The Exaltation of the Flower
The Exaltation of the Flower | |
---|---|
Artist | Unknown Greek artist |
Year | c. 470–460 BCE |
Type | Parian marble |
Dimensions | Height: 56.5 cm (22.2 in). Width: 67 cm (26.4 in). Depth: 14 cm (5.5 in). |
Condition | Fragment |
Location | Louvre, Paris |
The Exaltation of the Flower (L'Exaltation de la Fleur) is the modern title given to an early
Background
French archaeologist and historian
Heuzey and the architect Honoré Daumet were involved in an official mission to collect objects related to Caesar's campaigns; they also were interested in other artifacts unrelated to their work.[4] In 1861, they found this marble bas-relief embedded in the walls of a church in the neighborhood of Paleo-Loutro in Farsala and named it The Exaltation of the Flower. Heuzey was informed that the stone was originally discovered in a garden, close to another stone that was not recovered. Heuzey purchased the stone and had it sent to the Louvre in Paris.[2][3] Back in France, Heuzy would become curator of the Louvre, where he would retire in 1908.[4]
Description
A precise description and interpretation of the work has remained elusive since its initial discovery in the 19th century. Scholars agree on some aspects and disagree on others.[7] British Greek art scholar Martin Robertson notes that both women can be seen wearing the tubular peplos garment common to the Classical period. According to the descriptive text found in the Atlas database of the exhibited works of art at the Louvre, the women also are wearing a kekryphalos, a hairnet in the Greco-Roman hairstyle, and appear to hold a type of flower, perhaps poppy or pomegranate. One of the women in the stele carries what resembles a bag, presumed to be carrying seeds in the interpretation.[8]
Analysis
In his 1868 paper, Heuzey argued that the images in the stele suggested the goddesses Persephone (Kore) and Demeter, referring to the
German archaeologist
French scholar Charles Picard (1883–1965) argued that if the stele fragments were reconstructed,[note 1] the bottom missing fragment would have showed the figure on the left standing and the one on the right seated:[13][14]
Neither can the oblique trend of the drapery, belt-high in the silhouette (in profile) of the elder, be explained … without accepting that she was seated, her left forearm resting on her thigh. Only thus could the dice be handled. Only thus, moreover, can so extreme a slope in the pleats coming away from the shoulder, pleats that would have to fall vertically in a non-seated figure, become understandable. On the right, let it not be readily forgotten that all the pleats turn strongly forward, so that they pass the centerline of the stele, marked by the high, triumphant flower and the mingled group of hands. For the maiden on the left, although the cascade of pleats is generally much more direct—as appropriate to a standing posture—some of them, curiously arched, turn forward as well, for example at the left armhole. They can scarcely be understood without again invoking the supporting effect produced by the leg of the seated woman. The folds of Kore’s sleeve, which in 1939 I drew a little too short in the descent, carry on to Demeter’s lap, where they spread out.[15]
German classical archaeologist Roland Hampe (1908–1981) disagreed with Picard's hypothesis, saying that the size of the stele should demonstrate that both women were standing, not sitting.[13]
Flowers, fungi, or bones
It is generally agreed that the plants depicted in the stele fragment are either poppies or pomegranate flowers,[8] however, classical archaeologists and historians of ancient Greek art discuss different species in the literature: German scholar Ernst Langlotz (1895–1978) thought that the women were holding a type of rose;[13] Picard recognizes the symbolism of Demeter and Kore and identifies the flowers as a species of poppy, possibly the opium poppy, the Oriental poppy, or the Iranian poppy.[15][13] Careful examination of the thick 'stems' fails to resemble that of the flowers. German scholar Eugen Petersen (1837–1919) proposed that the figures were holding knucklebones (talus bones from goats or sheep used to play the game of jacks) in their left hand and roses in the right hand; Hampe argues that the stele depicts only knucklebones, not flowers.[13]
In 1911, Greek scholar and archaeologist
Alternate titles
The work is referred to by many different titles in contemporary literature. These include:
- Adoration of the Flower [20]
- Demeter and Kore Exalting the Flower [21]
- Demeter and Persephone [22]
- The Elevation of the Flower [16]
- Maidens Enjoying Flowers [23]
- Pharsalos Bas-Relief [19]
- Pharsalos relief [10]
- Relief of Demeter and Kore [24]
- Stele of Pharsalos [25]
- Stele of the Two Sisters [26]
- The Uplifting of the Flower [27]
See also
Notes
- ^ A scanned image hosted by the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) and the Archaeological Institute of the University of Cologne extrapolates the reconstruction of the missing bottom fragment. It is available here. For the main object record, see here.
- ^ Samorini (1998) writes: "This bas-relief takes us to the very heart of the 'Eleusinian question,' its mysteries, and the controversial issue of the Eleusinian entheogen’s psychopharmacology. Researchers have recently cast doubts on and rejected the hypothesis put forward by Wasson, Hofmann & Ruck in 1978 that presents ergot and its visionary alkaloids as the psycho-pharmacological key to the Eleusinian Mysteries..."
References
- OCLC 501814047.
- ^ OCLC 1713951.
- ^ OCLC 237249471.
- ^ OCLC 804512263.
- OCLC 320532175.
- OCLC 449845119.
- ^ OCLC 557223823.
- ^ OCLC 881834368.
- OCLC 1380621.
- ^ OCLC 3030573.
- OCLC 83996401.
- OCLC 244293425. (subscription required)
- ^ ISSN 2295-9076.
- OCLC 6864625.
- ^ OCLC 1160828. (subscription required)
- ^ OCLC 517364.
- OCLC 26889588.
- OCLC 42661455.
- ^ OCLC 65203694.
- OCLC 1943697.
- OCLC 475021534.
- OCLC 441816393.
- OCLC 135246.
- OCLC 41022089.
- OCLC 3761210.
- OCLC 2756223.
- OCLC 5434075.
Further reading
- Biesantz, Hagen. (1965). Die thessalischen Grabreliefs. Studien Zur Nordgriechischen Kunst. Mainz: Philip von Zabern. OCLC 164946719.
- Hamiaux, Marianne (1992). Les Sculptures grecques. Des origines à la fin du IVe siècle avant J.-C. Volume I. OCLC 186538987.
- OCLC 2205559.
- Knauf-Museum (2005). Reliefsammlung der großen Kulturepochen. J.H.Röll Verlag. p. 139. OCLC 181466502.
External links