Papers by Gabriella Prisco
Confronti. Quaderni di Restauro Architettonico, anno VII-IX, 13-16, 2018
The house of the Vettii in Pompeii has in common with other monuments the fate reserved for the t... more The house of the Vettii in Pompeii has in common with other monuments the fate reserved for the too famous, that is, having remained substantially unknown: victims of their own fame, they succumb to a vulgate handed down, with few variations, up to the present day, to the detriment of a critical analysis of the sources and of the meticulous observation of the signs perceptible on the material of the architectural organism with its finishes.
The intention is to highlight the gap between what was stated in the aftermath of the discovery (1894-95), i.e. the will to create the integral roof of the domus, not only to preserve the wall paintings in situ, but also to re-create for the visitor the atmosphere of a Roman house, with its volumes, the alternation of light and shadow, the garden with its water features and what has actually been built; which is linked, albeit on a larger scale, to the tradition in force in Pompeii throughout the 19th century.
In the space of a very few years, a different concept of restoration – with claims to greater philology – will lead to questioning what has been achieved and to modifying, indulging in the new interpretations, the appearance of the roofing, the viridarium, the gynaeceum and the restoration of the paintings themselves, initially treated in the spirit of preserving its ruderal appearance
F. Giacobello, C. Pouzadoux (edd.), Savoir-faire antichi e moderni tra Ruvo di Puglia e Napoli. Il cratere dell’Amazzonomachia e la loutrophoros con il mito di Niobe (Atti della Giornata di Studio internazionale. Gallerie d'Italia - Palazzo Zevallos Stigliano, Napoli, 13 Giugno 2013), 2020
M. Baggio, E. Bernard, M. Salvadori, L. Zamparo (a cura di), Anthropology of Forgery. A multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Archaeological Fakes, Padova , 2019
Napoli Nobilissima, 2018
Il contributo ripercorre le vicende delle collezioni della Soprintendenza alle Antichità e di qua... more Il contributo ripercorre le vicende delle collezioni della Soprintendenza alle Antichità e di quanto esposto nella Prima Triennale delle Terre Italiane d’Oltremare durante l’ultima guerra. Inediti documenti d’archivio, quali i piani alla base dei provvedimenti di salvaguardia allora adottati, redatti tra gli anni ’20 e ’40 – in particolare alla vigilia dell’aggressione italiana all’Etiopia (1935) –, gettano nuova luce sul piano predisposto dal soprintendente Maiuri e sulle responsabilità nel tragico epilogo di Montecassino e nelle devastazioni della Mostra d’Oltremare. Quanto all’immediato dopoguerra, il rinvenimento del manuale Field protection of objects of art and archives, redatto dal gruppo di Harvard nel 1944, offre un confronto tra il bagaglio di conoscenze di ambiente bostoniano e quello degli addetti alla tutela delle opere in tempo di guerra, in Italia e in particolare in Campania. Negli anni successivi la nuova disponibilità di fondi per la ricostruzione favorì l’adozione, in aree archeologiche e centri storici, di tecnologie e materiali innovativi che, ritenuti più durevoli, soppiantarono progressivamente tecniche tradizionali, con esiti spesso infelici.
Si esamina la relazione tra le pulsioni omoerotiche di Winckelmann e l’eco che suscitò in lui la ... more Si esamina la relazione tra le pulsioni omoerotiche di Winckelmann e l’eco che suscitò in lui la visione di alcune opere antiche di esplicita sensualità. Tra queste, il falso affresco di Giove e Ganimede, il cui soggetto lo portò alla perdita della consueta lucidità di sguardo; lo si esamina qui sotto l’ aspetto della tecnica esecutiva che, anch’essa, avrebbe dovuto mettere sull’avviso lo studioso.
La scoperta della beffa ordita ai suoi danni da G.B. Casanova e R. Mengs allo scopo di screditarlo come conoscitore di antichità - competenza, questa, contesa tra artisti e antiquari – suscitò risentite reazioni da parte di Winckelmann. Tra queste, si propone di inserire il suo ritratto, commissionato ad A. von Maron, in cui l’abbigliamento sfarzoso, i parerga ma, soprattutto, il turbante sottolineano la sua appartenenza a entrambi i mondi, mirando egli alla creazione di una nuova figura di Gelehrte.
