Click here for Italian version
Antoine Ch. Quatremère de Quincy
Lettere a Miranda (Letters to Miranda)With writings by Edouard Pommier
Edited by Michela Scolaro
Minerva Publishers, 2002
Part two
Go back to Part one
The Republic of the Arts
Antiquity
Greece
Go back to Part one
 |
| Art works seized by the French Army during the 1796-1797 Italian campaign Guido Reni, The massacre of Innocents (Bologna, Nationa Art Gallety) Source: Wikimedia commons |
To the theory of repatriation, Quatremère
replicates with an enigmatic expression: "The Spirit of conquest, in a
Republic, is entirely subversive of the spirit of freedom" (p. 121). These
are the political motivations that led him to speak out against the
requisitions. In fact, according to the testimony from the Letters, that policy is part of a reasoning that should have been
developed by Miranda, while more specifically artistic arguments in nature belonged
to the French critic. We do not know if Miranda ever wrote anything about it.
His archive, in essence, has been lost.
But the Letters
are enough to understand - says Pommier - that the type of freedom referenced by
Quatremère is not (of course) the same freedom which the members of the
Convention talk about. It is the same freedom that lives in the Chart of
fundamental rights; it is a universal freedom, which does not include the
prevarication of a people to another, and which results in Parliament control
and in a Constitution. To the contrary, the freedom of the revolution, in 1795,
is a totalitarian and nationalist freedom, based on the use of weapons and, of
course, on the right of conquest.
It is no coincidence that - perhaps in a rhetoric
way, but in direct continuity with the tradition of the Enlightenment of the
eighteenth century - the French critic begins, first of all, by affirming the
existence of a republic of the arts and sciences: "In fact, since a long
time as you know, arts and sciences form a republic, in Europe, whose members -
bound together by the love and the search for beauty and truth, which are their
social compact - tend much less to isolate themselves in their respective
homelands than to bring their own interests together, from the so valuable point
of view of a universal brotherhood. This happy feeling [...] cannot be
suppressed even by those bloody quarrels that push nations to tear each other together.
[...] The spread of Enlightenment made this valuable service to Europe: there
is no longer a nation that can receive from another the humiliation to be named
as barbaric. [...] It will be as a member of this general republic of the arts
and sciences - and not as a citizen of this or that nation - that I will
discuss this interest that all parties have to the preservation of the whole.
What is this interest? It is the one of civilization, of the enhancement of the
means of happiness and pleasure, of the advancement and progress of education
and reason, of the improvement, finally, of the human species. [...] The one wanting
to claim a sort of exclusive right to (and exclusive privilege of) education
and its means would soon be punished for this violation of the common property,
because of barbarism and ignorance. [...] Let us agree on the mere possibility
of injury which would be caused to general education in Europe by the displacement
of the models and the lessons which nature, by its almighty will, has placed in
Italy, especially in Rome. You will also agree on the fact that the nation making
itself guilty to Europe (and which would help making Europe ignorant) would
also be the first to be punished by the ignorance of Europe itself, which would
fall upon itself"(Lett. I, pp. 170-172 ) [7]. Very clear words: Quatremère
is a cosmopolitan enlightener and rejects the nationalist drift of the Revolution.
 |
| Art works seized by the French Army during the 1796-1797 Italian campaign Caravaggio, The deposition of Christ (Vatican City) Source: Wikimedia commons |
If there is a common ground upon which the
republic of the arts is based, this consists of antiquity. Actually, all
Quatremère’s theses develop themselves having antiquity as paradigm. We are in
the very core of the neoclassical climate (and Winckelmann is expressly cited
as the father of the science of antiquity). "It is impossible that this increasingly
ample fireplace of antiquity lights would not throw a light, shortly, which
would be unknown to those who have come before us. [...] I do not think to err,
if I predict that – among all the causes of revolution or regeneration, which
may affect the arts – the most active one, the most able one to produce effects
of an entirely new order is the general resurrection of that people of statues,
that world of ancients, whose population increases every day "(p. 178). Of
course, Quatremère alludes to the rediscovery of antiquity that began with the
excavations of Pompeii and Herculaneum and dominated the second half of the
eighteenth century. "That world, which neither Leonardo da Vinci nor
Michelangelo nor Raphael has ever seen, or of which they had only seen the
cradle, must exert an extraordinary influence on the study of the arts and the
genius of Europe" (idem).
