ID
stringlengths 6
8
| title
stringlengths 3
136
| question
stringlengths 33
235
| answer
stringlengths 51
15.3k
| image_url
stringlengths 57
817
| entities
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
15501_T | Salon Pedal | Focus on Salon Pedal and analyze the Analysis. | Salon Pedal is one of Alexandre de Riquer's notable works which he created during the evolution of his art career as a professional graphic artist in Barcelona. He was known to experiment with many different styles from the very beginning of his art training; From traditional landscape painting to mastery of illustrative creations. Examples of his work can be found in many different locations in Barcelona. Some of which are the decoration for the chemist shop on the corner of Carrer Nou de la Rambla, the lobby of the Cercle del Liceu, the Great Hall of the Industrial Institute in Terrassa, and the interior decoration of the Cafe Català. | [
"Alexandre de Riquer",
"Terrassa",
"car",
"Barcelona",
"Carrer Nou de la Rambla",
"Cercle del Liceu"
]
|
|
15501_NT | Salon Pedal | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Analysis. | Salon Pedal is one of Alexandre de Riquer's notable works which he created during the evolution of his art career as a professional graphic artist in Barcelona. He was known to experiment with many different styles from the very beginning of his art training; From traditional landscape painting to mastery of illustrative creations. Examples of his work can be found in many different locations in Barcelona. Some of which are the decoration for the chemist shop on the corner of Carrer Nou de la Rambla, the lobby of the Cercle del Liceu, the Great Hall of the Industrial Institute in Terrassa, and the interior decoration of the Cafe Català. | [
"Alexandre de Riquer",
"Terrassa",
"car",
"Barcelona",
"Carrer Nou de la Rambla",
"Cercle del Liceu"
]
|
|
15502_T | The Mouth of a Cave | Focus on The Mouth of a Cave and explore the abstract. | The Mouth of a Cave is an oil-on-canvas painting by French artist Hubert Robert, created in 1784. The painting is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York. | [
"Hubert Robert",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art",
"New York"
]
|
|
15502_NT | The Mouth of a Cave | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | The Mouth of a Cave is an oil-on-canvas painting by French artist Hubert Robert, created in 1784. The painting is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York. | [
"Hubert Robert",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art",
"New York"
]
|
|
15503_T | The Mouth of a Cave | Focus on The Mouth of a Cave and explain the Description. | The Mouth of a Cave was painted by Robert as part of a set of six paintings for the younger brother of Louis XVI. The work was at one point damaged by water, though it was later restored.The subject is likely to be inspired by the Grotta del Tuono in the Gulf of Naples. The Posillipo tunnel has also been suggested as a possible source of inspiration. | [
"Gulf of Naples",
"Posillipo tunnel",
"Louis XVI"
]
|
|
15503_NT | The Mouth of a Cave | Focus on this artwork and explain the Description. | The Mouth of a Cave was painted by Robert as part of a set of six paintings for the younger brother of Louis XVI. The work was at one point damaged by water, though it was later restored.The subject is likely to be inspired by the Grotta del Tuono in the Gulf of Naples. The Posillipo tunnel has also been suggested as a possible source of inspiration. | [
"Gulf of Naples",
"Posillipo tunnel",
"Louis XVI"
]
|
|
15504_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Baptistère de Saint Louis. | The Baptistère de Saint Louis is an object of Islamic art, made of hammered brass, and inlaid with silver, gold, and niello. It was produced in the Syro-Egyptian zone, under the Mamluk dynasty by the coppersmith Muhammad ibn al-Zayn. This object is now in the Islamic Arts department of the Louvre under inventory number LP 16. Despite its common name, it has no connection with the King of France Louis IX, known as Saint Louis (1226–1270). It was used as a baptismal font for future French Kings, making it an important Islamic and French historical object.
The origins and original purpose of the basin are not fully known, since the first record of the object was in a French church inventory. It was possibly used as a ritual washing bowl at the Mamluk court or it could have been commissioned by a Christian patron.
The Baptistère de Saint Louis has a complicated visual program on the interior and exterior, depicting a number of different groups of people, a wide variety of animals, fish, plants, and Arabic inscriptions. The basin was made through an engraving and hammering process using precious and high quality metal. Due to the ambiguous history of the basin, the meaning of the iconography, the exact date and location of its creation, and sponsorship is still being debated by scholars. | [
"Mamluk dynasty",
"Louis IX",
"Islamic art",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre"
]
|
|
15504_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | The Baptistère de Saint Louis is an object of Islamic art, made of hammered brass, and inlaid with silver, gold, and niello. It was produced in the Syro-Egyptian zone, under the Mamluk dynasty by the coppersmith Muhammad ibn al-Zayn. This object is now in the Islamic Arts department of the Louvre under inventory number LP 16. Despite its common name, it has no connection with the King of France Louis IX, known as Saint Louis (1226–1270). It was used as a baptismal font for future French Kings, making it an important Islamic and French historical object.
The origins and original purpose of the basin are not fully known, since the first record of the object was in a French church inventory. It was possibly used as a ritual washing bowl at the Mamluk court or it could have been commissioned by a Christian patron.
The Baptistère de Saint Louis has a complicated visual program on the interior and exterior, depicting a number of different groups of people, a wide variety of animals, fish, plants, and Arabic inscriptions. The basin was made through an engraving and hammering process using precious and high quality metal. Due to the ambiguous history of the basin, the meaning of the iconography, the exact date and location of its creation, and sponsorship is still being debated by scholars. | [
"Mamluk dynasty",
"Louis IX",
"Islamic art",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre"
]
|
|
15505_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on Baptistère de Saint Louis and discuss the History. | The conditions of commissioning and production of the object are still unknown, as is the date and context of its arrival in France. It does not appear on the inventory of goods Charles V erected before 1380, but it is mentioned around 1440 in an unpublished inventory of the treasure of the Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes. On September 14, 1606, it was used for the baptism of the future king Louis XIII.The Baptistery can be traced several times to the 18th century: first in an inventory of the sacristy of the Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes of 1739 and in the article "Vincennes" in Description of Paris by Jean-Aimar Piganiol of La Force, in 1742, in which he explains that the baptistery was located for some time at the Bâtme des Enfans de France and served at the baptism of Dauphin who later went on to reign as Louis XIII. He then goes on to describe the Persian or Chinese figures throughout the basin as well as the variety of animals represented throughout the inner frieze. In 1791, Aubin-Louis Milin, in National Antiquities, seems to be the first to make the link between the Baptistery and Saint LouisThe same author recognizes many Western characters; he believes that the four horsemen present in the medallions outside indicate the years of conflict between the sultans and the Franks. Milin also raises the possibility of an earlier arrival in France, linked to the Embassy of Harun al-Rashid to Charlemagne at the beginning of the 10th century. The work also presents rather imprecise engravings, but which show that the object has not undergone major modification since that time, with the exception of the addition of two plates to the arms of France in 1821, a date in which the object is used to baptise the Duke of Bordeaux.On 17 January 1793, the Baptistery was sent to the deposit of Petits-Augustins before entering the museum nine days later. Replaced in 1818 at Vincennes, by order of the king, it returned to the Louvre in 1852, after a decree of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte stating that "all objects that belonged to the rulers who ruled France would be sought, gathered and placed in the Palace of the Louvre." It left the museum temporarily in 1856 to serve in Notre Dame at the baptismal ceremony of Prince Napoleon Eugene; this is the last time this basin was used as a baptismal object.The year 1866 is marked by two publications: in the Catalog of the Museum of Sovereigns Henry Barbet de Jouy describes the subjects of the basin and their depiction of a Saracen prince fighting, hunting, and feasting, as well as the different animals, some predators and some prey.
Barbet de Jouy calls into question the dating proposed before and puts forward the hypothesis of a work reported in France around 1150. For its part, Adrien Prévost de Longpérier proposes in an article the first scientific study of the Baptistery. He discovered the origin of the false date of Piganiol, refutes the idea that the work served at the baptism of St. Louis, and sees a work of the first half of the 13th century, because of fleur-de-lys which seem to have been added in the 13th or 14th century in Europe.
In 1930, a stylistic analysis by Mehmet Aga Oglu is the first to recognize the baptistry as a work of Syrian workshop, and the date of the first quarter of the 14th century. Nine years later, at the time of the German invasion, the basin was made safe in the Chambord castle by conservationists John David-Weill and David Storm Rice, who was then in Paris to study. World War II delayed the release of his monograph, which remains today the most comprehensive and best illustrative reference. His interpretations have, however, been partly questioned by several researchers since then. | [
"Napoleon Eugene",
"Harun al-Rashid",
"Mehmet Aga Oglu",
"Aubin-Louis Milin",
"Henry Barbet de Jouy",
"Louvre",
"Charles V",
"Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes",
"Charlemagne",
"Louis XIII",
"Chambord castle",
"Louis Napoleon Bonaparte"
]
|
|
15505_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on this artwork and discuss the History. | The conditions of commissioning and production of the object are still unknown, as is the date and context of its arrival in France. It does not appear on the inventory of goods Charles V erected before 1380, but it is mentioned around 1440 in an unpublished inventory of the treasure of the Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes. On September 14, 1606, it was used for the baptism of the future king Louis XIII.The Baptistery can be traced several times to the 18th century: first in an inventory of the sacristy of the Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes of 1739 and in the article "Vincennes" in Description of Paris by Jean-Aimar Piganiol of La Force, in 1742, in which he explains that the baptistery was located for some time at the Bâtme des Enfans de France and served at the baptism of Dauphin who later went on to reign as Louis XIII. He then goes on to describe the Persian or Chinese figures throughout the basin as well as the variety of animals represented throughout the inner frieze. In 1791, Aubin-Louis Milin, in National Antiquities, seems to be the first to make the link between the Baptistery and Saint LouisThe same author recognizes many Western characters; he believes that the four horsemen present in the medallions outside indicate the years of conflict between the sultans and the Franks. Milin also raises the possibility of an earlier arrival in France, linked to the Embassy of Harun al-Rashid to Charlemagne at the beginning of the 10th century. The work also presents rather imprecise engravings, but which show that the object has not undergone major modification since that time, with the exception of the addition of two plates to the arms of France in 1821, a date in which the object is used to baptise the Duke of Bordeaux.On 17 January 1793, the Baptistery was sent to the deposit of Petits-Augustins before entering the museum nine days later. Replaced in 1818 at Vincennes, by order of the king, it returned to the Louvre in 1852, after a decree of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte stating that "all objects that belonged to the rulers who ruled France would be sought, gathered and placed in the Palace of the Louvre." It left the museum temporarily in 1856 to serve in Notre Dame at the baptismal ceremony of Prince Napoleon Eugene; this is the last time this basin was used as a baptismal object.The year 1866 is marked by two publications: in the Catalog of the Museum of Sovereigns Henry Barbet de Jouy describes the subjects of the basin and their depiction of a Saracen prince fighting, hunting, and feasting, as well as the different animals, some predators and some prey.
Barbet de Jouy calls into question the dating proposed before and puts forward the hypothesis of a work reported in France around 1150. For its part, Adrien Prévost de Longpérier proposes in an article the first scientific study of the Baptistery. He discovered the origin of the false date of Piganiol, refutes the idea that the work served at the baptism of St. Louis, and sees a work of the first half of the 13th century, because of fleur-de-lys which seem to have been added in the 13th or 14th century in Europe.
In 1930, a stylistic analysis by Mehmet Aga Oglu is the first to recognize the baptistry as a work of Syrian workshop, and the date of the first quarter of the 14th century. Nine years later, at the time of the German invasion, the basin was made safe in the Chambord castle by conservationists John David-Weill and David Storm Rice, who was then in Paris to study. World War II delayed the release of his monograph, which remains today the most comprehensive and best illustrative reference. His interpretations have, however, been partly questioned by several researchers since then. | [
"Napoleon Eugene",
"Harun al-Rashid",
"Mehmet Aga Oglu",
"Aubin-Louis Milin",
"Henry Barbet de Jouy",
"Louvre",
"Charles V",
"Sainte-Chapelle de Vincennes",
"Charlemagne",
"Louis XIII",
"Chambord castle",
"Louis Napoleon Bonaparte"
]
|
|
15506_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | How does Baptistère de Saint Louis elucidate its Manufacturing: technical and work organization? | The technique of making this object consists of inlaid metalwork which is still practiced in Cairo to this day. The artist first develops the desired pattern by hammering the brass and then polishing it. Subsequently, he creates the next layer of decorative metal by dividing the surface of the basin into divisions, then drawing the figures and foliage. The artist cuts the patterns out of precious metal and prepares it to be hammered into the brass. The artist then begins working hammers the precious materials, silver and gold, into the copper, and then engraves the details. The final step is coating the bowl with bituminous black material, which enhances the engravings, highlights the contours, and creates contrasts.This technique appears in Islamic lands in the 12th century, probably in eastern Iran, before spreading quickly to the Syrian world. The Ayyubid dynasty, especially the artists of the "School of Mosul," some of whom worked in Damascus brought this technique to a zenith. The Mamluks, who came to power in 1250, adopted this tradition and produced works of great luxury in the Bahrite period (1250–1382).
Despite its generally stable state of conservation, the Saint Louis Baptistery has lost part of its inlay, either because of the wear of time (which is probably the case for the fish that were covered by water) or by vandals who stole the precious metal. This phenomenon of theft and loss took place mainly at the end of the 14th century, when the precious metals were scarce. However, the majority of the basin's inlays are complete.
The organization of work in the workshops remains difficult to understand because of a lack of written sources. Although coppersmiths appear to sign their work more so than other artisans, they were still considered to be artisans of secondary status, unlikely to attract the attention of their contemporary scholars. The Baptistery bears the signature of one person named Muhammad ibn al-Zayn, who also put his name on a smaller bowl in the Louvre. LA Mayer emphasizes that some works with two signatures show that there is usually at least one artist doing the foundational work of shaping the bowl, and another, the Naqqash, was the main decorative inlayer. When a name is inlaid in silver letters, it usually means that this person was the “master” and inserter. One such name is Muhammad ibn al-Zayn, Al mu'allim. The use of the term al-mu'allim is found in other pieces of Mamluk inlaid metals such as a piece of furniture in the name of an-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qala'un kept at the Museum of Islamic Art in Cairo, or a mirror preserved at the Topkapi Museum. | [
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre"
]
|
|
15506_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | How does this artwork elucidate its Manufacturing: technical and work organization? | The technique of making this object consists of inlaid metalwork which is still practiced in Cairo to this day. The artist first develops the desired pattern by hammering the brass and then polishing it. Subsequently, he creates the next layer of decorative metal by dividing the surface of the basin into divisions, then drawing the figures and foliage. The artist cuts the patterns out of precious metal and prepares it to be hammered into the brass. The artist then begins working hammers the precious materials, silver and gold, into the copper, and then engraves the details. The final step is coating the bowl with bituminous black material, which enhances the engravings, highlights the contours, and creates contrasts.This technique appears in Islamic lands in the 12th century, probably in eastern Iran, before spreading quickly to the Syrian world. The Ayyubid dynasty, especially the artists of the "School of Mosul," some of whom worked in Damascus brought this technique to a zenith. The Mamluks, who came to power in 1250, adopted this tradition and produced works of great luxury in the Bahrite period (1250–1382).
Despite its generally stable state of conservation, the Saint Louis Baptistery has lost part of its inlay, either because of the wear of time (which is probably the case for the fish that were covered by water) or by vandals who stole the precious metal. This phenomenon of theft and loss took place mainly at the end of the 14th century, when the precious metals were scarce. However, the majority of the basin's inlays are complete.
The organization of work in the workshops remains difficult to understand because of a lack of written sources. Although coppersmiths appear to sign their work more so than other artisans, they were still considered to be artisans of secondary status, unlikely to attract the attention of their contemporary scholars. The Baptistery bears the signature of one person named Muhammad ibn al-Zayn, who also put his name on a smaller bowl in the Louvre. LA Mayer emphasizes that some works with two signatures show that there is usually at least one artist doing the foundational work of shaping the bowl, and another, the Naqqash, was the main decorative inlayer. When a name is inlaid in silver letters, it usually means that this person was the “master” and inserter. One such name is Muhammad ibn al-Zayn, Al mu'allim. The use of the term al-mu'allim is found in other pieces of Mamluk inlaid metals such as a piece of furniture in the name of an-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qala'un kept at the Museum of Islamic Art in Cairo, or a mirror preserved at the Topkapi Museum. | [
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre"
]
|
|
15507_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on Baptistère de Saint Louis and analyze the Form and style. | Basins with flared edges had existed since the Ayyubid period: for example, the Arenberg Basin, dated around 1247–1249 and preserved at the Freer Gallery of Art, or the basin in the name of Salih Najm ad-Din Ayyub preserved in the Museum of Islamic Art in Cairo. However, these basins often have a fairly smooth and curved transition zone. With its strongly streamlined profile, angularity, as well as its remarkable dimensions, the Baptistery of Saint Louis moves away from this type. It belongs to a group of basins of similar shape and size, 50 of which two bear the name of Sultan An-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qala'un, one is dedicated to a Sultan of Yemen and another was made to Hugh IV of Lusignan. There is another basin also very close in form and decoration, but is unfinished probably because of a technical accident (a crack in the background) and is kept at the LA Mayer Memorial in Jerusalem, and was attributed to Muhammad ibn al-Zayn by Jonathan M. Bloom.The general style of the basin is a continuation of previous works. The friezes of animals is an element that predates Islam. All the frieze animals are traditional species in the arts of middle east: all are found, for example, in the copies of Ibn Bakhtishu's Manafi al-Hayawan. In particular, the unicorn chasing the elephant is a recurrent theme of Islamic art, which echoes legends reported by al-Jahiz and al-Qazwini in particular; it is found on lustrous tiles in the thirteenth century in Iran and on bas-reliefs in Konya during the same period. In the same way, the association between the griffin and the sphinx is well established at the time of the creation of the Baptistery. Only the serpentine dragon could have been a novelty that arrived in Egypt with the Mongol invasion; however, they are found in the Syrian zone from the Seljuk period. Rounds of fish including other animals become a motif according to E. Baer at the beginning of the fourteenth century, as shown by an Iranian brass inlaid metal bowl, dated around 1305. For her, these motifs "evoke – it seems – dreams about distant seas and foreign whose waters bring wealth and good fortune. " Several elements would indicate a certain sense of humor on the part of the artist, such as the absurd inscription on the flat, or the presence of a small rabbit represented from the front, for short, which seems to look directly at the viewer.In the same way, decorative foliage parallels older works. The spiral motif is predominant in Egypt: it is found for example on ivories and Fatimid woodwork. In Ayyubid metals, as on the Basin of Sultan al-'Adil II signed by al-Dhaki, the foliage – as well as the calligraphy of the signature – are very similar to those on the Baptistery. The tall-stemmed flowers bearing rows of leaves fare parallel to Baghdad's painting of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, such as the Pseudo-Galian's Book of Antidotes, which dates to 1199. There are no new motifs in the Baptistery that are not found in other works. Brought by the Mongol invasions, the group of metalworks (except those of LA Mayer) have a large number of peony flowers in particular. The only peonies of the Baptistery are present on a napkin worn by a character, which could demonstrate his Mongol origin. The five-petalled florets surrounding the blazons in the internal medallions find immediate parallels in the medallions of the other basins in the group.
