Étiquette : king
The Cenacle of Meaux and Christian Humanism in the Renaissance
“Everything that happens daily in this country stems from a government that calls itself ‘Christian.’ For weeks, not only Jews but also thousands of faithful Catholics in Germany—and I think throughout the world—have been waiting and hoping that the Church of Christ [the Roman Catholic Church] will raise its voice to put an end to this abuse of Christ’s name. Is not this idolatry of race and state power, hammered into the masses daily by radio, a blatant heresy? Is not all of this in total contradiction with the attitude of our Lord and Savior, who, even on the cross, prayed for those who persecuted him?” 1
This quote is similar in many ways to what many Christians feel today in the face of the abuse of « religion » to justify rapacious and bloody wars presented as « just wars, » especially by prominent members of the Trump Administration, notably its Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth.
History tragically repeats itself, for this quote is not new. It comes from a letter sent to the Pope in 1933 by Edith Stein, a philosopher of Jewish origin who became a Carmelite nun, when German Catholics, a minority in this Protestant country, signed a Concordat with Hitler. The common enemy to be fought was now Bolshevism. In exchange for their silence in the face of Nazi barbarity, Hitler offered them his gracious protection.
In France, at the same time, big business, Europeanists before their time, were proclaiming: « Better Hitler than the Popular Front! »
Our good fortune today is to have a pope who raises his voice for peace and justice for all. And one can hope that his voice can give everyone the courage to stop the mad march towards war.
On Palm Sunday, Leo XIV forcefully reiterated that no one can justify war in the name of the Lord:
God « does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war. » « On the contrary, he who has turned his back on the living God, making himself and his own power a mute, blind, and deaf idol, is enslaved to death. »
In addition to the thirst for power, there is also the thirst for money, which was denounced during his trip to the Principality of Monaco.
During his first year as Pope, he repeatedly called for a reconciliation that was « disarmed and disarming. » To the « warlords » who make their power « a mute, blind, and deaf idol, » he contrasted listening to a « melody greater than ourselves » —a harmony to which we can dance when the world seems to forget even « the light. »
The arrival of Pope Leo XIV in France
In a statement published on May 6, the president of the Conference of Bishops of France confirmed what many had been hoping for for a year: although it remains to be confirmed, Leo XIV could come to France at the end of September 2026, stopping in Paris and Lourdes.
This is an opportunity for us to evoke one of the most luminous upsurges of our country, which reached its peak in 1521, with the creation of the Cenacle of Meaux by the philosopher-theologian Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (1450-1537) , at the request of his student Bishop Guillaume Briçonnet (1472-1534) .
It was not a philosophical or prayer circle. Its primary purpose was to read, study, translate, and print the Gospel in French and to train clergymen in preaching. The approach was so simple, honest, and innovative that it deeply disturbed the established political and religious powers. The Cenacle was closed after only four years, its leaders were persecuted, and forced into exile. It was only thanks to the protection of Marguerite of Navarre (1492–1549) (also known as Marguerite of Angoulême or Marguerite of Valois-Angoulême), sister of king Francis I, who embraced this movement, that its leading figures were able to escape the flames of the stake.
Renaissance Evangelicalism
For Guillaume d’Alonge, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples is
« The intellectual leader and founder of French evangelicalism, a reform movement that developed in the early decades of the 16th century, in parallel with the Protestant Reformation, with which it had important points of contact. » 2
What some call « Renaissance evangelicalism » (not to be confused with American messianic evangelicalism, a current that animates today’s warmongers) corresponds to a movement of ideas characterized by the valorization of biblical exegesis.
Unlike evangelicalism in the most common sense of the term, it does not necessarily relate to the Protestant Reformation. On the contrary, many humanists who did not wish to break with the papacy but nevertheless declared themselves hostile to ecclesiastical abuses, such as Erasmus of Rotterdam and François Rabelais, were driven by a desire for reform without schism.
While Catholics sought to eradicate them by ignoring them, Protestants have always claimed that they were one of their own.
Like Erasmus, Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples was certainly a reformer, but he never considered breaking with the Roman Catholic Church, as demanded by Luther, Calvin, and other figures of the Protestant Reformation. The Christian humanists of the Renaissance believed, perhaps naively, that by appealing to reason, the Roman Curia would eventually yield to their demands and agree to eradicate the corruption and abuses that severely plagued the institution.
Humanism
It was in Italy, with Petrarch (1304-1374) , that humanism was born. The poet began by collecting inscriptions on the old stones of Rome and continued his quest for the Ancients in manuscripts.
With his friend Boccaccio , he brought Byzantine scholars to Italy to revive the study of Greek and Latin. While the term humanist then referred to someone who, through the study of Greek and Latin , « cultivated the humanities » ( studia humanitatis ), Renaissance humanist thinkers did not renounce their Christian faith but rather sought to reconcile the two.
A very clear break with scholastic pessimism then took place. Conceiving of himself as « created in the living image of the Creator, » the Renaissance man, uomo universale, endowed with reason and free will, no longer blamed the devil. It was he who had to strive to overcome his evil inclinations. And if he fully developed his creative potential, it was above all to please the Creator by placing his life at the service of the public good rather than his personal glory.
In Northern Europe, the movement of the Brethren and Sisters of the Common Life and that of the Beguines stemmed from the conviction that the contemplative life and the active life should complement each other and not oppose each other. Each person should live « in imitation of Christ. » It was in Deventer, among the Brethren of the Common Life , that Erasmus, inspired by teachers like Rudolph Agricola , discovered Christian humanism and the « good literature . «
Greek and the Greeks
While the study of Greek penetrated Italy and the Netherlands from the beginning of the 15th century, in France, young elites jostled to attend, from 1476 onwards, the courses of a Greek exile, Georges Hermonyme of Sparta, a poor pedagogue, rapacious and with little mastery of his own language.
But, as Jacqueline de Romilly points out:
“Hermonymus had only one merit: that of being the first. The fact is that he had as students, (…) or simply through his advice, all those who were to become the glory of nascent humanism: Reuchlin was his student, Lefèvre d’Étaples said he benefited from his advice, Erasmus asked him for lessons, as did Beatus Rhenanus – and above all our patron saint, Guillaume Budé.” 4
Two other Greeks played a major role in the revival of Hellenic studies.
And first of all , Constantin Lascaris (1434-1501). A student of Jean Argyropoulos between 1444 and 1553, he arrived in the West around 1460, after being taken prisoner during the Turkish occupation of Constantinople in 1453.
After a few short stays between the Greek islands, he became tutor to Francesco Sforza’s daughter in Milan, where he began writing his grammar, the Erotemata .
An essential tool for learning Greek, the work was first printed in Milan, then published twice by Aldus Manutius in Venice.
Constantin Lascaris then went to Rome where he met the greatest protector of Greek scholars in the West and of Byzantine humanism within the clergy, Cardinal Jean Bessarion (1403-1472), Latin Patriarch of Constantinople from 1463.
Bessarion was a friend of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), with whom he collaborated in particular during the Ecumenical Council of Ferrara/Florence, convened to end the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches.
Jean Lascaris
The other Greek scholar (unrelated to the first) is Jean (Janus) Lascaris (1445-1535) , also a protégé of Cardinal Jean Bessarion who entrusted him with numerous missions, notably bringing back precious manuscripts from Mount Athos in 1492.
Although born in Asia Minor and frequenting the great figures of Italy, Lascaris entered the service of France as Louis XII ‘s ambassador to Venice between 1503 and 1508. There he joined the academy of the printer Alde Manutius (1449-1515) where scholars from the East and West met to discuss and edit the classics.
When Erasmus went to Venice to the printer Alde Manutius to publish his Adages, a masterful work aimed at popularizing all ancient wisdom, Lascaris not only offered to welcome him into his home, but also contributed to the work himself.
Erasmus, writes the Belgian historian Yvonne Charlier, feverishly composed his Adages there.
« with the help of a host of distinguished scholars, including Jean-Baptiste Egnazio, a member of the Aldine Academy, and Jean Lascaris, a Greek refugee, passionate about manuscripts and ambassador of Louis XII to Venice. »
He also worked with Lascaris, the young French student Germain de Brie.
A few years later, when Erasmus and Thomas More published Utopia in 1516, a fictional account of a people (the Utopians) who attempt to create an ideal society based on the principles defined by Plato in his Republic, they argue that they must be of Greek origin, since Lascaris « was their only grammarian ».
It was in Venice that Jean Lascaris and Erasmus together conceived the idea of a College of Languages. Being able to compare the translations of the Gospel into Hebrew and Greek was the essential condition for achieving a proper understanding of its content.
Lascaris ended his life in Rome with Pope Leo X , who in 1514 commissioned him to found the « Greek College of the Quirinal. » Erasmus, against all odds, and especially against the theologians of the Brabant university town of Leuven, opened the Trilingual College there in 1517.
Lascaris also took care of the Royal Library, which was established in Blois in 1501 by Louis XII, then moved to Fontainebleau with Guillaume Budé under Francis I.
Subsequently, at Budé’s insistence, François I created in 1530, under royal patronage, the « Collège des Lecteurs royaux, » allowing the study of Greek and all subjects rejected by the Sorbonne.
Lascaris’s close relationship with Lefèvre d’Étaples may have led to the writing that the work of the great French scholars, Budé, Scaliger, Casaubon, Lambin, Cujas, Estienne, appeared
« To be a continuation of the schools of Byzantium and Alexandria, rather than an emanation of currents coming from Italy. » 5
Hidden from Europeans for centuries, this immense heritage – one could say a vast civilization that was being rediscovered – thus made its way to the kingdom of France thanks to men such as Lascaris, whose disciples like Lefèvre took over.
Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples
Philosopher, mathematician, musicologist and theologian, Jacques Lefèvre was born around 1450 in Étaples, Picardy, and died in 1536 in Nérac (Lot-et-Garonne). He Latinized his name to Jacobus Faber Stupulensis, hence the nickname « Fabritists » given to those who adhere to his doctrine.
He studied in Paris, where he earned a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree in arts. He then entered the clergy and became a priest, though it is unknown whether he actually served in this capacity. Gentle and timid by nature, of delicate constitution, and possessing a selflessness that led him to bequeath his inheritance to his brothers and nephews in order to devote himself more freely to his studies, Jacques Lefèvre primarily studied literature and philosophy.
After completing his studies and teaching literature for a time, he developed a taste for travel. He explored parts of Europe, and it is even said that his desire to broaden his knowledge led him to Asia and Africa. Drawn by the winds of renewal that the Renaissance was sweeping across Europe, Lefèvre traveled to Italy at least twice, spending extended periods in Pavia, Padua, Venice, Rome, and Florence.
With his translation of Plato and Aristotle, Leonardo Bruni (1370-1444) provided Italy, and with it the scholarly world, with a philosophical framework. Italian humanism sided with Plato.
Aristotle was attacked for « his metaphysics which puts the particular before the general, his theology which substitutes an inactive god for Plato’s creator God, his psychology which does not dare to resolutely affirm the immortality of the soul, his morality which locates virtue not in goodness, but in the golden mean between good and evil. » 6
In 1492, Lefèvre met and discussed with Florentine Platonists and Neo-Platonists, grouped around Marsilio Ficino, his student Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Poliziano and Ermolao Barbaro.
Starting with Hermes Trismegistus, Plotinus, Iamblichus, and Cicero, this school of thought emphasized the supposed complementarity between Plato and Aristotle rather than their opposition, hoping to reconcile the doctrines of the two philosophers. Positioning himself above both camps, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola was preparing a major work, which death prevented him from completing: the Concordia Platonis et Aristoteles , which aimed to reduce all philosophies and religions to a single wisdom, naturally under the tutelage of the Vatican. Florentine Neoplatonism then exerted a significant influence on an entire generation of prelates and clergymen.
Later, in 1509, under the warrior Pope Julius II, his Neoplatonists advisors dictated to Raphael the content of the frescoes in the Stanza della Segnatura, where Pico della Mirandola features prominently. In his treatise The Ciceronians, Erasmus denounced these Neoplatonists who, instead of Christianizing Plato, used ancient philosophy to reduce Christianity to pagan barbarity.
Returning to Paris in 1495, Lefèvre became a professor at the Cardinal Lemoine college where he taught, until 1507, according to the fashion of the time, philosophy, geometry, arithmetic, grammar, geography, cosmography and music.
His first works were commentaries on Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who was often quoted but rarely read. Somewhat surprisingly, it was only after his encounter with the Florentine Neoplatonists that he decided to publish Aristotle’s writings, in the versions of the Quattrocento humanists, accompanied by commentaries aimed at restoring the philosopher’s sound understanding . Ambitious, Lefèvre conceived his Aristotelian corpus as a reaction against scholastic teaching, against which he had no words harsh enough in his prefaces.
Using the partial or incomplete translations provided by Boethius and Bessarion, he attempts to rid them of what François Rabelais called « the so filthy glosses. » At the time, he still hoped to reconcile Aristotle’s thought with the message of the Gospel.
But Lefèvre did not forget Plato . In 1499, he published the works of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, a 6th-century Neoplatonist thinker who was mistakenly considered one of Christ’s disciples. He then turned his attention to John of Damascus, Nicholas of Cusa, and the Spanish mystic Raymond Lull : authors who nourished the spiritual reflection of French Christians throughout the century. Lefèvre, the mathematician, found himself aligned with the approach of Nicholas of Cusa, for whom, as for Pythagoras, mathematics was simply the science of divine proportions.
Paradoxically, it was after reading Pseudo-Dionysius that he rejected what he had once adored, and his subsequent commentaries reveal a profound distrust of Platonism. In 1506, following his Politics, he published a summary of the Republic and the Laws , entitled Hecatonomies , the margins of which are frequently annotated with « stultitia » (foolishness) or « semistultitia » (half-foolishness). In this treatise, he grouped together the Platonic principles he approved of and those he condemned.
Briçonnet
At one point, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples got the attention of the powerful Briçonnet family.
It was a true dynasty of diplomats, builders and great servants of the Kingdom.
Guillaume Briçonnet (1445-1514) was a French royal officer and later a clergyman, known as the Cardinal of Saint-Malo. Initially a financier, he served as the general of finances for Languedoc under Louis XI.
After his wife’s death, he entered the clergy. Recommended by Louis XI to his successor, he was appointed Secretary of the Treasury. He served as Minister of State under Charles VIII and was created a cardinal by the Pope in 1495. On May 27, 1498, he crowned Louis XII in Reims.
Guillaume Briçonnet (the elder) had a son of the same name, born in 1470. In 1489, while a student in Paris at the Collège de Navarre (he was only 19 years old at the time), Guillaume Briçonnet (the younger) was appointed Bishop of Lodève in Southern France. He also became Abbot of Saint-Guilhem-le-Désert in 1493, a monastry built by one of the lieutenants of Charlemagne. .
He continued to reside in Paris for a time to complete his education, under the tutelage of flemish theologian Josse Clichtove, through whom he met Lefèvre d’Étaples and his circle. In 1495, succeeding his uncle Robert, Archbishop of Reims, Guillaume Briçonnet became one of the two presidents of the Chamber of Accounts in Paris, a position he held until 1507. Having been made a canon of the Church of Paris in 1503, he had a magnificent residence built for himself in the cloister of Notre-Dame.
Appointed abbot of Saint-Germain-des-Prés in 1507, he summoned Lefebvre to his side to promote a reform of the monks’ morals. For Lefebvre, this was a moment of truth. What becomes strikingly clear is that he never practiced philosophy to distance himself from religion; on the contrary, his quest for truth was merely a step in his journey toward God. Prudent in examining the doctrines of others, he avoided taking sides while pursuing his own reflections. Far more than from Aristotle or Plato, it was from the Gospels that Lefebvre drew his inspiration. For him, the study of Holy Scripture was to be the culmination of his work, its natural endpoint.
“In the distance,” he wrote, “such a brilliant light struck my eyes that human doctrines seemed like darkness compared to divine studies, while the latter appeared to exhale a fragrance whose sweetness is unmatched on Earth.” 8
Lefèvre wanted to draw closer to the light he saw in the distance. It could be said that he was going through a « mystical crisis. » The list of « mystical » authors whose works Lefèvre published is long. From the one he considered the most ancient of all, Dionysius the Areopagite, it extends to the most recent, Nicholas of Cusa, passing through Heraclitus, Hermes Trismegistus, John Damascene, Raymond Lull, Richard of Saint Victor, and Ruysbroeck the Admirable .
In 1509, Lefèvre published a Psalter in five languages. The choice to focus first on the Psalter was primarily pastoral in nature: he wanted to offer monks an effective tool to fully understand the content of their prayers, but also to emphasize the centrality of the direct relationship between the faithful and God.
In 1511, while passing through Paris, Erasmus met Lefèvre. Although they may have criticized each other, they deeply respected one another and shared a common commitment throughout their lives.
Lefèvre continued his offensive by publishing the Epistles of Paul (1512), which we know constituted one of the battlegrounds for the Reformation in general and for Luther in particular (« faith and works » or « faith alone » as the path to salvation).
One important point clearly aligns Lefèvre with Erasmus and distinctly separates him from Luther: his interpretation of free will. For the Picard theologian, despite the state of misery and powerlessness into which original sin has plunged humanity, we retain the capacity, however diminished, to receive the gift of grace, to open ourselves to salvation, to reject evil, and to choose good. From this stems a more optimistic and serene vision of the salvation process, truly open and accessible to all, in contrast to the somber and anguished interpretation of salvation that the Reformers reserved for a select few.
Lefèvre, publisher of Nicholas of Cusa
in the 1514 edition by Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples at Josse Bade in Paris.
Lefèvre shared his « mystical » passion with the Briçonnet family, and later with Marguerite de Navarre.
And when, in 1514, Lefèvre had the complete works of Nicholas of Cusa printed in Paris, until then only published twice in Germany, he addressed his dedicatory epistle to William’s brother, Denys Briçonnet, bishop of Toulon.
According to Noëlle Balley ,
« The most remarkable example of this cooperation between scholars is the edition of the works of Nicholas of Cusa, directed by Lefèvre, for which he had manuscripts searched for and copied by all his correspondents, thus creating a truly international collective edition. » 9
His printer was Josse Bade, a passionate Fleming from Ghent, trained by printers in Lyon. Not always rigorous, he published many humanists, including Sebastian Brant (The Ship of Fools), Erasmus (In Praise of Folly), Guillaume Budé, etc.
His son-in-law was the humanist and scholarly printer Robert Estienne (1503-1559), son of the great printer Henri Estienne (1460-1520) (the elder). Francis I appointed him, before 1539, royal printer for Hebrew and Latin, as well as for Greek from 1544.
Cenacle of Meaux
From 1518 onwards, Lefèvre’s patron, Guillaume Briçonnet, decided to take up residence in his new diocese, Meaux, 41 km from Paris. There he intended to implement a pastoral reform inspired by the theological approach outlined by the Picard humanist. At the heart of this project lay the desire, shared by humanists, to bring the essential message of the Gospel to all people, even the simplest and least educated, and thus facilitate access to the mysteries of faith, with the conviction that the intervention of the Holy Spirit could inspire the minds and hearts of the faithful.
A friend and disciple of Lefèvre, Guillaume Briçonnet resolved to promote his moral ideas in his diocese. And, unusually for that time, he abandoned court life to live there.
At Briçonnet’s request, Lefèvre then founded in 1521 the Cenacle of Meaux, a center for reflection and reform of the Church of Meaux. The aim was to return to the sources of Christianity, to the original teachings of Christ, by spreading the New Testament in French: the Gospel texts were « de-Latinized. »
Oil on canvas, attributed to Jean Clouet.
Appointed in 1520 as vicar to Guillaume Briçonnet, who had become Bishop of Meaux, Lefèvre settled in that city. In 1521, Briçonnet became the spiritual director of the sister of the King of France, Marguerite de Navarre, who was committed to the cause.
That same year, Briçonnet and Lefèvre attracted several theologians and preachers to their circle, including the future Reformed philosopher Guillaume Farel, the tireless Gérard Roussel , the Flemish theologian Josse Clichtove, the Hebraist François Vatable, the eloquent Martial Mazurier, the intrepid Michel d’Arande, the renowned preacher Pierre Caroli , and Jean Lecomte de Lacroix.
Then others joined, expanding their circle: Pierre de Sébiville, Aimé Mégret , the Franciscan friar and friend of Rabelais, Pierre Amy, and Jacques Groslot , bailiff of Orléans. Their simple motto was also that of Marguerite de Navarre:
« To know the Gospel, to follow the Gospel, and to make the Gospel known everywhere. »
Marguerite of Navarre was close to Leonardo da Vinci during the last three years of his life (1516-1519) at the Château du Clos Lucé in Amboise. Marguerite had lived there with her husband, Charles IV of Alençon, in 1509. Subsequently, she stayed there regularly with her mother, Louise of Savoy, and her brother, Francis I, in the immediate vicinity of Leonardo da Vinci.
She was an influential patron of the arts, while Leonardo was the king’s « first painter. » In 1546, Rabelais paid tribute to her by dedicating his Third Book to her.
A recent thesis by Jonathan Reid has shown that Marguerite was already at the heart of a vast network including more than two hundred members of the court, diplomats, prelates, and men of letters. Extending well beyond Paris and Meaux, this network also encompassed Alençon, Lyon, Grenoble, Bourges, Poitiers, and Mâcon.
Printers, including Augereau and Du Bois, but also Simon de Colines, who was operating clandestinely in Lyon, were among them. In total, according to Reid, 450 editions of 200 « evangelical » works were printed in France thanks to Marguerite’s protection. 10
On the ground
After visiting his entire diocese, Briçonnet observed that most priests did not reside in their parishes and that the assistant priests had little to no theological training. Furthermore, they lacked the time to teach their parishioners because they had to work, as all parish income went to the priests. The only educated preachers were the Franciscan friars (aka Cordeliers), who often limited themselves to promising hell to wicked Christians.
As early as 1518, Briçonnet undertook to combat moral depravity and the laxity of ecclesiastical discipline by thoroughly reforming his diocese. He simplified worship, abolished the veneration of images and relics, and encouraged preaching to revive the faith. He considered his diocese a mission field and divided it into 26 stations of nine parishes each. But, year after year, he observed the inadequacy of these measures: more than half of the priests were incapable of properly carrying out their assigned duties. He decided to expel the 53 most unfit priests and to train new ones. The Cordeliers were forbidden from preaching.
In Meaux, the Cenacle ran a printing press to publish, among others, the works of Lefèvre d’Étaples: Commentary on the four gospels (in Latin) in 1522, Old Testament (in French), Homilies, Epistles, Gospels, Acts of the Apostles (1523) and Psalms (1524).
The main instruments of religious renewal were greater attention to the selection and education of the priestly body, the restoration of the bishop’s authority over competing religious orders, the control of pulpits entrusted to preachers faithful to Christocentric doctrine and firmly convinced of the principle of justification by faith alone, on which Lefèvre had insisted for years in his writings, as well as the printing and distribution of numerous writings and works intended for clerics and laity: these were devotional texts focused mainly on mental prayer and on the invitation to simplify and purify traditional rituals, as well as Latin and especially French versions of the Holy Scriptures.
Stripped of unnecessary glosses, the texts were read aloud to small groups of people with some education. Prayers in simple language were printed for the common people, as well as popular works beginning in 1525.
The sermons, which changed (no more threats of hell, no more collections at the end), were successful. Neighboring Picardy, the Thiérache region, and the monastery of Livry-en-Aulnoy followed the Fabrist approach.
Meaux served as a laboratory for other dioceses in the kingdom, where bishops close to the evangelical network attempted to implement the model of pastoral renewal developed by Lefèvre and his followers. But if evangelicalism did indeed become an influential and respected movement during the reign of Francis I, it was thanks to the support of a segment of the court which, as we have mentioned, referred to Marguerite. The political, economic, and diplomatic support of the king’s sister and her network allowed the Fabrists to have direct access to the court and to influence the crown’s decisions regarding the policy of tolerance toward « heresy » and the appointment of bishops and abbots.
The reaction
The Cenacle of Meaux immediately attracted the wrath of the Cordeliers (whom it deprived of the proceeds of their collections) and the theologians of the Sorbonne.
In April 1521, Luther’s theses, initially well received and studied, were condemned by the University of Paris.
Clichtove defected (he wrote a work on the cult of saints, proclaiming that « the intelligence of laymen will never be able to understand the sublime meaning contained in the divine books » which even the most learned struggle to understand).
Although Lefèvre’s translation of the New Testament is based on the Vulgate text, he makes about sixty corrections based on the Greek originals. The doctors of Paris are particularly irritated by the « Exhortatory Epistle » that he places at the beginning of the second part, where he recommends that all the faithful read Holy Scripture in the vernacular, that is, in French.
Eleven proposals were submitted to the faculty. The courts ordered that Lefèvre d’Étaples’s French New Testament be burned. But the king, informed of this affair, which he saw as nothing more than harassment by the dean of the Sorbonne, Noël Béda, intervened, and Lefèvre, having defended himself before the prelates and doctors whom the court had appointed as judges, emerged from this attack with his honor intact.
In October 1523, under pressure, Briçonnet banned Luther’s books in his diocese, and in 1524, he dismissed Farel, whose sermons were too provocative, in order to continue his work of spreading the Gospel. At his own expense, he organized public readings of the Bible and distributed translations, which reached Normandy, Champagne, and the Loire Valley.
This first phase of expansion of the Fabrist movement ended around 1525, when, under the regency, the conservative party imposed a repressive policy towards Lutherans and Evangelicals, without distinction.
The hour of persecutions
In 1525, geopolitical upheavals changed the situation in France. First, the trap set by the Italian Wars closed on Francis I. On February 24, 1525, the king was taken prisoner at Pavia by the troops of Charles V.
Consequently, he was no longer in a position to protect the Bishop of Meaux. Furthermore, in May, a papal bull authorized a group composed of three theologians from the Sorbonne and a priest to hunt down heresy.
While Lefèvre was publishing the Epistles and Gospels for the 52 Sundays of the coming year , his enemies were more successful with a new attack, taking advantage of the unrest stirred up in the diocese of Meaux by indiscreet preachers and turbulent monks. A trial opened before the Sorbonne at the instigation of the Cordeliers, who accused him of allowing « heresy » to spread.
That same year, the Parliament of Paris brought a case against Briçonnet. As a conciliatory measure, he again authorized the Cordeliers to preach, asked his parish priests to restore the veneration of saints and the Virgin Mary, forbade preaching to the most extreme elements, and took the statues and images of saints under his personal protection. Jean Leclerc, a wool carder converted to the new ideas, was flogged for putting up posters hostile to the Pope.
After barely four years of existence, the Meaux circle was dissolved in 1525.
For several months, in order to avoid arrest and conviction, Lefèvre and his family were forced to leave the kingdom and take refuge in Strasbourg. There, he strengthened his ties with moderate Protestants such as Capiton and Butzer, and associated with Otto Brunfels, to whom he was linked by a Nicodemite attitude, recognizing the legitimacy of religious concealment in a context of persecution.
In 1526, with the return of Francis I, negotiated with Spain by Margaret of Navarre, and thanks to her protection, they were back in France and managed to maintain some influence for a few more years at court and throughout the rest of the kingdom, through intense activity in printing and disseminating written works, as well as through systematic preaching in the heart of the capital. The king granted Lefèvre the position of personal librarian at Blois and entrusted him with the education of his two children.
Guillaume Briçonnet, for his part, was acquitted. In 1528, he participated in the Synod of Paris that condemned Lutheranism. A year later, Francis I and Marguerite failed to save the life of preacher Louis de Berquin (1490-1529), a friend of Erasmus and also a translator of Lutheran treatises. He was burned alive in the Place de Grève in Paris.
Exile
In 1530, Lefèvre chose to leave the court to go to Nérac to be with his patroness, Marguerite de Navarre. He remained there until his death in 1536, preferring not to take sides in the disputes between Protestants and Catholics.
He cannot be accused of Protestantism, although his comments on priestly celibacy, fasting, and the sacraments are extremely harsh and pave the way for the Reformed movement. The term « evangelicalism, » recently proposed, seems, on the other hand, to be appropriate for this attitude of absolute fidelity to the spirit and the letter of Scripture.
Marguerite de Navarre , it must be emphasized, was a learned woman.
While she knew Latin and even Greek, she was far from mastering these ancient languages like Lefèvre, whose lessons she was able to attend.
For religious reasons, she even received Hebrew lessons from Paul Paradis, nicknamed Canosse, who would later become a lecturer at the Collège Royal. She was greatly influenced by the inspiration and ideas of the Cenacle of Meaux, examples of which she provides particularly in her secular comedies and poems.
And according to one historian,
« She was also familiar with Nicholas of Cusa, author of ‘De Docte Ignorance’, also edited by Lefèvre, with Saint Bonaventure, and with Pseudo-Dionysius, actually a 5th-century Syrian monk. » 11
In 1531, the Venetian scholar Jerome Aleander, former papal nuncio who had become Erasmus’s chief persecutor for the Roman Curia, proved to be very well informed about the situation. He regretted that Lefèvre remained under the influence of his former disciple Gerard Roussel, Bishop of Oloron.
The ambition of the Roman and French conservatives at that time was to convince Lefèvre to write a retraction of his errors and to go to Rome to obtain his full reintegration into the Roman Church.
This was not the case. Although Lefèvre could no longer publicly display his spiritual beliefs, he remained close to the positions of his disciples Roussel and Marguerite, who, throughout the reign of Francis I, even after the Affair of the Placards, continued to advocate a third way between Rome and Geneva. In 1534, Briçonnet died at the Château d’Esmans, near Montereau-Fault-Yonne.
Conclusion
Lefèvre’s translation of the Holy Bible , based on the Vulgate text, was printed not in France, but in Antwerp in 1530.
This was the first Bible in the vernacular language, which served as the basis for all French translations, including modern ones.
A center of preaching, this epicenter of Christian humanism, the Cenacle of Meaux , a precursor of « reformism » , had a great influence on the humanists and writers of this generation.
Marguerite protected François Rabelais (1483-1553) and encouraged him to write Gargantua and Pantagruel.
A friend of Rabelais, the famous poet Clément Marot, entered Marguerite’s service. He was soon accused of heresy and took refuge in Nérac in 1535.
Nicknamed the « mother of the Renaissance, » Marguerite de Navarre was the mother of Jeanne d’Albret and therefore the grandmother of Henri IV, the good King Henri who, knowing this intellectual and spiritual lineage, would embody this ideal in action.
It was certainly with the work of the Cenacle of Meaux in mind that he succeeded, at least in part, in putting an end to the Wars of Religion ravaging France.
The inclusive peace he organized in France, based on the coincidence of opposites theorized by Nicholas of Cusa, would be the model for the Peace of Westphalia which ended the Thirty Years’ War in 1648.
Selected Bibliography
- ALONGE, Guillaume Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples in the religious crisis of the 16th century , nord’ 2022/2 No. 80, pages 15 to 21, Éditions Société de Littérature du Nord.
- BARNAUD, Jean
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples: the preparation , Theological and religious studies, 11th year, No. 1, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples, Master of Philosophy , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 2, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (continued) , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 3, 1936.
— Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (continued and concluded) , Theological and Religious Studies, 11th year, No. 4-5, 1936. - CHARLIER, Yvonne , Erasmus and friendship, based on his correspondence , Editions Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1977.
- DE ROMILLY, Jacqueline, Five centuries of Hellenism in France , Bulletin of the Association Guillaume Budé, March 1977.
- EICHEL-LOJKINE, Patricia, Marguerite de Navarre, pearl of the Renaissance , Perrin, Paris, 2021.
- PERNOT, Jean-François, Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples (1450? – 1536), Proceedings of the Etaples colloquium on November 7 and 8, 1992, Classiques Garnier, Paris, 1995.
NOTES:
- https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/agreement-catholic-church ↩︎
- file:///C:/Users/User/Desktop/alonge-2022-jacques-lefevre-detaples-dans-la-crise-religieuse-du-xvie-siecle.pdf ↩︎
- Christian humanism differs from « secular humanism » (anti-religious) and supposedly « scientific. » Once the spiritual dimension was eliminated, the humanist dimension also fell by the wayside. Julian Huxley, one of the great promoters of « secular humanism, » ended up inventing the term « transhumanist, » an ideology he saw as capable of replacing all religions. Millionaire Jeffrey Epstein, as well as billionaires Elon Musk, Larry Ellison, and Peter Thiel, are adherents of this ideology .
- file:///C:/Users/User/Desktop/Jacques%20LEtap/Romilly_Helle%CC%81isme-France.pdf ↩︎
- Börje Knös , An Ambassador of Hellenism: Janus Lascaris and the Greco-Byzantine Tradition in French Humanism , Uppsala, Almqvist & Wiksells, 1945 .
- Philip. Monnier , The Quattrocento . Volume II, p. 82. ↩︎
- https://www.etudesheraultaises.fr/publi/evocation-de-guillaume-briconnet-eveque-de-lodeve-de-1489-a-1519/ ↩︎
- Heminjard , Correspondence of the Reformers, vol. I, p. 4, note. ↩︎
- https://theses.chartes.psl.eu/document/ENCPOS_1991_01 ↩︎
- Jonathan Reid , King’s Sister, Queen of Dissent: Marguerite de Navarre (1492-1549) and her Evangelical Network . Leyden, Brill, 2009; 2 vol. ↩︎
- Jean-Pierre Duteil . Marguerite de Navarre . Ellipses, 2021. hal-04186835.
How James Ensor ripped off the mask off the oligarchy
Lire cet article en FR en ligne
By Karel Vereycken,
December 2022.
James Ensor was born on April 13, 1860 into a petty-bourgeois family in Ostend, Belgium. His father, James Frederic Ensor, a failed English engineer and anti-conformist, sank into alcoholism and heroin addiction.
His mother, Maria Catherina Haegheman, a Flemish-Belgian who did little to encourage his artistic vocation, ran a store selling souvenirs, shells, chinoiserie, glassware, stuffed animals and carnival masks – artifacts that were to populate the painter’s imagination.
A bubbly spirit, Ensor was passionate about politics, literature and poetry. Commenting on his birth at a banquet held in his honor, he once said:
« I was born in Ostend on a Friday, the day of Venus [goddess of peace]. Well, dear friends, as soon as I was born, Venus came to me smiling, and we looked into each other’s eyes for a long time. Ah! the beautiful green persian eyes, the long sandy hair. Venus was blonde and beautiful, all smeared with foam, smelling of the salty sea. I soon painted her, for she bit my brushes, ate my colors, coveted my painted shells, ran over my mother-of-pearl, forgot herself in my conch shells, salivated over my brushes ».
After an initial introduction to artistic techniques at the Ostend Academy, he moved to Brussels to live with his half-brother Théo Hannon, where he continued his studies at the Académie des Beaux Arts. In Théo’s company, he was introduced to the bourgeois circles of left-wing liberals that flourished on the outskirts of the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB).
With Ernest Rousseau, a professor at the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), of which he was to become rector, Ensor discovered the stakes of the political struggle. Madame Rousseau was a microbiologist with a passion for insects, mushrooms and… art.
The Rousseaus held their salon on rue Vautier in Brussels, near Antoine Wiertz‘s studio and the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences. A privileged meeting place for artists, freethinkers and other influential minds.
Back in Ostend, Ensor set up his studio in the family home, where he produced his first masterpieces, portraits imbued with realism and landscapes inspired by Impressionism.
The Realm of Colors
« Life is but a palpitation« , exclaimed Ensor. His clouds are masses of gray, gold and azure above a line of roofs. His Lady at the Breakwater (1880) is caught in a glaze of gray and mother-of-pearl, at the end of the pier. Ensor is an orchestral conductor, using knives and brushes to spread paint in thin or thick layers, adding pasty accents here and there.
His genius takes full flight in his painting The Oyster Eater (1882). Although the picture seems to exude a certain tranquility, in reality he is painting a gigantic still life that seems to have swallowed his younger sister Mitche.
The artist initially called his work “In the Realm of Colors”, more abstract than La Mangeuse d’huîtres, since colors play the main role in the composition.
The mother-of-pearl of the shells, the bluish-white of the tablecloth, the reflections of the glasses and bottles – it’s all about variation, both in the elaboration and in the tonalities of color. Ensor retained the classical approach: he always used undercoats, whereas the Impressionists applied paint directly to the white canvas.
The pigments he uses are also very traditional: vermilion red, lead white, brown earth, cobalt blue, Prussian blue and synthetic ultramarine. The chrome yellow of La Mangeuse d’huîtres is an exception. The intensity of this pigment is much higher than that of the paler Naples yellow he had previously used.
The writer Emile Verhaeren, who later wrote the painter’s first monograph, contemplated La Mangeuse d’huîtres and exclaimed: « This is the first truly luminous canvas ».
Stunned, he wanted to highlight Ensor as the great innovator of Belgian art. But opinion was not unanimous. The critics were not kind: the colors were too garish and the work was painted in a sloppy manner. What’s more, it’s immoral to paint « a subject of second rank » (in monarchy, there are no citizens, only « subjects », a woman not being part of the aristocracy) in such dimensions – 207 cm by 150 cm.
In 1882, the Salon d’Anvers, which exhibited the best of contemporary art, rejected the work. Even his former Brussels colleagues at L’Essor rejected La Mangeuse d’huîtres a year later.
The XX group
In Belgium, for example, the artistic revolution of 1884 began with a phrase uttered by a member of the official jury: « Let them exhibit at home! » he proclaimed, rejecting the canvases of two or three painters; and so they did, exhibiting at home, in « citizens’ salons », or creating their own cultural associations.
It was against this backdrop that Octave Maus and Ensor founded the « Groupe des XX », an avant-garde artistic circle in Brussels. Among the early « vingtists », in addition to Ensor, were Fernand Khnopff, Jef Lambeaux, Paul Signac, George Minne and Théo Van Rysselberghe, whose artists included Ferdinand Rops, Auguste Rodin, Camille Pissarro, Claude Monet, Georges Seurat, Gustave Caillebotte and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec.
It wasn’t until 1886, therefore, that Ensor was able to exhibit his innovative work La mangeuse d’huîtres for the first time at the Groupe des XX. But this was not the end of his ordeal. In 1907, the Liège municipal council decided not to buy the work for the city’s Musée des Beaux-Arts.
Fortunately, Ensor’s friend Emma Lambotte did not give up on the painter. She bought the painting and exhibited it in her salon citoyen.
Social and political commitment
The social unrest that coincided with his rise as a painter, and which culminated in tragedy with the deadly clashes between workers and civic guards in 1886, prompted him to find in the masses, as a collective actor, a powerful companion in misfortune. At the end of the 19th century, the Belgian capital was a bubbling cauldron of revolutionary, creative and innovative ideas. Karl Marx, Victor Hugo and many others found exile here, sometimes briefly. Symbolism, Impressionism, Pointillism and Art Nouveau all vied for glory.
While Marx was wrong on many points, he did understand that, at a time when finance derived its wealth from production, the modernization of the means of production bore the seeds of the transformation of social relations. Sooner or later, and at all levels, those who produce wealth will claim their rightful place in the decision-making process.
Ensor’s fight for freer art reflects and coincides with the epochal change taking place at the time.
Originating in Vienna, Austria, the banking crisis of May 1873 triggered a stock market crash that marked the beginning of a crisis known as the Great Depression, which lasted throughout the last quarter of the 19th century.
On September 18, 1873, Wall Street was panic-stricken and closed for 10 days. In Belgium, after a period marked by rapid industrialization, the Le Chapelier law, which had been in force since 1791, i.e. forty years before the birth of Belgium, and which prohibited the slightest form of workers’ organization, was repealed in 1867, but strikes were still a crime punishable by the State.
It was against this backdrop that a hundred delegates representing Belgian trade unions founded the Belgian Workers’ Party (POB) in 1885. Reformist and cautious, in 1894 they called not for the « dictatorship of the proletariat », but for a strong « socialization of the means of production ». That same year, the POB won 20% of the votes cast in the parliamentary elections and had 28 deputies. It participated in several governments until it was dissolved by the German invasion of May 1940.
Victor Horta, Jean Jaurès and the Maison du Peuple in Brussels
The architect Victor Horta, a great innovator of Art Nouveau whose early houses symbolized a new art of living, was commissioned by the POB to build the magnificent « Maison du Peuple » in Brussels, a remarkable building made mainly of steel, housing a maximum of functionalities: offices, meeting room, stores, café, auditorium…
The building was inaugurated in 1899 in the presence of Jean Jaurès. In 1903, Lenin took part in the congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ Party.
Jean Jaurès gave his last speech on July 29, 1914, at the Cirque Royal in Brussels, during a major meeting of the Socialist International to save peace. Speaking of the threat of war, Jaurès said: « Attila is on the brink of the abyss, but his horse is still stumbling and hesitating ».
Opposing, as he did all his life, France’s submission to a subordinate role, he said:
« If we appeal to a secret treaty with Russia, we will appeal to a public treaty with Humanity ». And he ended his speech, the best of his life, with these prophetic words, written almost literally: « At the beginning of the war, everyone will be drawn in. But when the consequences and disasters unfold, the people will say to those responsible: ‘Go away and may God forgive you' ».
According to eyewitness accounts, Jaurès’ speech in Brussels aroused thousands of people from all classes of society. Two days later, on July 31, 1914, Jaurès was assassinated on his return to Paris, and the Maison du Peuple in Brussels was demolished in 1965 and replaced by a model of ugliness.
Doctrinary Food
Ensor’s art, especially his etchings, echoed this upheaval. His social and political criticism permeates his best work, none of which is perhaps as virulent as his etching Doctrinary Food (1889/1895) showing figures embodying the powers that be (the King of the Belgians, the clergy, etc.) literally defecating on the masses, a nasty habit that remains entrenched among our French « elites », if we review the treatment meted out, without the slightest discrimination, to our « yellow vests ».
In these engravings, Ensor presents the major demands of the POB: universal suffrage (passed in 1893, albeit imperfectly, at least for men), « personal » military service (i.e. for all, passed in 1913) and compulsory universal education (passed in 1914).
Revenge
Faced with injustice and incomprehension, Ensor can no longer suppress his righteous anger. For his own amusement – and, let’s face it, revenge – he set out to « get even » with those who ignored, despised and sabotaged him, above all the Belgian aristocracy, who clung to their privileges like mussels to rocks.
Deconstructing the straitjacket of academic rules, and drawing inspiration from Goya, Ensor forged a powerful language of metaphor and symbol. Between 1888 and 1892, Ensor began to deal with religious themes. Like Gauguin and Van Gogh, he identified with the persecuted Christ.
In 1889, at the age of 28, he painted L’Entrée du Christ à Bruxelles, a vast satirical canvas that made his name. Even those closest to him, eager for recognition in order to exist, didn’t want it. The painting was rejected at the Salon des XX, where there was talk of excluding him from the Cercle, of which he was a founding member! Against Ensor’s wishes, the « vingtistes », racing towards success, split up four years later to re-create themselves under the name of La Libre Esthétique.
In this work, a large red banner reads « Vive la sociale », not « Vive le Christ ». Only a small panel on the side applauds Jesus, King of Brussels. But what on earth is the prophet, with the painter’s features and almost lost in the crowd, doing in Brussels? Has socialism replaced Christianity to such an extent that if Jesus were to return today, he would do so under the banner « For Ensor’s friends, he had lost his mind.
The Belgian lawyer and art critic Octave Maus, co-founder with Ensor of Les XX, famously summed up the reaction of contemporary art critics to Ensor’s « pictorial outburst »:
« Ensor is the leader of a clan. Ensor is in the limelight. Ensor summarizes and concentrates certain principles that are considered anarchist. In short, Ensor is a dangerous person who has initiated great changes (…) He is therefore marked for blows. All the harquebuses are aimed at him. It is on his head that the most aromatic containers of the so-called serious critics are poured ».
In 1894, he was invited to exhibit in Paris, but his work, more intellectual than aesthetic, aroused little interest. Desperate for success, Ensor persisted with his wild, saturated and violently variegated painting.
Skeletons and masks
Skulls, skeletons and masks burst into his work very early on. This is not the morbid imagination of a sick mind, as his slanderers claim. Radical? Insolent? Certainly; sarcastic, often; pessimistic? Never; anarchist? let’s rather say « yellow vest spirit », i.e. strongly contesting an established order that has lost all legitimacy and, absorbed in immense geopolitical maneuvers, is marching like a horde of sleepwalkers towards the « Great War » and the Second World War that’s coming behind!
Dead heads, symbols of truth
Poetically, Ensor resurrected the ultra-classical Renaissance metaphor of the « Vanities« , a very Christian theme that already appeared in « The Triumph of Death », the poem by Petrarch that inspired the Flemish painter Pieter Bruegel the Elder, and Holbein’s series of woodcuts, « The Dance of Death ».
A skull juxtaposed with an hourglass were the basic elements for visualizing the ephemeral nature of human existence on earth. As humans, this metaphor reminds us, we constantly try not to think about it, but inevitably, we all end up dying, at least on a physical level. Our « vanity » is our constant desire to believe ourselves eternal.
Ensor did not hesitate to use symbols. To penetrate his work, you need to know how to read the meaning behind them. Visually, in the face of the triumph of lies and hypocrisy, Ensor, like a good Christian, sets up death as the only truth capable of giving meaning to our existence. Death triumphs over our physical existence.
Masks, symbols of lies
Gradually, as in Death and Masks (1897) (image at the top of this article), the artist dramatized this theme even further, pitting death against grotesque masks, symbols of human lies and hypocrisy.1
Often in his works, in a sublime reversal of roles, it is death who laughs and it is the masks who howl and weep, never the other way around.
It may sound grotesque and appalling, but in reality it’s only normal: truth laughs when it triumphs, and lies weep when they see their end coming! What’s more, when death returns to the living and shows the trembling flame of the candlestick, the latter howl, whereas the former has a big advantage: it’s already dead and therefore appears to live without fear!
No doubt thinking of the Brussels aristocracy who flocked to Ostend for a dip, Ensor wrote:
« Ah, you have to see the masks, under our great opal skies, and when, daubed in cruel colors, they evolve, miserable, their spines bent, pitiful under the rains, what a pitiful rout. Terrified characters, at once insolent and timid, snarling and yelping, voices in falsetto or like unleashed bugles ».
The same Ensor also castigated bad doctors pulling a huge tapeworm out of a patient’s belly, kings and priests whom he painted literally « shitting » on the people. He criticized the fishwives in the bars, the art critics who failed to see his genius and whom he painted in the form of skulls fighting over a kipper (a pun on « Art Ensor »).
The King’s Notebooks
In 1903, a scandal of unprecedented proportions shook Belgium, France and neighboring countries. Les Carnets du Roi (The King’s Notebooks), a work published anonymously in Paris and quickly banned in Brussels, portrayed a white-bearded autocrat: Leopold II, King of the Belgians, without naming him. Arrogant, pretentious and cunning, he was more concerned with enriching himself and collecting mistresses than ensuring the common good of his citizens and respect for the laws of a democratic state. The book, published by a Belgian publisher based in Paris, was the brainchild of a Belgian writer from the Liège region, Paul Gérardy (1870-1933), who happened to be a friend of Ensor.
The story of the Carnets du Roi is first and foremost that of a monarch who was not only mocked in writing and drawing throughout his reign, but also criticized extremely harshly for the methods used to govern his personal estate in the Congo. Divided into some thirty short chapters, the work is presented as a series of letters and advice from the aging king to his soon-to-be successor on the throne, his nephew Albert, who went on to become Ensor’s patron and, along with his friend Albert Einstein, whom he welcomed to Belgium, was deeply involved in preventing the outbreak of the Second World War.
In Les Carnets, a veritable satire, the monarch explains how hypocrisy, lies, treachery and double standards are necessary for the exercise of power: not to ensure the good of the « common people » or the stability of the monarchical state, but quite simply to shamelessly enrich himself.
The pages devoted to the exploitation of the people of the Congo and the « re-establishment of slavery » (sic) by a king who, via the explorer Stanley, was said to have been one of its eradicators, are ruthlessly lucid, and echo the most authoritative denunciations of the white-bearded monarch, to whom Gérardy lends these words:
« I took care to have it published that I was only concerned with civilizing the negroes, and as this nonsense was asserted with sincerity by a few convinced people, it was quickly believed and saved me some trouble ».
Meeting Albert Einstein
After 1900, the first exhibitions were devoted to him. Verhaeren wrote his first monograph. But, curiously, this success defused his strength as a painter. He contented himself with repeating his favorite themes or portraying himself, including as a skeleton. In 1903, he was awarded the Order of Leopold.
The whole world flocked to Ostend to see him. In early 1933, Ensor met Albert Einstein, who was visiting Belgium after fleeing Germany. Einstein, who resided for several months in Den Haan, not far from Ostend, was protected by the Belgian King, Albert I, with whom he coordinated his efforts to prevent another world war.
If it is claimed that Ensor and Einstein had little understanding of each other, the following quotation rather indicates the opposite.
Ensor, always lyrical, is quoted as saying:
« Let us all promptly praise the great Einstein and his relative orders, but let us condemn algebraism and its square roots, geometers and their cubic reasons. I say the world is round.… »
In 1929, King Albert I conferred the title of Baron on James Ensor. In 1934, listening to all that Franklin Roosevelt had to offer and seeing Belgium caught up in the turmoil of the 1929 crash, the King of the Belgians commissioned his Prime Minister De Broqueville to reorganize credit and the banking system along the lines of the Glass-Steagall Act model adopted in the United States in 1933.
On February 17, 1934, during a climb at Marche-les-Dames, Albert I died under conditions that have never been clarified. On March 6, De Broqueville made a speech to the Belgian Senate on the need to mourn the Treaty of Versailles and to reach an agreement with Germany on disarmament between the Allies of 1914-1918, failing which we would be heading for another war…
De Broqueville then energetically embarked on banking reform. On August 22, 1934, several Royal Decrees were promulgated, in particular Decree no. 2 of August 22, 1934, on the protection of savings and banking activities, imposing a split into separate companies, between deposit banks and business and market banks.
Pictorial bombs
From 1929 onwards, Ensor was dubbed the « Prince of Painters ». The artist had an unexpected reaction to this long-awaited recognition, which came too late for his liking: he gave up painting and devoted the last years of his life exclusively to contemporary music, before dying in 1949, covered in honors.
In 2016, a painting by Ensor from 1891, dubbed « Skeleton stopping masks », which had remained in the same family for almost a century and was unknown to historians, sold for 7.4 million euros, a world record for this artist. In the center, death (here a skull wearing the bearskin cap typical of the 1st Grenadier Regiment) is caught by the throat by strange masks that could represent the rulers of countries preparing for future conflicts.
Are the masks (the lie) about to strangle the truth (the skull and crossbones) without success? And so, over a hundred years later, Ensor’s pictorial bombs are still happily exploding in the heads of the narrow-minded, the floured bourgeois and the piss-poor, as he himself would have put it.
Notes:
- In 1819, another artist, the English poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, composed his political poem The Mask of Anarchy in reaction to the Peterloo massacre (18 dead, 700 wounded), when cavalry charged a peaceful demonstration of 60,000-80,000 people gathered to demand reform of parliamentary representation. In this call for liberty, he denounces an oligarchy that kills as it pleases (anarchy). Far from a call for anarchic counter-violence, it is perhaps the first modern declaration of the principle of non-violent resistance. ↩︎
ARTKAREL AUDIO GUIDE: short note before starting your visit at the Louvre
Listen:
- To the audio on this website
Read:
- Index of articles dealing with art history and Renaissance studies on this website.
——————————
Uccello, Donatello, Verrocchio and the art of military command
Uccello, Donatello, Verrocchio and the art of military command. An inquiry into the key events and artistic achievements that created the Renaissance. By Karel Vereycken, Paris.
Prologue
If there is still a lot to say, write and learn about the great geniuses of the European Renaissance, it is also time to take an interest in those whom the historian Georgio Vasari condescendingly called « transitional figures ».
How can one measure the contributions of Pieter Bruegel the Elder without knowing Pieter Coecke van Aelst? How can we value Rembrandt’s work without knowing Pieter Lastman? How did Raphaelo Sanzio innovate in relation to his master Perugino?
In 2019, an exceptional exhibition on Andrea Del Verrocchio (1435-1488), at the National Gallery in Washington, D.C., highlighted his great achievements, truly inspiring outbursts of great beauty that his pupil Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) would theorize and put to his greatest advantage.
The sfumato of Leonardo ? Verrochio is the pioneer, especially in the blurred features of portraits of women made with mixed techniques (pencil, chalk and gouache).
The joy of discovery
Leafing through the catalog of this exhibition, my joy got immense when I discovered (and to my knowledgne nobody else seems to have made this observation before me) that the enigmatic angel the viewer’s eye meets in Leonardo’s painting titled The Virgin on the Rocks (1483-1486) (Louvre, Paris), besides the movement of the body, is grosso modo a visual “quote” of the image of a terra cotta high relief (Louvre, Paris) attributed to Verrochio and “one of his assistants”, possibly even Leonardo himself, since the latter was training with the master as early as age seventeen ! The finesse of its execution and drapery also reminds us of the only known statue of Da Vinci, The Virgin with the laughing Child.
Many others made their beginnings in Verrocchio’s workshop, notably Lorenzo de Credi, Sandro Botticelli, Piero Perugino (Raphael’s teacher) and Domenico Ghirlandaio (Michelangelo’s teacher).
Coming out of the tradition of the great building sites launched in Florence by the great patron of the Renaissance, Cosimo de Medici for the realization of the doors of the Baptistery and the completion of the dome of Florence by Philippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446), Verrocchio conceived his studio as a true “polytechnic” school.
In Florence, for the artists, the orders flowed in. In order to be able to respond to all requests, Verrocchio, initially trained as a goldsmith, trained his students as craftsman-engineer-artists: drawing, calculation, interior decoration, sculpture, geology, anatomy, metal and woodworking, perspective, architecture, poetry, music and painting. A level of freedom and a demand for creativity that has unfortunately long since disappeared.
The Ghiberti legacy
In painting, Verrocchio is said to have begun with the painter Fra Filippo Lippi (1406-1469). As for the bronze casting trade, he would have been, like Donatello, Masolino, Michelozzo, Uccello and Pollaiuolo, one of the apprentices recruited by Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378-1455) whose workshop, starting from 1401, over forty years, will be in charge of casting the bronze bas-reliefs of two of the huge doors of the Baptistery of Florence.
Others suggest that Verrocchio was most likely trained by Michelozzo, the former companion of Ghiberti who said up shop with Donatello. As a teenager, Donatello had accompanied Brunelleschi on their joint expeditions to Rome to investigate the legacy of Greek and Roman art, and not only the architectural legacy.
In reality, Verrocchio only perpetuated and developed the model of Ghiberti’s « polytechnic » studio, where he learned the art. An excellent craftsman, Ghiberti was also goldsmith, art collector, musician and humanist scolar and historian.
His genius is to have understood the importance of multidisciplinarity for artists. According to him « sculpture and painting are sciences of several disciplines nourished by different teachings ».
The ten disciplines that he considered important to train artists are grammar, philosophy, history, followed by perspective, geometry, drawing, astronomy, arithmetic, medicine and anatomy.
You can discover, says Ghiberti, only when you managed to isolate the object of your research from interfering factors, and you can discover by detaching oneself from a dogmatic system;
as the nature of things want it, the sciences hidden under artifices are not constituted so that the men with narrow chests can judge them.
Anticipating the type of biomimicry that will characterize Leonardo thereafter, Ghiberti affirms that he sought:
to discover how nature functioned and how he could approach it to know how the objects come to the eye, how the sight functions and in which way one has to practice sculpture and painting.
Ghiberti, who was familiar with some of the leading members of the circle of humanists led by Salutati and Traversari, based his own reflexions on optics on the authority of ancient texts, especially Arabic. He wrote:
But in order not to repeat in a superficial and superfluous way the principles that found all opinions, I will treat the composition of the eye particularly according to the opinions of three authors, namely Avicenna [Ibn Sina], in his books, Alhazen [Ibn al Haytam], in the first book of his perspective, and Constantine [Qusta ibn Luqa] in the first book on the eye; for these authors are sufficient and treat with more certainty the things that interest us.
Deliberately ignored (but copied) by Vasari, Ghiberti’s Commentaries are a real manuel for artists, written by an artist. Most interestingly, it is by reading Ghiberti’s Commentaries that Leonardo da Vinci became familiar with important Arab contributions to science, in particular the outstanding work of Ibn al Haytam (Alhazen) whose treatise on optics had just been translated from Latin into Italian under the title De li Aspecti, and is quoted at length by Ghiberti in his Commentario Terzio. Author A. Mark Smith suggests that, through Ghiberti, Alhazen’s Book of Optics
may well have played a central role in the development of artificial perspective in early Renaissance Italian painting.
Ghiberti’s comments are not extensive. However, for the pupils of his pupil Verrocchio, such as Leonardo, who didn’t command any foreign language, Ghiberti’s book did make available in italian a series of original quotes from the roman architect Vitruvius, arab scientists such as Alhazen), Avicenna, Averroes and those european scientists having studied arab optics, notably the Oxford fransciscans Roger Bacon, John Pecham and the Polish monk working in Padua, Witelo.
Finally, in 1412, Ghiberti, while busy coordinating all the works on the Gates of the Baptistry, was also the first Renaissance sculptor to cast a life-size statue in bronze, his Saint John the Baptist, to decorate Orsanmichele, the house of the Corporations in Florence.
Lost wax casting
However, in order to cast bronzes of such a size, the artists, considering the price of metal, would use the technique known as “lost wax casting”.
This technique consists of first making a model in refractory clay (A), covered with a thickness of wax corresponding to the thickness of the bronze thought necessary.
The model is then covered with a thick layer of wet plaster (B) which, as it solidifies, forms an outer mold. Finally, the very hot molten bronze, pored into the mold it penetrates by rods (J) provided for this purpose, will replace the wax.
Finally, once the metal has solidified, the coating is broken. The details of the bronze (K) are then adjusted and polished (L) according to the artist’s choice.
This technique would become crucial for the manufacture of bells and cannons. While it was commonly used in Ifé in Africa in the 12th century for statuary, in Europe it was only during the Renaissance, with the orders received by Ghiberti and Donatello, that it was entirely reinvented.
In 1466, after the death of Donatello, it was Verrocchio’s turn to become the Medici’s sculptor in title for whom he produced a whole series of works, notably, after Donatello, his own David in bronze (Bargello National Museum, Florence).
If with this promotion his social ascendancy is certain, Verrocchio found himself facing the greatest challenge that any artist of the Renaissance could have imagined: how to equal or even surpass Donatello, an artist whose genius has never been praised enough?
Equestrian art
This being said, let us now approach the subject of the art of military command by comparing four equestrian monuments:
- Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius on the Capitoline square in Rome (175 AD) ;
- Paolo Uccello’s fresco of John Hawkwood in the church of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence (1436);
- Erasmo da Narni, known as “Gattamelata” (1446-1450), casted by Donatello in Padua.
- Bartolomeo Colleoni by Andrea del Verrocchio in Venice (1480-1488).
Equestrian statues appeared in Greece in the middle of the 6th century B.C. to honor the victorious riders in a race. From the Hellenistic period onward, they were reserved for the highest state figures, sovereigns, victorious generals and magistrates. In Rome, on the forum, they constituted a supreme honor, subject to the approval of the Senate. Apart from being bronze equestrian statues, each one is placed in a place where their troops fought.
While each statue is a reminder of the importance of military and political command, the way in which this responsibility is exercised is quite different.
Marcus Aurelius in Rome
Marcus Aurelius was born in Rome in 121 A.D., into a noble family of Spanish origin. He was the nephew of the emperor Hadrian. After the death of Marcus Aurelius’ father, Hadrian entrusted him to his successor Antonin. The latter adopts and gives him an excellent education. He was initiated early in philosophy by his master Diognetus.
Interested in the stoics, he adopted for a while their lifestyle, sleeping on the ground, wearing a rough tunic, before he was dissuaded by his mother.
He went to Athens in 175 A.D. and became a promotor of philosophy. He helps financially the philosophers and the rhetoricians by granting them a fixed salary. Concerned with pluralism, he supported the Platonic Academy, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Garden of Epicurus and the Stoic Portico.
On the other hand, during his reign, persecutions against Christians were numerous. He saw them as troublemakers – since they refused to recognize the Roman gods, and as fanatics.
Erected in 175 A.D., the statue was entirely gilded. Its location in antiquity is unknown, but in the Middle Ages it stood in front of the Basilica of St. John Lateran, founded by Constantine, and the Lateran Palace, then the papal residence.
In 1538, Pope Paul III had the monument of Marcus Aurelius transferred to the Capitol, the seat of the city’s government. Michelangelo restored the statue and redesigned the square around it, one of the fanciest in Rome. It is undoubtedly the most famous equestrian statue, and above all the only one dating back to ancient Rome that has survived, the others having been melted down into coins or weapons…
If the statue survived, it is thanks to a misunderstanding: it was thought that it represented Constantine, the first Roman emperor to have converted to Christianity at the beginning of the 4th century, and it was out of the question to destroy the image of a Christian ruler.
Neither the date nor the circumstances of the commission are known.
But the presence of a defeated enemy under the right foreleg of the horse (attested by medieval testimonies and since lost), the emperor’s gesture and the shape of the saddle cloth, unusual in the Roman world, make us to belief that the statue commemorated Marcus Aurelius’ victories, perhaps on the occasion of his triumph in Rome in 176, or even after his death. Indeed, his reign (161-180) was marked by incessant wars to counter the incursions of Germanic or Eastern peoples on the borders of an Empire that was now threatened and on the defensive.
The horse, while not that large, but looking powerful, has been sculpted with great care and represented with realism. Its nostrils are strongly dilated, its lips pulled by the bit reveal its teeth and tongue.
One leg raised, he has just been stopped by his rider, who holds the reins with his left hand. Like him, the horse turns his head slightly to the right, a sign that the statue was made to be seen from that side. Part of his harness is preserved, but the reins have disappeared.
The size of the athletic rider nevertheless dominates that of a powerful horse that he rides without stirrups (accessories unknown to the Romans). He is dressed in a short tunic belted at the waist and a ceremonial cloak stapled on the right shoulder. It is a civil and not a military garment, adapted to a peaceful context. He is wearing leather shoes held together by intertwined straps.
The statue is striking for its size (424 cm high) and for the majesty it exudes. Without armor or weapons, eyes wide open and without emotion, the emperor raises his right arm. His authority derives above all from the function he embodies: he is the Emperor who protects his Empire and his people by punishing their enemies without mercy.
The fresco by Paolo Uccello
In 1436, at the request of Cosimo de’ Medici, the young Paolo Uccello was commissioned to paint a fresco depicting John Hawkwood (1323-1394), the son of an English tanner who had become a warlord during the Hundred Years’ War in France and whose name would be Italicized into Giovanno Acuto.
Serving the highest bidder, especially rival Italian cities, Hawkwood’s company of mercenaries was no slouch.
In Florence, although it may seem paradoxical, it was the humanist chancellor Coluccio Salutati (1331-1406) who put Hawkwood at the head of a regular army in the service of the Signoria.
This approach is not unlike that of Louis XI in France, who, in order to control the skinners and other cutthroats who were ravaging the nation, did not hesitate to discipline them by incorporating them into a standing army, the new royal army.
The humanists of the Renaissance, notably Leonardo Bruni (1370-1440) in his De Militia (1420), became aware of the curse of using mercenaries in conflicts and of the fact that only standing army, i.e. a permanent army formed of professionals and even better by citizens and maintained by a state or a city could guarantee a lasting peace.
Although Hawkwood faithfully protected the city for 18 years, his ugly “professionalism” as a mercenary was not unanimously accepted, to the point of inspiring the proverb “Inglese italianato è un diavolo Incarnato” (« An Italianized Englishman is a devil incarnate »).
Petrarch denounced him, Boccaccio tried in vain to mount a diplomatic offensive against him, St. Catherine of Sienna begged him to leave Italy, Chaucer met him and, no doubt, used him as a model for The Knight’s Tale (The Canterbury Tales).
All this will not prevent Cosimo, a member of the humanist conspiracy and a great patron of the arts, returning from exile, from wanting to honor him. But in the absence of the bronze equestrian statue (which had been promised to him…), Florence, will only offer him a fresco in the nave of Santa Maria del Fiore, that is to say under right under the cupola of the Duomo.
From the very beginning, Paolo Uccello’s fresco seems to have stirred quite a controversy. A preparatory drawing in the collections of Florence’s Uffizi Museum indicates the commander, more armed, taller, and, with his horse in a more military position. Uccello had originally depicted Hawkwood as « more threatening », with his baton raised and horse « at the ready ».
A recent ultraviolet study confirms the fact that the painter had originally depicted the condottiere armed from head to toe. In the final version, he wears a sleeveless jacket, the giornea, and a coat; only his legs and feet are protected by a piece of armor. The final version presents a less imposing rider, less warlike, more human and more individualized
In the dispute, it was not Uccello who was considered faulty, but his sponsors. Moreover, the painter was quickly given the task of redoing the fresco in a way deemed “more appropriate”.
Unfortunately, there is no record of the debates that must have raged among the officials of the church fabric (Opera Del Domo). What is certain is the fact that in the final version, visible today, the condottiere has been transformed from a warlord running a gang of mercenaries, into the image of philosopher-king whose only weapon is his commanding staff. At the bottom of the fresco, we can read in Latin: “Giovanno Acuto, British knight, who was in his time held as a very prudent general and very expert in military affairs.”
The position of the horse and the perspective of the sarcophagus have been changed from a simple profile to a di sotto in su view.
If this perspective is somewhat surrealistic and the pose of the horse, raising both legs on the same side, simply impossible, it remains a fact that Uccello’s fresco will set “the standards” of the ideal and impassive image of virtue and command that must embody the hero of the Renaissance: his goal is no longer to “win” a war (the objective of the mercenary), but to preserve the peace by preventing it (the objective of a philosopher-king or simply a wise head of state).
Paradigm shift
As such, one might say that Uccello’s fresco announces the “paradigm shift” marking the end of the age of perpetual feudal wars, to that of the Renaissance, that is to say to that of a necessary concord between sovereign nation-states whose security is indivisible, the security of one being the guarantee of the security of the other, a paradigm even more rigorously defined in 1648 at the Peace of Westphalia, when it made the agapic notion of the “advantage of the other” the basis of its success.
One historian suggests that the recommissioning of Uccello’s fresco was part of the « refurbishing » of the cathedral associated with its rededication as Santa Maria del Fiore by the humanist Pope Eugene IV in March 1436, determined to convince the Eastern and Western Churches to peacefully overcome their divisions and réunite as was attempted at the Council of Florence of 1437-1438 and for which the Duomo was central.
Interesting is the fact that Uccello’s fresco appeared at around the same time that Yolande d’Aragon and Jacques Coeur, who had his Italian connections, persuaded the French king Charles VII to put an end to the Hundred Years’ War by setting up a permanent, standing army.
In 1445, an ordinance was passed to discipline and rationalize the army in the form of cavalry units grouped into Compagnies d’Ordonnances, the first permanent army at the disposal, not of warlords or aristocrats, but of the King of France.
Donatello’s “Gattamelata” (1447-1453)
It was only some years later, in Padua, between 1447 and 1453, that Donatello would work on the statue of Erasmo da Narni (1370-1443), a Renaissance condottiere, i.e. the leader of a professional army in the service of the Republic of Venice, which at the time ruled the city of Padua. An important detail is that Erasmo was nicknamed “il Gattamelata”.
In French, « faire la chattemite » means to affect a false air of sweetness to deceive or seduce… Others explain that his nickname of “honeyed cat” comes from the fact that his mother was called Melania Gattelli or that he wore a crest (a helmet) in the shape of a honey-colored cat in battle…
The man was of humble origin, the son of a baker, born in Umbria around 1370. He learned to handle weapons from Ceccolo Broglio, lord of Assisi, and then, when he was in his thirties, from the captains of Braccio da Montone, who was known for recruiting the best fighters.
In 1427, Erasmo, who had the confidence of Cosimo de’ Medici, signed a seven-year contract with the humanist Pope Martin V, who wished to strengthen an army corps loyal to his cause with the aim of bringing to heel the lords of Emilia, Romagna and Umbria who were rebellious against papal authority.
He bought a huge suit of armor to reinforce his high stature. He was not an impetuous fighter, but a master of siege warfare, which forced him to take slow, thoughtful and progressive action. He spied on his prey for a long time before trapping it.
In 1432, he captured the fortress of Villafranca near Imola by cunning alone and without fighting. The following year he did the same to capture the fortified town of Castelfranco, thus sparing his soldiers and his treasure.
Those who were unable to grasp his tactics, accused him of being a coward for “running away” from the front-line, not realizing, that on a given moment, this was part of the tactics of his winning strategy.
He was a prudent captain, with a very well-mannered troop, and he was careful to maintain good relations with the magistrates of the towns that employed him. He obtained the rank of captain-general of the army of the Republic of Venice during the fourth war against the Duke of Milan in 1438 and died in Padua in 1443. Following his death, the Venetian Republic gave him full honors and Giacoma della Leonessa, his widow, commissioned a sculpture in honor of her late husband for 1650 ducats.
The statue, which represents the life-size condottiere, in antique-style armor and bareheaded, holding his commanding staff in his raised right hand, on his horse, was made by the lost-wax method. As early as 1447, Donatello made the models for the casting of the horse and the condottiere. The work progresses at full speed and the work is completed in 1453 and placed on its pedestal in the cemetery that adjoins the Basilica of Padua.
Brilliant for his cunning and guile, Gattamelata was a thoughtful and effective fighter in action, the type of leader recommended by Machiavelli in The Prince, and which appears in the sixteenth century by François Rabelais in his account of the “Picrocholine wars”.
Not the brute power of weapons, but the cunning and the intelligence will be the major qualities that Donatello will make appear powerfully in his work.
Contrary to Marcus Aurelius, it is not his social status that gives the commander his authority, but his intelligence and his creativity in the government of the city and the art of war. Donatello had an eye for detail. Looking at the horse, we see that it is a massive animal but far from static. It has a slow and determined gait, without any hesitation.
But that’s not all. A rigorous analysis shows that the proportions of the horse are of a “higher order” than those of the condottiere. Did Donatello make a mistake and make Erasmo too small and the horse too large? No, the sculptor made this choice to emphasize the value of Gattamelata who, thanks to his skills, is able to tame even wild and gigantic animals. In addition, the horse’s eyes show him as wild and untameable. Looking at him, one could say that it is impossible to ride him, but Gattamelata manages it with ease and without effort.
Because if you look at the reins in the hands of the protagonist, you will notice that he holds them in complete tranquility. This is another detail that highlights Erasmus’ powerful cunning and ingenuity.
Next, did you notice that one of the horse’s legs rests on a sphere? If this sphere (which could also be a cannonball, since Erasmus was a warrior) serves to give stability to Donatello’s composition as a whole, it also indicates how this animal of gigantic strength (symbolizing here warlike violence), once tamed and well used, allows the globe (the earthly kingdom) to be kept in balance.
Having told you about the horse, it is time to know more about the condottiere.
He has a proud and determined expression. The baton of command, which he holds in his hand, delicately touches the horse’s mane. The baton is not just a symbolic object; he may have received it in 1438 from the Republic of Venice.
Unlike Uccello’s fresco, Gattamelata is not dressed as a contemporary prince of commander, but as a figure beyond time embodying both the past, the present and the future. To capture this, Donatello, who takes care of every detail, has taken an ancient model and modernized it with incredible results. The details of the protagonist’s armor include purely classical motifs such as the head of Medusa, taken from Marcus Aurelius, in Greek mythology one of the three gorgons whose eyes had the power to petrify any mortal who crossed her gaze.
Although the helmet of Gattamelata would have allowed to identify him at eyesight, Donatello has discarded this option. With a helmet on his head, he would have been the symbol of a bloodthirsty warrior, rather than a cunning man. Even better, the absence of a helmet allows the artist to show us a fearless commander whose fixed gaze shows his determination. With the figure slightly bowed and legs extended, the sword in its scabbard placed at an angle, Donatello gives the illusion of an “imbalance” that reinforces in the viewer’s mind the idea that the horse is advancing with full strength.
Art historian John Pope-Hennessy is emphatic:
The fundamental differences between the Gattamelata and Marcus Aurelius are obvious. The (roman) emperor sits passively on his horse, legs dangling. In the fifteenth century, on the other hand, the art of riding implies the use of spurs. The impression of authority that emanates from the monument designed by Donatello comes from the total domination of the condottiere over his horse. (…) The soles of the feet are exactly parallel to the surface of the pedestal, as are the large six-pointed spurs, stretched to the middle of the animal’s flank.
As a result, Gattamelata is not a remake of the “classical Greek or Roman sculpture” of a hero with a sculpted physique, but a kind of new man who succeeds through reason. The fact that the statue has such a high pedestal also has its reason. Placed at such a height, the Gattamelata does not “share” our own space. It is in another dimension, eternal and out of time.
Verrocchio’s Colleoni
Some thirty years later, between 1480 and 1488, Andrea del Verrocchio, after a contest, was selected to make a large bronze equestrian statue of another Italian condottiere named Bartolomeo Colleoni (1400-1475).
A ruthless mercenary, working for a patron one day and his rival the next day, he served from 1454 the Republic of Venice with the title of general-in-chief (capitano generale). He died in 1475 leaving a will in which he bequeathed part of his fortune to Venice in exchange for the commitment to erect a bronze statue to his honor in St. Mark’s Square.
The Venetian Senate agreed to erect an equestrian monument to his memory, while charging the costs to the widow of the deceased…
In addition, the Senate refused to erect it in St. Mark’s Square, which was, along with St. Mark’s Basilica, at the heart of the city’s life. The Senate therefore decided to interpret the conditions set by Colleoni in his last will and testament without contradicting them, choosing to erect his statue in 1479, not in St. Mark’s Square, but in an area further from the city center in front of the Scuola San Marco, on the campo dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo.
Although Verrocchio had started working on the project since 1482, it remained unfinished at his death in 1488. And it is, not as Verrocchio wished, his heir Lorenzo di Credi who will cast the statue, but the Venetian Alessandro Leopardi (who lost the contest to Verrocchio), who will not hesitate to sign it!
If the horse is in conformity with the typology of the magnificent horses composing the quadriga overseeing the Basilica of Saint Mark of Venice (Greek statuary of the IVth century BC brought back by the crusaders from Constantinople to Venice in 1204) and of the horse of Marcus Aurelius, its musculature is more nervously underlined and traced. Objectively, this statue is ideally more proportionate. There is also more fine detail, a result of new pre-sculpture techniques, making the work captivating and realistic to look at.
The sculpture overflows its pedestal. According to André Suarès quoted in The Majesty of Centaurs:
Colleone on horseback walks in the air, he will not fall. He cannot fall. He leads his earth with him. His base follows him […] He has all the strength and all the calm. Marcus Aurelius, in Rome, is too peaceful. He does not speak and does not command. Colleone is the order of the force, on horseback. The force is right, the man is accomplished. He goes a magnificent amble. His strong beast, with the fine head, is a battle horse; he does not run, but neither slow nor hasty, this nervous step ignores the fatigue. The condottiere is one with the glorious animal: he is the hero in arms.
His baton of command is even metamorphosed into a bludgeon! But since it is not Verrocchio who finished this work, let us not blame the latter for the warlike fury that emanates from this statue.
Venice, a vicious slave-trading financial and maritime Empire fronting as a “Republic”, clearly took its revenge here on the beautiful conception developed during the Renaissance of a philosopher-king defending the nation-state.
On the aesthetic level, this mercenary smells like an animal. As a good observer, Leonardo warned us: when an artist represents a man entirely imprisoned by a single emotion (joy, rage, sadness, etc.), he ends up painting something that takes us away from the truly human soul. This is what we see in this equestrian statue.
If, on the contrary, the artist shows several emotions running through the figure represented, the human aspect will be emphasized. This is the case, as we have seen, with Donatello’s Gattamelata, uniting cunning, determination and prudence to overcome fear the face of threat.
Leonardo’s own, gigantic project to erect a gigantic bronze horse, on which he worked for years and developed new bronze casting techniques, unfortunately was never build, seen the hectic circumstances.
Finally, beyond all the interpretations, let us admire the admirable know-how of these artists. In terms of craft and skill, it generally took an entire life to become able to realize such great works, not even mentioning the patience and boundless passion required.
Up to us to bring it back to life !
Bibliography:
- Verrocchio, Sculptor and Painter of Renaissance Florence, Andrew Butterfield, National Gallery, Princeton University Press, 2020;
- Donatello, John Pope-Hennessy, Abbeville Press, 1993;
- Uccello, Franco and Stefano Borsi, Hazan, 2004;
- Les Commentaires de Lorenzo Ghiberti dans la culture florentine du Quattrocento, Pascal Dubourg-Glatigny, Histoire de l’Art, N° 23, 1993, Varia, pp. 15-26;
- Monumento Equestre al Gattamelata di Donatello: la Statua del Guerriero Astuto, blog de Dario Mastromattei, mars 2020;
- La sculpture florentine de la Renaissance, Charles Avery, Livre de poche, 1996 ;
- La sculpture de la Renaissance au XXe siècle, Taschen, 1999;
- Ateliers de la Renaissance, Zodiaque-Desclée de Brouwer, 1998;
- Rabelais et l’art de la guerre, Christine Bierre, 2007.
- The Greek language project, Plato and the Renaissance, Karel Vereycken, jan. 2021.