On the basis of a review of the exhibition “Le Faux dans l’Art et dans l’Histoire” (Paris 1955) w... more On the basis of a review of the exhibition “Le Faux dans l’Art et dans l’Histoire” (Paris 1955) written by Cesare Brandi, this essays will explore the Italian contribution to this exhibition and examine the relationship between fakes and the “artistic diagnosis”, definite in France and Italy in different ways from the 1930s onwards, with the establishment of the Institut Mainini in the former and of the Istituto Centrale del Restauro (ICR) in the latter. In addition, the article investigates the narrow interdependence of the concepts of authenticity and fake, which both derive from the recognition of the work of art, and were characterized by two permanent exhibitions organized by ICR in the early 1950s, conceived as pendants. Finally, the article focuses, using texts contemporary of these exhibitions, on the different understanding of the relation between authenticity and aesthetic judgment in the thought of Cesare Brandi and that of Étienne Gilson.
G. Prisco, B. Fossà, S. Ferrari, S. Federico, A. Giglio, K. Schneider, P. Scarpitti, G. Priori, F. Talarico, I.M. Villa, La cassaforte della casa dei Vettii a Pompei. Dalla scoperta al restauro, in BICR (ns) 28, 2014, pp. 68-86 The strongbox, dating from the third quarter of the first century AD, was unearthed in 1894 insid... more The strongbox, dating from the third quarter of the first century AD, was unearthed in 1894 inside the house of the Vettii in Pompeii. It is made with several different types of materials, and laminas in iron and bronze
are attached to the boxwith a large number of nails.All that remains of the decorative scheme is a band depicting small palm trees with garlands, in damask steel with bronze thread. Restoration was carried out immediately
after excavation in 1894, aiming to provide an image of thework thatwas as complete as possible; hence the original partsweremounted on amodernwooden box in approximate positions, combinedwith some exnovo
elements. The strongbox was then repositioned in situ on its original base, protected by a display case in plate glass; this arrangement is what has come down to the present day. The new restoration became necessary
since the state of conservation was extremely precarious due to the unsuitable location, causing warping of the wooden parts with consequent deformation of the structure; the situation was aggravated by the
unequal distribution of the weight on the base; in addition, the gradual decay of the iron pieces had caused detachment and loss of original parts as well as alterations in the appearance of the surfaces. Restoration proved to be a complex task not only technically but also fromthe aesthetic point of view.After removing the modern wood, the remains of the original material were brought to light. This, together with the cleaning of the metal items, showed how the 19th century re-composition was the result of misunderstandings and arbitrary juxtapositions, also regarding the basic dimensions.Many elements were specifically identified and correctly
repositioned. Given the need to leave the internal surfaces of the original wooden box in view, panels inmethacrylate were chosen for the new support; however, in order to provide a unified overview of the surviving fragments, the effect of transparency was toned down somewhat. The panels were fixed to a stainless steel frame designed to suggest the original shape and volume. These operations have made the strongbox rather different to the object imagined by our predecessors; the proportions have been corrected and the constituent
elements of the metal finishing have been identified.
Techniques of execution and conservation for wall paintings of the roman period: the impassioned ... more Techniques of execution and conservation for wall paintings of the roman period: the impassioned discussion that took place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries
Towards the end of the 19th century, there was further heated discussion on the execution technique for wall paintings dating from the Roman period, which had never really subsided from the time of discovery of Herculaneum and Pompeii. The discussion involved opposing factions until the mid-20th century, consisting of artists, restorers and archaeologists, supporters at various times of frescoes, then of encaustic plaster (encausto), then of polished stucco (stucco lustro); sometimes the discussion became very heated, due not only to political reasons – under fascism, for example, the theory was that the originality of Roman wall painting owed nothing to Greek culture – but also to motives of personal interest: inevitably the “discoverer” of the “true” ancient technique put himself forward immediately as the only person able to halt the deterioration of the paintings. The renewed interest in the technical aspects of Roman paintings would also have repercussions on the applied arts – several schools were set up at that time, with the aim of teaching the presumed ancient techniques, foisting the possibility of economic advantages due to the increased demand for powdered quartz, pigments made with the traditional methods, etc. Only a few voices of independent artists showed a genuine interest in Roman wall paintings for which, rather than explaining the mysterious technique, they made do with reproducing the appearance.