But the most unusual missing element on the Baptistery is the absence of a large inscription in Thuluth, characteristic of the art of this period. The other basins of the group, with the exception of that of the L. A. Mayer collection, that are unfinished and undated still have large Thuluth inscriptions. J. M. Bloom as R. Ward and S. Makariou both note this incongruity; R. Ward and S. Makariou argue it could be due to Christian ownership of the Baptistery. However, the basin in the name of Hugh de Lusignan in the Louvre bears a large inscription in Thuluth calligraph. | [
"Islamic art",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre",
"Manafi al-Hayawan"
]
|
|
15507_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Form and style. | Basins with flared edges had existed since the Ayyubid period: for example, the Arenberg Basin, dated around 1247–1249 and preserved at the Freer Gallery of Art, or the basin in the name of Salih Najm ad-Din Ayyub preserved in the Museum of Islamic Art in Cairo. However, these basins often have a fairly smooth and curved transition zone. With its strongly streamlined profile, angularity, as well as its remarkable dimensions, the Baptistery of Saint Louis moves away from this type. It belongs to a group of basins of similar shape and size, 50 of which two bear the name of Sultan An-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qala'un, one is dedicated to a Sultan of Yemen and another was made to Hugh IV of Lusignan. There is another basin also very close in form and decoration, but is unfinished probably because of a technical accident (a crack in the background) and is kept at the LA Mayer Memorial in Jerusalem, and was attributed to Muhammad ibn al-Zayn by Jonathan M. Bloom.The general style of the basin is a continuation of previous works. The friezes of animals is an element that predates Islam. All the frieze animals are traditional species in the arts of middle east: all are found, for example, in the copies of Ibn Bakhtishu's Manafi al-Hayawan. In particular, the unicorn chasing the elephant is a recurrent theme of Islamic art, which echoes legends reported by al-Jahiz and al-Qazwini in particular; it is found on lustrous tiles in the thirteenth century in Iran and on bas-reliefs in Konya during the same period. In the same way, the association between the griffin and the sphinx is well established at the time of the creation of the Baptistery. Only the serpentine dragon could have been a novelty that arrived in Egypt with the Mongol invasion; however, they are found in the Syrian zone from the Seljuk period. Rounds of fish including other animals become a motif according to E. Baer at the beginning of the fourteenth century, as shown by an Iranian brass inlaid metal bowl, dated around 1305. For her, these motifs "evoke – it seems – dreams about distant seas and foreign whose waters bring wealth and good fortune. " Several elements would indicate a certain sense of humor on the part of the artist, such as the absurd inscription on the flat, or the presence of a small rabbit represented from the front, for short, which seems to look directly at the viewer.In the same way, decorative foliage parallels older works. The spiral motif is predominant in Egypt: it is found for example on ivories and Fatimid woodwork. In Ayyubid metals, as on the Basin of Sultan al-'Adil II signed by al-Dhaki, the foliage – as well as the calligraphy of the signature – are very similar to those on the Baptistery. The tall-stemmed flowers bearing rows of leaves fare parallel to Baghdad's painting of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, such as the Pseudo-Galian's Book of Antidotes, which dates to 1199. There are no new motifs in the Baptistery that are not found in other works. Brought by the Mongol invasions, the group of metalworks (except those of LA Mayer) have a large number of peony flowers in particular. The only peonies of the Baptistery are present on a napkin worn by a character, which could demonstrate his Mongol origin. The five-petalled florets surrounding the blazons in the internal medallions find immediate parallels in the medallions of the other basins in the group.
But the most unusual missing element on the Baptistery is the absence of a large inscription in Thuluth, characteristic of the art of this period. The other basins of the group, with the exception of that of the L. A. Mayer collection, that are unfinished and undated still have large Thuluth inscriptions. J. M. Bloom as R. Ward and S. Makariou both note this incongruity; R. Ward and S. Makariou argue it could be due to Christian ownership of the Baptistery. However, the basin in the name of Hugh de Lusignan in the Louvre bears a large inscription in Thuluth calligraph. | [
"Islamic art",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn",
"Louvre",
"Manafi al-Hayawan"
]
|
|
15508_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | In Baptistère de Saint Louis, how is the Interpretations of iconography discussed? | The interpretation of the iconography of the Baptistery of St. Louis has been controversial since the nineteenth century. Most researchers, including DS Rice, agree that some of the scenes depicted specific events, while some elements, such as genuflection, have no equivalent in other Islamic art and might be purely decorative. However, Rachel Ward argues against this interpretation by pointing out that Mamluks do not have a tradition of portraiture or 'history painting' in their metal art, and that such representation would be inconceivable without an inscription that identifies the scene. She also believes that looking to date the basin based on the costumes represented is absurd, as Mamluk artists worked more abstractly rather than direct representation.
S. Makariou considers R. Ward's hypotheses valid, while other researchers disagree. D. Rice argues, based on the difference in clothing and physical characters of the external friezes, contrasts with the traditional Mamluk costume, that two the basin depicts two distinct groups: panels E1 and E3 depict Turkish emirs and panels E2 and E4 depict Arab servants. Among the emirs, one could be Salar because of his coat of arms, but because of some of the figures around him, like the huntsman (fahhad), the cheetah, and the falconer (bâzyâr) all associated with emirship. The medallions with the scenes of throne might have no particular meaning; on the other hand, there would be narrative continuity between the battle scenes, the severed head being that of the character struck in the previous banner.In 1984 E. Knauer, in an article devoted to the representation of the Mongols in the painting of trecento, proposes that the baptistery was "a testimony of the lively exchanges between Berke Khan and Baybars I, which culminate with the circumcision of the son of Baybars on September 3, 1264, in the presence of the representative [of the Golden Horde]. E. Knauer supports his point by looking at the unusual character of the double coat of arms; he identifies the lion-shaped one at Baybars, and evokes the idea that the tamga-shaped one would be that of the young circumcised, Berke. He mostly identifies hats as Mongol hats, and believes that their physical type would be that of the Caucasian emirates.Doris Behrens-Abouseif, in 1989, questions these assumptions. She insists that the types identified as servants by Rice are sometimes associated with aristocratic privilege. For her, each rider in the medallions represents an aspect of the furusiyya, an equestrian art highly valued in the Mamluk period; the entire Baptistery would be an evocation of tournaments (maydân) taking place during ceremonies at the time of Sultan Baybars. | [
"Islamic art"
]
|
|
15508_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | In this artwork, how is the Interpretations of iconography discussed? | The interpretation of the iconography of the Baptistery of St. Louis has been controversial since the nineteenth century. Most researchers, including DS Rice, agree that some of the scenes depicted specific events, while some elements, such as genuflection, have no equivalent in other Islamic art and might be purely decorative. However, Rachel Ward argues against this interpretation by pointing out that Mamluks do not have a tradition of portraiture or 'history painting' in their metal art, and that such representation would be inconceivable without an inscription that identifies the scene. She also believes that looking to date the basin based on the costumes represented is absurd, as Mamluk artists worked more abstractly rather than direct representation.
S. Makariou considers R. Ward's hypotheses valid, while other researchers disagree. D. Rice argues, based on the difference in clothing and physical characters of the external friezes, contrasts with the traditional Mamluk costume, that two the basin depicts two distinct groups: panels E1 and E3 depict Turkish emirs and panels E2 and E4 depict Arab servants. Among the emirs, one could be Salar because of his coat of arms, but because of some of the figures around him, like the huntsman (fahhad), the cheetah, and the falconer (bâzyâr) all associated with emirship. The medallions with the scenes of throne might have no particular meaning; on the other hand, there would be narrative continuity between the battle scenes, the severed head being that of the character struck in the previous banner.In 1984 E. Knauer, in an article devoted to the representation of the Mongols in the painting of trecento, proposes that the baptistery was "a testimony of the lively exchanges between Berke Khan and Baybars I, which culminate with the circumcision of the son of Baybars on September 3, 1264, in the presence of the representative [of the Golden Horde]. E. Knauer supports his point by looking at the unusual character of the double coat of arms; he identifies the lion-shaped one at Baybars, and evokes the idea that the tamga-shaped one would be that of the young circumcised, Berke. He mostly identifies hats as Mongol hats, and believes that their physical type would be that of the Caucasian emirates.Doris Behrens-Abouseif, in 1989, questions these assumptions. She insists that the types identified as servants by Rice are sometimes associated with aristocratic privilege. For her, each rider in the medallions represents an aspect of the furusiyya, an equestrian art highly valued in the Mamluk period; the entire Baptistery would be an evocation of tournaments (maydân) taking place during ceremonies at the time of Sultan Baybars. | [
"Islamic art"
]
|
|
15509_T | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on Baptistère de Saint Louis and explore the Sponsor, dating, and location. | These different hypotheses result in academics dating and locating the Baptistery differently. By his identification of Salar as an emissary represented and sponsor of the work, D. S. Rice proposes a date between 1290 and 1310 . A stylistic comparison with a bowl kept in the Berlin museum and made for Emir Sumul, companion of Salar, allows him to support his hypothesis. He speculates that the lion's coat of arms could be that of Baybars II70. As for localization, the presence of a crocodile, a nilotic animal, makes it look like an Egyptian work.E. Knauer and D. Behrens-Abouseif, identify the scenes as related to the life of Baybars I, argue for an older dating in the third quarter of the thirteenth century. After having questioned Rice's dating because of the costume, Behrens-Abouseif puts forward several arguments to this effect: the costumes of the non-Mongol emirs are archaic; the strange absence of musicians Baybars hated; the importance of Mongolian traits, to be linked with the influx of Mongol refugees in Cairo under Baybars; the highlighting of charges put in place and renovated by the Baybars reforms; the importance given to the lion in iconography. For her, the work is therefore an order of Sultan Baybars.On the contrary, R. Ward believes that the Baptistery is an early example of Venetian-Saracenic metal, made in Syria for a European sponsor in the mid-fourteenth century. The quality of the metal does not necessarily mean it was created for the local rulers. According to her; on the contrary, the absence of monumental inscriptions to the titles of a major character shows that this is a work done for a foreign sponsor because it would be labelled if it was meant for local nobility. In the same way, the signatures and the annexed inscriptions would be only a decorative tool, because they would not have been appreciated by a sponsor unable to read Arabic. The shield shape that was kept free of metal and the use of the rampant lion flag (the Lusignans symbol) indicates a European sponsor since there were no comparable Islamic symbols. The dating proposed between 1325 and 1360 is based essentially on the gradual approximation of the age of Baptistery within the group of basins already mentioned, and with a corresponding group of manuscripts made in Damascus between 1334 and 1360. This comparison, the fact that Damascus was recognized in Europe as a center of metal (sensitive in the words "damasquinure" and "damassé") whereas Cairo was closed to foreigners, supports the theory that the manufacturer was in Damascus. This hypothesis could be reinforced by the existence, in Damascus, of an iron gate dated 1340–59, which contains the name Muhammad ibn al-Zayn; however, the identification of the author of the Baptistery with that of the grates of Damascus remains questionable, because it would then be a unique example of an unusual artist who worked both iron and brass metal inlay works. S. Makariou argues this hypotheses and proposes that the lion's coat of arms belong to Hugh IV of Lusignan. | [
"center",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn"
]
|
|
15509_NT | Baptistère de Saint Louis | Focus on this artwork and explore the Sponsor, dating, and location. | These different hypotheses result in academics dating and locating the Baptistery differently. By his identification of Salar as an emissary represented and sponsor of the work, D. S. Rice proposes a date between 1290 and 1310 . A stylistic comparison with a bowl kept in the Berlin museum and made for Emir Sumul, companion of Salar, allows him to support his hypothesis. He speculates that the lion's coat of arms could be that of Baybars II70. As for localization, the presence of a crocodile, a nilotic animal, makes it look like an Egyptian work.E. Knauer and D. Behrens-Abouseif, identify the scenes as related to the life of Baybars I, argue for an older dating in the third quarter of the thirteenth century. After having questioned Rice's dating because of the costume, Behrens-Abouseif puts forward several arguments to this effect: the costumes of the non-Mongol emirs are archaic; the strange absence of musicians Baybars hated; the importance of Mongolian traits, to be linked with the influx of Mongol refugees in Cairo under Baybars; the highlighting of charges put in place and renovated by the Baybars reforms; the importance given to the lion in iconography. For her, the work is therefore an order of Sultan Baybars.On the contrary, R. Ward believes that the Baptistery is an early example of Venetian-Saracenic metal, made in Syria for a European sponsor in the mid-fourteenth century. The quality of the metal does not necessarily mean it was created for the local rulers. According to her; on the contrary, the absence of monumental inscriptions to the titles of a major character shows that this is a work done for a foreign sponsor because it would be labelled if it was meant for local nobility. In the same way, the signatures and the annexed inscriptions would be only a decorative tool, because they would not have been appreciated by a sponsor unable to read Arabic. The shield shape that was kept free of metal and the use of the rampant lion flag (the Lusignans symbol) indicates a European sponsor since there were no comparable Islamic symbols. The dating proposed between 1325 and 1360 is based essentially on the gradual approximation of the age of Baptistery within the group of basins already mentioned, and with a corresponding group of manuscripts made in Damascus between 1334 and 1360. This comparison, the fact that Damascus was recognized in Europe as a center of metal (sensitive in the words "damasquinure" and "damassé") whereas Cairo was closed to foreigners, supports the theory that the manufacturer was in Damascus. This hypothesis could be reinforced by the existence, in Damascus, of an iron gate dated 1340–59, which contains the name Muhammad ibn al-Zayn; however, the identification of the author of the Baptistery with that of the grates of Damascus remains questionable, because it would then be a unique example of an unusual artist who worked both iron and brass metal inlay works. S. Makariou argues this hypotheses and proposes that the lion's coat of arms belong to Hugh IV of Lusignan. | [
"center",
"Muhammad ibn al-Zayn"
]
|
|
15510_T | The Knight in Black | Focus on The Knight in Black and explain the abstract. | The Knight in Black is an oil on canvas portrait painting of an unknown male subject by Giovanni Battista Moroni, from c. 1567. It is held in the Museo Poldi Pezzoli, in Milan. | [
"Giovanni Battista Moroni",
"Milan",
"Museo Poldi Pezzoli"
]
|
|
15510_NT | The Knight in Black | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | The Knight in Black is an oil on canvas portrait painting of an unknown male subject by Giovanni Battista Moroni, from c. 1567. It is held in the Museo Poldi Pezzoli, in Milan. | [
"Giovanni Battista Moroni",
"Milan",
"Museo Poldi Pezzoli"
]
|
|
15511_T | The Knight in Black | Explore the History of this artwork, The Knight in Black. | The first written reference to the work shows it was probably in Secco Suardo's collection with other portraits produced for his family by the same artist. At the end of the 18th century it was still in the family, namely with Caterina Terzi Secco Suardo in Bergamo, shortly before passing to Barbara Secco Suardo Mosconi of the same city and then to the latter's husband Giovanni Mosconi. In 1845 it was left to the Moroni counts in Bergamo, before being acquired by Luciano Scotti, son of Giulia Casanova and Annibale Scotti. In 1952 it was moved to Milan, where it remained for ten years before being donated to its present owner. | [
"Luciano Scotti",
"Bergamo",
"Milan"
]
|
|
15511_NT | The Knight in Black | Explore the History of this artwork. | The first written reference to the work shows it was probably in Secco Suardo's collection with other portraits produced for his family by the same artist. At the end of the 18th century it was still in the family, namely with Caterina Terzi Secco Suardo in Bergamo, shortly before passing to Barbara Secco Suardo Mosconi of the same city and then to the latter's husband Giovanni Mosconi. In 1845 it was left to the Moroni counts in Bergamo, before being acquired by Luciano Scotti, son of Giulia Casanova and Annibale Scotti. In 1952 it was moved to Milan, where it remained for ten years before being donated to its present owner. | [
"Luciano Scotti",
"Bergamo",
"Milan"
]
|
|
15512_T | The Knight in Black | Focus on The Knight in Black and discuss the Description and analysis. | As in many other portraits by Moroni of the same time, the subject of the painting is anonymous. He seems to be from the nobility, because of his fine clothing, has a beard and is portrayed standing, life-sized, dressed in black according to the fashion of the time, refined even more by a curled white collar. He has one hand helding the hilt of the sword tied at his waist, while the other hand is on his chest. The clothing has an extraordinary drapery, specially adequated for the composition which is based on a single colour. He wears a black hat on his head, decorated with an elegant and light black feather that stands out diaphanously in the background.The man is portrayed while looking straight at the viewer, with a confident attitude. He is probably inserted in the context of a house, with the presence of a gray background with pilasters, on which his shadow is also hinted. | []
|
|
15512_NT | The Knight in Black | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Description and analysis. | As in many other portraits by Moroni of the same time, the subject of the painting is anonymous. He seems to be from the nobility, because of his fine clothing, has a beard and is portrayed standing, life-sized, dressed in black according to the fashion of the time, refined even more by a curled white collar. He has one hand helding the hilt of the sword tied at his waist, while the other hand is on his chest. The clothing has an extraordinary drapery, specially adequated for the composition which is based on a single colour. He wears a black hat on his head, decorated with an elegant and light black feather that stands out diaphanously in the background.The man is portrayed while looking straight at the viewer, with a confident attitude. He is probably inserted in the context of a house, with the presence of a gray background with pilasters, on which his shadow is also hinted. | []
|
|
15513_T | El Khasné, Petra (painting) | How does El Khasné, Petra (painting) elucidate its abstract? | El Khasné, Petra is an 1874 oil painting by American landscape artist Frederic Edwin Church. It is a depiction of the Al-Khazneh temple in the historical city of Petra, Jordan, which Church visited during an extended trip to the Middle East and Europe in 1867 and 1868. He visited the tomb with American missionary D. Stuart Dodge in February 1868 and made sketches there. The painting is located at Olana State Historic Site, the preserved homestead where Church lived in his later years. It may be the last canvas that he painted entirely with his right hand, owing to worsening rheumatoid arthritis.
The mausoleum is carved out of sandstone and at the time was only approachable by the depicted passageway, called the Siq. Church composed the painting as he would have first glimpsed the temple; he frames it with the dark rock in a manner that is unconventional for its time. Church found the site "astonishing" and wrote in his diary of a "beautiful temple ... shining as if by its own internal light", which he described as a salmon color. The composition is unlike those of the paintings that had made Church famous; there is no panoramic view, no conveyance of a "greater whole", and little sense of depth. The narrow passage has a stream running through it, and the two Bedouin figures at left, barely discernible, provide a sense of scale.
Church set out for Petra from Jerusalem with a large entourage of 21 men who provided meals and protection, and got on well with them. The area was popular with artists but considered dangerous; Church reported that an artist had been shot before him. Taking sketches of sacred locales was not necessarily seen as an innocent activity. As Church wrote:We went straight to the famous Khasné, first as being the best of all the temples at Petra—I saw it, was astonished and then deliberately opened my three legged stool, sat upon it, opened my sketchbook, spread out the paper, sharpened the pencil, took a square look at the Temple and an askant one at the Bedawins and made my first line—they made no motion and after a few rapid touches, I felt that the mystery was solved in my favor—I could sketch without let or hindrance, a freedom unaccorded before.
The painting was a gift to Church's wife. He designed it, along with its frame, for the sitting room in which it still hangs at the Olana site. Its salmon color is reflected in the interior decoration. It was shown at the National Academy in 1874. | [
"Jordan",
"Bedouin",
"Olana State Historic Site",
"Petra",
"D. Stuart Dodge",
"Al-Khazneh",
"Frederic Edwin Church"
]
|
|
15513_NT | El Khasné, Petra (painting) | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | El Khasné, Petra is an 1874 oil painting by American landscape artist Frederic Edwin Church. It is a depiction of the Al-Khazneh temple in the historical city of Petra, Jordan, which Church visited during an extended trip to the Middle East and Europe in 1867 and 1868. He visited the tomb with American missionary D. Stuart Dodge in February 1868 and made sketches there. The painting is located at Olana State Historic Site, the preserved homestead where Church lived in his later years. It may be the last canvas that he painted entirely with his right hand, owing to worsening rheumatoid arthritis.
The mausoleum is carved out of sandstone and at the time was only approachable by the depicted passageway, called the Siq. Church composed the painting as he would have first glimpsed the temple; he frames it with the dark rock in a manner that is unconventional for its time. Church found the site "astonishing" and wrote in his diary of a "beautiful temple ... shining as if by its own internal light", which he described as a salmon color. The composition is unlike those of the paintings that had made Church famous; there is no panoramic view, no conveyance of a "greater whole", and little sense of depth. The narrow passage has a stream running through it, and the two Bedouin figures at left, barely discernible, provide a sense of scale.
