subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act,, 4 December 1998, Federal w Gazette 1998/181.group=n}} which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis.group=n}} The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime".Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna.group=n}} They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing , would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act . The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann.group=n}} In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings.To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel.group=n}} Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery., Vienna. On her death she left the painting to the Galerie Belvedere. Altmann claimed the transfer was through an illegal act by Führer; the Zuckerkandl heirs claimed the printing was donated freely by Ferdinand. With no clear evidence to show the transfer from Ferdinand had been coerced or illegal, the panel stated that the Restitution Act did not apply, and the painting should remain with the Galerie Belvedere.group=n}}After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald uder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "uder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". uder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

Prompt: Dans le contexte de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, expliquez la Depuis 1945 et la Réception.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

ARTnews
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Christie's
E. Randol Schoenberg
Expressionism
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Hubertus Czernin
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I
Los Angeles County Museum of Art
Maria Altmann
Michael Kimmelman
Republic of Austria v. Altmann
Vienna
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act,, 4 December 1998, Federal w Gazette 1998/181.group=n}} which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis.group=n}} The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime".Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna.group=n}} They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing , would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act . The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann.group=n}} In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings.To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel.group=n}} Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery., Vienna. On her death she left the painting to the Galerie Belvedere. Altmann claimed the transfer was through an illegal act by Führer; the Zuckerkandl heirs claimed the printing was donated freely by Ferdinand. With no clear evidence to show the transfer from Ferdinand had been coerced or illegal, the panel stated that the Restitution Act did not apply, and the painting should remain with the Galerie Belvedere.group=n}}After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald uder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "uder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". uder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

Prompt: Expliquer la Depuis 1945 concernant la Réception de cette œuvre d'art, Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

ARTnews
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Christie's
E. Randol Schoenberg
Expressionism
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Hubertus Czernin
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I
Los Angeles County Museum of Art
Maria Altmann
Michael Kimmelman
Republic of Austria v. Altmann
Vienna
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act,, 4 December 1998, Federal w Gazette 1998/181.group=n}} which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis.group=n}} The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime".Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna.group=n}} They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing , would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act . The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann.group=n}} In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings.To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel.group=n}} Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery., Vienna. On her death she left the painting to the Galerie Belvedere. Altmann claimed the transfer was through an illegal act by Führer; the Zuckerkandl heirs claimed the printing was donated freely by Ferdinand. With no clear evidence to show the transfer from Ferdinand had been coerced or illegal, the panel stated that the Restitution Act did not apply, and the painting should remain with the Galerie Belvedere.group=n}}After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald uder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "uder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". uder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

Prompt: Dans Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment la Depuis 1945 de la Réception est-elle expliquée?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

ARTnews
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Christie's
E. Randol Schoenberg
Expressionism
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Hubertus Czernin
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I
Los Angeles County Museum of Art
Maria Altmann
Michael Kimmelman
Republic of Austria v. Altmann
Vienna
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act,, 4 December 1998, Federal w Gazette 1998/181.group=n}} which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis.group=n}} The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime".Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna.group=n}} They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing , would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act . The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann.group=n}} In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings.To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel.group=n}} Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery., Vienna. On her death she left the painting to the Galerie Belvedere. Altmann claimed the transfer was through an illegal act by Führer; the Zuckerkandl heirs claimed the printing was donated freely by Ferdinand. With no clear evidence to show the transfer from Ferdinand had been coerced or illegal, the panel stated that the Restitution Act did not apply, and the painting should remain with the Galerie Belvedere.group=n}}After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald uder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "uder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". uder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

Prompt: Décrivez les caractéristiques de la Depuis 1945 dans la Réception de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

ARTnews
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Adele Bloch-Bauer
Christie's
E. Randol Schoenberg
Expressionism
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Hubertus Czernin
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I
Los Angeles County Museum of Art
Maria Altmann
Michael Kimmelman
Republic of Austria v. Altmann
Vienna
Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: En vous concentrant sur la Réception de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, expliquez la Journaux et journaux. concernant la Héritage.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Expliquer la Journaux et journaux. concernant la Héritage de la Réception dans cette œuvre, Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Concernant Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment la Héritage de la Réception intègre-t-elle la Journaux et journaux.?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: En examinant la Réception de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment discutez-vous la Journaux et journaux. de la Héritage?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: En vous concentrant sur la Réception de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, expliquez la Internet et médias télévisés concernant la Héritage.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Expliquer la Internet et médias télévisés concernant la Héritage de la Réception dans cette œuvre, Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Concernant Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment la Héritage de la Réception intègre-t-elle la Internet et médias télévisés?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsubsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: En examinant la Réception de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment discutez-vous la Internet et médias télévisés de la Héritage?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Dans le contexte de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, expliquez la Journaux et journaux. et la Depuis 1945.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Expliquer la Journaux et journaux. concernant la Depuis 1945 de cette œuvre d'art, Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Dans Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment la Journaux et journaux. de la Depuis 1945 est-elle expliquée?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Prompt: Décrivez les caractéristiques de la Journaux et journaux. dans la Depuis 1945 de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Dans le contexte de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, expliquez la Internet et médias télévisés et la Depuis 1945.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Expliquer la Internet et médias télévisés concernant la Depuis 1945 de cette œuvre d'art, Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Dans Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I, comment la Internet et médias télévisés de la Depuis 1945 est-elle expliquée?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


subsection

Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I

}}  }}  }}   }} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018093302/http://www.neuegalerie.org/museum/press-releases/klimt-bloch-bauerarchive-date=18 October 2017url-status=dead}} }} archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170314153125/http://www.austria.org/events1/2015/6/25/new-york-staged-reading-the-accidental-caregiverarchive-date=14 March 2017url-status=dead}} }} }} }}   }} }}

Prompt: Décrivez les caractéristiques de la Internet et médias télévisés dans la Depuis 1945 de Portrait d'Adele Bloch-Bauer I.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers is an oil painting on canvas attributed to the Italian High Renaissance artist Giorgione.  It shows three philosophers – one young, one middle-aged, and one old.The work may have been commissioned by the Venetian noble Taddeo Contarini, a Venetian merchant with an interest in the occult and alchemy. The Three Philosophers was finished one year before the painter died. One of Giorgione’s last paintings, it is now displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The painting was thought to have been finished by Sebastiano del Piombo, but a "new infrared reflectogram lends no support to the theory".

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Les Trois Philosophes et expliquez la Abstrait.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Giorgione
High Renaissance
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Sebastiano del Piombo
Taddeo Contarini
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers is an oil painting on canvas attributed to the Italian High Renaissance artist Giorgione.  It shows three philosophers – one young, one middle-aged, and one old.The work may have been commissioned by the Venetian noble Taddeo Contarini, a Venetian merchant with an interest in the occult and alchemy. The Three Philosophers was finished one year before the painter died. One of Giorgione’s last paintings, it is now displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The painting was thought to have been finished by Sebastiano del Piombo, but a "new infrared reflectogram lends no support to the theory".

