Letteratura artistica: ENGLISH VERSION François Lemée, Traité des Statuës, (a cura di Diane H. Bodart e Hendrick Ziegler)

Translation by Francesco Mazzaferro
CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION

François Lemée
Traité des Statuës
(The Treatise on Statues)

Edited by Diane H. Bodart e Hendrick Ziegler

2 voll., Weimar, VDG, 2012

Isbn 978 3 89739-5

Front-cover of the Treatise on Statues bt François Lemée
Source: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

Critical edition of the Treatise of Statues, published by François Lemée in Paris in 1688. The edition is organized in two volumes: the first presents the facsimile edition of the work, and the second the comments and a rich commentary to the text. This publication is the result of the collaboration between France and Germany. It was guided by study groups at the Hamburg and Poitiers Universities, led respectively by Diane H. Bodart and Hendrick Ziegler. This is why part of the work is in two versions, French and German. When it is not, intervenes to help the database which is available to the purchasers of the work. To better explain: the text of the treatise is - as mentioned - in facsimile, and then in French, but is transcribed in German on the Internet. The same applies to all those apparatuses (for example the 'Glossary of monuments') that are presented in print only in French (which thus remains the reference language for those not consulting the database).

An apologetic Treatise

The Treatise of Statues is not a treatise on sculpture. It does not examine issues related to techniques, does not distinguish between sculptures in bronze and marble, does not include the lives of the artists; indeed, it does not even mention any modern artist apart Bernini (and indeed, only passing). But it still has a special importance because it deals with public monuments and the theoretical problems associated with them: whether it is right or not erecting them, who can do it, how they should be erected, and when they encroach into idolatry, and so on. It is a work of apologetics. It is written two years after the erection of the colossal bronze statue built in honour of Louis XIV in the Place des Victoires in Paris. We should then briefly recap the events that led to the creation of the monument.

Place des Victoires in an old print
(with the monument dedicated to King Sun)
Source: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

In 1686 Louis XIV was at the peak of his power. In foreign policy, he had prevailed on an alliance composed of Austria, Spain and the Netherlands and obtained significant territorial conquests by the Peace of Nijmegen (1679); in domestic politics, he had, in fact, defeated the resistance of the French aristocracy and imposed a kind of check also on the local ecclesiastical hierarchy. On the other hand, with the revocation of the Edict of Nantes (1685), he had prohibited any other religion that was not Catholicism, thus taking drastic measures against the Huguenots, which were driven from the country.

And it is exactly of that year the erection of the monument in the Place des Victoires. Officially, it was a gift; a tribute to the King commissioned by one of his marshals, the Duke of La Feuillade. But it seems really impossible that the idea of erecting the work did not come from Louis himself. The statue was not placed in an already existing square. It is the place to be created to accommodate the bronze. In fact, the realisation of the entire project lasts for five years. In 1681, La Feuillade commissioned the work to the sculptor Martin Desjardins. At the end, the group consists of a base with four bas-reliefs and four slaves chained. On top of the base, one colossal gilded bronze statue of Louis XIV is crowned by the Goddess of Victory while trampling a deer, the symbol of the Triple Alliance (Austria, Spain and the Netherlands) defeated at the Peace of Nijmegen. It is estimated that the entire sculptural group had a total of 12 metres (forty feet) high. The statue was also illuminated at night by four colossal lanterns.

Of course, we described the work on the background of the chronicles and the prints of the time. The statue of Louis XIV was one of the major victims of the iconoclast wave against all symbols of the monarchy unleashed by the French revolution. The statue was melted between 11 and 13 August 1792. Ten days later Louis XVI will be arrested, in early September, and France will officially become a Republic. Some parts of the monument, however, were saved and have been handed down to the present day. These are the four slaves who were chained to the base of the sculpture group and which are now in the Louvre.

The dejection of the statue in Place des Victoires
Source: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

The controversies of the time

The gigantic dimensions of the statue, its iconography, the lavish opening ceremony immediately attracted controversy: controversy originating from foreign countries, informed by their ambassadors, which believe that the representation of the defeated powers in terms of slaves chained at the feet of the Sun King was highly offensive and in violation of the (unwritten) rules on the celebration of a victory; controversy in the Protestant world, accusing the work of idolatry (do not forget that the base included the dedication to Louis XIV as 'Viro immortali' (to the immortal man)); but also on the home front-side, where doubts (even if only whispered, for obvious reasons) about the gigantism of the entire operation, which would show the excessive vanity of the sovereign, are not infrequent.

A lawyer at work

For all these reasons Lemée intervenes with his treatise (it is not proven, but it is extremely likely that it was commissioned by the Duke of La Feuillade). Lemée is not a sculptor, an expert or an art critic. He is a lawyer. And, as a jurist, he traces the history of public sculpture in the world to show that the statue of Louis XIV not only fits perfectly in the tradition without violating any limit, but rather it is the culmination, the perfection, the non plus ultra of the genre.

The four slaves chianed (or The four nations defeated)
Paris, Louvre
Source: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

The arguments of Lemée are of great interest, as well as of great interest are the two introductions by the editors in the second volume of this modern edition. We will quote above from that of Bodart, or Le Traité des Statües de François Lemée: pour une théorie des monuments publics (The Treaties of Statues by François Lemée: for a theory of public monuments) (pp. 17-39). Bodart firstly shows that the author of the treatise used the De statuis illustrium romanorum (On the statues of illustrious Romans) by the Swedish Edmund Figrelius (1656) as a source. It is impossible not to notice that the structures of the two works are substantially similar: "an accumulation of thematic examples from ancient history, classical sources, from the Bible and the Fathers of the Church, that Lemée enhanced by modern examples [...] but also, and this is really new, of exotic ones [...]. Thus, to cite an example, in the section dedicated to the sculptures of gigantic proportions, Lemée compares the size of the Colossus of Rhodes to that of the "Colossus of Meaco» [...] that is the Daibutsu (the Great Buddha) of bronze in ancient Kyoto. [...]. The building that Lemée builds in this manner, referring to Figrelius, has the purpose of highlighting the history of the virtuous statuary, whose peak corresponds to the most recent case of the sculpture of Louis XIV in the Place des Victoires "(p. 23).

