Königlich Preußische Akademie Künste, Hellenistic Content

Königlich Preußische Akademie Künste, Hellenistic Content, the General background of change from private atelier system to Academy system using the Königlich Preußische Akademie Künste, Hellenistic Content, as an example. Academies, Rauch, Goethe, Royal Prussian Academy of Arts, Berlin.

funerary monument King Friedrich Wilhelm Mausoleum Charlottenburg

Louise von Mecklenburg-Strelitz, königin von Preussen, royal consort (Prussia), born 10 Mar 1776, Hannover – died 19 Jul 1810, Hohenzieritz (castle near Neustrelitz) her real name was Louise Auguste Wilhelmine Amalie, grave location, Berlin: Mausoleum of the Schlosspark at Charlottenburg, Berlin, sculpted by C.D. Rauch

Queen Luise of Prussia, Berlin Mausoleum Charlottenburg. Queen Louise of Prussia, Daughter of Karl I, Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. In 1793 she married crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia, who became King Friedrich Wilhelm III in 1797.

 

 

 

 

Field Marshal Blücher, Plaster cast, original modeled 1815, sculpted by Christian Daniel RauchField Marshal Blucher sculpted by Rauch

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sculpted by Rauch, Goethe bust

C D Rauch Bust of Goethe, Marble, Leipzig, Germany, marble, Leipzig, Germany

Royal Prussian Academy of Arts, Berlin Königlich-Preußische Akademie der Künste. The list of honorary members: Andreas Shluter, Daniel Chodowiecki, Asmus Carstens, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Johann Gottfried Herder, Karl Friederich Schinkel, Johann Gottfried Schadow, Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy,

The background in the German speaking regions for the opening of academies of art started with informal drawing groups that called themselves academies, as was the custom in Italy from the Renaissance through until the formation of the French Academy model that slowly was adopted into the academy structure in Europe. These drawing academies were at first most similar to gentleman’s clubs where artist met to draw the life model. Some of these academies early on had a small number of plaster casts of Greek antique sculpture available for sculpture and drawing copies. Individual artist commonly had their own private collections of plaster casts of antique Greek sculpture. Benvenuto Cellini is one of the earlier recorded artists to have a sizable private collection of plasters of antique keynote sculptures known at this time period. Assistants were sometimes given lessons by one or more of the member artist of the Academy. Usually, this was limited to one or several days out of the week. An early more advanced example of an Academy, though not called such at this time period, described by Vasari, was the one of Lorenzo the Magnificent who appointed the sculptor Bertoldo to set up instruction for young painters, and sculptors of great talent. Apprentices were sent from Domenico Ghirlandajo, such as Michelangelo. The academy required the full time of the young apprentice without the menial jobs of the guild system apprentice working ones way up the ladder. Adriean de Vries’ starting in 1601 was the court sculptor of Emperor Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor of the Austro-Hingarian Empire. Among the art collection of Emperor Rudolf II, which was the largest in Europe of the time period, was Adriean de Vries’ bronze relief representing Rudolf II’s 1585 imperial decree that painting should be considered among the liberal arts, and not of the guild craftsmen. Sculpture modern, and of Greek antique was the basis of the education from the collection of the Medici. Access to plaster cast collections was an important aspect of the instruction in the ateliers, private studios of artists, and especially the academies. Since the plaster casts of Greek antique sculpture were expensive, the availability of these was limited until the state supported financially, and philosophically the academy institutions.
The painter, and student of Honthorst at Utrecht, Joachim von Sandrart (1606 – 1688), published his book, “Deutsche Akademie” on the history of German artists, he started the first German academy in 1674 / 1675 in Nuremberg, the Academie der Kunstliebenden, based on his teacher Gerard (Gerrit) van Hornthorst’s (1592 – 1656) Dutch Caravaggisti, Utrecht studio. Sandrart’s academy was similar to the Karel van Manders’ (1548 – 1606), Harlem academy. The academy was primarily a place to attend life drawing, and had a large number of amateurs. The Nuremberg academy though was less important as the eighteenth century progressed. A student of Sandrart, Joh started a similar academy in Augsburg which was official in 1710 with two directors, one Lutheran, and one Catholic. The Augsburg Academy started as a serious academy in 1779. Stuttgart opened an academy of art as a government academy taken over from the private academy in 1762. The Munich academy of art opened in 1770, but wasn’t a functioning academy with a full curriculum until 1801. Düsseldorf opened an academy in 1762 as a school of drawing. In 1773, the academy became the Earl of Palatine’s Academy of Painting, Sculpture and Architecture. During the Napoleonic Wars, the Earl of Palentine’s art collection was inherited by the Wittelsbach family and moved to Munich, the Prussian government had annexed the Düsseldorf region after Napoleon had surrendered, and in 1819 changed the academy into the Royal Arts Academy of Düsseldorf. Dresden started its first academy in the 1680s under the private academy of Samuel Bottschild, (1641 – 1706), and in 1697 by a student of Bottschild, Heinrich Christoph Fehling (1654 – 1725). The academy became official in 1705 with reorganization under Elector Augustus the Strong (Frederick Augustus I, Elector of Saxony and King of Poland), (1670 – 1733), again this academy was mostly concerned with life drawing sessions, now with an annual grant to cover the life model costs. In 1750 / 1763 was the reopening of the academy, with the first time that the Dresden Academy had actual professors and a curriculum. In Karlsruhe the “Handwerkerschule” opened in 1770, the Kunsthochschule started in 1854, as the “Grand Ducal Baden Karlsruhe School of Art”. In Frankfurt am Main an Academy opened in 1780, Städelschule ‘Städelsches Kunstinstitut’ and was founded in 1817 by Johann Friederich Städel. Vienna started an academy similar to the Dresden academy in 1692 / 1705, under Joseph I (1678 – 1711), Holy Roman Emperor, King of Bohemia, King of Hungary, King of the Romans, under the Imperial court artist Peter Strudel von Strudendorff, a Tyrolean sculptor, (1660 – 1714). Jacob van Schuppen (1670 – 1751) an Austrian painter, became the director in 1725 during the reign of Emporer Karl VI, of the Imperial and Royal Court Academy of painters, sculptors, and architects. Jacob van Schuppen was the nephew of Nicolas de Largillière (1656 – 1746), in 1730, Schuppen taught Adam Friedrich Oeser (1717 – 1799). Another period started in 1751, with the reformation under Empress Maria Theresa (1717 – 1780), and then in 1772 there were further reforms under Chancellor Wenzel Anton Graf Kuntz.
The Berlin Academy started in 1690 to 1697 based on the Paris Academy education system. The building was designed by the architect Johann Arnold Nering, (1659 – 1695), and was located on Unter den Linden Strasse. Andreas Schlüter (1660 – 1714) was one of the important early influences of the formation of the Academy from 1699 onwards. The initial Berlin Maler – oder Bildhauer Academie, painters, and sculptors academy system consisted of a high school of art, or university of art based on the academies of Rome, and Paris. The first director of the Berlin academy, as well as in charge of the tapestry workshops, was Joseph Werner (1637 – 1710), previously the miniaturist painter to Louis XIX. He had been in Paris when the Academie Royale was set up under the direction of Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619 – 1683). The academy was the first in Germany to set up a full structure with a protector, vice-protector, director, four rectors – one of whom was Andreas Schlüter, with their Adjuncti, professors, Academici, Honorari, amateur, Assecores, prizes and reception pieces, lectures on paintings in the electoral collection, and the exemption of members from the guilds. The artist departed from the guilds in Renaissance Italy in order to achieve a higher status in society equal to the architect. The previous situation of artist’s mandatory association within the guild system limited independent development of the artist, and limited the amount the artist might get paid depending on how many heads, figures, hands, etc. might have been in a painting, or sculpture. This would be related to a brick layer in how many bricks were laid to determine the fee for his labor. Much of the public image projected of the Renaissance artist was to disassociate hard labor from the artwork produced, and leave the impression of a magical process, to assist with the separation from the guild. Because of this obsession with distancing oneself from the guild system, artist like Michelangelo made misleading declarations about the process of his work on sculpture. For example that he saw the image in a marble stone he chose. Which would seem a magical process, without the manual labor effort of all the preliminary studies. In fact a small number of his preliminary sculpture studies survive, which are necessary as models for choosing a stone, and copying the wax, terra cotta, or plaster version by mechanical methods to marble. Many of his marbles were barely touched by Michelangelo, his assistants primarily were the ones carving. One of the early professors in the Berlin academy was Augustin Terwesten, (1649 – 1711), who made a series of drawings (collection, Berlin Akademie der Künste), depicting the courses being taught in the rooms of the Berlin Academy. Depicted are the courses for drawing from plaster casts of antique, original drawings, drawing from drawings, anatomy, and perspective. Augustinus Terwesten had been a founding member of the academy in den Hague. Jacob van Schuppen, (1670 – 1751), a pupil of Nicolas de Largilliere, (1656 – 1746), and a member of the Paris academy initiated the first serious academy for Austria in 1735, progressing the Austrian academy system significantly. The prominent German sculptors went to Vienna to study during the eighteenth century, since Vienna had become the most sophisticated center of training in the Germanic sphere of the 18th. century, this also coincides with the reign of Frederick William I, when the Berlin academy lost support.