Uploads
Papers by Gabriella Prisco
The intention is to highlight the gap between what was stated in the aftermath of the discovery (1894-95), i.e. the will to create the integral roof of the domus, not only to preserve the wall paintings in situ, but also to re-create for the visitor the atmosphere of a Roman house, with its volumes, the alternation of light and shadow, the garden with its water features and what has actually been built; which is linked, albeit on a larger scale, to the tradition in force in Pompeii throughout the 19th century.
In the space of a very few years, a different concept of restoration – with claims to greater philology – will lead to questioning what has been achieved and to modifying, indulging in the new interpretations, the appearance of the roofing, the viridarium, the gynaeceum and the restoration of the paintings themselves, initially treated in the spirit of preserving its ruderal appearance
La scoperta della beffa ordita ai suoi danni da G.B. Casanova e R. Mengs allo scopo di screditarlo come conoscitore di antichità - competenza, questa, contesa tra artisti e antiquari – suscitò risentite reazioni da parte di Winckelmann. Tra queste, si propone di inserire il suo ritratto, commissionato ad A. von Maron, in cui l’abbigliamento sfarzoso, i parerga ma, soprattutto, il turbante sottolineano la sua appartenenza a entrambi i mondi, mirando egli alla creazione di una nuova figura di Gelehrte.
are attached to the boxwith a large number of nails.All that remains of the decorative scheme is a band depicting small palm trees with garlands, in damask steel with bronze thread. Restoration was carried out immediately
after excavation in 1894, aiming to provide an image of thework thatwas as complete as possible; hence the original partsweremounted on amodernwooden box in approximate positions, combinedwith some exnovo
elements. The strongbox was then repositioned in situ on its original base, protected by a display case in plate glass; this arrangement is what has come down to the present day. The new restoration became necessary
since the state of conservation was extremely precarious due to the unsuitable location, causing warping of the wooden parts with consequent deformation of the structure; the situation was aggravated by the
unequal distribution of the weight on the base; in addition, the gradual decay of the iron pieces had caused detachment and loss of original parts as well as alterations in the appearance of the surfaces. Restoration proved to be a complex task not only technically but also fromthe aesthetic point of view.After removing the modern wood, the remains of the original material were brought to light. This, together with the cleaning of the metal items, showed how the 19th century re-composition was the result of misunderstandings and arbitrary juxtapositions, also regarding the basic dimensions.Many elements were specifically identified and correctly
repositioned. Given the need to leave the internal surfaces of the original wooden box in view, panels inmethacrylate were chosen for the new support; however, in order to provide a unified overview of the surviving fragments, the effect of transparency was toned down somewhat. The panels were fixed to a stainless steel frame designed to suggest the original shape and volume. These operations have made the strongbox rather different to the object imagined by our predecessors; the proportions have been corrected and the constituent
elements of the metal finishing have been identified.
Towards the end of the 19th century, there was further heated discussion on the execution technique for wall paintings dating from the Roman period, which had never really subsided from the time of discovery of Herculaneum and Pompeii. The discussion involved opposing factions until the mid-20th century, consisting of artists, restorers and archaeologists, supporters at various times of frescoes, then of encaustic plaster (encausto), then of polished stucco (stucco lustro); sometimes the discussion became very heated, due not only to political reasons – under fascism, for example, the theory was that the originality of Roman wall painting owed nothing to Greek culture – but also to motives of personal interest: inevitably the “discoverer” of the “true” ancient technique put himself forward immediately as the only person able to halt the deterioration of the paintings. The renewed interest in the technical aspects of Roman paintings would also have repercussions on the applied arts – several schools were set up at that time, with the aim of teaching the presumed ancient techniques, foisting the possibility of economic advantages due to the increased demand for powdered quartz, pigments made with the traditional methods, etc. Only a few voices of independent artists showed a genuine interest in Roman wall paintings for which, rather than explaining the mysterious technique, they made do with reproducing the appearance.
