infancy
3, orange and blue: youth
4, red and yellow: adolescence
5, blue and white: pre-prime of life
6, red and green: prime of life
7, blue and orange: early autumn
8, orange and purple: autumn
9, yellow and black: warning
0, shades of gray: death.Indiana had been working with the 10 numbers two-dimensionally since the late 1950s, but Numbers 1-0 was his first opportunity to realize them in sculptural form. He sees each number as being both an abstract idea and a representation of the physical presence of numbers in life; he associates many significant memories from his own life with numbers. | [
"New York Times",
"Simon Property Group",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14785_T | Numbers 1-0 | In Numbers 1-0, how is the Other versions of the Historical information elucidated? | Indiana has fabricated at least one other version of the Numbers 1-0 that is similar in both size and color to the IMA set; however, they are slightly smaller than the originals and the colors are slightly different. A set that was fabricated in 1996, were on view in New York City (on Park Avenue between 60th Street and 70th Street) in early 2003.⅓ scale versions of Numbers 1-0 were on view at the Paul Kasmin gallery as part of his 2008 “Hard Edge” gallery show, which was planned in honor of the artist's 80th birthday ([Planned in honor of the artist's 80th birthday reference]). The colors used for these numbers were similar to, but not exactly like the IMA's or the 1996 versions.Indiana also fabricated another 8' tall set of the numbers with un-coated Cor-ten steel for his 2006 exhibition in Madrid. | [
"Indiana",
"Cor-ten",
"Madrid"
] |
|
14785_NT | Numbers 1-0 | In this artwork, how is the Other versions of the Historical information elucidated? | Indiana has fabricated at least one other version of the Numbers 1-0 that is similar in both size and color to the IMA set; however, they are slightly smaller than the originals and the colors are slightly different. A set that was fabricated in 1996, were on view in New York City (on Park Avenue between 60th Street and 70th Street) in early 2003.⅓ scale versions of Numbers 1-0 were on view at the Paul Kasmin gallery as part of his 2008 “Hard Edge” gallery show, which was planned in honor of the artist's 80th birthday ([Planned in honor of the artist's 80th birthday reference]). The colors used for these numbers were similar to, but not exactly like the IMA's or the 1996 versions.Indiana also fabricated another 8' tall set of the numbers with un-coated Cor-ten steel for his 2006 exhibition in Madrid. | [
"Indiana",
"Cor-ten",
"Madrid"
] |
|
14786_T | Numbers 1-0 | In the context of Numbers 1-0, analyze the Location history of the Historical information. | Each of the original 10 sculptures was intended to first be displayed at a different Simon Property Group property; in fall 1981, the 1 was on view at the Simon headquarters in Merchants Place, and the 2 was soon to be on view at Two West Washington. It is also known that the 1 and 2 appeared at the Children's Museum in 1982, in honor of director Mildred Compton's 21 years of service. Also in that year the 1, 2, and 3 were used at the awards podium for the 1982 National Sports Festival, which was held in Indianapolis.Although the entire series was accessioned into the IMA's collection in 1988, only the 6 was put on display at the museum at the time, because of an expansion project taking place. The rest of the numbers were added to the outdoor display in 1992.In 2005, the IMA building and grounds underwent an extensive renovation, which included rearrangement of the outdoor sculpture collection. The numbers were moved to their second and current location during this time. Indiana designed the presentation of the sculptures, arranging them in pairs of personal significance which he detailed in a 2003 drawing. The series of sculptures is located just east of the IMA's main parking lot, near the intersection of Michigan Road and 38th Street in Indianapolis, Indiana. | [
"Indianapolis",
"Simon Property Group",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14786_NT | Numbers 1-0 | In the context of this artwork, analyze the Location history of the Historical information. | Each of the original 10 sculptures was intended to first be displayed at a different Simon Property Group property; in fall 1981, the 1 was on view at the Simon headquarters in Merchants Place, and the 2 was soon to be on view at Two West Washington. It is also known that the 1 and 2 appeared at the Children's Museum in 1982, in honor of director Mildred Compton's 21 years of service. Also in that year the 1, 2, and 3 were used at the awards podium for the 1982 National Sports Festival, which was held in Indianapolis.Although the entire series was accessioned into the IMA's collection in 1988, only the 6 was put on display at the museum at the time, because of an expansion project taking place. The rest of the numbers were added to the outdoor display in 1992.In 2005, the IMA building and grounds underwent an extensive renovation, which included rearrangement of the outdoor sculpture collection. The numbers were moved to their second and current location during this time. Indiana designed the presentation of the sculptures, arranging them in pairs of personal significance which he detailed in a 2003 drawing. The series of sculptures is located just east of the IMA's main parking lot, near the intersection of Michigan Road and 38th Street in Indianapolis, Indiana. | [
