Giacobbe Giusti, PUISSANCE ET PATHOS. Bronzes du Monde Hellénistique

Giacobbe Giusti, PUISSANCE ET PATHOS. Bronzes du Monde Hellénistique

La beauté à l’époque hellénistique bronzes exposés au Palazzo Strozzi

En collaboration avec J. Paul Getty Museum de Los Angeles di, la National Gallery of Art de Washington et de l’Archaeological Survey of Toscane, coup d’envoi de l’exposition «Pouvoir et pathos. Bronzes du monde hellénistique »dans le prestigieux Palazzo Strozzi.

Les animateurs, jusqu’au 21 Juin, Palazzo Strozzi à Florence, une extraordinaire série de sculptures à partir du quatrième siècle avant JC. au premier siècle D.C..

Pour la première fois réunis à Florence sur les 50 chefs-d’œuvre en bronze de la période hellénistique, IV-I siècle avant JC, qualité très expressive, faite avec des techniques raffinées dans un langage artistique très élaborée, y compris Apoxyomenos Vienne bronze et la version en marbre Offices utilisé pour sa restauration; i due Apollo-Kouroi, archaïsant au Louvre et à Pompéi.

Jusqu’à présent, aucun des couples ne avait jamais été exposé un à côté de l’autre.

Le Apoxyomenos est l’athlète qui nettoie la sueur à la fin d’une course, avec un métal incurvée outil spécial, ce strigile.

Les sculpteurs hellénistiques qui le premier a poussé à la limite les effets dramatiques de les rideaux étaient balançant, les cheveux en désordre, grimaces dents serrées; était entre leurs mains que les formes extérieures de la sculpture sont devenus tout aussi expressive de triomphe et de tragédie intérieure; et ce est dans leurs images de taille que nous voyons pour la première fois une représentation de tous les individus crédibles et événements réels, ils étaient des scènes de la vie quotidienne ou le combat entre Achille et chevaux de Troie.

La représentation artistique de la figure humaine est centrale dans la plupart des cultures anciennes, mais la Grèce est l’endroit où il avait plus d’importance et d’influence sur l’histoire ultérieure de l’art.

L’art sculptural était destiné à embellir les rues et les espaces publics, où commémorant gens et les événements, et le sanctuaire, où ils ont été utilisés comme des “votes”, o le case, où il a servi comme éléments décoratifs, ou dans les cimetières, où les symboles funéraires représentés.

Alla fine dell’età classica gli scultori greci avevano raggiunto un’abilità straordinaria, sans précédent dans le monde de l’art, imitant le corps de disposition et la forme plastique.

Le bronze, pour sa qualité, a toujours été considéré comme un métal noble et les artistes du monde antique étaient les maîtres dans le processus de fabrication du complexe métallique.

L’exposition est divisée en sept sections thématiques, ouverture avec la grande statue de la soi-disant Arringatore, ce était déjà partie de la collection de Cosme Ier de Médicis, pour indiquer combien d’intérêt produit les œuvres hellénistiques déjà à la Renaissance; poi prosegue con una vasta sezione di ritratti di personaggi influenti, nouveau genre artistique qui est né avec Alexandre le Grand.

Organismes idéaux, organismes extrêmes vous permet de vérifier le développement de nouvelles formes de disciplines artistiques de la vie quotidienne, positions avec dynamique.

La sixième section, “Divinité”, aborde la place d’un sujet important et présente des œuvres d’une beauté extraordinaire, y compris la Minerve d’Arezzo, le médaillon avec le buste d’Athéna et de la Tête d’Aphrodite.

Cecilia Chiavisteli

Par le nombre 57 – Année II 25/03/2015

Puissance et de pathos. Bronzes du monde hellénistique
Jusqu’au 21 Juin 2015

Palais Strozzi – Florence
Info: 055 2645155 – http://www.palazzostrozzi.org

Headless male from Kythnos

Ritratto di un diadoco in bronzo 290 AC - 280 AC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apoxyomène

L’Apoxyomène dans le cabinet auquel il a donné son nom, musée Pio-Clementino

L’Apoxyomène (en grec ancienἀποξυόμενος / apoxuómenos, de ἀποξὐω / apoxúô, « racler, gratter ») est un marbre d’après Lysippe, représentant, comme son nom l’indique, un athlète nu se raclant la peau avec un strigile. Il est conservé au musée Pio-Clementino (musées du Vatican) sous le numéro Inv. 1185.

Découverte

En 1849, dans le quartier romain du Trastevere, des ouvriers découvrent dans les ruines de ce qu’on croit alors être des thermes romains la statue d’un jeune homme nu se raclant avec un strigile[1]. Son premier commentateur, l’architecte et antiquaire Luigi Canina, l’identifie comme une copie du sculpteur grec Polyclète[2], mais dès l’année suivante, l’archéologue allemand August Braun[3] y reconnaît une copie d’un type en bronze de Lysippe (vers 330320 av. J.-C.), que nous connaissons uniquement par une mention de Pline l’Ancien dans son Histoire naturelle : « [Lysippe] réalisa, comme nous l’avons dit, le plus grand nombre de statues de tous, avec un art très fécond, et parmi elles, un athlète en train de se nettoyer avec un strigile (destringens se)[4]. »

Le type est fameux dès l’Antiquité : toujours selon Pline, la statue est consacrée par le général Marcus Agrippa devant les thermes qui portent son nom. L’empereur Tibère, grand admirateur de la statue, la fait enlever et transporter dans sa chambre. « Il en résulta une telle fronde du peuple romain », raconte Pline, « qu’il réclama dans les clameurs du théâtre qu’on restituât l’Apoxyomène et que le prince, malgré son amour, le restitua[4]. »

Braun se fonde d’une part sur la pose de la statue, d’autre part sur les remarques de Pline sur le canon lysippéen, plus élancé que celui de Polyclète[5] : effectivement, la tête est plus petite par rapport au corps, plus fin — il faut toutefois remarquer qu’à l’époque, le Doryphore n’avait pas encore été reconnu comme tel[6]. Dans l’ensemble, les arguments avancés par Braun sont assez faibles[7] : d’abord, l’athlète au strigile est un type commun dans l’Antiquité. Ensuite, le canon élancé, bien qu’utilisé de manière intensive par Lysippe et son école, n’est pas spécifique à cet artiste : on le retrouve par exemple dans les combattants de la frise du Mausolée d’Halicarnasse[8]. Cependant, malgré des contestations, l’attribution à Lysippe est largement admise aujourd’hui[9].

La statue jouit d’une grande popularité dès sa découverte. Elle est restaurée par le sculpteur italien Pietro Tenerani qui complète les doigts de la main droite, le bout du nez, restitue le strigile disparu de la main gauche et cache le sexe de l’athlète par une feuille de vigne[10] — ces restaurations ont été supprimées récemment. De nombreux moulages en sont réalisés. Jacob Burckhardt la cite dans son Cicerone (guide de Rome) de 1865[11].

Description

Détail de la tête et des bras

La statue, réalisée en marbre du Pentélique est légèrement plus grande que nature : elle mesure 2,05 mètres[12]. Elle représente un jeune homme nu, debout, raclant la face postérieure de l’avant-bras droit à l’aide d’un strigile tenu de la main gauche. Il hoche légèrement la tête et regarde devant lui. Un tronc d’arbre sert d’étai à la jambe gauche ; un autre étai, aujourd’hui brisé, faisait supporter le poids du bras droit tendu sur la jambe droite.

La statue frappe d’abord par sa composition : elle n’est plus uniquement frontale, comme dans le Doryphore ou le Discobole. Le bras tendu à angle droit de l’athlète oblige le spectateur, s’il veut bien saisir le mouvement, à se déplacer sur les côtés. Elle se distingue également par l’emploi du contrapposto (« déhanché ») : le poids du corps repose sur la seule jambe gauche, la droite étant légèrement avancée et repliée. De ce fait, les hanches sont orientées vers la gauche, alors que les épaules sont tournées dans le sens inverse, suivant le mouvement du bras droit, créant ainsi un mouvement de torsion que le spectateur ne peut pleinement saisir qu’en reproduisant lui-même la pose. La musculature est rendue de manière moins marquée que chez Polyclète. Alors que le torse représente traditionnellement le morceau de bravoure du sculpteur, il est ici partiellement dissimulé par la position des bras.

La tête frappe par sa petite taille : elle représente un huitième du corps entier, contre un septième dans le canon polyclétéen. L’historienne de l’art Brunilde Sismondo Ridgway juge même l’effet « presque comique[13] ». Autre nouveauté, la tête est traitée comme un portrait : la chevelure est représentée en désordre, le front est marqué et les yeux, enfoncés. Pour R. R. R. Smith, ces caractéristiques rendent la tête plus vivante[14], mais Ridgway les considère comme des défauts attribuables au copiste, ou à une erreur de présentation de la statue : elle aurait pu être présentée sur une base surélevée[15].

Copies et variantes

L’Apoxyomène d’Éphèse

L’Apoxyomène de Croatie

L’Apoxyomène du Vatican est le seul exemplaire entier en marbre de ce type[16]. Un torse très abîmé des réserves du Musée national romain, d’origine inconnue, a été reconnu en 1967 comme une réplique, mais dont la pose est inversée. Un autre torse, décorant la façade du Bâtiment M (probablement une bibliothèque) à Sidé, en Pamphylie, a été identifiée comme une variante en 1973. Enfin, un torse de proportions beaucoup plus réduites, découvert à Fiesole (Toscane) a été rattaché à l’Apoxyomène, mais son authenticité a été contestée[17]. Cette relative absence de copies s’explique mal : Rome comptait plusieurs ateliers de copistes[18]. Par ailleurs, aucun obstacle technique ne semble avoir pu empêcher la réalisation de moulages, Pline ne mentionnant aucune dorure.

Un type différent a été découvert en 1898 à Éphèse ; la statue, en bronze, est actuellement conservée au musée d’histoire de l’art de Vienne (Inv. 3168). Haute de 1,92 mètre, cette copie romaine représente un athlète à la musculature puissante qui, ayant terminé de se racler le corps, nettoie son strigile : il le tient de la main droite et enlève la sueur et la poussière du racloir avec l’index et le pouce de la main gauche ; la position des jambes et plus généralement le mouvement de torsion sont inversés par rapport à l’Apoxyomène du Vatican. Contrairement à ce dernier, qui semble regarder dans la vague, l’athlète d’Éphèse est concentré sur sa tâche.

Un autre exemplaire en bronze, l’Apoxyomène de Croatie a été découvert en 1996 en mer Adriatique, remonté en 1999 et restauré jusqu’en 2005[19]. Son apparence est proche de l’Apoxyomène d’Éphèse et de la tête se trouvant au musée d’art Kimbell de Fort Worth (Texas). La particularité de l’Apoxyomène de Croatie est d’être pratiquement complet (il lui manque l’auriculaire de la main gauche), dans un état de conservation exceptionnel et d’avoir encore sa plinthe antique[20].