Prompt: Expliquer la Abstrait de cette œuvre d'art, Les Trois Philosophes.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Giorgione
High Renaissance
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Sebastiano del Piombo
Taddeo Contarini
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers is an oil painting on canvas attributed to the Italian High Renaissance artist Giorgione.  It shows three philosophers – one young, one middle-aged, and one old.The work may have been commissioned by the Venetian noble Taddeo Contarini, a Venetian merchant with an interest in the occult and alchemy. The Three Philosophers was finished one year before the painter died. One of Giorgione’s last paintings, it is now displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The painting was thought to have been finished by Sebastiano del Piombo, but a "new infrared reflectogram lends no support to the theory".

Prompt: Comment Les Trois Philosophes explique-t-il sa Abstrait?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Giorgione
High Renaissance
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Sebastiano del Piombo
Taddeo Contarini
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers is an oil painting on canvas attributed to the Italian High Renaissance artist Giorgione.  It shows three philosophers – one young, one middle-aged, and one old.The work may have been commissioned by the Venetian noble Taddeo Contarini, a Venetian merchant with an interest in the occult and alchemy. The Three Philosophers was finished one year before the painter died. One of Giorgione’s last paintings, it is now displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. The painting was thought to have been finished by Sebastiano del Piombo, but a "new infrared reflectogram lends no support to the theory".

Prompt: Dans Les Trois Philosophes, comment est discutée la Abstrait?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Giorgione
High Renaissance
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Sebastiano del Piombo
Taddeo Contarini
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers was finished around 1509, and the current name of the work derives from a writing of Marcantonio Michiel , who saw it just some years after in a Venetian villa. The three figures portrayed are allegorical: an old bearded man, possibly a Greek philosopher;  a Persian or Arab philosopher; and a sitting young man, enclosed within a natural landscape. In the background is a village with some mountains, the latter marked by a blue area whose meaning is unknown. The young man is observing a cave on the left of the scene, and apparently measuring it with some instruments. Since the end of the 19th century scholars and critics rejected on various grounds the earlier view that it is a representation of the three Magi gathered before Jesus' grotto.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Les Trois Philosophes et expliquez la Description.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers was finished around 1509, and the current name of the work derives from a writing of Marcantonio Michiel , who saw it just some years after in a Venetian villa. The three figures portrayed are allegorical: an old bearded man, possibly a Greek philosopher;  a Persian or Arab philosopher; and a sitting young man, enclosed within a natural landscape. In the background is a village with some mountains, the latter marked by a blue area whose meaning is unknown. The young man is observing a cave on the left of the scene, and apparently measuring it with some instruments. Since the end of the 19th century scholars and critics rejected on various grounds the earlier view that it is a representation of the three Magi gathered before Jesus' grotto.

Prompt: Expliquer la Description de cette œuvre d'art, Les Trois Philosophes.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers was finished around 1509, and the current name of the work derives from a writing of Marcantonio Michiel , who saw it just some years after in a Venetian villa. The three figures portrayed are allegorical: an old bearded man, possibly a Greek philosopher;  a Persian or Arab philosopher; and a sitting young man, enclosed within a natural landscape. In the background is a village with some mountains, the latter marked by a blue area whose meaning is unknown. The young man is observing a cave on the left of the scene, and apparently measuring it with some instruments. Since the end of the 19th century scholars and critics rejected on various grounds the earlier view that it is a representation of the three Magi gathered before Jesus' grotto.

Prompt: Comment Les Trois Philosophes explique-t-il sa Description?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Les Trois Philosophes

The Three Philosophers was finished around 1509, and the current name of the work derives from a writing of Marcantonio Michiel , who saw it just some years after in a Venetian villa. The three figures portrayed are allegorical: an old bearded man, possibly a Greek philosopher;  a Persian or Arab philosopher; and a sitting young man, enclosed within a natural landscape. In the background is a village with some mountains, the latter marked by a blue area whose meaning is unknown. The young man is observing a cave on the left of the scene, and apparently measuring it with some instruments. Since the end of the 19th century scholars and critics rejected on various grounds the earlier view that it is a representation of the three Magi gathered before Jesus' grotto.

Prompt: Dans Les Trois Philosophes, comment est discutée la Description?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Les Trois Philosophes

Various interpretations about Giorgione's picture have been proposed. The Three Philosophers — the old man, the Arab figure, and the young man — could depict the transmission of knowledge, the Transmission of the Classics from the ancient Greeks philosophy through the Arab translations, that became actual again around the Italian Renaissance. The old man is representing a Greek philosopher, such as Plato or Aristotle, whose writings have been copied and transmitted through the Arab philosophers to the Italian Renaissance. The Arab philosopher is possibly representing the polyhistor Avicenna or Averroes, both Arab philosophers and Arab scientists from the Islamic Golden Age.The young man could be seen as the new Renaissance science with roots in the past, looking into the empty darkness of the cave, symbolizing the yet undiscovered secrets. The cave might also symbolize the philosophic concept of Plato's Cave.  The possibility that the three men are King Solomon, Hiram I, King of Tyre, and Hiram Abiff has been advanced by Neil K. MacLennan and Ross S. Kilpatrick.It has been suggested that the figure of the young man can be inscribed neatly in a right-angled triangle for which the Pythagorean theorem applies. Karin Zeleny, relying on a reading of Polydore Vergil has proposed that the philosophers are the teachers of Pythagoras – Pherecydes of Syros and Thales. Thales has been painted as a Jew, while Pherecydes was mistakenly believed to be a Syrian. This interpretation was modified by Frank Keim who claimed that the older philosopher is in fact Aristarchus of SamosOther scholars have asserted that the figures are typical representations for three stages of humanity , three epochs of European civilization , the three Abrahamic religions or some combination of such general conceptions. Augusto Gentili proposed that the picture illustrates the waiting for the Antichrist, based on conjunctionist astrology. On the sheet held by the oldest philosopher the word "eclipsis" and an astronomical diagram can be seen. The great conjunction of 1503 and the eclipse the same year were believed to be signs announcing its coming.James Panero writes that, in interpreting The Three Philosophers, he is "partial to the poetic approach proposed by art historian Tom Nichols in his book Giorgione’s Ambiguity, in which he suggests that our interpretation is meant to remain free-floating and open-ended. Deliberate ambiguities, he writes, are Giorgione’s 'visual traps set to capture the viewer's curiosity and speculation.'"