Rauch sculpture of Goethe, Leipzig Museum of Fine Art, Saxony, Germany

Goethe’s Leipzig mentor Adam Friederich Oeser, (1717 – 1799), an advocate of Winckelmann’s for the place of Greek antique art, was the drawing teacher of Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Oeser was a student at the Vienna academy, he moved to Leipzig in 1759, and became the director at the Leipzig Academy in 1764. In 1743 a fire destroyed the Academy building. The Academy was primarily under the influence of the Dutch school of art. Since 1756 Rode was a member of the Berlin Academy of Arts. During the directorship under Blaise Le Sueur (1716 – 1783), instruction was at his residence with just an elementary drawing, Le Sueur, and a mathematics instructor. Le Sueur made a reputation for not involving himself with much of the affairs of the academy. In 1783 Christian Bernhard Rode (1725 – 1797), historical painter for Frederick the Great, was appointed Director of the Berlin Academy as successor to Le Sueur. The new building of the Berlin academy was finished in 1786. Rode’s Berlin Academy friend Daniel Chodowiecki (1726 – 1801) painter, printmaker, supported the nomination. King Friedrich Wilhelm I (1688 – 1740), had little interest in art and culture, and so the investment in the Berlin Academy had fallen into disrepair.
The Berlin Academy during Kaiser Frederick II (Frederick the Great) (1712 – 1786), was based almost exclusively on French models. Rode was unable to alter the French influence, and it was next under Chodowiecki as Director of the Berlin Academy that the reform of 1790, under the reign of Friederich Wilhelm II (1744 – 1797), took place. The last Fleming was Bernhardt Rode as Director of the Academy in 1783. In 1786 the building was restored, and the Academy refurnished with plaster casts, engravings, and drawings. A change of the education system was established by Daniel Nicholas Chodowiecki starting in 1786 / 1797 as director, after Rode’s death in 1797, and then by Gottfried Schadow as director of the Berlin Academy in 1816. As the acting director Johann Gottfried Schadow (1764 – 1850), brought in an expanded antique cast collection, as well as setting up the Rome Prize. Many of the Academies under the state guidance had seen a practical implementation of teaching the craft trade pupils within the academy system for the advancement of commerce, and manufacture within their countries. This new purpose of the academy for art as well as the trades shows up during the expansion of the curriculum, and more serious structure of the academies starting after 1750. The Vienna academy director and painter Friedrich Heinrich Füger (1751 – 1818), warned not to lose sight of the foremost task of an academy to maintain, and further the grand style. As director of “Kultus” department of the Prussian Ministry of the Interior since 1809, Wilhelm von Humbolt, Friedrich Wilhelm Christian Karl Ferdinand Freiherr von Humboldt (1767 – 1835), architect of the Prussian education system, Prussian philosopher, diplomat, involved in government posts in Prussia, part of the Goethe Weimar group, took out the “Mechanic Sciences” from the “Berlin Royal Academy of Arts and Mechanic Sciences”. Jean-Pierre-Antoine Tassaert (Antwerp 1727 — Berlin 1788) was influenced by Greek antique, as well as the French sculptor Etienne-maurice Falconnet, sculptor (1716 – 1791). He went to Paris as a young man to work in the atelier of Michel-Ange Slodtz, french sculptor (René-Michel Slodtz, 1705 – 1764) he lived in Paris for a decade, and then came to Berlin as the court sculptor to Kaiser Frederick II (Frederick the Great). J.P.A. Tassaert made sculptures for Potsdam, and directed the courses in sculpture at the Academy, where his major student and successor was Johann Gottfried Schadow.
Schadow was an adherent of the school of Classicism along with Antonio Canova (1757 – 1822), and Swedish sculptor J. T. Sergell (1736-1813), but with a keener understanding of shape orientation in his sculpture than Canova, which for Schadow was more properly influenced by Greek antique sculpture, and Winckelmann’s writing on antique. With Winckelmann’s quote as an example “ easier to discover the beauty of Greek statues than the beauty of nature….Imitating them will teach us how to become wise without loss of time”. This would indicate the understanding of the content form issues, as they are derived from nature, instead of imatating the surface style. Though there is quite a bit of sculpture especially with the Neo-Classical output that resembles Greek sculpture because of a pose, face, nose, robe, and proportions, instead of a more sophisticated understanding of the translation of complex form exhibited in the better Greek Classical, Hellenisitic, and Greco-Roman sculpture. As a written treatise on what is essential about Greek antique sculpture, the written format can only address superficially the issues of content. There is my attempt to address this content of Greek antique sculpture in my “A Brief Vocational Autobiography”, and more directly with my “Partial Description Visual Concepts Hellenistic Sculpture”. This would also relate to the underlying idea of the French academy “Académie de peinture et de sculpture”, started under Cardinal Mazarin (1585 – 1642), in 1648, with Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619 – 1683) who reorganized the Academy of Painting and Sculpture which Cardinal Richelieu had established. Winckelmann’s student the sculptor Johannes Wiedewelt (1731 – 1802) (“Thoughts on Taste in the Arts in General”), taught at the Copenhagen academy, and when in Rome starting in 1754, among his associates were the German painter Anton Raphael Mengs, his philosophy on art, – Oeuvres Completes D’Antoine-Raphael Mengs, Volumes 1-2 , a reprint from 2009, and 2010, Italian – Pompeo Batoni, Giovanni Battista Piranesi, and German archeologist and art theorist Johann Joachim Winckelmann who arrived in Rome 1755.
Johannes Wiedewelt started sculpture under the advice of French Academy graduate sculptor Jacques François Joseph Saly (1717 – 1776), then the director, and sculpture professor at the Danish Academy of Art. Among Wiedewelt’s students were Nikolaj Abraham Abildgaard, (1743 – 1809), future Director of the Danish Academy, Alexander Trippel (1744 – 1793), the sculptor, – later started a private academy in Rome, {Gottfied Schadow (1764 – 1850), and Johann Jakob Schmid (1759 – 1798) worked with Trippel, as well as Goethe learned much of his understanding of ancient art from Alexander Trippel}, J. H. W. Tischbein, (1751 – 1829) – later the director of the Naples Academy, Franz Anton Zauner (1746 – 1822), – before teaching, and director at the Vienna academy, Johann Heinrich von Dannecker (1758 – 1841), – before founding, and as director of the Stuttgart Academy, and Bertel Thorvaldsen, (1770 – 1844). The first public exhibition of art in Prussia occurred in 1786. This date was the institution of the Age of Enlightenment under King (Kaiser) Friedirich Wilhelm II (1744 – 1797), for the modernization of Prussia. Schadow made an equestrian statue of Frederick the Great for the town Stettin. Initially the equestrian statue of Frederick the Great was intended as more neo-Classical with a Roman motif in the clothes of the statue, but instead included a contemporary Prussian look. His statue of Leopold of Dessau (1676 – 1747), is in Prussian attire, but the reliefs on the pedestal are costumed in neo-Classical Roman style. The beginning of a more practical depiction in sculpture of the time period, and national cultural context referred to as “Patriotic” style was in the early stages at this time of Schadow in the German lands, especially Prussia. Some of Schadow’s additional important sculpture works were the Quadriga of Victory over the Brandenburger Thor at Berlin; his Nymph awaking out of Sleep; and the double figure portrait of Prinzessinnen Luise und Frederike von Preußen (1797).
Schadow produced drawings after antique sculpture, portraits, designs for monuments, representations of the stages in life for men and women, the theory of canons, as well as the sexes in comparison to each other for scale, proportion, and type, and animal studies which he published as “Polyklet”, Johann Gottfried Schadow “POLICLET : oder von den Maasen des Menschen nach dem Geschlete un Alter mit Angabe der wirklischen Naturgrosse nach dem rheinländischen Zollstöcke. Berlin 1834 (The sculptor and Art Student’s Guide to the Proportions of the Human Form) or from the masses of the person; and Polykleitos, or guide to the Proportions of the Humanly form and “National Physiognomy” Johann Gottfried Schadow “National Physiognomien oder Beobachtungen uber den Unterschied der Geichtszuge und die auszehre Gestaltung des menschlichen Kopfes als Werkes von Petrus Camper. (National physiognomy or observations about the difference of facial part and the external design of the human head as a continuation of the work of Petrus Camper). Petrus Camper is now discredited pioneering anthropologist who demonstrated the relationship between all organisms by a mechanical system he called metamorphosis. He headed into controversy with a theory that facial angle correlated with intelligence. It was the nature of his drawings which interested Schadow. They appear to be scientific and employ many of the same architectural methods Schadow used in his work, //Johann Gottfried Schadow – “Lehre von den Knochen und Muskeln, von den Verhältnissen des menschlichen Körpers und von den Verkürzen, In 30 Tafeln sum Gebrauch bei Akademie der Künste”, Berlin, 1830. (Teaching from the bones and muscles, of the circumstances of the human body and foreshortening). These kinds of artistic guides were common from the early Renaissance through the mid nineteenth century. Schadow’s published guide was the first to give proportion scale with measured ruler units of inches, and feet, instead of just interrelationships of the parts in relative scale. He based his analysis on multiple life models, as well as what were the preferred Greek sculptures of the time. The majority of the drawings is rather simplistic and crude, but gives the idea of part of the establishment of the Berlin Academy curriculum, and the philosophy so important to establishing a more rigorous approach to the sculpture related to Greek antique. The use of caliper measurements to make an analysis of scale, and measured proportion is shown in many instances of manuals, as well as art of the earlier time periods, as in the Carracci studio of Bologna, and Rome in the 16th., and early 17th. Century. Another example of many made in the past is the: “Anatomie du gladiateur combattant, applicable aux beaux arts…”, Paris, 1812. Two-layer copperplate engraving, color. Jean-Galbert Salvage, (1770-1813), A military doctor of the Napoleonic era, Salvage based his drawings on dissections of soldiers “killed in duels, in their prime.” For this study of the Borghese Gladiator, an ancient Greek statue, he arranged his cadavers in the same pose as the sculpture and meticulously worked out the skeletal and muscular anatomy. Anatomical studies of important classical sculptures constituted a genre within fine art. Another is the: “Tabulae Sceleti e Musculorum Corporis Humani”, (London, 1749). Copperplate engraving with etching. Bernhard Siegfried Albinus, (1697-1770), [anatomist], Jan Wandelaar, (1690-1759), [artist], Albinus intended his figures to exemplify ideal humanity and an ideal of anatomical illustration. The cadaver, carefully chosen for its close approximation to classical ideals of proportion, stands with guardian angel hovering behind against a painterly backdrop. Another is the Italian work of: “Elementi di anatomia fisiologica applicata alle belle arti figurative”, Turin, 1837-39. Lithograph., Francesco Bertinatti, (fl. mid-1800s), [anatomist], Mecco Leone, [artist], The anatomical studies for real, imaginary and prospective sculptures and paintings became a genre in its own right in the early and middle decades of the 19th century. Another by the Roman work: “Anatomia per uso et intelligenza del disegno ricercata…”, Rome, 1691. Copperplate engraving., Bernardino Genga, (1636?-1734?), [anatomist], Charles Errard, (1609?-1689), [artist], The association between death and anatomy continued in art anatomy, even as it waned in medical texts. Genga, a Roman anatomist, specialized in studies of classical sculptures. Errard, court painter to Louis XIV, helped found the Académie Royale de Peinture and was first Director of the Académie de France in Rome. Another representation of anatomical text is the: “Ontleding des menschelyken lichaams…”, Amsterdam, 1690. Copperplate engraving with etching. Govard Bidloo, (1649-1713), [anatomist], Gérard de Lairesse, (1640-1711), [artist], published his books on theory, and practical art content – The Principles of Drawing: Or, an Easy and Familiar Method Whereby Youth are Directed in the Practice of that Useful Art, (1701), and ”Groot Schilderboek”, How to Create Beauty: De Lairesse on the Theory and Practice of Making Art, (1707). This stark dissection—with ragged flesh fully displayed and hands bound with a cord—signals a commitment to a higher level of realism. To our eyes, the picture may suggest a distressing indifference to, or even pleasure in, human suffering. Bidloo’s realistic anatomy has affinities to trompe l’oeil and still-life, two popular genres of 17th-century Netherlandish painting that often featured bones and other symbols of death. Another the Renaissance anatomy text of: “De Humani Corporis Fabrica…”,Basel, 1543. Woodcut., Andreas Vesalius, (1514-1564), [anatomist], Stephen van Calcar and the Workshop of Titian, [artists], Vesalius sought to make illustrations that were true to nature, but many of his figures conform to classical ideals of beauty and proportion, and stand in classical poses. {These anatomical pictures and text are from the National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Md., U.S.} “Elementi di anatomia fisiologica applicata alle belle arti figurative”, Turin, 1837-39. Lithograph., Francesco Bertinatti, (fl. mid-1800s), [anatomist], Mecco Leone, [artist], The anatomical studies for real, imaginary and prospective sculptures and paintings became a genre in its own right in the early and middle decades of the 19th century. Another by the Roman work: “Anatomia per uso et intelligenza del disegno ricercata…”, Rome, 1691. Copperplate engraving., Bernardino Genga, (1636?-1734?), [anatomist], Charles Errard, (1609?-1689), [artist], The association between death and anatomy continued in art anatomy, even as it waned in medical texts. Genga, a Roman anatomist, specialized in studies of classical sculptures. Errard, court painter to Louis XIV, helped found the Académie Royale de Peinture and was first Director of the Académie de France in Rome. 

 

Jean-Galbert Salvage, (1770-1813) –

“Anatomie du gladiateur combattant, applicable aux beaux arts…”, 

Paris, (1812).

 

Trew, Christoph Jacob (1695–1769).

Title: Tabulae osteologicae.

Publication Information: Norimbergae : [s.n.], (1767).

 

 

Gamelin, Jacques (1738–1803).

Title: Nouveau receuil d’ostéologie et de myologie.

Publication Information: Toulouse: J. F. Desclassan, (1779).

 

 

Cheselden, William (1688–1752).

Title: Osteographia, or The anatomy of the bones.

Publication Information: London: [William Bowyer], (1733).

 

 

Bidloo, Govard (1649–1713).

Title: Ontleding des menschelyken lichaams.

Publication Information: Amsterdam: Weduwe van Joannes van Someren, et al., (1690).

 

 

Anonymous.

Title: [Treatise on physiognomy].

Publication Information: [Netherlands?, ca. 1790].

 

 

Albinus, Bernhard Seigfried (1697–1770).

Title: Tabulae sceleti et musculorum corporis humani.

Publication Information: London: H. Woodfall; J. & P. Knapton, (1749).

 

 

Valverde de Amusco, Juan (ca. 1525–ca. 1588).

Title: Anatomia del corpo humano.

Publication Information: Rome: Ant. Salamanca and Antonio Lafrery, (1560).

 

 

Nicolas Henri Jacob: 

Muscles of the back (study).Drawing for the Complete Treatise on the Anatomy of Man

by JM Bourgery, (1831-1854).

 

A Myology by Professor of Anatomy Johannes Van Horne and draftsman Marten Sagemolen:

Four books of original drawings dated from the Dutch Golden Age, (1660).

 

Zur Anatomie des Weiblichen Torso, Zwölf Tafeln; in geometrischen Aufrissen für Kunstler und Anatomen – Dr. Joh Christn. Gustav Lucas, professor der Anatomie

 

 

Traite Complet de La Peinture par M. Paillot de Montabert. Planches. Paris, (1829).

 

Das Gesetz der Formenschonheit von Johannes Bochenek, Leipzig, (1903).

 

Planches Anatomiques A Usage Des Juenes Gens Qui De Destinent A L’etude, De La Chirurgie, De La Medecine, De La Peinture Et De La Sculpture; Par M. Chaussier, Paris, (1823).

 

Anatomie Canonique Ou Le Canon De Polyclete, Retrouve par Hubertus Cornelius Anton Leopold Fock, Utrecht, (1865).

Edme Bouchardon “L’ANATOMIE NECESSAIRE POUR L’UASAGE DU DESSIN”, (1741).

 

Jacques Gamelin “Nouveau recueil d’ostéologie et de myologie dessiné d’après nature”, (1779).

 

Jean Cousin “LIVRE DE POVRATRAICTVRE”, (1595).

 

Francesco Bertinatti “Tavole anatomiche annesse agli elementi di anatomia fisiologica applicata alle belle arti figurative”, (1837).

 

Alphonse Lami “Anatomie artistique Myologie superficielle du corps humain”, (1861).