 

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apoxyom%C3%A8ne

http://www.laterrazzadimichelangelo.it/news/la-bellezza-nei-bronzi-ellenistici-in-mostra-a-palazzo-strozzi/?lang=fr
http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, Chimera of Arezzo

Giacobbe Giusti, Chimera of Arezzo

Chimera of Arezzo

Chimera of Arezzo

 

Chimera d'arezzo, fi, 04.JPG
Year c. 400 BC
Type bronze

The bronze “Chimera of Arezzo” is one of the best known examples of the art of the Etruscans. It was found in Arezzo, an ancient Etruscan and Roman city in Tuscany, in 1553 and was quickly claimed for the collection of the Medici Grand Duke of Tuscany Cosimo I, who placed it publicly in the Palazzo Vecchio, and placed the smaller bronzes from the trove in his own studiolo at Palazzo Pitti, where “the Duke took great pleasure in cleaning them by himself, with some goldsmith’s tools,” Benvenuto Cellini reported in his autobiography. The Chimera is still conserved in Florence, now in the Archaeological Museum. It is approximately 80 cm in height.[1]

In Greek mythology the monstrous Chimera ravaged its homeland, Lycia, until it was slain by Bellerophon. The goat head of the Chimera has a wound inflicted by this Greek hero. Based on the cowering, representation of fear, and the wound inflicted, this sculpture may have been part of a set that would have included a bronze sculpture of Bellerophon. This bronze was at first identified as a lion by its discoverers in Arezzo, for its tail, which would have taken the form of a serpent, is missing. It was soon recognized as representing the chimera of myth and in fact, among smaller bronze pieces and fragments brought to Florence, a section of the tail was soon recovered, according to Giorgio Vasari. The present bronze tail is an 18th-century restoration.

The Chimera was one of a hoard of bronzes that had been carefully buried for safety some time in antiquity. They were discovered by accident, when trenches were being dug just outside the Porta San Laurentino in the city walls. A bronze replica now stands near the spot.

Inscribed on its right foreleg is an inscription which has been variously read, but most recently is agreed to be TINSCVIL, showing that the bronze was a votive object dedicated to the supreme Etruscan god of day, Tin or Tinia. The original statue is estimated to have been created around 400 BC.

In 2009 and 2010 the statue traveled to the United States where it was displayed at the Getty Villa in Malibu, California.[1][2][3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_of_Arezzo

Chimera di Arezzo

Chimera di Arezzo
Chimera di Arezzo
Autore sconosciuto
Data seconda metà o fine V sec. a.C. circa
Materiale bronzo
Altezza 65 cm
Ubicazione Museo archeologico nazionale, Firenze

 

 

La firma

La Chimera di Arezzo è un bronzo etrusco, probabilmente opera di un équipe di artigiani attiva nella zona di Arezzo, che combinava modello e forma stilistica di ascendenza greca o italiota all’abilità tecnica fornita da maestranze etrusche[1]. È conservata presso il Museo archeologico nazionale di Firenze ed è alta 65 cm.

Storia

La sua datazione viene fatta risalire ad un periodo compreso tra l’ultimo quarto del V e i primi decenni del IV secolo a.C. Faceva parte di un gruppo di bronzi sepolti nell’antichità per poterli preservare.

Con l’aiuto di Pegaso, Bellerofonte riuscì a sconfiggere Chimera con le sue stesse terribili armi: immerse la punta del suo giavellotto nelle fauci della belva, il fuoco che ne usciva sciolse il piombo che uccise l’animale.

Si tratta di una statua di bronzo rinvenuta il 15 novembre 1553 in Toscana,La chimera è stata representata in modi diversi.è stata creata per incudere peura e terrore. precisamente nella città d’Arezzo durante la costruzione di fortificazioni medicee alla periferia della cittadina, fuori da Porta San Lorentino (dove oggi si trova una replica in bronzo). Venne subito reclamata dal granduca di Toscana Cosimo I de’ Medici per la sua collezione, il quale la espose pubblicamente presso il Palazzo Vecchio, nella sala di Leone X. Venne poi trasferita presso il suo studiolo di Palazzo Pitti, in cui, come riportato da Benvenuto Cellini nella sua autobiografia, “il duca ricavava grande piacere nel pulirla personalmente con attrezzi da orafo”.

Dalle notizie del ritrovamento, presenti nell’Archivio di Arezzo, risulta che questo bronzo venne identificato inizialmente con un leone poiché la coda, rintracciata in seguito da Giorgio Vasari, non era ancora stata trovata e fu ricomposta solo nel XVIII secolo grazie ad un restauro visibile ancora oggi. Vasari nei suoi Ragionamenti sopra le invenzioni da lui dipinte in Firenze nel palazzo di loro Altezze Serenissime[2] risponde così ad un interlocutore che gli domanda se si tratta proprio della Chimera di Bellerofonte

« Signor sì, perché ce n’è il riscontro delle medaglie che ha il Duca mio signore, che vennono da Roma con la testa di capra appiccicata in sul collo di questo leone, il quale come vede V.E., ha anche il ventre di serpente, e abbiamo ritrovato la coda che era rotta fra que’ fragmenti di bronzo con tante figurine di metallo che V.E. ha veduto tutte, e le ferite che ella ha addosso, lo dimostrano, e ancora il dolore, che si conosce nella prontezza della testa di questo animale… »

Il restauro alla coda è però un restauro sbagliato: il serpente doveva avventarsi minacciosamente contro Bellerofonte e non mordere un corno della testa della capra.

Nel 1718 venne poi trasportata nella Galleria degli Uffizi e in seguito fu trasferita nuovamente, insieme all’Idolino e ad altri bronzi classici, presso il Palazzo della Crocetta, dove si trova tuttora, nell’odierno Museo archeologico di Firenze.

Descrizione e stile

Nella mitologia greca la chimera (il cui nome in greco significa letteralmente capra) era un mostro che sputava fuoco, talvolta alato, con il corpo e la testa di leone, la coda a forma di serpente e con una testa di capra nel mezzo della schiena, che terrorizzava la terra della Licia. Venne uccisa da Bellerofonte in un epico scontro con l’aiuto del cavallo alato Pegaso.

La Chimera di Arezzo raffigura il mostro uccidente, che si ritrae di lato, e volge la testa in atteggiamento drammatico di notevole sofferenza, con la bocca spalancata e la criniera irta. La testa di capra sul dorso è già reclinata e morente a causa delle ferite ricevute. Il corpo è modellato in maniera da mostrare le costole del torace, mentre le vene solcano il ventre e le gambe. Probabilmente, la Chimera faceva parte di un gruppo con Bellerofonte e Pegaso ma non si può escludere completamente l’ipotesi che si trattasse di un’offerta votiva a sé stante. Quest’ipotesi sembra essere confermata dalla presenza di un’iscrizione sulla branca anteriore destra, in cui vi si legge la scritta TINSCVIL o TINS’VIL (TLE^2 663), che significa “donata al dio Tin“, supremo dio etrusco del giorno.

La Chimera presenta elementi arcaici, come la criniera schematica e il muso leonino simile a modelli greci del V secolo a.C., mentre il corpo è di una secchezza austera. Altri tratti sono invece più spiccatamente naturalistici, come l’accentuazione drammatica della posa e la sofisticata postura del corpo e delle zampe. Questa commistione è tipica del gusto etrusco della prima metà del IV secolo a.C. e attraverso il confronto con leoni funerari coevi si è giunti a una datazione attorno al 380360 a.C. È da osservare il particolare della criniera, molto lavorata, e che riproduce abbastanza fedelmente (per l’epoca) l’aspetto naturale della fiera.

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_di_Arezzo

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

https://softbrightness.wordpress.com/

https://giacobbegiusti01.wordpress.com/

https://giacobbegiusti10.wordpress.com/

Giacobbe Giusti, The Celts

Giacobbe Giusti, The Celts

Celts

This article is about the ancient and medieval peoples of Europe. For Celts of the present day, see Celts (modern). For other uses, see Celt (disambiguation).

Diachronic distribution of Celtic peoples:

  core Hallstatt territory, by the 6th century BC
  maximal Celtic expansion, by 275 BC
 Lusitanian area of Iberia where Celtic presence is uncertain
  the six Celtic nations which retained significant numbers of Celtic speakers into the Early Modern period
  areas where Celtic languages remain widely spoken today

The Wandsworth Shield-boss, in the plastic style, found in London

The Celts (/ˈkɛlts/, occasionally /ˈsɛlts/, see pronunciation of Celtic) were people in Iron Age and Medieval Europe who spoke Celtic languages and had cultural similarites,[1] although the relationship between ethnic, linguistic and cultural factors in the Celtic world remains uncertain and controversial.[2] The exact geographic spread of the ancient Celts is also disputed; in particular, the ways in which the Iron Age inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland should be regarded as Celts has become a subject of controversy.[1][2][3][4]

The history of pre-Celtic Europe remains very uncertain. According to one theory, the common root of the Celtic languages, a language known as Proto-Celtic, arose in the Late Bronze Age Urnfield culture of Central Europe, which flourished from around 1200 BC.[5] In addition, according to a theory proposed in the 19th century, the first people to adopt cultural characteristics regarded as Celtic were the people of the Iron Age Hallstatt culture in central Europe (c. 800–450 BC), named for the rich grave finds in Hallstatt, Austria.[5][6] Thus this area is sometimes called the ‘Celtic homeland’. By or during the later La Tène period (c. 450 BC up to the Roman conquest), this Celtic culture was supposed to have expanded by diffusion or migration to the British Isles (Insular Celts), France and The Low Countries (Gauls), Bohemia, Poland and much of Central Europe, the Iberian Peninsula (Celtiberians, Celtici, Lusitanians and Gallaeci) and Italy (Canegrate, Golaseccans and Cisalpine Gauls)[7] and, following the Gallic invasion of the Balkans in 279 BC, as far east as central Anatolia (Galatians).[8]

The earliest undisputed direct examples of a Celtic language are the Lepontic inscriptions, beginning in the 6th century BC.[9] Continental Celtic languages are attested almost exclusively through inscriptions and place-names. Insular Celtic is attested beginning around the 4th century AD through Ogham inscriptions, although it was clearly being spoken much earlier. Celtic literary tradition begins with Old Irish texts around the 8th century. Coherent texts of Early Irish literature, such as the Táin Bó Cúailnge (The Cattle Raid of Cooley), survive in 12th-century recensions.

By the mid 1st millennium AD, with the expansion of the Roman Empire and the Great Migrations (Migration Period) of Germanic peoples, Celtic culture and Insular Celtic had become restricted to Ireland, the western and northern parts of Great Britain (Wales, Scotland, and Cornwall), the Isle of Man, and Brittany. Between the 5th and 8th centuries, the Celtic-speaking communities in these Atlantic regions emerged as a reasonably cohesive cultural entity. They had a common linguistic, religious, and artistic heritage that distinguished them from the culture of the surrounding polities.[10] By the 6th century, however, the Continental Celtic languages were no longer in wide use.

Insular Celtic culture diversified into that of the Gaels (Irish, Scottish and Manx) and the Brythonic Celts (Welsh, Cornish, and Bretons) of the medieval and modern periods. A modern “Celtic identity” was constructed as part of the Romanticist Celtic Revival in Great Britain, Ireland, and other European territories, such as Portugal and Spanish Galicia.[11] Today, Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, and Breton are still spoken in parts of their historical territories, and Cornish and Manx are undergoing a revival.

