Journal - Comune di Monteleone di Spoleto

Recommendations

Info

26 i.28 detail of the monteleone chariot as reconstructed in 1903. Photograph taken in 1990. The bronze boss and the kouros were not placed where the traces of them could still be seen. The nail holding the boss in place was a modern addition. i.29 The monteleone chariot after recent reconstruction, top view G. Reasons for disassembling the chariot in 2002 Soon after the reconstructed chariot was displayed in 1903, doubts were expressed that it did not match the original vehicle, and they were periodically reiterated in the archaeological literature. 62 The opportunity to assess the extent of the inaccuracy arose about twenty years ago, when the exhibition “antichità dall’umbria a new York” was being prepared, and i was invited to write the essay “The monteleone Chariot: From discovery to restoration” for the catalogue. 63 on that occasion, thanks to the generous cooperation of the depart ment of Greek and roman art, i was able to examine the chariot in detail. 64 The reasons for a new reconstruction are detailed in that publication and can be briefly summarized. The two side panels (cats. 3a and 4a) needed to be raised slightly in order to place the bosses (cats. 5 and 6) where the traces of them could still be seen (Figure i.28), at the edge of the front panel (cat. 1a). The lower friezes (cats. 11 and 12) had to be moved back, and two smaller rectangular panels (cat. 15) had to be inserted behind the larger side panels (Figures i.7, i.8). The sides of the u-shaped floor frame had to be extended to form the two finials at the sides of the rear running board, which must have been curved and not straight (Figures i.22, i.29). The lion heads (cats. 7 and 8) did not belong to the wheels, where they were incorrectly mounted as axle finials, but were originally positioned under the feet of the small kouroi (Figures i.7, i.8), as indicated by traces on the lion heads (Figures V.44, V.47). moreover, the deformed lion head belonged under the kouros with boots; in ancient times the feet of this youth had been damaged, together with the underlying head, and the subsequent ancient restoration replaced the boots where
the feet had been. The traces of the two crouching rams (cats. 13, 14), which Balliard placed at the base of the main panel (Figure i.30), were clearly visible at the front of the lower friezes (Figures V.52, V.56); it was also evident that their hindquarters were trimmed in antiquity to fit the underlying reliefs (Figures V.60, V.61). The boar protome (cat. 2) was originally placed just below the deer’s curved back on the front panel, as the outline on the surface of the bronze confirms (Figure i.31). in 2002, the happy moment arrived when work on the monteleone chariot could begin. This undertaking was part of the reinstallation of the galleries of Greek and roman art that was completed in 2007. 65 in 2001, i participated in the formulation of an official agreement between The metropolitan museum of art and the Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche’s istituto di Studi sulle Civiltà italiche e del mediterraneo antico (iSCima), for the purpose of reexamining and restoring the chariot. Work began in march 2002 in the Sherman Fairchild Center for objects Conservation. i served as overall coordinator. The principal specialists in the Con servation department were Kendra roth and Frederick J. Sager, with the collaboration of dorothy H. abramitis. James H. Frantz, then lawrence Becker were the successive department heads. my curatorial colleague was Joan r. mertens, with dietrich von Bothmer and Carlos a. Picón as successive heads of the department of Greek and roman art. H. A century of studies i.30 detail of the monteleone chariot as reconstructed in 1903. Photograph taken in news reports in the italian and american press are dis- 1990. When the pole was attached the boar protome was not placed where the outline had been chased by the craftsman on the central panel (see Figures i.31, V.1). cussed above (i.C, i.d) and in the pertinent endnotes. The history of the scholarship on the monteleone chariot was skillfully and clearly presented by marisa Bonamici in 1992. my consideration here will highlight only the most significant contributions. The publication history of the chariot appears on page 121. it is unnecessary to retrace the studies on the typology of the chariot prior to the catalogue of the 1997 exhibition “Carri da guerra e principi etruschi,” which explains why the vehicle is classified as a parade chariot actually used by its owner in life. 66 From the first notices in 1903, however, all authors agree that, given the fragile bronze revetment, the chariot could have been utilized only for ceremonies and parades. 