 

Ludwig Pfeiffer “Handbuch der Angewandten Anatomie”, (1899).

 

 

 

Giovannni Battista de Rubejs “De’ Ritratti ossia, Trattato per coglier le fisionomie”, (1809).

Francesco Carradori “Istruzione elementare per gli studiosi della scultura”, (1802).

 

Tommaso Piroli “Raccolta di Studj come Elementi del Disegno tratti dall’Antico da Raffaello e Michelangelo Con aggiunta di Alcune Tavole Anatomiche”, (1801).

 

Jean Bosio “Traité élémentaire des règles du dessin”, (1800).

Kollmann, Julius Konstantin Ernst. “Plastische Anatomie des Mmenschlichen Körpers”, (1886).

Elfinger, Anton. Anatomie des Menschen die Knochen-Muskel-und Bänderlehre., (1854).

M. Vagnier “Cours d’Anatomie artistique”, (1942).

 

Gustav Fritsch – DIE GESTALT DES MENSCHEN (1899), Berlin.

 

Geisela M. A. Richter “KOUROI” Oxford University press, New York, (1942).

Giambattista Sabattini “TAVOLE ANATOMICHE PER LI PITTORI, E GLI SCULTORI”, (1814).

Samuel Thomas von Soemmerring “Über die Wirkungen der Schnürbruste”, (1793) (2nd ed.).

Giambattista Sabattini “TAVOLE ANATOMICHE PER LI PITTORI, E GLI SCULTORI”, (1814).

 

 

 

Crisóstomo Martínez – Anatomical Atlas (Valencia , Spain , 1638 – Flanders , ca. 1694).

was a Spanish painter , engraver and microscopist, framed within the novator movement of Spanish Baroque science .Esqueletos y huesos, hacia 1680-1694, aguafuerte, Biblioteca Nacional de España.
Anatomical Atlas
In the Archive of the City of Valencia eighteen original plates are preserved, twelve of them made in Valencia and the remaining in Paris and sent from there to the professor of the University of Valencia Juan Bautista Gil de Castelldases . One of them, dedicated to the proportions of the human body, was the only one that was published in the author’s life in 1689, being reprinted in Frankfurt and Leipzig and again, along with another representing twelve skeletons in various positions, in 1740 in Paris. In 1780, the Royal Academy of Painting and French Sculpture , bought the plates and published them again in 1780.

The conserved sheets correspond to the osteology , which included new morphological aspects, such as bone embryology (ossification of cartilage) and microscopy (trabecular aspect of the same), placing themselves at the forefront of the European morphologists of the moment, contain representations Of ninety percent of the human skeleton.

 

 

 

August Froriep “ANATOMIE FÜR KÜNSTLER. KURZGEFASSTES LEHRBUCH DER ANATOMIE, MECHANIK, MIMIK UND PROPORTIONSLEHRE DES MENSCHELICHEN KÖRPERS”, (1880).

Julien Fau “ANATOMIE ARTISTIQUE ÉLÉMENTAIRE DU CORPS HUMAIN”, (1850).

Julien Fau “ATLAS DE L’ANATOMIE DES FORMES DU CORPS HUMAIN A L’USAGE DES PEINTERS ET DES SCULPTURES”, (1866).

Giuseppe del Medico “ANATOMIA PER USO DEI PITTORI SCULTORI”, (1811).

“CATALOGUE OF PLASTER REPRODUCTIONS FROM ANTIQUE, MEDIVAL AND MODERN SCULPTURE”, (1911).

Gottfried Schadow “POLICLET : oder von den Maasen des Menschen nach dem Geschlete un Alter mit Angabe der wirklischen Naturgrosse nach dem rheinländischen Zollstöcke. Berlin, (1834). (The sculptor and Art Student’s Guide to the Proportions of the Human Form), (1834).

Johann Gottfried Schadow “Lehre von den Knochen und Muskeln, von den Verhältnissen des menschlichen Körpers und von den Verkürzen, In 30 Tafeln sum Gebrauch bei Akademie der Künste”, Berlin, (1830). (Teaching from the bones and muscles, of the circumstances of the human body and foreshortening), (1830).

Johann Gottfried Schadow “National Physiognomien oder Beobachtungen uber den Unterschied der Geichtszuge und die auszehre Gestaltung des menschlichen Kopfes als Werkes von Petrus Camper. (National physiognomy or observations about the difference of facial part and the external design of the human head as a continuation of the work of Petrus Camper).

Petrus Camper is now discredited pioneering anthropologist who demonstrated the relationship between all organisms by a mechanical system he called metamorphosis. He headed into controversy with a theory that facial angle correlated with intelligence. It was the nature of his drawings which interested Schadow. They appear to be scientific and employ many of the same architectural methods Schadow used in his work.

Dr. Julien Fau “ATLAS DE L’ANATOMIE DES FORMES DU CORPS HUMAIN A L’USAGE DES PEINTERS ET DES SCULPTURES_DEUXIÉME ÉDITION RETOUCHÉE ET AUGMENTÉE”, (1866).

Paul Richer “8heads Canon”, (1893).

Paul Richer “7.5heads Canon”, (1890, 1893).

Paul Richer: Statuette-étalon du corps humain, (1893).

Paul Licher: Proportions moyennes de la femme – caractéristiques osseuses, (1915).

Paul Licher “Proportions moyennes de l’homme”, (1915).

Compas de proportions, (1893).

 

 

 

Johann Gottfried Schadow – “Lehre von den Knochen und Muskeln von den Verhaeltnissen des Menschlichen Koerpers”.

 

 

 

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Born: May 20, 1764, Berlin, Germany – Died: January 27, 1850, Berlin, Germany.

 

 

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Medallion: Hercules and the horses of Diomedes.

Von Johann Gottfried Schadow – geschaffenes Marmor-Grabmal für Friedrich Wilhelm Schütze in der Schlosskirche Schöneiche.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Lehre von den Knochen und Muskeln von den Verhaeltnissen des Menschlichen Koerpers.

Blücher monument in front of the University of Rostock’s main building, created by Johann Gottfried Schadow in collaboration with Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.

Tombstone for Count Alexander von der Mark 1788 90 By Johann Gottfried Schadow 1764 1850, Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin, Germany.

Schadow – Statue Zieten platz (Mitte) Hans Joachim von Zieten, Gesellschaft Berlin, Berlin-Mitte (Wilhelmstraße/Mohrenstraße):

Friederike von Preußen by Johann Gottfried Schadow.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, Lying girl, 1826.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, The princesses Luisa and Federica, marble statue, from 1795 to 1797.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, The princesses Luisa and Federica,
Plaster model without the basket of flowers, 1795-1797.

Johann Gottfried Schadow,
The original design for the group of princesses Luisa and Federica with a basket of flowers, 1795.

Johann Heinrich von Dannecker (1758–1841), Ariadne auf dem Panther, 1803–1814, Marmor, 146 cm Liebieghaus Skulpturensammlung, Frankfurt am Main.

Johann Gottfried Schadow Borussia personifikacja Prus z cokołu pomnika Leopolda von Dessau 1798 / 1800 Berlin.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Frederike Unger – drawing Nach Der Originalzeichnung.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – man und frau.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – five women dancing.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – frau leg up sitting in dress.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – das taenzerpaar vigan.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – Vigano.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – Vigano.

Johann Gottfried Schadow – Zeichnung – Der Tänzer Vigano.

Schadow, Johann Gottfried, – Zeichnung – 1764 die tanzerin vigano die frau.

1792 Berlin Minerva von Johann Gottfried Schadow Johann D. Meltzer nördliches Torhaus Brandenburger Tor, Berlin.

1792 Berlin Mars als Kriegsgötter von Johann Gottfried Schadow Johann D. Meltzer nördliches Torhaus Brandenburger Tor, Berlin.

Blücher monument in front of the University of Rostock’s main building, created by Johann Gottfried Schadow in collaboration with Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.

Tombstone for Count Alexander von der Mark 1788 90 By Johann Gottfried Schadow 1764 1850, Alte Nationalgalerie, Berlin, Germany.

Schadow – Statue Zieten platz (Mitte) Hans Joachim von Zieten, Gesellschaft Berlin, Berlin-Mitte (Wilhelmstraße/Mohrenstraße):

Friederike von Preußen by Johann Gottfried Schadow.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, Lying girl, 1826.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, The princesses Luisa and Federica, marble statue, from 1795 to 1797.

Johann Gottfried Schadow, The princesses Luisa and Federica,
Plaster model without the basket of flowers, 1795-1797.

Johann Gottfried Schadow,
The original design for the group of princesses Luisa and Federica with a basket of flowers, 1795.

 

Schadow, Rudolf (Karl Zeno Rudolf Schadow) – BORN 9 Jul 1786, Roma – DIED 31 Jan 1822, Roma

GRAVE LOCATION Roma, Lazio: Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, 1 Via Sant’Andrea delle Fratte

Oldest son of the sculptor Gottfried Schadow and his first wife Marianne Devidels.

. In 1810 he went to Rome with his brother Wilhelm to study. In 1812 he decided to stay in Rome and in 1814 he became a Roman Catholic.

In 1818 he refused an offer to become a professor at the Academy in Düsseldorf. In 1822 he died in Rome, aged only 36. He was buried in the Sant’Andrea

delle

Fratte.

His “Die Spinnerin” (1816) is in the Wallraf-Richartz Museum in Cologne and his “Die Sandalenbinderin” (1817) in the Neue Pinakothek in Munich.

Family
• Father: Schadow, Johann Gottfried
• Brother: Schadow-Godenhaus, Wilhelm Friedrich von

Related persons
• is brother/sister of Schadow-Godenhaus, Wilhelm Friedrich von
Rudolf Schadow (1786-1822) – The Spinner-Hermitage, St. Petersburg.

Born in Rome, he had his father, Johann Gottfried Schadow, at Berlin, for his first master.

In 1810 he went to Rome and received kindly help from Canova and Thorvaldsen. His talents were versatile; his first independent work was a figure of Paris, and it had for its companion a spinning girl.[1] The latter, a portrayal of a young girl spinning, proved to be extremely popular among visitors to Rome, and even admirers of the work of Canova and

Thorvaldensen

acknowledged its worth.

Schadow

made several other versions of the work, the first probably between 1814 and 1816. The King of Prussia, Prince Esterhazy and the Duke of Devonshire all expressed a wish to include this statue in their collections. One version completed in 1820 is on display in the Hermitage, which acquired it from the Znamenka Palace, near St. Petersburg, in 1930.

 

 

 

Rudolf Schadow – Putting on a sandal (German: Die Sandalenbinderin)

Embracing the Roman Catholic faith, he produced statues of John the Baptist and of the Virgin and Child. In England he became known by bas-reliefs executed for the Duke of Devonshire and for the Marquess of Lansdowne.

His last composition, commissioned by the king of Prussia, was a colossal group, Achilles with the Body of Penthesilea; the model, universally admired for its antique character and the largeness of its style, had not been carried out in marble when in 1822 the artist died in Rome.

 

 

 

Portrait of the sculptor Rudolph (also Rudolf) Schadow. Carl Christian Vogel of Vogelstein – Carl Christian Vogel of Vogelstein 1788-1868 – State Art Collections Dresden.

Johann Heinrich von Dannecker (1758–1841), Ariadne auf dem Panther, 1803–1814, Marmor, 146 cm Liebieghaus Skulpturensammlung, Frankfurt am Main.

 

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

Alexander Trippel – “Bust Johann Wolfgang von Goethe” (Weimar, Duchess Anna Amalia Library, Stiftung Weimarer Klassik), (1790), marble, 82 cm, And sign .: “ALEX: TRIPPEL./FECIT IN ROMA./i1790.”

 

 

Alexander Trippel – “Bust Johann Wolfgang von Goethe” (Arolsen, castle), (1788), marble, 82 cm.

 

 

Alexander Trippel – Bust Frederick II of Prussia” (Arolsen, castle), (1788/1790), marble.

 

 

Alexander Trippel – 1st edition: “Bust Johann Gottfried Herder” (Weimar, Goethe House), (1789/1790), marble.