Names and terminology

Celtic stele from Galicia, 2nd century AD: “APANA·AMBO / LLI·
F(ilia)·CELTICA / SUPERTAM(arica)· /
(j) MIOBRI· / AN(norum
XXV·H(ic)·S(ita)·E(st)· / APANUS·FR(ater
F(aciendum)·C(uravit)”

Main article: Names of the Celts

The first recorded use of the name of Celts – as Κελτοί – to refer to an ethnic group was by Hecataeus of Miletus, the Greek geographer, in 517 BC,[12] when writing about a people living near Massilia (modern Marseille).[13] According to the testimony of Julius Caesar and Strabo, the Latin name Celtus (pl. Celti or Celtae) and the Greek Κέλτης (pl. Κέλται) or Κελτός (pl. Κελτοί) were borrowed from a native Celtic tribal name.[14][15] Pliny the Elder cited its use in Lusitania as a tribal surname,[16] which epigraphic findings have confirmed.[17][18]

Latin Gallus (pl. Galli) might also stem from a Celtic ethnic or tribal name originally, perhaps one borrowed into Latin during the Celtic expansions into Italy during the early 5th century BC. Its root may be the Common Celtic *galno, meaning “power, strength”, hence Old Irish gal “boldness, ferocity” and Welsh gallu “to be able, power”. The tribal names of Gallaeci and the Greek Γαλάται (Galatai, Latinized Galatae; see the region Galatia in Anatolia) most probably go with the same origin.[19] The suffix -atai might be an Ancient Greek inflection.[20] Classical writers did not apply the terms Κελτοί or “Celtae” to the inhabitants of Britain or Ireland,[1][2][3] which has led to some scholars preferring not to use the term for the Iron Age inhabitants of those islands.[1][2][3][4]

Celt is a modern English word, first attested in 1707, in the writing of Edward Lhuyd, whose work, along with that of other late 17th-century scholars, brought academic attention to the languages and history of the early Celtic inhabitants of Great Britain.[21] The English form Gaul (first recorded in the 17th century) and Gaulish come from the French Gaule and Gaulois, a borrowing from Frankish *Walholant, “Land of foreigners or Romans” (see Gaul: Name), the root of which is Proto-Germanic *walha-, “foreigner”’, or “Celt”, whence the English word Welsh (Anglo-Saxon wælisċ < *walhiska-), South German welsch, meaning “Celtic speaker”, “French speaker” or “Italian speaker” in different contexts, and Old Norse valskr, pl. valir, “Gaulish, French”). Proto-Germanic *walha is derived ultimately from the name of the Volcae,[22] a Celtic tribe who lived first in the South of Germany and emigrated then to Gaul.[23] This means that English Gaul, despite its superficial similarity, is not actually derived from Latin Gallia (which should have produced **Jaille in French), though it does refer to the same ancient region.

Celtic refers to a family of languages and, more generally, means “of the Celts” or “in the style of the Celts”. Several archaeological cultures are considered Celtic in nature, based on unique sets of artefacts. The link between language and artefact is aided by the presence of inscriptions.[24] (See Celtic (disambiguation) for other applications of the term.) The relatively modern idea of an identifiable Celtic cultural identity or “Celticity” generally focuses on similarities among languages, works of art, and classical texts,[25] and sometimes also among material artefacts, social organisation, homeland and mythology.[26] Earlier theories held that these similarities suggest a common racial origin for the various Celtic peoples, but more recent theories hold that they reflect a common cultural and language heritage more than a genetic one. Celtic cultures seem to have been widely diverse, with the use of a Celtic language being the main thing they have in common.[1]

Today, the term Celtic generally refers to the languages and respective cultures of Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, the Isle of Man, and Brittany, also known as the Celtic nations. These are the regions where four Celtic languages are still spoken to some extent as mother tongues. The four are Irish Gaelic, Scottish Gaelic, Welsh, and Breton; plus two recent revivals, Cornish (one of the Brythonic languages) and Manx (one of the Goidelic languages). There are also attempts to reconstruct the Cumbric language (a Brythonic language from North West England and South West Scotland). Celtic regions of Continental Europe are those whose residents claim a Celtic heritage, but where no Celtic language has survived; these areas include the western Iberian Peninsula, i.e. Portugal, and north-central Spain (Galicia, Asturias, Cantabria, Castile and León, Extremadura).[27] (See also: Modern Celts.)

Continental Celts are the Celtic-speaking people of mainland Europe and Insular Celts are the Celtic-speaking peoples of the British and Irish islands and their descendants. The Celts of Brittany derive their language from migrating insular Celts, mainly from Wales and Cornwall, and so are grouped accordingly.[28]

Origins

Overview of the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures:

  The core Hallstatt territory (HaC, 800 BC) is shown in solid yellow,
  the eventual area of Hallstatt influence (by 500 BC, HaD) in light yellow.
  The core territory of the La Tène culture (450 BC) is shown in solid green,
  the eventual area of La Tène influence (by 250 BC) in light green.
Main articles: Pre-Celtic and Celticization

The territories of some major Celtic tribes of the late La Tène period are labelled.

Reconstruction of a late La Tène period settlement in Altburg near Bundenbach (1st century BC).
Reconstruction of a late La Tène period settlement in Havranok, Slovakia (2nd–1st century BC).

The Celtic languages form a branch of the larger Indo-European family. By the time speakers of Celtic languages enter history around 400 BC, they were already split into several language groups, and spread over much of Western continental Europe, the Iberian Peninsula, Ireland and Britain.

Some scholars think that the Urnfield culture of Western Middle Europe represents an origin for the Celts as a distinct cultural branch of the Indo-European family.[5] This culture was preeminent in central Europe during the late Bronze Age, from c. 1200 BC until 700 BC, itself following the Unetice and Tumulus cultures. The Urnfield period saw a dramatic increase in population in the region, probably due to innovations in technology and agricultural practices. The Greek historian Ephoros of Cyme in Asia Minor, writing in the 4th century BC, believed that the Celts came from the islands off the mouth of the Rhine and were “driven from their homes by the frequency of wars and the violent rising of the sea”.

The spread of iron-working led to the development of the Hallstatt culture directly from the Urnfield (c. 700 to 500 BC). Proto-Celtic, the latest common ancestor of all known Celtic languages, is considered by this school of thought to have been spoken at the time of the late Urnfield or early Hallstatt cultures, in the early 1st millennium BC. The spread of the Celtic languages to Iberia, Ireland and Britain would have occurred during the first half of the 1st millennium BC, the earliest chariot burials in Britain dating to c. 500 BC. Other scholars see Celtic languages as covering Britain and Ireland, and parts of the Continent, long before any evidence of “Celtic” culture is found in archaeology. Over the centuries the language(s) developed into the separate Celtiberian, Goidelic and Brythonic languages.

The Hallstatt culture was succeeded by the La Tène culture of central Europe, which was overrun by the Roman Empire, though traces of La Tène style are still to be seen in Gallo-Roman artefacts. In Britain and Ireland La Tène style in art survived precariously to re-emerge in Insular art. Early Irish literature casts light on the flavour and tradition of the heroic warrior elites who dominated Celtic societies. Celtic river-names are found in great numbers around the upper reaches of the Danube and Rhine, which led many Celtic scholars to place the ethnogenesis of the Celts in this area. A recent book about an ancient site in northern Germany, concludes that it was the most significant Celtic sacred site in Europe. It is called the “Externsteine”, the strange carvings and astronomical orientation of the chambers of this site are presented as solid evidence for a Celtic origin. In view of the large number of sites excavated in recent years in Germany, and formally defined as ‘Celtic”, Pryor’s research appears to be on solid ground. (Damien Pryor, The Externsteine, 2011, Threshold Publishing, ISBN 978-0-9581341-7-0 )

Diodorus Siculus and Strabo both suggest that the heartland of the people they called Celts was in southern France. The former says that the Gauls were to the north of the Celts, but that the Romans referred to both as Gauls (in linguistic terms the Gauls were certainly Celts). Before the discoveries at Hallstatt and La Tène, it was generally considered that the Celtic heartland was southern France, see Encyclopædia Britannica for 1813.

Linguistic evidence

Main article: Proto-Celtic language
Further information: Celtic toponymy

The Proto-Celtic language is usually dated to the Late Bronze Age.[5] The earliest records of a Celtic language are the Lepontic inscriptions of Cisalpine Gaul (Northern Italy), the oldest of which still predate the La Tène period. Other early inscriptions, appearing from the early La Tène period in the area of Massilia, are in Gaulish, which was written in the Greek alphabet until the Roman conquest. Celtiberian inscriptions, using their own Iberian script, appear later, after about 200 BC. Evidence of Insular Celtic is available only from about 400 AD, in the form of Primitive Irish Ogham inscriptions.

Besides epigraphical evidence, an important source of information on early Celtic is toponymy.[29]

Archaeological evidence

Map of the Hallstatt Culture

Further information: Iron Age Europe

Before the 19th century, scholars[who?] assumed that the original land of the Celts was west of the Rhine, more precisely in Gaul, because it was where Greek and Roman ancient sources, namely Caesar, located the Celts. This view was challenged by the 19th-century historian Marie Henri d’Arbois de Jubainville[citation needed] who placed the land of origin of the Celts east of the Rhine. Jubainville based his arguments on a phrase of Herodotus’ that placed the Celts at the source of the Danube, and argued that Herodotus had meant to place the Celtic homeland in southern Germany. The finding of the prehistoric cemetery of Hallstat in 1846 by Johan Ramsauer and the finding of the archaeological site of La Tène by Hansli Kopp in 1857 drew attention to this area.

The concept that the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures could be seen not just as chronological periods but as “Culture Groups”, entities composed of people of the same ethnicity and language, started to grow by the end of the 19th century. In the beginning of the 20th century the belief that those “Culture Groups” could be thought in racial or ethnic terms was strongly held by Gordon Childe whose theory was influenced by the writings of Gustaf Kossinna.[30] Along the 20th century the racial ethnic interpretation of La Tène culture rooted much stronger, and any findings of “La Tène culture” and “flat inhumation cemeteries” were directly associated with the celts and the Celtic language.[31] The Iron Age Hallstatt (c. 800–475 BC) and La Tène (c. 500–50 BC) cultures are typically associated with Proto-Celtic and Celtic culture.[32]

In various[clarification needed] academic disciplines the Celts were considered a Central European Iron Age phenomenon, through the cultures of Hallstatt and La Tène. However, archaeological finds from the Halstatt and La Tène culture were rare in the Iberian Peninsula, in southwestern France, northern and western Britain, southern Ireland and Galatia[33][34] and did not provide enough evidence for a cultural scenario comparable to that of Central Europe. It is considered equally difficult to maintain that the origin of the Peninsular Celts can be linked to the preceding Urnfield culture, leading to a more recent approach that introduces a ‘proto-Celtic’ substratum and a process of Celticisation having its initial roots in the Bronze Age Bell Beaker culture.[35]

Expansion of the Celtic culture in the 3rd century BC according to Francisco Villar[36]

The La Tène culture developed and flourished during the late Iron Age (from 450 BC to the Roman conquest in the 1st century BC) in eastern France, Switzerland, Austria, southwest Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. It developed out of the Hallstatt culture without any definite cultural break, under the impetus of considerable Mediterranean influence from Greek, and later Etruscan civilisations. A shift of settlement centres took place in the 4th century.