Church set out for Petra from Jerusalem with a large entourage of 21 men who provided meals and protection, and got on well with them. The area was popular with artists but considered dangerous; Church reported that an artist had been shot before him. Taking sketches of sacred locales was not necessarily seen as an innocent activity. As Church wrote:We went straight to the famous Khasné, first as being the best of all the temples at Petra—I saw it, was astonished and then deliberately opened my three legged stool, sat upon it, opened my sketchbook, spread out the paper, sharpened the pencil, took a square look at the Temple and an askant one at the Bedawins and made my first line—they made no motion and after a few rapid touches, I felt that the mystery was solved in my favor—I could sketch without let or hindrance, a freedom unaccorded before.
The painting was a gift to Church's wife. He designed it, along with its frame, for the sitting room in which it still hangs at the Olana site. Its salmon color is reflected in the interior decoration. It was shown at the National Academy in 1874. | [
"Jordan",
"Bedouin",
"Olana State Historic Site",
"Petra",
"D. Stuart Dodge",
"Al-Khazneh",
"Frederic Edwin Church"
]
|
|
15514_T | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria | Focus on Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria and analyze the abstract. | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria is an oil-on-panel painting by the Italian Renaissance painter Fra Bartolomeo, created c. 1516, commissioned by the church of Santa Maria in Castello in Prato. To the left of the Virgin's tomb is John the Baptist, whilst to the right is Catherine of Alexandria. It is now in the National Museum of Capodimonte in Naples.
It was confiscated from San Luigi dei Francesi in Rome in 1800 and acquired by Domenico Venuti for the Bourbon collection. | [
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Italian Renaissance",
"Naples",
"John the Baptist",
"Prato",
"San Luigi dei Francesi",
"Catherine of Alexandria",
"National Museum of Capodimonte"
]
|
|
15514_NT | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria is an oil-on-panel painting by the Italian Renaissance painter Fra Bartolomeo, created c. 1516, commissioned by the church of Santa Maria in Castello in Prato. To the left of the Virgin's tomb is John the Baptist, whilst to the right is Catherine of Alexandria. It is now in the National Museum of Capodimonte in Naples.
It was confiscated from San Luigi dei Francesi in Rome in 1800 and acquired by Domenico Venuti for the Bourbon collection. | [
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Italian Renaissance",
"Naples",
"John the Baptist",
"Prato",
"San Luigi dei Francesi",
"Catherine of Alexandria",
"National Museum of Capodimonte"
]
|
|
15515_T | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria | In Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria, how is the History and description discussed? | The altarpiece, mentioned by Giorgio Vasari, was presumably made in 1516, a date that according to sources was reported on the work. It was commissioned for the church of Santa Maria in Castello in Prato. In 1800 it was confiscated in Rome from the deposit of the church of San Luigi dei Francesi, and purchased by Domenico Venuti, becoming part of the Bourbon collection. Later it was exhibited in the National Museum of Capodimonte, in the room 10.The work maintains the typical canons of Fra Bartolomeo: a symmetrical composition and the use of soft colors of the devotional painting wished by the painter, inspired by the models of Raphael. At the center is depicted the Assumption of Mary, whose preparatory drawing is kept in the Uffizi Gallery, in Florence, surrounded by angels, while at her feet, on the left, kneeling and leaning against the tomb with flowers inside, is John the Baptist, a figure who differs from the rest of the work, mostly inspired by the painting of Leonardo da Vinci, whilst to the right is Catherine of Alexandria. The upper part of the table is characterized by a gold background, a technique developed by the artist during his stay in Venice in 1508. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"John the Baptist",
"Assumption of Mary",
"Prato",
"Uffizi Gallery",
"San Luigi dei Francesi",
"Catherine of Alexandria",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"National Museum of Capodimonte"
]
|
|
15515_NT | Assumption of the Virgin with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Catherine of Alexandria | In this artwork, how is the History and description discussed? | The altarpiece, mentioned by Giorgio Vasari, was presumably made in 1516, a date that according to sources was reported on the work. It was commissioned for the church of Santa Maria in Castello in Prato. In 1800 it was confiscated in Rome from the deposit of the church of San Luigi dei Francesi, and purchased by Domenico Venuti, becoming part of the Bourbon collection. Later it was exhibited in the National Museum of Capodimonte, in the room 10.The work maintains the typical canons of Fra Bartolomeo: a symmetrical composition and the use of soft colors of the devotional painting wished by the painter, inspired by the models of Raphael. At the center is depicted the Assumption of Mary, whose preparatory drawing is kept in the Uffizi Gallery, in Florence, surrounded by angels, while at her feet, on the left, kneeling and leaning against the tomb with flowers inside, is John the Baptist, a figure who differs from the rest of the work, mostly inspired by the painting of Leonardo da Vinci, whilst to the right is Catherine of Alexandria. The upper part of the table is characterized by a gold background, a technique developed by the artist during his stay in Venice in 1508. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"John the Baptist",
"Assumption of Mary",
"Prato",
"Uffizi Gallery",
"San Luigi dei Francesi",
"Catherine of Alexandria",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"National Museum of Capodimonte"
]
|
|
15516_T | Face mask (We people) | Focus on Face mask (We people) and explore the Description. | Designed to resemble a snarling leopard, this wooden mask is heavily adorned with a variety of materials to include pigment, shells, cloth, fiber, fur, paper, metal, feathers, and quills. This mask is denoted as male by the cartridge shells along the top and the wood carved leopard's teeth placed along the sides and bottom. | []
|
|
15516_NT | Face mask (We people) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Description. | Designed to resemble a snarling leopard, this wooden mask is heavily adorned with a variety of materials to include pigment, shells, cloth, fiber, fur, paper, metal, feathers, and quills. This mask is denoted as male by the cartridge shells along the top and the wood carved leopard's teeth placed along the sides and bottom. | []
|
|
15517_T | Face mask (We people) | In the context of Face mask (We people), explain the We people of the Description. | The We, sometimes called the Krahn or Guere, are an indigenous African people that inhabit areas in eastern Liberia and western Côte d'Ivoire. In this region, masks such as this one typically start as simple, unadorned objects carved by a male artist. The mask is then handed down through generations with each new wearer adding adornments. According to the We, as each generation adds to the mask, it grows in ritual significance and power. The individual honored with wearing the mask traditionally wears an oversized skirt made of raffia fronds and may carry a ceremonial staff.We masks similar to this one are often designed to appear ferocious and are intended for use in mediations between community members, as visual aids during moral lessons, and as forms of entertainment. By portraying the more frightening nature of the animal, the mask is viewed as powerful and may have been used as part of social control methods prior to the introduction of Western law systems during the colonial period. | [
"Côte d'Ivoire",
"Africa",
"Krahn",
"raffia",
"Liberia",
"Guere",
"colonial period"
]
|
|
15517_NT | Face mask (We people) | In the context of this artwork, explain the We people of the Description. | The We, sometimes called the Krahn or Guere, are an indigenous African people that inhabit areas in eastern Liberia and western Côte d'Ivoire. In this region, masks such as this one typically start as simple, unadorned objects carved by a male artist. The mask is then handed down through generations with each new wearer adding adornments. According to the We, as each generation adds to the mask, it grows in ritual significance and power. The individual honored with wearing the mask traditionally wears an oversized skirt made of raffia fronds and may carry a ceremonial staff.We masks similar to this one are often designed to appear ferocious and are intended for use in mediations between community members, as visual aids during moral lessons, and as forms of entertainment. By portraying the more frightening nature of the animal, the mask is viewed as powerful and may have been used as part of social control methods prior to the introduction of Western law systems during the colonial period. | [
"Côte d'Ivoire",
"Africa",
"Krahn",
"raffia",
"Liberia",
"Guere",
"colonial period"
]
|
|
15518_T | Face mask (We people) | Explore the Acquisition of this artwork, Face mask (We people). | A detailed history of this mask is unknown. The work has however been dated to approximately 1900-50 and the acquisition credit line is attributed to a gift from Mr. and Mrs. Harrison Eiteljorg. | [
"Harrison Eiteljorg"
]
|
|
15518_NT | Face mask (We people) | Explore the Acquisition of this artwork. | A detailed history of this mask is unknown. The work has however been dated to approximately 1900-50 and the acquisition credit line is attributed to a gift from Mr. and Mrs. Harrison Eiteljorg. | [
"Harrison Eiteljorg"
]
|
|
15519_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on Transfiguration (Raphael) and discuss the abstract. | The Transfiguration is the last painting by the Italian High Renaissance master Raphael. Cardinal Giulio de Medici – who later became Pope Clement VII (in office: 1523–1534) – commissioned the work, conceived as an altarpiece for Narbonne Cathedral in France; Raphael worked on it in the years preceding his death in 1520. The painting exemplifies Raphael's development as an artist and the culmination of his career. Unusually for a depiction of the Transfiguration of Jesus in Christian art, the subject is combined with the next episode from the Gospels (the healing of a possessed boy) in the lower part of the painting.
The work is now in the Pinacoteca Vaticana in the Vatican City.From the late 16th century until the early 20th century, various commentators regarded it as the most famous oil painting in the world. | [
"Jesus",
"Raphael",
"Christ",
" Pinacoteca Vaticana",
" master",
"Transfiguration of Jesus in Christian art",
"Italian",
"Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"altarpiece",
"Narbonne Cathedral",
"High Renaissance",
"Narbonne",
"Cardinal Giulio de Medici",
"Vatican City",
"Transfiguration of Jesus",
"Pope Clement VII"
]
|
|
15519_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | The Transfiguration is the last painting by the Italian High Renaissance master Raphael. Cardinal Giulio de Medici – who later became Pope Clement VII (in office: 1523–1534) – commissioned the work, conceived as an altarpiece for Narbonne Cathedral in France; Raphael worked on it in the years preceding his death in 1520. The painting exemplifies Raphael's development as an artist and the culmination of his career. Unusually for a depiction of the Transfiguration of Jesus in Christian art, the subject is combined with the next episode from the Gospels (the healing of a possessed boy) in the lower part of the painting.
The work is now in the Pinacoteca Vaticana in the Vatican City.From the late 16th century until the early 20th century, various commentators regarded it as the most famous oil painting in the world. | [
"Jesus",
"Raphael",
"Christ",
" Pinacoteca Vaticana",
" master",
"Transfiguration of Jesus in Christian art",
"Italian",
"Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"altarpiece",
"Narbonne Cathedral",
"High Renaissance",
"Narbonne",
"Cardinal Giulio de Medici",
"Vatican City",
"Transfiguration of Jesus",
"Pope Clement VII"
]
|
|
15520_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | How does Transfiguration (Raphael) elucidate its History of the painting? | By December 1517, the latest date of commission, Cardinal Giulio de Medici, cousin to Pope Leo X (1513–1521), was also the Pope's vice-chancellor and chief advisor. He had been endowed with the legation of Bologna, the bishoprics of Albi, Ascoli, Worcester, Eger and others. From February 1515, this included the archbishopric of Narbonne. He commissioned two paintings for the cathedral of Narbonne, The Transfiguration of Christ from Raphael and The Raising of Lazarus from Sebastiano del Piombo. With Michelangelo providing drawings for the latter work, Medici was rekindling the rivalry initiated a decade earlier between Michelangelo and Raphael, in the Stanze and Sistine Chapel.From 11 to 12 December 1516, Michelangelo was in Rome to discuss with Pope Leo X and Cardinal Medici the facade of the Basilica of San Lorenzo in Florence. During this meeting, he was confronted with the commission of The Raising of Lazarus and it was here that he agreed to provide drawings for the endeavour, but not to execute the painting himself. The commission went to Michelangelo's friend Sebastiano del Piombo. As of this meeting the paintings would become emblematic of a paragone between two approaches to painting, and between painting and sculpture in Italian art.An early modello for the painting, done in Raphael's studio by Giulio Romano, depicted a 1:10 scale drawing for The Transfiguration. Here Christ is shown on Mount Tabor. Moses and Eljah float towards him; John and James are kneeling to the right; Peter is to the left. The top of the model depicts God the Father and a throng of angels. A second modello, done by Gianfrancesco Penni, shows a design with two scenes, as the painting was to develop. This modello is held by the Louvre.The Raising of Lazarus was unofficially on view by October 1518. By this time Raphael had barely started on his altarpiece. When Sebastiano del Piombo's work was officially inspected in the Vatican by Leo X on Sunday, 11 December 1519, the third Sunday of Advent, The Transfiguration was still unfinished.Raphael would have been familiar with the final form of The Raising of Lazarus as early as the autumn of 1518, and there is considerable evidence that he worked feverishly to compete, adding a second theme and nineteen figures. A surviving modello for the project, now in the Louvre (a workshop copy of a lost drawing by Raphael's assistant Gianfrancesco Penni) shows the dramatic change in the intended work.Examination of the final Transfiguration revealed more than sixteen incomplete areas and pentimenti (alterations). An important theory holds that the writings of Blessed Amadeo Menes da Silva was key to the transformation. Amadeo was an influential friar, healer and visionary as well as the Pope's confessor. He was also diplomat for the Vatican State. In 1502, after his death, many of Amadeo's writings and sermons were compiled as the Apocalypsis Nova. This tract was well known to Pope Leo X. Guillaume Briçonnet, Cardinal Giulio de' Medici's predecessor as bishop of Narbonne, and his two sons also consulted the tract as spiritual guide. Cardinal Giulio knew the Apocalypsis Nova and could have influenced the painting's final composition. Amadeo's tract describes the episodes of the Transfiguration and the possessed boy consecutively. The Transfiguration represents a prefiguration of the Last Judgment, and of the final defeat of the Devil. Another interpretation is that the epileptic boy has been cured, thus linking the divinity of Christ with his healing power.Raphael died on 6 April 1520. For a couple of days afterward, The Transfiguration lay at the head of his catafalque at his house in the Borgo. A week after his death, the two paintings were exhibited together in the Vatican.While there is some speculation that Raphael's pupil, Giulio Romano, and assistant, Gianfrancesco Penni, painted some of the background figures in the lower right half of the painting, there is no evidence that anyone but Raphael finished the substance of the painting. The cleaning of the painting from 1972 to 1976 revealed that assistants only finished some of the lower left figures, while the rest of the painting is by Raphael himself.Rather than send it to France, Cardinal Giulio de' Medici retained the picture. In 1523, he installed it on the high altar in the Blessed Amadeo's church of San Pietro in Montorio, Rome, in a frame which was the work of Giovanni Barile (no longer in existence). Giulio ordered Penni a copy of the Transfiguration to take with him to Naples. The final result with slight differences from the original is preserved in the Prado Museum in Madrid. A mosaic copy of the painting was completed by Stefano Pozzi in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican City in 1774.In 1797, during Napoleon Bonaparte's Italian campaign, it was taken to Paris by French troops and installed in the Louvre. Already on 17 June 1794, Napoleon's Committee of Public Instruction had suggested an expert committee accompany the armies to remove important works of art and science for return to Paris. The Louvre, which had been opened to the public in 1793, was a clear destination for the art. On 19 February 1799, Napoleon concluded the Treaty of Tolentino with Pope Pius VI, in which was formalized the confiscation of 100 artistic treasures from the Vatican.
Among the most sought after treasures Napoleons agents coveted were the works of Raphael. Jean-Baptiste Wicar, a member of Napoleon's selection committee, was a collector of Raphael's drawings. Baron Antoine-Jean Gros, another member, had been influenced by Raphael. For artists like Jacques-Louis David, and his pupils Girodet and Ingres, Raphael represented the embodiment of French artistic ideals. Consequently, Napoleon's committee seized every available Raphael. To Napoleon, Raphael was simply the greatest of Italian artists and The Transfiguration his greatest work. The painting, along with the Apollo Belvedere, the Laocoön, the Capitoline Brutus and many others, received a triumphal entry into Paris on 27 July 1798, the fourth anniversary of Maximilien de Robespierre's fall.In November 1798, The Transfiguration was on public display in the Grand Salon at the Louvre. As of 4 July 1801, it became the centrepiece of a large Raphael exhibition in the Grande Galerie. More than 20 Raphaels were on display. In 1810, a famous drawing by Benjamin Zix recorded the occasion of Napoleon and Marie Louise's wedding procession through the Grande Galerie, The Transfiguration on display in the background.
The painting's presence at the Louvre gave English painters like Joseph Farington (on 1 and 6 September 1802): 1820–32 and Joseph Mallord William Turner (in September 1802) the opportunity to study it. Turner would dedicate the first of his lectures as Professor of Perspective at the Royal Academy to the picture. Farington also reported on others having been to see the picture: Swiss painter Henry Fuseli, for whom it was second at the Louvre only to Titian's The Death of St. Peter Martyr (1530), and English painter John Hoppner.: 1847 The Anglo-American painter Benjamin West "said that the opinion of ages stood confirmed that it still held the first place".: 1852 Farington himself expressed his sentiments as follows:Were I to decide by the effect it had upon me I should not hesitate to say that the patient care and solid manner in which The Transfiguration is painted made an impression on my mind that caused other pictures esteemed of the first Class, to appear weak, and as wanting in strength & vigour.