 

 

2nd edition: “Bust Johann Gottfried Herder” (Weimar, Duchess Anna Amalia Library, Stiftung Weimarer Klassik), 1790, marble, 80 cm, And sign .: “A. TRIPPEL: / FECIT. IN ROMA./i1790. ”

 

 

http://www.goethezeitportal.de/wissen/projektepool/goethe-italien/rom-kuenstler/rom-trippel.html

 

 

Goethe, Schiller and the Goethezeit on Google+
You are here: Home > Knowledge Base > Projects Pool> Goethes Italian Tour > Artists in Rome > Alexander Trippel
Goethe’s Italian Tour, Rome

Yvette Deseyve

Artists in Rome:
Alexander Trippel

Last update: December 2006

Alexander Trippel

Alexander Trippel
Engraving from Chr. Fr. Schulze to Clemens 1775

structure

1. Short Biography
2. Trippel and Goethe
3. Important Works of Trippel from Goethe’s Roman Period
4. Literature and Weblinks
5. Legal Notice and Contact Address

1. Short Biography

 

In his observations on “Italy and Germany,” Karl Philipp Moritz (1756-1793) devoted a detailed report to the Swiss sculptor Alexander Trippel, working in Rome:

The name of this sculptor is well known to the public. He is now a man in the best years. Already in his early youth he suffered strange destiny, until finally his own genius led him to the school of art. With weak principles he came to Rome about twelve years ago. Less favored by happiness, he continued his studies with perseverance, which is peculiar to the genius, who, though in the midst of the greatest masterpieces of art, feels his weakness, but does not despair of his powers.
( Moritz, 1789, p. 56)

 

Trippel, who was born in Schaffhausen on September 23, 1744, actually came only through detours to art. Due to financial difficulties in Switzerland, the family moved to London, where Trippel began an instrument building apprenticeship which he broke up without success after a short time. Only the drawing lessons with Johann Christian Ludwig von Lücke (c. 1703-1780) led him “into the school of art”. At the age of 15, Trippel finally broke out to Copenhagen and visited the Copenhagen Art Academy under the influence of the early classicist sculptor Johann Wiedewelt (1731-1802). On the other hand, on the other hand, the work of Carl Frederick Stanley (1740-1813), on the other hand, influenced the young sculptor and awakened his wish , In Rome to study the antiquity:

For a few years it has always floated in my mind, in what way I know I could see Rome “” to see the important place, the Temppel of the arts and the creatures, where I was always a worshiper

(Trippel to Christian von Mechel, 1775, cited by Ausst.Kat. Basel Ulrich, 1995, p. 143) (Trippel to Clemens, undated, cited by Ulrich, 2004, p.

 

After a financial trip to Paris, where he became acquainted with the Swiss artist, Christian von Mechel (1737-1817), who was to become his most important sponsor and agent in the early years, Trippel traveled to Paris Autumn 1776 for the first time to Rome.

Early difficulties on the Roman art market forced him to return to Switzerland briefly, so that Alexander Trippel finally moved to Rome in 1778. Several attempts by Tripoli to recommend themselves for a permanent employment also outside Rome, in order to permanently improve his financial situation failed. This shows above all the rejection of his memorial design for Frederick the Great. Although he obtained honorary membership in the Prussian Academy, he was no more conducive to his application to the vacant post as court sculptor in Dresden, nor did his active efforts to mediate part of the Mengs’ legacy to Dresden. Thus Alexander Trippel remained until his death on September 24, 1793, in Rome, where his sculptor’s workshop enjoyed great prestige, and he was temporarily occupied by Gottfried Schadow (1764-1850) and Johann Jakob Schmid (1759-1798). Trippel himself made a name for himself primarily as a portrait artist and with his drawing school not far from Trinità dei Monti. Numerous porcelain works and a few tomb projects, such as the Gessner and Chernyshev tomb, consolidated his place among the German-speaking artists of Rome.

Only the art-historical analysis of the entire Ãuvre Alexander Trippel in the 1990s allowed a comprehensive insight into his work after the previously almost exclusive reception of Trippel as an artist of the busts for Goethe and Herder. Amazingly, Trippel can be found in literary sources far more than in his traditional pictorial works – about 30 sculptures and 180 preserved graphic sheets: the correspondence with his patrons Christian von Mechel and Johann Rudolf Burckhardt (1750-1813) provide information on his work , His art purchases together with Hofrat Friedrich von Reiffenstein (1719-1793) and the enthusiastic reception of his works both in Rome and in the north of the Alps. Diary recordings by the painter Marianne Kraus (1765-1838) and the travel reports by Count Stolberg (1750-1819), as well as reports on the visits to the studios of Moritz and Goethe complement the picture, so that Alexander Trippel can be described as a key figure of German classicism.

2. Trippel and Goethe

Alexander Trippel, an antique expert, restorer and sculptor, was closely connected with the circle of the antiquarianists around Friedrich von Reiffenstein, Aloys Hirth (1759-1837) and Karl Philipp Moritz, can not be identified immediately after Goethe’s arrival in Rome in the close environment of the poet , The mediator function for the German-speaking artists in Rome was first and foremost the painter Angelika Kauffmann (1741-1807), who initially watched carefully the contacts of Goethe with other Roman artists and challenged Trippel to cynical commentaries:

Herr Göde came here about four weeks ago (under the name of a German scholar, Miiller), lodges at the table, he goes with no one but the Reiffenstein and the Angelika Kauffmann, for they have made a conspiracy that he is nowhere to go, As they lead him, so this great lion is walking around the street through the alley.
(Ausg.Kat. München Maisak 1998, p. 80)

 

Only a single visit to the studio at Trippel in November, 1786, is at first mentioned. The production of a portrait bust of Goethe in the following year did not return to the initiative of Trippel, as once the portrait work of Kauffmann and Tischbein to the homage of the poet, but was caused as external commissioning. It was only Goethe’s character studies and his attempt to capture the proportions of the human body more accurately by means of plastic modeling, bringing him closer and closer to Trippel. Thus, Goethe enthusiastically reported on the progress made in his modeling studies and his instructive conversation with Alexander Trippel:

Now, at last, the essence of all the things known to us, the human figure, has occupied me, and I […]. Drawing is not at all, and I have therefore decided to make a model, and that seems to want to move back. […] It is then that my stubborn study of nature, my diligence with which I have proceeded in the comparatively anatomical anatomy, now enables me to make a whole difference in nature and the antiquities To see what is difficult for the artists in detail, and that when they finally get it, they can only possess it for themselves, and can not communicate it to others “(HA Bd 11, p. 386, 15-35). “A most agreeable, instructive conversation, directly in touch with my wishes and purposes, I connected with the sculptor Trippel in his workshop when he modeled my bust, which he was to work out for the prince of Waldeck in marble. It was not for the study of the human form, and for its proportions, as a canon, and as a different character, to be elucidated under other conditions.
(Goethe to Charlotte von Stein, 1787, cited by Schaffhausen, 1993, p. 106)

 

Trippel and Goethe shared the idea of an inseparable link between art and science, in particular antiquity and the study of nature. However, “[Trippel], in increasing measure and true to the image of true Neo-Classicalism, later cemented by Goethe and Johann Heinrich Meyer (1760-1832), as a practically German-Roman creation, the [[Trippel] Denied “(Schaffhausen, Ulrich 1993, p. 11). Consequently, Trippel also strictly denied contact with the French academy in Rome and set up an independent drawing academy for his followers to pursue studies.

Trippel’s private drawing academy, near the Spanish Steps, pursued as the ultimate goal of intensifying the study of nature, in particular the study of the human act, and to compensate for the study of antiquity required in Rome. As well as the son of Salomon Gessner (1730-1788), Johann Heinrich Wilhelm Tischbein (1751-1829) enjoyed the teaching of Trippel’s private academy as prominent pupils

3. Important works of Trippel from Goethe’s Roman period

 

2nd edition: “Bust Johann Wolfgang von Goethe” (Weimar, Duchess Anna Amalia Library, Stiftung Weimarer Klassik), 1790, marble, 82 cm, And sign .: “ALEX: TRIPPEL./FECIT IN ROMA./i1790.”

 

1st edition: “Bust Johann Wolfgang von Goethe” (Arolsen, castle), 1788, marble, 82 cm

“I do not mind that the idea, as if I had looked so much, remains in the world” – the bust Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Above a simple, profiled pedestal rises the Marmorküste of Goethe. The evenly shaped, oval face is framed by dynamic curls that fall down to the shoulders. The suggestion of an anastole, as graced by the portraits of Alexander the Great, and the simple toga, which is held together on the shoulder, which closes the bust in great soft lines, underscore the ancient character.

On August 23rd, and shortly thereafter, on August 28th, 1787, Goethe, in his Italian Journey, reported on the making of his bust by the sculptor Alexander Trippel:

It is my bust, and that cost me three mornings this week.
(HA Vol 11, pp 387, 11-12)

Have I already said that Trippel is working my bust? The prince of Waldeck ordered it from him. He is already finished, and it makes a good whole. She is working in a very solid style. When the model is ready, he will make a plaster mold over it, and then begin the marble, which he then wishes to work out after his life; Because what can be done in this matter can not be achieved in any other.

(HA Vol 11, pp 388, 10-17)

Already in January 1787, Goethe and Prince Christian August von Waldeck (1744-1798) had met in Rome. The common veneration of the two for Friedrich II of Prussia, the “great king,” whom Goethe dedicated an obituary in his Italian voyage (HA Vol. 11, p. 162, 32-34), prompted Waldeck to order two of his pendants Busts at Alexander Trippel. The busts of the Prussian king and the poet’s prince, now standing at the castle of Arolsen, correspond to their formal design. In the cloaks, which are decorated by a Medusa’s head on the one hand, and an antique tragedy mask on the other, the couple’s testimony is concentrated: the wise war hero stands against the young genius of the fine arts and sciences as the creator of the Iphigenia tragedy. This detail was lapsed with the repeated execution of the bust for Duchess Anna Amalia of Saxony-Weimar (1739-1807), replacing it with a neutral clasp with acanthus rosette. Thus the latter was able to take a new relationship with the bust herder (1744-1803) commissioned at the same time by Trippel.

Bust of Frederick II of Prussia

 

“Bust Frederick II of Prussia” (Arolsen, castle), 1788/1790, marble

The bust of Goethe’s by Alexander Trippel was stylized as a highly esteemed, ideal Goethe representation, unlike Kauffmann’s sensitive Goethe portrait. This idealization, which is confirmed by research, can be traced back to the influence of the Apollo of Belvedere, honored by Goethe, has given rise to an ever-changing debate about the mimesis concept of the bust, both in contemporary as well as contemporary art-historical studies.

Not only the main forms, but also the most individual traits are formed with the truth that one can not misunderstand them, although the costume of the ancients always astonishes the eye at the first sight, and the striking similarity of a bust always behaves as much as it does Thereby gaining artistic beauty.
(Alois Hirt, 1789, cited by Schaffhausen, 1993, p. 107)

My bust is very good; Everyone is satisfied with it. Certainly she has worked in a beautiful and noble style, and I do not mind that the idea, as if I had looked so, remains in the world.

(HA Vol 11, p. 397, 9-12)

Alexander Trippel’s Goethe busts were, especially in the face of the portrayed personality, but also due to the limited transmission of other works of Trippel to his celebrated principal work. At least two more casts of the Goethe bust, produced by Trippel, are demonstrable. One was owned by Archiv Reiffenstein, the other had been requested by painter Angelika Kauffmann. Already in the first half of the nineteenth century, numerous casts were produced in almost every material, such as a variety of sizes and prices, as a “souvenir” and “educational quotation” (ZSAK Maaz 1995, p. 283). Prints and later photographic reproductions provided a widespread reception of Trippel’s Goethe busts.

Goethe-Busten
“O of the sorry pendants!” – the bust of Johann Gottfried Herder

 

1st edition: “Bust Johann Gottfried Herder” (Weimar, Goethe House), 1789/1790, marble

 

2nd edition: “Bust Johann Gottfried Herder” (Weimar, Duchess Anna Amalia Library, Stiftung Weimarer Klassik), 1790, marble, 80 cm, And sign .: “A. TRIPPEL: / FECIT. IN ROMA./i1790. ”

Already on the first day of his arrival in Rome, Herder was confronted with the Goethe bust painted by Alexander Trippel in the house of painter Angelika Kauffmann. Only a little later the desire for an adequate counterpart should follow from different sides:

O the sorrowful companions! G. has been idealized as an Apollo; How shall I look poor with my bald head? The better, so I stand naked & Poor there
(Herder 1798, cited by AusK.Kat München Maisak 1998, p. 88.)

Kauffmann himself immortalized Herder – like the portrait of Goethe – in a rapturous youthful manner, which Herder accepted with benevolence. On the other hand the execution in marble by Alexander Trippel. On behalf of Duchess Anna Amalia, at the end of February, 1789, Trippel began her portrait of Herder as a counterpart to his celebrated Apollo-Goethe bust. The bust of Herder rises above a round base, which is only slightly arched. Heavy folds indicate the robe in an antique, unadulterated toga, which is lacking the elegantly closing clasp of the Goethe bust. In contrast to the Goethedarstellung, her face is filled with a full face of her realism, with her tear-sacks and unmotivated mouth, there is no idealizing grace, so that Herder demanded improvements:

I wanted a little more hair on my forehead. Now she is almost bald in the bosom, which makes me even too philosophical. It seems to me that the contrast between me and Goethe is too strong.
(Herder, 1789, cited by the Ausg.Kat., Munich Maisak 1998, p. 88)

Because of the faulty marble, an intact new marble reception had to be made anyway, Trippel made numerous changes to the second version, which considerably increased the attractiveness of the depicted. The second bust, now also in Weimar, reproduces the same neckline with the same drapery drape, but the massiveness of the pleats was significantly reduced. Even the headform changed Trippel in favor of a refined representation, in which also the tear-bags and the fullness of the face were greatly reduced.