The western La Tène culture corresponds to historical Celtic Gaul. Whether this means that the whole of La Tène culture can be attributed to a unified Celtic people is difficult to assess; archaeologists have repeatedly concluded that language, material culture, and political affiliation do not necessarily run parallel. Frey notes that in the 5th century, “burial customs in the Celtic world were not uniform; rather, localised groups had their own beliefs, which, in consequence, also gave rise to distinct artistic expressions”.[37] Thus, while the La Tène culture is certainly associated with the Gauls, the presence of La Tène artefacts may be due to cultural contact and does not imply the permanent presence of Celtic speakers.

Historical evidence

Polybius published a history of Rome about 150 BC in which he describes the Gauls of Italy and their conflict with Rome. Pausanias in the 2nd century AD says that the Gauls “originally called Celts”, “live on the remotest region of Europe on the coast of an enormous tidal sea”. Posidonius described the southern Gauls about 100 BC. Though his original work is lost it was used by later writers such as Strabo. The latter, writing in the early 1st century AD, deals with Britain and Gaul as well as Hispania, Italy and Galatia. Caesar wrote extensively about his Gallic Wars in 58–51 BC. Diodorus Siculus wrote about the Celts of Gaul and Britain in his 1st-century history.

The world according to Herodotus

Borders of the region known as Celtica at time of the Roman conquest c. 54 BC; they soon renamed it Gallia Lugdunensis.

Minority views

Myles Dillon and Nora Kershaw Chadwick accepted that “the Celtic settlement of the British Isles” might have to be dated to the Beaker period concluding that “There is no reason why so early a date for the coming of the Celts should be impossible”.[38][39] Martín Almagro Gorbea[40] proposed the origins of the Celts could be traced back to the 3rd millennium BC, seeking the initial roots in the Bell Beaker culture, thus offering the wide dispersion of the Celts throughout western Europe, as well as the variability of the different Celtic peoples, and the existence of ancestral traditions an ancient perspective. Using a multidisciplinary approach Alberto J. Lorrio and Gonzalo Ruiz Zapatero reviewed and built on Almagro Gorbea’s work to present a model for the origin of the Celtic archaeological groups in the Iberian Peninsula (Celtiberian, Vetton, Vaccean, the Castro Culture of the northwest, Asturian-Cantabrian and Celtic of the southwest) and proposing a rethinking the meaning of “Celtic” from a European perspective.[41] More recently, John Koch[42] and Barry Cunliffe[43] have suggested that Celtic origins lie with the Atlantic Bronze Age, roughly contemporaneous with the Hallstatt culture but positioned considerably to the West, extending along the Atlantic coast of Europe.

Stephen Oppenheimer[44] points out that the only written evidence that locates the Keltoi near the source of the Danube (i.e. in the Hallstatt region) is in the Histories of Herodotus. However, Oppenheimer shows that Herodotus seemed to believe the Danube rose near the Pyrenees, which would place the Ancient Celts in a region which is more in agreement with later Classical writers and historians (i.e. in Gaul and the Iberian peninsula).

Distribution

Continental Celts

Gaul

Main article: Gauls

The Romans knew the Celts then living in what became present-day France as Gauls. The territory of these peoples probably included the Low Countries, the Alps and present-day northern Italy. Julius Caesar in his Gallic Wars described the 1st-century BC descendants of those Gauls.

Eastern Gaul became the centre of the western La Tène culture. In later Iron Age Gaul, the social organisation resembled that of the Romans, with large towns. From the 3rd century BC the Gauls adopted coinage, and texts with Greek characters from southern Gaul have survived from the 2nd century BC.

Greek traders founded Massalia about 600 BC, with some objects (mostly drinking ceramics) being traded up the Rhone valley. But trade became disrupted soon after 500 BC and re-oriented over the Alps to the Po valley in the Italian peninsula. The Romans arrived in the Rhone valley in the 2nd century BC and encountered a mostly Celtic-speaking Gaul. Rome wanted land communications with its Iberian provinces and fought a major battle with the Saluvii at Entremont in 124–123 BC. Gradually Roman control extended, and the Roman Province of Gallia Transalpina developed along the Mediterranean coast.[45][46] The Romans knew the remainder of Gaul as Gallia Comata – “Hairy Gaul”.

In 58 BC the Helvetii planned to migrate westward but Julius Caesar forced them back. He then became involved in fighting the various tribes in Gaul, and by 55 BC had overrun most of Gaul. In 52 BC Vercingetorix led a revolt against the Roman occupation but was defeated at the siege of Alesia and surrendered.

Following the Gallic Wars of 58–51 BC, Caesar’s Celtica formed the main part of Roman Gaul, becoming the province of Gallia Lugdunensis. This territory of the Celtic tribes was bounded on the south by the Garonne and on the north by the Seine and the Marne.[47] The Romans attached large swathes of this region to neighboring provinces Belgica and Aquitania, particularly under Augustus.

Place- and personal-name analysis and inscriptions suggest that the Gaulish Celtic language was spoken over most of what is now France.[48][49]

Main language areas in Iberia, showing Celtic languages in beige, c. 300 BC.

Iberia

Main articles: Celtiberians and Gallaeci

Until the end of the 19th century, traditional scholarship dealing with the Celts did acknowledge their presence in the Iberian Peninsula[50][51] as a material culture relatable to the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures. However, since according to the definition of the Iron Age in the 19th century Celtic populations were supposedly rare in Iberia and did not provide a cultural scenario that could easily be linked to that of Central Europe, the presence of Celtic culture in that region was generally not fully recognised. Three divisions of the Celts of the Iberian Peninsula were assumed to have existed: the Celtiberians in the mountains near the centre of the peninsula, the Celtici in the southwest, and the Celts in the northwest (in Gallaecia and Asturias).[52]

Modern scholarship, however, has clearly proven that Celtic presence and influences were most substantial in what is today Spain and Portugal (with perhaps the highest settlement saturation in Western Europe), particularly in the central, western and northern regions.[53][54] The Celts in Iberia were divided into two main archaeological and cultural groups,[55] even though that division is not very clear:

Triskelion and spirals on a Galician torc terminal (Museu do castro de Santa Tegra).

The origins of the Celtiberians might provide a key to understanding the Celticisation process in the rest of the Peninsula. The process of Celticisation of the southwestern area of the peninsula by the Keltoi and of the northwestern area is, however, not a simple Celtiberian question. Recent investigations about the Callaici[62] and Bracari[63] in northwestern Portugal are providing new approaches to understanding Celtic culture (language, art and religion) in western Iberia.[64]

John T. Koch of Aberystwyth University suggested that Tartessian inscriptions of the 8th century BC might be classified as Celtic. This would mean that Tartessian is the earliest attested trace of Celtic by a margin of more than a century.[65]

Alps and Italy

Peoples of northern Italy during the 4th to 3rd centuries BC.

Further information: History of the Alps

The Canegrate culture (13th century BC) represents the first migratory wave of the proto-Celtic[66] population from the northwest part of the Alps that, through the Alpine passes, had already penetrated and settled in the western Po valley between Lake Maggiore and Lake Como (Scamozzina culture). They brought a new funerary practice—cremation—which supplanted inhumation.

It had been known for some time that there was an early, Celtic (Lepontic, sometimes called Cisalpine Celtic) presence in Northern Italy since inscriptions dated to the 6th century BC have been found there.

The site of Golasecca, where the Ticino exits from Lake Maggiore, was particularly suitable for long-distance exchanges, in which Golaseccans acted as intermediaries between Etruscans and the Halstatt culture of Austria, supported on the all-important trade in salt.

Ligures lived in Northern Mediterranean Coast straddling South-east French and North-west Italian coasts, including parts of Tuscany, Elba island and Corsica. Xavier Delamarre argues that Ligurian was a Celtic language, similar to, but not the same as Gaulish.[67][68] The Ligurian-Celtic question is also discussed by Barruol (1999). Ancient Ligurian is either listed as Celtic (epigraphic),[69] or Para-Celtic (onomastic).[70]

In 391 BC Celts “who had their homes beyond the Alps streamed through the passes in great strength and seized the territory that lay between the Apennine mountains and the Alps” according to Diodorus Siculus. The Po Valley and the rest of northern Italy (known to the Romans as Cisalpine Gaul) was inhabited by Celtic-speakers who founded cities such as Milan.[71] Later the Roman army was routed at the battle of Allia and Rome was sacked in 390 BC by the Senones.

 

The oldest known Lepontic inscription (from Castelletto sopra Ticino), dated ca. 575 BC.

Clear La Tène Celtic presence in Italy was found as far south as among the Umbri, who were thought to be descended from an ancient Gaulish tribe by many Roman writers, and related to the Insubres and the Ambrones.[72][73]

At the battle of Telamon in 225 BC a large Celtic army was trapped between two Roman forces and crushed.

The defeat of the combined Samnite, Celtic and Etruscan alliance by the Romans in the Third Samnite War sounded the beginning of the end of the Celtic domination in mainland Europe, but it was not until 192 BC that the Roman armies conquered the last remaining independent Celtic kingdoms in Italy.

Eastward expansion

Celtic tribes in S.E.Europe, c. 1st century BC (in purple)

The Celts also expanded down the Danube river and its tributaries. One of the most influential tribes, the Scordisci, had established their capital at Singidunum in 3rd century BC, which is present-day Belgrade, Serbia. The concentration of hill-forts and cemeteries shows a density of population in the Tisza valley of modern-day Vojvodina, Serbia, Hungary and into Ukraine. Expansion into Romania was however blocked by the Dacians.

Further south, Celts settled in Thrace (Bulgaria), which they ruled for over a century, and Anatolia, where they settled as the Galatians (see also: Gallic Invasion of Greece). Despite their geographical isolation from the rest of the Celtic world, the Galatians maintained their Celtic language for at least 700 years. St Jerome, who visited Ancyra (modern-day Ankara) in 373 AD, likened their language to that of the Treveri of northern Gaul.

For Venceslas Kruta, Galatia in central Turkey was an area of dense Celtic settlement.

The Boii tribe gave their name to Bohemia, Bologna and possibly Bavaria, and Celtic artefacts and cemeteries have been discovered further east in what is now Poland and Slovakia. A Celtic coin (Biatec) from Bratislava‘s mint was displayed on the old Slovak 5-crown coin.

As there is no archaeological evidence for large-scale invasions in some of the other areas, one current school of thought holds that Celtic language and culture spread to those areas by contact rather than invasion.[74] However, the Celtic invasions of Italy and the expedition in Greece and western Anatolia, are well documented in Greek and Latin history.

There are records of Celtic mercenaries in Egypt serving the Ptolemies. Thousands were employed in 283–246 BC and they were also in service around 186 BC. They attempted to overthrow Ptolemy II.

Insular Celts

Principal sites in Roman Britain, with indication of tribal territories.

Main article: Insular Celts

All Celtic languages extant today belong to the Insular Celtic languages, derived from the Celtic languages spoken in Iron Age Britain and Ireland.[75] They were separated into a Goidelic and a Brythonic branch from an early period.

Linguists have been arguing for many years whether a Celtic language came to Britain and Ireland and then split or whether there were two separate “invasions”. The older view of prehistorians was that the Celtic influence in the British Isles was the result of successive invasions from the European continent by diverse Celtic-speaking peoples over the course of several centuries, accounting for the P-Celtic vs. Q-Celtic isogloss. This view has fallen into disfavour,[dubious ] to be replaced by the model of a phylogenetic Insular Celtic dialect group.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, scholars commonly dated the “arrival” of Celtic culture in Britain (via an invasion model) to the 6th century BC, corresponding to archaeological evidence of Hallstatt influence and the appearance of chariot burials in what is now England. Some Iron Age migration does seem to have occurred but the nature of the interactions with the indigenous populations of the isles is unknown. In the late Iron Age. According to this model, by about the 6th century (Sub-Roman Britain), most of the inhabitants of the Isles were speaking Celtic languages of either the Goidelic or the Brythonic branch. Since the late 20th century, a new model has emerged (championed by archaeologists such as Barry Cunliffe and Celtic historians such as John T. Koch) which places the emergence of Celtic culture in Britain much earlier, in the Bronze Age, and credits its spread not to invasion, but due to a gradual emergence in situ out of Proto-Indo-European culture (perhaps introduced to the region by the Bell Beaker People, and enabled by an extensive network of contacts that existed between the peoples of Britain and Ireland and those of the Atlantic seaboard.[76][77]

It should be noted, however, that Classical writers did not apply the terms Κελτοί or “Celtae” to the inhabitants of Britain or Ireland,[1][2][3] leading a number of scholars to question the use of the term Celt to describe the Iron Age inhabitants of those islands.[1][2][3][4] The first historical account of the islands of Britain and Ireland was by Pytheas, a Greek from the city of Massalia, who around 310-306 BC, sailed around what he called the “Pretannikai nesoi”, which can be translated as the “Pretannic Isles”.[78] In general, classical writers referred to the inhabitants of Britain as Pretannoi or Britanni.[79] Strabo, writing in the Roman era, clearly distinguished between the Celts and Britons.[80]

Romanisation

Main article: Gallo-Roman culture

The Roman republic and its neighbours in 58 BC.

Under Caesar the Romans conquered Celtic Gaul, and from Claudius onward the Roman empire absorbed parts of Britain. Roman local government of these regions closely mirrored pre-Roman tribal boundaries, and archaeological finds suggest native involvement in local government.

The native peoples under Roman rule became Romanised and keen to adopt Roman ways. Celtic art had already incorporated classical influences, and surviving Gallo-Roman pieces interpret classical subjects or keep faith with old traditions despite a Roman overlay.

The Roman occupation of Gaul, and to a lesser extent of Britain, led to Roman-Celtic syncretism. In the case of the continental Celts, this eventually resulted in a language shift to Vulgar Latin, while the Insular Celts retained their language.

There was also considerable cultural influence exerted by Gaul on Rome, particularly in military matters and horsemanship, as the Gauls often served in the Roman cavalry. The Romans adopted the Celtic cavalry sword, the spatha, and Epona, the Celtic horse goddess.[81][82]

Society

To the extent that sources are available, they depict a pre-Christian Iron Age Celtic social structure based formally on class and kingship, although this may only have been a particular late phase of organization in Celtic societies. Patron-client relationships similar to those of Roman society are also described by Caesar and others in the Gaul of the 1st century BC.

In the main, the evidence is of tribes being led by kings, although some argue that there is also evidence of oligarchical republican forms of government eventually emerging in areas which had close contact with Rome. Most descriptions of Celtic societies portray them as being divided into three groups: a warrior aristocracy; an intellectual class including professions such as druid, poet, and jurist; and everyone else. In historical times, the offices of high and low kings in Ireland and Scotland were filled by election under the system of tanistry, which eventually came into conflict with the feudal principle of primogeniture in which succession goes to the first-born son.

Stone head from Mšecké Žehrovice, Czech Republic, wearing a torc, late La Tène culture.

The Dying Gaul, a Roman marble copy of a Hellenistic work of the late 3rd century BC Capitoline Museums, Rome

Little is known of family structure among the Celts. Patterns of settlement varied from decentralised to urban. The popular stereotype of non-urbanised societies settled in hillforts and duns,[83] drawn from Britain and Ireland (there are about 3,000 hill forts known in Britain)[84] contrasts with the urban settlements present in the core Hallstatt and La Tène areas, with the many significant oppida of Gaul late in the first millennium BC, and with the towns of Gallia Cisalpina.

Slavery, as practised by the Celts, was very likely similar to the better documented practice in ancient Greece and Rome.[85] Slaves were acquired from war, raids, and penal and debt servitude.[85] Slavery was hereditary[citation needed], though manumission was possible. The Old Irish word for slave, cacht, and the Welsh term caeth are likely derived from the Latin captus, captive, suggesting that slave trade was an early venue of contact between Latin and Celtic societies.[85] In the Middle Ages, slavery was especially prevalent in the Celtic countries.[86] Manumissions were discouraged by law and the word for “female slave”, cumal, was used as a general unit of value in Ireland.[87]

Archaeological evidence suggests that the pre-Roman Celtic societies were linked to the network of overland trade routes that spanned Eurasia. Archaeologists have discovered large prehistoric trackways crossing bogs in Ireland and Germany. Due to their substantial nature, these are believed to have been created for wheeled transport as part of an extensive roadway system that facilitated trade.[88] The territory held by the Celts contained tin, lead, iron, silver and gold.[89] Celtic smiths and metalworkers created weapons and jewellery for international trade, particularly with the Romans.

The myth that the Celtic monetary system consisted of wholly barter is a common one, but is in part false. The monetary system was complex and is still not understood (much like the late Roman coinages), and due to the absence of large numbers of coin items, it is assumed that “proto-money” was used. This included bronze items made from the early La Tène period and onwards, which were often in the shape of axeheads, rings, or bells. Due to the large number of these present in some burials, it is thought they had a relatively high monetary value, and could be used for “day to day” purchases. Low-value coinages of potin, a bronze alloy with high tin content, were minted in most Celtic areas of the continent and in South-East Britain prior to the Roman conquest of these lands. Higher-value coinages, suitable for use in trade, were minted in gold, silver, and high-quality bronze. Gold coinage was much more common than silver coinage, despite being worth substantially more, as while there were around 100 mines in Southern Britain and Central France, silver was more rarely mined. This was due partly to the relative sparcity of mines and the amount of effort needed for extraction compared to the profit gained. As the Roman civilisation grew in importance and expanded its trade with the Celtic world, silver and bronze coinage became more common. This coincided with a major increase in gold production in Celtic areas to meet the Roman demand, due to the high value Romans put on the metal. The large number of gold mines in France is thought to be a major reason why Caesar invaded.

There are only very limited records from pre-Christian times written in Celtic languages. These are mostly inscriptions in the Roman and sometimes Greek alphabets. The Ogham script, an Early Medieval alphabet, was mostly used in early Christian times in Ireland and Scotland (but also in Wales and England), and was only used for ceremonial purposes such as inscriptions on gravestones. The available evidence is of a strong oral tradition, such as that preserved by bards in Ireland, and eventually recorded by monasteries. Celtic art also produced a great deal of intricate and beautiful metalwork, examples of which have been preserved by their distinctive burial rites.

In some regards the Atlantic Celts were conservative: for example, they still used chariots in combat long after they had been reduced to ceremonial roles by the Greeks and Romans. However, despite being outdated, Celtic chariot tactics were able to repel the invasion of Britain attempted by Julius Caesar.

According to Diodorus Siculus:

The Gauls are tall of body with rippling muscles and white of skin and their hair is blond, and not only naturally so for they also make it their practice by artificial means to increase the distinguishing colour which nature has given it. For they are always washing their hair in limewater and they pull it back from the forehead to the nape of the neck, with the result that their appearance is like that of Satyrs and Pans since the treatment of their hair makes it so heavy and coarse that it differs in no respect from the mane of horses. Some of them shave the beard but others let it grow a little; and the nobles shave their cheeks but they let the moustache grow until it covers the mouth.

Clothing

Celtic costumes par in Przeworsk culture (3rd century BC, La Tène period), Archaeological Museum of Kraków.

During the later Iron Age the Gauls generally wore long-sleeved shirts or tunics and long trousers (called braccae by the Romans).[90] Clothes were made of wool or linen, with some silk being used by the rich. Cloaks were worn in the winter. Brooches and armlets were used, but the most famous item of jewellery was the torc, a neck collar of metal, sometimes gold. The horned Waterloo Helmet in the British Museum, which long set the standard for modern images of Celtic warriors, is in fact a unique survival, and may have been a piece for ceremonial rather than military wear.

Gender and sexual norms

Reconstruction of a German Iron Age Celtic warrior’s garments

According to Aristotle, most “belligerent nations” were strongly influenced by their women, but the Celts were unusual because their men openly preferred male lovers (Politics II 1269b).[91] H. D. Rankin in Celts and the Classical World notes that “Athenaeus echoes this comment (603a) and so does Ammianus (30.9). It seems to be the general opinion of antiquity.”[92] In book XIII of his Deipnosophists, the Roman Greek rhetorician and grammarian Athenaeus, repeating assertions made by Diodorus Siculus in the 1st century BC (Bibliotheca historica 5:32), wrote that Celtic women were beautiful but that the men preferred to sleep together. Diodorus went further, stating that “the young men will offer themselves to strangers and are insulted if the offer is refused”. Rankin argues that the ultimate source of these assertions is likely to be Poseidonius and speculates that these authors may be recording male “bonding rituals”.[93]

The sexual freedom of women in Britain was noted by Cassius Dio:

… a very witty remark is reported to have been made by the wife of Argentocoxus, a Caledonian, to Julia Augusta. When the empress was jesting with her, after the treaty, about the free intercourse of her sex with men in Britain, she replied: “We fulfill the demands of nature in a much better way than do you Roman women; for we consort openly with the best men, whereas you let yourselves be debauched in secret by the vilest.” Such was the retort of the British woman.[94]

There are instances recorded where women participated both in warfare and in kingship, although they were in the minority in these areas. Plutarch reports that Celtic women acted as ambassadors to avoid a war among Celts chiefdoms in the Po valley during the 4th century BC.[95]

Very few reliable sources exist regarding Celtic views towards gender divisions and societal status, though some archaeological evidence does suggest that their views towards gender roles may differ from contemporary and less egalitarian classical counterparts of the Roman era.[96][97]

There are some general indications from Iron Age burial sites in the Champagne and Bourgogne regions of Northeastern France suggesting that women may have had roles in combat during the earlier La Tène period. However, the evidence is far from conclusive.[98] Examples of individuals buried with both female jewellery and weaponry have been identified, such as the Vix Grave, and there are questions about the gender of some skeletons that were buried with warrior assemblages. However, it has been suggested that “the weapons may indicate rank instead of masculinity”.[99]

Among the insular Celts, there is a greater amount of historic documentation to suggest warrior roles for women. In addition to commentary by Tacitus about Boudica, there are indications from later period histories that also suggest a more substantial role for “women as warriors”, in symbolic if not actual roles. Posidonius and Strabo described an island of women where men could not venture for fear of death, and where the women ripped each other apart.[100] Other writers, such as Ammianus Marcellinus and Tacitus, mentioned Celtic women inciting, participating in, and leading battles.[101] Poseidonius’ anthropological comments on the Celts had common themes, primarily primitivism, extreme ferocity, cruel sacrificial practices, and the strength and courage of their women.[102]

Under Brehon Law, which was written down in early Medieval Ireland after conversion to Christianity, a woman had the right to divorce her husband and gain his property if he was unable to perform his marital duties due to impotence, obesity, homosexual inclination or preference for other women.[103]

Celtic art

The reverse side of a British bronze mirror, with spiral and trumpet motifs typical of La Tène Celtic art in Britain

Main article: Celtic art

Celtic art is generally used by art historians to refer to art of the La Tène period across Europe, while the Early Medieval art of Britain and Ireland, that is what “Celtic art” evokes for much of the general public, is called Insular art in art history. Both styles absorbed considerable influences from non-Celtic sources, but retained a preference for geometrical decoration over figurative subjects, which are often extremely stylised when they do appear; narrative scenes only appear under outside influence. Energetic circular forms, triskeles and spirals are characteristic. Much of the surviving material is in precious metal, which no doubt gives a very unrepresentative picture, but apart from Pictish stones and the Insular high crosses, large monumental sculpture, even with decorative carving, is very rare; possibly it was originally common in wood.