"Indianapolis",
"Simon Property Group",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14787_T | Numbers 1-0 | Describe the characteristics of the Acquisition in Numbers 1-0's Historical information. | The numbers were acquired by the IMA in 1988 as a gift of Melvin Simon & Associates (now Simon Property Group). | [
"Simon Property Group"
] |
|
14787_NT | Numbers 1-0 | Describe the characteristics of the Acquisition in this artwork's Historical information. | The numbers were acquired by the IMA in 1988 as a gift of Melvin Simon & Associates (now Simon Property Group). | [
"Simon Property Group"
] |
|
14788_T | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on Numbers 1-0 and explore the Artist. | Robert Indiana (born Robert Clark, September 13, 1928) is an American artist associated with the Pop Art movement. | [
"American",
"Robert Indiana",
"Pop Art",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14788_NT | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on this artwork and explore the Artist. | Robert Indiana (born Robert Clark, September 13, 1928) is an American artist associated with the Pop Art movement. | [
"American",
"Robert Indiana",
"Pop Art",
"Indiana"
] |
|
14789_T | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on Numbers 1-0 and explain the Condition. | The series of sculptures Numbers 1-0 was surveyed in July 1993 as part of the Smithsonian American Art Museum's Inventories of American Painting and Sculpture database, and it was considered to be well maintained. According to the IMA's Blog, Numbers 1-0 is washed annually by the IMA Conservation Department. | [
"American"
] |
|
14789_NT | Numbers 1-0 | Focus on this artwork and explain the Condition. | The series of sculptures Numbers 1-0 was surveyed in July 1993 as part of the Smithsonian American Art Museum's Inventories of American Painting and Sculpture database, and it was considered to be well maintained. According to the IMA's Blog, Numbers 1-0 is washed annually by the IMA Conservation Department. | [
"American"
] |
|
14790_T | Butcher's Shop | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Butcher's Shop. | Butcher's Shop is the title of two paintings by the Italian Baroque painter Annibale Carracci, both dating from the early 1580s. They are now in the collections of Christ Church Picture Gallery, Oxford, and the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas.
The paintings are connected to the contemporary Beaneater (Galleria Colonna), as they are very early examples of Italian genre painting. The large size of the Christ Church painting is exceptional for such a subject at this date, and it has been suggested they were commissioned by a butcher's guild, or for use as a sign. Carracci was influenced in his depiction of everyday life subjects by Vincenzo Campi and Bartolomeo Passarotti, whom the Butcher's Shop was originally attributed to. Carracci's ability to adapt his style is demonstrated, making it "lower" when concerning "lower", quasi-satirical subjects like the Mangiafagioli and the Butcher's Shop, while in his more academic works (such as the roughly contemporary Assumption of the Virgin) he was able to use a more finished manner with the same ease.
It is claimed that members of the painter's family were used as models. Significant alterations to some figures are revealed by X-rays, and the hand on the edge of the table, now apparently belonging to the old woman, though not in proportion with the rest of her, may have originally belonged to the butcher to the right of her.
The Christ Church painting was in the collections of the Gonzaga Dukes of Mantua and Charles I of England; after reaching Christ Church it was hung for a long time in the college kitchen, before being recognised for what it was in the 20th century. | [
"Annibale Carracci",
"Galleria Colonna",
"Assumption of the Virgin",
"Fort Worth",
"Texas",
"Oxford",
"right",
"Gonzaga",
"Vincenzo Campi",
"Baroque",
"genre painting",
"Fort Worth, Texas",
"Dukes of Mantua",
"Beaneater",
"Italian",
"Butcher's Shop",
"Bartolomeo Passarotti",
"guild",
"Christ Church Picture Gallery",
"Kimbell Art Museum",
"Charles I of England"
] |
|
14790_NT | Butcher's Shop | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | Butcher's Shop is the title of two paintings by the Italian Baroque painter Annibale Carracci, both dating from the early 1580s. They are now in the collections of Christ Church Picture Gallery, Oxford, and the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, Texas.
