The Art of Stoneworking: A Reference Guide by Bernard Frischer

f:(NE

This book ISintended as a reference guide for the conservator, restorer, art histonan and archaeologist An object carved m stone ISthe product of a long senes of work processes. from the quarry where the stone IS obtamed through vanous stages of transport and shaping, to the site where It IS put into posihon Each of these processes has ItS own techniques. mvolvmg tools, methods and traditions This book contains detailed descnpnons of the vanous techniques involved in the production of works m stone It ISpossible for an expenenced observer to see on the surface of any piece of stone the marks of the tools that shaped It This book provides the reader with techniques for reading and recording these marks Using a senes of stone monuments of different types and eras as Illustrations, both the techniques and the ways of recording them are demonstrated

The art of stoneworking

The art of stoneworking: a reference guide

PETER ROCKWELL

,,~~~CAMBRIDGE :';

UNIVERSITY PRESS

Published by the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambndge The PItt Building Trumpmgton Street Cambndge CB2 lRP 40 West zoth Street, New York NY 10011-4211 USA 10 Stamford Road Oakleigh Melbourne 3166 Australia

ÂŠ Cambndge

University Press

FIrSt published

1993

Printed

1993

in Great Bntam at the Uruversrty

Press

Cambndge

A catalogue record for tills book ts auailable from the BrIt.slt L.bmrtl L,bmrtl of COllgress cataloglllllg '" PUbJ.catlOll data Rockwell Peter The art of stoneworkmg

a reference

guide/Peter Rockwell

cm Includes bibliograplucal ISBN0 521 41332 1

Stone-carvmg-

NB1208 R63

Technique

ISBN0 521 41332

and index TItle

1993

7314' 63-dC20

TAG

references

92-44389

x hardback

ClP

Contents

List of photographs Acknoioiedgmenis 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Introduction Principles of stoneworkmg Stone Tools Tool drawings Methods Architectural process Sculptural process Design and process The project Quarrymg Moving. transport and hfhng Workshop orgarnzahon Carvmg without quarrymg and the reuse of stone The history of stoneworkmg technology Documentation I Documentation II Documentation of major monuments Computer documentation Conclusion Photographs Tables References Index

page

Vlll IX

1 8 15 31 55 69 89 107 127 142 156 166 178 187 198 207 216 226 243 250 254 292 299 309

Vll

Photographs

Between pages 254 and 291 Axes (Claudio Marhru) Hammers (Claudio Marhru) 2 Carving tools (Claudio Marhru) 3 Tool marks (Claudio Marhru) 4-8 Abrasion tools (Claudio Marhru) 9 Tool marks (Claudio Marhru) 10 Two unhrushed columns, Aphrodisras, Turkey 11 Partially reconstructed section of the fneze from the Temple of Vespasian, 12 Rome Unhmshed column shaft 13 Quarned column drum 14 Unhrushed metope, National Museum, Paestum 15 Unhrushed sarcophagus ltd, Capitolme Museum, Rome 16 Sarcophagus ltd, Capitolme Museum, Rome 17 Unhrushed statue, Museo Gregonano Profane. Vatican Museums 18 Scene of a large building project. Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) Detail of a large buildmg project, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 20 Large quarry at Carrara 21 The 11=, photograph from Carrara 1964 22 Detail from the Processional fneze, Arch of Trajan, Benevento, Rome Detarl of an mtenor sculpture, Baptistry of Parma (Bruno Zanardi) Detail of the Chnst m Judgement Tympanum, Baptistry of Parma (Bruno Zanardi) 2g--37 Detail of the central portal of the facade, San NIcola of Ban (Libero De Cunzo) 38 Detail from drums 12-13, Column of Trajan, Rome (Susanne Friend) 39 Detail from drum 17, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 40 Detail from drum 12, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 41 Detail from drum 9, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 42-3 Detail from drum 13, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 44 Detail from drum 17, Column of Trajan, Rome (Claudio Marhru) 45 Detail from drums 12-13, Column of Trajan, Rome (Susanne Friend) Photographs were taken by the author unless stated otherwise The measure In the photographs IS m inches 1

Vlll

Acknowledgments

This book would not have been possible without the aid and support of institutions Part of the matenal was developed while teaching for the International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the Ishtuto Centrale del Restauro, the Unesco Stone Conservation Course In Vemce and the summer school of the Institute of Archaeology of the Uruversity of London I have been assisted In my research by the Sopnntendenza Archeologica dr Roma, the X rtparhzione of the Comune di Roma and the late Prof Kenan T Enm. director of the excavations In Aphrodisias, Turkey My thanks are also due to the Sopnntendenze ai Bern artistic! e stoner of Campania, Puglia, Roma, Umbna, Emilia Romagna and Veruce. as well as the Comune di Roma for having given me access to monuments under their care I have had the privilege of being a consultant to vanous restoration groups dunng the conservation and restoration of some of the monuments descnbed In the text the Centro dl Conservazione Archaeologrca. the Cooperahva Bem Culturali, the Secreta Alessandn, the Gruppo SEI and l'Impresa Pouch In These projects have been extremely helpful In developing my Ideas as well as the techmques of documenting the evidence of stoneworkmg In tlus context I would particularly like to thank Mana Crazia Chilosi, Crovanna Martelloth, Roberto Nardi and Bruno Zanardi The Philadelphia sculptor Wallace Kelly, first Introduced me to stone carving and John Guarente taught me a great deal of the techmques and traditions of stone carving In the USA I am deeply grateful to Carlo Nicoli for Ius knowledge of stone carving and for allowing me to work In lus workshop In Carrara, It was while carving there that I first perceived somethmg of both the vanety and complexity of stonecarving I am equally grateful to Goffredo De Tomassi and his sons Damele and Alessandro In Rome, they have been a constant source of information and inspiration regarding the craft of stone and marble working Many more stonemasons, quarryers and stonecarvers than I can name have generously helped me With information and assistance Many people have assisted In diverse ways With this book W Brown Morton III, who first got me Involved With stone conservation, Prof GIOrgIOTorraca of the Uruversity of Rome and Prof Lorenzo Lazzanm of the University of Venice, whose knowledge of the SCientificaspects of conservation and stone Identification have been very helpful, Prof Clayton Fant of the Uruversrty of Akron, who has freely shared his archaeological IX

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

knowledge as well as mterest m explonng quarnes, Gianni Ponti, who has been a continuous help m more ways than I can mention, Rossana dr Paola, Susanne Fnend. Juliette Pope, Elisabeth Tiso and Ondme Wnght have provided essential assistance m research and documentation, Nicholas Stanley Price, who provided me with matenal on the Easter Island sculpture, and Joan Ormondroyd of the Library of Cornell University, who found matenal by LoUISHinton for me My students at ICCROM, the Venice stone course and the Ishtuto centrale del restauro have provided me With many nuggets of mformahon about stoneworkmg m diverse areas of the world The manuscnpt was read by Chnsnna Huerner, whose suggestions have led to makmg the work more coherent and readable Finally. my Wife Cynthia has been essential m many ways durmg each step of the process that led to the completion of this book The drawmgs are by the author With the exception of the followmg drawmgs 14, 15, 16,72,75 and 76 are by Gianni Ponti, drawmg 77 IS by Susanne Fnend, drawmg 65 IS by Ondme Wnght, drawmgs 21, 24 and 25 are by Juliette Pope based on drawmgs m Warland, 1953

Introduction

This book ongmated from a suggestion from the Central Restoration Institute in Rome to the Italian publishers. Nuova Italia Scienhhca, that a manual on stoneworkmg was needed for restorers As I had been lectunng on the subject for several years at the mshtute, It was suggested that I undertake the project WhIle the book was being planned, the audience was enlarged to mclude anyone who was interested in the study of stoneworkmg, especially art historians and archaeologists On the other hand, the book was not intended as an mstruchon manual for the student carver My purpose was to help the reader to see a hrushed work m stone, whether It be architecture, sculpture or whatever, as the product of a sequence of actions and tools to look backward from the final product rather than forward from the raw matenal Since the Italian publrcahon of the book, It has been Impressed upon me that It ISnot as easy to separate these two audiences as I had presumed Stoneworkers of vanous sorts are interested m the history of their craft, while some of those whose pnmary interest IS analysis may also wish to learn to carve stone The result IS that a somewhat different audience than I had ongmally envisaged IS bnngmg ItS knowledge and needs to their reading It has thus become necessary to modify the ongmal text somewhat Although the book was hrst published m italian, the ongmal manuscnpt was wntten in English The changes m the text are therefore bemg made in the ongmal English text, not m a translation from the Italian As It ISnow directed to an English-speakmg audience, however, a new problem anses which did not occur for the Italian publicahon the difference between Enghsh and Amencan tennmology in stoneworkmg Tlus IS a very real problem, especially for those readers who are stoneworkers To take the most Immediate example, the use of the word" stone" as a genenc tenn IScommon m North Amenca, but IS technically incorrect for some English stoneworkers For the trade m Great Bntam, "stone" IS a more precise term that usually excludes marble 1 The problem of terminology IScomplicated by the fact that there ISno dictionary of technical terms for the craft Tlus IS a charactenshc of stoneworkmg everywhere For example, three books which deal with stoneworkmg tools in France Technologie de la pIerre de tadle, La Sculpture and I'Ounllage iradilumnel du tailleur de pIerre, all three attemptmg to be dehrutrve, do not agree on such a simple Issue as the exact dehmhon of the tooth chisel There are no recent texts m English for stoneworkmg which attempt to be as complete as these three French ones An example of the type of problem that 1

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

anses IS the term "punch," which IS used extensively In archaeological literature This term denotes a tool that ISpresumably similar to a POint chisel As a term It ISknown only m Great Bntam, yet It ISnot present m modem English tool catalogues nor have I been able to get a smgle clear dehruhon from contemporary workers or literature 2 The reason for this seemmg confusion lres m the nature of stoneworkmg as a craft It has always been somethmg that was taught by example A stonecarver learned as an apprentice. not by gomg to school The nse m organized education m trade or craft schools has happened dunng roughly the same penod m which stoneworkmg has become less Important as an industry. so little attempt has been made to adapt Its mstruchon to schools Even m those areas, such as Carrara m Italy, where there are trade schools m stoneworkmg, the trammg ISstill pnmanly by example As a result there has been lIttle urge to write manuals or organize teachmg m such a way as to develop a common vocabulary Stoneworkmg remams a highly localized craft Tool shapes and names are liable to vary from region to region Those m Venice differ from those m Rome and both differ from those m Carrara Usually these differences are based on the charactenshcs of the stone carved in the different areas, but they may also be based on the types of work that have developed histon cally m different areas French and English stoneworkmg developed pnmanly from medieval stoneworkmg, wluch was based on usmg local limestones and sandstones Stoneworkmg m Italy has been much more mclmed to develop on harder limestones such as Istnan stone and travertine and especially on marble Whereas m northern France and England there were few stone monuments from an earlier penod, medieval Italy had Roman and Greek cihes to pillage for marble before they reactivated extensive marble quarrymg Many of the same drlferences can be found on a much smaller scale Wherever there are differences m hardness or type of stone, different tool usages from quarrymg to the fmished product can be observed Even now, the techniques used m Venetian workshops differ from those m Vicenza because the stones reqUIre dIfferent workmg condihons These differences act as a deterrent to a uruhcahon of termmology or technical usage The type of work demanded has also been a strong factor dividing the technology of different areas At the present hrne, much of the carvmg that IS done m England and France ISrestorahon of carved stonework of earlier penods or irrutahon of the styles of these pen ods The ability to carve an architectural moldmg ISstill a pnmary requisite of the professional worker 3 That tlus was true even at the begmnmg of the century IS demonstrated by the books on stone masonry 4 The laymg out and carvmg of often very complex moldmgs was and ISm northern countries what the carvmg of stone as a craft has been pnmanly about In Italy, on the other hand, marble workmg has been one of the most Important crafts m the stone trade Marble workmg mvolves much more sawmg as well as polislung and mcludes mlaymg of mtarsia or mosaic patterns Color ISImportant m marble m contrast to less vanegated stones It can be polished to a high gloss, unlike most of the lImestones and sandstones worked m the north When marble IScarved, It ISmuch more likely to be carved m non-repeatIng deSIgns, such as floral mterlaces or complex patterns on a flat or SImple curved surface rather than moldmgs There IS also an actIve mdustry m Italy of statue productIon, both for modem sculpture and church decoratIon, as well as the

INTRODUCTION

copymg or even fakmg of anhquihes Techniques that are rarely known to northern stoneworkers, such as the pomhng system, are a normal part of Italian trammg The result of these differences ISthat there often seems to be a WIde nft between stoneworking in different areas, especially to the workers themselves Stoneworkmg ISa conservative craft 5 It ISa technique passed If not from father to son at least from master to assistant What ISlearned ISthe craft in ItSparticular location, WIth certain materials and product requirements Since It has very httle literature, there IS lrttle urge toward standardizahon To the extent that there IS a history Within the craft, It IS spoken rather than written and therefore changes from place to place Stoneworkmg IS not so much a long tradition as a senes of long traditions, each of which has ItS own history, techniques and preferred matenals This tendency to localization can exist on many different levels national, regional, or even simply one town With ItS own quarnes of ItSown particular stone All of these vanahons exrst at the same time One may define Italian techruques, looking from the outside, but also regional tendencies in the Veneto as well as local techniques witlun the workshops of Vicenza Bessac demonstrates that the same thmg IS true m France 6 It depends on your POint of view which one you think IS most Important Against this tendency to localizahon, there IS another which bnngs the traditions together Large stone buildings have always required more workers than most areas can provide Thus stoneworkers have moved around, gomg where the work IS This can be seen among the Greeks With a monument such as the Mausoleum at Halrcarnassus, which was the work of many sculptors, In Roman times With projects such as the north Afncan CIty of Lephs Magna, magnificently enlarged by a hometown boy become famous, the emperor Sephrruus Severus, and In the medieval cathedrals of Europe One of the most recent pen ods of movement was late nineteenth-century North Amenca when, according to one of the master carvers who particrpated, the best were coming from all over Europe because of the high pay offered 7 This gathenng of workers from diverse areas for a large project acted as a means to rrux and spread tools and techniques It functioned as a counter movement to the locahzahon of technique It IS worth nohng at this POint that the stoneworkers who were most likely to be moving about were also the most expert It might have been possible to hnd or tram local workers for the more humble Jobs, movmg stone or squanng blocks, but one would have had to Import a certain number of expert carvers and master masons, whose trairung required years of apprenticeship The result ISthat It would have been the most expert who would be observing and learning new techniques In my own expenence, the most expert stonecarvers also show the greatest curiosity about their craft and the greatest interest m expanding their knowledge of It Their cunosity leads them to seek new ways to solve the problems the work presents Since the middle of the nineteenth century, there has been a great effort to modernize m certain areas of stoneworkmg Machmery, mdustnal techniques, and modem plannmg have all acted to change certain branches of the trade This moderruzahon, however, has not occurred across the board, but m areas of greater demand Certain materials. marble and granite for example, which are popular WIth contemporary architects. have been In great demand Others, such as the limestones and sandstones that were the staple of the building trades m northern Europe, seem to be less In demand than In the past Marble

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

working, especially In Italy, has undergone tremendous changes dunng this century so that superficially It seems almost unrecognizable In comparIson to a hundred and ÂŁIfty years ago Italian marble workers have spread to many parts of the world as the experts In the trade In some areas, such as the Uruted States, popular consciousness has associated Italians with stoneworkmg as If they were the only experts, however much a contradichon of reality tlus may be On the other hand, carvers working In local tradihons where there has been no Increase In demand or change In type of the product, have not undergone this modermzahon process Although there IS a great difference between their techniques and those associated with Italian marble working, the difference IS often one of stages In the process of mecharuzahon As the tradihonal craft In one area absorbs the changes that come with acqumng more and more mechanical tools, It becomes Similar to the craft In other areas which have absorbed the same tools The result may be defensive atbtudes, resistance to change and often an atbtude to history built on pnde m local tradihons 8 Thus the contradictory trends In the craft of stoneworkmg persist On the one hand are local traditions with their tendency to conservahsm based on local materials. demands and history On the other hand IS a continuous process of change going on where the demand ISgreatest Although there IS often a superficial resistance to change within local or regional techniques, m fact the new technologies are almost invisibly sifting down Into and modifying them It IShard to hnd local workshops anywhere without some modem tools, but the new tools adopted are those that ÂŁItwithin local needs, so the tradihonal still exerts a powerful Influence The tension between new techniques and conservabve local tradinons, as well as the way the tension acts to change technology while still ensunng tradition. would seem to be a part of the tradition of stoneworkmg For the purposes of this book the relationship between change and tradition ISImportant as It affects the literature on stoneworkmg In fact there are two literatures One IS the modem techmcal/rndustnal literature whose purpose ISto promote contemporary technology Tlus literature ISoften put out by trade associahons to advertise the modem stone industry and ItS wares GOing hand-In-hand With tlus material are the trade fairs in centers such as Carrara and Verona at which the latest rnachmery ISdemonstrated and sold The attitude of tlus literature ISuruversahshc the machines are meant to work all stones and the technology to function worldwide The other literature ISthe product of research Into specihc traditions This can take the form of the study of local or nabonal techniques, as for example In Donovan Purcell's Cambndge Stolle or Jean-Claude Bessac's L'Ol/tzllage iradslumnel du iatlleur de pierre, or It can take the form of archaeological study as m Carl Bluemel's Greek Sculptors at Work The charactenshc of all of these works IS their selecbon of one specific area to study and describe. and thus they tend to encourage the viewpoint that the history of stoneworkmg technology IS a history of conservabve local or nabonal tradihons 9 Because of the nature of the literature on stoneworkmg as It now stands, there ISno attempt to deal With ItS overall history Stoneworkmg IS seen either as a modem technology or as a disappearing craft Both of these are half-truths which discourage the understanding of stoneworkmg and ItS history Both emphasize that part of stone technology which IS Immediately VISible to the author In works descnbmg local tradihons, this hrrutahon In viewpoint IS often fueled and increased by a defensiveness

INTRODUCTION

wluch tends toward rejecting anything unfamiliar, whereas the modem technological literature tends to view everything that IS not at the forefront as obsolete Both viewpoints discourage any attempt to take an overview of stoneworkmg The modernists wish to deny the past In their rush to the future. while the tradihonahsts apply a moralistic athtude toward techniques An example of the first ISthe tendency of some young sculptors to avoid ever learning to carve with a hammer and chisel, beginning Immediately with the air hammer and therefore hrruhng their techniques Conservahves, on the other hand. teach that the air hammer ISan evil to be avoided This attitude can be seen extending Into the literature when WIttkower dendes the use of the dnll In sculpture.!" or when Bluemel claims an aesthetic supenonty for archaic technique 11 It extends Into our study of the past when one hears a scholar asserhng. as I have heard. that modem technology IS so changed from the past that understanding of the present Will not help with understanding the past It ISprobably clear from the bnef descnphon of the literature of stoneworkmg above that there IS some resistance to the Idea of underlying conditions that apply to stoneworkmg The worker In a local tradihon. as well as ItS lustonan, has a certain Investment In ItS Importance This often seems to be especially true when the tradition IS dying out It IS tempting to adopt the attitude of a beleaguered parhsan of a dying tradition. Waiting alone for the last onslaught of the barbanan hordes of modem technology It IS not necessanly helpful. however. for a broader comprehension of technology It ISperhaps more Important to try to establish bndges between that which remains of traditional techniques and modem methodologies for the good of both I certainly do not Wish to belittle those who are maintaining traditional working methods They are an excellent source for technical knowledge. often the only source for hrst-hand mformahon about traditions, and are valuable to both the stoneworker and the histonan Those stone carvers. In the United States for example. who are forced to rediscover traditional techmques working Virtually alone because the tradition IS gone. are equally admirable Yet this adrrurahon should not blind us to seeking a broader knowledge of the technology of stoneworkmg Any object worked In stone ISa document that. correctly understood, descnbes ItS own manufacture Tlus ISespecially true of unhrushed works. of which there are many, but It IS also true of fuushed works A pIece of worked stone has a language mscnbed on ItS surface that can be read by those who have learned the signs This ought to be a truism. but needs restating all the same In a technology where the written documentahon IS scarce and often confusing. or wntten by those who were not familiar With It. usually the only accurate evidence ISthe object Itself 12 Obviously the final tools used will leave their mark on the surface Less obviously, many of the other tools Willalso leave signs of their passage Shaping also often leaves signs, and certain final shapes indicate the existence of preliminary shapes In the process of manufacture The problem IS not whether the evidence exists, but rather the idenhhcahon and interpretahon of that evidence Before mOVing ahead, we must diSCUSStwo areas of terrmnology Stoneworkmg m general and tools m parhcular have some essentially very Simple baSICSwhich are then elaborated into an almost mhruty of vanahons There are relahvely few baSICtool shapes which are repeated everywhere that metal tools are used The point chisel. the flat chisel

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

and the round-headed chisel are virtually uruversal, but when one comes to a particular tradition, one also hnds many vanahons 10both the tool and Its name These are usually developed to meet the specific needs of the stone worked and the forms cut In considenng any toot the mdividual name may be Important for descnphon withm a particular tradition Tlus should not blmd one to the fact that the name sigrufies the same or very sirrular tools 10 other traditions Somethmg of the same problem exists 10 the classihcahon of tools, where certain traditions create classihcahons that do not exist 10 others Bessac asserts a general difference between hand tools With flat as agamst pointed teeth wluch does not exist 10other countnes or 10fact 10some other French literature 13 For the sake of simplicity and clarity, the most genenc name for the tool and the baSIC modem classihcahon as commonly found 10 commercial tool catalogues wil] be used 10 this book The descnphon of the matenals of stoneworkmg IS also a problem Often one needs to know the descnber to understand the descnphon A stoneworker 10central Italy may descnbe any polishable stone that ISnot Igneous rock as marble, even though much that hts this descnphon IS geologically another stone For a long hme 10 Great Bntain. Carrara marble was called SICIlIan marble, and Istnan stone was called Roman stone 14 Stoneworkers 10 different traditions gIve different names to the same stones as well Geologists wilt on the other hand, use names that are too particular or unfamiliar to be applicable commercially In my expenence, thrs difference 10 denorrunahon can cause considerable acnmony at conferences and 10 the literature, WIth scholars, stoneworkers and geologists each proclairrung the validity of their own names for the materials WIthout wishing to enter mto tlus arena, which occasionally seems to 10splre some quite unnecessary name-callmg.P It seems to me that the safest procedure for the broadest comprehension ISto hew a lme as close as possible to geological usage, when It can be commonly understood "Stone" IS the general term used here given to compnse all worked rocks The individual local names will be given, where possible, followed by geological terms, such as limestone, sandstone, marble, granite, or others where they apply This ISmeant to supply mformahon that IS clear Without bemg too techrucal

My viewpoint IS as follows stoneworking IS a technology that meets certain conditions wherever and whenever practiced, by understanding these condihons It IS possible to establish a baSISfor the study of that technology, any pIece of worked stone IS a document of ItS own manufacture, and the document IS at least partially legible Without specific knowledge of the tradihon that created It To descnbe this. I wrll provide examples from the areas WIth which I am most familiar stoneworkmg and especially stonecarvmg 10 Italy and the United States ThIS means that there are more examples about marble carV10g than any other material or technique ThIS emphasis on marble IS necessary because It ISmy area of greatest expertise, both as a carver and an histonan I believe It WIllhelp the reader who has no farruhanty WIth sroneworkmg to delve deeper 10 one area of ItS technology The orgaruzahon of this book ISto move from the general to the particular The next chapter WIll diSCUSSthe underlying pnnciples of stonework1Og Followmg that will be three chapters descnbmg stone and tools from the worker's pomt of vIew Then come chapters on methods of carvIng and related technIques A fi.nalsectIon Willbe a senes of

INTRODUCTION

analyses of particular works and monuments m order to assist the readers m developing useful methods of analysis for themselves Notes 1 There are exceptions Hopton Wood stone IS geologically marble, see Renwick. 1909 p 5 2 The only defiruhon I have found m the literature IS in Purchase, 1904 p 1 This dehruhon has some relahonslup to modem prachce because ItSonly dishnchon between the punch and point IS that one has a hammer head and the other a mallet head 3 I am making a drshnchon at tlus pomt between the professional stoneworker, i e , a craftsman, and a sculptor who carves In the twentieth century, It ISquite rare for sculptors to carve stone When they do, they are very unlikely to be trained stoneworkers, but rather someone With sculptural trammg who takes up stonecarvmg for his own work When USing the term "stoneworker" what IS meant IS a trained craftsperson who has no particular Interest m working from lus or her own design 4 Warland, 1953 and Purchase, 1904 Tlus dishnchon between carving In Northern Europe and Italy already existed one hundred years ago as can be seen m a companson of Purchase With RICCI,1895 where there IS no mention of the techniques of carVing moldings 5 This ISnot necessanly true, however, of sloneworkers' politics In the late runeteenth century, Carrara was an anarchist center, and people of this persuasIOn still form a noticeable pohhca! presence there 6 Bessac, 1986 7 Hinton, C 1926 8 An interesting example of the continuation of traditional techniques IS found among the makers of fake anhqurhes In Rome Traditional techniques are valued and mamlamed for their capacity to give an old look to the objects made 9 For a more complete view of Bessac, 1986, as well as further discussion of some of the Issues mvolved m the literature, see Rockwell, 1990a 10 Wlttkower, 1977 p 28 11 Carl Bluemel. 1969 ThIS attitude IS baSICto Bluemel's whole thesis 12 Plmy the Elder's comments on sculpture are a good example They are often confusmg about technique and are wntten by one who was certamly not knowledgeable about stoneworkmg On the other hand, documentation for buildings such as that available for some medieval cathedrals (Orvieto IS an example), only gives us information like accounts of payments to stoneworkers Tlus IS only marginally useful when we want to know the tools and practices of carving an individual work Even with nearly contemporary monuments such as the late nineteenth-century New York State Capitol m Albany, there ISvery little useful documentation of techniques other than the firushed and especially the unbrushed carvings themselves I might add that the most useful documentation other than that are the photographs made Since the late nmeteenth century, especially in the Carrara area, documenting the gradual change from traditional to modern lechruques. see Ii marmo len e Oggl, 1984 13 Bessac, 1.986 pp 138-48 and NoeL 1.965 p 91 14 RenWICk. 1909 p 216 and Cater, n d p 11 15 Herz, 1990

Principles of stoneworking

Stoneworkmg IS a technology that meets certain condinons wherever and whenever practiced The first condihon of stoneworkmg ISthe stone Itself Stone ISa highly variable material These vanables have a strong influence on techmque at all levels The shapmg of the tools, how they are held and how they are used can vary according to the stone This ISsuch an Important condmon that stoneworkers have usually specialized m certain types of stone Chapter 3 will detail some of the vanables m stone that affect ItSworkmg It would be impossible even In a longer book than llus to gIve them all To a carver, each pIece of stone can seem an mdividual Even when machine tools are used, each type of marble has vanables from the norm that can affect the working process Marble meanwlule ISa very different material for working from sandstone, limestone or granite Since stone ISan already fully formed matenal that cannot be changed, the first condihon of the technology ISthe necessity of understanding the working problems of the type of stone being worked An example of this IS the workmg of flmt to produce weapons that was practiced m many early sociehes ThIS craft could produce SImple objects such as pebbles WIth a cuttmg edge, or arrowheads, and It also produced the beauhful long ceremonial knives of the Egyptians and Aztecs These objects were possible because of the nature of flmt It breaks easily WIth a flat conchoid fracture wluch can be continued so as to create a sharp blade None of the stones commonly used m more hrghly developed stone technologies have this charactenshc In order to make these objects, the worker had to understand that stones vary accordmg to type and that one specihc type lent Itself to makmg the Implements desired, then he had to discover how to work this type of stone I What we call the Stone Age IS technologically charactenzed by working methods wluch depend on a deep knowledge of the malenal combined WIth rrurumal tools and VIrtually non-existent machmery It would probably be true to say that the average person m these pen ods had a knowledge and feel for stone that only the most expert workers now possess An example of how the nature of the stone affects tool working In more developed crvihzahons can be seen In one use of pohshable stones When struck WIth chisels, both granites and colored marbles acqUire a hght gray color ThIS ISdue to the rrucrofractures caused when the tool stnkes the stone When polished, they regam the natural color of the stone, whether It be black, red, or variegated ThIS quality has been used m sculptures 8