The exceptional circumstance that both bracts have been retained in the same place allows a direct comparison which clearly shows the degree of idealization. The second interpretation of Herder as a timeless, ancient philosopher could at least have attracted the admiration of Moritz, who, in his observations on “Italy and Germany,” wrote an emphatic praise for the busts of the sculptor Alexander Trippel:

Alexander had a Lysippus, Plato, and Socrates had their alems, through whose hands they were drawn to the latest posterity: happy that ours had found a triple!
(Moritz, 1789, p. 66)

4. Literature and Weblinks

Literature:

Exhibition cat. Basel Debrunner 1995
Debrunner, Albert M .: “Goethe’s Basler Stays and his Friendships with Johann Rudolf Burckhardt”, in: Roda von, Burkhard, Schubiger, Benno (Hrsg.): Longing for Antiquity. The Haus zum Kirschgarten and the beginnings of classicism in Basel, Ausst.Kat. Basel, Basel, 1995, pp. 159-168.

Exhibition cat. “Ulrich
Jörg Burckhardt as the patron of the sculptor Alexander Trippels (144-1793), in: Roda von, Burkhard, Schubiger, Benno (Hrsg.): Longing antiquity. The Haus zum Kirschgarten and the beginnings of classicism in Basel, Ausst.Kat. Basel, Basel, 1995, pp. 143-158.

Exhibition cat. “Ulrich
Jörg Burckhardt as the patron of the sculptor Alexander Trippels (144-1793), in: Roda von, Burkhard, Schubiger, Benno (Hrsg.): Longing antiquity. The Haus zum Kirschgarten and the beginnings of classicism in Basel, Ausst. Basel, Basel, 1995, pp. 143-158.

Exhibition cat. Munich Maisak 1998
Maisak, Petra: “Happy Psyche is no longer a tragedy”. Angelika Kauffmann’s encounter with Goethe, Herder and the Weimar Circle, in: Baumgärtel, Bettina (Eds.): Angelika Kauffmann, Ausst.Kat. Munich, Ostfildern-Ruit 1998, S 79-90.

Exhibition cat. Schaffhausen 1993
Swiss Institute of Fine Arts (eds.): Alexander Trippel (1744-1793). Sculptures and Drawings, Ausst.Kat. Schaffhausen, Schaffhausen, 1993.

Exhibition cat. Schaffhausen Ulrich 1993,
Ulrich, Dieter: “Alexander Trippel, the greatest sculptor in Rome, and therefore in the world …”, in: Museum zu Allerheiligen Schaffhausen, Swiss Institute of Art Science (eds.): Alexander Trippel (1744-1793). Sculptures and Drawings, Ausst.Kat. Schaffhausen, Schaffhausen 1993, pp. 9-13.

Moritz 1789
Moritz, Karl Philipp: VI. Description of a memorial of Count Tzernichev, edited by Mr. Alexander Trippel, in: Italy and Germany, with regard to customs, customs, literature, and art, Berlin, 1789, pp. 55-68.

Ulrich 2004
Ulrich, Dieter: Alexander Trippel (1744-1793) as a “case”. Origin, identity, and sense of belonging of a Swiss sculptor as a part of the turn to German-Roman classicism, in: Griener, Pascal, Imesch, Kornelia (Hrsg.): Classicism and Cosmopolitanism. Program or problem? Exchange in art and art theory in the 18th century, Chur 2004, pp. 249-266.

ZSAK Howard 1995
Howard, Seymour: Alexander Trippel and Bartolomeo Cavaceppi in the Roman Art Market, in: Directorate of the Swiss National Museum Zurich (Ed.): Zeitschrift fur Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, Vol. 52, Heft 4, Zurich 1995, p -234.

ZSAK Maaz 1995
Maaz, Bernhard: “That the idea, as if I had looked so much, remains in the world” – Alexander Trippel’s Goethe bust: work and effect, in: Directorate of the Swiss National Museum Zurich (ed.): Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie And Art History, vol. 52, vol. 4, Zurich 1995, pp. 281-292.

ZSAK Schnyder 1995
Schnyder, Rudolf: The Sculptor and the Porcelain Manufactory or the Transformation of Venus in Wilhelm Tell, in: Directorate of the Swiss National Museum Zurich (ed.): Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, Vol. Pp. 223-234.

ZSAK Ulrich 1995
Ulrich, Dieter: Michelangelo, Raphael and the Old. Alexander Trippel as illustrator: The attempt to reconstruct the artistic reference points of an early classicist sculptor in: Directorate of the Swiss National Museum Zurich (eds.): Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte, Vol. 52, Issue 4, Zurich 1995, p. 225- 246th

Web Links:

Documents for Alexander Trippel in the City Archives Schaffhausen:
http://www.stadtarchiv-schaffhausen.ch/Bibliothek/Biographien-Literatur_t.htm

To the Basel sponsor of Alexander Trippel, Johann Jakob Burckhardt:
http://pages.unibas.ch/klassarch/geschichte/burckhardt.html

Trippel in the museum Bad Arolsen:
http://www.museum-bad-arolsen.de/index.php

Trippel in the Allerheiligen Museum Schaffhausen:
http://www.vms-ams.ch/index.php?id=632&action=detail&museumid=590

5. Legal notice and contact address

All templates originate from a private collection. Private use and non-commercial use for artistic, cultural and scientific purposes is permitted provided source (Goethezeitportal) and URL ( http://www.goethezeitportal.de/index.php?id=rom_trippel ) are given. Commercial use or use for commercial purposes (eg for illustration or advertising) is only permitted with the express written permission of the author. No copyright owner is known to the Goethezeit Portal; If there is still a copyright, please contact us.

Contact:
Prof. Dr. Georg Jäger
Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
Department of German Philology
Schellingstr. 3
80799 Munich, Germany

E-mail: georg.jaeger@germanistik.uni-muenchen.de .

Back to top

Supported by the Bavarian State Ministry
of Science, Research and Art
CULTURAL BAVARIA

 

 

 

Christian Friedrich Tieck, German, 1776-1851, by sculptor Christian Rauch, plaster cast. Original modelled in 1816-18, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, Denmark
Tieck, Christian Friedrich sculpture by Rauch,

Johann Gottfried Schadow’s main students were Christian Friedrich Tieck (1776–1851) who spent fourteen years in Rome, and worked on the sculpture for the Royal Theatre of Berlin; Rudolph Schadow (1786–1822) son of Johann Gottfried Schadow, made ideal genre sculpture, Wilhelm von Schadow-Godenhaus (1788–1862), became well known as a painter, and became the director of the Dusseldorf Academy in 1826; Christian Daniel Rauch (1777-1857), with his most famous work being the monument of Queen Louise at the Mausoleum at Charlottenburg; General Scharnhorst statue, Berlin; General Bulow, Berlin; Albrecht Dürer, Nuremberg; Blucher monument, Breslau, made after a design by Schadow; Maximilian I., Munich; statue of Frederick the Great, Berlin, 1839 to 1851; and his Goethe bust, Leipzig. When Rauch was thirteen years old, he began his five year study with the sculptor Friedrich Valentin, sculptor (1752 – 1819). He was made an assistant from 1795-1797 to the sculptor and academy professor Johann Christian Ruhl, sculptor (1764 – 1842) in Kassel. Rauch became Gottfried Schadow’s official assistant in 1803, modeling reliefs after sketches made by Gottfried Schadow.Schadow’s most prominent student was Christian Daniel Rauch (1777 – 1857). C.D. Rauch went further into the examination, and influence of Greek antique sculpture within his own development, as well as the influence of Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767 – 1835), Bertel Thorvaldsen (1770 – 1844), and the writings of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749 – 1832).

Rauch established the maturity of intent, procedure and technique for the Berlin Academy that was the main influence in the German regions for several generations. Relevant with the later period of this art training, and production was the installment of the The Pergamum Altar, and earlier further extensive Greek Hellenistic sculpture (or Greco Roman copies of Hellenistic Greek sculpture), during then Wilhelminian Germany for the modernization of Prussia. Dresden and it’s collections of Greek sculpture were started earlier in the seventeenth, and eighteenth century. The cross pollination between the various German speaking region academies, as well as the pertinent writings, and personalities on Classicism came to a high sophistication at the Berlin, Dusseldorf, Munich, Dresden, and Vienna academies at the end of the eighteenth century, up until the later nineteenth century. The plaster cast collection of Greek antique in Dresden numbered over five thousand, in Berlin the number was over seven thousand plaster casts of antique, the same type of antique large collections were at Dusseldorf, Munich, and Vienna. Kaiser Wilhelm I (1797 – 1888), and Kaiser Wilhelm II (1859 – 1941) supported traditions of European art that evolved from the influence of Greek antique, and refused the growing degenerate decline in art of the modern. Kaiser Wilhelm II’s main counsel was the painter, and Director of the Academy, Anton von Werner (1843-1915), though this painter has the modernist influence of the photograph obviously in his artwork. It was in this instance probably more nationalist ferver than objective high values in sustaining “High Art”. The following generations were the most prominent sculptors associated with the Academy of Berlin from Rauch’s instruction: Drake, Blaser, Schievelbein, Kiss, Wolff, Shaper.Johann Friedrich Drake (18o5 – 1882) is represented with his equestrian statue of Kaiser Wilhelm I. at Cologne, and in his sculptures of Rauch and Schinkel at Berlin. Gustav Bläser (1813–1874) of Cologne sculpted the Francke monument at Magdeburg. Friedrich Hermann Schievelbein (1817—1867) made the sculpture group Pallas instructing a youth on the use of the spear, placed on the palace bridge in Berlin. Schievelbein’s frieze of the Destruction of Pompeii, Nues Museum, was influenced by the frieze of the Apollo Temple at Phigaleia. August Kiss (1804—1865), predominantly sculpted animals in bronze, best known for his Mounted Amazon fighting a Tiger, front steps of the Alte Museum at Berlin. Albert Wolff (1814 – 1892), being a direct line from Rauch. Albert Wolff carried more closely to Rauch in content, and style, The main students of Albert Wolff were Reinhold Begas (1831 – 1911), straddled the line between weaker modern influences of the French sculpture school from the nineteenth century Romantic mixed with his inherited content from Rauch, and the mostly unfortunate influence from Bernini’s sculpture, branded Wilhemian Neo-Baroque / WilhelminischerNeubarock. R. Begas had a high level of sophistication in form content in his best works, and impressive development in his other sculpture that was left in an undeveloped state, missing supporting shape content on a deeper level, as finished works. Albert Wolff’s other student Fritz Shaper (1841 – 1919) carried more closely the tradition of the German school from Rauch. Ernst Herter (1846 – 1917) was most influenced and involved in Greek antique, Neo-Hellenistic, more than Neo-Baroque. Herter received an award to study in Copenhagen where it looks like he may have encountered Andreas Kolberg’s (1817 1869) sculpture, studied at the Academy of Arts in Berlin and later as an apprentice of Ferdinand August Fischer, Gustav Blaeser and Albert Wolff as well.
The Berliner Secession formed in 1898 with Walter Leistikow as the main modernist leader. The influence toward modernist tendencies started earlier in the mid century in Berlin. There was support against following France in the decline of art through the century by Kaiser Wilhelm I, and then to a lesser degree by Kaiser Wilhelm II. Artists working, and teaching in the region were divergent in the content value of the art work produced, and the training offered. Many artist in the Germanic regions did continue against the prevailing tide of modernism, and the superficial art that replaced earlier higher standards. But the Berliner Secession was the festering moderism finally taking hold in the region. Walter Leistikow was expelled from the Berlin Academy of Fine Art for his lack of artistic talent. Much in the way that the French Impressionists started a revolt by having gallery shows independent of the French Academy of Fine Art. The gallery shows in France were funded by some of the wealthiest families in France, the parents of the talentless students – expelled, or not accepted in to the French Academy of Fine Art. This broke the system that the French Academy had to deny exhibition of non credited art work, which would have been deemed amateur, and inferior. Artists like Degas joined in on the private wealthy families revolution when there was the realization of how much money was backing the process. One might look at Degas, an average student at the Academy of Fine Art in Paris, ( École des Beaux-Arts ) as quite the opportunist. The École des Beaux-Arts, started its decline during Napoleon Bonaparte, with artists pushed to produce more superficial state propaganda style for his reign, the early form of the photograph introduced soon after, into a copy device for the artists source work, as well as influencing a superficial surface quest for more, and more imitation of flesh effects, and realism. Plaster Casts of Antique Greek sculpture became more of a tonal reproduction exercise, instead of a training in complex form, and then mostly disbanded from the later training altogether. Also the new age of Democracy in France, which fueled a dumbing down of aesthetics, (though no intention is meant on my part to imply a critique of the value of Democracy here) , as well as the philosophy that anything new in art was better than the old standards based from Greek Antique, in the age of technological, and societal change. These changes in the French Academy of Fine Art were in stages. Curriculum of the Ecole de Beaux Arts changed every five to twenty years or so throughout the 19th. Century, culminating in its complete artistic decline. There were private ateliers schools in France that countered this tendency, as well as individual artists, but they were few. This was a similar situation that came to a full takeover in Berlin with the Berliner Secession formed in 1898. The German artists also succumbed to the photograph and illustration realism, but there was also a counter to this with the influence of Greek sculpture that lasted into the nineteenth century longer than in France.The modern period was solidified at the period of the November Revolution with the takeover by the “degenerate” (as referred by the traditionalists influenced by Classical, and Hellenistic Greek sculpture) artist of the contemporary modernists. Some of the Secession artists were Ernst Barlach, Lovis Corinth, Georg Kolbe, Kathy Kollwitz, and Wilhelm Lehnbruch. There was an attempt to rid the Academy of the modernist camp in 1933, and effective in 1937 with the Gleichschaltung (Gleichschaltung: n., the standardization of political, economic, and social institutions as carried out in authoritarian states.) of the Nazi’s. The merits of earlier art from the Greek antique, as well as the 19th. and late 18th. Century in Prussia, and the other Germanic regions best work was predominantly missing in this period of the 1930s, and 1940s. The majority of the art that was reflected in this war period of the Nazi’s had more to do with the Bauhaus realism, the late 19th. Century modernism post Classical, and post Hellenistic influenced art. There were a few obscure sculptors within the Axis, and Axis aligned regions, and states, with more sound work, though generally they are not remembered in art history. This Bauhaus / late 19th. century modernist realism influence, and early 20th. century German modernist schools were the larger influence on Russian propaganda sculpture of the Soviets, and later Chinese Communists. , – (P. Brad Parker)