The paintings are connected to the contemporary Beaneater (Galleria Colonna), as they are very early examples of Italian genre painting. The large size of the Christ Church painting is exceptional for such a subject at this date, and it has been suggested they were commissioned by a butcher's guild, or for use as a sign. Carracci was influenced in his depiction of everyday life subjects by Vincenzo Campi and Bartolomeo Passarotti, whom the Butcher's Shop was originally attributed to. Carracci's ability to adapt his style is demonstrated, making it "lower" when concerning "lower", quasi-satirical subjects like the Mangiafagioli and the Butcher's Shop, while in his more academic works (such as the roughly contemporary Assumption of the Virgin) he was able to use a more finished manner with the same ease.
It is claimed that members of the painter's family were used as models. Significant alterations to some figures are revealed by X-rays, and the hand on the edge of the table, now apparently belonging to the old woman, though not in proportion with the rest of her, may have originally belonged to the butcher to the right of her.
The Christ Church painting was in the collections of the Gonzaga Dukes of Mantua and Charles I of England; after reaching Christ Church it was hung for a long time in the college kitchen, before being recognised for what it was in the 20th century. | [
"Annibale Carracci",
"Galleria Colonna",
"Assumption of the Virgin",
"Fort Worth",
"Texas",
"Oxford",
"right",
"Gonzaga",
"Vincenzo Campi",
"Baroque",
"genre painting",
"Fort Worth, Texas",
"Dukes of Mantua",
"Beaneater",
"Italian",
"Butcher's Shop",
"Bartolomeo Passarotti",
"guild",
"Christ Church Picture Gallery",
"Kimbell Art Museum",
"Charles I of England"
] |
|
14791_T | Statue of the Marquess of Salisbury | Focus on Statue of the Marquess of Salisbury and discuss the abstract. | A statue of Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, stands outside the gates leading to the north side of Hatfield House, Hertfordshire.
The bronze statue by George Frampton was erected in 1906 and portrays The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury in a seated position, raised on a large rectangular stone plinth approximately 2.5 m (8.2 ft) high. The front (west) side of the plinth bears a relief carving of the Salisbury coat of arms, and the inscription robert arthur / talbot / marquess of salisbury / kg kcvo / three times prime minister / of / great britain and ireland / 1830–1903 // erected to his memory by his hertfordshire friends / and neighbours in recognition of a / great life devoted to the welfare of his country.The statue became a Grade II listed building in 1983. It stands to the west of the gates and screen (separately listed at Grade II) erected by The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury on the approach from Hatfield railway station to Hatfield Park and the north side of Hatfield House (itself Grade I listed). To the north of the statue is the Grade II* listed Hatfield War Memorial. | [
"Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury",
"George Frampton",
"listed building",
"Hatfield railway station",
"Hatfield House",
"Hertfordshire",
"Hatfield War Memorial",
"The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury"
] |
|
14791_NT | Statue of the Marquess of Salisbury | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | A statue of Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, stands outside the gates leading to the north side of Hatfield House, Hertfordshire.
The bronze statue by George Frampton was erected in 1906 and portrays The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury in a seated position, raised on a large rectangular stone plinth approximately 2.5 m (8.2 ft) high. The front (west) side of the plinth bears a relief carving of the Salisbury coat of arms, and the inscription robert arthur / talbot / marquess of salisbury / kg kcvo / three times prime minister / of / great britain and ireland / 1830–1903 // erected to his memory by his hertfordshire friends / and neighbours in recognition of a / great life devoted to the welfare of his country.The statue became a Grade II listed building in 1983. It stands to the west of the gates and screen (separately listed at Grade II) erected by The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury on the approach from Hatfield railway station to Hatfield Park and the north side of Hatfield House (itself Grade I listed). To the north of the statue is the Grade II* listed Hatfield War Memorial. | [
"Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury",
"George Frampton",
"listed building",
"Hatfield railway station",
"Hatfield House",
"Hertfordshire",
"Hatfield War Memorial",
"The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury"
] |
|
14792_T | Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro | How does Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro elucidate its abstract? | The Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro is a picture from around 1504–1505, attributed by some to the Italian Renaissance artist Raphael and housed by the Baltimore Museum of Art, United States | [
"Raphael",
"Emilia Pia",
"Renaissance",
"United States",
"Baltimore",
"Italian",
"Baltimore Museum of Art"
] |
|
14792_NT | Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | The Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro is a picture from around 1504–1505, attributed by some to the Italian Renaissance artist Raphael and housed by the Baltimore Museum of Art, United States | [
"Raphael",
"Emilia Pia",
"Renaissance",
"United States",
"Baltimore",
"Italian",
"Baltimore Museum of Art"
] |
|
14793_T | Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro | Focus on Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro and analyze the History. | The rear of the work has an inscription saying "Emilia Pia da Montefeltro" and a seal with a fragmentary line, usually interpreted as "[Fo]ntico tedescho di V[enezia]", i.e. the Fondaco dei Tedeschi in Venice.