PRINCIPLES

STONEWORKING

of vanous unrelated crvilizahons for a particular effect In a large Egyptian granite statue of a woman (first rrullenruum, BC) In the Vatican Museum and In a Chinese Han Dynasty tomb In the Boston Museum, the carvers polished the stone first and then made drawings over the surface WIth carving tools The drawings stand out because, being unpolished. they are of a different color from the polished surface A characteristic of these particular stones ISbeing adapted to aesthetic purposes A second condition of stoneworkmg ISthe nature of the tools There are a fairly small number of efficient tool shapes for the working of stone Despite the histone, cultural and geographical variety of the hrghly developed civilizahons of tlus world, they all have two basic metal tools for the carving of stone the POint chisel and the flat chisel Equally they all, as well as some others Without metal stoneworkmg tools, seem to have understood at an early stage the use of shaped abrasrve stones for the cutting and smoothing of stone Given a particular matenal for the manufacture of tools, stoneworkers In unconnected crvrlizahons will make most of the same basic tool shapes for working similar stones 2 The basic metal tools of stoneworkmg WIll In any place at any time be used by expenenced workers In a way specific to the stone being cut The POint chisel was held perpendicular to the stone In second-rrullenruum Egypt, second-century AD Rome and late nineteenth-century northern United States when carVing granite In the same places and pen ods, the POint clusel was held at about a forty- to SIxty-degree angle to the stone when marble or limestone was carved Tlus can be attnbuted partially to the nature of the stone and partially to the fact that the tool IS made of metal, even though It IS not the same metal In all cases A stone used to cut or shape another stone by percussIOn always moves perpendicular to the surface being cut, whatever the type of stone Involved Stoneworkmg can be divided Into three areas the understanding of the stone being worked, the knowledge of the tools available, and the methodology used In applymg the tools to the stone so as to arnve at the desired form The knowledge of the tools does Imply a methodology In Itself Each tool tends to nt Into a certain place In the sequence of the removal of stone A POint chisel roughs the form and a flat chisel smooths It It IS possible to use the tools differently, however, and certain crvilizahons do It IStherefore Intellectually convenient to drvide our thinking about tools between the knowledge of a tool and ItS cutting charactenshcs and the knowledge of ItS place In the sequence of shaping a form In the stone 3 The latter ISpart of our understanding of the methodology of arnVIng at the form "Process" ISthe word I WIlluse to describe tlus methodology Process ISthe sequence of applicahons of the tools to the stone so that something IScarved and a hnal product emerges Carvers do not Simply charge hke a raging bull at a piece of stone and somehow produce a hrushed statue out of a cloud of chips and dust Instead, the work ISearned out In a methodical way that rrururruzes the hkelihood of mistakes and breakages and maximizes the carver's control over the final product The processes of carving are generally learned along WIth learning the tools Process ISalso closely related to style A particular style reqUires a particular process, and a particular process results In a particular style ThIS ISone reason why It ISpossible to recognize Imitations and fakes Process ISboth one of the most Important things the carver learns and the area of technique that IS most likely to be modihed to meet

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

particular needs There are therefore both some general laws of process and an almost mhrure vanahon on these laws The chapters wluch follow on process are not Intended to gIve all these vanahons or even most of them, but to convey some feeling for process and Its marufestahons Each carved object must be studied for Its own peculiar variants "Process" ISa general term There ISmore than one type of process and there may be several lesser processes withm a larger one To create a squared block of stone In a building there ISfirst the quarrying, followed by transport, culhng and placement Each of these ISa separate process WIthin the overall one of the building Thus the term process may be used to descnbe a group of processes There are four baSIC laws of stone methodology which are foundahons for the processes These four concern the baSICnature of stoneworkmg, the nature of the stone, the nature of the tools, and what I call the law of SImple sequence All methods and all processes fIt WIthin the boundanes defmed by these laws By beanng In mind these laws or generalihes It IS usually possible to amve at an understanding of the methods and processes by wluch a stone has been worked (1) The nature of stonecarving IS that one IS always taking matenal away from the original mass ThIS ISobVIOUS,but ItS consequences are not necessanly so It means that most method and process m sioneioorkmg IS subtracuoe A stoneworker cannot add to the pIece of stone, he can only subtract Since most other materials, especially those used In modem times, Involve handling In such a way that It goes through a malleable or liquid state, It IS possible to make changes In the matenal itself ThIS IS not possible In stone Subtractive thmkmg reqUIres the worker or planner always to bear In mind that once any part of the onginal mass IStaken off, It cannot be put back on ThIS In tum means that careful planrung ISnecessary To take a SImple example, If one has a large, uneven mass of stone from wluch an architectural molding 2 m X 1 m X 1 m WIllbe carved, It ISVItal to be sure that the iruhal work of squanng the block does not make It too small The squanng technique must therefore be sufficiently controlled to ensure a rrurumum dimension The stone cannot be reforged, melted down or added to In sculpture, the nature of subtractive thmkmg becomes very obvIOUS A stonecarved sculpture ISusually carefully planned The sculpture must stay withm the boundanes of the stone, once It ISselected, so an Idea ISconfined withm a certain area by the material In other media the Idea tends to define ItS own SIze,unless other outside factors such as econorrucs or location enter In Even one's sense of form changes, for a form made by cutting into a larger mass IS dIfferent from one made by addmg to a mass that already exists ThIS drshnchon has been made theoretically for centunes there are two kinds of sculpture, one Involves cutting away, and one Involves addmg on In fact, sculptors used to be defined by whether they were carvers or modelers In tlus sense, "carving" applies to all stoneworkmg, not only sculpture Additions of other pIeces of stone to the mass or block have sometimes been made, to cover mistakes or In accordance WIth tradrhonal practices Intarsia and the making of statues from dIfferent colored stones are both examples On ancient Roman statues, the head and sometimes the hands are frequently separate pIeces added on Before the second century AD, the pIeCing together of white marble statues seems to have been frequent In Italy" but these are special SItuations or specialized techniques Large bas-reliefs are often

PRINCIPLES

STONEWORKING

made of more than one block of stone Stone building construction also involves adding one stone to another Yet, the law of subtraction shll applies, because each block in conslruchon and each pIece of a mulh-piece statue must ongmally come from a larger mass However much the overall plan may be broken down into smaller component parts, the parts themselves still return to the ongmal problem, wluch ISthe need to have a method and process careful enough to avoid overcuthng One of the major purposes of ordered process ISto avoid the waste of hme and energy involved in deCISIOnmakmg that would exist WIthout It Anyone who has taught stonecarvmg ISfarruliar WIth the student's reludance to cut away from the block for fear of taking away somethmg necessary for the future sculpture I have seen students brood for hours whether to carve off the comer of a block Early twenheth-century books on stonemasonry were mainly concerned WIth descnbmg the geometry of the process by which a parallelepiped could be carved to more complex forms The purpose of this ISto tram a worker to avoid the costly hme, effort and msecunty of having to thmk It out each hme5 (2) The second law of stoneworkmg methods and processes ISthat the nature of the stolle always has an IIlfluence ThIS ISparticularly evident m quarrymg The quarrymg of marble reqUires not only different tools, but also different techniques from the quarrymg of either grarute or soft limestones In modem technology, limestones are frequently quarned WIth a type of chainsaw that runs on tracks, marble ISquarned WIth WIre saws, and granite IS quarned WIth a form of gas torch The use of these different tools m the quarrymg, Indeed the development of different tools, IS the produd of the varying requirements of the materials In an example from ancient Egypt, compare a relief WIth a tnal portrait of Akhenaton" WIth a contemporary unbrushed portrait of hIS WIfe Neferhh," the hrst m soft limestone and the second m hard sandstone On the relief one can see, where the lme of the neck begms on both profiles. that the carver started carving from the bottom usmg the comer of a flat clusel The clusel was held at about a forty-hve degree angle to the stone and cut along the stone almost as If It were drawing on It On the Neferhh portrait one can see, especially around the eyes, that the chisel ISa point tool that ISheld vertical to the stone and ISmaking small pit marks The carver did not cut the stone but worked more like a metalsmith, hammenng a shape mto a sheet of metal The difference between the two techniques IS between cuthng and shattering the stone Thus the whole process of carvmg an eye, for example, WIlldiffer according to whether the stone IScut by lateral blows or shattered WIth vertical blows These two examples can be repeated WIth vanahons throughout the hIstory of stoneworkmg If one ISnot famIliar WIth the stones mvolved, It ISsomehmes dIfficult to see exadly how much a method or process can be affeded by the matenal In many cases It ISnot so much a queshon of vanahon as that of a whole techmcal culture, mvolvmg tools, carvmg methods and construdIOn processes, based on a parhcular type of stone I am mclmed to doubt that the VIrtUOSItyand freedom of French GothIC could have developed except m conJundIOn WIth the soft, hIghly carvable limestones and sandstones of central and northern France, here, the techmcal culture is at the very least faCilitated by the stone avaIlable (3) The third law ISthat the matenal avmlable for tools IS a major factor III the methods and

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

processes We are so used to the availability of Iron and steel that we tend to take It for granted that highly developed stoneworkmg reqUIres their presence In lookmg at cultures where they are not present, there ISa modem tendency to fanciful or complicated explanations for their obvIOUSability to work stone In fact major cultural areas - preColumbian central and South Amenca, ancient Egypt and the Cyclades Islands m the second and third rrullenrua - have worked stone Without the aid of Iron and steel There ISnothmg particularly unusual or mexplrcable about their methods They all used forms of percussIOn and abrasion, but because the tools they used were based on different matenals from ours, their methods vaned accordingly Cycladic marble carvmgs, for example, were earned out With a great deal of the shaping being done by abrasion The shape of the slot between the legs of the goddess ftgures makes this obvIOUS It IS rounded at the bottom and shows the marks of having been made by rubbing longitudinally With a thin abrasive stone It ISgenerally true of non-steel cultures that a great deal more of the carVing ISexecuted by abrasion than ISnormal for Iron and steelUSing cultures A difference In tool matenal modifies the methods and processes but does not change the baSICcharactenshcs of stoneworkmg Abrasion and exact knowledge of the splithng charactenshcs of stone are relahvely more Important In Stone Age methods, but they are present and Important at all hmes The working of stone IS often technically very soplushcated In supposedly pnrruhve cultures The tools are different because of the material the tools are made from, but the baSICnecessities of breaking away the stone do not change (4) The fourth law, which I call the law of Simple sequence, IS an observation that apphes almost universally to the processes of stoneworkmg stone IS worked by a senes of SImple steps Each step IS a small change from ItS predecessor For example, to make a squared block from a rough quarned stone, first one flat surface IScarved, then another at a ninety-degree angle to the first, and then another and so on After SIXflat surfaces have been carved, a squared block has been completed, by breaking the process down Into SImple steps It may seem obvIOUSthat a plain architectural block would work tlus way, but the same tendency ISVISIbleIn sculpture A head of Apollo from the west pediment of the temple at Olympia In Greece" shows that the sculptor, m order to carve the hair, ftrst drvides It Into the separate large forms and then inCISeSthe lines of the hair Into these forms These are two separate acts, each one clearly deftned as to purpose and tool, the first With a POint clusel, the second With a flat chisel A similar way of breaking down the carving of a detail Into a succession of Simple steps can be seen on a senes of angel's Wings on the thirteenth-century facade reliefs of Orviero cathedral" or on the nineteenth-century carved flowers decorahng the senate chamber of the New York State Capitol building In Albany, New York 10 On the Wings, the outer shape IS carved first In a precise and completed form, then the feathers are outlined also In a hrushed way, and then at the last the pattern Within the feather IS carved Each stage IS a dishnct carving Job, and IS completed before the next ISbegun The nineteenth-century flowers are not divided as drshnctly as the angel's Wings, but It IS easy to see that the stone IS squared to ItS ftnal shape before the flower ISbegun, and then the flower IScarved by successively deepening the relief and cleanng the design

PRINCIPLES

OF STONEWORKING

It IS possible to find equally good examples from penods geograplucally and chronologically as diverse as these What uruhes them all IS the tendency to break any carVIng Job Into a step-by-step from the one before

procedure

In which each step IS a relatively

At first sight It IS dIfficult to argue the universality

of unhrushed

However,

observation

reconfirms

the conclusion

stoneworkmg

as well as modern

My own opInion IS that the procedure

the result of the need to aVOId overcuthng have unconsciously developed

the stone

a type of step-by-step

away stone that I might need later Making

procedure

In my own sculpture, sequence

always

of SImple sequence

I find that I

In order to aVOId carVIng

a big change by a sequence

IS In fact one of the most reliable ways of conrrollmg

small change

of such procedure

of small changes

that change

a lugh degree of imaginahon IS required, and more If there IS a large work force or a very strong tradihon The law of Simple sequence

Sculpture

tends

to apply

less In cases where

carved directly by the sculptor shows fewer clearly demarcated

architectural

stonecuttIng

steps because

A large workshop

they are earned

based working

system

out by different

workers

A highly

of steps

On the other hand,

of method

Even mdividual step-by-step

sculptors

working

tradihon-

on their own outside

procedures

and process are laws only In the sense that observation

has shown them to be uruversal At first Sight the methods are many and diverse

steps than does

more drshnchon between

specialized

tend to develop

These four "laws"

shows

also shows a more ngid sequence

these are all relative mdicahons of any tradition

usually

These "laws"

are the urufymg

and processes

elements

of stoneworkmg

that make the diversity

comprehensible and allow us to make compansons For the study of stoneworkmg from the POInt of VIew of a non-worker,

It IS Important

to remember

the dIVISIon of the technology

the tools, and

the methods

One must first know what the type of stone IS and something

working

charactensncs

FInally, the methodology, be analyzed

The "laws"

Then It IS possible the sequence of stoneworkmg

Into three areas

the matenal,

of ItS general

to identify the tools and how they were used

of tool use and the arnval at the final form, can are Intended

to assist Hus study

They are laws

after the fact They are certainly not laws In the sense that I thmk that a stoneworker plan ahead of hrne to follow them, but rather that methods

developed

must

by stoneworkers

do follow them

Notes For a descnphon of flmt working techruque see Oakley, 1972 ch 5 ThIS statement may be less true of the tooth chisel and the bush hammer These remarks are based on personal observations of stone sculpture in the followmg museums for Indian and Chmese sculpture the Bnhsh Museum, the Boston Museum of Fme Arts, the Cleveland Museum and ISMEO In Rome, for Cycladrc sculpture the Nahonal Museum in Athens, for pre-Columbian sculpture the Dumbarron Oaks collection and varIOUS shows held at the Institute of Italian Lahn Amencan Studies in Rome 3 People trained m a particular tradihon often balk at this pomt They have been trained to thmk of a tool as havmg certain working charactcnshcs which necessarily place It in a certain position in the sequence of cutting stone Only after studymg stoneworkIng from dIfferent places and perIods do you see that thIS ISnot necessarIly true In fIfteenth-century VenIce, the pomt chIsel was sometImes used as a fInIshmg tool on both marble and hmestone In attIc

1 2

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

sculpture between the fIfth and hrst century Be, the tooth chisel was frequently used after the flat chisel and Immediately before the rasp 4 Claridge. 1990 and unpublished lectures and private conversations 5 Purchase, 1904 and Wariand, 1953 6 Peck and Ross, 1978 pi 26 7 Lange and Hrrmer, 1957 pis 178 and 179 8 Bluemel. 1969 III 22, P 29 9 For a descnphon of the tools and processes of the Orvieto Cathedral facade sculpture see White, 1959 and Martelloth and Rockwell, 1988 10 Proceedings, 1983 fIg 49

Stone

ThIS chapter ISIntended to present stone as viewed by the stoneworker Tlus means that the classification ISstrictly from that POInt of view Although I also accept the geological classihcahon of stone, I am mtenhonally avoidmg other viewpoints There are several problems In presenting stone In tlus way Charactenshcs such as workability are Infernally dIfficult to descnbe, but a worker's classihcanon of stone IS strongly based on precisely that charactenshc As anyone WIth stoneworkmg experIence knows, stones vary but the vanahons are only appreciable expenenhally You cannot sahsfactonly descnbe to a non-carver the differences between Carrara statuary marble and Afyon wlure marble or between Vrcenza limestone and Indiana limestone They are real all the same The reality of working charactenshcs ISeveryday and crucial to carrying out any Job on stone SInce they are not easily describable or classifiable, they have less power In literature than the measurable geological classifications The problem IS that the geological descnphon seems to have no relahonship to workabihty, or If It does It has never been understood or described There IStherefore a conflict between the expenential and the analytical The latter has come to dominate the hterature, but It provides no assistance to the worker It IS Important In the context of this book to present the expenenhal view To understand stoneworkmg technology It ISnecessary to understand the worker's response to stone, even though It may not be analytically venhable A stoneworker's view of stone ISnot solely dictated by workability It ISalso dictated of necessity by marketability and tradition Some stones sell better than others They must be worked even If others rrught be preferable In certam areas there are stones that are part of the arclurectural tradihon, even If they are not particularly attractive or good to work The sandstone of the Apennines. wluch generally fits under the name pieira forte, ISan example It ISneither particularly workable nor attractive, but It ISso hallowed by tradition that no building restored USInga more attrachve replacement WIlllook the same Most classihcahons found In the professional literature used before the late nineteenth century were based on the stone's appearance, and were strongly affected by market considerations For thIS reason, polishable stones that do not geologically belong together were frequently grouped together ThIS method of classification has by no means completely died out The persistence of this method of classifying stone IS 15

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

probably the reason for most of the acnmony that comes up when the subject IS discussed 1 The followmg descnphon of stone from a worker's POint of VIew IS based on a combination of personal expenence and discussion with professional workers In Italy, England, the Uruled States and France It IShrruted by my own expenence, travels and language abihhes I have made very little use of the literature because there ISso little of It and because what there IShas seemed so unreliable to me and the workers I have talked to Furthermore, even gIven our combined expenence, this ISby no means an exhaustive survey My pnncipal expenence IS WIth marble and limestone (geologically defined) Although, I have also carved grarute, sandstone, alabaster and onyx (commercially defmed), I cannot claim more than superficial knowledge of them ThIS cannot, therefore, be In any way a complete coverage of the field I am obviously not dealing WIth the stones of some Important European tradrhons such as Germany, or the great nonEuropean ones of ASIa and Central and South America, but because granite ISgrarute and marble marble wherever you go, I believe tlus diSCUSSIOn has validity even for those areas Although all stones can be classihed geologically, to the stoneworker, this classihcahon IS urumportant Whether a hard stone that can be polrshed IS, geologically speaking, limestone or marble or granite has very httle relevance to the problem The working approach can be drvided Into three large areas first, the availability of the stone and the SIzeof block obtainable, second, the use that the stone WIllbe put to, third, the working charactenshcs and potenhals of the stone The appearance of the stone IS Important to the designer but ISconsidered by the stoneworker as only one part of the overall aspect of the material Competence IS With production rather than design and therefore he concentrates on that Exammmg the three areas m some detail will convey something of the stoneworker's attitude toward matenal The avadabzltty of the stone ISof obVIOUSImportance However nght a stone ISfor a specific purpose, If the quarnes are a thousand miles away and the transport facilities pnrruhve, a more readily available matenal WIllbe used, even If less suitable The fad that the quarnes are nearby but inaccessible, or that the conditions for quarrymg are dIfficult, will have the same effect 2 Equally, where conditions do not allow for the quarrying of large blocks, the stone may be rejected regardless of ItS availabiuty or usefulness It can also happen in this latter case that the techniques of working or the use of the stone will change to take account of the size of block available The carVing of a large pIece of sculpture from several small blocks rather than one large one IS a case In POint In any case, availability both In dimension and type ISa first considerahon that Influences both design and technique Any stone can be worked and used in some way Dry stone walls and cobblestone streets are two of the simplest uses that reqUIre relatively little working of the matenal On the other end of the scale, Cotluc vaulting or polished mtarsia pavements reqUIre highly developed working techniques Certainly, a stone to be used In an mtarsia floor must meet certain standards of color, equally Important, however, IS ItS durability A stone selected to bear weight In architecture must have the charactenshcs necessary for ItS function There are some more subtle dishnchons that are made according to function When

STONE

two stones are to be glued together, as In the laying of colored stones for a table top, they must be heat-resistant If the glue ISmixed hot, as was the case In Rome before the advent of modem plastics For this reason, inlaid tables made there before the rrud-twenheth century used heat-resistant peperino as a base rather than structurally stronger travertine, which IS not heat-resistant This type of dishnchon IS generally made by the workers Involved from their own or traditional expenence of the material 3 An even subtler dishnchon Involves less obVIOUSstructural charactenshcs of the stone Some stones adapt easily to certain kinds of uses and others adapt less easily Certain limestones, such as the buff-colored, unpohshable Amencan Indiana, Italian Vicenza or many of the English and French vanehes, have a slightly gntty surface quality when hrushed Two blocks when placed together are unlikely to slide Marble, on the other hand, has a hrushed surface which IS smoother and more slippery, even when not polished Tlus ImpressIOn that limestone IS less hkely to slrp may not be testable or venhable. but It IStrue that a high percentage of complex vaulted Gothic architecture IS made of limestone In contrast, where marble ISa pnmary matenal, complex vaulting IS less likely White marble m contrast lends Itself to the very hne detail Involved In mmcate low relief decoranon This may explain some of the differences between medieval decorahon In Northern Europe and that In Central and Southern Italy 4 A stoneworker's view of his malenal is also concerned with ItS use Durability, color and structural strength are considered In Judging the stone's suitability No stone IS rejected as such, but only In relahon to a specific purpose

WorkabIhty The working properties of a stone are a combinahon of definable physical charactenshcs with" feel" Certain stones have the capacity to be carved to hne detail Tlus capacity IS a physical charactenshc The summing together of physical and visual charactenshcs (such as color) gives certain stones a "feel" which makes them a JOYto carve Carrara statuary marble or white Aphrodisias marble are distinctly different but both have rhis character The same IS true of Indiana limestone The physical charactenshcs of workability can be classified as follows present condition of the stone hardness charactenshcs caused by the stone's geological formation reachon to tools color

Each of these elements of workability has some mfluence on the carver's methods as well as his results, and are described In more detail below Condltron The stone's condition when It IScarved ISImportant for two reasons FIrst, stone changes when exposed to air or weathenng Marble becomes "cooked" after long exposure to weathenng My own expenence IS that Carrara white marble, after more than ÂŁIftyyears' exposure m the northeastern USA, has four to hve centimeters of surface

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

that ISso weak and powdery It cannot hold detail Many hmestones, both travertine and Vicenza stone bemg examples, must be seasoned after quarrymg to be effectively worked Once, on carvmg a block measunng over a cubic meter, I found It still wet m the mtenor a year after It was quarned Second, certam kmds of stone, particularly colored ones, are frequently reused, so that carvers or stoneworkers are often presented with old and sometimes weathered working material Examples of this abound in marble workmg two fourth-century portrait busts found at Aphrodisias m Turkey were reworked from earlier busts The later sculptors, even with marble quarnes only two kilometers away, were scavengmg earlier works Throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, Roman buildings were a constant source for stone of all kmds 5 Even m the twentieth century, the spiral stairway entenng the Vatican Museums was lmed with Cippolmo marble obtained by sawmg ancient columns In Northern Europe the situation IS slightly different Many stoneworkers, and especially those carvmg stone, are engaged m the restoration of old buildings The ongmal stone was usually a limestone or sandstone which weathers badly 6 The restoration often mvolves replacement of badly weathered stones with newly worked ones, mcludmg simple blocks, moldmgs and mtncate decoration The worker's knowledge of stone IS required to recogruze when the matenal is no longer structurally sound The combmahon of these two factors, mutability and frequent reuse, means that many stoneworkers have had to consider the detenorated condition of their matenal as an Important factor m ItS workmg problems Generally this means a weaker stone more prone to faults that may cause It to break With marble the surface de ten orates so that It Will not hold detail The usable stone IS then less than the actual block Sandstone frequently exfoliates, the surface breakmg away m thin sheets It ISalso possible that the shape of the available blocks for reuse ISawkward and mconveruent Rather than large, neatly squared blocks, the worker Will be forced to deal with shapes unsuitable to his design because they come from some prevIous design The overall effect of reUSing stone ISto mcrease the problems in both carvmg and adaptation of the matenal to the design Hardness The hardness of the stone IS a single physical charactenshc that has great mfluence on the working process In the Simplest sense, the hardness of the tool ISusually directly related to the hardness of the stone Soapstone can be carved with a pocket knife Softer limestones are carved with tempered steel, but have been carved with softer metals Marble and granite can be carved with tempered steel as well, but the temper IS changed accordmg to the hardness of the stone The harder the stone, the harder and more brittle the steel must be Modem granite tools usually inset a harder metal, such as tungsten carbide, into the steel point Even the hardest tempered steel dulls quickly on granite The shapes of the tools also vary considerably m relation to the hardness of the stone Gouges are frequently used on soft stones such as alabaster, soapstone or soft limestones, seldom If ever used on marble and never on granite The same basic tool, such as a flat chisel or pomt, IS thinner and has a longer taper to the cutting edge If It IS made for marble, or thick and blunt If made for granite

STONE

The angle at which the tool strikes the stone and therefore the way It breaks the stone also vanes accordmg to the hardness of the material For carvmg soft stones, the tool IS held at a low angle to the surface plane It cuts the stone m a way Similar to the achon of a wood-carvmg chisel The harder the stone, the more likely that the tool will be held more perpendicular to the cuttmg surface Generally granite IScarved by holdmg the tool vertical to the surface of the stone Tlus means that granite ISnot "cut" but rather the surface IS smashed and shattered Gramte carvmg technique IS a separate branch of stonecarvmg techmque from either limestone or marble It reqUIres different tools and methods, pnncipally because of the hardness of the stone The differences of hardness are so Important that they are expressed m terms of pncmg In the United States, the same piece of work will cost $100 m limestone, $200 m marble and $300 m granite. based on the hardness of the stone, not the cost of the rnatenal Italian practice IS more on a job-by-job baSIS, Similar but more complicated pncmg practices are found in France and Great Bntam 7 Hardness does not necessarily relate to geological classificahon Whereas some limestones are very soft, others are extremely hard For example, Vicenza stone IS soft, while Verona red ISvery hard and almost feels like granite at hrst That the same IStrue mother countries ISclear from the pnce coefficients for limestone m Purchase, these are essentially a statement of relative hardness, and vary from 0 5 to 2 3 The terms" limestone." "marble" and" grarute " used geologically are not descnphve of a stone's workmg hardness Among white marbles there ISa Wide variety of hardness from the relatively soft, such as Aphrodisias, to the very hard of Thasos from the Vathi quarnes This last ISso hard that the carvmg technique approaches grarute workmg Thus, as hardness ISa factor that can vary greatly withm the range of one geological type, It ISbest to have two levels of descnphon of the hardness of stone The first ISloosely based on the geological one A second level of descnphon, which disnnguishes among stones m the same geological groupmg, ISnecessary to understand the way a stone's hardness Will affect the carvmg Aphrodisias marble ISa "soft marble" and Thasos Vathr a "hard marble" Purbeck Portland IS a "hard limestone" and Bath IS a "soft limestone "8 Both words are Important to understand how the hardness of the stone affects the carvmg Geological [ormaiion Most stones are subject to faults of one sort or another caused by their Iormahon process A fault ISa crack lme exishng m the stone when It ISquarried, and may or may not be VISibleon the surface Some stones, such as marble, are highly subject to tlus It affects the quarrymg because a fault clearly dirrurushes the value of the stone It can also affect carvmg because not all faults are found at the hme of quarrymg Perhaps the most famous fault was m the block from which Michelangelo carved the DaVId Because of It the block was declared unusable by an earlier sculptor, Agostino di DUCCIO It ISa proof of Michelangelo's bravura, both technical and arhshc, that he succeeded m working around the fault ASide from faults, the Iormahon process of the stone creates certain charactensncs that affect the carvmg LImestone and many sandstones, as sedimentary rocks, have horizontal lmes runmng through them which are called beddmg lmes They are Similar to the gram m wood The stone breaks more easily along the beddmg lmes and ISfrequently

