Andean Artists in Colonial Quito: - College of William and Mary

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Andean Artists in Colonial Quito with downcast eyes, clearly reflects the “highly polished encarnación” that is described by Palmer (Figure 3). However, her overall facial features remain similar to Pedro de Mena’s Mater Dolorosa, undoubtedly placing the sculpture in the seventeenth century. Pauca and Monga have continued the use of a furrowed brow and downcast eyes with her anguish implied through her gentle clutching of the cloth. The only difference between Spanish and Quiteñan sculptures is proven in this example through the use of the highly polished encarnación. Without the encarnación, Pauca and Monga’s sculpture might well be confused with contemporary Spanish examples. The similarity of the sculptures suggests that these native Andean artists were not only as capable as the Spanish sculptors, but they were also able to create their own artistic conventions that set their work apart from that of Spanish artists. Through the analysis of a contemporary Quiteñan sculpture of the Dolorosa by an unknown, native artist, it is clear that there is little difference between peninsular Spanish and colonial Quiteñan depictions of the Sorrowing Virgin beyond the highly polished surfaces of the Quito School (Figure 4). A late seventeenth-century Dolorosa from the indigenous Capilla de Cantuña at the Franciscan Monastery adapts the furrowed brow while maintaining the downcast eyes (Figure 5). The similarities certainly suggest that Pauca and Monga’s Dolorosa is from the same time period, portraying the local artistic trends of late seventeenth-century Quito. Additionally, their Dolorosa exhibits the Quiteñan stylistic tendency of the highly polished encarnación; the application of this technique makes the work Quiteñan. Anonymity and the Placement of Pauca and Monga among the Artists of Quito Webster suggests that the “anonymity” of Andean artists is a result of insufficient research in the notarial records of Latin American urban centers. 43 Undoubtedly, if more systematic research were to be undertaken, notarial records might well reveal the names of the “unknown masses” as principally Andean artists. From her research with notarial records, Webster proves this point by including a list—which is in no way comprehensive—of numerous colonial Andean artists previously unrecognized for their work. 44 Specifically, she cites the Andean surname “Paucar” as a distinguished family line of woodworkers in Quito with Inca ancestry. 45 The surname Paucar, a variation on the spelling of Pauca, obviously includes Nicolas Pauca and 49
50 The Monitor - Winter 2011 his relatives, a family line of Andean master sculptors. Alfredo Costales Samaniego mentions a native, Luis Guamán Paucar, who excelled as a sillero and/or guarnicionero, a saddler or a harness-maker, working closely with the carpenters’ guild, possibly even working with a relative, Nicolas Pauca. 46 Webster also demonstrates that the surname “Monga” is associated with “a long familial tradition of local Andean woodworkers,” as noted with the commission for the Capilla de Santa Ana in the Cathedral. 47 In fact, one Cristóbal Monga was named by the City Council as maestro mayor of the sculptors’ and carpenters’ guilds in both 1718 and 1719; no mean feat, and surely an honor for any artist of the colonial era. 48 Costales Samaniego discusses the same artist, noting that he is listed in the City Council Acts as a carpintero escultor. 49 With this evidence and documentation of their status as maestros escultores, it is clear that Pauca, Monga, and their families all played important roles in the woodworking profession in Quito, yet today they remain unrecognized. As mentioned above, it appears the continued anonymity of Andean artists in Quito is partially due to the late establishment of a formal guild system for sculptors and carpenters in 1690 and 1692, respectively. 50 Prior to the establishment of a formal guild system, documentation of artistic activity occurred less frequently. Webster points out that a review of Quito’s notarial records shows some 40 Andean masters of the building trade for the seventeenth century alone. 51 It is important, therefore, to note that the commissions for Pauca and Monga, dated 1693 and 1699, occurred virtually on the cusp of the official establishment of both the sculptors’ and carpenters’ guilds. To receive important commissions so early on under the newly-established guilds of sculpture and carpentry likely signifies that these two Andean artists were both well-known and prolific prior to these commissions, previously completing works under informal and most likely oral contracts. The idea that these artists were previously successful is suggested by earlier documents—particularly two notarial records dating from 1670 and 1677. 52 Both of these documents detail ventas de casas, or the sale of houses. A document of 1670 states that Francisco Monga and his wife, María Criolla, purchased a house from Augustina Criolla for one hundred and seventy pesos. 53 Furthermore, the house had an upper room and a tile-covered roof. 54 Compared to the many Quiteñan houses with
Page 1 and 2: Andean Artists in Colonial Quito: T
Page 3 and 4: 44 The Monitor - Winter 2011 commis
Page 5 and 6: 46 The Monitor - Winter 2011 the sa
Page 7: 48 The Monitor - Winter 2011 commis
Page 11 and 12: 52 The Monitor - Winter 2011 nomina
Page 13 and 14: 54 The Monitor - Winter 2011 Figure
Page 15: 56 The Monitor - Winter 2011 1693,

Andean Artists in Colonial Quito: - College of William and Mary

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?