{"title":"A New Analysis of Major Greek Sculptures in the Metropolitan Museum: Petrological and Stylistic","authors":"L. Lazzarini, C. Marconi","doi":"10.1086/680028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interest in the provenance of ancient marbles used in Greek and Roman sculpture is long-standing, going back to the very foundation of the study of ancient art, Johann Joachim Winckelmann’s History of the Art of Antiquity, published in 1764. In Part 1 of this seminal text, the German scholar addresses the materials selected by Greek sculptors in two important passages. In the introductory chapter, which discusses the origin of art and the reasons for its diversity among peoples, Winckelmann proposes a line of development for ancient sculptors’ materials that begins with clay and gradually progresses to wood and ivory, and finally to stone and metal. In Chapter 4, on the art of the Greeks, section 4, devoted to the “Mechanical Part of Greek Sculpture,” he addresses first the materials in which Greek sculptors worked and then the manner of their workmanship. In the passage, Winckelmann begins — in keeping with the taste of his time — with marble, and he not only presents the relevant literary sources but also discusses the qualities of different kinds of marble, including texture, consistency, and color. He focuses on marble from the island of Paros but also mentions Thasian, Pentelic, and Carrara marble. He explores the correlation between the qualities of these marbles and their different workabilities and appearances, thus proposing a strong connection between the material and the aesthetic quality of ancient sculpture.1 After such a start, it would seem inevitable that the identification of the marbles used in antiquity would have been a constant concern of both historians of ancient art and archaeologists. However, it was not until more than one hundred years after Winckelmann that the German geologist Richard Lepsius developed the first scientifically correct approach, one that can unreservedly be defined as archaeometric in the strict sense of the term.2 Archaeometry is a rather new science, officially dating to the end of the 1950s when the University of Oxford’s Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art began publishing a bulletin for the purpose of “fostering the close integration between the physical sciences, archaeology, and art history.”3 The bulletin soon became Archaeome try, an international journal now published six times a year that reports on the applications of scientific disciplines, such as biology, chemistry, physics, geology, and informatics, to archaeology, architecture, and art. Among other topics, its contributors discuss methods for determining the age and authenticity of all kinds of artifacts, the nature of their materials, and their sources and manufacturing techniques. One important application of archaeometry concerns marbles.4 Technically, marbles are pure carbonatic (calcitic or dolomitic) rocks with a carbonatic content that is usually well in excess of 95 percent. These rocks are crystalline; they may be white or gray, more rarely black, red, or green; and they will have been produced by contact or regional metamorphism. Marbles are quite common throughout the Mediterranean area. We know when some of them were first used by builders and sculptors, and we have information from various sources that enables us to reconstruct at least a partial picture of their distribution and the ways they were traded and transported. In most cases, however, we know very little, mostly because of the fundamental difficulty of reliably identifying marbles when they are found in use as structural or decorative members of ancient buildings, or as sculptures, or when they have been reused in medieval or Renaissance monuments. A New Analysis of Major Greek Sculptures in the Metropolitan Museum: Petrological and Stylistic","PeriodicalId":42073,"journal":{"name":"METROPOLITAN MUSEUM JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/680028","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"METROPOLITAN MUSEUM JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/680028","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