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

more dIfficult to carve or break across the gram The Importance of the bedding or gram IS such that It IS usually taken mto consideration when stone IS placed architecturally When" quarry bedded" or laid WIth the gram runnmg as It does in the quarry, limestone or marble ISmuch more resistant to weathenng than otherwise Marble has two grams, a major and a rrunor one In some types of marble the gram IS very strong and the stone tends to split easily along these lmes ThIS feature can be very useful in quarrymg, as It enables large blocks to be split quite easily It IS quite clear m some ancient quarnes that the gram of the marble was understood and the quarrymg adapted to It On the other hand, gram can make a marble very difhcult to carve As a student, I was warned agamst Vermont white marble by an old carver who claimed It was possible to carve a portrait, hrush It, and have the nose drop off three days later because of the gram A strong-gramed stone that sphrs m one direcnon and resists the tools m another can be a very nsky and difficult material to work 9 A good working stone for carving IShght-gramed rather than strong-gramed, meanIng It does not break too easily along the gram or against It In this case a carver will feel the gram as he carves, but It WIllnot be strong enough to affect hIS work Reachon fa fools

The single most Important factor for a worker m judging a stone ISItS reachon to tools Does It cut easily? WIll It take fine detail? Is It recephve to the range of tools that a worker has at hIS command? Some stones are extremely receptive. others are not Clearly the type and kind of detail that can be carved depends on the receptivity of the stone Even an expert carver can only go so far WIth an unreceptive stone Receptivity to tools usually mvolves a hght-grained stone that WIllnot break when cut to a fine edge It also involves to some extent the tensile strength of the stone A stone that can be carved to long thm projections WIthout breakmg ISalmost mvanably one that WIlltake very precIse detail as well In fact, recephvity to tools can best be descnbed as a comb mah on of high tensile strength WIth the capacity to hold fine detail In each geological type of stone there are more and less receptive examples Some of the limestones from the Ile de France area, the sandstone of the Vosges used on Strasbourg Cathedral and the Amencan grarute from Westerly, Rhode Island, are all considered excellent carving stones Each in ItS way IS receptive to tools There IS, however, a difference related to hardness A good granite WIll not take as fine a detail SImply because the way It ISworked subjects the grarute to greater stress than the other stones Therefore It has less capacity to hold fine detail In my expenence, the stones WIth the greatest tool receptivity are the fine while marbles such as Carrara statuary, Aphrodisias white and Paros Ligrute. the limestones are Indiana and a fine French stone from near Vienne, the sandstones Corsehill and Vosges 10 They comb me the nght level of hardness WIth tensIle strength and the capaCIty to hold detaIl to an extent that allows a carver freedom m hIS work ThIS ISof course the ultImate pomt of tool receptIvIty It gIves the worker the maXImum pOSSIble freedom to manIpulate the matenal A sub-category of tool receptIvIty ISthe capaCIty of a stone to take a polIsh A stone that can be polIshed ISreceptIve to abraSIVes to such a degree that It can be smoothed to a hIgh luster Some hard lImestones, marbles and granItes can be polIshed, soft

STONE

limestones and sandstones generally cannot Often these latter are smoothed with a steel scraper Instead of abrasives A polishable stone IS firushed with rasps and then a succession of progressively finer abrasives without the addition of any other material such as wax It ISnot a true polish If anything ISadded to the surface The nature of the stone, ItS recephvity to abrasives as srnoothmg agents, IS what dehnes ItS polishabihty rather than the skill of the workman Color Non-uniform coloration In stone ISthe visible marufestahon of vanahons In the stone that affed the carving Vaned colors represent different materials In the formahon of the stone, these In tum often represent vanahons In hardness The mtershces between colors are often weak POInts as well The fad that vanous materials go Into the stone and do not always bmd well to each other ISthus a formation fador that affeds workability A multicolored marble or Innestone!' IS generally a much more unreliable workmg medium than a plam one, but these stones are often chosen for their beauty Three marbles very popular with the ancient Romans - Pavonazzetto, Luculleo and GIallo Anhco - are, In varying degrees, examples Even more difhcult to work but used for their beauty, are the many onyxes found throughout the world Therefore color, a desirable factor In stone selection, IS often a negatIve fador In workability The elements a stoneworker considers when deahng with his matenal- availability, use and workability - constitute hIS professional viewpoint It IS Important Ior the nonprofessional to bear these elements In mmd when analyzing the techrucal SIde of stoneworkmg Nevertheless, the stoneworker does not exist In a vacuum Generally speakmg, choices or selections of matenal are not based solely on working knowledge In fad, the worker IS often litHe more than a servant Therefore, we must bear several fadors In rrund The hrst ISthat almost any stone can be worked, gIven suffrcient hrne and expenditure Even the most unlikely or dIfficult stones, such as lava, have been worked and used for both architecture and sculpture Pre-Columbian art In Mexico and Central Amenca provides many examples The rehnernent of the hnal surface and the delicacy of detail still reflect the quality of the stone The reason that even a difhcult-to-work stone IS frequently carved IS pnmanly availability when nothing better IS at hand, one uses what one can Therefore a knowledge of the qualihes of stone does not necessanly mean the use of high quality stone A corollary IS that some societies have developed a whole technology based on the use of technically poor-quality stone The fact that the stone ISthere ISsuffiCIentto make It worth developIng the technology to a much hIgher degree than It would be In a sOCIety wIth access to better matenals The same can be true even when a good stone ISavaIlable Often the avaIlable hIgh-quality stone IS too expenSIve, so that an appropnate technology IS developed to deal wIth an InexpenSIve local stone The sandstone pletra forte used for constructIon along much of the ApennIne mountaInS In Italy, where marble and &ne limestones were avaIlable, IS an example Even now there eXIsts a partIcular technology for workIng thIs stone SImIlarly, the development of a stone technology does not depend on the presence of matenals for makIng hIgh-quality tools In Bronze Age Egypt granIte was worked wIth stone, copper and bronze or brass tools Some of the largest as well as the &nest granIte

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

monuments ever created were done with these tools, which a modem worker would find extremely awkward GIven enough hme and manpower a society, however pnrruhve In technology, can develop functional stoneworkmg techniques These techniques are not based on certain stones or certain toolmaking matenals, but on the adaptation of available tool matenals to the charactenshcs of the stones at hand Therefore what IS most Important to the technology IS the human capacity to learn and understand the working charadenshcs of stone given a parhcular stone and the available tools, what IS the best way to cut It? Even though a different type of tool Involves diffenng techniques, the stone Itself remains the Single most Important fador Crarute working techruque IS always gramte technique. and marble carVing ISalways condihoned by the charadenshcs of marble The technology vanes Within parameters set by the stone Thrs IS the most baSICrule of stoneworkmg and must always be borne In mind when one ISstudying stone techniques In order to assist the non-professional, a Simplified classihcahon of stone can be used Carving stones can be divided Into groups, as follows soft stones, mcludmg principally soft limestones, sandstones and also some alabaster and soapstone hard limestones and marble granites and related stones very hard, semi-precIOUS stones, such as lapis lazuli, that are worked With abrasives

Each of these groups IS defined by a sirrulanty In working techniques In general and carving technique In particular Group one, soft stones, Includes most unpolishable limestones and many of the commonly carved sandstones 12 Red sandstone from the Vosges and Scottish Coarse Hill stone are good examples It also Includes a few pohshable stones, such as Volterra alabaster, although as a rule most of the stones In this category cannot be polished This category IScharadenzed by a softness that allows for very easy carVing Tools normally associated With wood carving. such as gouges, are very frequently used Also common are vanehes of scrapers, especially the vanety known In France as chemin-defer Carvers often work With wooden or soft metal mallets Instead of steel hammers The softer examples of this category can be sawed With metal saws that do not use abrasives In general these are soft, easily worked stones of an even consistency throughout These features combine to make many of these stones almost perfect to use They can be worked In any direction and to a quite amaZing level of detail Northern European Cotluc architecture and sculpture are excellent proof of the level of detail and refinement to which the best of tlus type of stone can be taken The factors most Important In dehnmg the carving technique are softness, capacity to take detail and not being pohshable These fadors make them the easiest to deal With of all the carving stones The second category Includes all marbles and most pohshable limestones The matenal IS generally of medium hardness, between soft limestones and grarutes, and can take a large vanety of finished surfaces from rough tool working through several stages of smoothing, to a high-gloss finish These stones allow the worker the greatest vanety of surface tone and texture, but less ease In carVing than the prevIOus group Tools for this category are tempered steel chisels and rasps Scrapers are very

STONE

Infrequently used. gouges almost never A wide vanety of tooth chisels. rasps and frequent dnllmg are charactenshc of these stones They are sawed with blades without teeth, usmg an abrasive and water combmanon to effect the cuttmg The best examples of this type of stone are charactenzed by a tight gram and a capacity to take both fme detail and a high polish This last feature ISImportant because It strongly influences the carving technique Too strong a vertical blow WIth a hammer and chisel causes rrucrofractures beneath the surface of the stone If not removed, these rrucrofraclures show In the pohshed stone as ugly white or light-color blotches or bruises To aVOId thrs, the carver must take care to hold the tool at a sloping angle to the stone and to carve the fmal surfaces away m layers, usmg lIght hammer strokes Marble carvmg technique. more than the other two, involves peeling successive surfaces off the stone All marbles have a VISIblecrystal structure, which can be seen as sparklmg points m the stone Some marbles have large crystals, others small ones ThIS has been erroneously used in the past as a means of marble idenhficahon It ISnow generally accepted that the crystal SIze of marbles from the same quarrymg area vanes too much to allow this to be the pnncipal baSISfor idenhhcahon Neither does crystal SIze have any effect on carvmg quality My expenence IS that there IS no observable relahon between the two I have carved all the marbles descnbed below as well as others. and can hnd no correspondence between the crystal SIze and the carving quality A stone's workabihty can only be comprehended by carvmg It or by studying a large number of carved pIeces of certain idenhty Any other method such as crystal SIze IS entering mto the area of pseudoSCIence Crarute and ItS allied stones are the hardest of the matenals Their advantages are an often beauhful and consistent colonng as well as a greater resistance to weathenng than the other stones The best of thIS category are sufficiently recephve to carvmg to take hne detail, although not nearly as hne as the prevIOUStwo groups They are very receptive to work WIth abrasives. and take a high and very durable pohsh The durability of granite ISan Important feature Although stone. especially marble, IS often VIewed by the general public as an almost mdestruchble material, stoneworkers have always known this to be untrue Too much In the way of damaged, disintegrahng stone passes through the workshop for one to have any IllUSIOnson this subject Therefore the durability of grarute IS a strong counterweight to the hrne and labor Involved m workmg It Another quality In ItSfavor ISthe SIZeof block attainable m quarrymg Large one-pIece columns. such as those of the porch of the Pantheon m Rome, can be quamed m granIte but not m lImestone or marble Equally Important IS that they can be transported and erected WIthout breakmg GranIte IS often worked by holdmg the tool vertIcal to the stone and smashing the stone The tools are shaped accordmgly They are thIcker and blunter than marble or lImestone tools. and must be sharpened and reforged more often Tooth chIsels are not used m granIte carvmg because the teeth are too delIcate and break too eaSIly 13 Harder stones were often used as smashers to work away the surface In the twentIeth century, tools WIth speCIally hardened metal tIps have been developed The stoneworker must always remember that gramte IS a hard, bnttle matenal, whatever hIS tools There are very few undercuts (spaces beneath or behind detaIls) found on gramte carvmgs

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Grarule can be sawed With abrasives and polished to a very lugh gloss Emery has been used smce early antiquity and now steel shot IS used as well Details are more often achieved WIth pamstakmg work WIth abrasives than m the work on the softer stones Although modern tools and techruques have lessened the differences, granite technique IS still something of a world to Itself The fourth category compnses stones that, due to extreme hardness or tendency to fracture, can only be sawed and polished Petnhed wood and lapis lazuli are m this category because of their hardness Many onyxes are so prone to Iractunng that only very careful sawmg and polishmg IS possible These stones are generally handled by specialists They are used most often as a decorative veneer on walls or furmture These classihcahons are most useful as a way of seemg different techniques The tools and methods of limestone, marble and granite are sufficiently different to be quite obvIOUS Ancient Egyptian limestone techniques and tools are closer to modern limestone techniques than they are to ancient Egyptian gramte techniques Therefore, in considering the techniques of workmanship of any piece of worked stone, It ISessential to know the category to which the matenal belongs Even within a category, each mdrvidual type of stone can differ markedly from another ThIS Willnot change the tools and baSICtechniques, but It Will change what can be done With the tools It IS much more likely to have an effect on sculpture or fine architectural detail than on sawmg Therefore, a marble such as white Vermont marble which ISIll-adapted to sculpture can be sahsfactonly used in many ways m architecture. for example as a facmg stone To explam the differences of workability withm a category, Iwill give bnef portraits of stones from the hrst two groups The compansons given are meant solely to refled differences withm the category, not from one to another Several terms used below are relative Hard, medium and soft, or large-crystal and small-crystal have no exad scale to be measured on There are, however, clear physical differences that can be easily seen or felt The limitation ISof course that the onlooker or experimenter must have some expenence to have a baSISfor companson Most of the followmg descnphons of limestones and white marbles are based on carvmg more than one pIece Wherever possible, my method of idenhhcahon has been to procure the matenal directly from the quarry My descnphons are a sculptor/carver's reactions, but Ihave attempted to remam m the area of physical attributes Comparison of soft stones The soft stones discussed are the limestones from Aquila and Vicenza m Italy, the limestone pieira d'Istna14 from Yugoslavia, a limestone from the Vienne area in Prance.l" Beer stone from Devonslure and Indiana limestone from the United States They have all been used extensively m both architecture and sculpture All of these stones are similar in bemg of even consistency and color throughout the block They are also similar m color, varymg from a warm tan to a light tan gray, all turn darker gray WIth weathering

STONE

Aqlllla limesione Thrs ISa hard, almost white limestone It IShne textured and carves reasonably well to fine detail It ISreceptive to tools and ISof an even workmg consistency Because It ISso hard It ISpoltshable, but as this does not change ItSappearance very much It ISvery seldom poltshed LIke many hard limestones. It has a tendency to flake when being carved It IS not a popular carving stone except In areas near Its source in the Aimrzzr because It ISas hard as marble without being as poltshable or as good at taking detail It IS put m tlus category of stones, even though It IS harder than most, because It IS traditionally used both architecturally and sculpturally in the same way as other limestones m the category The borderline nature of this stone m the" soft" category ISshown by at least one use of It as a replacement for marble Dunng the 1960s, a carvmg shop in Rome drd at least forty over life-SIze portrait busts of the Shah of Iran and hIS father m tlus matenal The carver told me that the Aquila stone was used because the client felt that marble was too expensIve ThIS was the best cheap alternative 16

Vlcenza umestone ThIS stone ISsoft and easy to carve It ISwarm toned and even textured It has a VISIblegrammess or particle SIze, wluch may be the reason that It IS somewhat less receptive to detail than sirrularly soft limestones ThIS latter charactenshc IS only a margmal difference wluch ISoffset by the softness of the stone, especially m companson to the Aquila stone On the other hand, It does not take detail as well as either the French or the Indiana limestone

lstnan stone ThIS limestone IShard and grayish It tends to break in flakes I fmd It a rather dIfficult stone to carve for details, but my own rmpressrons are belted by the amount of fmely carved decorative work m tlus stone to be found m Venice 17 On the other hand, It ISa compact, umfied stone which does not present difficulhes for sharp edges and fine detaihng It has often been used externally In preference to marble because of ItS ability to resist weathenng Istnan stone ISa good example of a stone that ISnot Ideal for carving but that has other charactenshcs which have made It popular It weathers well, IS easily obtainable m reasonably large blocks from very accessible quarnes, ISuruhed In color and structurally very strong Its accessibility to Veruce m seaside quarnes made It the stone of choice for the Manbme Republic And It IScarvable, even If not Ideally so All this has led to the development of techniques m the Veneto precisely adapted to tlus stone

Vlenne lunestone ThIS IS one of the hnest carvmg stones that I have ever encountered My ImpressIOn when first workIng It was, "Now I understand the development of GothIC archItecture" It IS creamy whIte and fine textured, a compact stone that WIll take any level of rehnement It has great tenSIle strength m the holdmg of fIne details and ISsoft

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

enough so that these are easy to carve It responds supremely to chisels, thus allowing the carver great freedom In undercuts and mtncate high-relief detail Like most soft limestones, It does not weather well Beer stone18 This IS an excellent soft carving stone Its baSIC charactenshcs are those of Vicenza stone to which It IS very similar It IS an excellent carVing stone because of ItS softness and evenness of color, but seems of only moderate tensile strength I have the ImpreSSIOnthat ItS very softness makes It less adaptable to very fine detail than the Vienne or Indiana stones Indiana limestone This ISa compact slightly sandy looking, cream-colored hmestone which turns gray with weathering It has very httle felt grain In carving It has a high tensile strength and IShighly receptive to details and deep undercuts It ISreceptive to a Wide vanety of tools It ISobtainable In large blocks and ISa very dependable stone, not being inclined to faults or changes In color The only weakness of this stone ISItS color, as It becomes a sort of dirty gray With weathenng which combined With ItS slightly gntty surface makes It look like concrete In all other ways ItS weathenng charactenshcs compare well With other limestones A charactenshc of Indiana limestone IS that hke much harder limestone such as the Aquila and Istnan stones It has a surface which IS receptive to the texture of bush hammers and axes These tools, which are normally associated With granite and Similar stones, can give a texture to the surface of softer stones which some penods have found very attractive 19 The softer limestones are usually hmshed With chisels and scrapers, the harder limestones are often hrushed With bush hammers and tooth chisels Indiana hmestone ISthe only one of the stones listed here which ISequally adapted to a hrush With either type of tool All of the limestones listed above have been used at one hme or another as matenals for sculpture This means a certain minimum level of receptiveness to detail and an evenness of color In tlus they are Similar to the marbles descnbed below Beyond that, these descnphons are not exactly comparable Terms such as tensile strength or carvability are only imprecrsely transferable from one category to the other Companson of marbles The following SIXwhite carving marbles are all well known Carrara statuary, Carrara white or ordinano, Paros ligrute. Thasos white from the Vathi quarries, Afyon honey and Aphrodisias white The first ISfrom Italy, the second and third from Greece and the last two from Turkey All these marbles have been frequently used for both sculpture and architecture, either In anhquity, the Renaissance or modem times Carrara statuary marble Tlus ISa warm. Ivory-white marble It IStight grained, of medium hardness, and With very small crystals There are occasional flecks of black or brown color which sometimes are quite large and can damage ItSusefulness for sculpture It ISvery receptive

STONE

to the whole range of tools and does not break in unexpected ways when carved It IS also highly receptive to very fme detail, as well as glvmg the impression of very high relative tensile strength Extended arms and fingers, in the style of Cian Lorenzo Berruru, do not pose insurmountable problems This marble IS one of the two or three finest carvmg marbles known Carrara whIte or ordmano Tlus marble ISan off-wlute tending toward gray, frequently with Imes or areas of darker gray It can have lmes of black and approaches the dark gray of Carrara Bardigho as It darkens It often seems slightly harder than the statuary marble Otherwise. in ItS gram, crystal size and carvmg charactenshcs It ISvirtually idenhcal to the statuary marble Its pnncipal defect ISthe cold white to gray of ItS color, wluch makes It much less visually attractive than the statuary variety Its pnncipal advantage ISthat It ISavailable m much larger quantities and blocks, making It commercially very worthwhile Thasos whIte from the Vathl quarries ThIS ISa very hard, pure-white marble, with large crystals and moderately hght grained Its hardness makes It unreceptive to tools It ISdifficult to carve In fine detail It polishes rucely and ISvirtually without black or colored spots, although It somehmes has areas of weak porous stone that can make a block virtually unusable It ISnot a material that adapts easily to hgurahve detail Works In Thasos marble in the museums of both Thasos and Thessaloruka show the carvers trying to aVOId detail or developing techruques usmg abrasives to aclueve such details as eyelids On the other hand, because It ISconsistently white and obtainable In large blocks, It has been commercially valuable for architecture. decoration and sculpture Since anhquity Paras hgnite ThIS IS considered the finest of the Paras marbles for carVing purposes It IS a medium-hard marble, somewhat softer than Carrara marble It IS cool white In color, somehmes tending toward a light gray or even bluish color Generally the color IS uniform. without streaks or spots Paras ligrute in my expenence has medium-stze crystals, although Ihave seen a reliable sample with small crystals ThIS IS a very fine carVing marble It takes detail very well and reacts well to all the tools It IStIght grained It shows a greater inclinatIon to fracture than Carrara marble and has less tenSIle strength The sIze and shape of the remainS of the quarrIes suggest that It may have been dIfficult to obtain thIS stone m very large blocks In ItS purest fonn A great deal of Greek and Roman sculpture and archItecture has been IdentIfied as bemg Panan marble, almost as If over the past 200 years thIS has been a fashIOn ThIS IdentIficatIon has been made wIthout any relIable testing, so one should be extremely skeptIcal of thIS as well as any other whIte marble IdentIficatIon The small sIze of the quarrIes and the blocks obtainable strangly suggest that all that IScalled Panan ISnot so Panan marble IdentIficatIons that are not based on recent sCIentIfictests should be treated wIth the same skeptICISmas relIcs of the true cross On the other hand, It ISa marble that would be In great demand for ItS umfonn color and excellent carving charactenstIcs

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Afyon whIte or honey In the ancient world, these marbles were called either DOCImlUmor Smada Tlus ISgenerally a warm white, medium-to-soft marble It has small crystals The color ISnot consistent because spots, clouds and streaks of gray and yellow frequently occur The colored marble Pavonazzetto also comes from the same quarnes, often from veins next to the while The most commercially attractive modem marble from these quarnes IS Afyon honey, a white marble with gold-yellow and gray-green streaks and cloudmgs It IS Similar to the Carrara marble Calacaia macchia d' oro Afyon has a tendency to flake away and be uncontrollable when carved with a POint clusel, but can be worked very well with the tooth and flat chisels It takes detail reasonably well It lacks tensile strength when carved In thin extensions The Afyon quarnes are large and extensive The marble IS found In several areas as much as forty kilometers apart Remains from ancient quarnes and modem expenence both demonstrate that very large blocks can be easily obtained It was and IS therefore a very Important marble AphrodlSlas whIte A warm white marble, It ISsoft, with medium-to-large crystals The colonng IS usually very uruhed although occasional patches of a very light warm brown can show up, as well as small porous pockets with oversized crystals which are troublesome to carve Fortunately, these areas are relatively rare and therefore do not pose senous problems The amount of statuary and architecture In pure white marble found at Aphrodisias In recent years shows both the extent of the matenal and the size of blocks obtainable from these quarnes As a carving marble, Aphrodisias ISvery hne It reacts very reliably to all the tools, and ISespecially easy and enjoyable to carve WIth a POint chisel It takes detail well although not quite as well as Carrara statuary, but In recompense reacts better to the POint A special charactenshc of Aphrodisias marble ISthe vanety and subtlety of hrush that can be obtained With abrasives, hles and scrapers Delicately vaned hrushes charactenze some of the hnest sculpture done by the Greco-Roman carvers In this stone In this respect It IS the hnest of all the statuary marbles These descnphons of limestones and hne white carving marbles are Intended to give an ImpreSSIOnof the differences that exist among stones In the same category The hnal product will be conditioned by many factors, including availability, client, time and the carver's ability and expenence The stone Itself ISa range or parameter Within which all the others must function ThIS chapter has attempted to give a carver's descnphon of the charactenshcs of stone as they affect the stoneworker There are factors that have an obVIOUSeffect, such as polishabihty and the differences between granite, marble and limestone These differences have an Influence on workmanship and the hnal product Then there are other, more subtle differences, such as those between marbles that look very much alike The Influence these have on workmanship and hrushed product ISless easy to detect Often tlus subtlety of matenal can strongly Influence a personal or group style, but tlus aspect has often been overlooked The matenal must be hrst considered and idenhhed as clearly

STONE

as possible when one analyzes the techmque of a stonecarvmg be Isolated from the other elements of techmque

Only m this way can It

Notes 1 For some examples of this method of classification see Cater, n d , I manlll tiahant, 1939,

Consrglro. 1972 and RenWICk.1909 See Renwick, 1909 pp 3-4 for a concise statement of the classification problem from a commercial point of view 2 The replacement of Carrara marble by Proconnessian marble as the material of choice for large monuments in late-second-century AD Rome may be a case m pomt Although Lum (Carrara) was much closer to Rome, the quarnes were much harder to reach from the sea and the quarrymg more difficult than the Proconnessian Without knowmg the relative costs of quarrymg and land transport versus sea transport, however, we cannot be sure that tlus was the reason for the change 3 An mterestmg sidelight on llus technique If a merchant orders a table specifymg peperlIlo as the base for the mtarsia one may assume the intenhon IS to sell the fmrshed product as an antique The materials and techniques used With peperll10 make the work more expensive but a better Imitation of pre-modem workmanship than the use of travertine 4 A closer comparison ISthe difference between the carved decoration of Modena Cathedral and that of the Baptistry of Parma which IS in two forms of hmestone The problem With these compansons IS that in art-lustoncal literature on sculpture or architecture, rechruque and material are almost never considered m stylistic compansons There IS no habit of consciousness of the matenal as an Important consideration m sculptural or architectural style See Baxandall, 1980 ch 2 for an mterestmg discussion of the effects of matenal on style m wood sculpture 5 Examples from my own observations are the Portals of San Nicola, Ban, twelfth century, the pulprt by Nicola Pisano m the Baptistry of Pisa. thirteenth century, the facade reliefs on Orvieto Cathedral, fourteenth century, the carved decoration on the Porta del Popolo and the Porta Pia, Rome, sixteenth century 6 Canterbury Cathedral, for example, was ongmally built of the very soft Caen stone from Normandy, and Strasbourg Cathedral of the soft red sandstone of the Vosges Both stones are highly workable but weather badly 7 An example of the extent to whrch the pncmg can become organized IS found m Purchase, 1904 p 169 "The relative value of labour, as compared With Portland stone, has been gIVen where known, computing Portland at 10, thus plain work 09 would be 10 per cent under Portland, while 1 1 would be 10 per cent above" Then follows a listing of the stones of Great Bntam m which we find that Bath stone, a limestone. ISrated at 0 5, Beer stone at 0 6, Corsehill stone, a sandstone, at 13 and Hopton Wood stone, geologically a marble, at 23 8 Purchase, 1904 pp 182-3 and 189 9 An exception ISstone, such as slate, that ISto be used for roofing or for flagstone pavmg ThIS ISgenerally any weather-resistant stone WIth a strong gram m close-together parallellmes For the quarrymg and working of slate, see Purcell, 1967 pp 59 ...... 63 10 This IS not to deny that there are other, equally fine stones An evaluation such as tlus IS naturally Iirruted by personal expenence 11 A particular example of a multi-colored limestone which vanes in hardness within the stone IStravertine It ISnot marble but a geologically distinct type of limestone wluch IS quarned m vanous places in the world - Turkey, Greece, Iran, Italy and the Umted States among others 12 An exception in Italy IS pieira serena, a dark gray sandstone that was used in Florence dunng the Renaissance and IS still used m construction and occasionally in sculpture In Great Bntam