67 also at the outset — as well as recently, with the discovery of other bronze-clad vehicles — some commentators speculated that it was a specially built funeral chariot or used for votive purposes. 68 The shortcomings of this view will be shown in Section iii.d. many hypotheses have been advanced concerning the iconography of the chariot, from generic scenes to depictions of the myths of Herakles and achilles. 69 The 1964 study by roland Hampe and erika Simon has proved fundamental to subsequent research. Hampe and Simon go beyond ducati’s insights, arguing that the minor friezes were part of the overall program and establishing that, i.31 detail showing the placement of the boar protome as recently restored The Monteleone Chariot I: Introduction 27
Page 1 and 2: M e t r o p o l i ta n M u s e u M
Page 3 and 4: M e t r o p o l i ta n MuseuM Journ
Page 5 and 6: Contents The etruscan Chariot from
Page 7: M e t r o p o l i ta n MuseuM Journ
Page 10 and 11: i.2-i.4 The monteleone chariot afte
Page 12 and 13: i.5. diagram of the monteleone char
Page 14 and 15: i.7 The monteleone chariot after re
Page 16 and 17: 16 i.9 The site of monteleone di Sp
Page 18 and 19: i.10 Plan of the gravesite of the m
Page 20 and 21: i.18 Pieces of the chariot and othe
Page 22 and 23: 22 in that city he promptly cabled
Page 24 and 25: i.24 The monteleone chariot during
Page 28 and 29: 28 among surviving works of ancient
Page 30 and 31: ii.2 The plaster cast used to encas
Page 32 and 33: 32 a b c ii.8 Bronze decoration on
Page 34 and 35: ii.11 Substructure of parade chario
Page 36 and 37: ii.15 reconstruction of the shock-a
Page 38 and 39: 38 century B.C. it seems that the s
Page 40 and 41: 40 inserted the tenons of a curved
Page 42 and 43: iii.3 The box of the monteleone cha
Page 44 and 45: iii.4 montage of photographs showin
Page 46 and 47: iii.6 diagrams of the central panel
Page 48 and 49: 48 fied the female figure as earth,
Page 50 and 51: 50 outside wheel of achilles’s ch
Page 52 and 53: iii.15 iii.16 iii.17 details of the
Page 54 and 55: iii.29 details of the toolmarks on
Page 56 and 57: iii.41 Toolmarks on the inner decor
Page 58 and 59: 58 attested from excavations) devel
Page 60 and 61: iii.43 aryballos in the form of an
Page 62 and 63: 62 that reached the metropolitan mu
Page 64 and 65: 64 6. The head of the eagle at the
Page 66 and 67: V.1 Central panel of the monteleone
Page 68 and 69: 68 V.4 Central panel, right profile
Page 70 and 71: V.8 Central panel, detail of the Bo
Page 72 and 73: V.11 Boar protome V.12 detail of th
Page 74 and 75: 74 V.19 Proper right tusk of the bo
Page 76 and 77:
V.23 Proper right panel and related
Page 78 and 79:
78 V.26 edging of the proper right
Page 80 and 81:
80 V.30 Proper left panel and relat
Page 82 and 83:
82 V.33 edging of the proper left p
Page 84 and 85:
V.37 right nailed boss, front V.38
Page 86 and 87:
V.46 left lion head, front 86 V.47
Page 88 and 89:
88 V.52 Frieze on proper right side
Page 90 and 91:
V.56 Frieze on proper left side, fr
Page 92 and 93:
V.62 Bronze fragments as reconstruc
Page 94 and 95:
V.65 eagle head from the end of the
Page 96 and 97:
V.68 lion head from the proper left
Page 98 and 99:
V.74 Proper left wheel V.75 X-ray o
Page 100 and 101:
100 V.77 location of ivory fragment
Page 102 and 103:
102 for much of their length — an
Page 104 and 105:
104 V.86 Fragment of ivory decorati
Page 106 and 107:
106
Page 108 and 109:
108 aPPendiX: TranSCriPTion oF SiGn
Page 110 and 111:
110 minuti dettagli sulla disposizi
Page 112 and 113:
112 found in the nearby small valle
Page 114 and 115:
114 14. emiliozzi 1992, p. 102, fig
Page 116 and 117:
116 dall’uso [sic!] e sopravvive
Page 118 and 119:
118 39. Serra ridgway 2001, p. 352.
Page 120 and 121:
120 suggests that they were all mad
Page 122 and 123:
122 reFerenCeS Åkerström, Åke 19
Page 124 and 125:
124 1972 Buccheri a cilindretto di
Page 126 and 127:
126 emiliozzi, adriana 1991 “il C
Page 128 and 129:
128 laureti, Pasquale 1904 “la bi
Page 130 and 131:
130 Welt, vol. 1, part 1, Von den A
Page 132:
132 Bruwier, marie-Françoise Tilli
show all

Journal - Comune di Monteleone di Spoleto

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?