After the fall of Napoleon Bonaparte, in 1815, envoys to Pope Pius VII, Antonio Canova and Marino Marini managed to secure The Transfiguration (along with 66 other pictures) as part of the Treaty of Paris. By agreement with the Congress of Vienna, the works were to be exhibited to the public. The original gallery was in the Borgia Apartment in the Apostolic Palace. After several moves within the Vatican, the painting now resides in the Pinacoteca Vaticana. | [
"Advent",
"Napoleon",
"Sistine Chapel",
"Congress of Vienna",
"Treaty of Tolentino",
"Raphael",
"Antoine-Jean Gros",
"Pope Pius VI",
"Treaty of Paris",
"Apostolic Palace",
"pentimenti",
"Benjamin West",
"Rome",
"Bologna",
"Stanze",
"Titian",
"Christ",
"Marie Louise",
"Giulio Romano",
"Sebastiano del Piombo",
"Jacques-Louis David",
"Apollo Belvedere",
"Albi",
"Florence",
" Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"Basilica of San Lorenzo",
"paragone",
"Italian campaign",
"Maximilien de Robespierre",
"Laocoön",
"Italian",
"modello",
"Napoleon Bonaparte",
"Benjamin Zix",
"Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"God the Father",
"Ingres",
"Joseph Farington",
"Louvre",
"altarpiece",
"Blessed Amadeo Menes da Silva",
"John Hoppner",
"Jean-Baptiste Wicar",
"Pope Leo X",
"Moses",
"Worcester",
"Henry Fuseli",
"Girodet",
"Mount Tabor",
"Eger",
"Narbonne",
"Paris",
"Pope Pius VII",
"Cardinal Giulio de Medici",
"Antonio Canova",
"St. Peter's Basilica",
"Capitoline Brutus",
"Prado Museum",
"Stefano Pozzi",
"Michelangelo",
"Borgia Apartment",
"1810",
"Royal Academy",
"Baron Antoine-Jean Gros",
"Joseph Mallord William Turner",
"Vatican City",
"left",
"Leo X",
"Ascoli",
"Titian's",
"Gianfrancesco Penni",
"San Pietro in Montorio",
"Transfiguration of Christ"
]
|
|
15520_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | How does this artwork elucidate its History of the painting? | By December 1517, the latest date of commission, Cardinal Giulio de Medici, cousin to Pope Leo X (1513–1521), was also the Pope's vice-chancellor and chief advisor. He had been endowed with the legation of Bologna, the bishoprics of Albi, Ascoli, Worcester, Eger and others. From February 1515, this included the archbishopric of Narbonne. He commissioned two paintings for the cathedral of Narbonne, The Transfiguration of Christ from Raphael and The Raising of Lazarus from Sebastiano del Piombo. With Michelangelo providing drawings for the latter work, Medici was rekindling the rivalry initiated a decade earlier between Michelangelo and Raphael, in the Stanze and Sistine Chapel.From 11 to 12 December 1516, Michelangelo was in Rome to discuss with Pope Leo X and Cardinal Medici the facade of the Basilica of San Lorenzo in Florence. During this meeting, he was confronted with the commission of The Raising of Lazarus and it was here that he agreed to provide drawings for the endeavour, but not to execute the painting himself. The commission went to Michelangelo's friend Sebastiano del Piombo. As of this meeting the paintings would become emblematic of a paragone between two approaches to painting, and between painting and sculpture in Italian art.An early modello for the painting, done in Raphael's studio by Giulio Romano, depicted a 1:10 scale drawing for The Transfiguration. Here Christ is shown on Mount Tabor. Moses and Eljah float towards him; John and James are kneeling to the right; Peter is to the left. The top of the model depicts God the Father and a throng of angels. A second modello, done by Gianfrancesco Penni, shows a design with two scenes, as the painting was to develop. This modello is held by the Louvre.The Raising of Lazarus was unofficially on view by October 1518. By this time Raphael had barely started on his altarpiece. When Sebastiano del Piombo's work was officially inspected in the Vatican by Leo X on Sunday, 11 December 1519, the third Sunday of Advent, The Transfiguration was still unfinished.Raphael would have been familiar with the final form of The Raising of Lazarus as early as the autumn of 1518, and there is considerable evidence that he worked feverishly to compete, adding a second theme and nineteen figures. A surviving modello for the project, now in the Louvre (a workshop copy of a lost drawing by Raphael's assistant Gianfrancesco Penni) shows the dramatic change in the intended work.Examination of the final Transfiguration revealed more than sixteen incomplete areas and pentimenti (alterations). An important theory holds that the writings of Blessed Amadeo Menes da Silva was key to the transformation. Amadeo was an influential friar, healer and visionary as well as the Pope's confessor. He was also diplomat for the Vatican State. In 1502, after his death, many of Amadeo's writings and sermons were compiled as the Apocalypsis Nova. This tract was well known to Pope Leo X. Guillaume Briçonnet, Cardinal Giulio de' Medici's predecessor as bishop of Narbonne, and his two sons also consulted the tract as spiritual guide. Cardinal Giulio knew the Apocalypsis Nova and could have influenced the painting's final composition. Amadeo's tract describes the episodes of the Transfiguration and the possessed boy consecutively. The Transfiguration represents a prefiguration of the Last Judgment, and of the final defeat of the Devil. Another interpretation is that the epileptic boy has been cured, thus linking the divinity of Christ with his healing power.Raphael died on 6 April 1520. For a couple of days afterward, The Transfiguration lay at the head of his catafalque at his house in the Borgo. A week after his death, the two paintings were exhibited together in the Vatican.While there is some speculation that Raphael's pupil, Giulio Romano, and assistant, Gianfrancesco Penni, painted some of the background figures in the lower right half of the painting, there is no evidence that anyone but Raphael finished the substance of the painting. The cleaning of the painting from 1972 to 1976 revealed that assistants only finished some of the lower left figures, while the rest of the painting is by Raphael himself.Rather than send it to France, Cardinal Giulio de' Medici retained the picture. In 1523, he installed it on the high altar in the Blessed Amadeo's church of San Pietro in Montorio, Rome, in a frame which was the work of Giovanni Barile (no longer in existence). Giulio ordered Penni a copy of the Transfiguration to take with him to Naples. The final result with slight differences from the original is preserved in the Prado Museum in Madrid. A mosaic copy of the painting was completed by Stefano Pozzi in St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican City in 1774.In 1797, during Napoleon Bonaparte's Italian campaign, it was taken to Paris by French troops and installed in the Louvre. Already on 17 June 1794, Napoleon's Committee of Public Instruction had suggested an expert committee accompany the armies to remove important works of art and science for return to Paris. The Louvre, which had been opened to the public in 1793, was a clear destination for the art. On 19 February 1799, Napoleon concluded the Treaty of Tolentino with Pope Pius VI, in which was formalized the confiscation of 100 artistic treasures from the Vatican.
Among the most sought after treasures Napoleons agents coveted were the works of Raphael. Jean-Baptiste Wicar, a member of Napoleon's selection committee, was a collector of Raphael's drawings. Baron Antoine-Jean Gros, another member, had been influenced by Raphael. For artists like Jacques-Louis David, and his pupils Girodet and Ingres, Raphael represented the embodiment of French artistic ideals. Consequently, Napoleon's committee seized every available Raphael. To Napoleon, Raphael was simply the greatest of Italian artists and The Transfiguration his greatest work. The painting, along with the Apollo Belvedere, the Laocoön, the Capitoline Brutus and many others, received a triumphal entry into Paris on 27 July 1798, the fourth anniversary of Maximilien de Robespierre's fall.In November 1798, The Transfiguration was on public display in the Grand Salon at the Louvre. As of 4 July 1801, it became the centrepiece of a large Raphael exhibition in the Grande Galerie. More than 20 Raphaels were on display. In 1810, a famous drawing by Benjamin Zix recorded the occasion of Napoleon and Marie Louise's wedding procession through the Grande Galerie, The Transfiguration on display in the background.
The painting's presence at the Louvre gave English painters like Joseph Farington (on 1 and 6 September 1802): 1820–32 and Joseph Mallord William Turner (in September 1802) the opportunity to study it. Turner would dedicate the first of his lectures as Professor of Perspective at the Royal Academy to the picture. Farington also reported on others having been to see the picture: Swiss painter Henry Fuseli, for whom it was second at the Louvre only to Titian's The Death of St. Peter Martyr (1530), and English painter John Hoppner.: 1847 The Anglo-American painter Benjamin West "said that the opinion of ages stood confirmed that it still held the first place".: 1852 Farington himself expressed his sentiments as follows:Were I to decide by the effect it had upon me I should not hesitate to say that the patient care and solid manner in which The Transfiguration is painted made an impression on my mind that caused other pictures esteemed of the first Class, to appear weak, and as wanting in strength & vigour.
After the fall of Napoleon Bonaparte, in 1815, envoys to Pope Pius VII, Antonio Canova and Marino Marini managed to secure The Transfiguration (along with 66 other pictures) as part of the Treaty of Paris. By agreement with the Congress of Vienna, the works were to be exhibited to the public. The original gallery was in the Borgia Apartment in the Apostolic Palace. After several moves within the Vatican, the painting now resides in the Pinacoteca Vaticana. | [
"Advent",
"Napoleon",
"Sistine Chapel",
"Congress of Vienna",
"Treaty of Tolentino",
"Raphael",
"Antoine-Jean Gros",
"Pope Pius VI",
"Treaty of Paris",
"Apostolic Palace",
"pentimenti",
"Benjamin West",
"Rome",
"Bologna",
"Stanze",
"Titian",
"Christ",
"Marie Louise",
"Giulio Romano",
"Sebastiano del Piombo",
"Jacques-Louis David",
"Apollo Belvedere",
"Albi",
"Florence",
" Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"Basilica of San Lorenzo",
"paragone",
"Italian campaign",
"Maximilien de Robespierre",
"Laocoön",
"Italian",
"modello",
"Napoleon Bonaparte",
"Benjamin Zix",
"Pinacoteca Vaticana",
"God the Father",
"Ingres",
"Joseph Farington",
"Louvre",
"altarpiece",
"Blessed Amadeo Menes da Silva",
"John Hoppner",
"Jean-Baptiste Wicar",
"Pope Leo X",
"Moses",
"Worcester",
"Henry Fuseli",
"Girodet",
"Mount Tabor",
"Eger",
"Narbonne",
"Paris",
"Pope Pius VII",
"Cardinal Giulio de Medici",
"Antonio Canova",
"St. Peter's Basilica",
"Capitoline Brutus",
"Prado Museum",
"Stefano Pozzi",
"Michelangelo",
"Borgia Apartment",
"1810",
"Royal Academy",
"Baron Antoine-Jean Gros",
"Joseph Mallord William Turner",
"Vatican City",
"left",
"Leo X",
"Ascoli",
"Titian's",
"Gianfrancesco Penni",
"San Pietro in Montorio",
"Transfiguration of Christ"
]
|
|
15521_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on Transfiguration (Raphael) and analyze the Reception. | The reception of the painting is well documented. Between the year 1525 and 1935, at least 229 written sources can be identified that describe, analyse, praise or criticise The Transfiguration.The first descriptions of the painting after Raphael's death in 1520 called The Transfiguration already a masterpiece, but this status evolved until the end of the 16th century. In his notes of a travel to Rome in 1577, the Spanish humanist Pablo de Céspedes called it the most famous oil painting in the world for the first time. The painting would preserve this authority for more than 300 years. It was acknowledged and repeated by many authors, like the connoisseur François Raguenet, who analysed Raphael's composition in 1701. In his opinion, its outline drawing, the effect of light, the colours and the arrangement of the figures made The Transfiguration the most perfect painting in the world.
Jonathan Richardson Senior and Junior dared to criticise the overwhelming status of The Transfiguration, asking if this painting could really be the most famous painting in the world. They criticised that the composition was divided into an upper and a lower half that would not correspond to each other. Also the lower half would draw too much attention instead of the upper half, while the full attention of the viewer should be paid to the figure of Christ alone.
This criticism did not diminish the fame of the painting, but provoked counter-criticism by other connoisseurs and scholars. For the German-speaking world, it was the assessment by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe that prevailed. He interpreted the upper and the lower half as complementary parts. This assessment was quoted by many authors and scholars during the 19th century and thus the authority of Goethe helped to save the fame of The Transfiguration.During the short period of time the painting spent in Paris, it became a major attraction to visitors, and this continued after its return to Rome, then placed in the Vatican museums. Mark Twain was one of many visitors and he wrote in 1869: "I shall remember The Transfiguration partly because it was placed in a room almost by itself; partly because it is acknowledged by all to be the first oil painting in the world; and partly because it was wonderfully beautiful."In the early 20th century, the fame of the painting rapidly diminished and soon The Transfiguration lost its denomination as the most famous painting in the world. A new generation of artists did not accept Raphael as an artistic authority anymore. Copies and reproductions were no longer in high demand. While the complexity of the composition had been an argument to praise the painting until the end of the 19th century, viewers were now repelled by it. The painting was felt to be too crowded, the figures to be too dramatic and the whole setting to be too artificial. In contrast, other paintings like the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci were much easier to recognise and did not suffer from the decline of the overwhelming status of Raphael as an artistic example. Thus The Transfiguration is a good example for the changeability of the fame of an artwork, that may last for centuries but may also decline in just a short period. | [
"Raphael",
"Rome",
"Christ",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"François Raguenet",
"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe",
" master",
"Pablo de Céspedes",
"Jonathan Richardson",
"Goethe",
"Jonathan Richardson Senior",
"Paris",
"Mark Twain",
"Mona Lisa"
]
|
|
15521_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Reception. | The reception of the painting is well documented. Between the year 1525 and 1935, at least 229 written sources can be identified that describe, analyse, praise or criticise The Transfiguration.The first descriptions of the painting after Raphael's death in 1520 called The Transfiguration already a masterpiece, but this status evolved until the end of the 16th century. In his notes of a travel to Rome in 1577, the Spanish humanist Pablo de Céspedes called it the most famous oil painting in the world for the first time. The painting would preserve this authority for more than 300 years. It was acknowledged and repeated by many authors, like the connoisseur François Raguenet, who analysed Raphael's composition in 1701. In his opinion, its outline drawing, the effect of light, the colours and the arrangement of the figures made The Transfiguration the most perfect painting in the world.
Jonathan Richardson Senior and Junior dared to criticise the overwhelming status of The Transfiguration, asking if this painting could really be the most famous painting in the world. They criticised that the composition was divided into an upper and a lower half that would not correspond to each other. Also the lower half would draw too much attention instead of the upper half, while the full attention of the viewer should be paid to the figure of Christ alone.
This criticism did not diminish the fame of the painting, but provoked counter-criticism by other connoisseurs and scholars. For the German-speaking world, it was the assessment by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe that prevailed. He interpreted the upper and the lower half as complementary parts. This assessment was quoted by many authors and scholars during the 19th century and thus the authority of Goethe helped to save the fame of The Transfiguration.During the short period of time the painting spent in Paris, it became a major attraction to visitors, and this continued after its return to Rome, then placed in the Vatican museums. Mark Twain was one of many visitors and he wrote in 1869: "I shall remember The Transfiguration partly because it was placed in a room almost by itself; partly because it is acknowledged by all to be the first oil painting in the world; and partly because it was wonderfully beautiful."In the early 20th century, the fame of the painting rapidly diminished and soon The Transfiguration lost its denomination as the most famous painting in the world. A new generation of artists did not accept Raphael as an artistic authority anymore. Copies and reproductions were no longer in high demand. While the complexity of the composition had been an argument to praise the painting until the end of the 19th century, viewers were now repelled by it. The painting was felt to be too crowded, the figures to be too dramatic and the whole setting to be too artificial. In contrast, other paintings like the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci were much easier to recognise and did not suffer from the decline of the overwhelming status of Raphael as an artistic example. Thus The Transfiguration is a good example for the changeability of the fame of an artwork, that may last for centuries but may also decline in just a short period. | [
"Raphael",
"Rome",
"Christ",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"François Raguenet",
"Johann Wolfgang von Goethe",
" master",
"Pablo de Céspedes",
"Jonathan Richardson",
"Goethe",
"Jonathan Richardson Senior",
"Paris",
"Mark Twain",
"Mona Lisa"
]
|
|
15522_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | In Transfiguration (Raphael), how is the Reproductions discussed? | The fame of the painting is also based on its reproduction. While the original could only be admired in one place – in Rome, and for a short period of time in Paris after it had been taken away by Napoleon – the large number of reproductions ensured that the composition of the painting was omnipresent in nearly every important art collection in Europe. It could thus be studied and admired by many collectors, connoisseurs, artists and art historians.
Including the mosaic in St Peter's in the Vatican, at least 68 copies were made between 1523 and 1913. Good copies after the painting were highly sought after during the Early Modern period and young artists could earn money for an Italian journey by selling copies of The Transfiguration. One of the best painted copies ever was made by Gregor Urquhart in 1827.
At least 52 engravings and etchings were produced after the painting until the end of the 19th century, including illustrations for books like biographies and even for Christian songbooks. The Istituto nazionale per la grafica in Rome possesses twelve of these reproductions. At least 32 etchings and engravings can be traced that depict details of the painting, sometimes to use them as a part of a new composition. Among these depictions of details is one set of prints of heads, hands and feet engraved by G. Folo after Vincenzo Camuccini (1806), and another set of heads produced in stipple engraving by J. Godby after drawings by I. Goubaud (1818 and 1830). The first engraved reproduction of The Transfiguration is also called to be the first reproductive print of a painting ever. It was made by an anonymous engraver in 1538 and is sometimes identified with the manner of Agostino Veneziano. | [
"Napoleon",
"Rome",
"Christ",
"Agostino Veneziano",
"St Peter's in the Vatican",
"Italian",
"Istituto nazionale per la grafica",
"Vincenzo Camuccini",
"Gregor Urquhart",
"Paris"
]
|
|
15522_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | In this artwork, how is the Reproductions discussed? | The fame of the painting is also based on its reproduction. While the original could only be admired in one place – in Rome, and for a short period of time in Paris after it had been taken away by Napoleon – the large number of reproductions ensured that the composition of the painting was omnipresent in nearly every important art collection in Europe. It could thus be studied and admired by many collectors, connoisseurs, artists and art historians.
Including the mosaic in St Peter's in the Vatican, at least 68 copies were made between 1523 and 1913. Good copies after the painting were highly sought after during the Early Modern period and young artists could earn money for an Italian journey by selling copies of The Transfiguration. One of the best painted copies ever was made by Gregor Urquhart in 1827.
At least 52 engravings and etchings were produced after the painting until the end of the 19th century, including illustrations for books like biographies and even for Christian songbooks. The Istituto nazionale per la grafica in Rome possesses twelve of these reproductions. At least 32 etchings and engravings can be traced that depict details of the painting, sometimes to use them as a part of a new composition. Among these depictions of details is one set of prints of heads, hands and feet engraved by G. Folo after Vincenzo Camuccini (1806), and another set of heads produced in stipple engraving by J. Godby after drawings by I. Goubaud (1818 and 1830). The first engraved reproduction of The Transfiguration is also called to be the first reproductive print of a painting ever. It was made by an anonymous engraver in 1538 and is sometimes identified with the manner of Agostino Veneziano. | [
"Napoleon",
"Rome",
"Christ",
"Agostino Veneziano",
"St Peter's in the Vatican",
"Italian",
"Istituto nazionale per la grafica",
"Vincenzo Camuccini",
"Gregor Urquhart",
"Paris"
]
|
|
15523_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on Transfiguration (Raphael) and explore the Iconography. | Raphael's painting depicts two consecutive, but distinct, biblical narratives from the Gospel of Matthew, also related in the Gospel of Mark. In the first, the Transfiguration of Christ itself, Moses and Elijah appear before the transfigured Christ with Peter, James and John looking on (Matthew 17:1–9; Mark 9:2–13). In the second, the Apostles fail to cure a boy from demons and await the return of Christ (Matthew 17:14–21; Mark 9:14).The upper register of the painting shows the Transfiguration itself (on Mount Tabor, according to tradition), with the transfigured Christ floating in front of illuminated clouds, between the prophets Moses, on the right, and Elijah, on the left, with whom he is conversing (Matthew 17:3). The two figures kneeling on the left are commonly identified as Justus and Pastor who shared August 6 as a feast day with the Feast of the Transfiguration. These saints were the patrons of Medici's archbishopric and the cathedral for which the painting was intended. It has also been proposed that the figures might represent the martyrs Saint Felicissimus and Saint Agapitus who are commemorated in the missal on the feast of the Transfiguration.The upper register of the painting includes, from left to right, James, Peter and John, traditionally read as symbols of faith, hope and love; hence the symbolic colours of blue-yellow, green and red for their robes.In the lower register, Raphael depicts the Apostles attempting to free the possessed boy of his demonic possession. They are unable to cure the sick child until the arrival of the recently transfigured Christ, who performs a miracle. The youth is no longer prostrate from his seizure but is standing on his feet, and his mouth is open, which signals the departure of the demonic spirit. As his last work before this death, Raphael (which in Hebrew רָפָאֵל [Rafa'el] means "God has healed"), joins the two scenes together as his final testament to the healing power of the transfigured Christ. According to Goethe: "The two are one: below suffering, need, above, effective power, succour. Each bearing on the other, both interacting with one another."
The man at lower left is the apostle-evangelist Matthew (some would say St. Andrew), depicted at eye-level and serving as interlocutor with the viewer. The function of figures like those at the bottom left was best described by Leon Battista Alberti almost a century earlier in 1435. I like there to be someone in the "historia", who tells the spectators what is going on, and either beckons them with his hand to look, or with ferocious expression and forbidding glance challenges them not to come near, as if he wished their business to be secret, or points to some danger or remarkable thing in the picture, or by his gestures invites you to laugh or weep with them.
