ESSAY: On Leonardo da Vinci's "Hercules"
(Author's Note:
The following is the final project for the seminar I took on Leonardo da Vinci
in the fall. I have previously shared a paper I wrote for this class about The Philadelphia Crucifixion, linked here. The assignment was to write as if we had discovered a
long-lost work by the master, and then perform stylistic analysis of the work
to justify it within Leonardo's oeuvre. I took the story of
Leonardo's Hercules sculpture as a jumping-off point, a
never-created work commissioned to match Michelangelo's David at
the turn of the 16th century in Florence. This piece was also published in the Fall 2013 issue of the Northwestern Art Review, "Constructing Reality", which can be found here. Enjoy!)
The darkness of
the restoration room, with its sole bright spotlight on a table in the center,
was a contrast from the soft natural lighting of the rest of the museum.
As one of the leading experts in the field of European Art, I had been called
to Florence’s Uffizi Gallery several days prior to lend my expertise in
identifying some drawings from the back catalogue. I sat down at
the table, slicked on latex rubber gloves, and turned to the works lying before
me in the bin labeled “Unattributed-Drawings-European-13th-16th century”.
Around me were shelves and shelves of works that were waiting to be identified
or had been long forgotten and were currently gathering years of dust.
I carefully
picked up the first faded drawing and began to examine it. The drawing
was in silverpoint and depicted a muscular nude man holding a club standing,
legs apart, over a wrinkled bit of what looked like…fur? My trained eyes took
in the detailed yet purposeful strokes, the elegant tufts of hair and beard of
the figure. “Italian,” I remarked to myself. “Likely late
fifteenth, early sixteenth century?” As I examined the drawing further, I
became more and more confident in this assessment.
My eyes lingered
on the musculature of the figure, noting the artist’s keen demonstrated
knowledge of anatomy. The vigor in the pen strokes describing the
abdomen, the musculature of the thigh muscles, the direction of the shading…
this particular touch seemed familiar, somehow.
Suddenly,
something clicked in my brain. This drawing… Could it be…? I
turned over the drawing and had to catch my breath in surprise. Glued to
the back of the drawing of the man was a paper marked up with faint Italian
script. This sheet was similarly faded like the first. On it was
written in faint ink in a beautiful neat script (translated from the Italian),
“The Overseers
have chosen for the magnificent figure of a Hercules,
carved in white
Cararra marble to match maestro Michelangelo Buonarroti of Florence’s David, to
be made by the maestro Leonardo da Vinci, son of Ser Piero da Vinci…”
I nearly dropped
the sheet. Leonardo da Vinci? Could it be? “This… this… I’ve
seen this before, at the Met,” I remembered aloud, looking again at the fine
silverpoint drawing of the man. Studies for Hercules with a
Club. I knew I had recognized that same strong gesture and noble
figure. I had found the presentation drawing for the never-created
Hercules sculpture Leonardo was commissioned by Florence to make, to accompany
Michelangelo’s David. And to have found the contract for
the Hercules as well? I had truly come upon a stroke of luck. My
hands were shaking as I gently placed the contract and drawing back on the
table. What an incredible find. Now all I needed to do, aside from
the research, was have a conservator detach the two pages so I could properly
analyze them both at a later date.
I left the
museum shortly after filling out the necessary paperwork to handle the drawings
the next day. I retired to a small café across the Piazza della
Signoria. Pulling a pen and paper out of my briefcase, cappuccino sitting
on the table before me, I began to write.
Leonardo da
Vinci is primarily known as a great painter. His contributions to the art
of sculpture are much less famous, if only because none of his planned
sculptural works ever came to completion. However, scholars do know about
his planned sculptures even if none exist today. The Leonardo da Vinci
work I discovered is a presentation drawing in silverpoint of the planned
Hercules sculpture, which Leonardo is said to have been commissioned to create
in the early sixteenth century by the city of Florence. I also discovered
the accompanying contract for the work as it was drawn up by the city. I
am confident in my attribution of the drawing to the master based on the
previously established scholarship of the planned work as outlined by Carmen
Bambach; the significance Hercules held for the city of Florence; Leonardo’s
own background and training in sculpture; and the characteristics and stylistic
idiosyncrasies of the drawing itself.