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Les Trois Philosophes et expliquez la Interprétations.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Abrahamic religions
Aristarchus of Samos
Aristotle
Augusto Gentili
Averroes
Avicenna
Giorgione
Hiram Abiff
Hiram I
Islamic Golden Age
Italian Renaissance
James Panero
Solomon
Pherecydes of Syros
Plato
Polydore Vergil
Pythagoras
Pythagorean theorem


section

Les Trois Philosophes

Various interpretations about Giorgione's picture have been proposed. The Three Philosophers — the old man, the Arab figure, and the young man — could depict the transmission of knowledge, the Transmission of the Classics from the ancient Greeks philosophy through the Arab translations, that became actual again around the Italian Renaissance. The old man is representing a Greek philosopher, such as Plato or Aristotle, whose writings have been copied and transmitted through the Arab philosophers to the Italian Renaissance. The Arab philosopher is possibly representing the polyhistor Avicenna or Averroes, both Arab philosophers and Arab scientists from the Islamic Golden Age.The young man could be seen as the new Renaissance science with roots in the past, looking into the empty darkness of the cave, symbolizing the yet undiscovered secrets. The cave might also symbolize the philosophic concept of Plato's Cave.  The possibility that the three men are King Solomon, Hiram I, King of Tyre, and Hiram Abiff has been advanced by Neil K. MacLennan and Ross S. Kilpatrick.It has been suggested that the figure of the young man can be inscribed neatly in a right-angled triangle for which the Pythagorean theorem applies. Karin Zeleny, relying on a reading of Polydore Vergil has proposed that the philosophers are the teachers of Pythagoras – Pherecydes of Syros and Thales. Thales has been painted as a Jew, while Pherecydes was mistakenly believed to be a Syrian. This interpretation was modified by Frank Keim who claimed that the older philosopher is in fact Aristarchus of SamosOther scholars have asserted that the figures are typical representations for three stages of humanity , three epochs of European civilization , the three Abrahamic religions or some combination of such general conceptions. Augusto Gentili proposed that the picture illustrates the waiting for the Antichrist, based on conjunctionist astrology. On the sheet held by the oldest philosopher the word "eclipsis" and an astronomical diagram can be seen. The great conjunction of 1503 and the eclipse the same year were believed to be signs announcing its coming.James Panero writes that, in interpreting The Three Philosophers, he is "partial to the poetic approach proposed by art historian Tom Nichols in his book Giorgione’s Ambiguity, in which he suggests that our interpretation is meant to remain free-floating and open-ended. Deliberate ambiguities, he writes, are Giorgione’s 'visual traps set to capture the viewer's curiosity and speculation.'"

Prompt: Expliquer la Interprétations de cette œuvre d'art, Les Trois Philosophes.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Abrahamic religions
Aristarchus of Samos
Aristotle
Augusto Gentili
Averroes
Avicenna
Giorgione
Hiram Abiff
Hiram I
Islamic Golden Age
Italian Renaissance
James Panero
Solomon
Pherecydes of Syros
Plato
Polydore Vergil
Pythagoras
Pythagorean theorem


section

Les Trois Philosophes

Various interpretations about Giorgione's picture have been proposed. The Three Philosophers — the old man, the Arab figure, and the young man — could depict the transmission of knowledge, the Transmission of the Classics from the ancient Greeks philosophy through the Arab translations, that became actual again around the Italian Renaissance. The old man is representing a Greek philosopher, such as Plato or Aristotle, whose writings have been copied and transmitted through the Arab philosophers to the Italian Renaissance. The Arab philosopher is possibly representing the polyhistor Avicenna or Averroes, both Arab philosophers and Arab scientists from the Islamic Golden Age.The young man could be seen as the new Renaissance science with roots in the past, looking into the empty darkness of the cave, symbolizing the yet undiscovered secrets. The cave might also symbolize the philosophic concept of Plato's Cave.  The possibility that the three men are King Solomon, Hiram I, King of Tyre, and Hiram Abiff has been advanced by Neil K. MacLennan and Ross S. Kilpatrick.It has been suggested that the figure of the young man can be inscribed neatly in a right-angled triangle for which the Pythagorean theorem applies. Karin Zeleny, relying on a reading of Polydore Vergil has proposed that the philosophers are the teachers of Pythagoras – Pherecydes of Syros and Thales. Thales has been painted as a Jew, while Pherecydes was mistakenly believed to be a Syrian. This interpretation was modified by Frank Keim who claimed that the older philosopher is in fact Aristarchus of SamosOther scholars have asserted that the figures are typical representations for three stages of humanity , three epochs of European civilization , the three Abrahamic religions or some combination of such general conceptions. Augusto Gentili proposed that the picture illustrates the waiting for the Antichrist, based on conjunctionist astrology. On the sheet held by the oldest philosopher the word "eclipsis" and an astronomical diagram can be seen. The great conjunction of 1503 and the eclipse the same year were believed to be signs announcing its coming.James Panero writes that, in interpreting The Three Philosophers, he is "partial to the poetic approach proposed by art historian Tom Nichols in his book Giorgione’s Ambiguity, in which he suggests that our interpretation is meant to remain free-floating and open-ended. Deliberate ambiguities, he writes, are Giorgione’s 'visual traps set to capture the viewer's curiosity and speculation.'"

Prompt: Comment Les Trois Philosophes explique-t-il sa Interprétations?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Abrahamic religions
Aristarchus of Samos
Aristotle
Augusto Gentili
Averroes
Avicenna
Giorgione
Hiram Abiff
Hiram I
Islamic Golden Age
Italian Renaissance
James Panero
Solomon
Pherecydes of Syros
Plato
Polydore Vergil
Pythagoras
Pythagorean theorem


section

Les Trois Philosophes

Various interpretations about Giorgione's picture have been proposed. The Three Philosophers — the old man, the Arab figure, and the young man — could depict the transmission of knowledge, the Transmission of the Classics from the ancient Greeks philosophy through the Arab translations, that became actual again around the Italian Renaissance. The old man is representing a Greek philosopher, such as Plato or Aristotle, whose writings have been copied and transmitted through the Arab philosophers to the Italian Renaissance. The Arab philosopher is possibly representing the polyhistor Avicenna or Averroes, both Arab philosophers and Arab scientists from the Islamic Golden Age.The young man could be seen as the new Renaissance science with roots in the past, looking into the empty darkness of the cave, symbolizing the yet undiscovered secrets. The cave might also symbolize the philosophic concept of Plato's Cave.  The possibility that the three men are King Solomon, Hiram I, King of Tyre, and Hiram Abiff has been advanced by Neil K. MacLennan and Ross S. Kilpatrick.It has been suggested that the figure of the young man can be inscribed neatly in a right-angled triangle for which the Pythagorean theorem applies. Karin Zeleny, relying on a reading of Polydore Vergil has proposed that the philosophers are the teachers of Pythagoras – Pherecydes of Syros and Thales. Thales has been painted as a Jew, while Pherecydes was mistakenly believed to be a Syrian. This interpretation was modified by Frank Keim who claimed that the older philosopher is in fact Aristarchus of SamosOther scholars have asserted that the figures are typical representations for three stages of humanity , three epochs of European civilization , the three Abrahamic religions or some combination of such general conceptions. Augusto Gentili proposed that the picture illustrates the waiting for the Antichrist, based on conjunctionist astrology. On the sheet held by the oldest philosopher the word "eclipsis" and an astronomical diagram can be seen. The great conjunction of 1503 and the eclipse the same year were believed to be signs announcing its coming.James Panero writes that, in interpreting The Three Philosophers, he is "partial to the poetic approach proposed by art historian Tom Nichols in his book Giorgione’s Ambiguity, in which he suggests that our interpretation is meant to remain free-floating and open-ended. Deliberate ambiguities, he writes, are Giorgione’s 'visual traps set to capture the viewer's curiosity and speculation.'"