The interlace patterns that are often regarded as typical of “Celtic art” were in fact introduced to Insular art from the animal Style II of Germanic Migration Period art, though taken up with great skill and enthusiasm by Celtic artists in metalwork and illuminated manuscripts. Equally, the forms used for the finest Insular art were all adopted from the Roman world: Gospel books like the Book of Kells and Book of Lindisfarne, chalices like the Ardagh Chalice and Derrynaflan Chalice, and penannular brooches like the Tara Brooch. These works are from the period of peak achievement of Insular art, which lasted from the 7th to the 9th centuries, before the Viking attacks sharply set back cultural life.

In contrast the less well known but often spectacular art of the richest earlier Continental Celts, before they were conquered by the Romans, often adopted elements of Roman, Greek and other “foreign” styles (and possibly used imported craftsmen) to decorate objects that were distinctively Celtic. After the Roman conquests, some Celtic elements remained in popular art, especially Ancient Roman pottery, of which Gaul was actually the largest producer, mostly in Italian styles, but also producing work in local taste, including figurines of deities and wares painted with animals and other subjects in highly formalised styles. Roman Britain also took more interest in enamel than most of the Empire, and its development of champlevé technique was probably important to the later Medieval art of the whole of Europe, of which the energy and freedom of Insular decoration was an important element. Rising nationalism brought Celtic revivals from the 19th century.

Warfare and weapons

Parade Helmet, Agris, France. 350 BC, with stylistic borrowings from around the Mediterranean.

Main articles: Celtic warfare and Celtic sword

Tribal warfare appears to have been a regular feature of Celtic societies. While epic literature depicts this as more of a sport focused on raids and hunting rather than organised territorial conquest, the historical record is more of tribes using warfare to exert political control and harass rivals, for economic advantage, and in some instances to conquer territory.[citation needed]

The Celts were described by classical writers such as Strabo, Livy, Pausanias, and Florus as fighting like “wild beasts”, and as hordes. Dionysius said that their “manner of fighting, being in large measure that of wild beasts and frenzied, was an erratic procedure, quite lacking in military science. Thus, at one moment they would raise their swords aloft and smite after the manner of wild boars, throwing the whole weight of their bodies into the blow like hewers of wood or men digging with mattocks, and again they would deliver crosswise blows aimed at no target, as if they intended to cut to pieces the entire bodies of their adversaries, protective armour and all”.[104] Such descriptions have been challenged by contemporary historians.[105]

Polybius (2.33) indicates that the principal Celtic weapon was a long bladed sword which was used for hacking edgewise rather than stabbing. Celtic warriors are described by Polybius and Plutarch as frequently having to cease fighting in order to straighten their sword blades. This claim has been questioned by some archaeologists, who note that Noric steel, steel produced in Celtic Noricum, was famous in the Roman Empire period and was used to equip the Roman military.[106][107] However, Radomir Pleiner, in The Celtic Sword (1993) argues that “the metallographic evidence shows that Polybius was right up to a point”, as around one third of surviving swords from the period might well have behaved as he describes.[108]

Polybius also asserts that certain of the Celts fought naked, “The appearance of these naked warriors was a terrifying spectacle, for they were all men of splendid physique and in the prime of life.”[109] According to Livy this was also true of the Celts of Asia Minor.[110]

A Gallic statue of a Celtic warrior, in the Museum of Brittany

Head hunting

Celts had a reputation as head hunters. According to Paul Jacobsthal, “Amongst the Celts the human head was venerated above all else, since the head was to the Celt the soul, centre of the emotions as well as of life itself, a symbol of divinity and of the powers of the other-world.”[111] Arguments for a Celtic cult of the severed head include the many sculptured representations of severed heads in La Tène carvings, and the surviving Celtic mythology, which is full of stories of the severed heads of heroes and the saints who carry their own severed heads, right down to Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, where the Green Knight picks up his own severed head after Gawain has struck it off, just as St. Denis carried his head to the top of Montmartre.

A further example of this regeneration after beheading lies in the tales of Connemara‘s St. Feichin, who after being beheaded by Viking pirates carried his head to the Holy Well on Omey Island and on dipping the head into the well placed it back upon his neck and was restored to full health.

Diodorus Siculus, in his 1st-century History had this to say about Celtic head-hunting:

They cut off the heads of enemies slain in battle and attach them to the necks of their horses. The blood-stained spoils they hand over to their attendants and striking up a paean and singing a song of victory; and they nail up these first fruits upon their houses, just as do those who lay low wild animals in certain kinds of hunting. They embalm in cedar oil the heads of the most distinguished enemies, and preserve them carefully in a chest, and display them with pride to strangers, saying that for this head one of their ancestors, or his father, or the man himself, refused the offer of a large sum of money. They say that some of them boast that they refused the weight of the head in gold

In Gods and Fighting Men, Lady Gregory‘s Celtic Revival translation of Irish mythology, heads of men killed in battle are described in the beginning of the story The Fight with the Fir Bolgs as pleasing to Macha, one aspect of the war goddess Morrigu.

Religion

A statuette in the Museum of Brittany, Rennes, probably depicting Brigantia/Brigid: c. 1st century AD, with iconography derived from Roman statues of Minerva.

Polytheism

Like other European Iron Age tribal societies, the Celts practised a polytheistic religion.[112] Many Celtic gods are known from texts and inscriptions from the Roman period. Rites and sacrifices were carried out by priests known as druids. The Celts did not see their gods as having human shapes until late in the Iron Age. Celtic shrines were situated in remote areas such as hilltops, groves, and lakes.

Celtic religious patterns were regionally variable; however, some patterns of deity forms, and ways of worshipping these deities, appeared over a wide geographical and temporal range. The Celts worshipped both gods and goddesses. In general, Celtic gods were deities of particular skills, such as the many-skilled Lugh and Dagda, while goddesses were associated with natural features, particularly rivers (such as Boann, goddess of the River Boyne). This was not universal, however, as goddesses such as Brighid and The Morrígan were associated with both natural features (holy wells and the River Unius) and skills such as blacksmithing and healing.[113]

Triplicity is a common theme in Celtic cosmology, and a number of deities were seen as threefold.[114] This trait is exhibited by The Three Mothers, a group of goddesses worshipped by many Celtic tribes (with regional variations).[115]

The Celts had literally hundreds of deities, some of which were unknown outside a single family or tribe, while others were popular enough to have a following that crossed lingual and cultural barriers. For instance, the Irish god Lugh, associated with storms, lightning, and culture, is seen in similar forms as Lugos in Gaul and Lleu in Wales. Similar patterns are also seen with the continental Celtic horse goddess Epona and what may well be her Irish and Welsh counterparts, Macha and Rhiannon, respectively.[116]

Roman reports of the druids mention ceremonies being held in sacred groves. La Tène Celts built temples of varying size and shape, though they also maintained shrines at sacred trees and votive pools.[112]

Druids fulfilled a variety of roles in Celtic religion, serving as priests and religious officiants, but also as judges, sacrificers, teachers, and lore-keepers. Druids organised and ran religious ceremonies, and they memorised and taught the calendar. Other classes of druids performed ceremonial sacrifices of crops and animals for the perceived benefit of the community.[117]

Gallic calendar

The Coligny calendar, which was found in 1897 in Coligny, Ain, was engraved on a bronze tablet, preserved in 73 fragments, that originally was 1.48 m wide and 0.9 m high (Lambert p. 111). Based on the style of lettering and the accompanying objects, it probably dates to the end of the 2nd century.[118] It is written in Latin inscriptional capitals, and is in the Gallic language. The restored tablet contains 16 vertical columns, with 62 months distributed over 5 years.

The French archaeologist J. Monard speculated that it was recorded by druids wishing to preserve their tradition of timekeeping in a time when the Julian calendar was imposed throughout the Roman Empire. However, the general form of the calendar suggests the public peg calendars (or parapegmata) found throughout the Greek and Roman world.[119]

Roman influence

Further information: Gallo-Roman culture

The Roman invasion of Gaul brought a great deal of Celtic peoples into the Roman Empire. Roman culture had a profound effect on the Celtic tribes which came under the empire’s control. Roman influence led to many changes in Celtic religion, the most noticeable of which was the weakening of the druid class, especially religiously; the druids were to eventually disappear altogether. Romano-Celtic deities also began to appear: these deities often had both Roman and Celtic attributes and combined the names of Roman and Celtic deities. Other changes included the adaptation of the Jupiter Pole, a sacred pole which was used throughout Celtic regions of the empire, primarily in the north. Another major change in religious practice was the use of stone monuments to represent gods and goddesses. The Celts had only created wooden idols (including monuments carved into trees, which were known as sacred poles) previously to Roman conquest.[115]

Celtic Christianity

Main article: Celtic Christianity

While the regions under Roman rule adopted Christianity along with the rest of the Roman empire, unconquered areas of Ireland and Scotland began to move from Celtic polytheism to Christianity in the 5th century. Ireland was converted by missionaries from Britain, such as Saint Patrick. Later missionaries from Ireland were a major source of missionary work in Scotland, Anglo-Saxon parts of Britain, and central Europe (see Hiberno-Scottish mission). Celtic Christianity, the forms of Christianity that took hold in Britain and Ireland at this time, had for some centuries only limited and intermittent contact with Rome and continental Christianity, as well as some contacts with Coptic Christianity. Some elements of Celtic Christianity developed, or retained, features that made them distinct from the rest of Western Christianity, most famously their conservative method of calculating the date of Easter. In 664 the Synod of Whitby began to resolve these differences, mostly by adopting the current Roman practices, which the Gregorian Mission from Rome had introduced to Anglo-Saxon England.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Cariatides de l’Érechthéion’

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Cariatides de l’Érechthéion’

 

 

Cariatides de l’Érechthéion

Le nom de « cariatides » leur a été attribué secondairement, on les appelait auparavant simplement « jeunes filles », en grec Koré[1].

