|
|
|

|
 |
The Triumph of the
City
|
The High Renaissance
&
Mannerism
(Renaissance
Art Map)
|
See collection:
El Greco
|
|
EL GRECO
Domenicos Theotokopoulos, known as El Greco (1541-1614),
moved to Venice from Greece in about 1567. He worked with Titian and
admired the work of Tintoretto, before visiting Rome in about
1570. He then moved to Madrid to work on the palace-monastery of San
Lorenzo at El Escorial. He lived in Spain for the rest of his life.
The luminosity and inherent spiritualism in his work, the innovative
layout in some of his paintings, and the sumptuous use of colour
make El Greco
one of the great masters of the
passage between High Renaissance and Baroque.
|
|
|
born 1541, Candia [Iraklion], Crete
died April 7, 1614, Toledo, Spain
byname of Domenikos Theotokópoulos master of Spanish painting, whose
highly individual dramatic and expressionistic style (see ) met with
the puzzlement of his contemporaries but gained newfound
appreciation in the 20th century. He also worked as a sculptor and
as an architect.
Early life and works
El Greco never forgot that he was of Greek descent and usually
signed his paintings in Greek letters with his full name, Domenikos
Theotokópoulos. He is, nevertheless, generally known as El Greco
(“the Greek”), a name he acquired when he lived in Italy, where the
custom of identifying a man by designating country or city of origin
was a common practice. The curious form of the article (El),
however, may be the Venetian dialect or more likely from theSpanish.
Because Crete, his homeland, was then a Venetian possession and he
was a Venetian citizen, he decided to go to Venice to study. The
exact year in which this took place is not known; but speculation
has placed the date anywhere from 1560, when he was 19, to 1566. In
Venice he entered the studio of Titian, who was the greatest painter
of the day. Knowledge of El Greco's years in Italy is limited. A
letter of Nov. 16, 1570, written by Giulio Clovio, an illuminator in
the service of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, requested lodging in the
Palazzo Farnese for “a young man from Candia, a pupil of Titian.” On
July 8, 1572, “the Greek painter” is mentioned in a letter sent from
Rome by a Farnese official to the same cardinal. Shortly thereafter,
on Sept. 18, 1572, “Dominico Greco” paid his dues to the guild of
St. Luke in Rome. How long the young artist remained in Rome is
unknown, because he may have returned to Venice, c. 1575–76, before
he left for Spain.
The certain works painted by El Greco in Italy are completely in the
Venetian Renaissance style of the 16th century. They show no effect
of his Byzantine heritage except possibly in the faces of old
men—for example, in the “Christ Healing the Blind.” The placing of
figures in deep space and the emphasis on an architectural setting
in High Renaissance style are particularly significant in his early
pictures, such as “Christ Cleansing the Temple.” The first evidence
of El Greco's extraordinary gifts as a portraitist appears in Italy
in a portrait of Giulio Clovio and Vincentio Anastagi.
Middle years
El Greco first appeared in Spain in the spring of 1577, initially at
Madrid, later in Toledo. One of his main reasons for seeking a new
career in Spain must have been knowledge of Philip II's great
project, the building of the monastery of San Lorenzo at El Escorial,
some 26 miles (42 km) northwest of Madrid. Moreover, the Greek must
have met important Spanish churchmen in Rome through Fulvio Orsini,
a humanist and librarian of the Palazzo Farnese. It is known that at
least one Spanish ecclesiastic who spent some time in Rome at this
period—Luis de Castilla—became El Greco's intimate friend and was
eventually named one of the two executors of his last testament.
Luis' brother, Diego de Castilla, gave El Greco his first commission
in Spain, which possibly had been promised before the artist left
Italy.
In 1578 Jorge Manuel, the painter's only son, was born at Toledo,
the offspring of Dona Jeronima de Las Cuevas. She appears to have
outlived El Greco, and, although he acknowledged both her and his
son, he never married her. That fact has puzzled all writers,
because he mentioned her in various documents, including his last
testament. It may be that El Greco had married unhappily in his
youth in Crete or Italy and therefore could not legalize another
attachment.
For the rest of his life El Greco continued to live in Toledo,
busily engaged on commissions for the churches and monasteries there
and in the province. He became a close friend of the leading
humanists, scholars, and churchmen. Antonio de Covarrubias, a
classical scholar and son of the architect Alonso de Covarrubias,
was a friend whose portrait he painted. Fray Hortensio Paravicino,
the head of the Trinitarian order in Spain and a favourite preacher
of Philip II of Spain, dedicated four sonnets to El Greco, one of
them recording his own portrait by the artist. Luis de Gongora y
Argote, one of the major literary figures of the late 16th century,
composed a sonnet to the tomb of the painter. Another writer, Don
Pedro de Salazar de Mendoza, figured among the most intimate circle
of El Greco's entourage.