Prompt: Dans Les Trois Philosophes, comment est discutée la Interprétations?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Abrahamic religions
Aristarchus of Samos
Aristotle
Augusto Gentili
Averroes
Avicenna
Giorgione
Hiram Abiff
Hiram I
Islamic Golden Age
Italian Renaissance
James Panero
Solomon
Pherecydes of Syros
Plato
Polydore Vergil
Pythagoras
Pythagorean theorem


section

Les Trois Philosophes

This painting was documented in David Teniers the Younger's catalog Theatrum Pictorium of the art collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm in 1659 and again in 1673, but the portrait had already gained attention from Teniers' portrayals of the Archduke's art collection: Tenier's copies that he made of the exhibits have long been recognised as a valuable historical resource.This painting is displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. While working on his picture, David Teniers the Younger made tiny separate copies of each and every picture as a study for the final big painting, depicting the duke's collection. It is a small copy that measures 21.5 x 30.9 cm.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Les Trois Philosophes et expliquez la Théâtre Pictural.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

David Teniers the Younger
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Theatrum Pictorium
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

This painting was documented in David Teniers the Younger's catalog Theatrum Pictorium of the art collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm in 1659 and again in 1673, but the portrait had already gained attention from Teniers' portrayals of the Archduke's art collection: Tenier's copies that he made of the exhibits have long been recognised as a valuable historical resource.This painting is displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. While working on his picture, David Teniers the Younger made tiny separate copies of each and every picture as a study for the final big painting, depicting the duke's collection. It is a small copy that measures 21.5 x 30.9 cm.

Prompt: Expliquer la Théâtre Pictural de cette œuvre d'art, Les Trois Philosophes.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

David Teniers the Younger
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Theatrum Pictorium
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

This painting was documented in David Teniers the Younger's catalog Theatrum Pictorium of the art collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm in 1659 and again in 1673, but the portrait had already gained attention from Teniers' portrayals of the Archduke's art collection: Tenier's copies that he made of the exhibits have long been recognised as a valuable historical resource.This painting is displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. While working on his picture, David Teniers the Younger made tiny separate copies of each and every picture as a study for the final big painting, depicting the duke's collection. It is a small copy that measures 21.5 x 30.9 cm.

Prompt: Comment Les Trois Philosophes explique-t-il sa Théâtre Pictural?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

David Teniers the Younger
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Theatrum Pictorium
Vienna


section

Les Trois Philosophes

This painting was documented in David Teniers the Younger's catalog Theatrum Pictorium of the art collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm in 1659 and again in 1673, but the portrait had already gained attention from Teniers' portrayals of the Archduke's art collection: Tenier's copies that he made of the exhibits have long been recognised as a valuable historical resource.This painting is displayed at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. While working on his picture, David Teniers the Younger made tiny separate copies of each and every picture as a study for the final big painting, depicting the duke's collection. It is a small copy that measures 21.5 x 30.9 cm.

Prompt: Dans Les Trois Philosophes, comment est discutée la Théâtre Pictural?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

David Teniers the Younger
Kunsthistorisches Museum
Theatrum Pictorium
Vienna


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

image_size = 270 mapframe-frame-width = 270 mapframe = yes mapframe-caption = Click on the map for a fullscreen view mapframe-zoom = 14 mapframe-marker = monument mapframe-wikidata = yes}}The Augustus of Prima Porta  is a full-length portrait statue of Augustus, the first Roman emperor.The statue was discovered on April 20, 1863, during archaeological excavations directed by Giuseppe Gagliardi at the Villa of Livia owned by Augustus' third and final wife, Livia Drusilla in Prima Porta. Livia had retired to the villa after Augustus's death in AD 14. The statue was discovered in 1863 and first publicized by the German archeologist Wilhelm Henzen in the same year.Crafted by skilled Greek sculptors, the marble statue is believed to be a copy of a lost original bronze piece displayed in Rome. It blends Greek and Roman elements to craft an official image of Augustus, showcasing his grasp of visual influence. While the head portrays a realistic youthful Augustus, the body diverges from reality; despite its clothed form, it resembles the heroic stance found in Greek statues. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The statue stands  tall and weighs .The Augustus of Prima Porta is now displayed in the   of the Vatican Museums. Since its discovery, it has become the best known of Augustus' portraits and one of the most famous sculptures of the ancient world.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la Abstrait.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Augustus
Livia
Parthia
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Vatican Museums
Villa of Livia
Wilhelm Henzen


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

image_size = 270 mapframe-frame-width = 270 mapframe = yes mapframe-caption = Click on the map for a fullscreen view mapframe-zoom = 14 mapframe-marker = monument mapframe-wikidata = yes}}The Augustus of Prima Porta  is a full-length portrait statue of Augustus, the first Roman emperor.The statue was discovered on April 20, 1863, during archaeological excavations directed by Giuseppe Gagliardi at the Villa of Livia owned by Augustus' third and final wife, Livia Drusilla in Prima Porta. Livia had retired to the villa after Augustus's death in AD 14. The statue was discovered in 1863 and first publicized by the German archeologist Wilhelm Henzen in the same year.Crafted by skilled Greek sculptors, the marble statue is believed to be a copy of a lost original bronze piece displayed in Rome. It blends Greek and Roman elements to craft an official image of Augustus, showcasing his grasp of visual influence. While the head portrays a realistic youthful Augustus, the body diverges from reality; despite its clothed form, it resembles the heroic stance found in Greek statues. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The statue stands  tall and weighs .The Augustus of Prima Porta is now displayed in the   of the Vatican Museums. Since its discovery, it has become the best known of Augustus' portraits and one of the most famous sculptures of the ancient world.