The painting was perhaps part of the ducal collection of Urbino, brought to Florence in 1625 as a part of Vittoria della Rovere's dowry. Later it was in Vienna, then in Erlenbach, near Zurich, and was later sold to the Kleinberger Gallery in New York, USA, whence it arrived to the current seat.
The identification with the subject (the wife of Antonio da Montefeltro, described in Baldassarre Castiglione's Book of the Courtier) is confirmed by a medal attributed to Adriano Fiorentino. However, the attribution to Raphael remains disputed, in a similar way than the Portrait of Elisabetta Gonzaga of the Uffizi. Emilia Pia was in fact a confidant of Elisabetta Gonzaga, and perhaps her portrait was executed to emulate the former's. | [
"Baldassarre Castiglione",
"Florence",
"Zurich",
"Erlenbach",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"Emilia Pia",
"Urbino",
"ducal collection",
"Kleinberger Gallery",
"Vittoria della Rovere",
"New York",
"Antonio da Montefeltro",
"Venice",
"Fondaco dei Tedeschi",
"Vienna",
"Elisabetta",
"Portrait of Elisabetta Gonzaga",
"Book of the Courtier"
] |
|
14793_NT | Portrait of Emilia Pia da Montefeltro | Focus on this artwork and analyze the History. | The rear of the work has an inscription saying "Emilia Pia da Montefeltro" and a seal with a fragmentary line, usually interpreted as "[Fo]ntico tedescho di V[enezia]", i.e. the Fondaco dei Tedeschi in Venice.
The painting was perhaps part of the ducal collection of Urbino, brought to Florence in 1625 as a part of Vittoria della Rovere's dowry. Later it was in Vienna, then in Erlenbach, near Zurich, and was later sold to the Kleinberger Gallery in New York, USA, whence it arrived to the current seat.
The identification with the subject (the wife of Antonio da Montefeltro, described in Baldassarre Castiglione's Book of the Courtier) is confirmed by a medal attributed to Adriano Fiorentino. However, the attribution to Raphael remains disputed, in a similar way than the Portrait of Elisabetta Gonzaga of the Uffizi. Emilia Pia was in fact a confidant of Elisabetta Gonzaga, and perhaps her portrait was executed to emulate the former's. | [
"Baldassarre Castiglione",
"Florence",
"Zurich",
"Erlenbach",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"Emilia Pia",
"Urbino",
"ducal collection",
"Kleinberger Gallery",
"Vittoria della Rovere",
"New York",
"Antonio da Montefeltro",
"Venice",
"Fondaco dei Tedeschi",
"Vienna",
"Elisabetta",
"Portrait of Elisabetta Gonzaga",
"Book of the Courtier"
] |
|
14794_T | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | In Isabella in Red (Rubens), how is the abstract discussed? | Isabella in Red (also called Portrait of the Aged Isabella d'Este) is a portrait of a woman by Peter Paul Rubens in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. It is considered a close copy of a lost Titian original. | [
"Peter Paul Rubens",
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Vienna"
] |
|
14794_NT | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed? | Isabella in Red (also called Portrait of the Aged Isabella d'Este) is a portrait of a woman by Peter Paul Rubens in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. It is considered a close copy of a lost Titian original. | [
"Peter Paul Rubens",
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Vienna"
] |
|
14795_T | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Focus on Isabella in Red (Rubens) and explore the Description. | The knee-piece shows a somewhat chubby middle-aged woman in a red velvet dress in front of a turquoise background. On her head she wears a balzo, a fashionable invention of Isabella d'Este (from 1509), which was widely used in northern Italy in the 1530s. Personal features are reddish-brown curls, brown eyes and classically arched eyebrows. | [
"balzo",
"Isabella d'Este"
] |
|
14795_NT | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Description. | The knee-piece shows a somewhat chubby middle-aged woman in a red velvet dress in front of a turquoise background. On her head she wears a balzo, a fashionable invention of Isabella d'Este (from 1509), which was widely used in northern Italy in the 1530s. Personal features are reddish-brown curls, brown eyes and classically arched eyebrows. | [
"balzo",
"Isabella d'Este"
] |
|
14796_T | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Focus on Isabella in Red (Rubens) and explain the History. | At the beginning of the 17th century, Rubens was a court painter in Mantua. During this time (and later in other places) he copied Italian painters, including Titian. These are considered close copies. The date of the Rubens copy remains unclear (1600, c. 1605 or later), and so does the date of Titian's original (depending on the source, the years 1524-1536 are assumed). After Rubens' death, two copies from his hand of two Titian portraits depicting Isabella d'Este are mentioned in his inventory. The Rubens painting Isabella in Red later transferred from the collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria to the Kunsthistorisches Museum.