The inventories compiled after his death confirm the fact that he
was a man of extraordinary culture—a true Renaissance humanist. His
library, which gives some idea of the breadth and range of his
interests, included works of the major Greek authors in Greek,
numerous books in Latin, and others in Italian and in Spanish:
Plutarch's Lives, Petrarch's poetry, Ludovico Ariosto's Orlando
Furioso, the Bible in Greek, the proceedings of the Council of
Trent, and architectural treatises by Marcus Vitruvius Pollio,
Giacomo da Vignola, Leon Battista Alberti, Andrea Palladio, and
Sebastiano Serlio. El Greco himself prepared an edition of Vitruvius,
accompanied by drawings, but the manuscript is lost.
In 1585 and thereafter El Greco lived in the large, late-medieval
palace of the Marques de Villena. Although it is near the site of
the now-destroyed Villena Palace, the museum in Toledo called the
Casa y Museo del Greco (“Home and Museum of El Greco”) was never his
residence. It can be assumed that he needed space for his atelier
more than for luxurious living. In 1605 the palace was listed by
the historian Francisco de Pisa as one of the handsomest in the city;
it was not a miserable ruined structure, as some romantic writers
have presumed. El Greco surely lived in considerable comfort, even
though he did not leave a large estate at his death.
El Greco's first commission in Spain was for the high altar and the
two lateral altars in the conventual church of Santo Domingo el
Antiguo at Toledo (1577–79). Never before had the artist had a
commission of such importance and scope. Even the architectural
design of the altar frames, reminiscent of the style of the Venetian
architect Palladio, was prepared by El Greco. The painting for the
high altar, “Assumption of the Virgin,” also marked a new period in
the artist's life, revealing the full extent of his genius. The
figures are brought close into the foreground, and in the Apostles a
new brilliance of colour is achieved. The technique remains Venetian
in the laying on of the paint and in the liberal use of white
highlights; yet the intensity of the colours and the manipulation of
contrasts, verging on dissonance, is distinctly El Greco. For the
first time the importance of his assimilation of the art of
Michelangelo comes to the fore, particularly in the painting of the
“Trinity,” in the upper part of the high altar (now in the Prado
Museum, Madrid), where the powerful sculpturesque body of the nude
Christ leaves no doubt of the ultimate source of inspiration. In the
lateral altar painting of the “Resurrection,” the poses of the
standing soldiers and the contrapposto (a position in which the
upper and lower parts of the body are contrasted indirection) of
those asleep are also clearly Michelangelesque in inspiration.
At the same time, El Greco created another masterpiece of
extraordinary originality—the “Espolio” (“Disrobing of Christ”). In
designing the composition vertically and compactly in the foreground
he seems to have been motivated by the desire to show the oppression
of Christ by his cruel tormentors. He chose a method of space
elimination that is common to middle and late 16th-century Italian
painters known as Mannerists, and at the same time he probably
recalled late Byzantine paintingsin which the superposition of heads
row upon row is employed to suggest a crowd. The original altar of
gilded wood that El Greco designed for the painting has been
destroyed, but his small sculptured group of the “Miracle of St.
Ildefonso” still survives on the lower centre of the frame.
El Greco's tendency to elongate the human figure becomes more
notable at this time—for example, in the handsome and unrestored
“St. Sebastian.” The same extreme elongation of body is also present
in Michelangelo's work, in the painting of the Venetians Tintoretto
and Paolo Veronese, and in the art of the leading Mannerist
painters. The increased slenderness of Christ's long body against
the dramatic clouds in “Crucifixion with Donors” foreshadows the
artist's late style.
El Greco's connection with the court of Philip II was brief and
unsuccessful, consisting first of the “Allegory of the Holy League”
(“Dream of Philip II”; 1578–79) and second of the “Martyrdom of St.
Maurice” (1580–82). The latter painting did not meet with the
approval of the king, who promptly ordered another work of the same
subject to replace it. Thus ended the great artist's connection with
the Spanish court. The king may have been troubled by the almost
shocking brilliance of the yellows as contrasted to the ultramarine
in the costumes of the main group of the painting, which includes
St. Maurice in the centre. On the other hand, to the modern eye El
Greco's daring use of colour is particularly appealing. The
brushwork remains Venetian in the way that the colour suggests form
and in the free illusionistic and atmospheric creation of space.