Prompt: Expliquer la Abstrait de cette œuvre d'art, Auguste de Prima Porta.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Augustus
Livia
Parthia
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Vatican Museums
Villa of Livia
Wilhelm Henzen


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

image_size = 270 mapframe-frame-width = 270 mapframe = yes mapframe-caption = Click on the map for a fullscreen view mapframe-zoom = 14 mapframe-marker = monument mapframe-wikidata = yes}}The Augustus of Prima Porta  is a full-length portrait statue of Augustus, the first Roman emperor.The statue was discovered on April 20, 1863, during archaeological excavations directed by Giuseppe Gagliardi at the Villa of Livia owned by Augustus' third and final wife, Livia Drusilla in Prima Porta. Livia had retired to the villa after Augustus's death in AD 14. The statue was discovered in 1863 and first publicized by the German archeologist Wilhelm Henzen in the same year.Crafted by skilled Greek sculptors, the marble statue is believed to be a copy of a lost original bronze piece displayed in Rome. It blends Greek and Roman elements to craft an official image of Augustus, showcasing his grasp of visual influence. While the head portrays a realistic youthful Augustus, the body diverges from reality; despite its clothed form, it resembles the heroic stance found in Greek statues. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The statue stands  tall and weighs .The Augustus of Prima Porta is now displayed in the   of the Vatican Museums. Since its discovery, it has become the best known of Augustus' portraits and one of the most famous sculptures of the ancient world.

Prompt: Comment Auguste de Prima Porta explique-t-il sa Abstrait?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Augustus
Livia
Parthia
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Vatican Museums
Villa of Livia
Wilhelm Henzen


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

image_size = 270 mapframe-frame-width = 270 mapframe = yes mapframe-caption = Click on the map for a fullscreen view mapframe-zoom = 14 mapframe-marker = monument mapframe-wikidata = yes}}The Augustus of Prima Porta  is a full-length portrait statue of Augustus, the first Roman emperor.The statue was discovered on April 20, 1863, during archaeological excavations directed by Giuseppe Gagliardi at the Villa of Livia owned by Augustus' third and final wife, Livia Drusilla in Prima Porta. Livia had retired to the villa after Augustus's death in AD 14. The statue was discovered in 1863 and first publicized by the German archeologist Wilhelm Henzen in the same year.Crafted by skilled Greek sculptors, the marble statue is believed to be a copy of a lost original bronze piece displayed in Rome. It blends Greek and Roman elements to craft an official image of Augustus, showcasing his grasp of visual influence. While the head portrays a realistic youthful Augustus, the body diverges from reality; despite its clothed form, it resembles the heroic stance found in Greek statues. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The statue stands  tall and weighs .The Augustus of Prima Porta is now displayed in the   of the Vatican Museums. Since its discovery, it has become the best known of Augustus' portraits and one of the most famous sculptures of the ancient world.

Prompt: Dans Auguste de Prima Porta, comment est discutée la Abstrait?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Augustus
Livia
Parthia
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Vatican Museums
Villa of Livia
Wilhelm Henzen


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The imagery on the  cuirass  refers to the Parthian restitution of the Roman eagles, or insignia, in 20 BC, one of Augustus' most significant diplomatic accomplishments. The date of the  bronze original is therefore later than 20 BC. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The fact that Augustus is depicted barefooted is intended to be a divine representation, as this was a standard depiction of gods or heroes in classical iconography. The date of the marble copy would presumably fall between that date and Livia's death in AD 29.The statue might have been commissioned by Tiberius, the son of Livia and successor to Augustus. This hypothesis is based on the fact that Tiberius, who served as an intermediary in the recovery of the eagles, is also depicted on the cuirass. As this act was the greatest service he had performed for Augustus, the breastplate imagery would remind viewers of Tiberius's connection to the deified emperor and suggest continuity between both reigns. It is also possible that it was commissioned by Livia herself, Augustus's wife at the time of his death.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la Original.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The imagery on the  cuirass  refers to the Parthian restitution of the Roman eagles, or insignia, in 20 BC, one of Augustus' most significant diplomatic accomplishments. The date of the  bronze original is therefore later than 20 BC. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The fact that Augustus is depicted barefooted is intended to be a divine representation, as this was a standard depiction of gods or heroes in classical iconography. The date of the marble copy would presumably fall between that date and Livia's death in AD 29.The statue might have been commissioned by Tiberius, the son of Livia and successor to Augustus. This hypothesis is based on the fact that Tiberius, who served as an intermediary in the recovery of the eagles, is also depicted on the cuirass. As this act was the greatest service he had performed for Augustus, the breastplate imagery would remind viewers of Tiberius's connection to the deified emperor and suggest continuity between both reigns. It is also possible that it was commissioned by Livia herself, Augustus's wife at the time of his death.

Prompt: Expliquer la Original de cette œuvre d'art, Auguste de Prima Porta.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The imagery on the  cuirass  refers to the Parthian restitution of the Roman eagles, or insignia, in 20 BC, one of Augustus' most significant diplomatic accomplishments. The date of the  bronze original is therefore later than 20 BC. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The fact that Augustus is depicted barefooted is intended to be a divine representation, as this was a standard depiction of gods or heroes in classical iconography. The date of the marble copy would presumably fall between that date and Livia's death in AD 29.The statue might have been commissioned by Tiberius, the son of Livia and successor to Augustus. This hypothesis is based on the fact that Tiberius, who served as an intermediary in the recovery of the eagles, is also depicted on the cuirass. As this act was the greatest service he had performed for Augustus, the breastplate imagery would remind viewers of Tiberius's connection to the deified emperor and suggest continuity between both reigns. It is also possible that it was commissioned by Livia herself, Augustus's wife at the time of his death.

Prompt: Comment Auguste de Prima Porta explique-t-il sa Original?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The imagery on the  cuirass  refers to the Parthian restitution of the Roman eagles, or insignia, in 20 BC, one of Augustus' most significant diplomatic accomplishments. The date of the  bronze original is therefore later than 20 BC. The detailed armor, depicting a Parthian returning standards to a Roman, symbolizes peace along the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire. The fact that Augustus is depicted barefooted is intended to be a divine representation, as this was a standard depiction of gods or heroes in classical iconography. The date of the marble copy would presumably fall between that date and Livia's death in AD 29.The statue might have been commissioned by Tiberius, the son of Livia and successor to Augustus. This hypothesis is based on the fact that Tiberius, who served as an intermediary in the recovery of the eagles, is also depicted on the cuirass. As this act was the greatest service he had performed for Augustus, the breastplate imagery would remind viewers of Tiberius's connection to the deified emperor and suggest continuity between both reigns. It is also possible that it was commissioned by Livia herself, Augustus's wife at the time of his death.

