Judith and the tassels

Unknown artist, Linen embroidery, Judith with the Head of Holofernes, 1608, Half-linen, linen, silk, gold and silver threads, 60 x 71 cm, Swiss National Museum, Zürich, CH

It is definitely embroidery, but … why?

I can’t imagine wearing it as a scarf  (“Oh, How lovely that looks around your neck!”)

I can’t envision as a placemat (“Just set your plate right here over the gaping stub of the neck … Don’t worry about the stains.”)

I can’t see it as a kerchief for a bedside table (“Don’t worry about a thing, dear.  Lay your spectacles on the kerchief and your scabbard by the bed, and then rest your heavy head on the pillow.  I won’t leave you … “)

I suppose it’s just a … warning notice?

 

Judith, delighted and disturbed

After tackling some of the artwork of Judith that is unclear – both literally and figuratively – it is comforting to return to a classical, straight-forward version of Judith and Holofernes, isn’t it?

Tommaso De Vivo (1787–1884), “Judith cutting off the head of Holofernes,” c. 1800, oil on canvas, 298 x 187 cm, Museo Dell’Appartamento Storico Del Palazzo Reale, Naples, IT

 

Although this appears to be a typical depiction of a conflicted Judith (“Should I or shouldn’t I attack this drunken lout and then butcher him? Let me think for a moment. I mean, it’s not like I do this every day”), there are two elements that are worth noting – one delightful and one disturbing.

Delightful:   The maid in the shadows to the left, keeping watch outside the opening of the tent.  Someone needs to be paying attention and she seems like the one to be practical.

Disturbing:  What IS the large cylindrical object in the upper right corner? I know we are all trained to see inappropriate images in simple cartoon characters these days – and yes, it appears to merely be a quiver of arrows that goes with the large bow.  But if Disney Studios can get into trouble with innocent underwater mermaid castles, then the unusually large and prominently displayed metallic sheath of arrows is alarming .   Maybe the maid should be paying attention to the other side of the room?

 

Judith is sketchy

Here are three of the most notable works by French painter William Laparra …

William Laparra, “Head of a girl in a green turban,” 1912, Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts. Paris, FR

William Laparra, “Girl in a Turban,” 1919, Musée de la Piscine, Roubaxr, France

William Laparra, “La piscine de Bethsaida (Pool of Bethesda),” 1898, Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Art, Paris, FR

… and here is Judith.

William Laparra (1873 -1920), “Judith and Holofernes,”  (c.1900), oil on cardboard, 33 x 41 cm, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Bordeaux, FR

 

William Laparra (1873 -1920), “Judith and Holofernes,”  (c.1900), oil on canvas, 33 x 41 cm, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Bordeaux, FR

 

Can we safely assume that these were preparatory works to a more complete composition of Judith showing Holofernes’ head to the Bethulians? And can I note the similarities to composition to “The Pool of Bethesda”?

Oddly, at age 22 Laparra won the Prix de Rome –  the French scholarship of the Academy of Fine Arts for young artists to train in Italy- with the painting of Bethesda.  The sketches of Bethulia are not dated, but the prone figure in the lower left is remarkably similar to Laparra’s winning artwork.  Thus it appears that at some point in his career he planned to retry the composition – moving it from New Testament with an angel as the central figure to Old Testament with Judith as the center of attention.

I am so disappointed it was never completed. The implications are that Judith would have been a beauty. And possibly would have sported an elaborate turban.

 

Judith wraps it up

Tapestry.  Wasn’t that an album by Carole King I played until the grooves were almost smooth?

You can tell I am getting to the end of my list as the quality of the images devolves.  And the quality of the commentary devolves,too.  Ah, well … I will keep trying.

But I leave the woven art behind with this witty title: “Judith leaves besieged Bethalie slice the head of Holofernes and singing in front of the Assyrians a sublime hymn.”  Which may have lost something in the translation – but the sublime hymn has me in stitches.

 

Unknown artist, “Judith leaves besieged Bethalie slice the head of Holofernes and singing in front of the Assyrians a sublime hymn.” 1600s, Aubusson tapestry: Wool, Silk; Tapestry Weave 275 x 490 cm, auctioned by Versailles Auctions Perrin-Royere-LaJeunesse, 09 November 2003, Lot 115, Versailles, FR

Unknown artist, Aubusson tapestry: Wool, Silk; Tapestry Weave, Musée Départemental de la Tapisserie, Aubusson, FR

 

BWUAHAHAHAH!! Has me in stitches!!

 

Judith weighs in

This topic is getting heavy.  About one hundred pounds of heavy.