The “Burial of the Count de Orgaz” (1586–88; Santo Tome, Toledo is universally regarded as El Greco's masterpiece. The
supernatural vision of Gloria (“Heaven”) above and the impressive
array of portraits represent all aspects of this extraordinary
genius's art. El Greco clearly distinguished between heaven and
earth: above, heaven is evoked by swirling icy clouds, semiabstract
in their shape, and the saints are tall and phantomlike; below, all
is normal in the scale and proportions of the figures. According to
the legend, Saints Augustine and Stephen appeared miraculously to
lay the Count de Orgaz in his tomb as a reward for his generosity to
their church. In golden and red vestments they bend reverently over
the body of the count, who is clad in magnificent armour that
reflects the yellow and reds of the other figures. The young boy at
the left is El Greco's son, Jorge Manuel; on a handkerchief in his
pocket is inscribed the artist's signature and the date 1578, the
year of the boy's birth. The men in contemporary 16th-century dress
who attend the funeral are unmistakably prominent members of Toledan
society. El Greco's Mannerist method of composition is nowhere more
clearly expressed than here, where all of the action takes place in
the frontal plane.
|
|
Later life and works
From 1590 until his death El Greco's painterly output was
prodigious. His pictures for the churches and convents of the
Toledan region include the “Holy Family with the Magdalen” and the
“Holy Family with St. Anne.” He repeated several times the “Agony in
the Garden,” in which a supernatural world is evoked through strange
shapes and brilliant, cold, clashing colours. The devotional theme
of “Christ Carrying the Cross” is known in 11 originals by El Greco
and many copies. El Greco depicted most of the major saints, often
repeating the same composition: St. Dominic, Mary Magdalen, St.
Jerome as cardinal, St. Jerome in penitence, and St. Peter in tears.
St. Francis of Assisi, however, was by far the saint most favoured
by the artist; about 25 originals representing St. Francis survive
and, in addition, more than 100 pieces by followers. The most
popular of several types was “St. Francis and Brother Leo Meditating
on Death.”
Two major series (“Apostolados”) survive representing Christ and the
Twelve Apostles in 13 canvases: one in the sacristy of Toledo
Cathedral (1605–10) and another, unfinished set (1612–14) in the El
Greco House and Museumat Toledo. The frontal pose of the Christ
blessing in this series suggests a medieval Byzantine figure,
although the colour and brushwork are El Greco's personal handling
of Venetian technique. In these works the devotional intensity of
mood reflects the religious spirit of Roman Catholic Spain in the
period of the Counter-Reformation. Although Greek by descent and
Italian by artistic preparation, the artist becameso immersed in the
religious environment of Spain that he became the most vital visual
representative of Spanish mysticism. Yet, because of the combination
of these three cultures, he developed into an artist so individual
that he belongs to no conventional school but is a lonely genius of
unprecedented emotional power and imagination.
Several major commissions came El Greco's way in the last 15 years
of his life: three altars for the Chapel of San Jose, Toledo
(1597–99); three paintings (1596–1600) for the Colegio de Dona Maria
de Aragon, an Augustinian monasteryin Madrid; and the high altar,
four lateral altars, and the painting “St. Ildefonso” for the
Hospital de la Caridad at Illescas (1603–05).
Extreme distortion of body characterizes El Greco's last works—for
example, the “Adoration of the Shepherds” (Prado Museum, Madrid),
painted in 1612–14 for his own burial chapel. The brilliant,
dissonant colours and the strange shapes and poses create a sense of
wonder and ecstasy, as the shepherd and angels celebrate the miracle
of the newly born child. In the unfinished “Vision of St. John,” El
Greco's imagination led him to disregard the laws of nature even
more. The gigantic swaying figure of St. John the Evangelist, in
abstractly painted icy-blue garments, reveals the souls of the
martyrs who cry out for deliverance. In like manner, the figure of
the Madonna in the “Immaculate Conception” (1607–14; Santa Cruz
Museum, Toledo), originally in the Church of San Vicente, floats
heavenward in a paroxysm of ecstasy supported by long, distorted
angels. The fantastic view of Toledo below, abstractly rendered, is
dazzling in its ghostly moonlit brilliance, and the clusters of
roses and lilies, symbols of the Virgin's purity, are unalloyed in
their sheer beauty.
In his three surviving landscapes, El Greco demonstrated his
characteristic tendency to dramatize rather than to describe. The
“View of Toledo” (c. 1595; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
renders a city stormy, sinister, and impassioned with the same dark,
foreboding clouds that appear in the background of his earlier
“Crucifixion with Donors.” Painting in his studio, he rearranged the
buildings depicted in the picture to suit his compositional purpose.
“View and Plan of Toledo” (1610–14; Greco House and Museum, Toledo)
is almost like a vision, all of the buildings painted glistening
white. An inscription by the artist on the canvas explains quite
fancifully that he had placed the Hospital of San Juan Bautista on a
cloud in the foreground so that it could better be seen and that the
map in the picture shows the streets of the city. At the left, a
river god represents the Tagus, which flows around Toledo, a city
built on rocky heights. Although El Greco had lived in Italy and in
Rome itself, he rarely used such classical Roman motives.
The one picture by El Greco that has a mythological subject, so dear
to most Renaissance artists, is the “Laocoon” (1610–14; National
Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.). For ancient Troy he substituted a
view of Toledo, similar to the one just discussed, and he displayed
little regard for classical tradition in painting the highly
expressive but great, sprawling body of the priest.
