The Gentle Art of Faking: A history of the methods of producing imitations & spurious works of art from the earliest times up to the present dayNobili, Riccardo
History
The Gentle Art of Faking: A history of the methods of producing imitations & spurious works of art from the earliest times up to the present day
Nobili, Riccardo
Art -- Forgeries; Collectors and collecting; Forgery of antiquities
As a matter of fact, we have no information as to anything that
might be called a private art collection in Athens, though quite
consistently, considering their extreme passion for knowledge, the
Greeks had fine private libraries, such as those of Aristotle and
Theophrastus. But even these, though containing the rarest and most
precious works, were true libraries, not collections of elaborate
volumes. The mania for fine bindings of costly materials was later on
the caprice of the learned Roman, not of the Greek.
The home of the “collector,” and consequently of his faithful
companion, the faker, was Rome.
The Roman was not a born lover of art. In fact during the early and
primitive period of its existence Rome had not only been somewhat
negative as regards art, but was even rather averse from its enjoyment.
It took centuries for the Roman to overcome the belief that matters
of art were trifling amusements that might be left as toys to their
conquered people. Thus for a long time Romans saw in the enjoyment
of art the chief source of the weakening and degeneration of the
enemies they had subjugated. Springing from a progeny of soldiers and
agriculturists, born to conquer the world, the Roman citizen assumed as
an aphorism the Virgilian saying that his sole duty was to subjugate
enemies, by granting them pardon or humiliating their pride.
Thus the early Romans not only show great ignorance as to marvels of
art, but even contempt for them. When art treasures were brought to
Rome as booty for the first time by Marcellus from conquered Sicily the
Senate censured such an innovation. Fabius Maximus, called the “shield
of Rome,” rose among others in protest, saying that after the siege of
Tarentum, he, unlike Marcellus, had brought home only gold and valuable
plunder. As for statues, more especially images, he had preferred to
leave to the conquered people “their enraged gods.” In fact the only
statue Fabius took away from Tarentum was the Hercules of Lysippus, a
bronze colossus which must have appealed to him either for its heroic
size or the large quantity of material.
A type of the early ignorant Roman art collector is given by Lucius
Mummius, the general who destroyed Corinth, and of whom Velleius
Paterculus tells (I, 13) that in sending to Rome what might be styled
the artistic booty of the destroyed city he consigned the statues and
paintings to those in charge of the transport with the warning that
should the goods be lost they would be held responsible and would have
to reproduce them all at their own expense.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account