Independently, since chronologically before, other copies of the lost Titian original exist, in particular:A copy from Titian's workshop (very similar but with a more youthful representation of the subject) is documented by a photograph (provenances Léopold Goldschmidt and Contesse Vogué in Paris)
An anonymous 16th-century copy (breastpiece representing the same age) shows the inscription "Isabella Estensis" and is now in the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool. | [
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Liverpool",
"Walker Art Gallery",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Mantua",
"Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria"
] |
|
14796_NT | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Focus on this artwork and explain the History. | At the beginning of the 17th century, Rubens was a court painter in Mantua. During this time (and later in other places) he copied Italian painters, including Titian. These are considered close copies. The date of the Rubens copy remains unclear (1600, c. 1605 or later), and so does the date of Titian's original (depending on the source, the years 1524-1536 are assumed). After Rubens' death, two copies from his hand of two Titian portraits depicting Isabella d'Este are mentioned in his inventory. The Rubens painting Isabella in Red later transferred from the collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria to the Kunsthistorisches Museum.
Independently, since chronologically before, other copies of the lost Titian original exist, in particular:A copy from Titian's workshop (very similar but with a more youthful representation of the subject) is documented by a photograph (provenances Léopold Goldschmidt and Contesse Vogué in Paris)
An anonymous 16th-century copy (breastpiece representing the same age) shows the inscription "Isabella Estensis" and is now in the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool. | [
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Liverpool",
"Walker Art Gallery",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Mantua",
"Archduke Leopold Wilhelm of Austria"
] |
|
14797_T | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Explore the Identity of the sitter of this artwork, Isabella in Red (Rubens). | As identifications of Isabella d'Este (1474-1539), three coloured portraits are exhibited in the Kunsthistorisches Museum. The personal characteristics are contradictory (see graphic on the right):Ambras Miniature (anonymous Mantuan artist in the 16th century),
Isabella in Red (copy by Rubens c. 1605 after a lost original by Titian) and
Isabella in Black (Titian 1530s).Due to the resulting confusion, all other museums have withdrawn colour identifications. The differences cannot be explained by idealisation, as Isabella in Black was commissioned as a "face-lift" of the over-60s and would be unflattering (e.g. eye colour, stub nose and eyebrows).Potential explanation would be a misidentification either in Isabella in Black or coincident confusions in Isabella in Red and the Ambras Miniature. The contradictions start in the inventory after Ruben's death in Antwerp with the simultaneous naming of Isabella in Red and Isabella in Black. The inventory is four generations later, in 1640, and thus included namings are not reliable. Portrayals with Balzo were often referred to as the famous patron of the arts after Isabella d'Este's death.The two older copies of the lost Titian original (including an inscription "Isabella Estensis" independent of Rubens) speak for the correct identification in the model of Isabella in Red. The Ambras Miniature also shows homogeneous features with Isabella in Red, bears also an inscription Isabella Estensis and, as a Mantuan copy about a generation later, should still represent a relatively contemporary identification. The confusion would then have to be (as published by some experts) in Isabella in Black. | [
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Isabella in Black",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Mantua"
] |
|
14797_NT | Isabella in Red (Rubens) | Explore the Identity of the sitter of this artwork. | As identifications of Isabella d'Este (1474-1539), three coloured portraits are exhibited in the Kunsthistorisches Museum. The personal characteristics are contradictory (see graphic on the right):Ambras Miniature (anonymous Mantuan artist in the 16th century),
Isabella in Red (copy by Rubens c. 1605 after a lost original by Titian) and
Isabella in Black (Titian 1530s).Due to the resulting confusion, all other museums have withdrawn colour identifications. The differences cannot be explained by idealisation, as Isabella in Black was commissioned as a "face-lift" of the over-60s and would be unflattering (e.g. eye colour, stub nose and eyebrows).Potential explanation would be a misidentification either in Isabella in Black or coincident confusions in Isabella in Red and the Ambras Miniature. The contradictions start in the inventory after Ruben's death in Antwerp with the simultaneous naming of Isabella in Red and Isabella in Black. The inventory is four generations later, in 1640, and thus included namings are not reliable. Portrayals with Balzo were often referred to as the famous patron of the arts after Isabella d'Este's death.The two older copies of the lost Titian original (including an inscription "Isabella Estensis" independent of Rubens) speak for the correct identification in the model of Isabella in Red. The Ambras Miniature also shows homogeneous features with Isabella in Red, bears also an inscription Isabella Estensis and, as a Mantuan copy about a generation later, should still represent a relatively contemporary identification. The confusion would then have to be (as published by some experts) in Isabella in Black. | [
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Rubens",
"Titian",
"Isabella in Black",
"Isabella d'Este",
"Mantua"
] |
|
14798_T | Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher | How does Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher elucidate its abstract? | The Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher is a painting by German Renaissance master Albrecht Dürer, dated from 1526, now housed in the Gemäldegalerie of Berlin, Germany. The signature is in the upper left corner, and reads HIERONIMVS HOLTZSCHVER ANNO DO[MI]NI 1526 ETATIS SVE 57.