Rome and the theory of context
However, the indispensable condition to make
sure the world of the statues can exercise all its influence on the genius of
the arts is that they remain where nature has determined that they would be
preserved: Rome. And here finally appears the theory of context. Nature itself
wanted that Rome would be the place of choice of art. It is not possible, it is
not desirable, and it is not useful to dismember the heritage located in Rome,
to take it elsewhere and to disseminate it around Europe. The damage caused by
looting cannot be compensated by anything useful for the looter. And here the
Frenchman disputes the proposed model as final hoarder of the seized masterpieces:
the museum. The idea of a museum conceived by Quatremère is quite different from
the collection of works of art taken individually and shown on the model of a 'Chamber of Wonders'. Let us read
together: "It is possible to transfer completely all other species of public
deposits of education: that of Rome’s antiquities could not be copied but in part;
in its entirety, it is immovable. [...] The real museum of Rome, the one of
which I speak, is indeed made of statues, giants, temples, obelisks, triumphal columns,
baths, circuses, amphitheatres, triumphal arches, tombs, stuccos, frescoes,
bas-reliefs, inscriptions, fragments of ornaments, building materials,
furniture, tools, etc. However, it is equally composed of places, sites,
mountains, streets, ancient roads, of the respective positions of the ruined
city, its geographical relations, the relations between all objects, memories,
local traditions, still existing habits, comparisons and contrasts that you cannot
do but in the location itself "(Lett. II, pp. 182-183). Here is the
irreplaceable nature of the context. Any artwork can be transportable, the context
cannot. "What artist has not experienced in Italy that harmonic virtue among
all art objects and the sky illuminating them; and the countryside serving
almost as the setting for them; that sort of charm that beautiful things
communicate to each other, that natural reflex which models of the different
arts receive, standing one in front of others, in their native country?
"(Letter IV, p. 195). The removal of the masterpieces is therefore to be
avoided; the masterpieces must stand next to all the other works, even next to those
of a lower grade, just to give the opportunity to understand the context and
make comparisons; the understanding of the beauty is not correct (and it is
indeed distorted, and therefore harmful), if it ignores the context. The museum
of Quatremère, therefore, is a widespread museum, made of light, colours,
environments, traditions. It is an open-air museum, it is Rome, and, in a
similar way, it is each of the local realities of Italy, each expression of a
school painting with its own characteristics. The museum being prepared by the revolution
cannot be anything else but a deposit of many art works, perhaps even
masterpieces, but all devoid of any connection with reality, and then mute.
 |
| Art works seized by the French Army during the 1796-1797 Italian campaign Raphael, The Madonna of Foligno (Roma, Vatican City) Source: Wikimedia commons |
Greece
Quatremère, of course, is well aware of the
weak points of his arguments. One for all: the place of origin of those statues
is not Rome, but Greece; they arrived in Rome either by right of conquest, or
because of trade agreements. "How much the artists regret that those
treasures of sculpture cannot be compared with the temples of Greece, with the
monuments of Attica! [...] It is there that sky, land, climate, nature forms,
uses, building styles, games, festivities and clothes, would still be in
harmony with their ancient guests. It is here, if it were allowed to advocate a
shift of ancient sculptures, where the decision of an artist would restore them.
[...] Rome has become for us what Greece used to be a time to Rome. Well! What did
Cicero say, the most gentle friend of the arts of his time, when bought statues
in Greece? These things, he said, are
losing their value in Rome. Here there is not enough relaxation to enjoy them. Business
distraction makes viewers indifferent to all these joys, which require – in
order to be heard – the rest and the philosophical quiet of Greece. And
Cicero spoke not only for scholars of Rome [...]; but he felt that the beautiful
things he had seen in Greece, in Rome did not seem so beautiful “(Letter IV, p.
196).
Modernity of Quatremère
Whom to give a reason to? To the idea of an encyclopaedic
museum or the one of a widespread museum? It is certainly not the case here to
take a position. Moreover, Michela Scolaro says accurately, in her
introduction: the French critic arouses in us a surge of sympathy (and
bitterness) which is the same we feel vis-à-vis Denon, when he tries with any
method and argument to prevent the dismemberment of the Louvre in 1815 and the
(partial) return of the requisitioned works to their respective homelands. What
is clear is that the theory of context is the basis of modern protection of
artistic heritage. And basically (recalibrating things on the basis of
modernity) what Quatremère raises is the debate that fills pages and pages of
our newspapers today: Where to exhibit the Riace Bronzes? Whether to return the
Parthenon marbles to Greece? Whether to exploit the tendency of event-type of
art exhibitions or to take the less rewarding but more useful path of an exhibition
as an expression of a research stream? In short, we are all children of
Quatremère, the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. If there is a point
that is not convincing in the wholehearted appeal of the French critic, if
anything, is to propose a vision of the world as a result of millenary-old historical
events-old, but lacking any future dynamic. The open-air museum involves the
idea that the social, civil and commercial context of a city will never change.