The intention is to highlight the gap between what was stated in the aftermath of the discovery (1894-95), i.e. the will to create the integral roof of the domus, not only to preserve the wall paintings in situ, but also to re-create for the visitor the atmosphere of a Roman house, with its volumes, the alternation of light and shadow, the garden with its water features and what has actually been built; which is linked, albeit on a larger scale, to the tradition in force in Pompeii throughout the 19th century.
In the space of a very few years, a different concept of restoration – with claims to greater philology – will lead to questioning what has been achieved and to modifying, indulging in the new interpretations, the appearance of the roofing, the viridarium, the gynaeceum and the restoration of the paintings themselves, initially treated in the spirit of preserving its ruderal appearance
La scoperta della beffa ordita ai suoi danni da G.B. Casanova e R. Mengs allo scopo di screditarlo come conoscitore di antichità - competenza, questa, contesa tra artisti e antiquari – suscitò risentite reazioni da parte di Winckelmann. Tra queste, si propone di inserire il suo ritratto, commissionato ad A. von Maron, in cui l’abbigliamento sfarzoso, i parerga ma, soprattutto, il turbante sottolineano la sua appartenenza a entrambi i mondi, mirando egli alla creazione di una nuova figura di Gelehrte.
are attached to the boxwith a large number of nails.All that remains of the decorative scheme is a band depicting small palm trees with garlands, in damask steel with bronze thread. Restoration was carried out immediately
after excavation in 1894, aiming to provide an image of thework thatwas as complete as possible; hence the original partsweremounted on amodernwooden box in approximate positions, combinedwith some exnovo
elements. The strongbox was then repositioned in situ on its original base, protected by a display case in plate glass; this arrangement is what has come down to the present day. The new restoration became necessary
since the state of conservation was extremely precarious due to the unsuitable location, causing warping of the wooden parts with consequent deformation of the structure; the situation was aggravated by the
unequal distribution of the weight on the base; in addition, the gradual decay of the iron pieces had caused detachment and loss of original parts as well as alterations in the appearance of the surfaces. Restoration proved to be a complex task not only technically but also fromthe aesthetic point of view.After removing the modern wood, the remains of the original material were brought to light. This, together with the cleaning of the metal items, showed how the 19th century re-composition was the result of misunderstandings and arbitrary juxtapositions, also regarding the basic dimensions.Many elements were specifically identified and correctly
repositioned. Given the need to leave the internal surfaces of the original wooden box in view, panels inmethacrylate were chosen for the new support; however, in order to provide a unified overview of the surviving fragments, the effect of transparency was toned down somewhat. The panels were fixed to a stainless steel frame designed to suggest the original shape and volume. These operations have made the strongbox rather different to the object imagined by our predecessors; the proportions have been corrected and the constituent
elements of the metal finishing have been identified.
Towards the end of the 19th century, there was further heated discussion on the execution technique for wall paintings dating from the Roman period, which had never really subsided from the time of discovery of Herculaneum and Pompeii. The discussion involved opposing factions until the mid-20th century, consisting of artists, restorers and archaeologists, supporters at various times of frescoes, then of encaustic plaster (encausto), then of polished stucco (stucco lustro); sometimes the discussion became very heated, due not only to political reasons – under fascism, for example, the theory was that the originality of Roman wall painting owed nothing to Greek culture – but also to motives of personal interest: inevitably the “discoverer” of the “true” ancient technique put himself forward immediately as the only person able to halt the deterioration of the paintings. The renewed interest in the technical aspects of Roman paintings would also have repercussions on the applied arts – several schools were set up at that time, with the aim of teaching the presumed ancient techniques, foisting the possibility of economic advantages due to the increased demand for powdered quartz, pigments made with the traditional methods, etc. Only a few voices of independent artists showed a genuine interest in Roman wall paintings for which, rather than explaining the mysterious technique, they made do with reproducing the appearance.