Plusieurs interprétations ont été proposées[2]. Il pourrait s’agir des jeunes filles de Laconie qui dansaient chaque année en l’honneur d’Artémis Karyatis[3], ou les choéphores de Cécrops, le baldaquin formant la partie visible de son tombeau[2].

D’après l’architecte romain Vitruve, leur nom viendrait de ce que la ville de Karyes s’étant alliée aux Perses lors de l’invasion, ses habitants furent exterminés par les autres Grecs et leurs femmes réduites en esclavage, et condamnées à porter les plus lourds fardeaux. Mais cette explication n’est actuellement pas retenue, ce motif architectural étant déjà répandu à cette époque, par exemple sur le Trésor des Siphniens à Delphes.

Histoire

Érechthéion. Le porche nord.

Comptes de construction de l’Érechthéion (IG I³ 476). (Musée épigraphique d’Athènes).

La construction du temple, tel qu’il est visible aujourd’hui, fut entreprise pendant la guerre du Péloponnèse. Elle commença lors de la trêve de Nicias en -421 et fut achevée entre -409 et -405, probablement en -406. Peu de temps après, en -403, Athènes dut capituler face à Sparte, entrer dans la ligue du Péloponnèse et voir sa démocratie remplacée par la tyrannie des Trente.

Le temple fut modifié et endommagé à plusieurs reprises, de sorte que son aménagement intérieur d’origine est sujet à controverse. Il fut d’abord endommagé par un incendie pendant la période classique, peut-être même avant d’être achevé et fut restauré. La cella ouest fut modifiée en -377 et en -27.

Au VIIe siècle, l’Érechthéion fut transformé en église byzantine ; les murs intérieurs furent détruits et d’autres furent édifiés. Pendant l’occupation franque, le temple est transformé en palais. Au cours de la période ottomane, le temple subit d’autres dommages. En 1463, il fut transformé pour loger le harem du commandant turc de l’Acropole et le portique nord fut muré.

Plus tard, Lord Elgin, ambassadeur britannique à Constantinople, fit enlever une des caryatides ainsi que de nombreuses autres sculptures du Parthénon et la vendit au gouvernement britannique. Cette statue se trouve actuellement au British Museum. Les cinq autres Caryatides se trouvent au musée de l’Acropole, protégées de la corrosion et de la pollution. Les six statues se trouvant sur le site sont des répliques exactes de celles d’origine.

Le bâtiment fut endommagé par les bombardements lors du siège de l’Acropole de 1827, au cours de la guerre d’indépendance. Servant d’abri aux familles de certains notables, il fut touché en janvier 1827 par un tir et son plafond s’effondra, tuant les occupants dont la veuve de Yannis Gouras.

De nos jours, le service grec de Conservation des Monuments de l’Acropole a proposé de permettre un accès à l’intérieur de l’Érechthéion, afin d’étudier sa configuration et d’enfouir les fondations de l’ancienne basilique chrétienne pour assurer leur conservation. Le narthex de cette église, transformé par la suite en citerne à l’époque ottomane, ne sera pas enterré, afin que ces éléments, témoins de l’histoire du monument, restent visibles. Pour ce projet, qui a obtenu l’accord du Conseil supérieur de l’Archéologie, il est prévu de doter l’Érechthéion d’un nouveau plancher provisoire fait de plaques de marbre blanc de quatorze cm d’épaisseur posées sur une armature métallique[4].

The Porch of the Caryatids.

La loggia con le Cariatidi

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89rechth%C3%A9ion

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Venus de Milo’

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘Venus de Milo’

 

 

The Aphrodite of Milos, better known as the Venus de Milo, is an ancient Greek statue and one of the most famous works of ancient Greek sculpture.

It is believed to depict Aphrodite (called Venus by the Romans), the Greek goddess of love and beauty. It is a marble sculpture, slightly larger than life size at 203 cm (80 inches) high. Its arms and original plinth have been lost. From an inscription on its now-lost plinth, it is thought to be the work of Alexandros of Antioch; it was earlier mistakenly attributed to the master sculptor Praxiteles.

It is at present on display at the Louvre Museum in Paris.

The statue was discovered in 1820 inside a buried niche within the ancient city ruins of Milos on the Aegean island of the same name, also called Melos or Milo, by a peasant named Yorgos Kentrotas.

The statue’s great fame in the 19th century was not simply the result of its admitted beauty, but also owed much to a major propaganda effort by the French authorities. In 1815 France had returned the Medici Venus to the Italians after it had been looted from Italy by Napoleon Bonaparte. The Medici Venus, regarded as one of the finest Classical sculptures in existence, caused the French to consciously promote the Venus de Milo as a greater treasure than that which they had recently lost. It was duly praised by artists and critics as the epitome of graceful female beauty.

 

 

 

Aphrodite of Milos (Greek: Ἀφροδίτη τῆς Μήλου, Aphroditē tēs Mēlou), better known as the Venus de Milo, is an ancient Greek statue and one of the most famous works of ancient Greek sculpture. Created sometime between 130 and 100 BC, it is believed to depict Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty (Venus to the Romans). It is a marble sculpture, slightly larger than life size at 203 cm (6 ft 8 in) high. The arms and original plinth were lost following its discovery. From an inscription that was on its plinth, it is thought to be the work of Alexandros of Antioch; earlier, it was mistakenly attributed to the master sculptor Praxiteles. It is currently on permanent display at the Louvre Museum in Paris. The statue is named after the Greek island of Milos, where it was discovered.

 

Historique

Cette statue date de l’époque hellénistique (Grèce antique), vers 100 av. J.-C. Elle a d’abord été attribuée à tort à Praxitèle mais une inscription sur le socle montre qu’elle pourrait être l’œuvre d’Alexandre d’Antioche (en).

Achetée par le comte de Rivière, celui-ci en fait don au roi Louis XVIII ; en 1821, le souverain en fait lui-même don au musée du Louvre.

Découverte[modifier | modifier le code]

Le buste de la statue est mis au jour le 8 avril 1820 à Milos, une île de la mer Égée, faisant alors partie de l’Empire ottoman, par un paysan nommé Yorgos Kentrotas[2] à la recherche de pierres pour bâtir un mur autour de son champ[3]. Par hasard, un élève officier de marine français, Olivier Voutier, assiste à la découverte. Passionné par l’archéologie, alors une discipline récente, il incite le paysan à continuer de creuser. Apparaissent alors la partie inférieure de la statue et quelques fragments appartenant de toute évidence à la statue, comme le nœud du chignon. En l’état, le buste n’a déjà plus ses bras, comme en témoigne le dessin exécuté sur place par Voutier. Celui-ci prévient Louis Brest, vice-consul de France à Milo, pendant que le paysan, poursuivant sur sa lancée, met au jour d’autres fragments[4], dont deux piliers hermaïques, deux blocs inscrits, qui seront ensuite rejoints par un troisième, une main mutilée tenant un fruit (mais d’un travail trop rudimentaire pour appartenir à la statue[réf. nécessaire]) et des morceaux de bras.

Voutier fait alors pression sur le consul pour que l’État français achète la statue. De son côté, Jules Dumont d’Urville, alors enseigne du vaisseau La Chevrette, dirigé par le capitaine et hydrographe Pierre-Henry Gauttier du Parc, a également vu la statue et alerte le marquis de Rivière, ambassadeur de France auprès de la Sublime Porte. Celui-ci dépêche sur place un secrétaire d’ambassade, le comte de Marcellus, qui arrive en rade de Milo au moment où la statue est en train d’embarquer sur un navire à destination de Constantinople pour le compte d’un haut dignitaire turc.

Au terme de tractations diverses, la statue est achetée pour le compte du marquis de Rivière, et ramenée en France. Durant son voyage, la statue fera escale au Château d’Audour, à Dompierre-les-Ormes dans la propriété du comte de Marcellus[5].

Le marquis de Rivière la fera offrir au roi Louis XVIII le 1er mars 1821, qui en fait aussitôt don au musée du Louvre. Comme toute œuvre endommagée, la Vénus entre dans l’atelier de restauration du musée afin de subir l’examen minutieux de son restaurateur en chef Bernard Lange. La rigueur d’analyse de ce dernier le conduit à écarter de ses projets de restauration toute conception fantaisiste. Il pense ainsi retrouver le mouvement initial de bras de la Vénus et envisage de recréer les parties manquantes selon les préceptes de restauration en vigueur à cette époque. Contre toute attente, mais avec l’appui du roi, il est finalement décidé de la présenter dans l’état où elle a été trouvée, sans ajout ou complément. Les seules restaurations sont celles de l’extrémité du nez, de la lèvre inférieure, du gros orteil du pied droit et de quelques raccords dans l’épaisseur de la draperie.

Description

Les cheveux sont relevés en un chignon maintenu par un bandeau, dont s’échappent trois mèches tombant sur la nuque.

La statue représente une femme plus grande que nature (hauteur sans la plinthe : 2,02 mètres), debout, en appui sur la jambe droite et la jambe gauche légèrement fléchie (contrapposto), le pied (disparu) dépassant de la plinthe. Le haut du corps est dénudé ; le bas est revêtu d’un himation roulé autour des hanches. Les cheveux sont relevés en un chignon maintenu par un bandeau, dont s’échappent trois mèches tombant sur la nuque.

Elle est constituée de deux blocs en marbre de Paros qui se rejoignent au milieu du bourrelet de l’himation. Il ne s’agit pas du résultat d’un accident, mais d’un procédé volontaire, courant à l’époque hellénistique, visant à faciliter le transport des statues. Les deux blocs étaient à l’origine raccordés par des goujons métalliques situés sur l’extrémité des hanches; ils ont été scellés en place par du plomb coulé dans des canaux dont les ouvertures se trouvent dans la section supérieure de la statue. Chacune des deux sections comprend également des pièces de marbre insérées au niveau des hanches. Il s’agit probablement d’une réparation antique suite à un éclatement du marbre dû à l’oxydation des goujons. L’éclat inférieur de la hanche gauche a vu sa surface retouchée au ciseau en 1871 : la statue, démontée et placée en lieu sûr au moment de la Commune, avait été mal remontée et l’éclat formait une saillie, que l’on s’est efforcé d’aplanir. Enfin, l’éclat supérieur de la hanche droite se caractérise par l’absence de mortaise : il s’agit probablement d’un morceau sculpté à part, sans remploi du tenon originel.

Détails du bloc supérieur, partie droite : travail régulier de la section du bras, trous de fixation pour un bracelet métallique (disparu) et, en haut, à gauche du nombril, cavité rebouchée au plâtre de l’étai qui soutenait le bras.

Pour ce qui est des bras manquants, la mortaise de l’arrachement du bras gauche tend à démontrer que celui-ci était rapporté ; en revanche, la finition régulière de la jonction du bras droit, qui n’a pas de mortaise, résulte probablement d’une autre réparation antique suite à un accident[6],[7]. Le pied manquant présente également une surface très régulière, qui a fait conclure là encore à une pièce rapportée[6],[8]. Enfin, le haut du dos présente des défauts de surface localisés.