Although El Greco was primarily a painter of religious subjects, his
portraits, though less numerous, are equally high in quality. Two of
his finest late works are the portraits of “Fray Felix Hortensio
Paravicino” (1609; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston) and “Cardinal Don
Fernando Niño de Guevara” (c. 1600; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York). Both are seated, as was customary after the time of Raphael
in portraits presenting important ecclesiastics. Paravicino, a
Trinitarian monk and a famous orator and poet, is depicted as a
sensitive, intelligent man. The pose is essentially frontal, and the
white habit and black cloak provide highly effective pictorial
contrasts. Cardinal Niño de Guevara, in crimson robes, is almost
electrical in his inherent energy, a man accustomed to command. El
Greco's portrait of “Jeronimo de Cevallos” (1605–10; Prado, Madrid),
on the other hand, is most sympathetic. The work is half-length,
painted thinly and limited to black and white. The huge ruff collar,
then in fashion, enframes the kindly face. By such simple means, the
artist created a memorable characterization that places him in the
highest rank as a portraitist, along with Titian and Rembrandt.
No followers of any consequence remained in Toledo after El Greco's
death in 1614. Only his son and a few unknown painters produced weak
copies of the master's work. His art was so personally and so highly
individual that it could not survive his passing. Moreover, the new
Baroque style of Caravaggio and of the Carracci soon supplanted the
last surviving traits of 16th-century Mannerism.
Harold E. Wethey
Encyclopaedia Britannica
|
|
|
See collection:
El Greco
|
____________________________
____________________________
|
|
El Greco: The Burial of Count Orgaz, 1586
Two saints bury the munificent
donor
Rose-Marie and Rainer Hagen
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz
1586-88
Oil on canvas, 480 x 360 cm
Santo Tome, Toledo
|
|
The canvas, 4.8 metres high and 3.6 metres wide, covers the
entire wall of a chapel, reaching from the arch of the ceiling
almost to the ground. The figures are life-sized, painted in 1586
for the Santo Tome church in Toledo by the Cretan artist Domenikos
Theotokopulos, known in Spain as El Greco, the Greek.
El Greco's painting shows a miracle, said to have occurred in the
Santo Tome church at the burial of Don Gonzalo Ruiz in 1312.
According to legend, St. Stephan and St. Augustine appeared and laid
the mortal remains of Gonzalo Ruiz in the grave.
Ruiz, erstwhile Chancellor of Castile and governor of Orgaz, was a
man of great wealth and influence, whose beni-ficence had been
especially apparent towards institutions of the church. Through his
good offices, the Augustiman Order acquired a developable site
within the Toledo town walls. He gave financial support to the
construction of a monastery, too, and to the building of the church
of Santo Tome. He even made provision that the town of Orgaz should,
after his death, make an annual donation to both church and
monastery of two lambs, sixteen chickens, two skins of wine, two
loads of firewoood and 800 coins. According to the testimony of the
saints who attended his funeral, their presence there conferred high
distinction upon one who had "served his God and saints". On
vanishing, they are said to have left a divine fragrance on the air.
El Greco made no attempt to clothe his figures in medieval dress.
Social or political change was little understood at the time, and
attention to detail of this kind would, in any case, have conflicted
with his patron's wishes: the painting was not intended to recall an
historical event, but to encourage contemporary spectators to follow
the worthy example it honoured.
Emphasis on the contemporary relevance of the subject probably
contributed to the artist's realistic rendering of many details in
the lower, more worldly half of the painting: ruffs, lace cuffs, the
transparent supplice. Furthermore, the Toledans would have
recognized, among the gentlemen in black, several of their most
well-known citizens.
El Greco gives to the two returned saints the appearance of ordinary
persons (showing them without the nimbus which typically invested
such figures). He portrays Augustine, the great church father, as a
venerable greybeard in a bishop's mitre, while Stephan, reputed to
be the first Christian martyr, appears as a young man. A further
painting is inset in his mantle: the lapidation of St. Stephan.
Stephan was the patron saint of the monastery to which Gonzalo Ruiz
had given his support. The robe of the priest standing at the right
edge of the painting carries a series of emblems referring to St.
Thomas, patron saint of the church and also of architects, whose
attribute was usually a builder's square.
It seems the artist chose the theme of the miracle in order to
deliver a lesson in ha-giology. This may explain why, confronted
with such an extraordinary event, the figures maintain their
composure: not one is shown throwing up his hands in fright, or
sinking in a state of shock to his knees. On the contrary, the monks
on the left are engaged in discussion, while others calmly point to
the event, as if illustrating a tenet of doctrine.
Indeed, to 16th-century Toledans that was exactly what the painting
meant. The legend was part of general religious knowledge, related
and reinterpreted each year in a service held on St. Stephan's day
at the church of Santo Tome. The artist's vision conflated past and
present, simultaneously showing the miracle and its incorporation
into ecclesiastical doctrine.