Matthew (or Andrew) gestures to the viewer to wait, his gaze focused on a kneeling woman in the lower foreground. She is ostensibly a part of the family group, but on closer examination is set apart from either group. She is a mirror image of a comparable figure in Raphael's The Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple (1512). Giorgio Vasari, Raphael's biographer, describes the woman as "the principal figure in that panel". She kneels in a contrapposto pose, forming a compositional bridge between the family group on the right and the nine apostles on the left. Raphael also renders her in cooler tones and drapes her in sunlit pink, while he renders the other participants, apart from Matthew, oblivious to her presence. The woman's contrapposto pose is more specifically called a figura serpentinata or serpent's pose, in which the shoulders and the hips move in opposition; one of the earliest examples being Leonardo da Vinci's Leda (c. 1504), which Raphael had copied while in Florence.In the centre are four apostles of different ages. The blonde youth appears to echo the apostle Philip from The Last Supper. The seated older man is Andrew. Simon is the older man behind Andrew. Judas Thaddeus is looking at Simon and pointing towards the boy.The apostle on the far left is widely considered to be Judas Iscariot He was the subject of one of only six surviving so-called auxiliary cartoons, first described by Oskar Fischel in 1937. | [
"Saint Felicissimus",
"Raphael",
"Christ",
"Gospel of Matthew",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"Elijah",
"Florence",
"feast day",
"contrapposto",
"Apostles",
"interlocutor",
"Leda",
"Judas Iscariot",
"figura serpentinata",
"prophet",
"Gospel of Mark",
"Leon Battista Alberti",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Goethe",
"Moses",
"Justus and Pastor",
"The Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple",
"Mount Tabor",
"left",
"Feast of the Transfiguration",
"Saint Agapitus",
"Transfiguration of Christ"
]
|
|
15523_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Iconography. | Raphael's painting depicts two consecutive, but distinct, biblical narratives from the Gospel of Matthew, also related in the Gospel of Mark. In the first, the Transfiguration of Christ itself, Moses and Elijah appear before the transfigured Christ with Peter, James and John looking on (Matthew 17:1–9; Mark 9:2–13). In the second, the Apostles fail to cure a boy from demons and await the return of Christ (Matthew 17:14–21; Mark 9:14).The upper register of the painting shows the Transfiguration itself (on Mount Tabor, according to tradition), with the transfigured Christ floating in front of illuminated clouds, between the prophets Moses, on the right, and Elijah, on the left, with whom he is conversing (Matthew 17:3). The two figures kneeling on the left are commonly identified as Justus and Pastor who shared August 6 as a feast day with the Feast of the Transfiguration. These saints were the patrons of Medici's archbishopric and the cathedral for which the painting was intended. It has also been proposed that the figures might represent the martyrs Saint Felicissimus and Saint Agapitus who are commemorated in the missal on the feast of the Transfiguration.The upper register of the painting includes, from left to right, James, Peter and John, traditionally read as symbols of faith, hope and love; hence the symbolic colours of blue-yellow, green and red for their robes.In the lower register, Raphael depicts the Apostles attempting to free the possessed boy of his demonic possession. They are unable to cure the sick child until the arrival of the recently transfigured Christ, who performs a miracle. The youth is no longer prostrate from his seizure but is standing on his feet, and his mouth is open, which signals the departure of the demonic spirit. As his last work before this death, Raphael (which in Hebrew רָפָאֵל [Rafa'el] means "God has healed"), joins the two scenes together as his final testament to the healing power of the transfigured Christ. According to Goethe: "The two are one: below suffering, need, above, effective power, succour. Each bearing on the other, both interacting with one another."
The man at lower left is the apostle-evangelist Matthew (some would say St. Andrew), depicted at eye-level and serving as interlocutor with the viewer. The function of figures like those at the bottom left was best described by Leon Battista Alberti almost a century earlier in 1435. I like there to be someone in the "historia", who tells the spectators what is going on, and either beckons them with his hand to look, or with ferocious expression and forbidding glance challenges them not to come near, as if he wished their business to be secret, or points to some danger or remarkable thing in the picture, or by his gestures invites you to laugh or weep with them.
Matthew (or Andrew) gestures to the viewer to wait, his gaze focused on a kneeling woman in the lower foreground. She is ostensibly a part of the family group, but on closer examination is set apart from either group. She is a mirror image of a comparable figure in Raphael's The Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple (1512). Giorgio Vasari, Raphael's biographer, describes the woman as "the principal figure in that panel". She kneels in a contrapposto pose, forming a compositional bridge between the family group on the right and the nine apostles on the left. Raphael also renders her in cooler tones and drapes her in sunlit pink, while he renders the other participants, apart from Matthew, oblivious to her presence. The woman's contrapposto pose is more specifically called a figura serpentinata or serpent's pose, in which the shoulders and the hips move in opposition; one of the earliest examples being Leonardo da Vinci's Leda (c. 1504), which Raphael had copied while in Florence.In the centre are four apostles of different ages. The blonde youth appears to echo the apostle Philip from The Last Supper. The seated older man is Andrew. Simon is the older man behind Andrew. Judas Thaddeus is looking at Simon and pointing towards the boy.The apostle on the far left is widely considered to be Judas Iscariot He was the subject of one of only six surviving so-called auxiliary cartoons, first described by Oskar Fischel in 1937. | [
"Saint Felicissimus",
"Raphael",
"Christ",
"Gospel of Matthew",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"Elijah",
"Florence",
"feast day",
"contrapposto",
"Apostles",
"interlocutor",
"Leda",
"Judas Iscariot",
"figura serpentinata",
"prophet",
"Gospel of Mark",
"Leon Battista Alberti",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Goethe",
"Moses",
"Justus and Pastor",
"The Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple",
"Mount Tabor",
"left",
"Feast of the Transfiguration",
"Saint Agapitus",
"Transfiguration of Christ"
]
|
|
15524_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on Transfiguration (Raphael) and explain the Analysis and interpretation. | The iconography of the picture has been interpreted as a reference to the delivery of the city of Narbonne from the repeated assaults of the Saracens. Pope Calixtus III proclaimed August 6 a feast day on the occasion of the victory of the Christians in 1456.Enlightenment philosopher Montesquieu noted that the healing of the obsessed boy in the foreground takes precedence over the figure of Christ. Modern critics have furthered Montesquieu's criticism by suggesting that the painting should be renamed to "Healing of the Obsessed Youth".J. M. W. Turner had seen The Transfiguration in the Louvre, in 1802. At the conclusion of the version of his first lecture, delivered on 7 January 1811, as Professor of Perspective at the Royal Academy, Turner demonstrated how the upper part of the composition is made up of intersecting triangles, forming a pyramid with Christ at the top.In a 1870 publication, German art historian Car Justi observes that the painting depicts two subsequent episodes in the biblical narrative of Christ: after the transfiguration, Jesus encounters a man who begs mercy for his devil-possessed son.Raphael plays on a tradition equating epilepsy with the aquatic moon (luna, from whence lunatic). This causal link is played on by the watery reflection of the moon in the lower left corner of the painting; the boy is literally moonstruck. In Raphael's time, epilepsy was often equated with the moon (morbus lunaticus), possession by demons (morbus daemonicus), and also, paradoxically, the sacred (morbus sacer). In the 16th century, it was not uncommon for sufferers of epilepsy to be burned at the stake, such was the fear evoked by the condition. The link between the phase of the moon and epilepsy would only be broken scientifically in 1854 by Jacques-Joseph Moreau de Tours.Raphael's Transfiguration can be considered a prefiguration of both Mannerism, as evidenced by the stylised, contorted poses of the figures at the bottom of the picture; and of Baroque painting, as evidenced by the dramatic tension imbued within those figures, and the strong use of chiaroscuro throughout.
As a reflection on the artist, Raphael likely viewed The Transfiguration as his triumph. Raphael uses the contrast of Jesus presiding over men to satiate his papal commissioners in the Roman Catholic Church. Raphael uses the cave to symbolize the Renaissance style, easily observed in the extended index finger as a reference to Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel. Additionally, he subtly incorporates a landscape in the background, but uses darker coloring to show his disdain for the style. Yet the focal point for the viewer is the Baroque styled child and his guarding father. In all, Raphael successfully appeased his commissioners, paid homage to his predecessors, and ushered in the subsequent predominance of Baroque painting.On the simplest level, the painting can be interpreted as depicting a dichotomy: the redemptive power of Christ, as symbolised by the purity and symmetry of the top half of the painting; contrasted with the flaws of Man, as symbolised by the dark, chaotic scenes in the bottom half of the painting.
The philosopher Nietzsche interpreted the painting in his book The Birth of Tragedy as an image of the interdependence of Apollonian and Dionysian principles.The sixteenth-century painter and biographer Giorgio Vasari wrote in his Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects that The Transfiguration was Raphael's "most beautiful and most divine" work. | [
"Saracen",
"Sistine Chapel",
"Jesus",
"Raphael",
"dichotomy",
"Montesquieu",
"Saracens",
"Christ",
"Enlightenment",
"Jacques-Joseph Moreau",
"The Birth of Tragedy",
"feast day",
"Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects",
"Catholic Church",
"Louvre",
"Apollonian",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Pope Calixtus III",
"Roman Catholic Church",
"chiaroscuro",
"Nietzsche",
"Narbonne",
"J. M. W. Turner",
"Dionysian",
"Apollonian and Dionysian",
"Michelangelo",
"Royal Academy",
"Car Justi",
"left",
"Baroque painting",
"Mannerism"
]
|
|
15524_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and explain the Analysis and interpretation. | The iconography of the picture has been interpreted as a reference to the delivery of the city of Narbonne from the repeated assaults of the Saracens. Pope Calixtus III proclaimed August 6 a feast day on the occasion of the victory of the Christians in 1456.Enlightenment philosopher Montesquieu noted that the healing of the obsessed boy in the foreground takes precedence over the figure of Christ. Modern critics have furthered Montesquieu's criticism by suggesting that the painting should be renamed to "Healing of the Obsessed Youth".J. M. W. Turner had seen The Transfiguration in the Louvre, in 1802. At the conclusion of the version of his first lecture, delivered on 7 January 1811, as Professor of Perspective at the Royal Academy, Turner demonstrated how the upper part of the composition is made up of intersecting triangles, forming a pyramid with Christ at the top.In a 1870 publication, German art historian Car Justi observes that the painting depicts two subsequent episodes in the biblical narrative of Christ: after the transfiguration, Jesus encounters a man who begs mercy for his devil-possessed son.Raphael plays on a tradition equating epilepsy with the aquatic moon (luna, from whence lunatic). This causal link is played on by the watery reflection of the moon in the lower left corner of the painting; the boy is literally moonstruck. In Raphael's time, epilepsy was often equated with the moon (morbus lunaticus), possession by demons (morbus daemonicus), and also, paradoxically, the sacred (morbus sacer). In the 16th century, it was not uncommon for sufferers of epilepsy to be burned at the stake, such was the fear evoked by the condition. The link between the phase of the moon and epilepsy would only be broken scientifically in 1854 by Jacques-Joseph Moreau de Tours.Raphael's Transfiguration can be considered a prefiguration of both Mannerism, as evidenced by the stylised, contorted poses of the figures at the bottom of the picture; and of Baroque painting, as evidenced by the dramatic tension imbued within those figures, and the strong use of chiaroscuro throughout.
As a reflection on the artist, Raphael likely viewed The Transfiguration as his triumph. Raphael uses the contrast of Jesus presiding over men to satiate his papal commissioners in the Roman Catholic Church. Raphael uses the cave to symbolize the Renaissance style, easily observed in the extended index finger as a reference to Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel. Additionally, he subtly incorporates a landscape in the background, but uses darker coloring to show his disdain for the style. Yet the focal point for the viewer is the Baroque styled child and his guarding father. In all, Raphael successfully appeased his commissioners, paid homage to his predecessors, and ushered in the subsequent predominance of Baroque painting.On the simplest level, the painting can be interpreted as depicting a dichotomy: the redemptive power of Christ, as symbolised by the purity and symmetry of the top half of the painting; contrasted with the flaws of Man, as symbolised by the dark, chaotic scenes in the bottom half of the painting.
The philosopher Nietzsche interpreted the painting in his book The Birth of Tragedy as an image of the interdependence of Apollonian and Dionysian principles.The sixteenth-century painter and biographer Giorgio Vasari wrote in his Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects that The Transfiguration was Raphael's "most beautiful and most divine" work. | [
"Saracen",
"Sistine Chapel",
"Jesus",
"Raphael",
"dichotomy",
"Montesquieu",
"Saracens",
"Christ",
"Enlightenment",
"Jacques-Joseph Moreau",
"The Birth of Tragedy",
"feast day",
"Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects",
"Catholic Church",
"Louvre",
"Apollonian",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Pope Calixtus III",
"Roman Catholic Church",
"chiaroscuro",
"Nietzsche",
"Narbonne",
"J. M. W. Turner",
"Dionysian",
"Apollonian and Dionysian",
"Michelangelo",
"Royal Academy",
"Car Justi",
"left",
"Baroque painting",
"Mannerism"
]
|
|
15525_T | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Explore the In popular culture of this artwork, Transfiguration (Raphael). | Fragments of the Transfiguration appear on the cover of the Renaissance: Desire album mixed by Dave Seaman in 2001 and published by Ultra Records. | [
"Dave Seaman",
"Ultra Records"
]
|
|
15525_NT | Transfiguration (Raphael) | Explore the In popular culture of this artwork. | Fragments of the Transfiguration appear on the cover of the Renaissance: Desire album mixed by Dave Seaman in 2001 and published by Ultra Records. | [
"Dave Seaman",
"Ultra Records"
]
|
|
15526_T | The Garden of Pan | Focus on The Garden of Pan and discuss the abstract. | The Garden of Pan is a painting by the pre-Raphaelite artist Edward Burne-Jones which was completed around 1886 and is currently housed at the National Gallery of Victoria. | [
"Pan",
"pre-Raphaelite",
"Edward Burne-Jones",
"National Gallery of Victoria"
]
|
|
15526_NT | The Garden of Pan | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | The Garden of Pan is a painting by the pre-Raphaelite artist Edward Burne-Jones which was completed around 1886 and is currently housed at the National Gallery of Victoria. | [
"Pan",
"pre-Raphaelite",
"Edward Burne-Jones",
"National Gallery of Victoria"
]
|
|
15527_T | The Garden of Pan | How does The Garden of Pan elucidate its History? | The subject of this painting was originally to form part of a piece inspired by Burne-Jones's visit to Italy in 1872. The original had intended to depict "the beginning of the world — with Pan and Echo and sylvan gods, and a forest full of centaurs, and a wild background of woods, mountains and rivers." The artist, at some point, decided that the subject was too large and settled on the present design in a series of sketches made in the mid-1870s.A note in Burne-Jones's work record for 1876 states that he had started work on "the large picture of Pan in the woods", but it was not until 1886 that the picture could be said to be truly begun. The final picture was exhibited in the summer of 1887 at the Grosvenor Gallery.The painting was purchased by the National Gallery of Victoria in 1919 as part of the Felton Bequest. | [
"Pan",
"Felton Bequest",
"National Gallery of Victoria"
]
|
|
15527_NT | The Garden of Pan | How does this artwork elucidate its History? | The subject of this painting was originally to form part of a piece inspired by Burne-Jones's visit to Italy in 1872. The original had intended to depict "the beginning of the world — with Pan and Echo and sylvan gods, and a forest full of centaurs, and a wild background of woods, mountains and rivers." The artist, at some point, decided that the subject was too large and settled on the present design in a series of sketches made in the mid-1870s.A note in Burne-Jones's work record for 1876 states that he had started work on "the large picture of Pan in the woods", but it was not until 1886 that the picture could be said to be truly begun. The final picture was exhibited in the summer of 1887 at the Grosvenor Gallery.The painting was purchased by the National Gallery of Victoria in 1919 as part of the Felton Bequest. | [
"Pan",
"Felton Bequest",
"National Gallery of Victoria"
]
|
|
15528_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on The Beloved (Rossetti) and analyze the abstract. | The Beloved (also The Bride) is an oil painting on canvas by the English artist Dante Gabriel Rossetti (1828–1882), now in Tate Britain, London. Rossetti signed his initials (as a monogram) and the date as "1865-6" on the bottom left of the canvas. It depicts the bride, or "beloved", from the Song of Solomon in the Hebrew Bible as she approaches her bridegroom, with her attendants.
The bride, caught in the action of moving back her veil, is attended by four virginal bridesmaids and an African page, who contrasts strikingly with the red hair and pale skin of the bride, and the varying shades of brunette hair and skin tones of the four bridesmaids. It has been suggested that this colour contrast, carefully painted as a frame to the bride's features, was influenced by Édouard Manet's controversial painting Olympia, in progress when Rossetti visited Manet's studio in late 1864 while working on The Beloved, and the painting also owes much to the works of Titian.In many respects, the painting fits into the series of "bust-length oil paintings of beautiful women" which were Rossetti's main painted output from 1859 to about 1867. These were a conscious change of style, to explore painterly effects of (in his words) "flesh painting" and colour, abandoning the densely packed narrative scenes, in media other than oil painting, he had produced over most of the 1850s, when he followed more closely the ideals of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. These grew "larger and more luxurious" in the next decade, and included Bocca Baciata, Venus Verticordia, Beata Beatrix, The Blue Bower, Monna Vanna, Regina Cordium, and Lady Lilith. But these were all rather tightly-framed pictures of a single figure, "in confined layers of space", with varying props and background, reflecting a variety of historical periods.It is generally agreed that Rossetti set out to show a range of skin colours within the figures, but the identification and interpretation of these varies greatly. | [
"Bible",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Beata Beatrix",
"Hebrew Bible",
"monogram",
"Titian",
"Bocca Baciata",
"Olympia",
"Tate Britain",
"Regina Cordium",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Édouard Manet",
"The Blue Bower",
"Song of Solomon",
"Monna Vanna",
"Dante",
"Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood",
"oil painting",
"Lady Lilith"
]
|
|
15528_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | The Beloved (also The Bride) is an oil painting on canvas by the English artist Dante Gabriel Rossetti (1828–1882), now in Tate Britain, London. Rossetti signed his initials (as a monogram) and the date as "1865-6" on the bottom left of the canvas. It depicts the bride, or "beloved", from the Song of Solomon in the Hebrew Bible as she approaches her bridegroom, with her attendants.
The bride, caught in the action of moving back her veil, is attended by four virginal bridesmaids and an African page, who contrasts strikingly with the red hair and pale skin of the bride, and the varying shades of brunette hair and skin tones of the four bridesmaids. It has been suggested that this colour contrast, carefully painted as a frame to the bride's features, was influenced by Édouard Manet's controversial painting Olympia, in progress when Rossetti visited Manet's studio in late 1864 while working on The Beloved, and the painting also owes much to the works of Titian.In many respects, the painting fits into the series of "bust-length oil paintings of beautiful women" which were Rossetti's main painted output from 1859 to about 1867. These were a conscious change of style, to explore painterly effects of (in his words) "flesh painting" and colour, abandoning the densely packed narrative scenes, in media other than oil painting, he had produced over most of the 1850s, when he followed more closely the ideals of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. These grew "larger and more luxurious" in the next decade, and included Bocca Baciata, Venus Verticordia, Beata Beatrix, The Blue Bower, Monna Vanna, Regina Cordium, and Lady Lilith. But these were all rather tightly-framed pictures of a single figure, "in confined layers of space", with varying props and background, reflecting a variety of historical periods.It is generally agreed that Rossetti set out to show a range of skin colours within the figures, but the identification and interpretation of these varies greatly. | [
"Bible",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Beata Beatrix",
"Hebrew Bible",
"monogram",
"Titian",
"Bocca Baciata",
"Olympia",
"Tate Britain",
"Regina Cordium",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Édouard Manet",
"The Blue Bower",
"Song of Solomon",
"Monna Vanna",
"Dante",
"Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood",
"oil painting",
"Lady Lilith"
]
|
|
15529_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | In The Beloved (Rossetti), how is the History discussed? | The painting was commissioned in 1863 by Rossetti's regular patron, the Birkenhead banker George Rae, for £300. At that stage, the broad composition seems to have been the same as in the final work, but the subject was intended to be Dante's Beatrice, as imagined in the poet's Il Purgatorio. After a month or two's work in the summer of 1863, the subject was changed to illustrate the Song of Solomon from the Bible, apparently because Rossetti found the complexion of his chosen model for the main figure at that point, Marie Ford, "too bright for his conception of Dante's Beatrice".Work progressed rather slowly, perhaps as Rossetti was working on other paintings at the same time, including Venus Verticordia, begun in 1864, but not finished until 1868. On a visit to Paris in November 1864, he paid a call to the studio of Édouard Manet, where he may well have seen Manet's Olympia, then a work in progress, where a white female nude contrasts with a clothed black maid. Manet did not paint the maid until the following month, but she may have been sketched in, or discussed with Rossetti.
It has also been suggested that the general composition was influenced by Titian's Allegory of Marriage (formerly so-called Allegory of Alfonso d'Avalos) in the Louvre, with three 17th-century copies (one a watercolour) in the Royal Collection. This is an allegory of marriage, with a number of figures arranged around a central object.