Unknown artist, “Judith Dining in the Camp of Holofernes,” 17th century, Flemish tapestry: Wool, Silk; Tapestry Weave, 343 x 318 cm, Palace of the Legion of Honor, San Francisco, California, US

 

This tapestry of Judith and Holofernes having a bite to eat is about 11 feet tall and 11 feet wide – and probably weighs about 100 pounds.  Not to mention it is over 400 years old.  As I look at this and the other weavings, I began to wonder:  how do you move one of these tapestries across the world without damaging it?

I found a very detailed article from the Metropolitan Museum of Art on the subject here.  Let’s just say: to travel thousands of miles by land and air, it requires:

• a really big plane – which can only take-off from one of three airports in Europe
• to carry a really big crate with a really big tube
• to arrive in the US where it sits to acclimatize to the temperature and humidity of its new (temporary) home
• before being gently transported to the exhibition space where it is unrolled
• then carefully attached with heavy-duty Velcro (!!) to a long wooden slat with hooks
• which are threaded with thin copper wires to secure the tapestry to the wall
• after it has been lifted by a rope and pulley system from the floor to the wall.
• All very, very carefully.

I will never sneer at a tapestry again.  It might fall on me.

 

Judith hangs with Jael

Serial posting.  Why didn’t I think of that before?

Yesterday began with trying to unravel the mystery of an unidentified tapestry.  Which led to the history and geography of tapestries.  Which led to the connection to four other tapestries with Judith as the subject. Which today leads to the south of France … but not the sandy, sunny south.  The mountainous, snowy south.

In the heart of the Pays d’Asse is the ancient city of Senez, located in the Alpes-de-Haute-Provence.  The present Romanesque church dates 1176 but was nearly destroyed in the French Wars of Religion (1562–98).  It was rebuilt in 1750, to add an episcopal palace next to the cathedral – and after completion of the restoration Monseigneur de Ruffo Bonneval (bishop of Senez 1783-1784) presented eight tapestries in celebration.  All but one were Aubusson tapestries in wool and silk,  representing different biblical scenes from the Old Testament – among them Judith holding a sword in one hand (the head of Holofernes in the other) and Jael a hammer in hand.  What a pair!

Unknown artist, “Judith holding the head of Holofernes.” Aubusson tapestry: Wool, Silk; Tapestry Weave, Cathedral of Senez, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, FR

 

Unknown artist, “Jael holding a hammer.” Aubusson tapestry: Wool, Silk; Tapestry Weave, Cathedral of Senez, Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, FR

 

 

… which leads me to wonder:  how many grooms had second thoughts about their weddings when they stood before these wall hangings in the cathedral?

 

(1) L’inventaire Général du Patrimoine Culturel, Les objets mobiliers  – les tentures: Les tapisseries des Flandres 

 

 

Judith unravels

Sometimes things just don’t work out the way you planned.

This lovely tapestry was supposed to be in the collection of the Palais des Beaux-Arts, Lille, France – but it is not there.  I am almost 100% sure it is not there because the France Ministry of Culture is meticulous about cataloging every work of art in collections of public and private museums of France in a central online database, Joconde – and this tapestry is not listed.

Unknown, “Judith holding the head of Holophernes,” 17th century, Flemish tapestry, ???; photo by Herve Lewandowski

Here are the pieces of the puzzle with which I have to work:

• a tapestry
• of Judith
• in the Palais des Beaux-Arts, Lille OR in Lille OR in France
• in a French museum thus in the online collection of Joconde
• in a museum that is not in France
• photographed by Herve Lewandowski

And thus far – it’s all a dead end.  Unless I get up the nerve to contact the photographer.

If I can not locate the tapestry, at least I can figure out the style and possible date, perhaps? To satisfy my insatiable curiosity?  The pieces of the puzzle with which I have to work on that task:

• columns laden with fruit and tulips
• center title in the upper border “Fortitudo Judith” – and then something I can’t read which is probably the name of the artist.

A little about the history of tapestries:

One of the most expensive and time-consuming crafts, tapestry-making only truly flourished in Europe from the Middle Ages onwards, at the hands of French and (later) Flemish weavers. This growth of tapestry art coincided with the era of Romanesque and Gothic art – both part of a religious revival, when architecture, sculpture and stained glass were also harnessed by the Church to illustrate Biblical stories to illiterate congregations.

The finest European tapestries are considered to have been made by the Gobelins Royal Factory in Paris, while major tapestry-making centres existed at Arras, Tournai, Brussels, Aubusson, Fellitin and in the Beauvais factory in Paris. (1)

Arras had been the center of activity, but after it was plundered by Louis XI in 1447,  tapestry makers fled to Flanders and created a new center of European woven textiles.  That would include the city of Lille, which identifies itself as “Flemish” in the geographical and historical sense.  The style of tapestries in Flanders went from “mille flour” in the 15th century to significant improvements in perspective and composition with a wide range of colors and highly ornate borders in the 16th century. The Flemish painter Bernard van Orley (1492-1541) was most well-known for combining late Gothic realism and Renaissance idealism with the art of the tapestry medium.