El Greco's Heaven comes in muted tones; only the Virgin Mary is
somewhat brighter in colour. The figure behind her is Peter with his
keys; further down are the Old Testament "saints": King David with
his harp, Moses and the stone tablets of the decalogue, Noah and his
ark. John the Baptist kneels opposite Mary, while Jesus Christ is
enthroned on high. El Greco depicts the soul of the dead Gonzalo
Ruiz as the transparent figure of a child borne up in the arms of an
angel. The soul's progress appears obstructed, however, or
restricted to a narrow strait between two converging clouds.
This might seem surprising, given the high distinction conferred
upon the pious man at the burial of his mortal remains. An
inconsistency perhaps? In fact, the artist had good reason not to
take for granted the soul's unimpeded progress to heaven. The reason
lay in the political predicament of the church at the close of 16th
century.
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Fighting for the Holy Virgin
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail)
|
El Greco painted in the century of the Reformation.
Protestant thought had found few followers on the Iberian
peninsula, but the Netherlands, where it had spread very
quickly, and where Spaniards and Netherlandish mercenaries
fought each other over towns, ports and the true faith, was
part of the Spanish empire.
News from their northern province filled pious Spanish souls
with terror: church statues of saints had been cast down
from their pedestals, paintings of the Virgin pierced by
lances - satanic forces were at work. That the events had
less to do with the revival of the church than with the work
of the Devil was confirmed by reports of iconoclasts tearing
the saints to shreds and leaving the demons at their feet
intact.
It was the demotion of their most highly venerated Virgin
Mary that disturbed the Spaniards most. Luther, so it was
reported, had said Mary was no holier than any other
Christian believer, while yet another Reformer had said that
if Mary had been a purse full of gold before Christ's birth,
she was an empty purse afterwards, and that anybody who
prayed to the Virgin was committing blasphemy by exalting a
woman to the rank of a god.
The great respect commanded by the Holy Virgin south of the
Pyrenees stood in peculiar contrast to the disregard shown
to women in Spanish society. Their status was far below that
of women in Italy, Germany or France. One explanation may
lie in the fact that large tracts of Spain, including Toledo
itself, had been under Moorish rule for many centuries. The
Moors thought of women as base creatures who, easily
tempted, required constant surveillance. Although there were
famous nuns in Spain, the mistress of a king, by contrast
with her French peer, had no influence whatsoever. Women had
no place in the public sphere, as El Greco's painting so
ably demonstrates: Mary is the only large-scale female
figure among countless men in Heaven and on earth.
In the 16th and 17th centuries the Virgin Mary was the most
significant religious and cultural figure in Spanish life:
many works by Lope de Vega and Calderon are dedicated to
her.
The militant adoration of the Virgin climaxed in the dispute
surrounding her Immaculate Conception. This did not, as
might be imagined, refer to the begetting of Jesus Christ,
but to Mary's own procreation. Her mother was said to have
conceived her either without male contribution, or, if a
man's presence at the event were conceded, without original
sin, for the man was merely God's instrument. Although the
pope did not raise the Immaculate Conception to a dogma
until the 19th century, it had been tantamount to a dogma in
Spain long before. In 1618 the Spanish universities were put
under obligation to teach and actively defend the Immaculate
Conception.
From a Spanish point of view, however, the Protestants had
not only debased the Holy Virgin, they had also got rid of
the saints, who were tremendously important to the Catholic
faith. To say that El Greco underlines the integral function
of the saints in this painting would be an understatement.
Together with the Virgin, it is they who intercede with the
distant, enthroned figure of Christ on behalf of the souls
of the dead; only through their supplication can the barrier
of clouds dissolve and the soul find its way to paradise
unhindered. The painting's theological intervention
demonstrates the rupture of the vital dynamic suggested in
the brightly lit undersides of the clouds: the upward surge
through the vortex of light to Jesus Christ is obstructed.
Since the Reformation had degraded the Virgin and the
saints, it was now the task of the Counter-Reformation to
effectively demonstrate their significance.
|
|
|
|
|
A king among saints
|
|
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail)
|
|
|
|
The painting also contains a portrait of Philip II of Spain, who,
in 1586, was still on the throne. He is shown sitting among the
saints who, gathered behind John, are interceding for the soul of
Ruiz. Philip's empire was the largest of all European states. It not
only included the Netherlands and Naples with southern Italy, but
colonies in Central and South America, some of which "were literally
borderless. This was the empire on -which - in the words of the
well-known dictum - the sun never set.
Of course, his life was as remote from his many subjects as any god.
Furthermore, the court etiquette he had inherited from his father
ensured that court and government officials kept their distance.
Only a small elite was ever admitted to his presence, and anybody
who handed something to him in person was obliged to do so on his
knees. However, there was one important element of his father's
etiquette which, characteristically, Philip altered: priests were no
longer obliged to genuflect before him. He gave to the ambassadors
of the kingdom of God, though appointed by himself, a status far
greater than that accorded to the representatives of worldly
affairs.