Rauch text below from Wikpedia:

Some of the sculptors of note from the Academy:

Christian Daniel Rauch, – sculptor,, Potsdam, Prussia, Germany, – (*1777 in Arolsen in Hessen; †1857 in Dresden) was one of the most important and most successful sculptors of the German Classicism. He was a pupil of Johann Gottfried Schadow. When Rauch was thirteen years old, he began his five year study with the sculptor Friedrich Valentin. He was made an assistant from 1795-1797 to the sculptor and academy professor Johann Christian Ruhl in Kassel. Rauch became Gottfried Schadow’s official assistant in 1803, modeling reliefs after sketches made by Gottfried Schadow. Gottfried Schadow had been the director of the Berlin Royal Academy sculpture workshop for twenty four years when Rauch was accepted as his assistant. Rauch read works of Goethe and Schiller which were the prominent sources of the Classicism of the period.In 1804 under Frederich William III, Rauch was granted an annual scholarship of 125 Talern, and twelve groschens for a six year period of study in Italy. In Rome he befriended Antonio Canova, and Bertel Thorvaldsen. In 1809 Rauch had his annual scholarship increased to 400 Taler. After William of Humboldt supported it, Rauch in the autumn 1810 received a commission order to Prussian king Friedrich William III., because his 36 year old wife Luise had died. Thorwaldsen favoured Rauch for the commission without competition for the tomb, and in a similar way later Rauch favored his friend and favorite pupil Ernst Rietschel in the commission for the Weimar Goethe-Schiller monuments. Rauch lived alternating between Rome and Carrara, together with Friedrich Tieck, another pupil of Gottfried Schadow. Rauch from the distance of Italy experienced the fall of Prussia as well as the war of liberation. Beside many prince and field gentleman statues he made also bronze and marble busts of Goethe, and Dürer, also busts of famous Germans were made for Walhalla (Parthenon inspired memorial place) in Regensburg. Sculpture Works: Christian Daniel Rauch: The married couple Niebuhr, marble relief in the old persons cemetery, Bonn Adelheid of Humbold as Psyche, seated, marble statue, Rome 1810 Grave monument of the Luise of Prussia (Berlin, in the Mausoleum in Charlottenburg), 1815, marble. Marble statues of Bülow, and Blücher beside Schinkels in Berlin, 1819 life-size Goethe bust, 1820 Monument A.H. Franckes , Saale, 1825-1828 Monument for Friedrich of Kleist for Merseburg, 1825/26
Goethe, Statuette, 1828
Statues of the Polish princes Mieczyslaw and Boleslaw for the Posener cathedral, 1841
Work for the Walhalla (with Danube-baptize): Büsten of Raphael Mengs (1808), Hans Sachs, van Dyck, admiral Tromp, Martin beautiful (1813), Snyders (1814), Blücher (1817), count Diebitsch Sabalkansky (1830), crowd refuge (1831), Dürer (1837) and 6 Victorien (2 sitting, 4 standing)
sitting statue max of Joseph I., Erzgusss of J.B. Stieglmair (1825/35)
Dürer in Nuremberg (1830/1840), ore casting of J.D. Burgschmiet
Model for Dürer monument in Nuremberg, 1849, of Jakob Daniel Burgschmiet 1849 in bronze poured.
Sarcophagus figure of Friedrich William III., Berlin, 1846

· Equestrian Statue of King Frederick II of Prussia (Frederick the Great), Unter der Linden, in Berlin 1851
1864 poured of Hermann Gladenbeck, lost after WWII was over in 1945 when the Soviet Union bombed to rubble the capitol of East Prussia – Königsberg, / In 1992 Replaced the statue of Immanuel Kant for Kings Castle by Marion Dönhoff in Käliningrad, – not the same Rauch sculpture
Iron statues of two lying lions in Luebeck before the Holsten Gate
Moses in Prayer, supported of the high priests Aaron and Hur, group of marbles at the Church of Peace (Friedenskirche) in Potsdam
Rauch school
By the large number of his pupils Rauch had a large and direct influence on the artists of its time. Some of his pupils that became prominent artists: Friedrich Drake, who designed the Berlin’sSiegessäule – Victory Column, and Ernst Rietschel , who created the Goethe Schiller monument in Weimar, Albert Wolff.

Sculptors below are from the beginning of the mid 17th. century through the18th century up to the period of Rauch. The styles represented by a few of the sculptors below give some context to Rauch arriving to his sculpture content from the European tradition. Thorvaldsen, Canova, Flaxman, etc… were in the basic same group of neo-Classical as Rauch. Rauch has a more sophisticated, and solid sculpture than Canova, or Flaxman, as well as better than most of Thorvaldsen’s work. None of these four sculptors are particularly noteworthy for their figure sculpture. Rauch was a great portrait / bust sculptor, but his figure sculpture was of a less successful quality. Houdon is the older generation, and has significant content from Greek Hellenistic sculpture in his bust work, which is only approached of these four sculptors mentioned here by the best work of Rauch, and to a lesser degree by Thorvaldsen. The sculptors below are not a full representation of all that could be included. Houdon has a whole page to his work, with some of his teacher Pigalle included, toward the last few pages of this blog. More will be included as commentary on these works and sculptors as I return throughout the blog, as time allows. } Blogger PBP Christian Daniel Rauch, – sculptor, , Goethe, Leipzig, Sachsen, Germany, – (* 2 January 1777 in Arolsen in Hessen; † 3 December 1857 in Dresden) was one of the most important and most successful sculptors of the German classicism. He was a pupil of Johann Gottfried Schadow

///////

Rauch, Christian Daniel German, 1777-1857 Field Marshal Blücher Plaster cast. Original modelled 1815. Plaster, H. 58.5 cm,

 

///////

Rudolph Siemering (born in Königsberg on 10 August 1835; died 23 January 1905) Siegesdenkmal Leipzig – (Leipzig Victory Monument) enthüllt 1888 – Bildhauer Rudolf Siemering

 

Büste Heinrich Rüdiger von Ilgen für die Siegesallee in Berlin, enthüllt 1902, Bildhauer Rudolf Siemering

 

Kaiser Wilhelm I. für die Börse in Berlin 1906, von Bildhauer Rudolf Siemering

 

The Washington Monument, sculpted by Rudolf Siemering, in Eakins Oval, just in front of the stairs of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

 

Bison, bronze, Tiergarten, Berlin, Germany – von Bildhauer Rudolf Siemering

 

Signature/Inscription: Iscription: FUERST BLUECHER VON WAHLSTADT, and verso: Nach dem Leben v: Chr:Rauch im J:1815 im A. (?)Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, Denmark

 