Des trous de fixation encore visibles sur la statue montrent qu’elle était couronnée d’un diadème (par-dessus le ruban) et qu’elle portait des boucles d’oreille et un bracelet au bras droit. Contrairement à l’usage de l’époque, la statue n’a pas été restaurée lors de son entrée dans les collections du Louvre. Le pied gauche a été un temps restitué en plâtre avant d’être retiré. Les seules interventions modernes subsistant à l’heure actuelle sont le recollage du chignon et le complément en plâtre d’éclats au bout du nez, sur la lèvre inférieure; la plinthe a également fait l’objet d’une reprise. La statue a été nettoyée au printemps 2010 et le complément en plâtre sur l’orteil droit a été retiré.

Les mesures principales de la Vénus de Milo sont les suivantes :

  • hauteur totale : 202 cm
  • largeur maximum : 36 cm
  • profondeur maximum : 64 cm
  • tour de poitrine : 121 cm
  • tour de taille : 97 cm
  • tour de hanches : 129 cm

La masse est d’environ 1 000 kg.

Identification

L’identification de la statue, difficile en l’absence d’attribut, a fait l’objet, depuis sa découverte, de multiples hypothèses et suscité de nombreuses études.

Voici les conclusions de la dernière en date[9] (1985), réalisée par Alain Pasquier, conservateur en chef du département des antiquités grecques et romaines du musée du Louvre :

« Les conditions de la trouvaille et de l’acquisition, l’état de conservation de la pièce, et l’histoire des fragments exhumés à Mélos se sont conjurés pour que la statue garde son mystère. Il n’est donc rien, à ce propos, qui puisse être prononcé avec certitude. Mais si l’on veut bien raisonner en termes de probabilité, c’est Aphrodite, sans doute, qui se présente comme l’identification la plus vraisemblable. L’histoire de l’iconographie de la déesse de l’Amour plaide en tout cas dans ce sens. Car pour revenir à des éléments simples, et ne laisser parler que le bon sens, cette effigie, où l’exaltation de la beauté du corps féminin le dispute à la souveraineté de l’attitude, correspond tout à fait à ce que nous connaissons des images d’Aphrodite. (…) Quant au geste, contentons-nous d’un à peu près : le bras droit croisait le corps, et la main venait à la hauteur de la hanche gauche ; et le plus vraisemblable est que le bras gauche occupait une position élevée : plus de précision serait téméraire. »

En ce qui concerne l’origine et la datation de la statue, « au prix d’une pyramide d’hypothèses dont il est inutile de souligner la fragilité », la Vénus de Milo serait « l’œuvre d’un artiste originaire de la Grèce d’Asie Mineure, dont la carrière occupe la génération des années 120-80 av. J.-C. »

 

 

Die Venus von Milo (auch Aphrodite von Melos), eine halbnackte Statue der Göttin Aphrodite, ist neben der Laokoon-Gruppe und der Nike von Samothrake eines der bekanntesten Beispiele der hellenistischen Kunst.

Die 2,02 Meter hohe und somit leicht überlebensgroße Statue entstand gegen Ende des 2. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. und wurde am 8. April 1820 von dem Bauern Georgios Kentrotas auf der Kykladeninsel Milos in der Umgebung der Ruine eines griechischen Theaters entdeckt. Kentrotas war auf der Suche nach Steinen als Baumaterial, als er bearbeiteten Marmor und die Statue entdeckte. Er rief einige Franzosen herbei, die auf der Suche nach antiken Funden waren. Der Bauer war sich der herausragenden Entdeckung nicht bewusst, die Franzosen gaben ihm einige Geldstücke.

Dem französischen Botschafter in Konstantinopel, Charles François de Riffardeau, marquis de Rivière, war es durch seine Kontakte möglich, die Statue für Frankreich zu erwerben. Nach einigen Wirren sollte die Statue zunächst nach Konstantinopel verfrachtet werden, aber dies wussten die Franzosen rechtzeitig zu verhindern. Der Marquis schenkte die Venus dem damaligen französischen König Ludwig XVIII. Dieser ließ sie im Louvre in Paris aufstellen, wo sich die Statue noch heute befindet.

Die Skulptur besteht aus Marmor aus den Steinbrüchen der Kykladeninsel Paros und symbolisiert das Ideal der weiblichen Schönheit. Daher wurde sie nach der römischen Göttin Venus benannt. Da Venus die römische Entsprechung der griechischen Aphrodite ist, wird die Statue auch „Aphrodite von Melos (Milos)“ genannt.

Der Name des Künstlers ist nicht überliefert.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_von_Milo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_de_Milo

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A9nus_de_Milo

http://www.ssqq.com/archive/louvre01.htm

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘KRAFT AND PATHOS:BRONZEN DER HELLENISTISCHEN WELT

Giacobbe Giusti, ‘KRAFT AND PATHOS:BRONZEN DER HELLENISTISCHEN WELT

KRAFT AND PATHOS:BRONZEN DER HELLENISTISCHEN WELT

 

Die Ausstellung im Palazzo Strozzi, erzählt die künstlerischen Entwicklungen der hellenistischen Zeit (IV-I Jahrhundert vor Christus), durch außergewöhnliche Bronzestatuen. Zu sehen sind einige der größten Meisterwerke der Antike von den wichtigsten archäologischen Museen italienischen und internationalen.

Monumentale Statuen von Göttern, Sportler und Führungskräfte sind mit Porträts historischer Persönlichkeiten gepaart, den Weg, der den Besucher in der Analyse der Produktionstechniken führen wird, Gießen und Veredelung aus Bronze und entdecken Sie die Geschichten von den Ergebnissen dieser Meisterwerke.

In sieben thematische Abschnitte unterteilt, öffnet sich die Ausstellung mit der großen Statue von Arringatore, ein Teil der Sammlung von Cosimo I. de ‘Medici und der Sockel der Statue von Lysippos, im Jahre 1901 in Korinth gefunden.

Setzt sich mit der Übersicht über die Portraits der Macht, die die Bildnisse der einflussreichsten Menschen der Zeit bietet. Ausgestellt außergewöhnliche Beispiele, wie die Figur von Alexander dem Großen zu Pferde, der Kopf-Porträt von Arsinoe III Philopator, die eines Diadochus und die einer wahrscheinlichen General.

Der vierte Abschnitt mit dem Titel “Realismus und Ausdruck” analysiert die einzelnen Porträts, die Verwendung von Inlays und Farbe, um ein natürliches Aussehen zu erhalten und betont das Pathos und andere Formen der Charakterisierung, wie wir in dem Bild des jungen Aristokraten und viele andere zu sehen Heads-Porträt männlich.

Der fünfte Abschnitt “Replicas und Mimesis”, wollen die Idee von der Kapazität der Bronze geben mehrere “Original” zu schaffen, hat in der Tat, Reproduktionen von hellenistischen Werken in den Folgeperioden, die Nachahmung der Bronze in der dunklen Stein und andere Aufbewahrungs Bronzen auf See von den in der Erde gefunden.

Der sechste Abschnitt “Divinity”, mit Werken von außergewöhnlicher Schönheit, einschließlich der Minerva Arezzo, das Medaillon mit der Büste der Athena und dem Kopf der Aphrodite.

Schließlich ist der siebte Abschnitt “Stile der Vergangenheit”, will ein neues Interesse an den archaischen und klassischen Modellen zusammen mit dem Stilmix späthellenistischen entdecken. Zu den wichtigsten Beispiele für die so genannte Idolino Pesaro und dem Apollo der Louvre in Paris.

PALAZZO STROZZI

  1. März 2015 – 21. Juni 2015

 

Buchen: Made of Tuscany Reiseveranstalter Florenz

Palazzo Strozzi
Piazza Strozzi
Florence – Italie

http://de.madeoftuscany.it/de/ereignisse-florenz/kraft-and-pathosbronzen-der-hellenistischen-welt_210/#!prettyPhoto

-Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, Italy
March 14 – June 21, 2015
http://www.palazzostrozzi.org
-J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, CA
July 28 – November 1, 2015
http://www.getty.edu
-National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
December 6, 2015 – March 20, 2016
http://www.nga.gov
http://www.artcover.com/index.adml?id=1700&h=2
http://www.giacobbegiusti.com

 

Giacobbe Giusti Author, Multi-media installation, Palazzo Bastogi, Florence, March 2015

Giacobbe Giusti Author, Multi-media installation, Palazzo Bastogi, Florence, March 2015

DSC_0456 - Copia
REGIONE TOSCANA
Consiglio Regionale
Palazzo Bastogi, Florence
Solo Exhibition ‘La Quarta Dimensione’ – Giacobbe Giusti
march 2015

La Quarta Dimensione

‘Digli che abbiamo
riprogrammato la realtà.
Digli che il linguaggio è un virus, la religione un sistema operativo
e le preghiere sono junk mail’
American Gods
Neil Gaiman

La Prossima Dimensione
E’ l’eterna tensione tra natura e cultura quella che si respira nei paesaggi disegnati dalle sculture di GIACOBBE GIUSTI. Paesaggi post-moderni e per certi versi post-umani o ULTRA-UMANI, do- ve forme di alluminio si stagliano come testimoni superstiti di un’umanità perduta, trasformata, ri-plasmata.
Rocce, alberi cristallizzati e fiori alieni diventano TOTEM in una realtà parallela (futura?) in cui possiamo ancora riconoscere l’eredità dell’uomo. L’effetto è ancor più perturbante dal permanere di un richiamo al quotidiano in quelli che al primo sguardo sembrano oggetti provenienti da un’altra dimensione. La scelta stessa del materiale utilizzato da Giacobbe Giusti contribuisce all’impatto emotivo. ALLUMINIO.
Come quello della carta stagnola in cui avvolgiamo gli alimenti o delle lattine di Coca-Cola. Ma an- che quello che viene largamente impiegato nell’industria aerospaziale, per esplorare altri mondi, altre pieghe dell’universo.
Duttilità, malleabilità, saldabilità: sono queste le principali doti dell’alluminio, caratteristiche che ben si adattano a indagare quella
“società liquida” fotografata da Zygmunt
Bauman, in cui è sempre più difficile trovare una superficie solida a cui affidare le nostre certezze. Una realtà duttile come l’alluminio, capace di fondere e cambiar forma in ogni momento.
Ma è un’altra proprietà dell’alluminio a conferire alle sculture di Giusti un’intrinseca enigmaticità: la leggerezza. Sono pietre, sono meteore, sono alberi dalle forme pesanti e tuttavia leggeri. Sono manifestazioni della violenza maestosa della natura, eppur tutta- via abbastanza leggere da risultare esposte ai colpi del destino, predisposte ad essere spazzate via dalla prossima onda mediatica.
E’ proprio nell’interazione con suoni, luci e proiezioni multimediali che le installazioni di Giacobbe Giusti raggiungono l’apice comunicativo: visi, format, spezzoni di programmi tv visti e riconoscibili si riflettono su forme familiari, ma sconosciute. Le sculture diventano specchi deformanti di una realtà deforme, soggetti immobili eppur partecipi e complici di questa realtà. Come noi. Come l’uomo, straniato in una giungla virtuale, proiettato in una Quarta Dimensione.
Francesca Puliti

http://www.giacobbegiusti.com