This was altogether typical of Philip's rule. He set greater store
by defending his faith than his empire. No personal loss could hurt
him more deeply, he wrote upon receiving news of the Netherlandish
iconoclasts, than the slightest insult or disrespect to the Lord and
his effigies. Even "the ruin" of all his lands could not hinder him
from "doing what a Christian and God-fearing sovereign must do in
the service of God and in testimony to his Catholic faith and the
power and honour of the Apostolic See."
Philip II had a powerful instrument at his disposal: the
Inquisition. In other countries the authorities who condemned
apostates, unbelievers and witches were purely clerical; afterwards,
offenders were handed over to the state authorities, who would then
enforce the penalty. In Spain even the trial was subordinate to the
throne. The king appointed the Grand Inquisitor, and the persecution
of non-Catholics served interests of state. For over 700 years the
Moors, finally defeated in 1492, had ruled over almost the whole
Iberian peninsula. Only families who converted from Islam to
Christinity were permitted to remain in Spain. The same applied to
Jews. They, too, suffered enforced baptism.
Though hundreds of thousands of Jews and Muslims had left the
country, or were in the process of doing so, Philip still saw
Catholic Spain threatened by unbelievers who merely paid lip-service
to Christ, or by heretics secretly plotting insurrection. The
Inquisition acted as a secret police force, defending the status quo
and transferring to the state the wealth and property of those it
condemned.
Combined religious and racial persecution was one of the chief
factors leading to the decline of the Spanish empire. The Jews had
been specialists in foreign trade and finance; the country's best
physicians were Jews, and they constituted the cream of its
university teachers. It was thanks to Jewish scholars and
translators that forgotten manuscripts by antique philosophers "were
translated from Arabic into Latin, thus becoming available to
Christian theologians.
For their part, the Muslims had farmed vast areas of the country,
and the success of agriculture depended on Moorish irrigation
systems. Now that they were gone, the fields were bare, the villages
depopulated, and the businesses of the merchants collapsed. For
Philip, however, as for the clergy, the Spanish grandees and a large
section of the Spanish population, this was less important than
defending the faith.
|
|
Monument to a priest
|
|
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail) |
|
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail)
|
Yet Philip's unrealistic religious zeal was not the only factor
that earned him a place among the saints in Heaven in El Greco's
painting. Other artists, too, for example Durer in his All Saints'
Altarpiece of 1511, gave a place in Heaven to their most prominent
contemporaries. In so doing, they enjoyed the support of St.
Augustine's "City of God", in which the domains of Heaven and earth
were interwoven, providing theological justification for the
depiction of mortals as the inhabitants of Heaven.
The priest portrayed reading is Andres Nunez, who, at the time in
question, was responsible for the parish of Santo Tome. It is to him
that we owe the existence of this painting. Commissioning El Greco
to execute the work was the final act in a campaign Nunez had
conducted for decades in an attempt to bring just renown to Gonzalo
Ruiz and -lest it be forgot - himself.
His first undertaking of this kind had been the attempt to move
Gonzalo's grave. The pious Castilian chancellor had chosen an
inconspicuous corner of the church of Santo Tome as the resting
place of his earthly remains — apparently a sign of his modesty.
Nunez wanted his bones moved to a more auspicious place, but his
superiors rejected the request, for "the hands of sinners" should
not touch the body of one who had been "touched by the hands of
saints".
Consequently, Nunez decided to build a chapel with a high dome over
the immured coffin. Soon after this demonstrative deed in memory of
the lord of Orgaz (it was his descendents who received the title of
count), the citizens of Orgaz decided to annul the 250-year-old
legacy of two lambs, 16 chickens, two skins of wine, two loads of
firewood and 800 coins. Nunez instituted legal proceedings, winning
the case in 1569. In order to record his triumph he had a Latin text
mounted above the grave, recounting the legend and referring to the
rebuttal of the town of Orgaz through "the vigorous efforts of
Andres Nunez".
The smart priest thus created a monument to himself. After applying
to the archbishopric in 1584, he was granted permission to
commission a painting of the miracle of the interment. El Greco was
commissioned in 1586 and delivered the painting in the same year.
Whatever the work may owe to the personal ambition of a priest, it
has to be said that propagation of the miracle of the burial was
also fully in keeping with Counter-Reformation church policy. It was
seen as important not only to exalt the Virgin and saints, but to
defend the need for charitable donations and the worship of relics.
According to Catholic belief, the route to Heaven was paved with
"good deeds", a view rejected by Reformers, for whom faith and
divine mercy were all that counted. The Reformers also vehemently
opposed the veneration of relics, a cult of considerable
significance in Catholic countries. It was at this time, too, that
Gaspar de Quiroga, appointed archbishop in 1577, brought the bones
of St. Leocadia and St. Ildefonso to Toledo, thereby greatly adding
to the status of its cathedral. Santo Tome's painting of the burial
extolled the piety of charitable donations, at the same time
defending the worship of relics. For had not two saints touched, and
thereby honoured, the mortal frame? Was it not therefore correct to
infer that all Christians should honour the mortal remains of the
pious, the saints and the martyrs?