////// Tieck, Christian Friedrich German, 1776-1851 The Sculptor Christian Rauch Plaster cast. Original modelled in 1816-18. Plaster, H. 67 cm, Signature/Inscription: Inscription on the front of the base: CHR:RAUCH, plus, on the back, Fried. Tieck. 23 April 1818. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, Denmark ////////// Louise von Mecklenburg-Strelitz, königin von PreussenROYAL CONSORT (Prussia) BORN 10 Mar 1776, Hannover – DIED 19 Jul 1810, Hohenzieritz (castle near Neustrelitz) REAL NAME Louise Auguste Wilhelmine Amalie GRAVE LOCATION Berlin: Mausoleum Charlottenburg, Berlin Daughter of Karl I, Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. In 1793 she married crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia, who became king Friedrich Wilhelm III in 1797. They had nine children, among them the future emperor Wilhelm I. After the battle of Jena they fled to Königsberg and then to Memel. Louise visited the French quarters at Tilsit in 1807, hoping to obtain better conditions for Prussia. She didn’t succeed, but it was said that this was only because her husband broke in impatiently on her conversation with the emperor before the latter gave in. It is certain that her fearless encounter with the emperor impressed many and added to her popularity. In 1809 she returned to Berlin. She was serioulsly ill in the summer of 1809. In June, 1810 she fell ill again of a severe pneumonia and she died on July 19th,1810, only 34 years old. After her death she became a symbol of all virtues that a good Prussian woman should posess. ////////// Some 19th. century Berlin Academy graduates:
* Reinhold Begas – (1831 – Berlin – 1911 Berlin) Son of painter Karl B., brother of Carl – 1843 Berlin academies under Schadow – in 1848 in the studio Rauch. 1. independent work> Hagar and Ismael <(1852). In 1855 Rome scholarship – till 1858 there in the circle Lenbach-Böcklin-Feuerbach. In 1861 with Böcklin and brook Len call in großherzogl. Art school of Weimar – in 1863 Berlin. In 1863-64 Rome 1865 Berlin – in 1869-70 and 1892 Rome. Artistic direction in the victory avenue (1895-1901 – and two Gruppenvon to him. One of the best sculptors of the 19th. Century –-, Specifically for his non modern style, not his realist impressionist outdoor or soft surface indoor impressionist work. Neo-Hellenistic Baroque / Lesser quality Impressionist Realist work / Neo Hellenistic Realism / Neo- Renaissance / Romantic Academic ; /// * Carl (Karlhienz ) Begas – (1845 Berlin – 1916 Köthen) Neo – Hellenistic very impressive neo Hellenistic sculpture of a Faun in the Alte Museum Berlin, Son of painter Karl B. – in the Berlin academy (1862 – 64) studies and in the studio seiners of brother Rheinhold, afterwards in the workshop of Louis Sussmann- Hellborn, him in the monuments> Frederich d. Gr. <and> Frederich Wilhelm III <({ Rathaus} city hall Berlin; town house Wroclaw (Breslau) in 1869) involved. 1. free works are Beethoven bust (1866) and charity group (1868. In 1869 and 1887 busts röm belong to Rome – during these years. Knabenund girls (bust of an Italian, in 1879, Stuttgart, Staatsgal.). Public orders in Berlin for the old (Alte) museum, the Academy of the Arts and the Zueghaus. 1890 successors to K. Hassenpflug in the teaching post the Kasseler Academy of Arts till 1898. Employee of his brother in the Berlin national monument for emperor Wilhelm I. (1892-97, 1950 outworn) and in the (Siegesallee) victory avenue (1899).; /// * Ernst Herter -Neo – Hellenistic , Excellent work – Better than Begas for his outdoor work, particular note his “Wounded Achiles” (influenced by Cortot‘s (early 19th. Century / late 18th. Century {which is influenced by the Hellenistic sculpture – “Dying Gaul”/and obviously the articulation of the Rhodian school – Laokoon, etc…faceted geometric glyptek shape dominating the turning rythems – of simplier conclusion than more complex Greek Hellenistic}) sculpture of the “Fallen Gladiator” in the Louvre – previously placed in Versaille) at the Greek Revival estate of the wife of Kaiser Wilhelm II on the island of Corfu, Greece; Fritz Heinmann – Romantic Academic Realism / Neo –Hellenistic ; /// Heinz Hoffmeister (1851 Saarlouis – in 1894 Berlin) sculptor, Painting-around author;: Schüler from C. and R. Cauer in Kreuznach, A. Wittig in Karlsruhe and the Berlin academy. College under A. Wolff. Since 1973 in Berlin resident. Study traveling to Spain, Nord-Africa, East. Involved in the decoration of the armoury with two bronze statues: Wrangle and from Goeben in the fame hall. Numerous official orders and monuments. Hansmann-monument (1888, Aachen); Mendelssohn’s monument (1890, Dessau); figürlicher jewellery in the main entrance of the town castle in Berlin; portrait busts of the imperial family (emperor Frederich III, emperor Wilhelm II, empress Augusta Viktoria). Gravestones (statue L. Of Ravine’ on old franz. Churchyard in Berlin – not recd) One of the letzen works was the draft for a monument of the Gr. Electors in Friesack (not ausgef). Company Gladenbeck led several works of the artist in her sales catalog (Whistling faun, faun on panther, Cupid, psyche, Beethoven, resurrection). Groups: Nymph and Bacchus boy – Ganymed on the eagle of the Zeus; Busts: Closer W. Müller (Cologne, Wallraf Richartz museum) – painter P. Flickel – Herzog Ernst II v. Castle Col-Gotha; Heinrich H., Ger. sculptor, painter and author (1851-1894), pupil v. K. and R. Cauer in Kreuznach, later b. Wittig a. d. Academy. Düsseldorf., anschl. b. Wolff a. d. Academy. Berlin, active in Berlin and on Capri, lit. cf Th. B., bronze bust of a faun with kiss mouth, hairband and bird’s claw, rs. sign. “Heinz Hoffmeister” “, Gießereistempel AG before. H. Gladenbeck and son, on column from Zöblitzer Serpentin (Saxony), on the foot min best of all, H 27.5 cms. ” ; /// Theodor Erdmann Kalide – Neo- Hellenistic, – Berlin artist (1801-1863). (b Königshütte, Upper Silesia [now Chorzów, Poland], 8 Feb 1801; d Gleiwitz [now Gliwice, Poland], 23 Aug 1863). German sculptor. At the age of 15 he was apprenticed at the Königliche Eisengiesserei in Gleiwitz, where he soon began sculpting cast-iron plaques. In 1819 Johann Gottfried Schadow summoned him to Berlin, where he was instructed in chasing by Coué and worked in the Berlin Eisengiesserei. In 1821 he transferred to the studio of Christian Daniel Rauch. Following Rauch’s example and under his influence, Kalide produced such large animal sculptures as the Resting Lion and the Sleeping Lion (several casts, e.g. zinc, 1824; Berlin, Schloss Kleinglienicke). From 1826 to 1830 Kalide worked on equestrian statuettes, including those of Frederick William II (zinc), after the model by Emanuel Bardou (1744–1818), and Frederick William III (e.g. cast iron; both Berlin, Schloss Charlottenburg, Schinkel-Pav.). In 1830 he became a member of the Berlin Akademie. His most popular works included the life-size bronze group Boy with a Swan (1836), which was installed on the Pfaueninsel in Berlin as a fountain (several casts, all untraced). Kalide achieved wide recognition and aroused violent controversy with his almost life-size marble figure Bacchante on the Panther (1848; Berlin, Schinkelmus., badly damaged). This work transgressed the accepted boundaries of classical art, above all in the figure’s provocative pose, and was perceived as shocking. In its uninhibited sensuality and its blending of the human and the animal, it offended the conservative Berlin public, and consequently Kalide received few new commissions. He had no success with competition designs and became increasingly embittered. He spent his last years at Gleiwitz, where he died. After a theory in the iron foundry Gleiwitz got the well-known artist Gottfried Schadow the young Kalide into its workshop to Berlin. From there Kalide changed later into the then more popular workshop of Christian Daniel Rauch. Solved from the classically determined influence, its own artistic temper developed Schadows and Rauch more for the expression of powerful movements. Its largest artistic acknowledgment found Kalide 1836 with the well figure “The boy with swan”, which received 1851 on the Londoner world exhibition price medal and which Friedrich William IIITH for the lock park Charlottenburg acquired. (verschollen). Theodor Kalide (1801-1864) shows here a trunkene, naked woman, who räkelt herself on the back of a Panthers and gives by an adventurous setting the Raubtier from their bowl to drink. This group released a scandal after its demonstration on the citizens of Berlin academy exhibition of 1848. Kalide accused it hurts the Decorum (behaviour), by showing humans and animal on a stage. During Kiss into its Amazone still the noble fight between humans and Raubtier makes it represented here in animalisch, driveful omittingness common thing. This group of figures is natureful in their to see dionysischen beginning in greatest possible distance from the apollonischen people ideal of the classicism and can as “splendourful proclamation anti-classical Unmen” Bloch / Grzimek 1978, 137) be quite designated. After the presentation of this work Kalide kept no more orders in Berlin and had in the native Schlesien, withdraws, in order to be able to continue to work than sculptors. The Bacchantin on the Panther is received, there only as Torso in the citizens of Berlin national gallery it in to 2. World war was heavily damaged. ; /// Otto Lang – Romantic Academic Realism ; /// Michael Lock – Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. & early 18TH. Century Academic ; /// * Carl Cauer – (1828 Kreuznach – 1885 Kreuznach) Pigalle influence and Hellenistic sculpture influence ; /// Ludwig Brunow – – (1843 Lutheran/Mecklenburg – in 1913 Berlin) rider’s monument Grand Duke Frederich Franz II (1893, Schwerin), rider’s monument emperor Wilhelm I. (1905, Erfurt) 19th. Century realism, Neo Boroque, – Frederich I., in 1883 Berlin, former. Armoury, Ruhmeshalle.this one is particularly good – it’s neo baroque; Brunnow – (1843 Lutheran/Mecklenburg – 1913 Berlin) Reiterdenkmal Großherzog Frederich Franz II. (1893, Schwerin), Reiterdenkmal Kaiser Wilhelm I. (1905, Erfurt) 19th. Century realism, Neo Boroque, – Frederich I. , 1883 Berlin, ehem. Zeughaus, Ruhmeshalle.this one is particularly good – it’s neo baroque ; /// Rudolf Marcuse – Neo – Hellenistic ; /// Julius ( Karl Adalbert) Moser – Neo – Hellenistic / Neo – Classical ; /// Richard Ohmann – Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. Century Realism ; /// Friedrich Johann Pfannschmidt – 19th.Century soft French Academy Style – but executed well ; /// Paul Peterich – 19th.Century Realism ; /// Johannes Pfuhl – Neo – Baroque – very impressive, unusual style for the 19th. century. Johannes Pfuhl (born 20 February 1846 in Löwenberg, province of Silesia, died May 5, 1914 in Baden-Baden) was a German sculptor. Johannes Pfuhl from Silesia studied from 1861 to 1865 at the Kunstakademie Berlin with practical training in the studio with sculptor Hermann Schievelbein. As the first major work he created the monument of the Freiherrn of the stone in Nassau in 1872. In 1878 he studied in Italy. Afterwards, he again worked in Charlottenburg in his own studio. Perseus frees Andromeda -Today at the Wilson Park in Poznań, Bronze 1882 Second copy in 1896. His son Ernst Pfuhl (1876-1940) was a well-known archaeologist./ ; /// Johannes Rottger (also Düsseldorfer Akad. ) – Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. Century Academic ; /// Fritz (Hugo Wilhelm) Schaper – Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. Century Academic ; Martin Schauss – Neo – Hellenistic / Soft 19th. Century French Style ; /// Walter Schmarje Transitional Style Period , elements of R.Begas ( his instructor ) Influence but also modern tendencies ; /// Moritz Schulz – Neo – Hellenistic / Neo – Classical / 19th. Century Academic ; /// Rudolf Schweinitz – Neo – Hellenistic / Neo – Classical ( study in Copenhagen & Italy of influence ) ; /// Victor Heinrich Seifert ( Vienna, Austria late 19th. 1870 – 1953 ) studied in Berlin with E. Herter, L. Manzel, & P. Breuer – Neo – Hellenistic / Late 19th. Century Academic ; /// Constantin Starck – ( 1866 Riga – 1939 ) 19TH. Century Academic / Hellenistic Realism; Ernst Westphahl – 19TH. Century Academic / Neo – early 18th. Century ; /// Carl Friedrich Wichmann ( 1775-1836 ) – Neo – Classical ; /// Albert Moritz Wolf – Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. Century Academic , Animals ; Martin Wolff -Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. & mid 18th. Century Academic ; Fritz Zadow – Transitional Soft late 19th. Century; /// August Kiss Academic 19th. Century / Neo Classical ; /// Hans Weddo von Glümer – (1867 Pyritz / Pommern – ?) Schüler der Kunstgewerbeschule und der Berliner Akad. – Meisterschüler von R. Begas. Debüt auf der Akad. – Ausstlg. 1890. – Nixe – Naturbursche (1892) – very nice bronze – neo Hellenistic influence – female in Grecian robe holding strands of very large and long sunflowers. – Karl Löwe Denkmal (1897, Stettin, Prueßen / Poland) , Kaiser Wilhelm Denkmal (Magdeburg) , Frederich der Große Denkmal (1906, Letschin) , Frederich der Große Denkmal (1906, Prenzlau) , Kaiser Frederich III. Denkmal (1906, Prenzlau und Magdeburg) , Ferdinand v. Schill (Stralsund) , Staatsminister Dr. v. Bötticher Berlin, Reichsamt des Innern) ; /// Nikolaus Geiger – (1849 Lauingen / Bayern – 1897 Berlin) Neo Hellenistic / one of the most interesting sculptors of the 19th. Century- Kaiser Barbarossa, Kaiser Wilhelm – Thuringen, Germany 1861 Steinmetzlehre in Lauingen – nebenher Gewerbeschule Augsburg – verläßt vorzeitig die Lehre – Akad. München – 1866 – 1872 Kgl. Akad. Bei Joseph Knabl und in Privatateliers tätig. 1873 Wechsel nach nach Berlin – Modelleur für Stuckornamente. 1878 -1879 Rom – 1880 Paris – 1881 Wien – 1881 – 1884 München (Malereistudium). 1893 Mitglied der Akad. Der Künste Berlin – 1896 Kgl. Professor der Berliner Akad. Verheiratet mit der Bildhauerin Henny Geiger-Spiegel. – Secessions – Kriegerdenkmal (ab 1888, Indianapolis, Indiana, U.S.A.) , Grab Amalie Hoffman, um 1889 (gest 1889 – seit 1882 Besitzer Ing. Hoffman, Berlin, Kirchhof St. Matthäus – Gemeinde) , Fries und Gruppe (1886, Berlin, Dresdner Bank) – Giebelfeld <Anbetung der Hl. drei Könige> (Vollend. 1898 von Henny Geiger-Spiegel; Berlin, St. Hedwigs – Kirche) Nikolaus Geiger – (1849 Lauingen / Bavaria – in 1897 Berlin) Neo Hellenistic / one of the most interesting sculptors of the 19th. Century – emperor Barbarossa, emperor Wilhelm– Thuringen, Germany In 1861 stonecutter apprenticeship in Lauingen – alongside vocational school Augsburg – leaves prematurely the apprenticeship – academy. Munich – In 1866 – in 1872 Kgl. Academy. With Joseph Knabl and in private studios active. 1873 changes after to Berlin – Modelleur for stucco ornaments. In 1878-1879 Rome – in 1880 Paris – in 1881 Vienna – in 1881 – in 1884 Munich (painting study). In 1893 member of the academy. Of the arts Berlin – in 1896 Kgl. Professor of the Berlin academy. Married with the sculptor Henny Geiger-Spiegel. – Secessions – war memorial (from 1888, Indianapolis, Indiana, U.S.A.), grave Amalie Hoffman, about 1889 (gest in 1889 – since 1882 owner engineer Hoffman, Berlin, churchyard Saint Mattew – municipality), frieze and group (1886, Berlin, Dresdner Bank) – tympanum <adoration of Holy three kings> (Vollend. In 1898 from Henny Geiger-Spiegel; Berlin, Saint Hedwigs – church); /// Georg August Gaul – (1869 Großauheim / Hanau – 1921 Berlin) Neo – Hellenistic / 19th. Century Academic – Animals,; /// Gustav Eberlein – (1847 Spiekerhausen – 1926 Berlin) technically very good, early work is solid neo Hellenistic / 19th. Century realism but evolved into junk of the pre modern. (* 14. July 1847 in Spiekershausen; † 5 February 1926 in Berlin) was a German sculptor, painter and a writer. It was around 1900 after Reinhold Begas that a usually busy artist of the citizens of Berlin sculptor school 19. Century. From it come among other things the Goethe monument in Rome, the Richard Wagner monument and the Lortzing monument in the citizen of Berlin zoo, the monumental work „God father haucht Adam the Odem “in Hannoversch flowing, the national monument of Argentina and further four person monuments in Buenos Aires, the kolossale „German well “in Santiago de Chile, still received rider monuments in Hamburg Altona, Geislingen and Coburg (rider monument from duke Ernst II., 1899 production) as well as person monuments in king stone, Goettingen and Dransfeld as well as sculptures in Wiesbaden (yard theatre) and Berlin (theatre of the west). The majority of its bronze monuments was melted in the Second World War, among them the emperors Wilhelm I – rider monuments in Mannheim, Elberfeld, Gera, Mönchengladbach, forest home, Neheim and Hann. Flow; the Friedrich III. – Fixed image in Elberfeld; the double monument emperor Wilhelm I. and Bismarck in Ruhr place; the Bismarck monument in Krefeld; the crucifix before the garrison church in Kiel and the Kolossalgruppen in the trade museum Stuttgart. From its two groups for the victory avenue in Berlin two marble statues and three Assistenzfiguren are received. Eberlein in the area of the haven guessing and small plastics was particularly successful. Altogether are well-known over 900 works of the sculpture, painting and Schriftstellerei. The list of works contains over 600 illustrations. Many museums in Germany and abroad possess works of Eberlein, under it the old person national gallery in Berlin (among other things thorn extractors). On art exhibitions in Berlin and Munich Eberlein with works was regularly represented. Politically Eberlein stepped out around 1900 by its commitment against the Lex Heinze and its employment for the peace between France and Prussia. Due to his critical attitude and his disapproval against support to the artworks of Augusts Rodin and Constantin Meunier all of their sculptures were removed from about 16 to 20 works from the large citizens of Berlin art exhibition 1900 „on highest instruction “. From over 300 gypsum originals became in the Städt. Museum Hann. Flow over half on the Schutthalde thrown. From a floor luggage situation of the yearly 1962 about 80 sculptures and 11 painting could be restored between 1983 and 1989. Some of it are located today in important museums (among other things German historical museum, Berlin). The grave Eberleins on the old person pc. – Matthäus Kirchhof is an honour grave of the city Berlin. The Internet sides of the Gustav Eberlein research registered association offer material, among other things an extensive bibliography, over this artist and its surrounding field. Professor Rolf Grimm has the presidency.; /// Max Klein ( Hungarian ) Excellent work Neo – Hellenistic /Romantic 19th. Century Academic ; /// Julius Jules Franz – (1824 Berlin – 1887 Berlin) neo Classical / neo Hellenistic / 19th. Century realism – Hirte von Einem Panther Angefallen, 1852 Shepard Attacked by a Panther, protected by his dog – 1852, bronze, – Schwerin, also Potsdam, Park Sanssouchi – 1850 – Shäfer und Hun dim Kampf mit einem Panther ; /// Rheinhold Boeltzig – (1863 Berlin – ?) Fruchtsammlerin, 1907 – very nice neo Hellenistic ; /// Konrad Kiesel (1846 Düsseldorf – 1921 Berlin) Zunächst Architektur an der Berliner Bauakad. Studiert – dann 6 Jahre Bildhauerei im Atelier von F. Schaper – wechselte spatter zur Malerei – Schüler von Fritz Paulsen in Berlin, spatter von Wilhelm Sohn in Düsseldorf. K. ließ sich 1885 in Berlin nieder – 1886 Titel <Kgl. Professor> – 1892 Ordentl. Mitglied der Berliner Akad. Der Kunste., – Hebe, den Adler tränkend, um 1870, Berlin, Privatbesitz., – bronze – female in a Grecian robe with eagle; /// Rudolph Siemering (born in Königsberg on 10 August 1835; died 23 January 1905) was a German sculptor known for his works in Germany and the United States.He attended the art academy in Königsberg and then became the pupil of Gustav Bläser in Berlin. For the decoration of Königsberg University, he furnished medallion portraits of its learned men. In 1860 he produced his “Penelope” and in 1860 a sitting figure in marble of King Wilhelm for the Exchange in Berlin; and a terra-cotta statue of Leibnitz for the Academy of Science at Perth, Australia, productions remarkable for realistic modeling and imposing expression. In 1871 he executed the masterly relief “Uprising of the People at the Summons of their King”; and the following year a design for the Goethe monument. Washington Monument, Benjamin Franklin Parkway, Philadelphia. His next work was the statue of Frederick the Great for Marienburg (1877). In 1882, he completed a monument to Albrecht von Graefe, a noted oculist. This was followed by a statue of Martin Luther (1883) at Eisleben. For the market place at Leipzig, he made a war monument: “Germany,” as an armed heroine (1888). Worthy also of special notice was the sitting statue of Emperor William I with the four colossal equestrian figures — King Albert of Saxony, Emperor Frederick, Bismarck, Moltke and eight figures of soldiers. He was the author of the colossal equestrian statue of Washington whose pedestal is enriched with reliefs and accessory sculptures. This impressive monument was unveiled in Fairmount Park, Philadelphia, May 1897 (completed 1883). Siemering’s group, “Saint Gertrude Hospitably receiving a Traveling Scholar,” was finished and set upon the Bridge of Saint Gertrude (Gertraudenbrücke) at Berlin in 1896. Another notable work is the marble group of “Frederick William I” (1900) in the Sieges-Allée. He was also the author of numerous portrait busts.