13 14 15 16

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

there are several sandstones that are rated m Purchase as at least twice as hard to work as Portland stone, so they must be similar in hardness to the Italian stone These stones are one of the several exceptions to this system of classihcahon The progressive development and refinement of tungsten carbide tools in recent years has somewhat changed this Expenenced granite workers shll avoid tooth chisels In Great Bntam tlus has been known as "Roman stone" See Cater, n d As I bought this piece in Rome and have little expenence with French stone, the idenhhcahon was made by two carvers with extensive working expenence in France A similar case IS the upper level statues ofthe "Seasons" on the Trevi Fountain m Rome These statues were always presumed to be of marble unhl the recent restorahon, when they were found to be of a limestone which may be a form of travertine. but has some visual sirrulanhes to Aquila stone It seems to be from quarnes near Rome, but the exact source has not yet been rdenhhed Documents show that a load of marble bemg shipped from Carrara to Rome for the fountain was sunk by Turkish pirates. which suggests the possibility that tlus stone might have been a last-rrunute alternahve, see Pinto. 1986 p 269 For example, the front waIl of the choir in the church of the Fran and the decoration on the facade of the Scuola dr San Marco In choosing tlus among the great vanety of excellent carvmg stones m Great Britain I am not making any Judgments Portland and Bath stones are more famous and frequently used and, from what I am told by carvers, equaIly good or better for carving My choice IS based purely on personal expenence For example Istnan stone m nfteenth- and sixteenth-century Venice

Tools

Stoneworkmg tools! can be divided Into two major categories those that work by percussion and those that work by abrasion A third, less visible category, Includes measunng Implements By far the greater vanety and number of tools are In the percussIOn group However, the oldest known worked stones, pebbles With holes drilled through them, were worked by abrasion In the twentieth century, With the production of modern machme tools and abrasive compounds, much more work IS done With abrasives than In any other way Formerly, percussIOn tools bore the brunt of the work so they will be considered hrst Percussion tools Axes (photograph 1) Percussion tools Involve some form of either hammer-and-tool combination or axe In general, any type of cutting edge that exists m hammer-and-tool form exists also In an axe form The axe generally leaves slightly different marks than the chisel Usually the marks are close to those a chisel would make when held perpendicular to the stone's surface Because of the nature of granite carving, the marks of an axe on gramte are difficult If not Impossible to distinguish from the hammer and chisel On marble or limestone they are relatively easy to see Axe marks show a clear ImpreSSIOnof the tool but do not make long smooth lines as the tool passes along the stone, the surface IS choppier Otherwise one may follow the general rules that (a) all tool cutting edges can exist m either form, and (b) when cut With an axe, stone shows a more broken surface and little of the lines of a tool moving across the stone, due to the more vertical stroke used Until the publication of Jean-Claude Bessac's book, there was very little literature on axes It was clear that they existed m local traditions in many countries, but that these traditions were dymg out 2 It IS also true that they were much more central to stoneworkmg In the MIddle Ages than they are today 3 Axes seem to have been slowly replaced In most areas by hand tools between the sixteenth century and the end of the runeteenth As they were never as Important in marble carvmg as In the other stones, tlus may have been as a result of the gradual dominance of marble technique m sculpture It IS certainly true that while we see no axes In Diderot's illustrations of the tools of sculpture in the rruddle of the eighteenth century, we know from Bessac and Noel that axes were still In use In tlus century m stone masonry In France In England, already by 31

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

the begmnmg of this century, they seem to be pnncipally hrruted to gramte working 4 The same seems to be the case m the United States The present Importance for the reintroduchon of axes IS in the field of restoration Hand tools do not leave the same marks as axes, or the same overall effect of workmanship Where new stones must be cut to replace old ones m medieval buildmgs, the effect of the ongmal is more closely approximated by the use of the axe On the other hand, as the use of axes was never as great on sculpture, even m soft stone" the relearnmg of them for this use ISa doubtful form of anhquanarusm The exception to this ISgramte workmg where axes often remam in use when air hammers are not employed Hammers (photograph 2) These exist in many different forms The simplest IS a stone held m the hand Most stoneworkmg hammers either have a metal head WIth a wooden handle or are made entirely of wood The metal hammers are generally square or rectangular, but can also be round m the lighter versions The metal ISIron or steel The length of the handle vanes as well Amencan gramte-carvmg hammers have long (30 em) handles that are thmner near the head Tlus thmness gIves a slight whiplash movement when one IScarvmg and mcreases the sharpness of the blow The Carrara marble hammer has a squarer and larger head, but has a shorter handle and no whiplash Another charactenshc of metal hammers IS that some have tempered steel heads and others have untempered ones The most commonly used modem vanahon on the hammer ISthe air hammer This IS simply a little brother of the large pavement breakers seen in road work The air hammer ISa cylinder connected by a hose to an air compressor The hammer action IScaused by the air which moves a piston back and forth within the cylmder This cylinder ISheld in one hand and pressed down on a tool held m the other Its value ISin the velocity of the blows, not their strength Any air hammer small enough to be controlled With one hand cannot stnke as hard as a carver swmgmg a one-kilo hammer Rough carvmg work IS frequently done by hand and the rest With air hammers The cuttmg edges of air hammer tools are by and large the same as hand tools The difference between the marks of air tools and hand tools ISnot always obvIOUS Air tool marks Will tend to be longer and smoother, the opposite of the axe's The mark of the specihc type of chisel Willbe clear, but It Willrun along the stone more, as a cuttmg rather than a breakmg mark Carvmg With an air hammer IS both Similar to and different from carvmg by hand There are some thmgs that are easier to carve With arr hammers, such as very hne and delicate detail in hard marbles and granites It 15 also true, however, that as air hammers speed up the process of carving, they also tend to lower the quality of the work Tlus IS not of necessity the fault of the air hammer but rather of the worker or lus client or supervisor who want to get more work done m less time The sacnhce of quality ISnot m my expenence caused so much by the tool as by the management of It 6 Wooden hammers or mallets are generally large and round, with short handles They look rather like a keg With a short handle commg out of one flat end The handle ISusually about as long as a hand ISWide Occasionally, wooden hammers With longer handles set m the round Side are used A wooden mallet must be large In order to have enough weight

TOOLS

The heads of tools made for use with wooden mallets are either wooden, like woodcarvmg chisels, or bulbous metal Because of the softness of the mallet, the tool must have a larger surface to receive the blow A tool prepared for a metal hammer will quickly damage the wood of a mallet The type of hammer ISfar more a product of geography and tradihon than other tools are In northern Europe, the wooden mallet or hammer ISfrequently used Metal hmshmg hammers are often cylmdncal in shape as If m irrurahon of wooden mallets Italian hammers are square or rectangular Iron or steel with handles 15 to 25 cm long Wlthm each area there are vanabons that are also geographically related Belgians use a wooden hammer whereas the English use a mallet The Veneban hammer head IS longer and thinner and the handle longer than the Carrara hammer Thus although other tools may not suggest a clear geographical locahon, the hammer often Will

Cartnng tools These tools are listed m order of their use, from rough work to hrushmg They are also sub-classified, With Important vanahons mcluded under the general headmg The names of tools are often confusing because of the strength of local lradihons Either the same name will be applied to different tools (calcagno lo, for instance. has meant a different form of tooth chisel m different places or bmes m Italy), or a tool Willacquire a local name because of a frequent or specialized use It ISalso true that an mdivrdual form of tool Will develop to meet the needs of a parbcular stone found or used pnnopally in one place With all these vanabons It ISImpossible to try to cover every tool and ItSlocalized forms What this hshng IS mtended to explain are the baSICtools and some of their pnmary vanabons The followmg terms Will be used m descnbmg the percussIOn tools head, the end of the tool struck by the hammer, shaft, the body of the tool. usually thm enough to be easily held m one hand and long enough so that It extends beyond the hand on each end, cuiiing edge, the part of the tool that actually strikes the stone, and ISat the opposite end of the tool from the head It ISshaped by a blacksmith to the form needed for the required cut With axes, the head ISthe whole of the tool apart from the handle, which normally means the enbre metal portion of the tool. the cutting edge ISthe part of the head that actually stnkes and cuts the stone, the handle IS the part, usually wood, held by the worker for swmgmg the tool These terms should be kept m mmd dunng the course of tlus chapter Modem tools are made of tempered steel, somebmes With Inserts of specially hardened cutting edges, such as tungsten carbide steel In the Mediterranean basin, the Near East and Europe, tools have been made of steel for over 2,000 years 7 In other bmes and places, tools have been made from Iron, brass, bronze, copper, stone and even bone As the matenal of the tool changes, so does ItS shape Nevertheless, certain basic cutbng edges have always been main tamed A lump of hard stone pointed at one end, held m both hands and used to smash stone, functions like a point chisel even though It does not look like one The material of the tool more than ItS appearance changes the funcbon Many of the tools descnbed here could be easily understood by an Egyptian carver working in the fourteenth century Be All or nearly all of them could be used and

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

understood without problems m first-century AD Rome, in thirteenth-century Pans, fifteenth-century Florence or seventeenth-century Istanbul This IS a fact of central Importance to the analysis and understanding of stonecarvmg technique The basic tools do not change The Roman might not agree with modern vanahons of the tooth clusel, but he would not find It difficult to use them Modern tools are made with hexagonal or round steel stock which ISbetween 1 and 3 em in diameter Before the introduction of hexagonal and round stock, the shaft was shaped by hand The length of the tool IS always long enough for the head and the culhng edge to protrude beyond the hand holding the tool For special purposes, a tool may be a meter long or more Such length ISgenerally avoided because the longer the tool, the more the metal absorbs the force of the hammer and cuts down the effectiveness of the blow Normal length ISbetween 18 and 25 ern and normal diameter between 15 and 3 cm All steel tools are tempered Tempenng ISa means of acluevmg a particular hardness in the cuthng edge by a process of heahng to red hot and controlled cooling Vanous tempers are possible A tool IS tempered to the appropnate temper for the stone being carved, as ISItS shape A granite tool ISalways thicker and blunter, With a harder, more bnttle temper than the same type of marble tool A tool ISredrawn, i e , the cutting edge ISremade, by a blacksrmth and retempered many times dunng ItSworkmg hfe Every time a pomt or tooth breaks or becomes dull beyond what a simple sharpening can cure, It IS taken to the blacksmith for redrawing and tempenng Frequently tools are remade to meet the exigencies of a particular carvmg Job Several early writers on sronecarvmg and sculpture, such as Boselli and Carradon. expect the carver to know something of blacksrruthmg in order to be able to adjust his tools to Ius needs Wedge A wedge ISa piece of hard wood or metal, V-shaped on the Side and square from the top It ISused to split stone A wooden wedge IS hammered mto a rectangular cut made 10 the stone, then wetted to make It swell, causmg the stone to split A metal wedge IS placed 10 a rectangular hole cut 10 the stone Tlun strips of metal, broader than the wedge, are placed between the stone and the broad Sides of the wedge These stnps serve to prevent the wedge from merely gnndmg away the mside of the hole The wedges (usually more than one IS placed along the cut lme) are hammered m With a sledge hammer until the stone splits The most commonly used modern form of a wedge ISthe plug and feathers The plug ISa long wedge, the feathers are two half-round rods which thicken gradually to one end A line of round holes ISdnlled along the break Ime In each hole a pair of feathers ISplaced With the thick ends down The plugs are inserted between them, and then hammered With a sledge until the stone splits A much larger, deeper break can be effected With thiS method than With normal wedges Large blocks of stone can be split quite accurately With wedges The split IS always more sure If the break ISWith the gram Splits across the gram WIlloften shear off, splitting off only part of the block Splithng With wedges has always been and still remains a baSIC quarrymg technique 8 Wedge holes have been discovered 10 ancient Egyptian quames, and 10 Roman quames such as at Aphrodrsias and Carrara Wedges are also used in modern carving shops when a block IS so large It can usefully be split and used for two

TOOLS

or more works The best method for recogmZIng the sIgns of splrthng with wedges ISto look for square, rectangular or round holes on the face of a quarry or broken block Sometimes In a quarry the holes for wedges have been left In a face, but the cuthng never earned out In this case only the top of the hole IS visible Sledge hammer ThIS large, long-handled metal hammer IS used as a simple roughmg tool on some stones The head usually weighs 2 kilos or more The handle IS 120 to 150 cm long A strong-grained stone such as Proconnessian marble can be roughed Into a baSIC rectangle with the sledge It ISalso used for hammenng wedges and other similar tasks There ISa whole senes of hammers similar In SIzeand weight to a sledge hammer, with vanous types of cutting edges They are used 10 quarryIng and sometimes the roughing out of large works Some examples are the spallmg hammer, the quarry pick and large bush hammers used 10 grarute working Generally, although not always. they have cuthng edges the same as the smaller carving hammers or hand tools 9 Drill Dnlls work by either percussIon or abrasion Because they are often used with wedges and sledge hammers m quarrymg, they are mcluded at thrs point m the chapter Simply put. a dnll ISa tool used to make a hole In stone that is the same diameter for ItS enhre depth The hole may be very shallow, but it may also be very deep, as much as eight meters Dnll holes are used for many dIfferent purposes as a space for placmg wedges, for sphthng some stones without wedges by dnllmg a row of holes close together, for placing pinS to hold pieces of stone together. and In carVing as a safe way to get depth of relief or as a decorative effect The types of dnll most commonly used now or m the past are the pneumabc drill, the electric drill, the core drill. the star dnIL the brace and bit. the staff drill, the bow dnll, the strap dnll and the roundel Pneumatic drill ThIS tool IS basically the same as that used as a pavement breaker In road work A long bit ISattached to a large pneumahc hammer which hammers as well as turning The brt ISeither flat or slightly rounded on the cuthng edge ThIS tool ISvery commonly used 10 modern quarrymg and for splrihng large blocks m conjunchon with plug and feathers Electric drill Fer cuthng. the eIectnc stone dnll normally uses spiral bits with tungsten carbide hps BItS are available for use with any SIze of electric dnll The newer dnlls usually can be set to hammer as well as cut by rotation (abrasion) Earlier types cut by rotation only Because these dnlls exist m many SIzes, they are adapted for many dIfferent vanehes of work Core dnll ThIS dnII IS shaped like a hollow pIpe The cuthng edge may have teeth or Inset abrasives, or it may use a mixture of sand and water to cut The CIrcular mohon of the drill causes the cutting edge or the sand to cut a CIrcleInto the stone As the cut deepens, the core In the center of the cut can from time to time be struck With a hammer and broken off and removed The core dnll IS used frequently In modern

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

quarrying and anywhere where a large diameter hole ISrequired It was also used In the past, far Into antiquity, as a means of hollowing stone vases

Star drill

This ISa form of steel dnll bit It ISusually long because It ISand was most frequently used for deep holes Its diameter IS generally from 1 to 4 em, but may be larger The cutting edge ISslightly com cal and ISserrated Seen head on, It has SIXto eight sharp edges radiating from the center - looking like a star shape The star dnll is a percussIOn tool which ISalso rotated while being hit It can be used either by hand or with a pneumahc hammer Before the mtroduchon of the pneumatic hammer, a long star dnll was held and rotated by one worker, while one or two others hit It with sledges Modem carvers use small star dnlls with small pneumahc hammers Brace and bt! A simple brace, idenhcal to a carpenter's brace and turning a Vshaped or roundel-shaped bit was frequently used In Italy before the nineteenth century GIVen the lack of documentary evidence or modem expenence, It IS difficult to know when tlus was used in preference to the staff, bow or strap dnll From the illustrations In Carra don It seems likely that when pressure on the tool was more Important than rapidity of rotation. the brace and bit was preferred The brace could be placed against the chest and pushed by the body or, as Carra don Illustrates, a heavy weight could be placed on a verhcally cuthng brace Tlus suggests that the brace and bit was used for deep straight holes whereas the others were for delicate surface work

Staff dnll This dnll, a small version of which ISstill used by Jewelers, ISa steel chisel-shaped tool with a rounded or V-shaped cutting edge set mto a metal or wooden shaft The staff pIerces the center of a round flat weight which ISfoced at the end of the staff near the bit At the opposite end of the staff, the center of a leather thong or cord IShxed The ends of this cord are attached to each end of a piece of wood which ISholed In the center The hole ISsuch that the stick, set perpendicular to the first shaft, can move freely up and down It from the weight to the end where the thong ISattached Thus the dnll shaft passes through a hole m the cross piece When the cross piece ISturned around, the cord wmds around the dnll shaft and lIfts the cross piece When the cross piece IS pushed down, the cords unwind, turnmg the shaft The weight continues the movement, rewmdmg the cords around the shaft, a bit like the achon of a yo-yo When the cord IS fully rewound, the operator pushes the cross piece down agam, restarhng the movement m the opposite direction This ISa very effective way of dnllmg with maximum speed of rotation, high directional control and not very heavy pressure It ISexcellent for shallow, delicate work The staff dnll was a medieval mvenhon as far as we know It ISseen m depichons of carvers and their tools from the fourteenth century on 10 It and the brace and bit are the only dnlls Illustrated in Italian sources unhl the seventeenth century It therefore may be considered the pnncipal dnll for delicate work in these pen ods Although It can still be found occasionally, It seems mainly to have been supplanted by the strap dnll by the late eighteenth century 11 Bow dnll and strap dnll

These are essentially the same tools, with a slightly

TOOLS

dIfferent form of imparhng the mohon The basic difference ISthat the bow dnll is a oneman, and the strap dnll a two-man tool The basic parts of the tools are a chisel-hke bit with a V-shaped or rounded shaped cutting edge ThIS tool IS set Into a shaft In such a way that It can be easily detached and changed to another bIt The other end of the shaft ISset mto or attached to a handle so that while the shaft ISbeing rotated a pressure can be put on the bit by pushmg the handle, wluch does not rotate The simplest form of a handle ISa cup In which the end of the shaft fIts and withm which It can tum The modem tool (eighteenth century to the present) has the shaft attached to the handle by way of a rIng of ball beanngs that allow free movement of the shaft The movement of the shaft ISachieved by wrappIng a cord once or twice around It and then pullmg the cord back and forth WIth the bow dnll, the ends of the cord are attached to a bow so that when the bow IS drawn back and forth (like a VIOlInbow) the shaft rotates WIth the strap drill, the ends of the strap are held by a second person and pulled back and forth The bow dnll has the advantage of one-person operation. the strap dnll allows the operator greater freedom of movement and direction In working the dnll Both these tools combine pressure and highly controlled rotation speed They can be used for slow, delicate work or fast, rougher work They are the most flexible of any of the hand dnlls that have been used on stone The strap dnll IS the more flexible The operator, as drshnct from the strap puller, ISfree to move the dnll about and change ItS direchon very easily, granted that hIS assistant IS suificiently rumble to follow hIS motions I have been told by workers who were trained WIth this tool that the strap puller, usually an apprentice, learned quickly because he had hIShead slapped every hme the cord slipped off the shaft, sornethmg which can happen quite easily ThIS dnll is very useful In sculpture as a means of acluevmg depth In relief or In drapery It ISexcellent for delicate work where the blow of a hammer rrught damage the stone A vanahon on the strap drill. called the runnIng drill. was WIdely used by the ancient Romans The operator of the strap dnll holds the handle In one hand and a long tlun pIece of wood In the other The wood ISheld so that one end touches the stone and pushes slightly against the SIde of the bit, Just behmd the cutting edge The dnll IS aimed at between a tlurty-frve and forty-five degree angle Into the stone As soon as the bit has cut a shallow hole In the stone, the dnll ISmoved to a smaller cuthng angle, USIngthe end of the wooden stick both as a fulcrum and as a protection In tlus way the dnll cuts a channel almost parallel to the stone's surface by culhng a senes of holes wluch are at a very shallow angle to the surface, WIth almost InVISIblesteps from hole to hole 12 Roundel ThIS IS a type of clusel and WIllbe descnbed In full below It can be used as a dnll by holding It between the palms of the hands and SpInnIng It, rubbmg the hands back and forth ThIS ISa slow way of dnllmg but for certain small holes, such as the comers of the eye or the mouth, a carver WIll frequently dnll In this fashion rather than bothenng WIth a more complicated tool Apart from those mentioned above, there are many other ways of dnllmg stone that are, or have been, used In pnrruhve cultures, such as spInnIng bamboo In wet sand placed on a pIece of stone, or spInnIng a pIece of pOInted stone The essentIal POInt IS that dnllIng Involves a combInatIon of lateral rotatIon and vertIcal pressure or perCUSSIOnIt IS a means of holIng stone rather than remOVIng It

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

The signs of a dnll are clear and easy to recognIze with one excephon A round hole, usually not of large diameter, whether deep or shallow, and with a rounded profile at the bottom ISthe sIgn of almost any dnll The core dnll will not have a rounded profile, but the outer nm of the hole at ItS base will be deeper than the rest and look like a narrow track The brace and bit, staff, bow and strap dnlls all show the same kmd of hole round at the surface and slightly concave at the base with a straight shaft If the shaft ISat a Wide angle from being perpendicular to the surface of the stone, the hole may seem oval for obvIOUSgeometnc reasons The only method of knowing which kmd of dnll was used ISto study secondary sources and make inferences For example, the fact that before the eighteenth century there IS no menhon of the bow dnll m pictorial or documentary sources, as well as the lack of any signs of running drilling, strongly suggests that the bow and strap dnlls were unknown m medieval and Renaissance Europe Recogruhon of the runnIng dnll is more of a problem There has been a considerable tendency to attribute almost any channelmg found on Ancient Roman and Baroque carving to this dnll In fact, careful study of the marks shows that there are two types of channel One ISround m profile and proceeds along the stone, creahng a pattern very Similar to a worm hole seen Iongitudmally It does not follow a straight lme and ItSdepth has many rrunor vanahons The other IS square or round m profile but a much more evenly cut channel There are cross marks of the stroke of a chisel but the channel ISmuch straighter and evenly controlled Only the former IS the mark of a runrung dnll Confusion somehmes anses from the fact that at the end of a channel of the latter type, a clear dnll hole may be seen, suggeshng the runrung dnll Often a carver Willdnll a hole at each end of the line he wishes to channel and then carve the channel with a narrow flat chisel In Roman work there were, m fact, two distinctly different techniques for channelmg The first (drawing 74b) Involves the runnmg dnll The second (drawing 74a) involves dnllmg some vertrcal or diagonal holes and then USInga channelmg tool with a square or slightly round cutting edge to join the holes The Visual effect from a distance ISvery similar unhl one reahzes the difference The technique ISquite different and in the latter case involves only one worker My opinIon ISthat channelmg With the runnmg dnll was the less frequent techruque unhl the fourth century It Will take considerably more detailed study than has been earned out at present to understand the differences and uses of the two channelmg methods

Pitching .tool A pitchmg tool ISthick-shafted, With a broad, blunt cuthng edge It ISalways hit With a metal hammer The shaft ISfrom 2 to 6 em m diameter, length from 12 to 25 em, the cutting edge ISbetween 4 and 8 em WIde and 5 and 10 em thick The cuthng surface IScanted slightly so that when the tool ISheld against the stone, the lower edge touches the stone but the upper does not unhl the tool IS struck With the hammer The pitchmg tool ISused for splithng away pieces of stone as much as 10 cm thick It splits rather than cuts, and ItSpurpose ISto get nd of corners or projections that are easily broken off from the main body of the stone Pitchmg ISnot preCIse or accurate work It functIOns best along a straIght lme and when the tool can be held agamst a flat surface It IS espeCIally useful m roughIng out flat surfaces on archItectural blocks The pitchmg

TOOLS

tool IS the roughest fonn of chisel used by the carver It ISmore accurate than squanng with a sledge hammer The marks of the pitching tool and the sledge hammer are basically the same They are breaks In the stone and are not easy to disnnguish If one sees a Wide tool mark on one Side of the break but not entenng Into the break, It ISmade by a pitclung tool A pitched or sledged surface ISa broken plane made up of many smaller breaks (5 to 15 ern Wide) which are flattest near the edge of the stone

Point cruse! (photographs 3 and 4) The point chisel IS a hand-held tool The shaft IS between 10 and 25 mm in diameter and 20 to 30 ern long It ISusually hit with a metal hammer, but some examples have the head prepared for wooden mallets The cuthng edge IS a simple point It IS drawn out long for limestone and marble, shorter and blunter for gramte The cuthng edge IS pyramidal rather than corneal m shape This chisel ISthe workhorse of carving At least 85 per cent of the stone removed m the process of carvmg a statue IScut away With this tool The baSICshape ISfirst roughed out Then in progressive stages the stone IS carved to withm 1 and 3 cm of the final surface Tlus work IS earned out With the pomt chisel The pomt chisel can be held vertical to the stone, at a seventy degree angle or as low as a forty-five degree angle Each angulahon produces ItS own particular mark The vertical stroke ISused for granite and very hard stones It produces a surface of pits, each blow producing a separate Pit as the tool IS lIfted and moved between each blow The surface of the stone IS shattered and fractured The seventy-degree angle stroke, often called the mason's stroke, produces a short line, 2 to 6 cm long, and a break area around It After each stroke the tool IS lIfted and moved to another area Tlus IS a very useful stroke for workmg large areas quickly m marble but It does not allow for closely approaching the final surface A great deal of stone can be removed quickly, so It IS the hrst roughmg out stroke m marble It used to be seen on newly quarned blocks as It was the stroke used by workers when blocks were squared by hand m the quarry The stroke at forty-five degrees ISa sculptor's or fine architectural carver's stroke The tool ISnot lifted between strokes, so It follows a straight hne across the stone A surface carved this way Will show a senes of parallel lines which are between 5 mm and 3 ern apart This way of usmg the point allows for a high degree of control over the forms of a carvmg The carver can block out almost all Ius Iorrn. however complex Often on an unhrushed work one can see areas Just prelim manly roughed With the mason's stroke and other areas where the fonn IS becoming clear With the sculptor's stroke The point chisel and Its sub-species, the carver's pick, are sometimes used as hrushmg tools This IS usually done when a particular tone or shade IS desired as a contrast to a smooth surface The carver then gently taps the chisel, either creahng a surface of small break points or one of closely spaced, carefully parallel straight lmes Tlus last can be distmgurshed from a tooth chisel by the broken-up quality of the stone between the parallel lmes The baSICpoint chisel has several vanahons, three of which are Important enough to note the quarry pick, the carver's pick and the limestone point