But this Judith does not resemble the borders created by Orley. Making comparisons across various tapestry designs, the fruity column design appears to  be the brain-child of either Michiel Coxie (1499–1592), Jacob Jordaens (1593–1678), or Justus van Egmont (1601–1674).  All three men were primarily painters, who moved to Brussels and designed various tapestries in their spare time.  Wait a minute … that sickly pink color reminds me of Joachim Wtewael (1566-1638) from Judith in Jeopardy.  So at least I am in the right time period.  And that will have to be enough … for now.

In the meantime, I did locate four other tapestries with Judith as the subject!!  Stay tuned tomorrow …

(1) Art Encyclopedia, Tapestry Art: Belgian Tapestries.  a must-read if you need a 101 on tapestries

 

 

Judith and the stoney stare

I love the face above the relief, don’t you?

Unknown, “Judith and Holofernes,” 1500s, Stone carving in cloister, Jerónimos Monastery, Lisbon, PT; photo by Paul Dykes

Jerónimos (aka St. Jerome, nee Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus) was the inspiration for the hermit movement in 14th-century Italy, the catalyst for number of religious orders.  (Who knew there was a hermit movement?)  Jerome was best known for outlining the lifestyle for Christians living in urban “melting pots of cultures” – especially the lives of women, based on close patronage with devout female members of prominent Roman senatorial families.

Social and religious upheavals after his peaceful death contributed to growth in the hermit lifestyle, and ultimately to the founding of the Hieronymite Order in Iberia (read carefully: not Hermaphrodite).  Through connections with the Portuguese monarch Manuel I and with the Pope’s consent, construction of the monastery and church for the Hieronymite Order began in 1501 and was completed 100 years later – in a style known as Manueline architecture.  Manuel I selected the Hieronymite monks to occupy the monastery “to pray for the King’s eternal soul and to provide spiritual assistance to navigators and sailors who departed from the port of Restelo to discover lands around the world. This the monks did for over four centuries until 1833, when the religious orders were dissolved and the monastery was abandoned” (1). (So altruistic, no?) After falling into disrepair, the monastery was restored from 1860 to 1880, and Vasco da Gama’s remains were transferred there to celebrate the starting point of his first journey around Africa to India and back.  It is now a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

The original cloister where Judith is found was designed to be an “agreeable and serene place for prayer, meditation and leisure for the monks.” (2).  The two stories, with vaulted ceilings and quadrangular layout, reflect the Mauline style – richly ornate combinations of –

• religious symbols (images from the Passion, among others)
• royal imagery (the Cross of the Order of Christ, the armillary sphere, the royal coat of arms)
• naturalist elements (ropes and plant-inspired motifs that cohabit with late Mediaeval imagery of fantastic animals)
• maritime elements and objects discovered during naval expeditions

And to the left of the entrance between the third and fourth arch, there sits Judith, mounted on a clamshell – a ship’s wheel on one side and a decapitated head on the other.  (Oh, you can’t see her?  Squint real hard.  Not yet?  Then you will probably have to enlarge the photo like I did.  But trust me, it’s her.)  She looks rather bored.  But consider: she only had monastic hermits to look at for 230 years.  Your face would probably turn to stone, too.

 

(1) Jerónimos Monastery, http://www.wikipedia.com

(2) Government of Portugal, Department of Cultural Heritage,  Mosteiro dos Jerónimos,

 

Judith signs her name

Bonifazio de’ Pitati (Veronese) (1487–1553), “Judith with the Head of Holofernes,” 1500-1553, Oil on panel, 24 x 9 cm, National Trust, Ascott Wing, near Leighton Buzzard, Buckinghamshire, UK

Poor Bonifazio de’ Pitati.  He trained under a master – Palma il Vecchio – as other Renaissance artists did in Verona and then went to Venice to run a large workshop.  He produced many notable works:

• Dives and Lazarus, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venice
• The Finding of Moses, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, 
• Christ and the Adulteress, National Museum, Warsaw.
• Holy Family with St. John the Baptist, Wawel Castle, Kraków

But then he forgot to sign his name and other painters received credit for his work.

• Repose in Egypt (also ascribed to Paris Bordone), Pitti Palace.
• Sibyl with the Emperor Augustus (also ascribed to Paris Bordone).
• Finding of Moses (formerly attributed to Giorgione}. Milan. Brera.
• Finding of Moses (formerly given Modena. Gall. Adoration of the Kings. to Giorgione).
• Holy Family (formerly called a Titian or Bordone, Colonna Palace, Rome.

This painting of Judith is clearly by … Not So Fast. This work of art is actually labeled “style of” Bonifazio de’ Pitati.