Leonardo would
have learned bronze casting and sculpture as a student of Andrea del Verrocchio
in the traditional workshop setting, where young apprentices were often trained
in a variety of artistic disciplines. Leonardo is also believed to
have studied in the Medici Gardens under Bertoldo di Giovanni, who “taught
Leonardo how to draw inspiration from and expand upon antique models without
being bound by them” [1]. Leonardo is in fact known to have done extensive
studies for sculptures and a clay model of an equestrian monument for the
Sforzas in Milan. In fact, among the many services he advertised in his
letter to Lodovico Sforza, he listed sculpture in both marble and clay as one
of them. Sadly, the finished product never came to fruition due to
its over-ambitious size and scale and the scarcity of bronze at the time.
It is quite interesting, then, that in his private writings Leonardo spoke
rather harshly of sculpture, comparing it unfavorably to painting: “Painting
requires more thought and skill and is a more marvellous [sic] art than
sculpture” [2]. He then goes on to describe in his mind all the things
painting can accomplish that sculpture cannot, including “all visible
things” [3] such as scenery and stars, whereas a sculptor is more limited
in what he can represent.
Nonetheless,
Leonardo is known to have begun work on designs for a standing Hercules
sculpture in 1506-08. He is known to have left Milan and the Sforza court
before 1500, traveling to Mantua and to Venice. He returned to Florence in
1503 and was known to have resided at the hospital of Santa Maria Nuova and to
have completed some anatomical studies during that time. He is believed
to have been extremely productive during the early years of his return to
Florence. Scholars today have found a great many sketches for a wide
range of projects both artistic and scientific that date from this time.
Several drawings
for this project exist in collections such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art
and depict the muscular, nude hero standing in victory, usually holding a
club. In particular, a two-sided sketch (Figure 1), the Standing
Hercules, Holding a Club, Seen from the Front, Male Nude Unsheathing a Sword,
and the Movements of Water (recto), and its reverse
side, Standing Hercules, Holding a Club, Seen from the Rear (verso) display
Leonardo’s “strikingly new […] anticlassical […] conception” of a Hercules
figure. Where earlier depictions of Hercules depicted the hero “in
repose” or “passive”, this Hercules would have been “tense and alert” [4]. This
sketch contains both a frontal and a rear view of an iteration for the Hercules
sculpture. Hercules is indeed tense and powerfully muscled, with a wide,
assertive stance and his head turned sharply to his right. In both views,
he holds a club across his body. In the frontal view, Hercules appears to
be wearing some kind of helmet, which is not present in the rear view.
Figure 1:
Standing Hercules, Holding a Club, Seen from the Rear; Standing Hercules,
Holding a Club, Seen from the Front, Male Nude Unsheathing a Sword, and the
Movements of Water (Metropolitan
Museum of Art)
Hercules has a
long and rich history as a symbol of Florence, as he embodied the treasured
civic virtues of strength, courage and honor. He first appears in context
with Florence on a seal from 1281, the reverse of which reads “the club of
Hercules subdues the depravity of Florence.” “His conquests over tyrants
and monsters were seen as the reestablishment of civic order that would bring
justice and liberty to the populace” [5]. Hercules also has a particular
association with the Medici family, who governed Florence for many years.
In fact, Michelangelo is known to have carved a Hercules in memory of Lorenzo
de Medici in 1494 after the great patron’s death in 1492. “Michelangelo's
choice of the Hercules image while he was sorrowing over the death of
Lorenzo il Magnifico and the Signoria's decision to remove three Hercules
pictures from the Medici Palace to the seat of the republican city
government at the moment of the fall of the ruling family can hardly be due to
coincidence” [6]. Sadly, this work has been lost. While a Classical, not a
Christian, hero, Hercules “had been Christianized as an embodiment of physical
and moral fortitude” [7].
Considering the
context of the Hercules commission is also important. At the turn of the
century, Florence was in a state of rebuilding and healing. In the previous few
decades, Florence had seen the ousting of the Medici family by the followers of
the fanatic monk Girolamo Savonarola and the bloody aftermath.