Interest in the provenance of ancient marbles used in Greek and Roman sculpture is long-standing, going back to the very foundation of the study of ancient art, Johann Joachim Winckelmann’s History of the Art of Antiquity, published in 1764. In Part 1 of this seminal text, the German scholar addresses the materials selected by Greek sculptors in two important passages. In the introductory chapter, which discusses the origin of art and the reasons for its diversity among peoples, Winckelmann proposes a line of development for ancient sculptors’ materials that begins with clay and gradually progresses to wood and ivory, and finally to stone and metal. In Chapter 4, on the art of the Greeks, section 4, devoted to the “Mechanical Part of Greek Sculpture,” he addresses first the materials in which Greek sculptors worked and then the manner of their workmanship. In the passage, Winckelmann begins — in keeping with the taste of his time — with marble, and he not only presents the relevant literary sources but also discusses the qualities of different kinds of marble, including texture, consistency, and color. He focuses on marble from the island of Paros but also mentions Thasian, Pentelic, and Carrara marble. He explores the correlation between the qualities of these marbles and their different workabilities and appearances, thus proposing a strong connection between the material and the aesthetic quality of ancient sculpture.1 After such a start, it would seem inevitable that the identification of the marbles used in antiquity would have been a constant concern of both historians of ancient art and archaeologists. However, it was not until more than one hundred years after Winckelmann that the German geologist Richard Lepsius developed the first scientifically correct approach, one that can unreservedly be defined as archaeometric in the strict sense of the term.2 Archaeometry is a rather new science, officially dating to the end of the 1950s when the University of Oxford’s Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art began publishing a bulletin for the purpose of “fostering the close integration between the physical sciences, archaeology, and art history.”3 The bulletin soon became Archaeome try, an international journal now published six times a year that reports on the applications of scientific disciplines, such as biology, chemistry, physics, geology, and informatics, to archaeology, architecture, and art. Among other topics, its contributors discuss methods for determining the age and authenticity of all kinds of artifacts, the nature of their materials, and their sources and manufacturing techniques. One important application of archaeometry concerns marbles.4 Technically, marbles are pure carbonatic (calcitic or dolomitic) rocks with a carbonatic content that is usually well in excess of 95 percent. These rocks are crystalline; they may be white or gray, more rarely black, red, or green; and they will have been produced by contact or regional metamorphism. Marbles are quite common throughout the Mediterranean area. We know when some of them were first used by builders and sculptors, and we have information from various sources that enables us to reconstruct at least a partial picture of their distribution and the ways they were traded and transported. In most cases, however, we know very little, mostly because of the fundamental difficulty of reliably identifying marbles when they are found in use as structural or decorative members of ancient buildings, or as sculptures, or when they have been reused in medieval or Renaissance monuments. A New Analysis of Major Greek Sculptures in the Metropolitan Museum: Petrological and Stylistic
人们对希腊和罗马雕塑中使用的古代大理石的来源一直很感兴趣,这可以追溯到古代艺术研究的基础——约翰·约阿希姆·温克尔曼(Johann Joachim Winckelmann)于1764年出版的《古代艺术史》。在这个开创性的文本的第一部分中,德国学者在两个重要的段落中讨论了希腊雕塑家选择的材料。在导论章中,Winckelmann讨论了艺术的起源及其在不同民族之间多样性的原因,他提出了古代雕塑家材料的发展路线,从粘土开始,逐渐发展到木材和象牙,最后到石头和金属。在第4章,关于希腊人的艺术,第4节,专门讨论“希腊雕塑的机械部分”,他首先讨论了希腊雕塑家工作的材料,然后是他们的工艺方式。在文章中,温克尔曼从大理石开始——与他那个时代的品味保持一致——他不仅介绍了相关的文学来源,还讨论了不同种类大理石的品质,包括质地、稠度和颜色。他专注于帕罗斯岛的大理石,但也提到了塔西亚、Pentelic和卡拉拉大理石。他探索了这些大理石的品质与它们不同的可加工性和外观之间的相关性,从而提出了古代雕塑的材料与美学品质之间的强烈联系在这样的开始之后,鉴定古代使用的大理石似乎不可避免地成为古代艺术史学家和考古学家一直关注的问题。然而,直到温克尔曼之后一百多年,德国地质学家理查德·莱普修斯才提出了第一个科学上正确的方法,这种方法可以毫无保留地定义为严格意义上的考古学考古学是一门相当新的科学,正式的历史可以追溯到20世纪50年代末,当时牛津大学考古学和艺术史研究实验室开始出版一份公报,目的是“促进物理科学、考古学和艺术史之间的紧密结合”。这份公报很快变成了《考古尝试》(Archaeome try),这是一本每年出版六期的国际期刊,报道诸如生物学、化学、物理学、地质学和信息学等科学学科在考古学、建筑学和艺术方面的应用。在其他主题中,它的贡献者讨论了确定各种人工制品的年龄和真实性的方法,它们的材料的性质,以及它们的来源和制造技术。考古学的一个重要应用与大理石有关从技术上讲,大理岩是纯碳酸盐(方解石或白云岩)岩石,其碳酸盐含量通常远远超过95%。这些岩石是结晶的;它们可能是白色或灰色,更罕见的是黑色、红色或绿色;它们可能是由接触作用或区域变质作用产生的。大理石在地中海地区很常见。我们知道其中一些是什么时候被建筑商和雕塑家首次使用的,我们从各种来源获得的信息使我们能够至少部分地重建它们的分布以及它们的交易和运输方式。然而,在大多数情况下,我们所知甚少,主要是因为当大理石被发现用作古代建筑的结构或装饰构件、雕塑或中世纪或文艺复兴时期的纪念碑时,很难可靠地识别它们。大都会博物馆主要希腊雕塑的新分析:岩石学和风格学