In March 1865 Rossetti painted a "Japanese" dress over the main figure, and replaced the previous female black ("mulatto" according to art historians) child with a male one, preferring his darker skin tone . By the autumn it was sufficiently complete to be shown to the leading art critic F.G. Stephens, who described it in some detail in the 21 October 1865 issue of the Athenaeum magazine, of which he was the editor for art, noting that: "As she unveils, they [the attendants] look with different expressions for the effect of the disclosure on the coming man". Stephens and Rossetti were close, and Rossetti would have seen the critique before publication. It appears Stephens sometimes allowed Rossetti to write such things himself, under Stephens's name.
Stephens praised Rossetti for his use of colour. However, he pointed out some technical errors. For example, Stephens claimed that the black child's hands look unnatural considering the vase that the child is holding. Furthermore, Stephens pointed out that the child's necklace does not seem to lie flat on his chest. Rather, the ornament is positioned in a way that the viewers of the piece could see its patterns and details.Rossetti did further work over the winter, hence his date of "1865-6" on the canvas. The painting was first exhibited, for a single day, at the Arundel Club on 21 February 1866. Rossetti took the painting back in 1873, when it was "considerably altered", changing the tone and making "more ideal" the heads of the bride and the woman to the right of her, and the bride's hands. A photograph of the painting before these changes exists.
In the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, whose art entries were supervised by Rossetti's brother, William Michael Rossetti, Rossetti's biography was by F.G. Stephens and another close friend, Theodore Watts-Dunton. In the biography the painting is praised highly: The same elements, energy, a sympathetic and poetic scheme of colour, and composition of a fine order, combined with far greater force and originality in "The Bride", or "The Beloved", that magnificent illustration of The Song of Solomon. The last named is a life-size group of powerfully coloured and diversely beautiful damsels accompanying their mistress with music and with song on her way to the bridegroom. This picture, as regards its brilliance, finish, the charms of four lovely faces and the splendour of its lighting, occupies a great place 'in the highest grade of modern art of all the world. It is likewise, so far as the qualities named are concerned, the crowning piece of Rossetti's art, and stands for him much as the “ Sacred and Profane Love ” of Titian represents that master.
The painting was exhibited at the Royal Academy of Art in 1883 and 1906 (but then not until 1973), and in large loan exhibitions in Liverpool in 1886 and Manchester in 1887. The painting was bought by the Tate in 1916, "Purchased with assistance from Sir Arthur Du Cros Bt and Sir Otto Beit KCMG through the Art Fund". They had been the joint owners of this and Monna Vanna, which came at the same time. | [
"Arthur Du Cros",
"Bible",
"Beatrice",
"William Michael Rossetti",
"Titian",
"F.G. Stephens",
"Royal Academy of Art",
"vase",
"Royal Collection",
"Encyclopædia Britannica",
"Art Fund",
"Allegory of Marriage",
"Olympia",
"Athenaeum",
"Birkenhead",
"Alfonso d'Avalos",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Arundel Club",
"necklace",
"Il Purgatorio",
"Édouard Manet",
"mulatto",
"Purgatorio",
"Song of Solomon",
"Monna Vanna",
"Dante",
"Otto Beit",
"George Rae",
"Theodore Watts-Dunton"
]
|
|
15529_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | In this artwork, how is the History discussed? | The painting was commissioned in 1863 by Rossetti's regular patron, the Birkenhead banker George Rae, for £300. At that stage, the broad composition seems to have been the same as in the final work, but the subject was intended to be Dante's Beatrice, as imagined in the poet's Il Purgatorio. After a month or two's work in the summer of 1863, the subject was changed to illustrate the Song of Solomon from the Bible, apparently because Rossetti found the complexion of his chosen model for the main figure at that point, Marie Ford, "too bright for his conception of Dante's Beatrice".Work progressed rather slowly, perhaps as Rossetti was working on other paintings at the same time, including Venus Verticordia, begun in 1864, but not finished until 1868. On a visit to Paris in November 1864, he paid a call to the studio of Édouard Manet, where he may well have seen Manet's Olympia, then a work in progress, where a white female nude contrasts with a clothed black maid. Manet did not paint the maid until the following month, but she may have been sketched in, or discussed with Rossetti.
It has also been suggested that the general composition was influenced by Titian's Allegory of Marriage (formerly so-called Allegory of Alfonso d'Avalos) in the Louvre, with three 17th-century copies (one a watercolour) in the Royal Collection. This is an allegory of marriage, with a number of figures arranged around a central object.
In March 1865 Rossetti painted a "Japanese" dress over the main figure, and replaced the previous female black ("mulatto" according to art historians) child with a male one, preferring his darker skin tone . By the autumn it was sufficiently complete to be shown to the leading art critic F.G. Stephens, who described it in some detail in the 21 October 1865 issue of the Athenaeum magazine, of which he was the editor for art, noting that: "As she unveils, they [the attendants] look with different expressions for the effect of the disclosure on the coming man". Stephens and Rossetti were close, and Rossetti would have seen the critique before publication. It appears Stephens sometimes allowed Rossetti to write such things himself, under Stephens's name.
Stephens praised Rossetti for his use of colour. However, he pointed out some technical errors. For example, Stephens claimed that the black child's hands look unnatural considering the vase that the child is holding. Furthermore, Stephens pointed out that the child's necklace does not seem to lie flat on his chest. Rather, the ornament is positioned in a way that the viewers of the piece could see its patterns and details.Rossetti did further work over the winter, hence his date of "1865-6" on the canvas. The painting was first exhibited, for a single day, at the Arundel Club on 21 February 1866. Rossetti took the painting back in 1873, when it was "considerably altered", changing the tone and making "more ideal" the heads of the bride and the woman to the right of her, and the bride's hands. A photograph of the painting before these changes exists.
In the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, whose art entries were supervised by Rossetti's brother, William Michael Rossetti, Rossetti's biography was by F.G. Stephens and another close friend, Theodore Watts-Dunton. In the biography the painting is praised highly: The same elements, energy, a sympathetic and poetic scheme of colour, and composition of a fine order, combined with far greater force and originality in "The Bride", or "The Beloved", that magnificent illustration of The Song of Solomon. The last named is a life-size group of powerfully coloured and diversely beautiful damsels accompanying their mistress with music and with song on her way to the bridegroom. This picture, as regards its brilliance, finish, the charms of four lovely faces and the splendour of its lighting, occupies a great place 'in the highest grade of modern art of all the world. It is likewise, so far as the qualities named are concerned, the crowning piece of Rossetti's art, and stands for him much as the “ Sacred and Profane Love ” of Titian represents that master.
The painting was exhibited at the Royal Academy of Art in 1883 and 1906 (but then not until 1973), and in large loan exhibitions in Liverpool in 1886 and Manchester in 1887. The painting was bought by the Tate in 1916, "Purchased with assistance from Sir Arthur Du Cros Bt and Sir Otto Beit KCMG through the Art Fund". They had been the joint owners of this and Monna Vanna, which came at the same time. | [
"Arthur Du Cros",
"Bible",
"Beatrice",
"William Michael Rossetti",
"Titian",
"F.G. Stephens",
"Royal Academy of Art",
"vase",
"Royal Collection",
"Encyclopædia Britannica",
"Art Fund",
"Allegory of Marriage",
"Olympia",
"Athenaeum",
"Birkenhead",
"Alfonso d'Avalos",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Arundel Club",
"necklace",
"Il Purgatorio",
"Édouard Manet",
"mulatto",
"Purgatorio",
"Song of Solomon",
"Monna Vanna",
"Dante",
"Otto Beit",
"George Rae",
"Theodore Watts-Dunton"
]
|
|
15530_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | In the context of The Beloved (Rossetti), explore the Frame and inscription of the History. | The 1873 return to Rossetti's studio was probably when the frame was fitted; Rossetti often designed his own frames and inscriptions on them.
Between conventional small mouldings, the widest zone of the gilded wood frame has a vegetal scroll of "wavy fronds" on a dotted background, with four raised roundels with a geometrical design, each midway along a side. A small wooden plaque is in the centre of the bottom member, with painted inscriptions: "The Beloved" large in the centre, and two sets of verses from the Bible on the sides, run together and slightly edited. On the left the verses are from the Song of Solomon, and on the right from Psalm 45:
My beloved is mine and I am his (Song, 2:16)
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth (Song 1:2)
for thy love is better than wine (Song 1:2)
She shall be brought unto the King in raiment of
needlework: the virgins that be her fellows shall
bear her company, and shall be brought unto thee (Psalm 45:14) | [
"Bible",
"Psalm 45",
"Song of Solomon"
]
|
|
15530_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | In the context of this artwork, explore the Frame and inscription of the History. | The 1873 return to Rossetti's studio was probably when the frame was fitted; Rossetti often designed his own frames and inscriptions on them.
Between conventional small mouldings, the widest zone of the gilded wood frame has a vegetal scroll of "wavy fronds" on a dotted background, with four raised roundels with a geometrical design, each midway along a side. A small wooden plaque is in the centre of the bottom member, with painted inscriptions: "The Beloved" large in the centre, and two sets of verses from the Bible on the sides, run together and slightly edited. On the left the verses are from the Song of Solomon, and on the right from Psalm 45:
My beloved is mine and I am his (Song, 2:16)
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth (Song 1:2)
for thy love is better than wine (Song 1:2)
She shall be brought unto the King in raiment of
needlework: the virgins that be her fellows shall
bear her company, and shall be brought unto thee (Psalm 45:14) | [
"Bible",
"Psalm 45",
"Song of Solomon"
]
|
|
15531_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on The Beloved (Rossetti) and explain the Ideals of beauty. | While the painting is mainly regarded as a celebration of feminine beauty in general, it has been interpreted as a celebration of a specific type of beauty. Most art historians assert that all the women are intended to be beautiful, "diversely beautiful damsels" with "the charms of four lovely faces" as the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica put it.However, recently some art historians have suggested that the painting's positioning of the models depicts the central woman as more beautiful. She has an oval and symmetrical face with blue-green eyes and Cupid's bow lips. Her paler skin may accentuate her beauty compared to the others. It is suggested these characteristics mean that this piece upholds whiteness as a standard of beauty. But another recent art historian claims (because of her red hair) that the bride is presented as an "Irish exotic Other", also claiming that Rossetti "demonstrated a fetishistic fixation on skin color and race", and that her position as a bride "can be seen as a representation of anxiety of the increasing presence of [Irish] foreign immigrants in Great Britain." But the model Alexa Wilding had red hair, which Rossetti liked to paint throughout his career. In his first two major paintings The Girlhood of Mary Virgin (1848) and Ecce Ancilla Domini! (1850), he had used his sister Christina Rossetti as his model for the Virgin Mary, and painted her with red hair, which was not her actual hair colour, nor indeed at all usual for depictions of Mary. A variety of interpretations of the standard of beauty and the black child has caused debates about Rossetti and this painting's relationship to racism. With the central figure being a white female, some art historians claim that this piece idealizes whiteness. On the other hand, others argue that the piece celebrates racial diversity. The hair ornament of the bride is based on Chinese featherwork. The green robe that she is wearing is a Japanese kimono (though held tight at the wrist by a bracelet in a most un-Japanese way). The pendant worn by the black child is North African. For some scholars, these details indicate that Rossetti pays tribute to the variety of cultures across the globe. | [
"feminine beauty",
"Virgin Mary",
"Ecce Ancilla Domini!",
"Alexa Wilding",
"Encyclopædia Britannica",
"North Africa",
"kimono",
"The Girlhood of Mary Virgin",
"Cupid's bow",
"featherwork",
"standard of beauty",
"Ecce Ancilla Domini",
"Christina Rossetti",
"racial diversity"
]
|
|
15531_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on this artwork and explain the Ideals of beauty. | While the painting is mainly regarded as a celebration of feminine beauty in general, it has been interpreted as a celebration of a specific type of beauty. Most art historians assert that all the women are intended to be beautiful, "diversely beautiful damsels" with "the charms of four lovely faces" as the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica put it.However, recently some art historians have suggested that the painting's positioning of the models depicts the central woman as more beautiful. She has an oval and symmetrical face with blue-green eyes and Cupid's bow lips. Her paler skin may accentuate her beauty compared to the others. It is suggested these characteristics mean that this piece upholds whiteness as a standard of beauty. But another recent art historian claims (because of her red hair) that the bride is presented as an "Irish exotic Other", also claiming that Rossetti "demonstrated a fetishistic fixation on skin color and race", and that her position as a bride "can be seen as a representation of anxiety of the increasing presence of [Irish] foreign immigrants in Great Britain." But the model Alexa Wilding had red hair, which Rossetti liked to paint throughout his career. In his first two major paintings The Girlhood of Mary Virgin (1848) and Ecce Ancilla Domini! (1850), he had used his sister Christina Rossetti as his model for the Virgin Mary, and painted her with red hair, which was not her actual hair colour, nor indeed at all usual for depictions of Mary. A variety of interpretations of the standard of beauty and the black child has caused debates about Rossetti and this painting's relationship to racism. With the central figure being a white female, some art historians claim that this piece idealizes whiteness. On the other hand, others argue that the piece celebrates racial diversity. The hair ornament of the bride is based on Chinese featherwork. The green robe that she is wearing is a Japanese kimono (though held tight at the wrist by a bracelet in a most un-Japanese way). The pendant worn by the black child is North African. For some scholars, these details indicate that Rossetti pays tribute to the variety of cultures across the globe. | [
"feminine beauty",
"Virgin Mary",
"Ecce Ancilla Domini!",
"Alexa Wilding",
"Encyclopædia Britannica",
"North Africa",
"kimono",
"The Girlhood of Mary Virgin",
"Cupid's bow",
"featherwork",
"standard of beauty",
"Ecce Ancilla Domini",
"Christina Rossetti",
"racial diversity"
]
|
|
15532_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Explore the The black child of this artwork, The Beloved (Rossetti). | The black child is another element that makes this piece unusual in Rossetti's paintings of the period. Prior to the 1990s, not much notice was taken of the black child other than as a colour contrast for aesthetic effect. But since 2000 the child has become the primary focus of academic discussion. The curator and writer Jan Marsh, claimed that the child "owes his presence in The Beloved to . . . current Abolitionist campaigning" taking place in the United States during the Civil War. The art historian Matthew Francis Rarey has disputed the idea that Rossetti intended to make a political statement, arguing instead that the painter included the child specifically in an effort to transcend politics, attempting a "figuration of Blackness independent of political implication or moral value." | [
"Jan Marsh",
"Civil War",
"aesthetic"
]
|
|
15532_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Explore the The black child of this artwork. | The black child is another element that makes this piece unusual in Rossetti's paintings of the period. Prior to the 1990s, not much notice was taken of the black child other than as a colour contrast for aesthetic effect. But since 2000 the child has become the primary focus of academic discussion. The curator and writer Jan Marsh, claimed that the child "owes his presence in The Beloved to . . . current Abolitionist campaigning" taking place in the United States during the Civil War. The art historian Matthew Francis Rarey has disputed the idea that Rossetti intended to make a political statement, arguing instead that the painter included the child specifically in an effort to transcend politics, attempting a "figuration of Blackness independent of political implication or moral value." | [
"Jan Marsh",
"Civil War",
"aesthetic"
]
|
|
15533_T | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on The Beloved (Rossetti) and discuss the The models. | Rossetti mostly used a small group of models, and often changed the model during the development of a work, as he did with Venus Verticordia, and even repainted the face with a different one some years after initial completion, as with Lady Lilith slightly later. In both cases the final model was the redhead Alexa Wilding. There is some disagreement as to whose was the final face used for the central figure. He seems to have begun with Marie Ford, but may have changed to Alexa Wilding; the hair colour suggests this. Rossetti's brother said it was an (otherwise unknown) "Miss MacKenzie".The known models for the six figures include: Alexa Wilding (front, the bride) - see above
Ellen Smith (left)
Marie Ford (back left)
Fanny Eaton (1835–1924) (back right)
Keomi Gray (1849–1914) (front right)While the other models are looking directly at the viewer, that is to say the bridegroom, Gray is the only one who has her head turned away to the side. She was a Romani (gypsy). It has been claimed that she has her face turned away to symbolize the resistance from the stereotypes that Romani people faced during this time, and that it also shows Rossetti's uncertainties about the sexuality of gypsies and his broader interest in Romani culture.Fanny Eaton was the model for the half-seen face at the back between the central bride and Keomi Gray at the right. She was born in Jamaica, probably to a recently-emancipated slave mother, and a father who was a British soldier. She was used as a model by several artists, whose depictions of her striking features varied her skin tones to suit their subjects; she was painted as the mother of Moses, and as an African slave. She married a cab-driver in 1859, and when not modelling worked as a cook and cleaner.
Both male and female children were used as models for the initial studies of the child attendant. Gabriel is the name of one of the children who modelled for this figure. | [
"Fanny Eaton",
"Romani people",
"Romani",
"Alexa Wilding",
"Jamaica",
"Moses",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Lady Lilith"
]
|
|
15533_NT | The Beloved (Rossetti) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the The models. | Rossetti mostly used a small group of models, and often changed the model during the development of a work, as he did with Venus Verticordia, and even repainted the face with a different one some years after initial completion, as with Lady Lilith slightly later. In both cases the final model was the redhead Alexa Wilding. There is some disagreement as to whose was the final face used for the central figure. He seems to have begun with Marie Ford, but may have changed to Alexa Wilding; the hair colour suggests this. Rossetti's brother said it was an (otherwise unknown) "Miss MacKenzie".The known models for the six figures include: Alexa Wilding (front, the bride) - see above
Ellen Smith (left)
Marie Ford (back left)
Fanny Eaton (1835–1924) (back right)
Keomi Gray (1849–1914) (front right)While the other models are looking directly at the viewer, that is to say the bridegroom, Gray is the only one who has her head turned away to the side. She was a Romani (gypsy). It has been claimed that she has her face turned away to symbolize the resistance from the stereotypes that Romani people faced during this time, and that it also shows Rossetti's uncertainties about the sexuality of gypsies and his broader interest in Romani culture.Fanny Eaton was the model for the half-seen face at the back between the central bride and Keomi Gray at the right. She was born in Jamaica, probably to a recently-emancipated slave mother, and a father who was a British soldier. She was used as a model by several artists, whose depictions of her striking features varied her skin tones to suit their subjects; she was painted as the mother of Moses, and as an African slave. She married a cab-driver in 1859, and when not modelling worked as a cook and cleaner.
Both male and female children were used as models for the initial studies of the child attendant. Gabriel is the name of one of the children who modelled for this figure. | [
"Fanny Eaton",
"Romani people",
"Romani",
"Alexa Wilding",
"Jamaica",
"Moses",
"Venus Verticordia",
"Lady Lilith"
]
|
|
15534_T | Lady in White (Toorop) | How does Lady in White (Toorop) elucidate its abstract? | Lady in White is an impressionist painting of a woman wearing a white robe, from 1886, by Dutch painter Jan Toorop. | [
"impressionist",
"Dutch painter",
"woman",
"Jan Toorop",
"white",
"White",
"painting",
"robe"
]
|
|
15534_NT | Lady in White (Toorop) | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | Lady in White is an impressionist painting of a woman wearing a white robe, from 1886, by Dutch painter Jan Toorop. | [
"impressionist",
"Dutch painter",
"woman",
"Jan Toorop",
"white",
"White",
"painting",
"robe"
]
|
|
15535_T | Lady in White (Toorop) | Focus on Lady in White (Toorop) and analyze the Painting. | The painting shows an intense, almost plain white colour on the woman's robe, contrasted with dark tones in the background, in an almost monochrome color palette. Beside the woman, there is a radiant circle of a wine glass filled with red wine. Toorop portrays his future wife in a manner influenced by James Ensor and James McNeill Whistler's Impressionist style. | [
"wine glass",
"woman",
"James Ensor",
"Painting",
"James McNeill Whistler",
"white",
"painting",
"monochrome",
"robe",
"color palette"
]
|
|
15535_NT | Lady in White (Toorop) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Painting. | The painting shows an intense, almost plain white colour on the woman's robe, contrasted with dark tones in the background, in an almost monochrome color palette. Beside the woman, there is a radiant circle of a wine glass filled with red wine. Toorop portrays his future wife in a manner influenced by James Ensor and James McNeill Whistler's Impressionist style. | [
"wine glass",
"woman",
"James Ensor",
"Painting",
"James McNeill Whistler",
"white",
"painting",
"monochrome",
"robe",
"color palette"
]
|
|
15536_T | Lady in White (Toorop) | In Lady in White (Toorop), how is the Annie Hall discussed? | The model is Annie Hall (1860-1929), an English woman who was studying in Brussels when Toorop met her in 1885. They got married in 1886.