The painting's gigantic format complied with Counter-Reformation
propaganda in yet another sense: its stunning visual impact. The
Protestants, by contrast, wished to see their churches purified of
all ornamentation. Places of worship were to be free of graven
images, or at least not crowded with visual distractions from God's
word. But the Catholics thought otherwise: since the church was
God's house, why not use every means possible to decorate it in His
honour? The exuberant splendour of Baroque churches was, not least,
a reaction against the plain churches of the Reformation.
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail)
|
|
Reality as a stage set
|
|
|
|

The Burial of the Count of Orgaz (detail)
|
|
|
|
The boy pointing so meaningfully at the saint was El Greco's son;
his year of birth, 1578, can be deciphered on his handkerchief. When
his father painted the miracle, he was eight years old. The contract
was concluded on 18th March. El Greco finished the work, whose value
was estimated by two experts at 1200 ducats, by Ghristmas. Since the
price was too steep for the parish council of Santo Tome, it
appointed two experts of its own, only to find that they arrived at
a value of 1600 ducats. It was not until July 1588 that the parties
agreed - on the lower sum.
El Greco was dogged by financial problems almost all his life. He
was not a prince among painters, like Titian, in whose Venice studio
he had trained. "The Greek" was born in 1541 on Crete, which, at
that time, was under Venetian rule. He learned icon painting, left
for Venice where he became a master of spatial representation and
architectonic perspective, then moved to Rome. When Pius V,
disturbed by the nudity of some of the figures in Michelangelo's
Last Judgement, wanted some of the frescos in the Sistine Chapel
painted over, El Greco is reputed to have offered to paint an
equally good, but more decent, work if the original were destroyed.
It is not known when, or why, El Greco settled in Spain. It is
possible he felt ill at ease with the Italian artists' exaltation of
corporeal and architectural beauty; perhaps he hoped his
celebrations of the afterlife would find greater recognition in
Spain. Spanish cardinals, resident in Rome, are likely to have
spoken of the Escorial, Philip II's palatial monastery, and El Greco
may have hoped to find work there. Instead he settled in the old
religious capital of Toledo, the seat of the archbishop. In 1579 the
king commissioned a painting from him - the only order he received
from that source. Philip apparently disliked the Greek's paintings.
Spiritually they had much in common. For both, the afterlife was
more important than this life. Philip longed to rule from the
Escorial in the company of monks, and to be able to see an altar
even from his bed. This view meant more to him than his empire: his
Armada was defeated in 1588; in 1598, the year of his death,
financial pressures forced him to give up his war against France,
and the northern provinces of the Netherlands were already as good
as lost.
El Greco's whole life's work, and this painting in particular, bears
witness to his belief that the kingdom of heaven was more important
and more real than the world in which we live. Though he is
painstakingly exact in his detailed rendering of the lower, worldly
half of the painting, the realistic heads and dress have the effect
of drawing the burial scene into the foreground, while the
isocephalic arrangement of onlookers' heads gives the appearance of
the top of a stage set. It is only here, behind this dividing line,
that the true life begins. Only the upper half is dynamic, vital
through and through, an effect achieved with the help of lighting
and a use of depth and line that draws the eye upward.
It remains to be said that not all Spaniards ceded to the uncritical
renunciation of reality. The writer Miguel de Cervantes, for
example, a contemporary of El Greco and Philip II, took a different
point of view. Though he did not attack the religious zeal of his
compatriots, his character Don Quixote, a chivalrous and deluded
idealist, illustrates the dangers that may befall a person who
inhabits a world of fantasy rather than facts, someone who, in
pursuit of ideals, loses sight of the ground beneath his feet.
|
See collection:
El Greco
|
____________________________
____________________________
|
|
EL GRECO: passionate
visionary
Sister Wendy
|
|
The greatest Mannerist of them all is the Spanish painter El Greco (Domenicos
Theotokopoulos, 1541-1614, called "El Greco" because he was born in
Crete). His artistic roots are diverse: he traveled between Venice,
Rome, and Spain (settling in Toledo). The Christian doctrines of
Spain made a crucial impact on his approach to painting, and his art
represents a blend of passion and restraint, religious fervor and
Neo-Platonism, influenced by the mysticism of the
Counter-Reformation. El Greco's elongated figures, ever straining
upward, his intense and unusual colors, his passionate involvement
in his subject, his ardor and his energy, all combine to create a
style that is wholly distinct and individual. He is the great fuser,
and also the transfuser, setting the stamp of his angular intensity
upon all that he creates. To the legacies of Venice, Florence, and
Siena, he added that of the Byzantine tradition, not necessarily in
form but in spirit (although he did in fact train as an icon painter
in his early years in
Crete). El Greco always produces icons, and it is this interior
gravity of spirit that gives his odd distortions a sacred Tightness.