That of Quatremère is an identity choice, but totally devoid of the idea that
the organization of a society may present different dynamics at later dates.
Rome is perhaps a wonderful aquarium, on which one has to worry about changing
the water in due time. Nevertheless, the emotional strength of the writing is
undoubtedly compelling.
 |
| Art works seized by the French Army during the 1796-1797 Italian campaign Federico Barocci, Christ's Circumcision (Paris, Louvre Museum) Source: Wikimedia commons |
Quatremère vs. Gaspard Monge
Let me conclude by making a brief comparison
between the Letters by Quatremère and
those which, in the same period, Gaspard Monge, French mathematician involvedin the seizure of Italian art, wrote to his wife from Rome. The two (of course)
hated each other. Monge writes to his wife that the Paris court was wrong, when
it acquitted the French critic of all charges of conspiracy for the coup of
1795. He should have been executed, instead. Beyond the different literary
genre (Quatremère’s letters are fictitious; those of Monge have a really
private nature), I do not believe that there may be any more appropriate
comparison to show how the two coexisting worlds in France were really far apart
as contrasting antipodes from each other. Of course, the subject of the dispute
is Rome.
Quatremère:
"Long
before Leo X, Pope Nicholas V, the main lover of the arts ever, had conceived
the idea of restoring ancient Rome in all its buildings: this gigantic idea
[...] was however a dream of the most ardent and passionate imagination for
good things; but that project, unfeasible regarding the buildings of the Roman
Empire, we saw and we see it accomplished everyday regarding the monuments of
art. Every moment, thanks to the care and the encouragement of the government
of modern Rome, sees some precious fragments rise from the ruins of ancient
Rome. [...] You are also aware how many times you got amazed – together with me
– about the fact that, at the centre of Europe, the government of Rome - with
so meagre finances - spends for the arts more than all other governments
combined, both by researching and restoring, in such an expensive way, hidden
and mutilated art masterpieces of the ancients, as well as by building up sumptuous
galleries to contain those. Their magnificence and splendour attest to Europe
the honour that here is given to the beautiful things, as well as to those who
go to visit or study them "(Letter II, pp. 176-177)
Gaspard Monge [8]:
"... I was flabbergasted when I saw in what
state of brutishness is forced to live a people ruled by a government that is
based on imposture and that, since ten centuries, survives only thanks to
subsidies from Christian nations. The ruins of ancient Rome, however, are
magnificent; compared to them, however, the imbeciles who inhabit this city exhibit
a sense of being extraneous equal to that which, relatively to the pyramids of
Egypt, demonstrate the poor Mohammedans, who do not even know who erected them.
The Forum, the place where the Roman people expressed their will, the theatre
of the great passions of extraordinary men; the Forum, successively enriched by
the emperors with beautiful monuments [...], well! The Forum is now called Campo vaccino (literally: the camp of
the cows), name of course worthy of the activity that takes place here: the
cattle market. [...] Rome, my dear friend, is nothing but a mummy, whose vital
spirit has died a long time "(Rome, 29-30 July 1796, pp. 67-68) And again:
"When we will have completed our mission, no one will take note of it
anymore, and nobody will be even less able to remember the number of the pieces
that we will have taken"(Rome, August 2, 1796, p. 70). Sad to say, but
(except for the absolute masterpieces) it is exactly what happened.
NOTES
[7] Of course, the fact that Quatremère, an ardent
monarchist, speaks of the existence of a republic of the arts has no political
significance. The term 'republic' is here understood in the sense of 'common
space of freedom and comparison'. Similarly, the awareness of the existence of
a transnational community is far from being a political federal project. Nation
states are not challenged. Indeed, in the letter II, it seems Quatremère
confers a positive value to their existence in the case of Italy: "The
division of Italy into several rival states, has contributed to multiplying
both the artists and the art works: [...] they have produced the different
schools, among which reigned the keenest emulation, both in terms of the size of
the endeavours as well as of the diversity of manners or imitation procedures
"(p. 175).
[8] See Gaspard Monge, Dall’Italia (1796-1798), (From Italy), edited by Sandro Cardinali e Luigi Pepe, Palermo, Sellerio, 1993
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento