Comments on: Apollo’s Drapery: An Unfolding Puzzle

By: Museums Using Social Media to Boost Engagement | Project Patrimonio

Museums Using Social Media to Boost Engagement | Project Patrimonio — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 00:07:54 +0000

[...] Iris, featured a short article co-authored by a member of its education and curatorial staff on the conservation of a bronze statue of Apollo from Pompeii. Articles such as these allow museum patrons a view behind the curtain through the eyes of the [...]

By: Erik Risser

Erik Risser — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 17:02:26 +0000

Dear Amber – Thank you for your interest and kind words. To respond to Andrew’s question, some ancient literary sources, in particular Plutarch and Pliny the Elder, have been variously interpreted to support the case for patination in antiquity. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that many bronzes still preserve evidence of various alloys or, indeed, different metals being used to create a single object (think of the lips, nipples and teeth of the Riace bronzes). These examples seemingly suggest that the color of the alloy or metal itself was sought after and not a particular patinated color. In the case of the Apollo, it is impossible to say with any degree of certainty that there was an ancient patina present since the surface was so heavily altered by nineteenth-century cleaning, removing any potential evidence. Because ancient bronzes do not come down through the ages unaltered, it would be difficult to discern whether a patina was intentional or accrued without knowing many factors associated with the object from its manufacture, practical life and use, burial environment and alteration since recovery. Even if some of these factors are known, the physical and chemical evidence are often the same, which would make it hard to interpret intent. The fact that ‘corrosion’ and ‘patina’ have often been used interchangeably suggests the difficulty in discerning between a natural or human product.

By: majid

majid — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 21:29:52 +0000

good job,Thank you .realy CSI in restoration.

By: IIC Facebook Administrator

IIC Facebook Administrator — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 14:20:52 +0000

The following comment was recently posted to the IIC Facebook page regarding the article in the Wall Street Journal on this project:

“An interesting article but there is an implication that bronzes were never patinated, if I read it correctly. Is there evidence for that, is it possible to discern whether a patina is intended or accrued?” Posted by Andrew Thorn, objects conservator, Australia

We would be happy to have you post a reply to his comment made on http://www.facebook.com/International.Institute.for.Conservation#!/International.Institute.for.Conservation?sk=info

Or we could post it for you.

Many thanks!
Amber Kerr-Allison
IIC, Facebook Administrator

By: Jennifer Malin

Jennifer Malin — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 19:34:35 +0000

David, thank you so much for taking time to answer my question so thoroughly! It is indeed very curious that the 19th-century restorers held back from adding a bow — and I hadn’t even thought about a quiver.

I look forward to seeing the results of your beautiful conservation work in person.

By: Kristine

Kristine — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 01:45:44 +0000

Fascinating and beautiful… the epoxy draping seems much more in proportion to the figure overall, and enhances the sense of action in the pose.

By: Corbin

Corbin — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 21:59:53 +0000

Great job, David and Erik. And it’s a beautiful gallery and show. Thanks!

By: David Saunders

David Saunders — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 21:22:29 +0000

Dear Jen
Your question is a good one. There is lead present in Apollo’s left hand, suggesting that he did indeed hold a bow (and there are also two holes in a shallow groove on the back, presumably for a quiver on his shoulder). As to its material, we simply don’t know. Wood is certainly the most ‘realistic’, but from a practical point of view, it would have been vulnerable to distortion and damage given the statue’s display outdoors. We can get some sense of the total appearance, though, by looking at other images of Apollo as an archer – on coins and sarcophagi, for example.

As for recreating the bow and arrow today – that’s a project that we wouldn’t enter into lightly. The situation with the drapery is instructive. The reasons for fabricating new versions (which are, should the need require, easily removable with minimal risk to the statue) during the conservation here at the Getty were:
(i) that the statue would have looked markedly less effective if the (existing, ancient) drapery stopped short on the arms
and (ii) because we had a number of archival images of the Apollo that illustrate what the drapery looked like after the initial phase of restoration between 1818-25. We thus had a clear ‘model’ to work from, and since the Apollo’s surface is, essentially, a nineteenth-century creation (after they’d cleaned the statue, the restorers covered the entire surface with pigments to give it a coherent, ancient-looking appearance), reconstructing the drapery in this form made sense; in some ways, the statue is as much a nineteenth-century object as an ancient one.

Suffice to say, we didn’t have such specific prototypes for a bow and arrow, and so to have reconstructed them would have been to go substantially beyond our remit. In sum, your question brings up a neat example of conservation ethics and practices, which are by no means static. What’s really interesting (to me now that the exhibition has opened and we’re writing up our research) is the fact that the bow hadn’t been restored in the nineteenth century. If you consider historical restorations of ancient sculptures, people certainly weren’t shy to add attributes, limbs, heads and so forth, so the fact that the nineteenth-century restorers chose not to add a bow (but were happy to add the drapery) reveals a decision-process that is worthy of further investigation and contextualisation.

By: Jennifer Malin

Jennifer Malin — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 15:16:57 +0000

Nice job on the restoration, but where is his epoxy bow and arrow? ; )

I’m only half-joking. Do we have an idea what the bow and arrow would have looked like? Did he perhaps hold a real (wooden) one, which is why it hasn’t survived?

Hope to see this in person when I visit CA this May.

Jen

By: Sera Baker

Sera Baker — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:28:13 +0000

Thank you for the well-detailed summary of your work on the statue. It was absolutely fascinating to read of the discoveries of both the original ancient and the two modern re-constructions (surprise!) combined with beautiful illustrations.