Munich: Max von Widnmann – Maximilian Ritter von Widnmann (* 16 October 1812 in Eichstätt , March 3, 1895 in Munich ); /// Johann von Halbig – 1814 – 1882; /// Ludwig Michael von Schwanthaler (* 26. August 1802 in München; † 14. November 1848 ebenda) war ein bayerischer Bildhauer und gilt als Hauptmeister der klassizistischen Plastik in Süddeutschland.; /// Ferdinand Miller, ab 1851 von Miller (* 18. Oktober 1813 in Fürstenfeldbruck; † 11. Februar 1887 in München); /// Ferdinand Freiherr von Miller (* 8. Juni 1842 in München; † 18. Dezember 1929 ebenda) war Bildhauer, Erzgießer, Kommunalpolitiker und Direktor der Kunstakademie in München.; /// Jacob Ungerer (* 13. Juni 1840 in München; † 27. April 1920 ebenda) war Bildhauer und Professor an der Akademie der Bildenden Künste in München. Er studierte bis 1864 an der Akademie der Bildenden Künste in München bei Prof. Max von Widnmann. Nach einer zweijährigen Studienreise nach Italien bezog er in München ein eigenes Bildhaueratelier. 1890 wurde er zum Professor für Bildhauerei an die Akademie der Bildenden Künste München berufen. Für den Justizpalast schuf Ungerer den Figurenschmuck sowie 4 Apostel für den Altar der Kirche St. Ursula in Schwabing.; ///

Scandinavia / Baltic : * Andreas Kolberg ( 1817 – unknown background from my research – I suspect his family is associated with Kolberg, Eastern Pomerania (Pommern, Land am Meer), Ost Preußen – 1869 ) – Hellenistic / one of the top sculptors for the 19th. Century period. – Lifesize ,“Drunkin Faun“, Neo-Hellenistic – beautiful sculpture one of the Best of the period, Bronze , Copenhagen – Vesterbro //; Johan Peter Molin – Sweden //; * Constantin Starck – ( 1866 Riga – 1939 ) Neo Hellenistic / 19TH. Century Academic, 1885 – 87 Kunstschule Stuttgart, 1887 – 91 Berliner Academy., Schüler von A: Wolff, F: Schaper, E: Herter – 1891 98 Meisterschüler von R. Begas – danach bis 1910 Lehrer der Unterrichtsanstalt des Berliner Kunstgewerbemuseums – 1898 Mitglied der Acad. der Künste Berlin. Werke für Berlin:

Italian 19th. century sculptors of note: * Francesco Barzaghi, – Milan – Neo-Hellenistic – and less appealing 19th. century realism: (Milano 1839 -1892). – Milan – Neo-Hellenistic – Attended the studies of Puttinati and Tantardini, and later on enrolled at the Academy of Brera, where he is student of Hunters. Professor at the Academy of Brera;/// * SAINT Saccomanno, Neo Hellenistic influence, one of the best Italian sculptors of the 19th. Century – (Genoa 1833 – 1914) Studied with Varni at the Academy Ligustica, (Tomba Chiarella, 1872), ( De Coast, 1877), Tomba Nicolò Lavarello (1890). “Eternal Sleep” – Tomba Carl Grass (1883), Tomba Acquarone (1899) – ; * Agusto Rivalta, – Genoa – Neo-Hellenistic – Romantic Academic Realism – , (Alexandria, Piemonte, Italy 1837- Florence 1925) studies end Ligustica Academy, in 1859, Florence, studied with Dupré. Staglieno ten works, between which the Tomba Carl Beam (1872), the Tomba Drago (the 1884) and Tomba Pallavicino Genoa ;/// * Giovanni Duprè – Giovanni Duprè – Italian Sculptor, 1817-1882, Opposed mannered imitation of the works of Antonio Canova. Dupré was the son of a carver in wood. Institute of art of Siena moved to Florence aligned with Bartolini. .;/// * Lorenzo Bartolini, – Italian Sculptor, 1777-1850, some nice elements in some work but essentially illustrative realism in much of his output;/// Pietro Tenerani ; /// Adriano Cecioni ; /// Giulio Monteverde
Spanish sculptors of note 19th. century: Luis Bonifas ; Damian Campany ; Jose Piquer Y Duart
French sculptors of note: * Jean-Pierre Cortot – – Paris, 1787 – Paris, 1843 Neo-Hellenistic early 19th. Century excellent “Le soldat de Marathon annonçant la victoire” 1834, Louvre, Paris, One of the four sculptural groups at the base of the Arc are The Triumph of 1810 (Jean-Pierre Cortot), Works – Paris: Arc de triomphe de l’Étoile: relief of Triumph (1810), Equestrian statue of Louis XIII, in the square of Louis XIII in the place des Vosges (1825) , In the Louvre: Daphne and Chloe (1824–1827) , Place de la Concorde: the French cities, statues representing Brest and Rouen (1835–1838) // * Ernest Dubois 1863 – 1931 (not Paul Dubois) Neo-Hellenistic – “The Pardon” marble life size – excellent composition and beautifully sculpted Neo Hellenictic – Glyptotek, Copenhagen. His late sculpture toward the very end of the 19th. century and very early 20th. century looks like he went insane and produced sculpture that looks like a different person made the works – and not well done – modernist. // * Jules Dalou – Mixed Styles – 1838 – 1902, Neo Hellenistic -17th. Century / Rubens / Romantic – Academic – some work being of poor quality (slick, and lacking any content), lacking in Hellenistic influence, staying within the weak French influence of Academic naturalism, other work arriving at more interesting and impressive better designed elements, uneven output; // * Antoine-Louis Barye – Romantic Academic 19th. Century his work has tendencies toward illustration. A flatness in dimension is present in his sculpture – condensed volume as a photograph will influence, but also a strange attempt at Archaic Greek sculpture influence. //; * Jules Moigniez – nicely sculpted bird subjects with an influence from Hellenistic Greek animal / bird sculpture; // * David D’Angers – Pierre-Jean David (Angers, 1788-Paris, 1856) his best work being his releifs ;// Ferdinand Pautrot ; //Charles Valton – student of Barye, made some more naturalistic animal sculpture, with underlying foundation of well executed form from the influence of Greek Greco-Roman animal sculpture; //Pierre Jules Mene naturalistic – but reasonably well executed animal sculpture – romantic realism style //; Christophe Fratin //; * Jean-Jacques Pradier (1790 – June 4, 1852) was a Swiss-born French sculptor best known for his work in the neoclassical style – very beautifully designed Greco-Roman / Hellenistic / Classical influenced sculpture – Hellenistic, Home base Geneva, Switzerland. //; Jean Baptiste Auguste Clesinger //; Francois Rude – a link to the relatives that studied with him for a more founded study in remnants of 18th. Century French Academic, not the more common weak naturalism of the French Romantic Academic of the 19th. Century //; Fremiet //; Jean Bapiste Carpeaux – F. Rude’s nephew – most of the work weak in content of structured form, a few quite well executed sculptures, of note the life size “Girl listening to a Conch Shell” – primarily just the torso / rib cage, the remainder is less fortunate, his best work being the “Three Graces” in a fully dimensional sculpture – table top //; Ernest Christophe //; Joseph Chinard

‘
‘
Bertel Thorvaldsen, Danish (active Rome and Copenhagen) 1770 – 1844, Portrait Bust of the Honorable Mrs. Pellew [later Lady Pellew], Made in Rome, Italy, 1817, Marble, Height: 18 1/2 inches (47 cm) Base: 4 3/8 x 8 7/8 x 8 7/8 inches (11.1 x 22.5 x 22.5 cm), Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A.
[contact-form-7 id=”1819″ title=”Contact form 1″]