Respond to the accusations of having sinned of pride is very easy. Since the times of the ancient Roman the practice of representing authorities and people who hold a public office is a tribute to their virtues. The real problem, if anything, is when (and here the text degenerates in flattery and pride) to be represented are figures that do not deserve it, petty individuals, minor characters. But it is not obviously the case of Lemée - all committed to his apologetic program – who cannot but point out how Louis XIV represents the pinnacle of morality, justice, and wisdom.

The link with the Treatises of the Counterreformation

Much more subtle and more complicated is the reasoning to deal with the accusations of idolatry that originates from the Protestant world. More serious allegations, let us not forget, as the Bible identifies the episode of the golden calf, created while Moses was on Mount Sinai, as the origin of idolatry. The sculpture, therefore, has a direct relationship to the biblical witness to the world of idols. Here Lemée’s answer is two-fold and refers to texts with which the Counter-Reformation had responded to the accusations by the Protestants. The author inspires himself above all from the De Historia sanctarum imaginum et picturarum (History of the holy images and pictures) by Johannes Molanus (1594) and especially from the Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre e profane (Discourse on sacred and profane images) by Gabriele Paleotti (1582). It is so that the author explains how the biblical prohibition to erect statues (and idols) "was necessary at the time ante gratiam [note of the translator: before Christ], because the Jewish people, as well as the Gentiles, had not yet been illuminated by the light of truth, being therefore prone to confuse a representation with the thing represented. Such a prohibition, however, had no reason to exist anymore, because Christians, enlightened by revelation, did not run the risk anymore of making such a gross mistake and were therefore immune from idolatry. [...] A second key point concerned the acts of worship vis-à-vis the images - uncovering the head, kneeling, bringing gifts, submitting prayer, touching the statues in reverence -. [...] Following the same principle, Lemée justifies the homage paid to the statues of the principles, in particular the monument of Louis XIV on the day of the inauguration at the Place des Victoires, as a gesture intended not to the sculpture as such, but in virtue of its resemblance to its model"(pp. 24-25).

The four slaves chained (or The four nations defeated): Spain
Source: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

But to Lemée does not escape another fundamental argument by Paleotti, which the cardinal had used at his time to justify the erection in Rome’s Capitol of statues dedicated to the Popes, as a broad popular demonstration of affection towards them. Is there a right to be represented? "The criterion of distinction is clearly virtue: as statues or pictures give a tribute by itself to the models shown, it would not be convenient to attribute such a tribute to a character without merit or even struck by vice [...]. In this view, if the portraits of the pagan emperors are to be banned, those of Christian principles do not raise objection whatsoever and are, on the contrary, absolutely recommendable. Now, under this moral interpretation of the portrait, the analysis of Paleotti about the statues of Christian principles is of an unprecedented political lucidity and completely unexpected. The cardinal, in fact, makes a bonfire of all those talks supporting public monuments, which were based on the notions of honour, merit and gratitude: in his view, these arguments have a value only for the Gentiles, to safeguard the originally virtuous use of the statues from the danger of flattery and pride. [...] The question of good or bad use of public monuments has no rationale for Christian principles, because the statue, in the same way as the royal insignia, refers to their "public figure", the dignity of their function originating from a divine right. [...] Paleotti comes to define public statuary as an instrument of power subject to the jurisdiction of the prince "(pp. 26-27).

The 'right to the statue' as a sovereign prerogative

And it is to this Counterreformation-friendly vision by Paleotti that Lemée adapts himself: not only there is no sin of pride or idolatry in the monument to Louis XIV, for the power of the reproduced model and because Christians have known the absolute truth and therefore do not run the risk of being misled down the wrong path. But the king also holds a real 'right to the statue', or 'an absolute jurisdiction on any public monument built in his own realm. The French jurist also brings a new and crucial tool to the building of this expression of power: exactly because the image of the prince that is carried by the monument, the statue defines the belonging of a territory to a particular sovereign [...]. Herewith, the royal monuments [...] draw on a larger scale the geography of power, of which Lemée leaves us, moreover, a European map, drawn with numerous examples of modern statues that feed his arguments "(p. 28).

The foue slaves chained (or The four nations defeated): Holland
Fonte: http://voyageursaparistome2.unblog.fr/page/5/

The public monuments, then, as an expression of absolute power. To think deeper, this is the formalisation of a theory that - before being aesthetics - is essentially political, and it has enjoyed incredible success over the centuries, not only in France, and even not only in Europe. It contains in itself the justification for their violent overthrow, that regularly occurs when regime changes. Not the art-piece is destroyed; it is destroyed the power and every visible trace of it. A circumstance of which also the author of the treatise is aware. It is not by chance that he closes the treatise with a chapter on the demolition of the monuments themselves, except to conclude that "the monument of the Place des Victoires is in no danger, at the present and in the future, thanks to the virtuous and exemplary character of his model, Louis XIV, to protect the statue from its main enemy, the inconstancy of the people "(p. 130). 104 years later - as mentioned above - the statue was torn down and melt down during the French Revolution.