EXCUSE ME??  “Style of “ or “School of” or “Follower of”  – what the neck does that even MEAN??  Is there a rule that governs the ability to say “Style of “ or “School of” or “Follower of”?  Or can I just slap that on any old juntique store find?  Apparently not – because according to the people who insure them

“High quality works produced in a specific period that cannot be directly connected to an individual artist by a signature or significant provenance, though created in the same style of an artist, are considered school or genre paintings.” (1)

Poor Bonifazio de’ Pitati. Now even unknown artists are cashing in on his fame.  If only he had remembered to sign it.

Or maybe he simply was humble and did not want to get a Big Head …

 

(1) Erin Hollenbank, “Valuing art with no signature: The claim case of Maxfield Parrish,” PropertyCasualty360, July 8, 2014

 

 

Judith and the Circumcision

Don’t jump to conclusions about this story. No – Judith did not circumcise Holofernes. Or anyone, for that matter.

This is about her neighbors.

It starts at the Emaus Monastery in Prague, Czechoslovakia – home to the largest Gothic painting to the north of the Alps. Anyone know the largest painting south of the Alps? Me neither … but back to Emaus Monastery.  The monastery was founded by the holy Roman Emperor Charles IV in 1347 and consecrated on Easter Monday in 1372 – named after the gospel about the disciples going to Emaus, which was the reading for that day.   In present day, the monastery has –

• Suffered a tragic history (1941 – occupied by Nazis who sent the abbot and his five monks to death in Dachau, 1945 – damaged by an Allied bomb, 1959 – taken by Communists who tortured the prior to death and sent the anti-communist monks to “detention monasteries”)
• Experienced a revival (1967 – the damaged frontage was replaced with two intertwining concrete spires “that stretch heavenwards like a pair of wings”, 1990 – the Benedictine Monks returned after the fall of Communist regime, and 2003 – the Church of Our Lady reopened)

 

Emaus Monastery in Prague, Czechoslovakia

 

During all that time, the Gothic cloisters have remained intact, containing the most significant surviving works from the early Prague school of painting.   Dating from 1360 to 1370, the cloisters were decorated with salvation events from the Old and New Testaments – depicted in 70 scenes over a total of 26 wall panels. These frescos have sustained damage and decay but are among the few from this time period that remain outside of Italy, Denmark and Sweden (1)(2)

Emaus Monastery, Prague, CZ – South wing of Cloister

 

Not only have these works of art survived time and the assaults of war, but also being converted into a pub with a bowling alley and musicians for entertainment in the 16th century by Abbot Matthew Benesov. Because every monastic order needs a bowling alley with a bar, right?

But we are here for Judith.  Unfortunately due to time and damage, Judith appears to be in discussion with a lump – but by this time we can fill in the blanks.  The other famous decapitator who took Judith’s place in biblical story telling – David – is depicted on the right.  Above them is the Madonna on a serpent – a story that is not familiar to me but apparently was a popular allegory in Medieval times depicting the Mother of Christ with her foot on a dragon or snake to show her defending her Son from demons.(3)

Emaus Monastery, Prague, CZ – South wing of Cloister: Madonna on a serpent; Judith with the Head of Holofernes; David beating Goliath.

 

Then we get to the entire panel devoted to circumcision.  I understand that in Genesis 17, God makes a deal with Abram that:

1. Change your name to Abraham and your wife will change her name from Sarai to Sarah
2. You and your descendants make me the One God
3. In return, you get to have lots of kids – some will be kings – and they get the whole land of Canaan forever
4. And one more thing: every male who is eight days old must have their foreskin cut off as a sign  of the covenant, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner – or they get kicked out of the Covenant

I don’t have a son and I don’t have a medical or theological position on circumcision of infant males – or adult males for that matter.  But it is obviously an important part of the Bible and important to the Benedictine monks.

Emaus Monastery, Prague, CZ – West wing of Cloister: Circumcision of Christ; Circumcision of Abraham; Zefor circumcised his son.

 

The thing I cannot figure out:  who is Zefor?  I got nothing on Zefor.  I even tried to google Zephor and Zephyr.  Unless the painters just needed to fill a space and said “Hey, anybody have a baby boy lately?  Mind if we fill up this empty spot with you and your kid? Zefor – you raised your hand?  You cool with that?”

Do you have a better explanation?

 

(1) http://www.tripwolf.com, Emmaus Monastery
(2) http://www.praguecityline.com, 10. Emmaus, Abbey of the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Jerome (Emauzy)

(3) Peter Bloch,  Representations of the Madonna about 1200.  The Year 1200: A Symposium.  François Avril, editor. Dublin: Cahill & Company for The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1975.

Special thanks to the Sciapoda project – an educational nonprofit that aims to provide as many resources online to study life in the XIV century – for the photography..