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

Quarry pick: This ISas big as a sledge-hammer and ISworked with both hands The head has a POint at each end On softer stones, this tool can be used for considerable roughing work In the limestone quarnes near Vicenza, before the advent of modem chain saws, the channels for quarrying blocks were cut with this tool In modem Turkish quarnes It ISused for squanng quarned blocks The ancient Roman form had a POint on only one end, and this POint was actually similar to a very narrow flat chisel or channeling tool Whereas the modem quarry pick produces a pitted surface, the Roman one produced long parallel, sornehrnes curved, lines one beneath another on the vertical face of a quarry FInished, squared Roman quarry blocks appear to have been finished with a tool similar to a modem quarry pick Carver's pick: (photograph 5) This ISa small. more delicate version of the quarry pick The handle ISno more than 60 cm long, and the head tapers to a fine POint on each end In modem hrnes It ISused almost exclusively as a close tool on granite In medieval Europe It was a very common carving tool on all kinds of stone and can be seen In use In medieval depictions of sculptors 13 In my opinIOn It was used a great deal In archaic Greek sculpture, most of the more delicate work that IS attnbuted to a verhcally held POint chisel ISIn fact a sculptor's pick It ISheld In two hands so the POint strikes the stone vertically, creahng a charactenshcally bumpy surface of many fine break POints It IS struck so lightly that It does not deeply fracture or bruise the stone When the practice of highly polishing marble statues was Introduced, however, the carver's pick went out of use Excellent examples of the quality of detail that can be achieved are seen on the upper levels of the first three pilasters from the left on the facade of Orvreto Cathedral In fact, at this penod the carver's pick seems to be best descnbed as a replacement for most of the uses of the tooth chisel In sculpture Limestone potni (punch) Because of the way soft limestone breaks, It IS often easier to rough out With a POint chisel that has a slightly Wider cutting edge It IS 0 5 cm or less In Width and slightly rounded when seen from above while culhng and pointed when seen from the Side Tlus tool ISused on soft stones exclusively and ISquite different In use from the ungiueiio (descnbed under flat chisel types) It IS never used on marble because the true POint form IS much more efhcrent and easier to control As With the POint, It ISa roughing tool which carves to the baSICform The marks left by this tool are Virtually idenhcal to those left by a POint chisel. the only exception ISthat the line made by the tool may be slightly Wider 14 Tooth or claw ChiSel15 (photograph 6) The tooth chisel ISa hand-held tool, usually between 16 and 22 em long The head does not differ from the POint or flat chisel The cutting edge ranges from 0 5 to 10 em Wide,serrated and usually finely sharpened The term" tooth" chisel IStherefore fairly obvIOUS,as the cuthng edge IS a senes of parallel teeth 16 Tlus chisel ISheld at an oblique angle (between thirty-five and sixty degrees) so that each blow carnes It along the surface of the stone The cut surface shows a senes of parallel lines rather like a carefully raked gravel path If the tool ISheld at a higher angle, the lines are not as smoothly continuous. but are broken by marks of the more vertical

TOOLS

cuttmg into the stone It IS Important to learn to drshnguish between the sort of hnes caused by vertical or near vertical strokes, With the tool bitmg directly Into the body of the stone, and the marks caused by the tool cuthng away the surface Generally speaking. the more vertical the tool ISheld to the surface, the less conhnuous and parallel the lmes of the teeth are across the stone The effect descnbed above of disconhnuous lmes becomes more marked when a toothed axe ISused In tlus case, the cuttmg edge of the tool ISraised and lowered With each blow so that the effect of continuous flow does not exist The purpose of the tooth chisel ISto create clear surfaces and forms It leaves a broken surface which must be cleaned before It can be rehned Therefore the tooth chisel ISnot used to shape large forms, It cleans away the surface roughness left by the POInt chisel Obviously, smaller details and forms Willbe described by the tooth chisel For example, when carVIng a life-size head, the POInt ISused for carVIng the overall head shape from the square block If the hairdo ISprominent, It may also be differenhated from the face The tooth chisel then cleans these forms, carves the shape of the mouth from the chm and the cheeks, and shapes the baSICcontours of the ear If a head were monumental m Size, much of this detail might be carved With the point chisel Used In this way, the tooth chisel ISan mtenrn tool between the rough shapmg of a point and the delicate detail of a flat or roundel chisel The other use of the tooth chisel IS for surface texture In certain instances, Michelangelo used the tooth chisel effectively m tlus way Also, on the Arch of Sephrruus Severus m Rome, Virtually all the flat architectural surfaces are fuushed With the tooth chisel This ISclearly a conscious choice on the architect's part and was probably based on tradition, economics and the tone given to white marble by this tool It can be used in the same way on limestone On the reliefs of the wall surrounding the choir of the church of the Fran m Venice. which IS carved In Istnan stone, the flesh of the hgures IS hrushed With a shallow tooth chisel Other uses of the tooth chisel as a hmslung tool are for hair, to give It a sense of flow, for trees in rehefs to give texture and for animal skin An excellent example of the last ISthe dog Cerberus m Cian Lorenzo Berruru's The Rape of Proserpine The tooth chisel. like the point. although normally taking an mtenm place m the carvmg sequence, can frequently be seen as a hmshmg tool because of the parncular texture It Imparts to the stone There are many vanehes as well as sizes to the cuthng edge of the tooth chisel The normal tooth chisel for sculpture has four or hve teeth and IS I 5 to 3 cm Wide The teeth can also be few and large A favonte tool in sixteenth-century Italy IS the calcagnolo, which consists of two teeth on a tool about 2 cm Wide The teeth are pointed and relahvely far apart, creating somethmg snrular to a double point Tlus tool was used Immediately after the point Another chisel With only two teeth IS narrow With broad teeth so that It IS Virtually a flat chisel With a notch m the cuthng edge This tool, frequently used dunng the hfteenth and sixteenth centuries in Italy, IS usually called a dog-toothed chisel Very Wide (7 to 10 cm) blunt-toothed chisels are often used for architectural flat work espeCially on soft stones It should be remembered that as a tool ISused and resharpened, the teeth are worn down and become Wider and blunter The same chisel used over a penod of days Will make different marks as the teeth are worn back 17

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Bush hammer or bush tool Tlus ISa square-headed hammer The hittmg surface, wluch ISthe cutting edge, IS cut In a gnd pattern Each square In the gnd IS shaped by a pyrarrud, so the cutting surface IS covered with small POints The rrururnum number of POints ISfour There are bush hammers with 9, 16, 24 and 36 POints There are bush tools as well, i e . tools with a bush surface which are struck with hammers These were relatively unusual until the mtroduchon of pneumatic hammers Since then they have become normal for granite carVing Both the bush hammer and the bush tool must stnke the stone so that all the POints hrt at the same time The tool creates a pitted but very even flat surface, on which all the holes are the same depth The surface can be drshnguished from that of a vertically struck toothed hammer by the even depth of all the holes The larger the number of POints on the bush, the shallower the PItting and the smoother and more even the surface The bush hammer ISa common tool for granite, in effect replacing the tooth chisel for that material (The tooth chisel was never used on granite before the invention of tungsten carbide-tipped tools) It IS much less frequently used on marble because It bruises the stone and makes polishing dIfficult, If not impossible Because It tends to be best SUited for working large flat or smooth undulating surfaces, It IS more frequently used In architectural than sculptural carving The pitted surface often gives an attractive tone to a stone It can therefore become a favonte way of surfacing stone for arclutecture Istnan stone, used a great deal In Venetian architecture, IS now almost always hrushed with bush tools 18

Flat chise! (photograph 7) ThIS chisel IS the most common hrushmg tool It IS generally similar to the POint and tooth clusel In the length of the shaft and shape of the head, but IS often made from a smaller diameter steel The cutting edge IS Simply a flat sharpened surface which IS perpendicular to the line of the shaft The marks of a flat chisel are an almost-smooth surface marked by a hatching of straIght lines These lines are caused by the movement Into the stone Imparted by each blow of the hammer If the flat clusel IS being used quickly, one passage of the tool may cut deeper than the one beside It, In which case there WIllbe some long lines running vertically to the others The harder and quicker the blow, the rougher the surface Conversely, soft careful hrushmg work WIth a flat clusel can leave a very smooth surface The flat clusel comes In as many WIdths as a tooth clusel Generally these are all called flat chisels, although certain traditions have particular names such as "drove" and "bolster" for the Wide flat chisel used in smoothing blocks for architecture 19 Often carvers WIllslIghtly round the comers of a flat chisel when sharpening It This keeps the comers from catching In the stone dunng detail work, so It ISmost frequently done by carvers of architectural detail and sculpture A letter-carving chisel ISusually a very hnely sharpened flat clusel In which the comers are sharpened and kept at exactly a ninety degree angle Since most letters In stone are V-shaped, the apex of the "V" IScarved With the comer of the flat chisel, as ISany kind of sharp mtenor angle 20 Often lines are carved Into a flat or smooth surface WIth a flat chisel comer, leaving a slightly cut "V " An example of tlus IS the worry lines in the

TOOLS

brows of fourth-century Roman portraits An expenenced carver has three uses for the flat chisel flat surfaces, smooth hruslung forms and cutting details with the comer of the chisel

Roundei (photograph 8) The roundel is also called the bullnose chisel or the round-headed chisel 21 It IS similar to the flat chisel The cutting edge ISflat In section but rather than being squared at the end, It ISround When held ready for cutting. the cutting edge ISround from the top and comes to a hne straight edge when Viewed from the front The roundel is an Important multi-purpose tool Because It ISrounded, It ISnot as likely to break delicate comers and details of the stone as ISa flat chisel Thus It can be used for rougher work With softer stones, thrs chisel can replace the tooth chisel as an intermediary tool It can be hit quite hard Without breaking ItS edge At any POint where mtenor curved shapes must be carved, the roundel ISused because It hts Into the curves Some carvers use It Instead of the flat chisel as a hrushmg tool The curve of the roundel vanes greatly, from a half CIrcleto only a slight curve The normal tool IS something less than a half CIrcle,With the cutting edge from 05 to 2 ern wide Since a flat chisel ISoften rounded at the comers, the difference between that kind of a flat chisel and a slightly curved roundel IS In the name only The marks of this tool are often slightly curved In sechon, although by no means always Often a hght hatchmg of curved marks, one following the other along the tool's line of passage, ISVISible If the successive passages across the stone do not overlap or are done With hard blows, there will often be a line demarcating the edge of the cut as the tool moves In effect the marks of a roundel are Similar to a flat chisel In the way they are formed, but differ due to the shape of the cuthng edge The roundel is seldom used on granite It ISused a great deal on marble Frequently It IS the dominant tool on soft stones Its uses are too vaned to enumerate, mcludmg, as previously mentioned, those of the dnll Marble sculptors In Rome dunng the hrst to the fourth centunes AD frequently used It as a hrushmg tool It ISImportant to remember about all the hand tools described that the differences are very dear m representative examples, but that there IS a mid-ground where the dishnchons become blurred A punch or a dog-toothed chisel comes close to bemg a form of roundel or flat chisel, whereas a round-cornered flat chisel becomes the same thing as a slightly curved roundel One tool IS sometimes modified so that It can serve the functIon normally covered by another, either because of the stone Itself or local traditional usage Each carver has lus own favonte types and groups of chisels which incorporate his own peculiar vanahons on the norm He may develop certain cuthng edges that he prefers on certain kinds of stone When he changes stone, he may change the cuthng edge on lus chisel Tools therefore vary from the norm for a number of reasons Gouge The gouge ISmore commonly associated With wood carving, but exists also as a soft-stone chisel It IScurved In the section rather than In the profile of Its cuttmg edge Thus when It cuts into the stone It automatically cuts out a slightly curved porhon Its

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

shaft behind the curved section ISsimilar to other hand tools The head ISusually shaped to receive a wooden mallet or soft metal round hammer The shape of the gouge ISsuch that the cuthng edge ISmuch more breakable than other tools Therefore It ISnot used on marble or gramte and IS hit with softer hammers The marks of the gouge are often similar to those of a roundel A roundel held at a forty-degree angle to the stone will cut a slightly concave furrow In the stone Just as a gouge does To know which tool ISbeing used, It IS often necessary to mveshgate the tradihons and usages of the carvers of that particular stone Generally speaking, the gouge seems to be a more modem tool found, for Instance, much more In restorations of northern Gothic stoneworkmg than In the ongmal workmanship The cuthng edge of the gouge ISnot necessanly an even one Toothed gouges exist In France They have both flat, wide teeth and longer, sharper teeth On certain soft limestones and sandstones these are very useful mtenm chisels It IS generally easy to recogmze the mark of the toothed gouge because there IS no such thing as a toothed roundel

Channelmg tool The channeling tool IS a hand-held chisel of normal length and diameter It IS usually used with a tempered steel hammer, so the head IS shaped accordingly The cuthng edge ISsimilar to a narrow flat chisel or roundel (05 to 10 cm) This tool differs from others In the shape of the shaft behind the cuttIng edge In profi.le the shaft tmckens considerably and then returns to Its ongmal drmension ThIS happens over a length of 5 to 10 ern so that the tool seems to swell behind the cuthng edge Seen from above, the shaft becomes thinner exactly where In profile It ISthickest At this POint the shaft, wluch ISnormally round or hexagonal, ISrectangular In section The result of this shape ISa tool that IS strong but thin As ISobvIOUSfrom ItSname, this tool has the pnmary purpose of carving channels The marks can be recognized as a channel with a flat or slightly rounded bottom and rectangular section Since a running dnll also cuts channels, It ISImportant to recogmze the dishnchon between the two Both the channeling tool and the running dnll might be used by the same carver The swelling In the shaft makes the tool strong enough to be struck very hard, the thinness behind the cuthng edge means that It can shll move freely In deep, narrow channels It IS therefore very useful for deep-cut drapery and smular purposes In fact, an expenenced carver can probably carve deep channels more quickly tlus way than with a running dnll The weakness of this method IS that It cannot be adapted to delicate detail as easily because of the force of the blow required The narrowness of the cutting edge combined wIth the force of the blow It can take makes tlus tool very adaptable In other areas It can be used for carving details like a fine flat clusel, but can also serve as a roughing tool It was clearly very Important In late Roman carving, covenng the funcbons of tooth, roundel and flat chisel on fourth- and fi.fth-century sarcophagi In sixth- to tenth-century work, It seems possible that It was the only tool the carver had An illustrahon can be seen In the hand of Magister Ursus on the Ferenhllo altar The tool shown differs from the standard channeling tool only In that It ISthicker both In profi.leand from above, behind the cutting edge Considenng the low

TOOLS

relief, lme-drawmg type of decoration carved at that time, It ISobvIOUSthat channel 109 was not Important but that having one multi-purpose tool was very useful ThIS form of the tool was Ideal for that purpose The channelmg tool IS very popular WIth modern marble carvers for use WIth pneumatic hammers It covers a WIde range of applications from rough work to some forms of hmshmg As 10 late Roman times, the thickness of the shaft makes a strong tool that allows the carver to work quickly and adapt to special problems 22 The tools descnbed up to this point are the percussIon tools used 10 one form or another 10 carvlOg Some tools will not be known 10 some areas or on certain types of stone There are many vanahons on these tools and It would be impossible to describe them all, as almost every carver has hIS own Nevertheless, anyone interested 10 carving can use this lisnng as a baSIS from which to explore the vanahons that pertain to a particular area of study Abrasion tools (photograph 9) An abrasion tool can be defined as any tool that shapes or cuts stone by rubbing away matenal rather than by luthng, smash 109 and/ or cutting Many different matenals can be used for this purpose, so long as they are shaped or of such a hardness or gnttmess that they can remove matenal from the stone to be worked Abrasion tools are perhaps the most ancient tools that have been used to work stone Certamly the most ancient technologies used abrasion to a greater degree 10 shaping their carvings than was common 10 later pen ods The less developed the metallurgy 10 a culture, the more likely that a greater part of the work WIllbe executed WIth abrasion. because the material is present and does not have to be reworked 10 order to make a tool Abrasive techniques are seen 10 the forms of Cycladic, pre-Columbian and Easter Island carvlOgs, where the shapes were obtained by rubbing matenal away Abrasion tools can be rather easily divided lOto tools for cuitmg. shaping, or smoothmgj'polislung The hrst are the saws, the second are the hles, rasps, scrapers and rough abrasive stones, the third are medium and nne abrasive stones, powders and sirmlar matenals There are certain tasks, such as polishmg, which can only be done WIth abrasion Modern technology has 10 fact developed the use of abrasives much more than any other branch of stoneworkmg Nevertheless, the general areas of work for the dIfferent types of tools have remained the same

Saws Stone saws come 10 many SIzes,but their essential feature IS a long thm blade of metal, more than 3 m long, between 10 and 20 em high and less than 5 mm WIde Only saws for very soft stone, such as tuff, have cuthng teeth on them All the rest cut WIth abrasives The most common form has been sand rruxed WIth water dnpping mto the cut 10 the stone The modern form has mdustnal diamond powder mset 10 small rectangular cubes along the blade and water runrung over the cut EVIdence for tlus baSICsaw type can be found 10 cuts or pictures from many cultures and far IOta antiquity 23 A small saw could be worked by one person but normal stone saws are long enough for two people The blade IS set 10 a wooden frame and looks similar to a buck saw (to use the Amencan term) From the rruddle of the nineteenth

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

century, the saw has evolved Into many new forms and has become the most Important tool of modern stone technology CIrcular saws have been developed that cut quickly and accurately There has been great progress In the areas of both abrasives and motor power Blades that have mdustnal diamonds embedded In the cuthng edge have been developed so that cutting IS tremendously speeded up Modern preCISIOnengIneenng has designed saws that cut to very precise measurements, while computenzahon has meant that the saw can be programmed Anyone wishmg to know more about the modern versions should consult one of the books on modern stoneworkmg listed In the

bibliography The essence of saWIng IS the use of an abrasive With water The saw blade, mOVing back and forth across the stone, gnnds It away and cuts a tlun path Because hand saWIng ISrelabvely slow, the culhng rate ISa product of the sand's abrasive quahhes against the stone's resistance The speed of cuthng can vary greatly With the hardness of the stone Saw cuts can be rdennhed by their large, flat, clean-cut surfaces With no chisel marks Generally there are long, faint, parallel marks across the stone, caused by the saw's movement from Side to Side within the cut This creates a slightly stepped surface A carved surface Will show smaller and more uneven marks, and a smooth abrasive surface Willshow nothing more than scratches Often at the very bottom of a saw cut there Will be a small step and then a narrow 1 to 2 ern WIdth of broken stone Before reaching the bottom of the cut, the saw was lifted out and the two pIeces broken apart There IS abundant evidence of the use of the saw In many different pre-mdustnal pen ods, but ItS exact use and hrrutahons are harder to detect It ISclear that the saw was not used for squanng large or small blocks as It ISnow Almost all, If not all, architectural work was done by hand What seems most hkely ISthat the saw's pnncipal purpose was to cut thm slabs These slabs could then be used as mtenor facmg (exterior facing was done WIth thicker slabs wluch were not sawn) or cut as hies and pIeces for floor mosaic or mtarsia Therefore, saWIng was especially a lechruque for colored and decorative stones The saw ISparticularly useful because It does not waste or break stone and ISan Ideal Instrument for cutting large thm slabs It ISpossible to saw stone WIth small saws or even WIth pIeces of abrasive stone ThIS latter techruque was, and probably shll IS, frequently used In less-developed cultures Because abrasive stones are a natural product and water the only lubricant needed, the technology IS there at hand for SImple, smaller cuts Larger saws are suspended from a frame by cords wluch run through pulleys to counterweights, so that the weight of the saw ISnot too great for the workmen to move It A vanahon known at least by the eighteenth century IS the gang saw ThIS saw has a senes of equal-length verhcal cutting blades set parallel In a horizontal frame hke an egg sheer Sand and water fall on the enhre upper surface of the block wlule the frame IS gradually lowered and moved back and forth The result ISto cut the block In one process Into a senes of uniform slabs Unhl the rrud-runeleenth century, the power source for saws was usually human effort Still, there IS an eighteenth-century design In Diderot's Encuclopedia for a wmdrrullpowered gang saw,2~ a design In Vuillard de Honnecourt's sketch book for a waterdriven wood saw which could funchon on stone25 and a reference to water-driven stone saws by Ausoruus, c AD 31D--94

TOOLS

and the Ruwar hears the screams of hIS nulls as they furiously saw the marble and make the distant shore-lme, hills and trees, nng with the dm of a marble quarry 26

The Importance of the saw to modem stoneworkmg indicates that although the basic technology ISvery old, the problem m the past was the lack of motor-dnven power such as IS available today FIle FIles used on stone are basically sirrular to hles for metal Flats, rounds and halfrounds are all used They are either hie-cut or rasp-cut "FIle-cut" means parallel sharp ndges across the length of the tool, or, m very fine files, cnsscrossed over the surface Rougher files are rasp-cut, and have the whole surface covered WIth hne, pomted spikes FIles are generally only used on flat surfaces or those WIth very large, low curves A hie can be useful for getbng a sharp, clean angle between two planes They are used by flat workers or architectural carvers and are not usually a sculptural carver's tool The marks of a hle are scratches m the stone The height of the teeth of the frle and the softness of the stone define the depth of these scratches The rasp-cut hie leaves a much rougher surface than the cross-cut one A fme cross-cut hie can create a smooth surface WIth few scratches, very similar to a moderately hne abrasive surface The use of hies goes back to anhquity At least one example of a rasp-cut hie dates from Assyrian hmes 27 As the technology for makmg them IS that of a blacksmith and similar to the making of chisels, It ISprobable that they have as long a lustory as chisels Rasp (photograph 10) The stone rasp ISa double-ended tool WIth a thm-shanked handle in the middle The shaft ISoctagonal m sechon and less than 1 cm in diameter It ISforged mto a Wide vanety of shapes on each end Some are flat, others curved, some convex on one SIdeand flat on the other, some pointed, and so on The shaped ends contain the sharp POInts that make It a rasp There are many gradabons of roughness, dependmg on the SIze and number of cutting points per square centimeter Rasps vary In length from 12 to 40 cm The smaller the rasp, the finer the cuttmg surface The rasp IS preeminently a marble worker's tool It IS not strong enough to be generally effechve on gramte and IS often replaced by scrapers on soft stones Because of the vanery of shapes to ItS cuthng surfaces, It IS excellent for working around forms of any SIze or shape as well as getting mto very narrow and mconveruent places Thus It ISthe tool best adapted for the smoothing of sculpture or fine and delicate architectural detail The rasp ISused both for smoothing, following the flat chisel or roundel, and for fme shapmg (the lme between smoothmg and fme shapmg ISrather blurred m any case) The rasp rrught be used to gIve the exact shape to an eyelid, nostril or the lips Or It rrughl be used m a rougher Iasluon for hnal shapmg on an ann or leg The rasp can be used either as a hruslung tool or as an InterIm tool m a process leadmg to a polIsh or near polIsh As a fInIshmg tooL It ISfrequently seen on second-century AD

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

impenal reliefs m Rome The Column of Trajan, for example, has large areas of rasp fnush For poushmg. several grades of rasp from rough to hne can be used In this case, each successive passage of a hner rasp erases the marks of the prevIOUSone while at the same time refmmg and sharpening the forms This tool leaves a surface of scratches on the stone They tend to go m all different direchons, to overlap each other, and m general on close exarrunahon gIve the rmpression of a surface that has been worked over from many Sides ThIS ISbecause the rasp ISrubbed back and forth on the stone The carver tends to change direction frequently, often crossmg his prevIOUS marks from another angle A rasped surface IS very easy to recognize because of this seemmgly disordered cnsscrossmg of the marks Scraper The scraper can be merely a flat chisel, roundel or tooth chisel that IS scraped back and forth across the surface of the stone rather than hammered to cut It Usually, however, It ISa tool WIth a flat or very fi.nely toothed cutting edge The cuthng edge IS quite thm because the tool IS never hammered The shaft IS the normal diameter for a cuttmg tool, but IS sometimes longer so It can be held m both hands One to three cm behind the cuthng edge, the shaft bends sixty to ninety degrees, glVlng the tool the appearance of a small rake Smaller versions of a scraper are frequently double-ended Tlus tool IS used for smoothing and fi.ne shapmg For the latter purpose, It IS not as adaptable as the rasp In modem times, It ISgenerally used on soft stones while the rasp ISused on marble It can, however, be seen as a frequently used tool on Roman Impenal marble reliefs On the sculpture of the Ara PaClS,for example, It was clearly used as a hruslung tool Another form of the scraper, seldom found in Italy but very common m France, Belgium and England, IS the chemin-de-Ier This tool IS a rectangular piece of wood, perhaps 5 ern thick, With a handle on the top On the bottom are several thm metal blades, set parallel or at angles to each other The cuthng edge of the blades may be flat, toothed or curved The worker holds the tool by the handle and rubs It back and forth on the stone The effect on soft limestones IS to smooth the surface quickly and easily This tool IS used a great deal by architectural carvers and others who are workmg flat surfaces When It has a flat cutting edge, the scraper leaves a smoother, less scratchy surface than the rasp A scraper can be used for the fi.nal smooth surface on soft unpolishable stone, as can be seen on French Cotluc sculpture The toothed scraper ISoften used pnor to the flat scraper, although It too can be a firuslung tool The marks of this tool on marble are generally quite clear They are a senes of parallel scratches, too fi.ne to be a tooth chisel, and too clearly parallel to be a rasp Certainly, both a rasp and a scraper can be used on the same surface, the rasp can be recognized by ItS crisscross. scratchy pattern, and the scraper by the very fi.neparallel lmes that stand out from nme to time AbraSIVes Abrasives take different forms The earliest types used were naturally abrasive stones such as emery, sandstones and pumIce Sand has always been used for saws and smoothmg Manufactured abrasive stones, cast from abrasive powders With a bmdmg

TOOLS

medium and graded like sandpaper or emery paper, are one modem product Emery paper, frequently used m hand pohslung of marble, ISanother It ISnumber graded the higher the number, the hner the grade Many fme abrasive compounds, made up by the worker himself, were used m the past An example ISthe paste made from burned goat or sheep bones which Carradon descnbes 28 In fact, any compound that Will smooth stone IS a useful abrasive The harder, rougher abrasives such as emery and hard sandstones can be used like rasps in that they shape as well as smooth the stone Inevitably in the earlier stages, when you are smoothmg a piece of sculpture, you are also shapmg the fme details After the iruhal work, abrasives are for smoothmg and pohshmg In fact, the two are the same thmg, as a polished surface IS simply the smoothest of the smooth Abrasives are rubbed over the stone together with water, which keeps the stone clear as It washes off the stone powder and abrasive powder The entire area to be polished or smoothed must be rubbed down completely with each successively hner abrasive With emery paper, one starts with 120 grade and proceeds through 220, 320, 400, 500 to 600 grade for the hnest surface By tlus hme, the stone Will be almost completely polished If the rubbmg has been earned out carefully and thoroughly at each stage There are gradations of polish and smoothness which can be seen If enough works are compared The surface of a marble smoothed to a 320 grade emery paper ISscratchless, the color ISclear and the crystals visible It ISmatt, however, and does not have the rrurror hrush of a fully polished stone The highest gloss ISachieved with a rmld acid salic acid (see below) Only very rarely will a rough, abrasive surface be left as the hrushed surface If that type of hrush IS needed, rasps are more likely to be used Therefore, the sign of an abrasive firush ISa very smooth, hnely fi.mshed surface without scratches and either matt or high gloss Modem power tools (usually disk sanders) use emery paper as a standard fonn of abrasive These do not function With water and therefore must be used carefully to avoid burnmg the stone Standard mdustnal smoothmg and pohshmg of stone IS done With large honzontal wheels that use composition stone abrasives Industnal diamonds set mto disk saws, cham saws and a fonn of wire saw are now used as abrasives Sand blastmg IS not only a techruque for cleamng stone (and a badly mistaken one), but IS also the standard modem technique for carvmg lettering m granite All of these techmques have been developed m the last one hundred and forty years Abrasive stones in less technologically developed penods or places have a much greater Importance in stoneworkmg They can be used to cut the stone, dnll it and shape It, as well as smooth It Cycladic sculpture of the second and third rrullenrua Be seems to have been earned out almost entirely With abrasives Probably there was only an mihal. very rough shaping earned out before the rest of the work was done With abrasives Since there ISan Important source of emery, an excellent abrasive. on the Island of N axos m the Cyclades, we have here a hne example of economy of motion in technology Where an excellent abrasive and a marble which reacts well to abrasives are both present, the path of least resistance IS to develop a carvmg technique based on abrasives In other cases, such as Central American. pre-Columbian carvmg, the adophon of an abrasive techmque may reflect Simply a lack of development m appropnate metallurgy