Toorop painted several paintings of Annie, in which she is depicted in similar white robes.
In 1883 while in Brussels Toorop allied himself with a group of avant-garde young artists called Les Vingt ("the twenty"), a group he eventually joined in 1885. The artists of "Les Vingt" and especially James Ensor strongly influenced him during this period.
In 1884 Toorop made a trip to London with his friend Emile Verhaeren and the art critic Georges Destrée. At the end of 1885, he returned to England for several months, where he lived on the estate of Annie Hall's parents. During his stay in England, Toorop became very impressed by the work of James McNeill Whistler, whose paintings he had encountered during an exhibition by Les Vingt in 1884. On the introduction of Lawrence Alma-Tadema he visited Whistler's studio in London; between 1885 and 1887 Whistler's work was a great inspiration for Toorop.The influence of James McNeill Whistler on this portrait of Annie Hall is unmistakably reflected in the dominant use of a brightly illuminated white in Annie's dress and embroidery. The presence of the aestheticist beauty ideal is clearly recognizable. Toorop made several portraits of Annie Hall during the period 1885-1887 in the same style, evoking memories of the "symphonies" Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl; Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl, and Symphony in White, No. 3 that Whistler made at that time.
In Toorop's Lady in White from the end of 1886, he still seems to be inspired by Whistler more emphatically than in the other portrait he made of Annie called Portrait of Annie Hall in Lissadell. The atmosphere is generally dreamy and melancholic. | [
"Les Vingt",
"Emile Verhaeren",
"Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl",
"English",
"woman",
"James Ensor",
"Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl",
"Lawrence Alma-Tadema",
"James McNeill Whistler",
"white",
"Symphony in White, No. 3",
"White",
"painting",
"London",
"robe",
"Brussels"
]
|
|
15536_NT | Lady in White (Toorop) | In this artwork, how is the Annie Hall discussed? | The model is Annie Hall (1860-1929), an English woman who was studying in Brussels when Toorop met her in 1885. They got married in 1886.
Toorop painted several paintings of Annie, in which she is depicted in similar white robes.
In 1883 while in Brussels Toorop allied himself with a group of avant-garde young artists called Les Vingt ("the twenty"), a group he eventually joined in 1885. The artists of "Les Vingt" and especially James Ensor strongly influenced him during this period.
In 1884 Toorop made a trip to London with his friend Emile Verhaeren and the art critic Georges Destrée. At the end of 1885, he returned to England for several months, where he lived on the estate of Annie Hall's parents. During his stay in England, Toorop became very impressed by the work of James McNeill Whistler, whose paintings he had encountered during an exhibition by Les Vingt in 1884. On the introduction of Lawrence Alma-Tadema he visited Whistler's studio in London; between 1885 and 1887 Whistler's work was a great inspiration for Toorop.The influence of James McNeill Whistler on this portrait of Annie Hall is unmistakably reflected in the dominant use of a brightly illuminated white in Annie's dress and embroidery. The presence of the aestheticist beauty ideal is clearly recognizable. Toorop made several portraits of Annie Hall during the period 1885-1887 in the same style, evoking memories of the "symphonies" Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl; Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl, and Symphony in White, No. 3 that Whistler made at that time.
In Toorop's Lady in White from the end of 1886, he still seems to be inspired by Whistler more emphatically than in the other portrait he made of Annie called Portrait of Annie Hall in Lissadell. The atmosphere is generally dreamy and melancholic. | [
"Les Vingt",
"Emile Verhaeren",
"Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl",
"English",
"woman",
"James Ensor",
"Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl",
"Lawrence Alma-Tadema",
"James McNeill Whistler",
"white",
"Symphony in White, No. 3",
"White",
"painting",
"London",
"robe",
"Brussels"
]
|
|
15537_T | Le Marteleur | Focus on Le Marteleur and explore the abstract. | Le Marteleur (French: [lə maʁt.lœʁ]; variously translated as The Hammerman or The Drop Forger) is a bronze sculpture by Belgian sculptor Constantin Meunier. It depicts a hammerman holding a pair of pincers and wearing an apron, cap, and spats. Created in 1886, several casts of the statue exist, including one on the campus of Columbia University. | [
"pincers",
"spats",
"bronze sculpture",
"Constantin Meunier",
"hammerman",
"Columbia University"
]
|
|
15537_NT | Le Marteleur | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | Le Marteleur (French: [lə maʁt.lœʁ]; variously translated as The Hammerman or The Drop Forger) is a bronze sculpture by Belgian sculptor Constantin Meunier. It depicts a hammerman holding a pair of pincers and wearing an apron, cap, and spats. Created in 1886, several casts of the statue exist, including one on the campus of Columbia University. | [
"pincers",
"spats",
"bronze sculpture",
"Constantin Meunier",
"hammerman",
"Columbia University"
]
|
|
15538_T | Le Marteleur | Focus on Le Marteleur and explain the History. | Le Marteleur was contemporaneous with the Belgian strike of 1886, considered by historians to be the first time the Belgian working class achieved significant concessions from the national government. Inspired by the "plastic grandeur of the industrial worker," Meunier's work reflected the political and economic developments of his day in his depiction of the hammerer: while the realism of the statue indicated the difficulty of the worker's labor, the contrapposto posture of its subject, borrowed from Classical and Renaissance sculpture, idealized and elevated him. The plaster cast of the statue was exhibited at the Parisian Salon 1886, where it earned an honorable mention. The Columbia cast of Le Marteleur was gifted to the university in 1914 by the Columbia University School of Mines Class of 1889. It was originally located in front of Lewisohn Hall, but now stands in front of the Mudd Building, where the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Sciences is located. | [
"working class",
"Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Sciences",
"contrapposto",
"Belgian strike of 1886",
"Lewisohn Hall",
"Parisian Salon",
"Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science",
"Columbia University",
"Columbia University School of Mines"
]
|
|
15538_NT | Le Marteleur | Focus on this artwork and explain the History. | Le Marteleur was contemporaneous with the Belgian strike of 1886, considered by historians to be the first time the Belgian working class achieved significant concessions from the national government. Inspired by the "plastic grandeur of the industrial worker," Meunier's work reflected the political and economic developments of his day in his depiction of the hammerer: while the realism of the statue indicated the difficulty of the worker's labor, the contrapposto posture of its subject, borrowed from Classical and Renaissance sculpture, idealized and elevated him. The plaster cast of the statue was exhibited at the Parisian Salon 1886, where it earned an honorable mention. The Columbia cast of Le Marteleur was gifted to the university in 1914 by the Columbia University School of Mines Class of 1889. It was originally located in front of Lewisohn Hall, but now stands in front of the Mudd Building, where the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Sciences is located. | [
"working class",
"Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Sciences",
"contrapposto",
"Belgian strike of 1886",
"Lewisohn Hall",
"Parisian Salon",
"Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science",
"Columbia University",
"Columbia University School of Mines"
]
|
|
15539_T | Mountain Landscape with Castle | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Mountain Landscape with Castle. | Mountain Landscape with Castle is an oil-on-panel painting by Flemish painter Joos de Momper. It was probably completed in the 1600s. | [
"oil-on-panel",
"Joos de Momper",
"Castle",
"Flemish"
]
|
|
15539_NT | Mountain Landscape with Castle | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | Mountain Landscape with Castle is an oil-on-panel painting by Flemish painter Joos de Momper. It was probably completed in the 1600s. | [
"oil-on-panel",
"Joos de Momper",
"Castle",
"Flemish"
]
|
|
15540_T | Mountain Landscape with Castle | Focus on Mountain Landscape with Castle and discuss the Painting. | The painting depicts the exotic, imaginary landscape typical of de Mompers' oeuvre and his circle. A warm-colored foreground gives way to a less warm background with bluish highlands seen from a distance. Several people are traveling up and down a winding path dug into a cliff, on top of which there sits a castle. In the foreground, there moves a group of travelers with two donkeys. Among them there are two horsemen, one of whose horses stands beside a dog. In his early work, de Momper often collaborated with Jan Brueghel the Elder, who generally painted staffage figures for him. | [
"Jan Brueghel the Elder",
"staffage",
"castle"
]
|
|
15540_NT | Mountain Landscape with Castle | Focus on this artwork and discuss the Painting. | The painting depicts the exotic, imaginary landscape typical of de Mompers' oeuvre and his circle. A warm-colored foreground gives way to a less warm background with bluish highlands seen from a distance. Several people are traveling up and down a winding path dug into a cliff, on top of which there sits a castle. In the foreground, there moves a group of travelers with two donkeys. Among them there are two horsemen, one of whose horses stands beside a dog. In his early work, de Momper often collaborated with Jan Brueghel the Elder, who generally painted staffage figures for him. | [
"Jan Brueghel the Elder",
"staffage",
"castle"
]
|
|
15541_T | Mountain Landscape with Castle | How does Mountain Landscape with Castle elucidate its Provenance of the painting? | The painting became property of Arthur Seyss-Inquart, an Austrian Nazi leader responsible of crimes against the Dutchmen and humanity. The painting was acquired in 1942 by Dr. Schubert-Soldern, and became part of Vienna's Gemäldegalerie collection in 1942. | [
"Austrian Nazi",
"Dutchmen",
"humanity",
"Arthur Seyss-Inquart"
]
|
|
15541_NT | Mountain Landscape with Castle | How does this artwork elucidate its Provenance of the painting? | The painting became property of Arthur Seyss-Inquart, an Austrian Nazi leader responsible of crimes against the Dutchmen and humanity. The painting was acquired in 1942 by Dr. Schubert-Soldern, and became part of Vienna's Gemäldegalerie collection in 1942. | [
"Austrian Nazi",
"Dutchmen",
"humanity",
"Arthur Seyss-Inquart"
]
|
|
15542_T | Tomioka Tessai | Focus on Tomioka Tessai and analyze the Biography. | Tessai was born in either 1836 or 1837 in Kyoto, as the second son of Tomioka Korenobu, who sold sacerdotal robes. Because his hearing was not good his parents decided he should be a scholar, rather than a merchant. He was educated as a scholar in classical Chinese philosophy and literature and the ancient Japanese classics under noted kokugaku scholar Okuni Tadamasa.
Tessai's father died in 1843, when he was only seven. The family fortunes declined, and young Tessai became a page at a Shinto shrine. Twelve years later, he came to be lodged with the now-famous Buddhist poet and nun Ōtagaki Rengetsu, who would become his greatest scholarly mentor and supporter. He developed his own style over the next decade or so, studying under a number of accomplished painters.
In 1861, Tessai opened a private school in Rengetsu's house to teach painting; he went on to become a teacher at the newly inaugurated Ritsumeikan University in 1868. He also did some work for the new Meiji government, contributing maps and topographical charts he created. Throughout the Meiji period, Tessai traveled extensively, visiting famous and scenic places that would later become subjects of his paintings. He was able to see many different sides of the country all the way from Nagasaki to Hokkaidō. He also served as a Shinto priest at a number of different shrines, but ultimately resigned from his final post when his brother died, so that he could look after his mother.
After Tessai settled back in Kyoto in 1882, he championed the old styles of Japanese traditional painting against the new influences of Western art (yōga), then becoming more and more popular, and was thus a participant in the early nihonga movement.
Tessai's early works followed the bunjinga styles of the early 19th century, although he also worked in almost all of the styles associated with Kyoto: Rimpa, Yamato-e, Otsu-e, etc. However, his mature style concentrated on Nanga, or Chinese style paintings based on the late Ming dynasty artists from Suzhou and Jiangsu Provinces, which had been introduced to Japan by Sakaki Hyakusen. Tessai tended towards use of rich colors to portray scenes of people in landscapes, with a composition intended to evoke or illustrate a historical or literary episode. He also sometimes made use of religious imagery, combining depictions of Buddhist bodhisattva with Daoist or Confucian figures to symbolize the unity of Asian religious traditions. Tessai's final works either use very brilliant colors, or else were monochrome ink with dense, rough brushwork and occasional slight jarring touches of bright pigments.In the 1890s, he was appointed a judge of the Young Men's Society of Painting, and became a professor at the Kyoto Fine Arts School soon afterwards. He also took part in the founding of several other art associations, including the Nanga Association of Japan. His mother died in 1895, but Tessai continued to have close relations with his family and gained a granddaughter several years later.
In 1907, he was appointed official painter to Emperor Meiji, who so liked his works that his commission was extended to cover the Imperial Household Agency as a court painter in 1917. He was also appointed a member of the Imperial Fine Arts Academy (Teikoku Bijutsu-in) in 1919.
Throughout his life, Tessai served as a Shinto priest and a scholar. He was an extremely prolific painter, and it is estimated that he painted approximately 20,000 paintings in the course of his career. On one occasion he completed 70 paintings in a single day. Tessai's best works were created in the last years of his life, from age 80 to his death in 1924 at age 88.
The largest collection of Tessai's works is at the Tessai Memorial Museum, a private art museum within the grounds of the Kiyoshikojin Seicho-ji, a Buddhist temple in Takarazuka, Hyogo. His art is also kept in the Princeton University Art Museum, University of Michigan Museum of Art, the National Museum of Asian Art, the British Museum, the Seattle Art Museum, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, the Birmingham Museum of Art, the Minneapolis Institute of Art, and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. | [
"Buddhist",
"Daoist",
"bunjinga",
"Emperor Meiji",
"Otsu-e",
"kokugaku",
"University of Michigan Museum of Art",
"Jiangsu Province",
"Nagasaki",
"Sakaki Hyakusen",
"Nanga",
"National Museum of Asian Art",
"British Museum",
"court painter",
"Chinese style paintings",
"Ritsumeikan University",
"landscape",
"literature",
"Seattle Art Museum",
"Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art",
"Birmingham Museum of Art",
"Takarazuka, Hyogo",
"Confucian",
"topographical chart",
"Suzhou",
"yōga",
"Hokkaidō",
"Princeton University Art Museum",
"bodhisattva",
"Imperial Fine Arts Academy",
"Imperial Household Agency",
"Minneapolis Institute of Art",
"Japanese",
"Kyoto",
"Rimpa",
"Yamato-e",
"Museum of Fine Arts, Boston",
"nihonga",
"Japan",
"Ming dynasty",
"Shinto",
"Ōtagaki Rengetsu",
"Meiji government",
"Painting",
"Jiangsu",
"Chinese philosophy",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art"
]
|
|
15542_NT | Tomioka Tessai | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Biography. | Tessai was born in either 1836 or 1837 in Kyoto, as the second son of Tomioka Korenobu, who sold sacerdotal robes. Because his hearing was not good his parents decided he should be a scholar, rather than a merchant. He was educated as a scholar in classical Chinese philosophy and literature and the ancient Japanese classics under noted kokugaku scholar Okuni Tadamasa.
Tessai's father died in 1843, when he was only seven. The family fortunes declined, and young Tessai became a page at a Shinto shrine. Twelve years later, he came to be lodged with the now-famous Buddhist poet and nun Ōtagaki Rengetsu, who would become his greatest scholarly mentor and supporter. He developed his own style over the next decade or so, studying under a number of accomplished painters.
In 1861, Tessai opened a private school in Rengetsu's house to teach painting; he went on to become a teacher at the newly inaugurated Ritsumeikan University in 1868. He also did some work for the new Meiji government, contributing maps and topographical charts he created. Throughout the Meiji period, Tessai traveled extensively, visiting famous and scenic places that would later become subjects of his paintings. He was able to see many different sides of the country all the way from Nagasaki to Hokkaidō. He also served as a Shinto priest at a number of different shrines, but ultimately resigned from his final post when his brother died, so that he could look after his mother.
After Tessai settled back in Kyoto in 1882, he championed the old styles of Japanese traditional painting against the new influences of Western art (yōga), then becoming more and more popular, and was thus a participant in the early nihonga movement.
Tessai's early works followed the bunjinga styles of the early 19th century, although he also worked in almost all of the styles associated with Kyoto: Rimpa, Yamato-e, Otsu-e, etc. However, his mature style concentrated on Nanga, or Chinese style paintings based on the late Ming dynasty artists from Suzhou and Jiangsu Provinces, which had been introduced to Japan by Sakaki Hyakusen. Tessai tended towards use of rich colors to portray scenes of people in landscapes, with a composition intended to evoke or illustrate a historical or literary episode. He also sometimes made use of religious imagery, combining depictions of Buddhist bodhisattva with Daoist or Confucian figures to symbolize the unity of Asian religious traditions. Tessai's final works either use very brilliant colors, or else were monochrome ink with dense, rough brushwork and occasional slight jarring touches of bright pigments.In the 1890s, he was appointed a judge of the Young Men's Society of Painting, and became a professor at the Kyoto Fine Arts School soon afterwards. He also took part in the founding of several other art associations, including the Nanga Association of Japan. His mother died in 1895, but Tessai continued to have close relations with his family and gained a granddaughter several years later.
In 1907, he was appointed official painter to Emperor Meiji, who so liked his works that his commission was extended to cover the Imperial Household Agency as a court painter in 1917. He was also appointed a member of the Imperial Fine Arts Academy (Teikoku Bijutsu-in) in 1919.
Throughout his life, Tessai served as a Shinto priest and a scholar. He was an extremely prolific painter, and it is estimated that he painted approximately 20,000 paintings in the course of his career. On one occasion he completed 70 paintings in a single day. Tessai's best works were created in the last years of his life, from age 80 to his death in 1924 at age 88.
The largest collection of Tessai's works is at the Tessai Memorial Museum, a private art museum within the grounds of the Kiyoshikojin Seicho-ji, a Buddhist temple in Takarazuka, Hyogo. His art is also kept in the Princeton University Art Museum, University of Michigan Museum of Art, the National Museum of Asian Art, the British Museum, the Seattle Art Museum, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, the Birmingham Museum of Art, the Minneapolis Institute of Art, and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. | [
"Buddhist",
"Daoist",
"bunjinga",
"Emperor Meiji",
"Otsu-e",
"kokugaku",
"University of Michigan Museum of Art",
"Jiangsu Province",
"Nagasaki",
"Sakaki Hyakusen",
"Nanga",
"National Museum of Asian Art",
"British Museum",
"court painter",
"Chinese style paintings",
"Ritsumeikan University",
"landscape",
"literature",
"Seattle Art Museum",
"Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art",
"Birmingham Museum of Art",
"Takarazuka, Hyogo",
"Confucian",
"topographical chart",
"Suzhou",
"yōga",
"Hokkaidō",
"Princeton University Art Museum",
"bodhisattva",
"Imperial Fine Arts Academy",
"Imperial Household Agency",
"Minneapolis Institute of Art",
"Japanese",
"Kyoto",
"Rimpa",
"Yamato-e",
"Museum of Fine Arts, Boston",
"nihonga",
"Japan",
"Ming dynasty",
"Shinto",
"Ōtagaki Rengetsu",
"Meiji government",
"Painting",
"Jiangsu",
"Chinese philosophy",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art"
]
|
|
15543_T | Tomioka Tessai | In Tomioka Tessai, how is the Important works discussed? | 「阿倍仲麻呂明州望月図」「円通大師呉門隠栖図 (1914, Important Cultural Property) Hakutaka Museum
「二神会舞図」Tokyo National Museum
「旧蝦夷風俗図」(1896) Tokyo National Museum
「不尽山頂全図」
「蓬莱仙境図」
「弘法大師像図」
「蘇東坡図」
「武陵桃源図」 (1923)
「瀛洲遷境図」 (1923)
「阿倍仲麻呂在唐詠和歌図」Adachi Art Museum | [
"Important Cultural Property",
"Tokyo",
"Tokyo National Museum"
]
|
|
15543_NT | Tomioka Tessai | In this artwork, how is the Important works discussed? | 「阿倍仲麻呂明州望月図」「円通大師呉門隠栖図 (1914, Important Cultural Property) Hakutaka Museum
「二神会舞図」Tokyo National Museum
「旧蝦夷風俗図」(1896) Tokyo National Museum
「不尽山頂全図」
「蓬莱仙境図」
「弘法大師像図」
「蘇東坡図」
「武陵桃源図」 (1923)
「瀛洲遷境図」 (1923)
「阿倍仲麻呂在唐詠和歌図」Adachi Art Museum | [
"Important Cultural Property",
"Tokyo",
"Tokyo National Museum"
]
|
|
15544_T | The Stonebreaker | Focus on The Stonebreaker and explore the abstract. | The Stonebreaker is an 1857 oil-on-canvas painting by Henry Wallis. It depicts a manual labourer who appears to be asleep, worn out by his work, but may have been worked to death.