Prompt: Dans Auguste de Prima Porta, comment est discutée la Original?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

Augustus is shown in his role of "Imperator", the commander of the army, as thoracatus —or commander-in-chief of the Roman army —meaning the statue should form part of a commemorative monument to his latest victories; he is in military clothing, carrying a consular baton and raising his right hand in a rhetorical adlocutio pose, addressing the troops. The bas-reliefs on his armored cuirass have a complex allegorical and political agenda, alluding to diverse Roman deities, including Mars, god of war, as well as the personifications of the latest territories he conquered:  Hispania, Gaul, Germania, Parthia ; at the top, the chariot of the Sun illuminates Augustus's deeds.The statue is an idealized image of Augustus showing a standard pose of a Roman orator and based on the 5th-century BC statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by the sculptor Polykleitos. The Doryphoross contrapposto stance, creating diagonals between tense and relaxed limbs, a feature typical of classical sculpture, is adapted here. The pose of the statue's legs is similar to Doryphoros. The right leg is taut, while the left leg is relaxed, as if the statue is moving forward. The misidentification of the Doryphoros in the Roman period as representing the warrior Achilles made the model all the more appropriate for this image. Despite the Republican influence in the portrait head, the overall style is closer to Hellenistic idealization than to the realism of Roman portraiture. The reason for this style shift is the acquisition of Greek art. Following each conquest, the Romans brought back large amounts of Greek art. This flow of Greek artifacts changed Romans' aesthetic tastes, and these art pieces were regarded as a symbol of wealth and status for the Roman upper class.Despite the accuracy with which Augustus' features are depicted , the distant and tranquil expression of his face has been idealized, as have the conventional contrapposto, the anatomical proportions and the deeply draped paludamentum or "cloth of the commander".  On the other hand, Augustus's barefootedness and the inclusion of Cupid riding a dolphin as structural support for the statue reveals his mythical connection to the goddess Venus  by way of his adopted father Julius Caesar. The clear Greek inspiration in style and symbol for official sculptural portraits, which under the Roman emperors became instruments of governmental propaganda, is a central part of the Augustan ideological campaign, a shift from the Roman Republican era iconography where old and wise features were seen as symbols of solemn character. Therefore, the Prima Porta statue marks a conscious reversal of iconography to the Greek classical and Hellenistic period, in which youth and strength were valued as signs of leadership, emulating heroes and culminating in Alexander the Great himself.  Such a statue's political function was very obvious—to show Rome that the emperor Augustus was an exceptional figure, comparable to the heroes worthy of being raised to divine status on Olympus, and the best man to govern Rome.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la Style.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Achilles
Alexander the Great
Augustus
Cupid
Doryphoros
Gaul
Germania
Hispania
Julius Caesar
Parthia
Polykleitos
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Roman portraiture


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

Augustus is shown in his role of "Imperator", the commander of the army, as thoracatus —or commander-in-chief of the Roman army —meaning the statue should form part of a commemorative monument to his latest victories; he is in military clothing, carrying a consular baton and raising his right hand in a rhetorical adlocutio pose, addressing the troops. The bas-reliefs on his armored cuirass have a complex allegorical and political agenda, alluding to diverse Roman deities, including Mars, god of war, as well as the personifications of the latest territories he conquered:  Hispania, Gaul, Germania, Parthia ; at the top, the chariot of the Sun illuminates Augustus's deeds.The statue is an idealized image of Augustus showing a standard pose of a Roman orator and based on the 5th-century BC statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by the sculptor Polykleitos. The Doryphoross contrapposto stance, creating diagonals between tense and relaxed limbs, a feature typical of classical sculpture, is adapted here. The pose of the statue's legs is similar to Doryphoros. The right leg is taut, while the left leg is relaxed, as if the statue is moving forward. The misidentification of the Doryphoros in the Roman period as representing the warrior Achilles made the model all the more appropriate for this image. Despite the Republican influence in the portrait head, the overall style is closer to Hellenistic idealization than to the realism of Roman portraiture. The reason for this style shift is the acquisition of Greek art. Following each conquest, the Romans brought back large amounts of Greek art. This flow of Greek artifacts changed Romans' aesthetic tastes, and these art pieces were regarded as a symbol of wealth and status for the Roman upper class.Despite the accuracy with which Augustus' features are depicted , the distant and tranquil expression of his face has been idealized, as have the conventional contrapposto, the anatomical proportions and the deeply draped paludamentum or "cloth of the commander".  On the other hand, Augustus's barefootedness and the inclusion of Cupid riding a dolphin as structural support for the statue reveals his mythical connection to the goddess Venus  by way of his adopted father Julius Caesar. The clear Greek inspiration in style and symbol for official sculptural portraits, which under the Roman emperors became instruments of governmental propaganda, is a central part of the Augustan ideological campaign, a shift from the Roman Republican era iconography where old and wise features were seen as symbols of solemn character. Therefore, the Prima Porta statue marks a conscious reversal of iconography to the Greek classical and Hellenistic period, in which youth and strength were valued as signs of leadership, emulating heroes and culminating in Alexander the Great himself.  Such a statue's political function was very obvious—to show Rome that the emperor Augustus was an exceptional figure, comparable to the heroes worthy of being raised to divine status on Olympus, and the best man to govern Rome.

Prompt: Expliquer la Style de cette œuvre d'art, Auguste de Prima Porta.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Achilles
Alexander the Great
Augustus
Cupid
Doryphoros
Gaul
Germania
Hispania
Julius Caesar
Parthia
Polykleitos
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Roman portraiture


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

Augustus is shown in his role of "Imperator", the commander of the army, as thoracatus —or commander-in-chief of the Roman army —meaning the statue should form part of a commemorative monument to his latest victories; he is in military clothing, carrying a consular baton and raising his right hand in a rhetorical adlocutio pose, addressing the troops. The bas-reliefs on his armored cuirass have a complex allegorical and political agenda, alluding to diverse Roman deities, including Mars, god of war, as well as the personifications of the latest territories he conquered:  Hispania, Gaul, Germania, Parthia ; at the top, the chariot of the Sun illuminates Augustus's deeds.The statue is an idealized image of Augustus showing a standard pose of a Roman orator and based on the 5th-century BC statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by the sculptor Polykleitos. The Doryphoross contrapposto stance, creating diagonals between tense and relaxed limbs, a feature typical of classical sculpture, is adapted here. The pose of the statue's legs is similar to Doryphoros. The right leg is taut, while the left leg is relaxed, as if the statue is moving forward. The misidentification of the Doryphoros in the Roman period as representing the warrior Achilles made the model all the more appropriate for this image. Despite the Republican influence in the portrait head, the overall style is closer to Hellenistic idealization than to the realism of Roman portraiture. The reason for this style shift is the acquisition of Greek art. Following each conquest, the Romans brought back large amounts of Greek art. This flow of Greek artifacts changed Romans' aesthetic tastes, and these art pieces were regarded as a symbol of wealth and status for the Roman upper class.Despite the accuracy with which Augustus' features are depicted , the distant and tranquil expression of his face has been idealized, as have the conventional contrapposto, the anatomical proportions and the deeply draped paludamentum or "cloth of the commander".  On the other hand, Augustus's barefootedness and the inclusion of Cupid riding a dolphin as structural support for the statue reveals his mythical connection to the goddess Venus  by way of his adopted father Julius Caesar. The clear Greek inspiration in style and symbol for official sculptural portraits, which under the Roman emperors became instruments of governmental propaganda, is a central part of the Augustan ideological campaign, a shift from the Roman Republican era iconography where old and wise features were seen as symbols of solemn character. Therefore, the Prima Porta statue marks a conscious reversal of iconography to the Greek classical and Hellenistic period, in which youth and strength were valued as signs of leadership, emulating heroes and culminating in Alexander the Great himself.  Such a statue's political function was very obvious—to show Rome that the emperor Augustus was an exceptional figure, comparable to the heroes worthy of being raised to divine status on Olympus, and the best man to govern Rome.