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

ACIds ACids have been used on stone for a long time, even though they are normally madvisable Carradon specifically mentions their use as cleamng agents They are also used for hrushmg stones In some cases Most speohcally, oxalic or sahc acid In a powder form ISfrequently used to put the hnal gloss on marble after hand polishing A piece of burlap IS dampened, dipped In the powder, and then rubbed vigorously on the stone Finally the stone IS washed WIth water In effed, the acid ads as a final abrasive, for a lughly polished stone IS simply a highly smoothed stone In the past and present, there have been many different methods for polishmg stone To my knowledge, the exad system that the Egyptians used on gramte ISunknown, as ISthe exad Roman method for marble We may be sure from the necessrhes of the stone, however, that each process used a succession of finer and fmer grades of abrasives From observing the high endurance quality of their polishes, we may also be sure that all of their polishes were Sincere (= sine cere, WIthout wax, a Roman marble worker's term for a true, unfaked, polish) Measunng tools A stoneworker uses several tools to layout hIS work Although they may not leave any trace on the stone, they are still a baSICpart of hIS tool kit These are a straight edge, a carpenter's square, one or more paIrS of calipers. some form of level. a plumb line and a marker Illustrations of tools from any penod as well as marks on hrushed and unhrushed stonework show us that any stoneworker must have the tools needed to lay out hIS work or mark the lines and form to be carved Specihcally, there are examples and/ or Illustrations of these tools from ancient Egyptian, Greek and Roman as well as medieval and Renaissance pen ods What follows ISa listing of the baSICtools of tlus sort Again, each penod or area WIll have ItS own van ants Strazght edge A straight edge, usually of wood but possibly of metal. has existed as a baSIC stoneworker's tool Since Egyptian times Since most carving Involves straight lines at some POint, and In fad by far the largest amount of work Involves producing squared blocks, a straight edge ISan obvIOUStool It ISused both for laying out straight lines and for checking a line to see whether It IS straight Measuring stzck The foot rule or yardstick or meter are now normal tools There IS some evidence of them even In Roman hmes In the begmrung of the seventeenth century, however, Boselli implres that one made one's own measunng stick based on each statue Until umversally accepted standards of measurement were devised. dimensions seem to have been more on an ad hoc baSIS A measunng shck rmght be established for a specihc buildmg, but ItS umversal validity would be doubtful Square An L-shaped or carpenter's square IS part of every carver's baggage As the carVing of squared or angled blocks was a baSICpart of building for much of history. the

TOOLS

square was a basic tool, either for laying out the work or for testing It A trained carver can carve almost any form of architectural work, from block to column to detailed moldings with a straight edge and a square The form ISalways the L-shaped carpenter's square and not the T-square Calipers The stoneworker's pnmary measunng tool ISa pair of calipers Carvers have not always known how to read numbers, so they often worked from a measurement laid out for them, all other measurements were denved from this baSIClength, by means of simple geometry For example, If the basic measure of a temple IS the diameter of a column at ItS base, the carver IS given the dimensions of any other urut In terms of multiples or fractions of this urut, which can be worked out with calipers In the Roman theater at Aphrodisias In Turkey there IS an incised line with marks incised on It giVing specific lengths that relate to lengths In the building With the calipers, a worker could take a measurement from this line and apply It to the block he was working on Calipers are also used In taking measurements for reproducing sculpture In stone from models In stone or some other matenal Indeed, the calipers are an excellent example of both the simplicity and endurance of baSICstoneworkmg tools The level Although some form of level ISas essential as the other tools listed, this ISmore of a stone layer's tool Almost all Illustrations from Egyptian times until the late Renaissance show the level as part of the worker's equipment, so we may assume that stone laying was part of the stoneworker's trade rather than a separate trade as It ISnow The Spirit level, which ISthe baSICmodern version, ISa fairly recent development The tool known since ancient times IS the plumb rule (arc111pendolo) This IS a right-angle triangle With a plumb line hanging from ItS apex, when the base ISlevel, the plumb line Willbisect the angle and cross a mark on the center of the base It ISanother example of a very Simple Instrument that meets a baSICneed Plumb ltne The plumb line IS also Simple and necessary With It you can find the vertical. which IS obviously Vital for stone laying It IS also a means for the sculptor to hnd the center line of lus statue In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centunes, the plumb line was the baSISof the method of enlarging and reproducing sculpture In stone from models Marker A marker IS obviously essential Modern stone tool suppliers offer hard-lead pencils made for marking and laying out designs The normal Instrument used In the past was a sharp, tempered-steel POint Many incised lines made With this type of Instrument have been found on ancient Roman buildings The descnphon given here of the tools must, of course, be considered general In the sense that there Will be many local or lustoncal permutations, but the baSICtools are virtually universal Given the availability of the appropnate metal, the POint chisel and

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

flat chisel at the very least will be found everywhere, Luckily, mankind

has been sensible

tool appropnate

to ItS object

totally culturally

and geographically

process

for a SImple Job

evolved

Of course

this principle

especially pertment

and mvenhve

In observing

stone

unconnected

technology

m many

to develop

the

different

and

their

tools

In stoneworkmg

It IS

the baSIS for a valid analysis of the worked object

To begm such an analysis, It IS not necessary that can certainly become Important

the stone reqUires them

everywhere

areas, I have never seen a complicated

IS true of all matenals

because It provides

because

enough

to understand

the cultural context,

although

What IS Important

IS to have

in a final detailed study

some Idea of the charactenshcs of the stone, and of the nature of tools Marks of tools that are not normally

used for hrushmg are found under three different

conditions

One IS when the tool IS used deliberately

the second

IS when the carving

carvmg are left m an unhrushed way (for example, understood

In modem

sledge hammers

abstract

In order to comprehend

The best way to understand piece of soft stone,

impossrble

to comprehend

In the usage must be

the technique Involved

and a couple

to watch a stoneworker In operation for a

the use of tools Itself

To take a small

of chisels and carve for half a day IS a

IS to spend some hme trying different stones

observation of the work process different

tools, may be used In either

so the difference

the use of tools IS to use them oneself

a hammer

The best approach

and pitching

sculpture),

beginrung At the very least, It IS necessary while

as a hrushmg tool for a special effect ,

and the third IS when areas of a hrushed

state for some reason, often because they WIll not be seen

tool. mcludmg drills, saws,

Any

IS unhrushed.

on stone

WIthout

some

In any case, It IS expenence

Tlus IS the only way to appreciate

ways that a Simple tool can be used on stone, the variety

the many

of apphcahons

and

results, which IS the essence of seeing how the tools work

Notes Any descnphon of stoneworkmg tools must generalize to some extent The generahzahon m this chapter IStoward hand tools "Hand tool" ISdefi.ned as a tool held in one hand and struck WIth a hammer My training m the Umted States and workmg in Italy ISalso a bras, wluch has meant that I am less farruhar WIth axes, which are seldom used in these countries. and more at home WIth the tools of marble carvmg ThIS tendency IS countered by the number of sroneworkmg tradihons I have studied In Italy not based on marble, as well as by VISItSto stoneworkmg shops and quarnes in Belgium, England, France, Greece and Turkey I also have an Inveterate habit of buying unfarruhar tools m countnes I VISIt, which leads me to fi.nd blacksmiths and supply stores wherever I go The books that are principally used for checking my own observations for this chapter are Vasan, 1960, Bosselh. 1978, Celhru. 1976, SICca and Tomasi, 1979, Carradon, 1979, Noel, 1965, Purchase, 19째4, Salvatori. 1983, ROSSIand Martello, 1984 and Bessac, 1986 I have also used Italian, English and Amencan tool catalogues For anyone wishmg to go deeper into tool descnphons, the best book IS Bessac, 1986 HIS histoncal sections must, however, be taken WIth a pmch of salt An example of thiS IS the Casenhno valley m Tuscany, where I found an old blacksmith who could make the axes that were obviously used untIl twenty or thIrty years ago, but no stonecutters used them anymore In contrast I have met a mason and owner of a Ii.rrn from Bath who told me he IS trymg to remtroduce the use of axes from France mto England

TOOLS

3 For examples of their use In this period. see the illustrations In Du Colornbier, 1973 hg 4 and Gimpel. 19lh pp 34-7 For an example of the use of an axe In the medieval period that IS different from modem usage see the use of the ptchierelio In Martelloth and Rockwell, 1088 4 Purchase 1904, pi I and p 8 5 An mtereshng Illustration of tlus IS the Jean Fouquet rruruature of the construction of the Temple In Jerusalem In which the mason cutting a molding ISUSIngan axe while the carver of a statue IS uSing a hammer and chisel See Du Col ambler, 1973 hg 7 6 If we presume that a piece of sculpture carved entirely by ItS creator IS of higher quality than one carved With the help of assistants, then the air hammer enables an Increase In quality Whereas In the past a sculptor had to use assistant carvers In order to create large works. With an air hammer It IS possible for one person to do the carving 7 For the dahng of the use of vanous metals for tools see Tylecote. 1976 8 See Purcell, 1967 pi roa for the use of a wedge In a quarry 9 More Information on these tools can be found In Bessac, 1986 and Noel. 1965 10 One can be seen hanging behmd the figure carvIng In In sculiura by Andrea Pisano In the Museo del Opera del Duomo In Florence Also In Florence, It IS being used by one of the stoneworkers depicted In the relief of the Quattro Sanh Coronah on the church of Or San Michele In Rome there are two on the tomb of Andrea Bregno by LUIgiCaponi In Santa Mana sopra Minerva 11 Both exist In Carradon's illustrations of sculptors' studios I am not aware of any examples of the staff dnll In later nineteenth-century Illustrations 12 There IS quite a bit of diSCUSSIOn of the running dnll as well as the tendency to attnbute most channels In Roman sculpture to It Bluemel. 1969 III 27, illustrates a carpenter working With a bow dnll from a Greek pot It would be quite impossible to cut channels With this or a Similar tool On the other hand. a relief on the sarcophagus In the National Museum of Urbmo, Strong and Clandge. 1976 III 327, shows a fourth-century Roman sarcophagus carver uSing a running drill, support and all 13 See note 10 14 From conversations With English stoneworkers I assume that tlus IS the tool meant when In archaeological literature the term "punch" IS used Purchase, 1904 p 1 gives a different defiruhon Neither Bluemel nor Adam clarify what they thmk the difference IS between the punch and POint 15 The North Amencan name IS tooth chisel, the English name IS claw chisel I am uSing throughout this book North American terminology 16 The tooth chisel IS the only major carving tool which may exist exclusively In post-Egyptian Mediterranean and European sculpture before the runetecnth-century spread of their techruques to other cultures I have never seen examples of Its use In pre-Columbian, Indian or Chinese carving 17 For a fuller diSCUSSIOn of the tooth chisel see Rockwell, 1990a I also diSCUSSIn this article my disagreement With Bessac (see Bessac, 1986 and Bessac, 1988) on the dehruhon of the tooth chisel He classifies It as a different tool depending on whether It has sharp or blunt teeth Since I wrote that review, I have seen his article on tool mark rdenhhcahon Bessac, 1988 As far as I can tell. the tool name that he uses" diamond pointed chisel" IS a pure mvenhon (possibly of his translator) In English, as It does not exist either In tool catalogues or In any of the literature I accept that there ISthis difference between French stonemasonry terminology and both Italian and English (Although other French books do not make tlus distmchon see Noel. 1965 and Baudry and Bozo, 1978, I am inclined to trust Bessac In thrs area) However, I cannot see any evidence for extending the French usage to ancient stoneworkmg

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

18 It IShighly doubtful that the bush hammer existed In anhquity even for granite carving Bessac, 1986 p 84 IS very doubtful A stonecarver fnend who IS closely acquainted with Roman technique has told me he IS sure that they did not have It, and I have seen no evidence of ItS use 19 In archaeological hterature the term used ISdrove, which ISthe North Amencan usage Bolster ISthe English usage A great deal that IScalled drove work in this literature IS,I thmk, axe work, but little attempt IS ever made to dishnguish between them 20 For a good bnef descnphon of letter-carving chisels and techniques see Gill, 1908 21 The usual English term IS bullnose chisel which IS not used m North Amenca 22 Another tool somehmes called a channelmg tool or sometimes a splitter has a wide (2 5 to 5 0 ern), blunt (0 8 ern thick) serrated edge I have found It m Rome for travertine and in the United States for granite In both cases it is an air hammer tool It may be considerably older than the air hammer, but I can find no evidence 23 For example on a second- to third-century AD Roman sarcophagus In Aphrodisias m Turkey one end of the block was cut With a saw before the carving began Frequently the hds of sarcophagi in Rome were cut With a saw 24 25 26 27 28

Sicca and Tomasi, 1979 pp 83-5 Erlande-Brandeburg, 1988 tav 44 Isbell, Harold, trans, The Last Poets of Imperial Rome, New York, 1971 p 61 Seen m the Museum In Kenya, Turkey Carradon, 1979 pp XXVI-XXVII

Tool drawings

This chapter contains thirteen drawings with a short commentary on each. It is a supplement to the information and photographs of chapter 4. Its purpose is to indicate the diversity of stoneworking tools that occurs due to material, period and area, and convey some idea of the variety that exists within the range of each tool type. The country where the tool was obtained is given in parenthesis where known.

2 5

bCID 6

------'--''------''-----------------

Drawing 1, wedges Numbers 1 and 2 are metal wedges which may vary greatly in size, depending on the use and stone. (For dimensions, see chapter 4). Numbers 3 and 4 show a round wedge of the type used in the peperino quarries in Marino, Italy. The two thin plates are also frequently used with square wedges such as number 2, and serve to spread the pressure of the wedge. Number 5 (Italy) is a plug and feathers shown in separate parts and how they fit together. A-a and bob are horizontal sections to demonstrate the changing width of the elements. Number 6 (Turkey) is a long plug and feathers. These can be as long as two meters when used in marble quarrying. Number 7 shows the wedge and plates of 3 and 4 as used in the Marino quarries for splitting the stone free on a horizontal line. The dotted lines show the slot cut into the stone to hold the wedges. Number 8 is the use of plug and feathers for splitting a block. The dotted line is the intended break line. 55

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

~\------------J ~

Drawing 2, pitching tools Number 1 is a marble pitching tool (Italy) with a tempered head. Note that as in all pitching tools, there is a very slight slant to the cutting edge. Number 2 is a small limestone pitcher (England) with a mallet head. Number 3 is a granite pitching tool (United States) with an untempered head. The tool is much thicker than the first two because of the force of the blow required to break granite. Number 4 shows the use of the marble tool for breaking the comer of a block. Number 5 shows a special type of granite pitching tool (United States) for two persons. The two tools are each the size of a sledge hammer. One worker holds the pitching tool onto the stone and the other hits it with a sledge hammer. The dotted lines show the way the stone can be cut. A pitching tool can thus be moved along a line with successive blows from one end of a block to the other. The pitching tool always works best against a flat surface. The rougher the surface, the less likely the tool is to break the stone.