The work was executed in Nuremberg, the same year in which the German artist portrayed Johann Kleberger and Jakob Muffel. Holzschuher was a local patrician who was senator and septemvir in its councils.
The panel has the same dimensions as the portrait of Muffel, and thus it has been speculated that they could have been commissioned for some official celebration and exhibited in the city's town hall. | [
"Jakob Muffel",
"Gemäldegalerie",
"Johann Kleberger",
"septemvir",
"Albrecht Dürer",
"Nuremberg",
"Berlin"
] |
|
14798_NT | Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | The Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher is a painting by German Renaissance master Albrecht Dürer, dated from 1526, now housed in the Gemäldegalerie of Berlin, Germany. The signature is in the upper left corner, and reads HIERONIMVS HOLTZSCHVER ANNO DO[MI]NI 1526 ETATIS SVE 57.
The work was executed in Nuremberg, the same year in which the German artist portrayed Johann Kleberger and Jakob Muffel. Holzschuher was a local patrician who was senator and septemvir in its councils.
The panel has the same dimensions as the portrait of Muffel, and thus it has been speculated that they could have been commissioned for some official celebration and exhibited in the city's town hall. | [
"Jakob Muffel",
"Gemäldegalerie",
"Johann Kleberger",
"septemvir",
"Albrecht Dürer",
"Nuremberg",
"Berlin"
] |
|
14799_T | Idle Woman | Focus on Idle Woman and analyze the abstract. | Idle Woman (Spanish: La Perezosa) is a genre painting completed in oil on canvas by Peruvian painter Daniel Hernández Morillo in Lima, Peru. | [
"oil on canvas",
"Daniel Hernández Morillo",
"genre painting",
"Lima"
] |
|
14799_NT | Idle Woman | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | Idle Woman (Spanish: La Perezosa) is a genre painting completed in oil on canvas by Peruvian painter Daniel Hernández Morillo in Lima, Peru. | [
"oil on canvas",
"Daniel Hernández Morillo",
"genre painting",
"Lima"
] |
|
14800_T | Idle Woman | In Idle Woman, how is the Background and creation discussed? | Daniel Hernández Morillo, a Peruvian student of itinerant Italian painter Leonardo Barbieri, left his homeland for Europe in 1874. Although Europe was in the midst of an artistic renewal, Morillo remained influenced by the academic art movement and French rococo painting. This is reflected in the pastel tones and the lightness of Idle Woman, which was completed in 1906. | [
"Daniel Hernández Morillo",
"Leonardo Barbieri",
"academic art",
"Europe",
"rococo painting"
] |
|
14800_NT | Idle Woman | In this artwork, how is the Background and creation discussed? | Daniel Hernández Morillo, a Peruvian student of itinerant Italian painter Leonardo Barbieri, left his homeland for Europe in 1874. Although Europe was in the midst of an artistic renewal, Morillo remained influenced by the academic art movement and French rococo painting. This is reflected in the pastel tones and the lightness of Idle Woman, which was completed in 1906. | [
"Daniel Hernández Morillo",
"Leonardo Barbieri",
"academic art",
"Europe",
"rococo painting"
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.