Savonarola, a former Dominican monk, and his followers espoused a reactionary
form of Christianity where they decried the mixing of Christian and Classical
culture cultivated by the Medici circle and claimed that Florence was so
sinful, that a second flood would soon arrive to deliver God’s justice unto the
wretched city. Savonarola also condemned displays of finery, especially
in women’s clothing, and hosted Bonfires of the Vanities, encouraging people to
burn works of art and objects of wealth and beauty. Among the
participants in the cult of Savonarola was the artist Sandro Botticelli, who
regretted his earlier mythological paintings of gods and goddesses; his later
works are more conservative and strictly Christian in nature. Savonarola
challenged the authority of the Pope, whom he claimed was corrupt, and was
excommunicated for his efforts. He also lost authority in Florence as a
result, and was soon arrested and hanged. Because the city was still reeling
at the time, Florentine officials likely turned to the mythological figure of
Hercules to represent strength for both the city’s inhabitants and to send a
message to other city-states that Florence was still strong as ever.
In the sketches
as well as the final presentation drawing, Hercules is presented as a figure of
strength and power as well as a humanistic endowment of virtue and
wisdom. He is an ideal hero as well as an ideal symbol of a city wishing
to tout its own accomplishments both in the humanistic and militaristic
realms. David is a biblical hero, and Hercules is in the Classical
tradition, and the planned juxtaposition of the two heroic figures would have
demonstrated the cultured aspect of this city that blended and appreciated both
the ancient and religious as well been a truly awe-inspiring sight.
In an
interesting historical twist, this sculpture of Hercules, had it indeed been
created and brought to completion by Leonardo, would likely have been paired
with Michelangelo’s David in the Piazza della Signoria as twin
symbols of Florence. “Michelangelo had sought unsuccessfully to receive the
commission to complete the pendant to his own David” [8].
After Leonardo failed to complete the commission it was given to Baccio
Bandinelli, who completed the work between 1525-34.
Interestingly,
this instance of the planned pair of heroic Florentine figures was not the only
planned meeting of the masters in Florence. In the same decade both
Leonardo and Michelangelo were commissioned to paint glorious frescoes in the
Florentine government building. These two works, Leonardo’s Battle
of Anghiari and Michelangelo’s Battle of Cascina, would
have competed brilliantly as well as serve the city’s purposes both culturally
and militaristically. Two of the finest artists ever seen, both in the
employ of Florence, creating works that glorified her strength in battle and
her inner virtue? It must have been quite the windfall for the officials
who commissioned these works. Alas, the frescoes were abandoned and the
cartoons lost to posterity. These planned masterpieces, however, were
quite influential at the time, and thus are known to some degree through bits
and pieces of sketches and preparatory drawings by the masters, and of copies
of copies of planned sections created by eager young art students.
The planned pair of sculptures likely was meant to serve a similar purpose as
the murals, namely to glorify the city. Sadly, of the four commissioned
masterpieces, only Michelangelo’s David lives to tell the
tale.
The presentation
drawing I discovered was drawn in silverpoint and depicts the planned sculpture
from a frontal view. In the tradition of presentation drawings, the work
is highly finished and lacks any kind of pentimenti.