TOOL

DRAWINGS

~~~::> ~~~~ 2

::::>

e=:

::::0

I~ 4

Drawing 3, point chisel Numbers 1, 2 and 3 are respectively a marble point (Italy) with an unused untempered head, a granite point (England) with the same kind of head, and a limestone point (England) with a mallet head. Note the difference in the thickness of the tools as well as the difference in the cutting edge. Numbers 4, 5 and 6 are respectively a granite point with its typical direction of blow, a marble point with a mason's stroke and a limestone point with the angle most frequently used for that tool. A granite point can be used at the angles of either 4 or 5, a marble point at all three angles as well as variations in-between, and a limestone point at angles of less than 5 to 6.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

========::::J

-~l 4

c=~<l C=::~~~~~===-~ 5

Drawing 4, tooth chisel Number 1 shows a fine marble tooth chisel (Italy) with an untempered head. The teeth are sharpened to a point. Number 2 shows three variations on a two-toothed chisel (Italy, Italy and France) with an air-hammer head. The first example is a roughing tool while the next two are finishing chisels. The last is similar, excepting the head, to a tool Michelangelo used frequently on almost-finished surfaces. Number 3 shows three versions of a four-toothed chisel (Italy). The second and third are simply later sharpenings of the tool as the teeth gradually wear down. Thus the same tool can change aspect during use. Number 4 is a tooth chisel (Greece) made from a flat bar of steel. I have seen similar tools in Turkey. Number 5 is a mallet-headed tooth chisel (United States) for carving large flat surfaces on limestone or sandstone. It is an old American stonecutter's tool. Number 6 is a wooden handled, gouge-shaped tooth chisel (France). It is used on soft stones with a mallet.

TOOL

c: 1

DRAWINGS

==-

[ (f

c C=~~~~======~

I 5

(~~~~~===~==:::J

( 7

=:>

Drawing 5, flat chisel Number 1 is a marble-finishing tool (Italy) with a tempered head. Number 2 is a granite tool (England) with an untempered head. Note that the granite tool has a very blunt cutting edge. Number 3 is a mallet-headed limestone chisel (United States). A tool of this width, which is used for smoothing large flat surfaces, is called a bolster in Great Britain and sometimes a drove in the United States.' Number 4 is a lettering chisel (England). Number 5 is a flat chisel known in Italian as an unghieiio or fingernail (Italy), with an air-hammer head, used for roughing stone. A similar hammer-headed tool used by the ancient Romans from the second century on was employed in both roughing and finishing. Number 6 is a marble finishing tool for air hammer (Italy). Number 7 is a channeling tool (Italy). Its head is untempered. The thickness of the tool in profile allows it to be hit with considerable force. A tool of this type was one of the basic tools in the ancient world, and in Italian marble carving from the fifteenth century on. Like tooth chisels, flat chisels exist in an almost infinite variety and for purposes ranging from roughing to the most delicate finishing.

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

=:::>-

===--

2 C

J 3 J

C=~~~~~j

c-~~~~~~:::::::::> 6

Drawing 6, roundel This chisel is also known as the tondino, the round-headed chisel and the bullnose chisel. Number 1 is a marble tool with a tempered head (Italy). Number 2 is a marble or soft-stone tool with a worn, untempered head (United States). Both can be used for finishing, the first also as a middle-range tool. Number 3 shows how a flat chisel gradually becomes a round-headed chisel through repeated sharpening. Number 4 is a marble drill (Italy) that can be either spun between the hands or hit with a hammer while being turned with one hand. Number 5 is a tempered-headed tool made from modern truck coil springs (Italy), used for rough and medium working. Number 6 is a malletheaded "bull-nosed chisel" (England), and number 7 is a mallet-headed gouge (England). The round-headed chisel can be used on marble as well as soft stones; the gouge is for soft stones only. The use of gouges for stone is so infrequent in the ancient and Renaissance world that I have not given them a separate listing here.

TOOL

DRAWINGS

Drawing

7, bush hammers

Numbers 1 and 2 are two different sizes of bush hammers (both Italy). There are many variants in the size and number of points to a bush hammer. The tool is always used so that the teeth all strike the stone at once. Although rare, there are also bush tools that are struck with a hammer. Number 3 is a form of toothed axe (France) in which each tooth is a separate piece of steel. This is a form of the tool used in both France and Germany. Number 4 (England) is a form of tooth chisel with a changeable cutting edge. It is called a claw chisel holder. The holder can carry different types of teeth.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

2~J=~--~ c:=:===========================::J

Drawing

8, scraper

In modem usage, the scraper is primarily employed on soft stone; it is, however, becoming increasingly clear that the toothed version was often used on marble in the ancient world. Number 1 shows the flat chisel used as a scraper (Italy). Number 2 shows a long medieval scraper similar to the one shown on a window of Chartres Cathedral (France). The cutting edge is deduced from the surface marks on finished carvings of the period as it is not visible on the window. A flat chisel edge is found equally frequently. Numbers 3 and 4 are modem scrapers (France), the first larger and toothed, the second small and without teeth. It is not known whether the ancient scrapers were doubleheaded as these are. Number 5 shows a chemin-de-fer and several variants on its cutting edges (France). This tool is very infrequently found in Italy or the United States, but is seen in many sizes and varieties of cutting edges throughout northern Europe. It is used exclusively on soft stone.

TOOL

DRAWINGS

""<2E'ill> •••.... D=------~ i ...

a~a

~:r:==t:

----"l~

==========:n::, ...=.>

~=======([[JD>

t.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·••.·.•.......•.••••••.......•.••...•.•.....•.•....•.•...•.•.•.....•...•••..••....•.•.•......••.••.•.••....•.•.•.....•.•.•..•.•..•.•.•.•.•...•.•......•.....•.•.•.....•...• j

Drawing

9, rasps

Number 1 is a marble rasp (Italy). Number 2 is a close-up to show the form of the cutting surface, and number 3 is the cross-section" a-a" of 2. The cutting points on the rasp are punched out by hand, and are dotted irregularly about the surface. This is part of the reason for the randomly scratched surface caused by this tool which so clearly differentiates it from the parallel scratches of the scraper. Numbers 4 and 5 are also marble rasps (Italy). There are many different sizes of rasp from 8 to 30 ern long, as well as many different shapes. Because the rasp is used to get into narrow and inaccessible places and to smooth large surfaces, there are many different varieties. The edges and ends of the cutting surfaces can also be used to cut. Number 6 is a rasp for soft stones (England). It is similar to an Assyrian rasp in the museum of Konya, Turkey. Greek and Roman rasps were almost certainly of both types, as can be seen from the surfaces of their statues. Number 7 is a stone file (England), Files for metal can also be used on stone, so almost any file can be considered a potential stone tool. Interestingly, the marble rasp does not seem to have been known in medieval Italian marble carving. No tool illustrations show them until the mid-sixteenth century. The evidence of carvings suggest their rediscovery in the very end of the fifteenth century.

;64

THE

AR T OF

STONEWORKING

t ~

~_~:> a

'::' __ f(

~ d

~'O

Drawing 10, drills Number Number

is the cord drill and is worked

by two persons

(ancient

is the bow drill (ancient Rome), 3 the pump drill (sixteenth-century

4 the brace and bit (sixteenth-century The cord drill becomes

a running

Italy). Number

Rome).

Italy) and

5 shows how the cord drill is used.

drill when, instead of holding

the drill bit, one holds a

piece of wood as a guide against the side of the bit so that the drill cuts a shallow channel instead of a hole. Numbers

6 and 7 show the process of cutting

a channel as the Romans

did in the second century. First a series of slanted holes is cut in the stone. Then the carver cuts from hole to hole with a channeling of the pump drill. The up-and-down forth motion method

motion

of the drill bit. Numbers

of cutting

a channel.f

tool or a londino. Number

Instead

8 shows the working

of the pump causes a continuous

9 and

of slanted

show the medieval holes as the Romans

parallel holes is drilled and then the chisel clears the space between

back-and-

and Renaissance used, a line of

them. Probably

this

method came into use because it is easier to use the pump drill to cut holes perpendicular to the stone surface.

TOOL

DRAWINGS

ll~ iii

Drawing

11, hammers

The shaded areas in this drawing signify metal. and the clear ones, wood. Number 1 is an Italian marble-carving hammer in soft iron. Number 2 shows the same hammer after extensive use. The hole that forms in the center of the striking surface can be filled in from time to time by hammering iron into it. Number 3 is an American granitecarver's hammer. The shaft is thinner near the head so that there is a certain flexibility to it which reinforces the carver's swing. This type of hammer comes in many different sizes. Number 4 is an English finishing hammer and number 5 is a French one." The head is zinc rather than iron or steel. Number 6 is an English wooden mallet and 7 is a Belgian wooden hammer."

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

~ 3

=V4~

=U~~ D 6

Drawing 12, axes''

Number 1 is a carver's pick (Italy, fifteenth century) adapted from Nanni di Banco's carving of the four sculptors on the church of Or San Michele in Florence. Number 2 shows the way it is held and used perpendicular to the surface of the stone. Number 3 is a modem quarrying axe from the quarries near Afyon (Turkey). Number 4 is an ancient Roman quarrying axe. Several have been found in the waste at Carrara. Number 5 is the type of carving axe (Italy) still being used in Palermo for carving the soft limestone used there. Number 6 is a modem Roman martel/ina or toothed axe and number 7 is one from the Casentino valley in Tuscany. Number 8 shows the Turkish method of working with the modem quarrying axe." This axe is always used with the head down. Number 9 shows the ancient Roman method of quarrying with the axe.

TOOL

DRAWINGS

â&#x20AC;˘

3 4

((1 6 8

Drawing 13, measuring tools Numbers 1 and 2 are forms of an archipendolo, or plumb level. The first is for leveling horizontal surfaces and the second for vertical ones. The first is found among ancient Egyptian tools, while the second goes back at least to the Middle Ages. These two are adapted from Diderot's Encyclopedia. Number 3 is a carpenter's square, 4 is a measuring stick and 5 is a tool that can be set to any degree of angle. The first two are found in ancient Egyptian and Roman illustrations. I do not know the age of the last, but it is now treated as a standard stonecutter's tool. Numbers 6-9 are calipers: 6 is taken from depictions on a Roman carving; 7 is a common medieval and Renaissance form (the Tomb of Andrea Bregno, Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Rome); 8 is modem (Italy and North America); and 9 is adapted from Dideror's Encyclopedia. The archipendolo (number 1), the square and the calipers are the standard implements of every carver from antiquity until the invention of the spirit level. The calipers and the square are still essential tools. These drawings are merely a taste of the possibilities in tools. To get some idea of their variety, one must explore stoneworking shops. Trying some carving tools and watching a professional at work are the best way to get a sense of their variety and use. The weight of the tool and the feel of it in the hand cannot be replaced by any drawings or description.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Notes 1 Sometimes there are dishnchons made between the tools used by carvers for sculpture and those used by masons for squanng blocks and carving architectural decoration This drshnchon IS so inconsistently applied that I have not used It The tools listed In Purchase, 1904 for example, do not differ from those used In sculpture The same appears to be true In the workshops of Salisbury and Wells Cathedral. as well as that of the Department of the Environment In London In other words, I did not see any hand tools that I do not have as a sculptor In general. the main difference IS that the stonecutter or mason has Wider tools and In some areas ISmore likely to use axes As there ISplenty of evidence for sculptors uSing both Wide tools and axes, I do not think that the dishnchon has more than local significance 2 Bessac, 1986 p 250 asserts that the dnll was not used for channeling This ISIncorrect for both marble and limestone, as examples can be found on the portals of San Nicola In Ban and the Baphslry of Parma, both of which are twelfth century 3 I have been told by a French stonecarver that this IS called a Portugais, suggestIng that the onginal IS of Portuguese design 4 The Illustration IS taken from photographs of modem tools taken In Narnur, Belgium An excellent illustrahon can also be found In The Tower of Babel by Pieter Bruegel the elder, Kunstlustonsches Museum, Vienna, Austria. see Wled, 1981 pp 85-9 5 A more thorough pictorial documentation of axes can be found In Bessac, 1986 and Noel. 1965 6 Purcell, 1967 pI 45a shows a Similar technique being used In the English Portland quarnes

Methods

Methods are frameworks that a stoneworker applies m order to orgaruze the work process There IS a method for roughmg out a statue or for cutbng a round table top There IS a method for quarrymg a column drum, laymg out the flubng and liftmg the drum into place There ISa method for polishmg a pIece of marble and a different one for polislung a pIece of granite of the same size and shape Methods help the stoneworker to arnve at the hrushed product Wlthm the boundanes defined by our "laws" of process in chapter 2, there IS a very great diversity the method of roughmg out a marble statue, for example, vanes accordmg to hme and place, but It also vanes accordmg to the individual. and m some cases an mdividual vanes hIS method from Job to Job even when the matenal does not change Basically we have the same problem we encountered with materials and tools m descnbmg stoneworkmg There are essential. comprehensible differences between types of stone such as grarute and marble and between types of marble such as Thasos and Carrara These differences are relahvely easy to descnbe There are, however, also subtler differences between one pIece of Thasos or Carrara marble or one piece of Indiana limestone and another which are unpredictable and difficult to descnbe The same IS true of tools the point chisel IS virtually universal. but ItS many small but percephble vanabons are not Wlthm each tradihon m stoneworkmg there are ways of working With the point chisel that shape the chisel Itself m subtle ways, and that are slightly different from the methods of other tradrhons Equally, there are recognizable differences between the methods of roughmg a statue and carvmg a moldmg There are also differences that are much more difficult to recognIze among the vanous methods for roughmg a statue or for carvmg a moldmg Our problem m analyzing technology ISthat It ISprecisely these mmor vanahons that are so Important They are the means by wluch we can see the diHerences between mdividuals and between pen ods The difference between the way a marble carver m Florence m the fIfteenth century AD and a granite carver m Egypt in the thirteenth century Be roughed a statue ISas attributable to the material carved and the material of the tools as It ISto bme and place The difference, however, between the way the same Florenhne carver and a second-century Roman carver roughed out a pIece of Carrara marble or the way Modigliaru carved a head m the twenbeth century and Ciselbertus carved one m the

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

twelfth can be at least partially attributed to histon cal and individual factors because the matenal and tools are sirrular Naturally, an understanding of methods and how they are used by stoneworkers IS Important, but It ISVirtually Impossible to give an exhaustive survey of all the methods used In stoneworkmg A senes of examples serves as a means of explammg the stoneworker's attitude toward and ways of working with methods Roughing out a statue Each sculptor has a method for roughing out a statue, depending on the stone involved. the tools available, and especially on the result desired Vasan, wnhng about technique, descnbes a method for roughmg out a marble carving" that perfectly hts the large unhrushed marble carvmg of Sf Matthew by Michelangelo which IS now In the GalIena dell' Accaderrua 10 Florence 2 Since the statue IS unfirushed, It ISquite easy to see the accuracy of Vasan's descnphon He says to ImagIne that the large figure IS lying sup me 10 a large tub of water It IS slowly lifted out of the water so that the first parts VISibleare the ones that project the most to the front As the work IS earned on, the details deeper 10 the block emerge Tlus IS an excellent descnphon of the technique of roughmg out this statue One can see that the projecting knee ISthe most clearly defined part, while the face, which IS deeper In relation to the front plane of the block, IS less clearly carved ThiS techruque Involves USIng POInt chisels and then a calcagnolo followed by hner tooth chisels to rough out and then clanfy the forms Vasan's descnphon and observation of the work Itself show that Michelangelo was working In from the front plane of the quarned block Tlus method would be Ideally SUIted for bas-reliefs Michelangelo's unhrushed fondos seem to be done In the same Iashion It ISalso a very feasible method If the sculptor ISworking from a drawing rather than a model In clay or wax A notable element of the techruque IS that the carver concentrates on details of the figure 10 roughing out rather than on the hgure as a whole As It stands now, the figure has not been outlined, even though some details have been earned forward to a fair degree The overall profile of the block ISstill VISibleas a sort of background to the fIgure The knee and a hand are earned out more fully than the head, and some parts of the body are not clear at all This means that parts are carved before the whole IS clear ThiS unhrushed statue, as IS true of all of Michelangelo's unhrushed pieces, IS aesthetically very attractive In part tlus IS true because of the roughmg out technique The parts of the body that are defined stand from the mass of the rough stone so that the figure seems to be comIng forth from chaos The clear parts are hrushed enough so that we can Imagme what the unfinished parts would look like This particular aesthetic tension would not exist If the carving were hrushed, as one can see from Michelangelo's hrushed statues of this penod The technique descnbed above IS an uncomfortable and difficult technique for roughing out a statue as well as being unusual for the penod, and unusual for Michelangelo himself 3 It ISuncomfortable and difficult precisely because It ISsomewhat Illogical To rough out details before the whole IS clear IS to nsk not having enough marble for the whole One perpetual danger In doing a full hgure IS that there may not be enough room at the base of the block for the feet That problem IS addressed In

METHODS

this method but at the expense of the possibility of sacnficmg part of the back of the hgure The method IS also unusual for ItS time There are several examples of unbrushed marble hgures near enough chronologically to enable us to make reasonable compansons When taken down for cleaning, two praymg hgures of the school of [acopo Sansovmo (facade of Santa Mana dell' Anima in Rome) were found to be unbrushed on the back half On these figures we see that the sculptor (or sculptors) roughed out the whole hgure with a point chisel before carrymg out any details The roughing out IS done WIthout any concern for the forms, but only for the overall pose of the hgure and position of the parts In fact, in contrast to the St Matthew, the roughed-out hgures have little or no aesthetic interest Practically speakmg, however, they are roughed out WIth a much easier method The figures have been taken to a level where the whole composihon IS clear They are ready for the next stage of carrymg out the details WIth a tooth chisel We have the sculptor to thank for the fact that half of each fIgure was not taken beyond the roughmgout stage, because he realized that the backs would not be seen ThIS IS a radically different SItuation from the St Matthew, where the state of hrush of a detail ISrelated to ItS distance from the front plane of the block, and IS thus the product of the sculptor's choice of method for roughmg out Another unhrushed hgure, attributed to Mmo da Piesole" IS roughed out WIth a method that differs from both of our prevIOUSexamples Most of the hgure ISroughed WIth a point chisel followed by a tooth clusel The pose and posihon of the arms and legs are clear The baSICposihonmg of the drapery ISaccomplished, and all these are more or less earned to the same stage The whole figure IS outlined so that the shape of the ongmal block ISno longer VISIble It shows the clearness of the pose and the rough lack of clanty of detail that charactenze the praymg hgures However, the head and left foot are virtually hmshed, in contrast to the lack of hrush of the rest of the hgure ThIS hmshmg has no obvIOUSrelahonslup to the front plane of the block, but does stand at opposite ends of the figure as dishnct from the rougher parts The sculptor rrught reasonably have roughed out in this Fashion. carving the head and foot much more fully sooner than the rest as a means of estabhshmg the proportions of the hgure and ItS position in the block Since proportions can be measured on the baSIS of head lengths, It becomes possible to establish the proportional SIze of any other part of the body once the head IShrushed WIth one foot firushed. the base of the hgure, and thus Its total height ISestablished, somethmg that MIchelangelo had not yet done on the St Matthew It could be that what we see here ISa method of roughmg out that deals m a very practical way WIth the problems of placing a fIgure mto a block of stone The parts that are carned ahead of the overall fIgure are done that way to solve the practical problem of placmg the composItion so that It wIll not extend outsIde the confInes of the block or leave the fIgure uncomfortably forced withm the block ChronologIcally later, but close enough to MIchelangelo to make It an mterestmg companson, ISthe unfInished Andrea Dona as Neptune by BaccIOBandmellI m the PIazza del Duomo of Carrara ThIS large carvmg of a male fIgure standmg on two dolphms has been roughed out WIth a pomt chIsel and a calcagnolo (a two-toothed chIsel WIth large pomted teeth) The next stage of cleanng the detaIls WIth a tooth chIsel had been partly executed when work was stopped PnnCIpally the carver was workmg from top to

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

bottom The head and torso are more hrushed than the legs and the base On the lower parts, there IS some greater detailing on the front than the rear, but the pnmary movement IS from top to bottom The fIgure IS completely outlined, but the space between the legs ISnot totally opened out The dolphin under the figure's nght foot has a flattened, smaller head than the other Obviously, In roughing out from top to bottom the sculptor did not allow enough room for the length of the figure when he placed the dolphins, so as the hgure developed he had to lower the dolphm, but had no more space to do so The result ISa dolphin WIth an uncomfortably squeezed head The block was also not large enough at the back The problem was easily solved m that case by addmg pIeces to the ongmal block WIth the dolphm's head, tlus does not seem to have been possible because roughmg out had been earned too far by the hme the problem was nohced What we see m the Baccro Bandmelh figure IS the problems that ensue If the carver's method of rouglung out does not protect him from the dangers of rmsplacmg the composition In the block WhIle the carvers precedmg Michelangelo had a method that avoids mistakes, Bandmelh, perhaps mfluenced by MIchelangelo's loose, less practical, but more artistically mterestmg method, fell mto the traps lus predecessors avoided Thus we see different carvers, in roughly the same tradihon, usmg different methods It IS mrereshng, and perhaps instruchve about the history of stoneworkmg techniques, that there IS no progressIOn in practical quality From that standpoint, Bandmelli IS a step backwards It IS then worth asking whether the same carver always uses the same method To what extent ISthe St Matthew charactensbc of Michelangelo's method of roughmg out? We are fortunate that he left us enough unbrushed work to allow us to answer tlus question, and the answer IS that the St Matthew IS not charactensbc The clearest examples of his technique are two of the pnsoners m the Galiena dell'Accaderrua the Giant called Atlas and the /uoakenmg Giant WIth both of these fIgures MIchelangelo used the same method He entered the block on the front and the two SIdeplanes, leavmg the back plane untouched On the first, the nght Side plane was cut Into for almost the whole height to show the upnght leg On the second, the front and left planes were cut into the most On both fIgures, the top and the bottom of the block were barely touched, meanmg that the heads and feet are either non-existent or barely roughed The area of the figure between the knees and shoulder has been carved quite clearly The three planes on which he entered shll have large areas untouched so that the ongmal shape of the quarned block ISplainly VISIble Not only are the poses clear, but the muscles and surface were carved WIth a tooth chisel By lookmg at more hrushed pnsoners, we can see that however hrushed these surfaces look, they probably do not represent the hnal fmished surface of the statue Neither the more completely executed pnsoners in the Accaderrua nor the hrushed ones m the Louvre have torsos nearly as thick as these To summanze the roughmg out of the Giant called Atlas and the Awake11lng Giant, MIchelangelo worked mto the stone from three planes of the block, carvmg an extended torso and leavmg the upper and lower exlrerruhes of the figure very rough or untouched He mamtamed enough of the outer planes so that the ongmal block ISstill before us The torso of each hgure was earned forward quite far beyond the roughing stage, carved WIth tooth chisels to a surface that could almost be considered fInIshed The result here ISthat

METHODS

different stages of the carving process - the quarry block roughing out, and cleanng forms With the tooth chisel - not the method, are present at the same time on the statues as they now stand There IS of course an aesthetic tension between the quarry block of marble and the torso anSIng Within It There ISalso a tension In the Incompleteness of the stages of the carving Not only IS the roughing out Incomplete, but some parts have been earned beyond to later stages of the carving while on other parts the roughing out has not yet begun While being aesthetically pleasing. the carVings are technically confusing Where does the carver go next? Whereas on the other examples It ISeasy to see a sequence that can be earned on beyond the stage at which the carVing has been left, on these, the very tension between untouched and completed gives a sense of immediate wholeness that makes It hard to sense the sequence of the methods and process It IS not hard to see that this method of roughing out differs from that of the Sf Matthew The blocks are entered from three planes rather than one, the stages beyond roughing out are earned on more consistently on one area of the figure, the torso, than on the projecting parts of the body which are closer to the onginal surface of the block and the contrast between hrushed, more completed, and not yet carved IS sharper Whereas the Sf Matthew shows a method that ISa modihcanon of a sequential technique, front to back rather than top to bottom, the pnsoners show a method that ISseemingly an attempt to contradict the sequential nature of method and process Although at first Sight It might seem that MIChelangelo's technique does not follow the law of Simple sequence, In fact there IS a sequence In the working of these carVings It IS a revelatory sequence rather than a practical one On most carVings, roughing out IS a method In a highly practical process directed toward getting a fmished statue It IS an artisan's approach, meant to accomplish a particular part of a definable Job The hnal product defmes and controls all Michelangelo's sequence IS revelatory, each stage discloses more of the hgure In the block First he does the torso, then he moves up and down In the block, then around the block, and then he proceeds beyond the stage of roughing to peel successive" skins" off the revealed figure until he has reached the fmal surface 5 The sequence exists, but With a different intention than for the other carvers under considerahon In one aspect at least, Michelangelo was both following a sequence and USing a traditional method This aspect ISthat of hrushmg one area before another The Mmo da Fiesole shows a more hmshed head and foot, the Bandmelh ISmore hmshed at the top than the bottom This method can be found as early as the fourteenth century In reliefs on the facade of Orvieto Cathedral" and a relief that ISIn the National Museum In Pisa 7 As we shall see, tlus technique was not usual at other places and other times Michelangelo was thus adapting an established technical process to his own purposes It ISinteresting that Michelangelo, who rather pnded himself on being self-taught, should have been adapting what was for lus time a traditional technique The Importance of this technique ISIn the Idea that you establish bndges Within the carving between steps In the sequence The more hmshed area, the head on the MInO da Fiesole or Bandmelh, becomes a reference POint for the proportions of the whole hgure Thus the sculptor has something to refer to In mOVing on In the carving Michelangelo enlarges on this technique, making It a source of Visual excitement In the unbrushed

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

works He IS not, however, inventing something new or completely obscuring ItS technical purpose 8 In the Boston Museum there ISa group of unhrushed seated statues of Mycemus (third millennium BC), arranged from left to nght according to the state of hrush They are all carved In a hard-stone technique, whereby the stone ISremoved by vertical pounding so that It IS shattered Into small bits as the carver moves over the surface The surface IS pitted, and the Pitting becomes hner and hner as the carving nears completion The carving of details IS gradual and sequential Each sculpture IS at a more fnushed state than ItSpredecessor and therefore the details are slightly clearer There ISno attempt to rehne one area more than another at any stage The basic pose ISclear In the first. seen as If It had been cut from the front and prohles With a Jigsaw It ISclear that the sculptor was working from a squared block, and that he traced outlines of the seated figure on his block before starting to carve 9 We know from drawings that these figures could be worked out on a gnd In drawing form and then transferred to the planes of the block of stone 10 As we also know, there was a canon of proportions that could be applied so that all figures of the same type could be carved With the same proportions 11 There are no signs on any of these hgures of a gnd applied to them On the other hand, the pose ISVISiblyclose to idenhcal It would be very doubtful that these statues were all carved by the same sculptor We do not have any direct proof on the pieces that they were carved USing a duplicating system There ISenough evidence of Egyptian technique to assume, however, that some form of laying out the composihon on the block was used The most stnking element of the methodology of these carvings ISthe sense that each one ISfmished to the same degree over the entire surface It would seem that the carver considered the work to be a process m which the hgure had to pass through a sequence of stages, each one complete In Itself, In order to arnve at the hrushed product For the lower legs, hrst the basic squared shape of the two legs together, then rehnernents of the shape and then the dIVIsIOnInto two legs and the rehnements of each All tlus was bemg earned out at exactly the same level on all the other areas In the Cairo Museum there ISan unhrushed statue of Iknaron With a daughter on his lap from the second rrullenruum BC (drawing 14) This ISa more complicated statue than the Mycemus figures because there are two figures, one set at ninety degrees to the other It ISnot possible to arnve at the pose With the simphcity that works With the execuhon of a Single seated figure The sculptor In this case treated the composition as two separate hgures, each a seated figure With arms at the Side, but With the larger fIgure's profile being on the Side planes of the block wlule the smaller one's profile would have been drawn on the front In order to do tlus, the sculptor must first have drvided the sculpture, at about the stage of the first of the Mycemus figures, mto two blocks one smaller and set at a right angle to the other Then each block was In effect treated as a separate pIece of sculpture to be carved according to ItS own design In this way the problem of a mulh-hgure composition in three dimensions ISsolved by breaking the composihon down Into Units which can then be carved as smgle figures If we look at the elements of each figure, we can see that tlus carving has arnved at a dehmre stage Each head IS a clear overall form With no interior detail The forms are

METHODS

Drawing 14

finished very clearly, more so even than the Mycernus figures. They are also curved forms, using a much more complex geometry than the earlier figures. One feels that this is the finished stage of roughing out the statue. It is carried out so consistently that it is possible to imagine that one carver took the work to this stage, and another could continue it in the carving of the details of each unit. This does not feel true of the earlier statues. It is also important to note the complexity of the forms used. They are curved and cylindrical solids which are quite different from the squared ones used by the thirdmillennium carvers. This sculptor had quite a sophisticated sense of the geometric solids that are the foundations for elements of his figures. An ability to analyze the figure geometrically is shown here that is not seen on the simple progression of details of the earlier carvings. There are then two ways in which this second-millennium carving differs in technique. The statue gives a clearer sense of having arrived at a specific stage that is finished in itself, and the figures at this point are the product of a geometric analysis of the forms of the figures, rather than simply a stage in the adding of details. It is similar to the earlier ones in the relationship of the final pose to squared blocks, in the sense that it is the product of a canon of proportions conceived on a grid, and that the process is conceived in distinct stages which must be completely carried out before the next is begun. In the Louvre, there is a roughed-out statue of a standing figure of Osiris from the first millennium Be (drawing 15). On this figure, we can see the lines used as a center line and

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

for the gnd to place details of the head and other parts of the body The carving IS pnncipally carried out In planes, although some curved surfaces are used to relate one plane to another, as In the shoulder, stomach and thigh Even where the curves are used, however, they serve as a transition from one plane to another Tlus figure ISquite different from either of the two prevIOus groups In contrast to the Mycernus figures, although the stage of carving ISearly and the forms are still conceived as planes, the elements of the fIgure have been clearly divided and are seen as separate details This IS true even of the hands In contrast to the second-rmllenruum group, the geometnc analysis of the hgure ISnot earned out In terms of round fonns This carver has not only laid out the hgure on the outer plane of the block, but has also retraced the lines of the gnd over already carved planes of the statue One has the ImpreSSIOnthat nothing IS done by eye, the gnd must always be renewed to place each detail This would have required considerable extra time on the carver's part Note also that the execution of the fonns as planes facilitates the continued replacement of the gnd So long as there are large areas of plane parallel to the front plane of the block, It ISeasy to replace the grid. when the fonns are rounded this becomes more difficult Although this latter carving IS very close In ItS state of completion to the secondrrullenruum group, the forms of the vanous parts of the body are separated and It has been executed With a considerably different sense of geometnc analysis The earlier statue may have been planned out USing a grid, as m the Bnhsh Museum drawing, but there are no signs that the gnd had to be renewed In order to place the details withm the fonn On the Osms, the geometnc breakdown of the figure ISconceived at least partly to allow space for the renewed gnd Three-dunensionally, the curved fonns of the Osms are conceived as the product of a senes of planes The thighs, the upper hand and wrist and the stomach, all of which will become curves, are now a succession of planes It IS executed the way modern carvers Without a lathe would carve a column drum, reducmg a rectangle by the successive carvmg of small planes to a cylinder This IS a very careful and methodical means of dividing up the process of carvmg a statue 12 Like the Renaissance statues, the vanous Egyptian works considered present a cornbmahon of sirrulanhes and differences In methodology They all show a careful, stepby-step process In which no one element of the design IScarned to a more nrushed state than another at any stage They all show a techruque based on workmg from a squared block on which the design can be drawn or incised Tlus technique can be called prohlmg Simply stated, prohlmg Involves drawmg an outlme of the statue on a plane of a squared block, and then cutting out around tlus outline at a nmery-degree angle to the plane that has been drawn on As the clearest outlme ISusually the profile, one Side of the block IS usually the plane on which tlus outline IS drawn The outline of the front can then be drawn on the front plane of the block and cut out accordingly Profiling implies that the statue In the round ISdeveloped from a drawing. not a three-dimensional model 13 A baSICsirrulanty of all the Egyptian pieces ISthe Interest In developing the sculpture as a progressively more complex sequence of geometrical forms In this sense their technique IS very different from the Renaissance The latter technique IS based on the human hgure and ItS proportions The head IS frequently carved hrst because this Will give a baSISfor the proportions of the whole Instead, the Egyptians reduce each pose to

METHODS

Drawing

the geometry of a grid in order to arrive at the relative proportions. From this they carry on considering the body as basically a sequence of solids which are carved before the details which make these solids represent a human form are executed. While this conception of the method of carving may be partly based on religious motives, it is still an extremely useful method of establishing a reliable and durable technique. Clearly this technique could be taught, because it was handed down over generations. While there is a basic similarity of Egyptian technique over a long period, it is also true that within the confines of this similarity there is a variation that allows for considerable change. The sculptures discussed above show significant difference in the geometric solids that were used as a basis for the ultimate forms. This difference is at least in part a technical one which is reflected in the finished statues of the same periods. Where methods are similar, there is a similarity in product even though there may be no other connection. A very interesting comparison can be made in this sense between an unfinished marble colossus from the sixth century Be, still in the quarry on the island of Naxos (drawing 16), and the unfinished colossal heads found in quarries on Easter Island. Here, the same methods were applied in two instances. First, the roughing out was done in the quarry with the statue unmoved from the natural bed of the stone, so the stone became a statue before it ceased to be part of the hillside. In other words, the quarrying and the roughing-out of the statue were one and the same operation. The second similarity in method was the use of profiling as a means of getting the basic shape of the statue. With this method, the profile of course extends from one side to the other, or from front to back, so that opposite planes have the same profile.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Drawing 16

Drawing 17

Drawing 18