Prompt: Comment Auguste de Prima Porta explique-t-il sa Style?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Achilles
Alexander the Great
Augustus
Cupid
Doryphoros
Gaul
Germania
Hispania
Julius Caesar
Parthia
Polykleitos
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Roman portraiture


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

Augustus is shown in his role of "Imperator", the commander of the army, as thoracatus —or commander-in-chief of the Roman army —meaning the statue should form part of a commemorative monument to his latest victories; he is in military clothing, carrying a consular baton and raising his right hand in a rhetorical adlocutio pose, addressing the troops. The bas-reliefs on his armored cuirass have a complex allegorical and political agenda, alluding to diverse Roman deities, including Mars, god of war, as well as the personifications of the latest territories he conquered:  Hispania, Gaul, Germania, Parthia ; at the top, the chariot of the Sun illuminates Augustus's deeds.The statue is an idealized image of Augustus showing a standard pose of a Roman orator and based on the 5th-century BC statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by the sculptor Polykleitos. The Doryphoross contrapposto stance, creating diagonals between tense and relaxed limbs, a feature typical of classical sculpture, is adapted here. The pose of the statue's legs is similar to Doryphoros. The right leg is taut, while the left leg is relaxed, as if the statue is moving forward. The misidentification of the Doryphoros in the Roman period as representing the warrior Achilles made the model all the more appropriate for this image. Despite the Republican influence in the portrait head, the overall style is closer to Hellenistic idealization than to the realism of Roman portraiture. The reason for this style shift is the acquisition of Greek art. Following each conquest, the Romans brought back large amounts of Greek art. This flow of Greek artifacts changed Romans' aesthetic tastes, and these art pieces were regarded as a symbol of wealth and status for the Roman upper class.Despite the accuracy with which Augustus' features are depicted , the distant and tranquil expression of his face has been idealized, as have the conventional contrapposto, the anatomical proportions and the deeply draped paludamentum or "cloth of the commander".  On the other hand, Augustus's barefootedness and the inclusion of Cupid riding a dolphin as structural support for the statue reveals his mythical connection to the goddess Venus  by way of his adopted father Julius Caesar. The clear Greek inspiration in style and symbol for official sculptural portraits, which under the Roman emperors became instruments of governmental propaganda, is a central part of the Augustan ideological campaign, a shift from the Roman Republican era iconography where old and wise features were seen as symbols of solemn character. Therefore, the Prima Porta statue marks a conscious reversal of iconography to the Greek classical and Hellenistic period, in which youth and strength were valued as signs of leadership, emulating heroes and culminating in Alexander the Great himself.  Such a statue's political function was very obvious—to show Rome that the emperor Augustus was an exceptional figure, comparable to the heroes worthy of being raised to divine status on Olympus, and the best man to govern Rome.

Prompt: Dans Auguste de Prima Porta, comment est discutée la Style?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Achilles
Alexander the Great
Augustus
Cupid
Doryphoros
Gaul
Germania
Hispania
Julius Caesar
Parthia
Polykleitos
Prima Porta
Roman emperor
Roman portraiture


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

It is almost certain that the Augustus was originally painted, but so few traces remain today  that historians have had to fall back on old watercolors and new scientific investigations for evidence. Vincenz Brinkmann of Munich researched the use of color on ancient sculpture in the 1980s using ultraviolet rays to find traces of color.Today, the Vatican Museums have produced a copy of the statue so as to paint it in the theorized original colors, as confirmed when the statue was cleaned in 1999. However, an art historian of the University of St Andrews in Scotland, Fabio Barry, has criticized this reconstitution as unsubtle and exaggerated, while other critics have argued that there are many notable differences between the original Prima Porta of Augustus and the painted recreation. Another copy was painted with a different color scheme for the Tarraco Viva 2014 Festival.Since at least the 18th century, the familiar sight of Roman sculptures that lack their original paint has encouraged the idea that monochromy is the natural condition for classical sculpture; but surface treatment is now recognized as integral to the overall effect of the sculpture.The writings of second-century polymath Lucian provide a good example of how color functioned for a work of that time, "I Fear I stand in the way of her most important feature!... the rest of the body let Apelles represent.. not too white but diffused with blood." The quote continues to state that a statue of the time is unfinished without its "chora"—skin—or layer, applied to the statue to render it complete.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la Polychromie.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Apelles
Augustus
Prima Porta
Roman sculpture
Scotland
University of St Andrews
Vatican Museums


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

It is almost certain that the Augustus was originally painted, but so few traces remain today  that historians have had to fall back on old watercolors and new scientific investigations for evidence. Vincenz Brinkmann of Munich researched the use of color on ancient sculpture in the 1980s using ultraviolet rays to find traces of color.Today, the Vatican Museums have produced a copy of the statue so as to paint it in the theorized original colors, as confirmed when the statue was cleaned in 1999. However, an art historian of the University of St Andrews in Scotland, Fabio Barry, has criticized this reconstitution as unsubtle and exaggerated, while other critics have argued that there are many notable differences between the original Prima Porta of Augustus and the painted recreation. Another copy was painted with a different color scheme for the Tarraco Viva 2014 Festival.Since at least the 18th century, the familiar sight of Roman sculptures that lack their original paint has encouraged the idea that monochromy is the natural condition for classical sculpture; but surface treatment is now recognized as integral to the overall effect of the sculpture.The writings of second-century polymath Lucian provide a good example of how color functioned for a work of that time, "I Fear I stand in the way of her most important feature!... the rest of the body let Apelles represent.. not too white but diffused with blood." The quote continues to state that a statue of the time is unfinished without its "chora"—skin—or layer, applied to the statue to render it complete.

Prompt: Expliquer la Polychromie de cette œuvre d'art, Auguste de Prima Porta.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Apelles
Augustus
Prima Porta
Roman sculpture
Scotland
University of St Andrews
Vatican Museums


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

It is almost certain that the Augustus was originally painted, but so few traces remain today  that historians have had to fall back on old watercolors and new scientific investigations for evidence. Vincenz Brinkmann of Munich researched the use of color on ancient sculpture in the 1980s using ultraviolet rays to find traces of color.Today, the Vatican Museums have produced a copy of the statue so as to paint it in the theorized original colors, as confirmed when the statue was cleaned in 1999. However, an art historian of the University of St Andrews in Scotland, Fabio Barry, has criticized this reconstitution as unsubtle and exaggerated, while other critics have argued that there are many notable differences between the original Prima Porta of Augustus and the painted recreation. Another copy was painted with a different color scheme for the Tarraco Viva 2014 Festival.Since at least the 18th century, the familiar sight of Roman sculptures that lack their original paint has encouraged the idea that monochromy is the natural condition for classical sculpture; but surface treatment is now recognized as integral to the overall effect of the sculpture.The writings of second-century polymath Lucian provide a good example of how color functioned for a work of that time, "I Fear I stand in the way of her most important feature!... the rest of the body let Apelles represent.. not too white but diffused with blood." The quote continues to state that a statue of the time is unfinished without its "chora"—skin—or layer, applied to the statue to render it complete.

