Journal - Comune di Monteleone di Spoleto

112
found in the nearby small valley known as Chiuse “small, terracotta
vessels and bronze idols” and that his friend antonio rotondi
found at the top of monte Pizzoro “five or six bronze putti five
centimeters high and with open arms, the hands of which end in
points like feet. They were very crudely made; the extremities had
no detail to them, and the head can be recognized only because
it is a little wider than the torso.” These are votive rather than
funerary objects and from a different period, as may also be the
case with the eagles, dogs, and rams that ended up among the
objects identified as from the Tomb of the Chariot.
34. This decision was made, at luigi a. milani’s suggestion, during the
deliberations of the Commissione Centrale per i monumenti e le
opere di antichità e d’arte, which was convened november 6 –
13, 1906 (see Bollettino d’arte del Ministero della P. Istruzione 1
[1907], p. 35).
35. Pasqui 1909, p. 487.
36. minto 1924a and 1924b respectively.
37. all the evidence is in agreement, from morini 1904, p. 8, no. 2, to
Pasqui, who in 1907 included them in his plan of the tomb (minto
1924b, fig. 2; Figure i.11).
38. at the time the chariot was expatriated Barnabei was a deputy in
Parliament after having served as director General of antiquities
and Fine arts from 1897 to 1900 (see Barnabei and delpino 1991,
p. 31).
39. The monteleone chariot was first called the “Biga of norcia,” both
because norcia is the largest town in the Corno Valley and
because Benedetto Petrangeli, the first person to acquire the
bronzes, lived there. See Barnabei 1904, n. 1.
40. after the collapse of the bell tower at Saint mark’s in Venice Barnabei
(1904, p. 645) said that “everyone was consumed by a single
thought, everyone had only one fear, the fear that other bell towers
would collapse. it seemed as though all the most famous bell towers
in italy were at the point of falling down. every day telegrams
arrived from all over italy calling on the government to hurry, after
such negligence, if it wanted to avoid other irreparable damage.”
41. Chase 1907 and 1908.
42. minto 1935. a letter written by angiolo Pasqui on July 6, 1907
(archivio Centrale dello Stato, rome; see appendix) gives an
idea of the confusion that at the time surrounded the provenance
of the tripods.
43. mario la Ferla (2007) mentions a series of photographs from that
period. This information should be approached cautiously because
the author writes as if the chariot were already, at that time, reconstructed,
or worse, as if it had been discovered with its substructure
intact. Furthermore, the large oval table in Figure i.18 would
not have been suitable furnishing for a stable.
44. most of the components of the chariot appear to be in the following
condition: 1) the side panels are separated from the central
panel and from the kouroi, which do not appear in the photo; 2)
the front panel appears intact, in contrast with its earlier fragmentary
condition described by G. e. rizzo (appendix, document 1);
3) the four figural fragments making up the two lower friezes are
visible; only one of the two concave roundels can be seen, while
the two small, angular sheets seem to be missing (see cats. 11 and
12); 4) the crouching rams (cats. 13 and 14) appear to be detached
from any support; 5) the boar protome, without its ears, and the
eagle belonging to the pole are both isolated; none of the bronze
sheets covering the pole are recognizable; 6) the two pieces of
bronze sheeting from the yoke are separate; 7) only one of the
wheels is clearly shown, complete with the nave and the lion’s
head, incorrectly attached as an axle finial.
45. among the most precious objects that are missing are the two attic
little master cups, which were not thought to be worth much on
the antiquarian market given the wide availability at the time of
Greek pottery.
46. leach 1991, pp. 411ff., nos. 25, 26.
47. ludwig Pollak’s memoirs (1994, pp. 132, 148, 166 [for our chariot],
234) give some information about the dealings of Commander
ortensio Vitalini, an intermediary for King Vittorio emmanuel iii
who was especially interested in coins but also in ancient bronzes,
sculpture, and gold. For the correspondence relative to the sale on
the Paris market of the chariot and other objects from monteleone,
see musée royal de mariemont 1967, pp. 101, 103, fig. 123; and
Tillet-Haulot 2005, pp. 118 – 19.
48. The price seemed high to mariemont in Belgium; see Van den
eynde 1970, p. 156 and n. 85; Verbanck-Piérard 2002, p. 322 and
n. 60. For suspicions about authenticity i refer to a letter from the
italian ambassador in Paris to the italian minister of public instruction
of January 28, 1903 (in the archive cited in the appendix),
from which we learn that the london firm of Pitt & Scott, which
was interested in acquiring it, wanted the ambassador, who was
still ignorant of the discovery, to verify that the objects were genuine
and their exportation legal.
49. most specifically la Ferla 2007. in reality it was Vitalini himself
who informed Cesnola that the bronzes were about to arrive in
Paris (mma inventory notes).
50. Cesnola is referring to the parliamentary questions posed by Felice
Barnabei, who had become a deputy in Parliament (see Barnabei
and delpino 1991, pp. 30 – 31, on his career). The texts of these
questions were published in Corona [2000], pp. 60 – 69.
51. See Barnabei in Corona [2000], p. 62.
52. richter 1915, p. 29.
53. The sources of this information are the brief obituary published in
the MMAB 11, no. 8 (august 1916), p. 181, and merrillees 2010,
pp. 112 – 117, 123.
54. The restoration was undertaken by Kendra roth and included
studies of the method of manufacture, the identification of
the materials used, and its physical history, with the results of
the tests, the Xrd data, and more. my thanks to her for graciously
allowing me to publish the photographs she took.
55. an entry for currus existed in the Dictionnaire des antiquités
grecques et romaines, by Charles daremberg and edmond Saglio
(Paris, 1887), vol. 1, pp. 1633 – 43, and a list of chariots discovered in
etruscan-italic regions through 1903, as well as representations of
etruscan chariots, is accurately described in nachod 1909, pp. 43 – 71.
56. emiliozzi 1991, pp. 110, 116; Colonna 1996a, pp. 346ff. (which
refers to four horse bits associated with the find, although in reality
they are four cheekpieces for two bits); Camerin and emiliozzi
1997, no. 36; Camerin 1997, fig. 1; Buranelli 1997, fig. 2; emiliozzi
1997a, figs. 6, 7; Buranelli and Sannibale 1998, figs. 179, 184, 186.
57. Scientific American 1903, pp. 385 – 86. The fragments mounted in
this way were the only ones to receive an inventory number and
to be included in richter’s catalogue (1915, p. 28).
58. minto 1924b, pp. 147ff.; and see also page 19. They are occasionally
cited in the later literature (martelli Cristofani 1977, p. 27n54;
emiliozzi 1991, pp. 103, 113; leach 1991, p. 414; Bonamici 1997,
p. 180). The small group that was seized from the Vannozzis by the
carabinieri in 1902 (see above, page 17, note 29, and appendix,
document 2) and that eventually went to the museum in Perugia
could not be located until very recently, when they were recognized
in storage by mafalda Cipollone, who graciously informed
me that they had been found and then allowed me to see them,
with the kind permission of the Soprintendenza per i Beni archeologici
dell’umbria.
59. Furtwängler 1905; this text relates to plates 586, 587. The same
information was later published separately (Furtwängler 1913).
60. Von Bothmer and noble (1961, p. 17n47) noted his qualifications. i
found the drawings in the archives during my 2000 visit to new York.
61. The architect dalia lamura worked with me through a collaborative
agreement with the institute for the Study of italic Civilizations
and the ancient mediterranean (iSCima) of the national research
Council (Cnr).