The Madonna and Child with St. Martina and St. Agnes sweeps
us up from our natural animal level, there at the bottom with St.
Martina's pensive lion and St. Agnes's lamb, balancing with
unnatural poise on the branch of her arm. Martina's palm of
martyrdom acts like a signal, as do the long, impossibly slender
fingers of Agnes.
We are drawn irresistibly up, past the flutter of cherubic wing and
the rich swirl of virginal robe, kept to the pictorial center by
those strangely papery or sheetlike clouds peculiar to El Greco. Up,
up, rising through the curve of Mary's cloak, we are drawn to the
heart of the work, the Child and, above Him, the oval serenity of
the Madonna's countenance. We are continually on the move, but never
left to our own devices. We are guided and directed by El Greco,
with praying figures at the corners to hold us in the right
position.
|
|
|
|
Unresolved questions
|
|
|

Laokoon
1610
Oil on canvas, 142 x 193 cm
National Gallery of Art, Washington |
|
|
|
Such a dramatic and insistent art can seem too obtrusive: we may
long to be left to ourselves. But this psychic control is essential
to El Greco, the great — in the nicest sense — manipulator. Even
when we cannot really understand the picture, as in the
Laocoon, we have no doubt that something portentous is
taking place and that we are diminished to the extent we cannot
participate. The literal reference to the Trojan priest and his sons
is clear enough. But who are the naked women, one of whom seems to
be double-headed? Even if the extra head is indicative of the work
being unfinished, it is still uncannily apposite. The Laocoon
was overpainted after El Greco's death, and the "second head" that
looks into the painting was obliterated, while the two standing
frontal nudes were given loincloths. Later, these features were
restored to the form that we see now.
The serpents seem oddly ineffectual, thin and meager; we wonder why
these muscular males have such trouble overcoming them. And we feel
that this is an allegory more than a straightforward story, that we
are watching evil and temptation at work on the unprotected bodies
of mankind. Even the rocks are materially unconvincing, made of the
same non-substance as the high and clouded sky.
The less we understand, the more we are held enthralled by this
work. It is the implicit meaning that always matters most in El
Greco, that which he conveys by manner rather than by substance,
gleaming with an unearthly light that we still, despite the
unresolved mysteries, do not feel to be alien to us. No other of the
great Mannerists carried manner to such height or with such
consistency as El Greco.
|
|
LAOCOON
|
|
|
|
El Greco's painting depicts events best known to us from
Virgil's Aeneid, but El Greco probably knew them from the Greek
writer Arctinus of Miletus. Laocoon tried to dissuade the Trojans
from letting in the treacherous wooden horse (which led to the
sacking of Troy). In the Arctinus version Laocoon, a priest, was
killed by serpents sent by Apollo for breaking his priestly rule of
celibacy (in Virgil the gods intervened openly on the Greek side).
|
|
|

Laokoon (detail)
|
OILED SERPENT
El Greco's wonderful circular invention of the boy
wrestling with the serpent creates a powerful physical
tension. We are kept in suspense as to whether the boy will
end the same way as his brother lying dead on the ground. El
Greco's unique and unorthodox style admits an unprecedented
freedom. Around the boy's outstretched arm there is a broad
band of black, which has no spatial "meaning" as such, and
which emphasizes the rigidity of the arm and the desperate
efforts of the boy. The line flows around the strange,
stone-colored figures.
|
|
|
|

Laokoon (detail)
|
MYSTERY WITNESSES
The figures who appear to watch the scene with
indifference are a mystery. One, a woman, seems
to be two-headed, with one head looking out of the
painting. The figures could be Apollo and Athena,
come down to witness the judgment on Laocoon.
|
|
|
|

Laokoon (detail)
|
A SPANISH TROY
The allegorical horse in the middle distance trots
toward the city, which is spread out under a glowering,
doom-laden sky. It is a beautiful landscape, in which the
vibrant red-earth ground is covered with a lattice of
silvers, blues, and greens. However, this is not the ancient
city of Troy, but El Greco's hometown of Toledo in Spain. El
Greco painted Laocoon during the time of the Spanish
Catholic Counter-Reformation, and his allegorical drama, of
transgressing mortals and vengeful gods, set unequivocally
in his own modern Spain, is an indication of the orthodoxy
of the artist's religious beliefs.
|
|
|
|

Laokoon (detail)
|
THE EPONYMOUS
SUFFERER
The anguished head of Laocoon
is an example of the artist's
characteristic light, rapid, feathery
brushwork. Where skin meets
skin - in between toes, lips,
nostrils - he has applied crimson
or vermilion, breathing life and
a suggestion of lifeblood into the
deathlike steely grays of the flesh.
|
|
See collection:
El Greco
|
|
|

|
|