Presentation drawings at the time were usually done in silverpoint, as these
drawings were meant to be complete visualizations rather than sketches in
easily alterable chalk. The visual equivalent of a sort of contract, they
were taken quite seriously by the patron, once approved, and were expected to
be followed closely. Leonardo would have learned silverpoint as part of
his workshop training and is known to have made many drawings in the
medium. This conception was clearly a fully realized idea and it is
treated as such. Compositionally, it appears to be a sort of combination
of earlier sketches such as the ones in the Metropolitan Museum of Art as
described by Bambach. It bears a strong resemblance to the frontal
view in the museum collection drawing, yet as in the rear view study, Hercules’
head is bare. Hercules stands, legs spread apart in victory, naked and
powerfully muscled, with the skin of the Nemean Lion at his feet, and with a
club in his hands in an attitude similar to that depicted in Leonardo’s earlier
rough sketches. His bearded face, turned sharply to his right as in the
earlier drawings, bears a noble and courageous expression, one that surely must
have pleased Leonardo’s patrons, who were seeking to glorify the city of
Florence with such a heroic figure. Attached to one of his legs is an
indication for a tree trunk, much like the one in the David, which
would have been used for stability in the marble figure. The twisting of
the shoulders and head, juxtaposed with the stability of the legs, implies a
hint of movement in the figure. The nuance and skillful line work and
shading of the figure, including the typically Leonardesque tufts of hair in
the hair and beard of the figure, the expert display of anatomical knowledge,
as well as the clearly left-handed strokes, which angle from the bottom right
to the top left, all provide evidence for the attribution to Leonardo. In
addition, the use of sfumato, or the blurring of the edges of
shadows, aid in this attribution. In contrast to Michelangelo’s toned yet
slender David, this Hercules is burly, covered with
rippling muscles. Where David is the epitome of a
focused yet relaxed potential energy, his body turning in contrapposto, Hercules
is tense and bristling with barely suppressed force as he stands over the lion
skin, a symbol of his strength and victory. His powerful body is filled
with energy. Based on the characteristics of the drawing, I am confident
in its attribution to the master himself.
"Presentation Drawing".
“The Overseers have chosen for the
magnificent figure of a Hercules,
carved in white
Cararra marble to match maestro Michelangelo Buonarroti of Florence’s David, to
be made by the maestro Leonardo da Vinci, son of Ser Piero da Vinci. The
Hercules should be nine braccia in height and finished to the
finest detail.
“The work shall
be completed within the period of two years from a month from today, with the
salary being 20 broad gold florins to be paid to the maestro on the month each
month. The Overseers are thus also bound to supply and provide men and
any such tools as needed by the maestro. And after the period of two
years the Overseers shall judge the quality of the figure, though we have
little doubt of its promise as the maestro is honored to produce this
work. The Overseers shall judge where the finished work should be placed
to match the earlier figure.”
The contract
appears to have several faded signatures near the bottom of the sheet, one of
which appears to be Leonardo’s. The other signature belongs to Piero
Soderini, who was an influential Italian official at the time and friend to
both Michelangelo and Leonardo. It was Piero Soderini who commissioned
the great artists to create the never-finished Battle of Anghiari and Battle
of Cascina. It is also reasonable to expect that he would have
played a role in the commissioning of the Hercules.
Together, the
Hercules presentation drawing and the work’s official contract fill in the
missing gap about this never-realized sculpture; they help paint a fuller
picture of Leonardo’s oeuvre. They help to provide a new dimension to
Leonardo as a sculptor, an oft-overlooked aspect of his artistry. The
drawing can confidently be attributed to the hand of the master based upon its
merit as well as the context surrounding the commissioned work at the
time. This find helps to establish Leonardo more firmly as a sculptor,
even if none of his planned works can be seen today. This work also
demonstrates Leonardo’s understanding and use of Classical mythology in
conjunction with the political purpose the Hercules would have served for his
city.
[1]: Gary Radke
and Martin Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci and the Art of Sculpture.
Exhibition catalogue. (New Haven: Yale University Press), 2009, 26.
[2/3]: Irma
Richter and Thereza Wells ed. Leonardo Da Vinci’s Notebooks. (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1952, updated 2008): 194.
[4]: Carmen
Bambach, ed. Leonardo da Vinci, Master Draftsman. (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 542.
[5,
7]: Virginia L. Bush, “Bandinelli’s Hercules and Cacus and
Florentine Traditions”, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome (1980).
[6]: Leopold D. Ettlinger, “Hercules
Florentinus.” Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz (1972):
120.
[8]: Dr. Allen Farber. “Baccio
Bandinelli, Self Portrait, c 1530.” SUNY Oneonta, http://employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/arth200/artist/bandinelli.htm
I assume this got an A... Quite an outstanding piece of historical and artistic analysis of a fictional piece of artwork :)
ReplyDelete