Prompt: Comment Auguste de Prima Porta explique-t-il sa Polychromie?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Apelles
Augustus
Prima Porta
Roman sculpture
Scotland
University of St Andrews
Vatican Museums


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

It is almost certain that the Augustus was originally painted, but so few traces remain today  that historians have had to fall back on old watercolors and new scientific investigations for evidence. Vincenz Brinkmann of Munich researched the use of color on ancient sculpture in the 1980s using ultraviolet rays to find traces of color.Today, the Vatican Museums have produced a copy of the statue so as to paint it in the theorized original colors, as confirmed when the statue was cleaned in 1999. However, an art historian of the University of St Andrews in Scotland, Fabio Barry, has criticized this reconstitution as unsubtle and exaggerated, while other critics have argued that there are many notable differences between the original Prima Porta of Augustus and the painted recreation. Another copy was painted with a different color scheme for the Tarraco Viva 2014 Festival.Since at least the 18th century, the familiar sight of Roman sculptures that lack their original paint has encouraged the idea that monochromy is the natural condition for classical sculpture; but surface treatment is now recognized as integral to the overall effect of the sculpture.The writings of second-century polymath Lucian provide a good example of how color functioned for a work of that time, "I Fear I stand in the way of her most important feature!... the rest of the body let Apelles represent.. not too white but diffused with blood." The quote continues to state that a statue of the time is unfinished without its "chora"—skin—or layer, applied to the statue to render it complete.

Prompt: Dans Auguste de Prima Porta, comment est discutée la Polychromie?Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Apelles
Augustus
Prima Porta
Roman sculpture
Scotland
University of St Andrews
Vatican Museums


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The Prima Porta-type of statues of Augustus, of which Augustus of Prima Porta is the most famous example, became the prevailing representational style for him. This type was introduced around 27 BC to visually express the title Augustus and was copied full-length and in busts in various versions throughout the empire up until his death in AD 14.  The copies never showed Augustus looking older, however, but represented him as forever young, in line with the aims of his propaganda, i.e. to display the authority of the Roman emperors through conventional styles and stories of the culture. At its best, in Roland R. R. Smith's view, this "type achieves a sort [of] visual paradox that might be described as mature, ageless, and authoritative youthfulness".

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la taper.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The Prima Porta-type of statues of Augustus, of which Augustus of Prima Porta is the most famous example, became the prevailing representational style for him. This type was introduced around 27 BC to visually express the title Augustus and was copied full-length and in busts in various versions throughout the empire up until his death in AD 14.  The copies never showed Augustus looking older, however, but represented him as forever young, in line with the aims of his propaganda, i.e. to display the authority of the Roman emperors through conventional styles and stories of the culture. At its best, in Roland R. R. Smith's view, this "type achieves a sort [of] visual paradox that might be described as mature, ageless, and authoritative youthfulness".

Prompt: Expliquer la taper de cette œuvre d'art, Auguste de Prima Porta.Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The Prima Porta-type of statues of Augustus, of which Augustus of Prima Porta is the most famous example, became the prevailing representational style for him. This type was introduced around 27 BC to visually express the title Augustus and was copied full-length and in busts in various versions throughout the empire up until his death in AD 14.  The copies never showed Augustus looking older, however, but represented him as forever young, in line with the aims of his propaganda, i.e. to display the authority of the Roman emperors through conventional styles and stories of the culture. At its best, in Roland R. R. Smith's view, this "type achieves a sort [of] visual paradox that might be described as mature, ageless, and authoritative youthfulness".

Prompt: Comment Auguste de Prima Porta explique-t-il sa taper?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The Prima Porta-type of statues of Augustus, of which Augustus of Prima Porta is the most famous example, became the prevailing representational style for him. This type was introduced around 27 BC to visually express the title Augustus and was copied full-length and in busts in various versions throughout the empire up until his death in AD 14.  The copies never showed Augustus looking older, however, but represented him as forever young, in line with the aims of his propaganda, i.e. to display the authority of the Roman emperors through conventional styles and stories of the culture. At its best, in Roland R. R. Smith's view, this "type achieves a sort [of] visual paradox that might be described as mature, ageless, and authoritative youthfulness".

Prompt: Dans Auguste de Prima Porta, comment est discutée la taper?Veuillez sortir en anglais.


section

Auguste de Prima Porta

The statue of Augustus of Prima Porta was discovered within the Villa of Livia in 1863, however little is known about the discovery itself and its immediate aftermath, as the incomplete archaeological journals leave ambiguous evidence for modern historians. The statue was first publicized by the German archeologist Wilhelm Henzen in 1863 the . a placement near a staircase, or in a laurel grove on the south-east corner of Prima Porta hill.  Scholars have stated that the last one is relatively unconvincing compared with the first three. The theory that Augustus's statue was found in the underground complex of the villa is based on a hypothesis that Augustus holds a laurel branch instead of a spear in his left hand. Scholars have noted that if this hypothesis is correct, then Villa of Livia must have been decorated with laurel groves and that the reason of the decoration is the omen of the gallina alba.Recent excavations have discovered the remnants of pots used to plant laurel on the edge of the Prima Porta hill in front of the underground complex, which Reeder believes suggests the possibility of the existence of laurel groves in the villa and makes it likely that the statue was located in the underground complex. She rationalized this by stating that per Suetonius, Augustus had a fear of lightning and often hid in 'an underground vaulted room', which she theorizes was likely the underground complex, particularly as during the time of Augustus laurels were thought to provide protection from lightning. As visitors would enter the atrium from the fauces at the northeastern corner, the statue would be the first thing that they would see and that they would view it from the left, which fits Kähler's idea that it should be seen from this position.  When the visitor walked across the atrium their eyes would meet with Augustus's right hand, thus "receiving" the address that Augustus made.The story of gallina alba narrates that after Livia married Octavian an eagle dropped a hen with a laurel branch onto Livia's lap, which the religious authorities of Rome took as a sign of blessing and divinity. The plant was ordered to be planted with great religious care at what is now known as the villa surbana, where it grew into a grove. According to Jane Clark Reeder, when Julio-Claudians experienced military success they would take a laurel branch from the villa.

Prompt: Concentrez-vous sur Auguste de Prima Porta et expliquez la Découverte.Veuillez sortir en anglais.

Augustus
Livia
Prima Porta
Villa of Livia
Wilhelm Henzen