Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo
Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo
Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo
Cleveland Masterwork Series 2
Michael Bennett
The Cleveland Museum of Art in association with D. Giles Ltd: 2013
ISBN 978-1-907804-38-0
The Cleveland Museum's publication: Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett, considers questions connected with a bronze statue, possibly from the great Greek marble and bronze sculptor Praxiteles' workshop. The most important of these are
That the Cleveland Museum of Art is now calling the statue "Apollo the Python-Slayer" provides a spoiler for the first question, although like the other two questions, there is no irrefutable solution.
The bronze creature that accompanies the modern-war-ravaged artifact -- including an arm forcibly yanked off the body -- has webbed feet like a lizard, but a face and coiling body like a snake.
So far, so good.
Apollo is renowned for having destroyed the terrible python at Delphi. But that python was huge and dangerous. That this funny little thing is called a python seems a stretch. Maybe a baby python, although Bennett also aptly refers to it as a hybrid creature (see: chimera).
Related questions are:
About Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett
What is left of the weather and war-ravaged ancient Apollo the Lizard-Slayer/Python-Slayer statue group attributed to Praxiteles includes a bronze base with an area that probably held a thin tree and the statue of Apollo with his weight shifted in the direction of the tree. The hand on the ripped-off left arm appears to have been encircling something, but what?
Bennett thinks a sapling, since nothing larger would be required to support the tiny lizard-python.
Bennett describes the group with great love, art historical training, and poetic detail:
One of the eyes has been replaced, but the right is ancient inset stone. A master's care detailed the cuticles of the nails and coiffed the individual locks of hair woven in and out of a headband. The lips were inlaid with copper. Tests showed that the material was appropriate for the time frame of 370-330 B.C., the period when Praxiteles would have worked. Except the base, tests showed that the other parts could all have been made at the same time. Corrosion on the base line up with markings for placement of the expected objects, but the base appears to be a later addition.
Bennett realizes nothing has proven that it is a genuine Praxiteles, but it was created by a great Classical Greek craftsman of the middle to end of the fourth century or, perhaps, the early third, making it potentially the work of Praxiteles, his sons, or his workshop.
About Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett
Mirroring concerns in Whose Culture?, edited by James Cuno, Michael Bennett addresses the question of whether the Cleveland Museum should house an artifact with a murky history. He writes:
Bennett does not believe modern political groups are fair representations of the ancient cultures that created such artifacts. He notes how much damage has been done to artifacts in situ in the wake of war and mentions that it was the totalitarian Mussolini who was responsible for Italy's nationalization of antiquities. Bennett laments the treatment of art collectors as pariahs. In sum, he believes he is serving mankind by saving and preserving ancient art for the public now and in the future.
The publisher's website provided me with a complimentary review copy of the book.
Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo
Cleveland Masterwork Series 2
Michael Bennett
The Cleveland Museum of Art in association with D. Giles Ltd: 2013
ISBN 978-1-907804-38-0
- "[Praxiteles] also made the youthful Apollo, known as the 'Sauroctonos,' because he is aiming an arrow at a lizard which is stealing towards him." -- Pliny Book 36.4 of his Natural History [See Pliny on Praxiteles' Apollo the Lizard Slayer]
- "The implication made us almost giddy as we considered the possibility that this figure was the very one that Pliny the Elder saw in the first century AD." -- Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett, p. 64.
The Cleveland Museum's publication: Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett, considers questions connected with a bronze statue, possibly from the great Greek marble and bronze sculptor Praxiteles' workshop. The most important of these are
- What is the significance of the name sauroctonos (lizard-slayer),
- Whether it is actually Greek bronze from the fourth century/Hellenistic era, and
- Why the Cleveland Museum should continue to house the artifact if authentic; connected with which, the book also describes the recent, foggy history of the sculptural group featuring the adolescent Apollo.
That the Cleveland Museum of Art is now calling the statue "Apollo the Python-Slayer" provides a spoiler for the first question, although like the other two questions, there is no irrefutable solution.
The bronze creature that accompanies the modern-war-ravaged artifact -- including an arm forcibly yanked off the body -- has webbed feet like a lizard, but a face and coiling body like a snake.
So far, so good.
Apollo is renowned for having destroyed the terrible python at Delphi. But that python was huge and dangerous. That this funny little thing is called a python seems a stretch. Maybe a baby python, although Bennett also aptly refers to it as a hybrid creature (see: chimera).
Related questions are:
- Why would the great archer god, slayer of the formidable python use his strength and skill to overcome a puny thing like the animal in this group? (This animal corresponds with what are clearly lizards on the marble Roman reproductions of whatever was the original Praxiteles the Lizard-Slayer, suggesting that those who actually saw the statue decided it was lizard. Of these copies, the most famous is at the Louvre.)
- Why would Praxiteles create such an homage to the god? Is it a spoof?
- Are we sure that the youthful Apollo is about to kill the creature?
About Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett
What is left of the weather and war-ravaged ancient Apollo the Lizard-Slayer/Python-Slayer statue group attributed to Praxiteles includes a bronze base with an area that probably held a thin tree and the statue of Apollo with his weight shifted in the direction of the tree. The hand on the ripped-off left arm appears to have been encircling something, but what?
Bennett thinks a sapling, since nothing larger would be required to support the tiny lizard-python.
Bennett describes the group with great love, art historical training, and poetic detail:
"The hair mass is rolled up in a form called a krobylis, the top of which is tucked back under the hairband. Such complex treatment of the hair, with completely logical registration of individual strands and locks passing behind, then reappearing above the headband, is masterful."
One of the eyes has been replaced, but the right is ancient inset stone. A master's care detailed the cuticles of the nails and coiffed the individual locks of hair woven in and out of a headband. The lips were inlaid with copper. Tests showed that the material was appropriate for the time frame of 370-330 B.C., the period when Praxiteles would have worked. Except the base, tests showed that the other parts could all have been made at the same time. Corrosion on the base line up with markings for placement of the expected objects, but the base appears to be a later addition.
Bennett realizes nothing has proven that it is a genuine Praxiteles, but it was created by a great Classical Greek craftsman of the middle to end of the fourth century or, perhaps, the early third, making it potentially the work of Praxiteles, his sons, or his workshop.
About Praxiteles: The Cleveland Apollo, by Michael Bennett
Mirroring concerns in Whose Culture?, edited by James Cuno, Michael Bennett addresses the question of whether the Cleveland Museum should house an artifact with a murky history. He writes:
"Most people, I believe, would agree with collectors and museums that these privately owned antiquities should be saved and preserved, and not treated as somehow tainted only because we will never know their ownership histories in full."
Bennett does not believe modern political groups are fair representations of the ancient cultures that created such artifacts. He notes how much damage has been done to artifacts in situ in the wake of war and mentions that it was the totalitarian Mussolini who was responsible for Italy's nationalization of antiquities. Bennett laments the treatment of art collectors as pariahs. In sum, he believes he is serving mankind by saving and preserving ancient art for the public now and in the future.
The publisher's website provided me with a complimentary review copy of the book.