The painting was first exhibited in 1858 at the Royal Academy in London and was highly acclaimed. Many viewers assumed the man was sleeping, worn out by his day of hard but honest labour. Wallis gave no outright statement that the man depicted was dead, but there are many suggestions to this effect. The frame was inscribed with a line paraphrased from Tennyson's A Dirge (1830): "Now is thy long day's work done"; the muted colours and setting sun give a feeling of finality; the man's posture indicates that his hammer has slipped from his grasp as he was working rather than being laid aside while he rests, and his body is so still that a stoat, only visible on close examination, has climbed onto his right foot. The painting's listing in the catalogue was accompanied by a long passage from Thomas Carlyle's "Helotage", a chapter in his Sartor Resartus, which extols the virtues of the working man and laments that "thy body like thy soul was not to know freedom".
Wallis is believed to have painted The Stonebreaker as a commentary on the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 which had formalised the workhouse system for paupers and discouraged other forms of relief for the poor. The able-bodied poor were forced into long hours of manual labour in order to qualify for the lodgings and food provided by the workhouse and the gruelling work sometimes resulted in the death of the workers. Carlyle's accompanying passage also has strong words for supporters of the workhouses:Perhaps in the most thickly-peopled country, some three days annually might suffice to shoot all the able-bodied Paupers that had accumulated during the year.
It was later claimed that by this painting, Wallis moved away from the Pre-Raphaelite principles towards those of an early Victorian Social Realism. However, for Wallis' contemporaries, The Stonebreaker consolidated his reputation as a true Pre-Raphaelite.The dead man wears the smock of an agricultural labourer which suggests that in former times he would have been employed year-round on a farm. Changing social conditions have robbed him of his employment and forced him instead to accept the charity of the workhouse and the arduous job of flint-knapping to produce material for the roads.The painting provides a strong contrast with John Brett's painting of the same name, completed the year after Wallis's version. Brett's Stonebreaker shows another pauper breaking rocks, but this time it is a smartly dressed, well-nourished boy, accompanied by a playful puppy, working away in a bright, sunlit landscape. Brett's painting made his reputation. The details are captured with a scientific accuracy, and the painting was lauded by the art critic John Ruskin. It too makes a statement about the poor, although it lacks the hopelessness and finality of Wallis's painting, just as in Wallis's version there is an underlying realism that is not at first obvious: the boy is rosy-cheeked not because of healthy exercise, but because of the work he is forced to undertake; the puppy cavorts happily, but the boy, working for the chance of receiving charity, cannot afford to stop to play. Brett's painting is in the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool.
Although Wallis's technique was admired, his choice of subject divided the critics. The Illustrated London News found it shocking and offensive while The Spectator said it embodied "the sacredness and solemnity which dwell in a human creature, however seared, and in death, however obscure". | [
"workhouse",
"Sartor Resartus",
"The Illustrated London News",
"Henry Wallis",
"John Ruskin",
"Poor Law Amendment Act",
"Royal Academy",
"Social Realism",
"Thomas Carlyle",
"Liverpool",
"Illustrated London News",
"Walker Art Gallery",
"The Spectator",
"paraphrase",
"stoat",
"flint-knapping",
"Tennyson",
"London",
"oil-on-canvas",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"John Brett",
"Victorian"
]
|
|
15544_NT | The Stonebreaker | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | The Stonebreaker is an 1857 oil-on-canvas painting by Henry Wallis. It depicts a manual labourer who appears to be asleep, worn out by his work, but may have been worked to death.
The painting was first exhibited in 1858 at the Royal Academy in London and was highly acclaimed. Many viewers assumed the man was sleeping, worn out by his day of hard but honest labour. Wallis gave no outright statement that the man depicted was dead, but there are many suggestions to this effect. The frame was inscribed with a line paraphrased from Tennyson's A Dirge (1830): "Now is thy long day's work done"; the muted colours and setting sun give a feeling of finality; the man's posture indicates that his hammer has slipped from his grasp as he was working rather than being laid aside while he rests, and his body is so still that a stoat, only visible on close examination, has climbed onto his right foot. The painting's listing in the catalogue was accompanied by a long passage from Thomas Carlyle's "Helotage", a chapter in his Sartor Resartus, which extols the virtues of the working man and laments that "thy body like thy soul was not to know freedom".
Wallis is believed to have painted The Stonebreaker as a commentary on the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 which had formalised the workhouse system for paupers and discouraged other forms of relief for the poor. The able-bodied poor were forced into long hours of manual labour in order to qualify for the lodgings and food provided by the workhouse and the gruelling work sometimes resulted in the death of the workers. Carlyle's accompanying passage also has strong words for supporters of the workhouses:Perhaps in the most thickly-peopled country, some three days annually might suffice to shoot all the able-bodied Paupers that had accumulated during the year.
It was later claimed that by this painting, Wallis moved away from the Pre-Raphaelite principles towards those of an early Victorian Social Realism. However, for Wallis' contemporaries, The Stonebreaker consolidated his reputation as a true Pre-Raphaelite.The dead man wears the smock of an agricultural labourer which suggests that in former times he would have been employed year-round on a farm. Changing social conditions have robbed him of his employment and forced him instead to accept the charity of the workhouse and the arduous job of flint-knapping to produce material for the roads.The painting provides a strong contrast with John Brett's painting of the same name, completed the year after Wallis's version. Brett's Stonebreaker shows another pauper breaking rocks, but this time it is a smartly dressed, well-nourished boy, accompanied by a playful puppy, working away in a bright, sunlit landscape. Brett's painting made his reputation. The details are captured with a scientific accuracy, and the painting was lauded by the art critic John Ruskin. It too makes a statement about the poor, although it lacks the hopelessness and finality of Wallis's painting, just as in Wallis's version there is an underlying realism that is not at first obvious: the boy is rosy-cheeked not because of healthy exercise, but because of the work he is forced to undertake; the puppy cavorts happily, but the boy, working for the chance of receiving charity, cannot afford to stop to play. Brett's painting is in the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool.
Although Wallis's technique was admired, his choice of subject divided the critics. The Illustrated London News found it shocking and offensive while The Spectator said it embodied "the sacredness and solemnity which dwell in a human creature, however seared, and in death, however obscure". | [
"workhouse",
"Sartor Resartus",
"The Illustrated London News",
"Henry Wallis",
"John Ruskin",
"Poor Law Amendment Act",
"Royal Academy",
"Social Realism",
"Thomas Carlyle",
"Liverpool",
"Illustrated London News",
"Walker Art Gallery",
"The Spectator",
"paraphrase",
"stoat",
"flint-knapping",
"Tennyson",
"London",
"oil-on-canvas",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"John Brett",
"Victorian"
]
|
|
15545_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) and explain the abstract. | Vertumnus is an oil painting produced by the Italian painter Giuseppe Arcimboldo in 1591 that consists of multiple fruits, vegetables and flowers that come together to create a portrait of Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II. Although Arcimboldo's colleagues commented that Vertumnus was scherzo, or humorous, there were intentional political meanings behind the piece, particularly regarding the choice of fruits, vegetables, and flowers. Arcimboldo's choice to include these items was also an intentional reference to the Roman god, Vertumnus.
Vertumnus was presented to Rudolf II after its completion. Its ownership shifted to the Swedish army after the Thirty Years' War. Although art historians lost track of Vertumnus after this shift, it reappeared in 1845 in Sweden in Skokloster Castle, where it is currently located. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Skokloster Castle",
"Thirty Years' War",
"pea",
"Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II",
"pear",
"scherzo",
"Giuseppe Arcimboldo"
]
|
|
15545_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Vertumnus is an oil painting produced by the Italian painter Giuseppe Arcimboldo in 1591 that consists of multiple fruits, vegetables and flowers that come together to create a portrait of Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II. Although Arcimboldo's colleagues commented that Vertumnus was scherzo, or humorous, there were intentional political meanings behind the piece, particularly regarding the choice of fruits, vegetables, and flowers. Arcimboldo's choice to include these items was also an intentional reference to the Roman god, Vertumnus.
Vertumnus was presented to Rudolf II after its completion. Its ownership shifted to the Swedish army after the Thirty Years' War. Although art historians lost track of Vertumnus after this shift, it reappeared in 1845 in Sweden in Skokloster Castle, where it is currently located. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Skokloster Castle",
"Thirty Years' War",
"pea",
"Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II",
"pear",
"scherzo",
"Giuseppe Arcimboldo"
]
|
|
15546_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | In the context of Vertumnus (Arcimboldo), discuss the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II of the Historical context. | During Rudolf II's 29-year rule in Hungary and Bohemia, art was celebrated and praised. His time as Holy Roman Emperor, now named "Rudolfine Prague", set an unprecedented era for the appreciation of art, with much of this cultivation pushed by Rudolf II himself. This acceptance of art is what allowed Arcimboldo to thrive in his court, especially with the unprecedented, unique style Arcimboldo came to be known for.
The initial impression of Arcimboldo's Vertumnus was that it was joke due to the whimsical nature of the piece. However, Vertumnus was not meant to be presented only as a joke. Rather, the use of fruits and vegetables were meant to display Rudolf II's "metamorphoses of power over the world for a ruler". The imperial patron behind Vertumnus, the specific fruit choices that act as power propaganda, and the copies of Vertumnus that were distributed throughout Europe, "all suggest their role as political allegories".Rudolf II's portrait itself encapsulated the perfect balance and harmony with nature, arts, and science, all of which Rudolf II believed he represented during his reign. These portraits were an expression of the Renaissance mind's fascination with riddles, puzzles, and the bizarre. The search for unique, fascinating pieces of art was a common trend among Renaissance elites which lent Arcimboldo the perfect opportunity to fascinate viewers with his distinctive style. Although Arcimboldo's traditional religious subjects were later forgotten, his portraits of human heads composed of objects were greatly admired by his contemporaries. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II"
]
|
|
15546_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | In the context of this artwork, discuss the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II of the Historical context. | During Rudolf II's 29-year rule in Hungary and Bohemia, art was celebrated and praised. His time as Holy Roman Emperor, now named "Rudolfine Prague", set an unprecedented era for the appreciation of art, with much of this cultivation pushed by Rudolf II himself. This acceptance of art is what allowed Arcimboldo to thrive in his court, especially with the unprecedented, unique style Arcimboldo came to be known for.
The initial impression of Arcimboldo's Vertumnus was that it was joke due to the whimsical nature of the piece. However, Vertumnus was not meant to be presented only as a joke. Rather, the use of fruits and vegetables were meant to display Rudolf II's "metamorphoses of power over the world for a ruler". The imperial patron behind Vertumnus, the specific fruit choices that act as power propaganda, and the copies of Vertumnus that were distributed throughout Europe, "all suggest their role as political allegories".Rudolf II's portrait itself encapsulated the perfect balance and harmony with nature, arts, and science, all of which Rudolf II believed he represented during his reign. These portraits were an expression of the Renaissance mind's fascination with riddles, puzzles, and the bizarre. The search for unique, fascinating pieces of art was a common trend among Renaissance elites which lent Arcimboldo the perfect opportunity to fascinate viewers with his distinctive style. Although Arcimboldo's traditional religious subjects were later forgotten, his portraits of human heads composed of objects were greatly admired by his contemporaries. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II"
]
|
|
15547_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | In the context of Vertumnus (Arcimboldo), analyze the Theme of the Style. | Giuseppe Arcimboldo was well known for his unique combination of flora, fruits and other various objects in his paintings. Vertumnus has become one of Arcimboldo's most popular paintings that he produced, and this particular art style was encouraged while he was employed in Rudolf II's court. Arcimboldo created a series of works that utilized these still life images such as the Four Seasons, Four Elements, and The Librarian. Ultimately, Arcimboldo would create Vertumnus which drew on much of his experience in the royal court. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Four Seasons",
"The Librarian.",
"Four Elements",
"Giuseppe Arcimboldo"
]
|
|
15547_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | In the context of this artwork, analyze the Theme of the Style. | Giuseppe Arcimboldo was well known for his unique combination of flora, fruits and other various objects in his paintings. Vertumnus has become one of Arcimboldo's most popular paintings that he produced, and this particular art style was encouraged while he was employed in Rudolf II's court. Arcimboldo created a series of works that utilized these still life images such as the Four Seasons, Four Elements, and The Librarian. Ultimately, Arcimboldo would create Vertumnus which drew on much of his experience in the royal court. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Four Seasons",
"The Librarian.",
"Four Elements",
"Giuseppe Arcimboldo"
]
|
|
15548_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Describe the characteristics of the Mannerism in Vertumnus (Arcimboldo)'s Style. | During Arcimboldo's time in Rudolf II's court, he was able to refine his unique style that would lead many to later regard Arcimboldo's approach as "typical...of mannerism". Mannerism is a particular art style that lasted from the 1530s to the 1600s. Mannerist artists focused on greatly displaying their technique, their exaggeration of figures, and decorative elements resulting in extremely stylized and hyperbolic pieces. Contemporarily, Arcimboldo is thought of as one of the first pioneers of the Mannerist art style especially due to his unique use of still life images. | [
"Mannerism"
]
|
|
15548_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Describe the characteristics of the Mannerism in this artwork's Style. | During Arcimboldo's time in Rudolf II's court, he was able to refine his unique style that would lead many to later regard Arcimboldo's approach as "typical...of mannerism". Mannerism is a particular art style that lasted from the 1530s to the 1600s. Mannerist artists focused on greatly displaying their technique, their exaggeration of figures, and decorative elements resulting in extremely stylized and hyperbolic pieces. Contemporarily, Arcimboldo is thought of as one of the first pioneers of the Mannerist art style especially due to his unique use of still life images. | [
"Mannerism"
]
|
|
15549_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) and explore the Fruits, vegetables and flowers. | The portrait of the emperor is created out of plants, flowers and fruits from all seasons: gourds, pears, apples, cherries, grapes, wheat, artichokes, beans, peas, corns, onions, cabbage foils, chestnuts, figs, mulberries, plums, pomegranates, various pumpkins and olives.
Arcimboldo's choice of fruits, vegetables and flowers not only alluded to Emperor Rudolf II's reign, but also referenced his power and wealth. During the Renaissance, collections of oddities and foreign luxury goods were status symbols for the rich. Great families of the Renaissance such as the Medici collected flora, foods, animals (both living and dead) and other materialistic objects to display their wealth and reach (as many people in those days could not afford such luxuries) and thus, goods from the New World began to trickle into the kunstkammer or wunderkammer of many elites. Arcimboldo's use of corn as Emperor Rudolf II's ear (a crop originating from the New World) thus can be seen as a pointedly political decision. By putting in these particular foreign crops, Rudolf II is revealing that he has access to these items showcasing his power and wealth. | [
"wunderkammer",
"New World",
"apple",
"wheat",
"pea",
"figs",
"cabbage",
"kunstkammer",
"mulberries",
"chestnut",
"grape",
"corn",
"pomegranate",
"olive",
"onion",
"plum",
"Medici",
"cherries",
"pear",
"artichoke",
"bean",
"gourd"
]
|
|
15549_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Fruits, vegetables and flowers. | The portrait of the emperor is created out of plants, flowers and fruits from all seasons: gourds, pears, apples, cherries, grapes, wheat, artichokes, beans, peas, corns, onions, cabbage foils, chestnuts, figs, mulberries, plums, pomegranates, various pumpkins and olives.
Arcimboldo's choice of fruits, vegetables and flowers not only alluded to Emperor Rudolf II's reign, but also referenced his power and wealth. During the Renaissance, collections of oddities and foreign luxury goods were status symbols for the rich. Great families of the Renaissance such as the Medici collected flora, foods, animals (both living and dead) and other materialistic objects to display their wealth and reach (as many people in those days could not afford such luxuries) and thus, goods from the New World began to trickle into the kunstkammer or wunderkammer of many elites. Arcimboldo's use of corn as Emperor Rudolf II's ear (a crop originating from the New World) thus can be seen as a pointedly political decision. By putting in these particular foreign crops, Rudolf II is revealing that he has access to these items showcasing his power and wealth. | [
"wunderkammer",
"New World",
"apple",
"wheat",
"pea",
"figs",
"cabbage",
"kunstkammer",
"mulberries",
"chestnut",
"grape",
"corn",
"pomegranate",
"olive",
"onion",
"plum",
"Medici",
"cherries",
"pear",
"artichoke",
"bean",
"gourd"
]
|
|
15550_T | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) and explain the Interpretations. | The political interpretation of Vertumnus revolves around Rudolf II's rule. In the interpretation, Vertumnus acts as a statement claiming that the known world was claimed under Rudolf II and reveals his intention to defeat the Turks, not for the sake of Christianity but rather for the sake of global power and the everlasting Habsburg dynasty. Politically, Vertumnus has also been interpreted to reveal that Rudolf II's power as the Holy Roman Emperor did not only apply to his subjects and kingdom, but to nature itself (again referencing back to the god Vertumnus). There is also a poetic interpretation that was derived from Arcimboldo's piece. When Arcimboldo compared Rudolf II to Vertumnus, the emperor took on Vertumnus as a representation of himself. While Vertumnus could change his form at will, Rudolf II was known to change his moods at will, too. In Roman mythology, Vertumnus is the god of changing seasons, gardens, fruit trees, and plant growth. These aspects of Vertumnus indicate an "underlying permanence" to the god which in turn reflects back onto Rudolf II's rule. Furthermore, this particular god was present during the birth of Rome which acts as another allusion to the Holy Roman Emperor, Rudolf II. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Christianity",
"Habsburg dynasty",
"Turks"
]
|
|
15550_NT | Vertumnus (Arcimboldo) | Focus on this artwork and explain the Interpretations. | The political interpretation of Vertumnus revolves around Rudolf II's rule. In the interpretation, Vertumnus acts as a statement claiming that the known world was claimed under Rudolf II and reveals his intention to defeat the Turks, not for the sake of Christianity but rather for the sake of global power and the everlasting Habsburg dynasty. Politically, Vertumnus has also been interpreted to reveal that Rudolf II's power as the Holy Roman Emperor did not only apply to his subjects and kingdom, but to nature itself (again referencing back to the god Vertumnus). There is also a poetic interpretation that was derived from Arcimboldo's piece. When Arcimboldo compared Rudolf II to Vertumnus, the emperor took on Vertumnus as a representation of himself. While Vertumnus could change his form at will, Rudolf II was known to change his moods at will, too. In Roman mythology, Vertumnus is the god of changing seasons, gardens, fruit trees, and plant growth. These aspects of Vertumnus indicate an "underlying permanence" to the god which in turn reflects back onto Rudolf II's rule. Furthermore, this particular god was present during the birth of Rome which acts as another allusion to the Holy Roman Emperor, Rudolf II. | [
"Vertumnus",
"Christianity",
"Habsburg dynasty",
"Turks"
]
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.