Drawing 17 gives a schematic view of profiling. Statues roughed out this way have simple outlines. In fact, the clarity of the outline is a stylistic characteristic of the sculpture of periods that use profiling as a roughing-out method. Statues worked with this method are almost invariably symmetrical in front view as welJ.l4 Where a large statue is roughed out in the quarry bed and profiled, as is the case with both examples, other characteristics are usually found, represented schematically in drawing 18. A channel is carved around the prospective block the profile is marked on one of the vertical planes, and then it is carved. The block is broken free from the quarry bed only after the profiling is finished. As one can see from the drawing and the examples, the result is that the back of the statue is usually a flat plane or close to it. Since statues of this size were usually moved on rollers while lying on their backs, the simplicity of the back plane was a great convenience. The Naxos figure and the Easter Island head show certain basic similarities which are caused by the use of the same roughing-out method (drawing 18). Both statues have simple profiles with most of the detail on the front half. Both are symmetrical from the front view. There can be great variations in fine details and level of finish, because these

METHODS

are not affected by the roughing-out method There may be a greater or lesser soplushcahon In the details of the pose Very finely carved and hrushed statues have been executed With this method There are, however, certain basic sirrulanhes The technique of prohlmg a large statue while the stone ISstill In the quarry bed will lead to a simple, clear overall profile With one relatively flat plane Two generalrzahons can be made about method at this POint The first ISthat methods are a combmahon of technological soplushcahon and production needs Obviously the more sophishcated a society, the more soplushcated ItS technology, but equally Important ISthe demand for stone The society of Easter Island developed a method for producing monumental sculpture that fitted ItS limited technological abihhes The particular quarrying method reduced the weight for transport to the rrurumum possible This shows eminent good sense because transport was their greatest problem Shll, even this method would not have been necessary If there had not been the demand for monumental sculpture In the first place The method was worked out as a sort of compromise between technology and demand Methods are Influenced by society at large and not simply by the stone and ItS workers The second generalizatIon IS that the more sophrshcated the society, the more each method IS likely to have one specific function, while a telescoping of two or more purposes Into one method IS generally the sign of a more pnrruhve technology The examples of quarrying combined With roughing out come from more pnrruhve conditions or indicate a technical backwater that shll mamtains an earlier approach In the Renaissance, In contrast, the two are dishnct The ulhmate purpose of a block IS not defmed until after It ISquarned, so that roughing out ISa later stage after the ulhmate use of the block has been decided However much we may Wish to view Michelangelo's blocks as potential and inevitable statues, the still-visible shape of the blocks shows they could have also been put to another, more uhhtanan, use With all these generalizahons It IS well to remember that methods always have an individual factor In them With the limited number of extant examples, It ISoften difficult to recogmze the elements of individuality In a technique used In the past Also, this factor tends to be suppressed In the search for broad connections The unhrushed Renaissance carvings demonstrate that where individuality IS valued It becomes very obVIOUSStill, It exists In other societies as well A partIcular example of tlus ISthe sculpture of ancient Rome In a monument to Marcus Aurelius (reliefs now In the Capitoline Museum), there are two trees In the same relief done WIth two different methods for carVing the details One carver used the dnll In a particular way and produced a fmished surface that differs from the other 15 We must always be careful not to discount the level of mdividuahty of methods that could exist even In very large workshops With a seemingly standardized production Roughing out architectural blocks Architectural stoneworkmg ISthe area where standardizahon of method ISthe most prevalent (By architectural stoneworkmg I mean everything from squanng the blocks to carVing moldings or mlncate floral decoration I am not including hgurahve sculpture, even when It ISexecuted as part of a buildmg ) More stone has been worked for architecture than for anything else Standardizahon IS obvIOUSbecause on a large

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

building many carvers produce work designed to be viewed as a Unit A molding or a capital on one side must be the same or nearly the same as on the other sides Forms of standardization have therefore tended to develop WIth each architectural style Modem methods are highly standardized because they are machine based Most stone used In modem building ISused as external or Internal facing or floonng The saw ISthe supreme modem tool The differences In methods are related more to the necessihes or decorative charactenshcs of different materials than to anything else Marble looks best polished, granite often looks best WIth a slightly rough surface, so there are different methods for working them In both cases, machme-hrushed surfaces are created on thin slabs cut to a standard Width These modem methods became dominant In architecture only after the Second World War Before that, the Important buildmg Without any decorative carVing, With a perfectly clean line unbroken by capitals or moldings or some form of carved decoration was the exception rather than the rule, and Virtually non-existent before the FIrst World War The mcredible wealth of decorated stone buildmgs In many different cultures demonstrates the existence of many traditions of stone carving that required some level of standardization From ancient times, western Europe and North Amenca have a continuous tradition of carved decoration Major buildmgs all over western Europe from every century attest to the conhnuity of this tradition, which has not yet been completely broken by modem technology It IS Important to dwell on this conhnuity of technical tradition because the stylistic study of art and architectural history tends to erect barners that do not necessanly exist In technology Traditional carVing methods are only modified, not completely overthrown, WIth stylistic change In the lifehme of one carver there may be a great change Visually, but his methods may remain Similar An interesting example of tlus ISthe decoration on the tombs of two Bishops by Tilman Rremanschneider In Wurzburg Cathedral 16 The decoration of the fIrst tomb IS a flond Gothic, that of the second IS Renaissance, yet they are both by the same sculptor Even allowing for a change In personnel In his workshop, It IShard to see that the methods would change completely to meet the stylishc change The method of quarry roughing was used a great deal In anhquity There are more examples of ItS use for carving architectural blocks than for statues The largest Single example ISthe unbrushed obelisk In the quarnes at Aswan In Egypt The obelisk shape, including the pyramid at the top, was carved quite close to the hnal surface on the front The two Side planes were executed by channeling along each SIde The block was never released from ItS bed, which probably would have been done by wedging The column drums for Temple E at Selmunte were being quarned at Rocche dr Cusa when quarrying was halted. presumably by the Carthagmian sack of Selmunte In 405 Be Here the column drum was being quarned upright, the flat plane of the quarry bed being the bottom of the drum A vertical cylinder was obtained by cutting a CIrcular channel around the block after the top was leveled Wedges would have been placed on the bottom plane and the cylinder broken free from the quarry bed In the pepenno quarnes at Manno In the hills outside of Rome, blocks are sbl] quarned by cutting a flat honzontal plane for the top and a vertical plane at ninety degrees to the horizontal one for the front of the block Then channels are cut for the Sides and back,

METHODS

Drawing 19

Drawing 20

wedges are placed along the line of the bottom, and the block broken free from the bed. In all three cases, the same basic method of quarrying and shaping is used to obtain the desired block as on the Naxos and Easter Island examples. Drawings 19 and 20 show the blocks of Marino and Selinunte, still in the quarry beds. The Marino quarry, although using a laborious, older method, still produces what is required: a squared block the correct size for being cut with a gang saw. As we will see in chapter 11, this method is not typical of quarrying at all periods. Its advantage is that it reduces both the work required on the block after it is quarried and the weight of block to be moved. Its disadvantage is that the quarrying is too closely related to the dimensions of the final product, so that a quarry can only function on specific orders. The more complex the society and its building program, the more likely a quarrying method will respond to the need to have a large stock and variety of quarried blocks ready for future projects. In that case this method is generally inadequate. The technical continuum underlying style is seen in the great similarity in architectural carving methods among different national carving traditions. Take the method of squaring a block, for example. A granite carver in Philadelphia taught me the method, which is virtually identical to the technique found in English manuals of 1904 and 1929, a German manual published in Munich in 1985 and a French book of 1965, as well as still being used by carvers in Rome.!" The drawing reproduced here is from the 1929 English manual. Although in this case the work is begun on a stone that is roughly squared, the method is based on the assumption that there is no flat plane or pair of parallel surfaces, so it will also work for a completely shapeless piece of stone. With a rough stone, the cutter first marks a straight line with a straight edge (drawing 21). He then cuts an approximately 2 em-deep marginal draft or thin ledge into the stone. (The only place where these English illustrations differ from my training and what I have observed in Italy is the use of the two small squares, lettered A and B in the first illustration, cut before the marginal draft.) After the first straight ledge, a second is established using two straight edges held parallel but on opposite sides of the stone. After this line is marked, it is carved and tested, using the straight edges as shown. Next

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Drawing 21

a straight edge is used to mark lines connecting the two parallel ones cut into the stone. It also can be held on the cut surface to check that it is flat and even. The four connecting lines cut into the stone now form the outline of a flat surface. The area encompassed by these cut ledges in the stone is now carved flat with successive passages of the point, tooth and flat chisel. As with the carving of the ledges, the work is periodically checked with a straight edge. The final result is a flat surface. As can be seen in drawing 22, it is not important to form a square from above as in drawing 2 I, because at this stage the only purpose is to cut a flat surface. The ability to carve a flat surface accurately has been the basis of architectural carving in Near-Eastern and Western-European culture since ancient times. The above method is very accurate when applied with reasonable care and works on any size or shape of block. There are many small variations according to time and place or block size, but this basic method has been followed with amazing consistency at least since medieval times. The method for following from this flat surface to a squared block is equally simple: it is done

METHODS

"----= -

\ rL Drawing

~\~'))

\ !L -,

\ !L

Drawing

with a square. Given one flat surface, another flat surface at a ninety-degree angle can be found by holding one arm of the square to the flat surface and marking a line on the stone along the edge of the other arm. This line can then be carved as an inset edge or ledge in the stone. The same is then done to make a parallel ledge on the opposite side of the surface to be flattened. These two are then connected by parallel lines, ledges cut, and the surface carved flat. Except for the use of the square to establish cuts at a ninety-degree angle to the original flat surface, this is basically the same process as before. This process can then be carried on around the block. One surface is used as the basis for the next until six have been cut to form a squared block. The dimensions of the block are conditioned only by the shape of the original piece. Drawing 23 gives a rough illustration of the method. Since the basis of stone architecture is squared blocks, the method of cutting a flat surface, by extension, makes a masonry building possible. A flat surface is also the basis for more complicated forms. One method of carving a column is shown in drawing 24. First, parallel flat surfaces are carved on each end, the distance between them being the length of the column. Then a ninety-degree angle comer is cut down the length of the stone between the two ends. The terminal diameter of the shaft is laid out on each end. The shaft is then cut first as a square, then with eight sides, then with sixteen. In this illustration, entasis is carved by following a wooden template held to the vertical surfaces instead of the usual straight edge. Even with the template, each surface of the square, octagon or decahexagon is cut with basically the same method as a flat surface. The final round of the column is cut by eye, erasing the angles between the flat surfaces.l"

THE

AR T OF

STONEWORKING

x A

Drawing 24

This process of carving a column is then one of carving narrower and narrower flat surfaces until the difference between the polygon form and a circle is so minimal it can be cut by eye. If fluting is required, the final rounding is not carried out because the flutes are carved into the ultimate flat surfaces (photograph 11). Thus the method of cutting a flat surface can be extended to become the basis for carving round forms as well. Even more complex forms are also carved with the flat surface as a base. A round molding such as that in drawing 25 is cut by a series of flat surfaces in a way similar to the column. First, tangent line "a" is cut. Next the insets "b " and "c" are carved then the tangents" d " and" e." The final round is then cut by eye. With a more complex molding, one follows the same principle of carving flat surfaces for as long as possible. Drawing 26 gives a hypothetical example seen in profile. First line "a-a" is carved (although it is seen as a line in the drawing it will be carved as a plane on the surface of the block). Then the two planes making a step of "b-e." "c-d." "d-e," and line" e-I" are carved, followed by the tangential planes represented by" s" "h." and "i." and the steps of" j-k." "k-l " and" I-f." The planes of "rn " and" n " are cut and then the whole is finished by rounding the edges on the three curved sections of the moldings.!" On a molding or a column, the surfaces will be carved in a somewhat simpler fashion than on an unformed block. When working from a squared block with flat planes, the carver will often mark a line and simply carve to that line rather than go through the process of carving insets all the way around the form. Obviously if a worker continuously carves flat surfaces, more of the work is done by eye as the eye becomes trained. All these examples show how a complex pattern can be reduced to a sequence of simple operations. The carving of a flat surface demonstrates the way in which one method can become central to a whole group of operations. In the same way, the method of roughing out a statue applies to many different kinds of statues. The centrality of one method is,

METHODS

Drawing 25

Drawing 26

however, more important in architectural carving because it is a way of ensuring uniformity of production. If all architectural production can be based on all the carvers' working principally with one method, it is much easier to ensure uniform quality and forms. The techniques for carving flat surfaces, columns and moldings can be found in illustrations, unfinished works or actually observed in practice in different areas and on different stones. They cross the lines of traditional practice, because workers in marble, granite and soft stone all use them.i" Ancient Roman architectural carving was based on a different method. The architectural carving on Roman buildings was finished after the stones were put in place. This in fact seems to be true of Hellenistic buildings as well. There are many unfinished buildings from these periods where one sees parts of decorative moldings, columns and flat surfaces that are still only cut with the point chisel. The Colosseum, the temple of Apollo at Didyma and the temple of Vespasian in Rome all contain examples (photograph 12). In several cases there are thin strips carved on the unfinished moldings or flat surfaces as a guide to the finished surfaces. On the cella wall of the temple of

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Apollo at Didyma, a carver has cut stnps at intervals to show where the hrushed surface ISand what the exact shape of the moldmg will be Another particularly good example IS a column lymg m the Colosseum Roughly equidistant parallel stnps are cut horizontally around the shaft with a flat chisel mto a rougher-surface These horizontal strips represent the hrushed cylmdncal shape of the shaft 21 In tlus method for directing the work of the architectural carvers, the hnal surface they are carvmg to ISmscnbed directly on the stone in front of them The architectural carvers of the ancient world were not trained primarily to carve flat surfaces, but rather to copy, apparently by eye, any shape put before them The guarantee of their quality was in their trammg as copyists, whereas the Renaissance and modem carvers' guarantee of quality ISbased on their ability to follow a sequence usmg virtually the same method over and over In either case the hnal production, however complex, IS derived from a Simple method, and the direction of a large group of carvers can exploit this feature The methods of stoneworkers are fascmatmg to me One can read the personality of an individual m the small variations of methods that each carver practices These come through as clearly as quirks of spelling. syntax and grammar can show personality m a letter Yet methods and their combmahons m processes are very characteristic of periods and places as well For example, there IS an overall consistency m the way Venetian Renaissance carvers work pielra d'Istna, which ISbased on certain tool methods and easily recognizable Then beneath all of tlus are the baSICmethods underlymg whole epochs which are the foundations of the technology I doubt If there have been many carvers smce the twelfth century who did not hrst learn how to carve a flat surface on a rough block, certamiy all architectural carvers did On the other hand I doubt very much If that IS what the ancient carver learned first Methods must be seen m three categories the particular, applymg to mdividuals. the general, applymg to a particular period and place, and the near universal, underlymg an epoch Tlus tripartite division must always be applied With allowances for the constraints of material and tools Any comparison of second-century stoneworkmg to the thirteenth century ISvalid only m as much as the materials are Similar Or to put It another way, the comparison of methods used on different stones IS dependent for ItS validity on the universality of the method The method of roughmg carvmgs m the quarry before breakmg them free from the quarry bed applies to many different kmds of stone Michelangelo's method of roughmg out statues applies only to Carrara marble Methods are patterns that are used by a stoneworker m applying a tool or group of tools to a particular stone to achieve a particular effect In the mass of work the effect IS more likely to be that demanded by society's values, rather than mdrvidual demands Modem society calls for a type of production which must meet certain standards of speed that can only be achieved by mechanization and a correspondmg loss of mdividuahty Modem methods of workmanship have accommodated these demands, otherwise there would be no more stone on buildings A method ISthen a sort of pattern of behavior As such, stoneworkmg does not exist Without methods You cannot take up a tool and work on a piece of stone Without by implicahon establislung a method I suppose one could Imagme never usmg the same tool twice in the same way, but tlus IS realishcally impossible A method IS then a habitual pattern of behavior, and It ISaimed at a practical end result, which ISusually measurable

METHODS

m a way that reflects back on the worker You can see the difference between good and bad stonework Thus methods have a repetitive unconscious element, as m the way one holds the tool. but also a conscious element in that the product can be measured and Judged It IS Important to recognize this combmahon of the habitually unconscious with the conscious action mvolved m method Comprehension of the mdividuality of a given piece of work may depend on recognlzmg the extent to which a method ISconscious or unconscious It IS useful to thmk of methods as habits because this IS the basic attitude of the stoneworker A carver does not think about how a tool Willbe held when he picks It up, or about how It Will be used, unless the work ISunusual One may decide which method to apply, and then the rest ISbuilt into the system, so to speak As we go on to consider processes and particular examples m more detail, the place of method as one of the three foundations of stoneworkmg technology, along With material and tools, Will become easier to understand Undoubtedly, analyzing methods m anyone piece of stonework is much more difficult than recognlzmg the tools and the effect of the material Yet It IS by no means less Important With time one begms to develop an eye for differences m method, so that the lme between unconscious and conscious, and the parhculanty or universality of a method become clearer One wants to understand something of the how and why of tlus pattern of action Notes :1 Vasan, :1960 p :15:1 2 Coldscheider, :1954 pi 36 3 It ISnot unusual to rough out from front to back, thrs ISdone for example on the Angels carved by Bernini and others on the Ponte Sant'Angelo In Rome, see Rockwell, :1988a What IS unusual IS to give so much detail to some areas before roughmg others 4 Bluemel, :1969 III 67 The analysis of this piece IS for obVIOUSreasons based solely on the photograph 5 The notion of carving a statue as taking off progressIVe skins comes from Celhru. :1976 p :136 A rather different way of descnbmg It was used by Eric Gill "Carving It (Mankmd), Gill said, had been like undressing a girl, each layer of stone a garment hrst one got nd of the rough woollies, then the delicate silk" John Carey, "Incest, Inspirauon and Innocence," In Books, The Sunday Tunes, 22 January :1989 Given Gill's proclivihes, one wonders whether the process of the revelation of the figure was not more Important to him than the final product 6 See Martelloth and Rockwell, :1988 7 See Bluemel, :1969 p 84 8 In vanous places In this chapter as well as chapters 8 and 9, I refer to systems of proportions as they apply to sloneworkmg As an arhst I am well aware that they serve a Vital aesthetic purpose A canon of proportions as used by the Egyptians, Greeks, frequently by the Romans and In the Renaissance was also a canon of beauty It was an essential element of the aesthetic of art work In pen ods that were attempting to create an Image of perfection ThIS aspect of proportions has been discussed frequently What does not seem to have been considered ISthe great Importance and convenience of such canons In the laying out of hgurahve art This IS especially true of carved sculpture because of ItS" you can't change your mind" charactenshcs I am to some extent following the lead of Wlttkower, :1977 In not dealing With the aesthetic aspect of proportions when wnhng of technique ThIS ISpartly an Intellectual convenience, but there are other reasons FlISt, the technical aspect of proportions has been so neglected that It

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

seems to me jusnhable to attempt to redress the balance The Immense difficulty of carvmg a statue from a large block Without them must be appreciated Second, there ISan element of the chicken and the egg problem m the relative Importance of the aesthetic and the technical Did the pnests and pharaoh declare ex mhzlo what constituted the perfectly proportioned hgure before the artists demonstrated that It was possible to depict such a tlung? Or did the artists develop a systematic way of depictmg the human figure whrch provided for the statmg of a fixed canon 7 I am mclmed toward the latter View, but I doubt that there ISany way to prove either one In any case, It IS a subject that may be disagreed about Third, It IS mcreasmgly obvious that when we speak of the concept of beauty we are limited by our own dehruhons We do not really know very much about what other pen ods Judged was beautiful m their works of art In the past It has been assumed that our analysis of their works results in knowmg what they thought beautiful This Idea IS now subject to considerable queshorung Recent work on both Renaissance and Roman art, Baxandall, 1972 and Marvin, 1989, has attempted to discover what conternporanes thought was beautiful m the art of those pen ods This ISnot an easy thmg to discover, and what ISdiscovered would seem to cast doubt on our tendency to project .)11rown views on the past I think therefore we should be very careful when we use the word beauty about a canon of proportions, or thmk that It was used as we use It today 9 Another clear, early stage example of this same techruque IS the Statuette of a Youth in the Bnhsh Museum Illustrated m Bluemel, 1969 III 11 Tlus IS an especially valid companson because the work IS small like the Mycernus fIgures 1('1 Peck and Ross, 1978 pp 26-9 1 Robins. 1986 chs 3 and 4 12 It ISmtereshng to note that the examples of unhmshed Greek carvmgs that are executed In a way closest to the Osms are the unbrushed met opes from the Heraion at the mouth of the nver Sele (now In the Paestum Museum) 13 This IS not mvanably true Some modern sculptors Will use a sort of profiling to work from a model to the hnal product All evidence I have seen of pre-modern work does however show prohlmg In conjunction With a design prepared With drawmgs alone 14 Archaic Greek Koroi are good examples 15 La Rocca, 1986 pl 1 16 See Bier, 1982 pis 22A and 43A for Illustrations of these tombs 17 Purchase, 1904, Warland, 1953, Der Sieinmetz; 1982 and Noel, 1965 18 WhIle this Illustration comes from Warland thus representing English practice m the first quarter of this century there IS an example of a very similar techmque to be found on an unfinished second-century AD column of the Agora Gate of the City of Aphrodisias in Turkey 19 For another Illustration of this techmque see Purchase, 1904 pi IX,hgs 4 and 5 20 My sources for tlus are for granite there are several examples of unbrushed work at the New L

York State Capitol In Albany New York, for soft stones Purchase, 1904, Warland, 1954 and Noel, 1965 as well as my own observations of English workshops and diSCUSSIOns With French stonecarvers, for marble my own tranung and observations 21 For a more complete descnphon of tlus process see Rockwell, 1987-8

Architectural process!

A process IS a group of methods organized to create a hrushed product A method ISa pattern for a particular achon, a process IS a pattern of methods as a whole Both architectural and sculptural processes can be divided Into three groups the work (which Willbe discussed In this and the next chapter), the design and the overall project The first IS the sequence of carrying out a specific piece of work such as a table top, floor hle, capital or statue The second IS the process by which design and stoneworkmg are put together to make an object or group of objects The third IS the sequence of an enhre project In the last case, a statue could be a whole project If It IS conceived as an Independent object. but one Includes quarrymg and transport as part of the process Projects also Include the whole process of a large stone building from design to completed product The hrsr and second categones of process are part of the overall project They are being considered separately for the sake of converuence, and also because workshop orgaruzahon ISusually such that only the architect or works foreman or project manager takes Into considerahon the problems of the whole project The normal workman knows the processes necessary to the part of the work that he does and perhaps those that Immediately precede and follow them A sculptor does not normally know much about quarrying, for example, but will have a thorough knowledge of sculptural processes and some understanding of shipping of rough stone and the shipping and placement of hrushed sculpture 2 The most convenient way to think of process IS as a way of orgaruzing methods A piece of rough stone must become a hrushed product It therefore passes through a senes of changes earned out by one or more workmen USinga succession of methods Normally the work process WillInvolve three or four stages In modem sculptural practice. the first stage, roughing out, ISdone With a POint chisel Then at stage two the forms are defined, usually With a tooth chisel Next the surface IS smoothed With a flat chisel or roundel Finally the surface IShrushed, which m a marble statue frequently means polislung With abrasives This descnphon seems very neat and clear, but It IS so general as to be mapplicable to most cases Sometimes, even In marble carVing, the tooth chisel IS not used at all Carvers of soft limestone frequently use no tooth chisel, and granite carvers never do In some cases, the hrush IS to be done With a tooth chisel, In others the hrush IS achieved With a flat chisel or an intermediary abrasive From a broad histoncal perspective there IS an almost mhrute variety of stages

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Flat work In contrast. generally Involves only three stages To make a marble table top. (1) the slab IS cut from a block with a gang saw, (2) the slab IS cut to Its final dimensions on a table saw (IfIt ISa round or oval table. a CIrclecutter ISused), (3) the table ISpolished on the top and sides The same process ISfollowed for polished floor tiles or facing slabs When these three stages are applied to something as complicated as a carved molding or capital or statue, It becomes more difficult to generalize Basically we may think In terms of blocking out the baSICshape as stage one In complicated pieces this may Involve working over the stone several times, carVing several skins off the block This stage IS usually executed with the point clusel or the saw The second stage ISthe cutting to the final dimensions It almost always Involves several passages across the stone, often with dIfferent tools A carver might use several different types of tooth chisels, or a bush hammer or a large roughmg flat chisel at this point The third stage ISthe makmg of the fmal surface It may involve delicate carving or polishing or bush hammering or even pamtmg the stone In the third stage one considers the stone pnmanly as a surface, which mayor may not be polished, or have lmes across It, or have color It ISuseful to try to apply these general stages when considering any pIece of worked stone As always. they are meant to help us understand the processes and as such are merely an intellectual framework Therefore one must not apply them too ngidly In order to convey a feeling for working process, I Willdescnbe the work sequence of several stone pieces, representing a vanety of types of work and a Wide range of history Almost all the examples gIven are of unhrushed pieces where the process IS obvIOUS because work was stopped rmd-way Luckily such pieces exist from virtually every known penod of stoneworkmg, even though they are often hidden in the back halls or storerooms of museums (In order to cover as WIde a range as possible, I Will use some examples that I know only from photographs Analysis of carving techniques from photographs IS always a questionable procedure and the results must be taken With several pinches of salt WIth the exception of the heads from Easter Island, I have only used examples from photographs when I can confirm my hndmgs on Similar hrushed pieces ) The work processes Involved In quarrying and transport WIllbe descnbed separately because they are sufficiently dishnct to reqUIre special treatment For our present purposes It IS sufficient to know that all stone has been quarned In some way and the method of quarrying creates [mutations m the SIzeand shape of the block that reaches the worker Most of the processes descnbed are a form of carving Although modem stoneworkmg IS pnncipally sawing, In history the large majority of the work has been carving Having said the above, I Willbegin With the modem process of cutting and polishing travertine facmg slabs Travertine ISa hard, pohshable limestone which ISVISIblyporous The baSICworking techruque ISsimilar to marble In a large modem workshop, the blocks arnve already sawed roughly square WIth travertine they are generally sawed to a dimension that will fit under the gang saw Marble blocks are often less regular In size so that often several smaller blocks will be sawed at the same time The gang saw usually has ItS blades set 2 cm apart, as this ISthe standard slab WIdth The time required to saw through the block depends on the abrasive used and the type of stone Travertine IScut

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

with diamond-embedded blades and ISa relatively soft stone, so around two hours are sufficient (granite can take four days for the same-SIze cut) The slabs are then put on large table saws equipped with diamond wheels The slabs can be laid several thick on the larger saws With the help of precise working drawings. the exact dimensions of each piece are cut (stage two) Since large shops generally work on Jobs requIrIng many slabs of the same dimensions (for example facing slabs for a large building) It speeds up the work to cut several pieces at once The individual cut pieces are then put on a conveyor belt which passes them under a succession of abrasive wheels, producmg the final hrush In some cases travertine pieces have a paste put on them before hrushmg that fills the natural porosity of the stone After hrushmg, the pieces are crated for shipping 3 For examples of Renaissance or medieval methods we must rely on paintings and manuscnpt Illuminations that show contemporary work practices There are several of these, especially depictions of the Tower of Babel Inasmuch as the Illustrations agree With evidence from the buildings themselves, we can trust them as accurate The painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder of the Tower of Babel (Kunsthistonsches Museum, Vienna)! IS an interesting example In the foreground are several carvers working on rectangular blocks The hammers being used are wooden mallets that have the handle In the middle of the Side of the cylinder of wood Tlus type of wooden mallet ISvery unusual and ISnormally found only among Belgian stoneworkers Since Bruegel was from Flanders, now part of Belgium, he seems to have reproduced a tool usage peculiar to lus area 5 A Van Eyck drawing of the Legend of Sf Barbara': a Jean Fouquet painting of the construction of the Temple at jerusalem" and a Piero di Cosima painting of a building site" provide Illustrations of fIfteenth-century practice from three different countries In none of these does the stone arnve at the work site In the form of squared blocks In the Van Eyck and the Fouquet, the stone IStotally unformed, seemingly shapes Just broken from the quarry face, not worked In any way The Piero dr Cosimo shows blocks that may have had some rough squanng All work other than the baSICquarrying ISearned out on site The blocks are then squared to the specific dimensions required for their placement In the building The squanng IS being carried out by hammer and chisel In the Piero painting and With carVing axes In the Van Eyck and the Fouquet, a difference that can be attributed to the different traditions of northern soft stone and Italian marble Special architectural forms - capitals and moldings - are being cut by the same group of workers We can also see the fnushed blocks being earned, lifted to the work level and placed The carvers are working together near the building and are not divided according to the type of work There ISa lean-to wooden porch against the buildmg In the Van Eyck, whereas the carvers are out In the open In the other two If there IS a division of labor among them Into squanng and hne carVing, It ISnot VISibleIn these Illustrations It seems to be one man to one stone, With squared blocks, moldings and statues all mixed In together The one difference that might denote an established diVISIOnof labor IS In the Fouquet The carver of the statue ISUSing hammer and chisel whereas the carver of the molding ISUSing an axe Each piece IS clearly a specific carved object The statue and capital are entire In one block the moldings do not Include any other type of detail Tlus Willbe seen as Important

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

when we look at Roman buildmg examples After aIL It IS possible for a column and capital or a moldmg and flat wall to be carved all in one block, but this IS certainly not happenmg m these illustrahons Because of the varymg shapes of the carved stones bemg worked on, as well as the designs of the burldings, one gets the ImpreSSIOnthat each block ISbemg cut for a specthc Iocahon on the building The lack of a mass of carved objects waihng to be placed, i e , the seemmgly direct relahonslup between the rate of building and the rate of carvmg, leads to the same conclusion The carvers are workmg to specrhc, mdividuahzed orders that are bemg formulated as the work proceeds 9 To summanze these observahons the stones arnve undifferenhated m form on the buildmg site They are shll bemg carved while the buildmg ISgomg up The carvmg and the building are gomg on at the same rate Each piece IS carved and hrushed before placement Each piece IS carved for a specihc locahon ThIS last observation hts wIth observations of the lack of Uniformity of block sizes on medieval buildmgs, m contrast to modern buildmgs 10 This can then be seen as a very different work process from the modern workshop, where a large majority of the blocks are cut mto 2 em slabs and modern design accommodates Itself to what IS available Modern cuthng IS earned out perhaps thousands of miles away from the worksite. because modern workshops are generally located in relahonship to the quarnes rather than the worksite In contrast, Renaissance and medieval architectural work IS completely site-onented 11 Lookmg at the process chronologically, the carver workmg on SIte receives an order for a specific piece of specifrc dimensions He selects hIS stone, shapes It for ItS locahon on the building. carves the details and hrushes It When completed, It IS placed in the building m a relatively short hme Then he receives another specific order and so on On the other hand, a workshop order might take the form of 10 meters of a certain type of moldmg which must be executed on several blocks of stone We know from other illustrations that the use of templates for moldmgs was common practice In lus book on the construction of Chartres Cathedral, James points out that Simple moldmgs on blocks used for the same purpose vary greatly m design Other generahzahons that cannot be earned too far are that all carvmg was earned out before placement and that work was not earned out to specihc dimensions m the quarnes Orvieto Cathedral facade IS only one example of a considerable amount of hruslung bemg executed after placement, and we know MIchelangelo earned out quarrymg for a specific work and to specific dimensions It IS also true that It IS dangerous to lump the Middle Ages and the Renaissance together Nevertheless, the observations made above can be considered to apply to many building SItes because we hnd them true of many medieval and Renaissance illustrations The modern architectural cutting process IS completely workshop-onented, the medieval one was site-onented Both of them mvolve a step-by-step change from rough block to hmshed cut pIece, prmcipally m one location Obviously there ISan advantage m not breakIng the work process up geographIcally - carrymg out part of It m one locatIon and part m another ThIS, however, ISpreCIsely what was done m some Impenal Roman work processes At hrst SIght there ISa sense of Unity about the work processes that are most effiCIently executed together, but the Impenal Romans at least found an effiCIency m divIdmg them between quarry and worksite

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

The most obvious example of this IS a roughed-out statue 10 military dress 10 the archaeological museum 10 Istanbul This unhrushed statue was part of a shipload of marble that sunk off Sile 10 the Black Sea Its large forms have been roughed out with a point clusel, but no attempt has been made to give It any detail One can see where the head IS,but no features have been carved Other shipwreck Sites, as well as quarnes, show that capitals, column bases and column drums were frequently carved 10 a rough or even nearly finished state 10 the quarnes The Sile find also has a roughed-out shape of a female portrait 12 An architectural example of this technique can be seen at Ostia Among a large group of blocks of vaned dimensions. which are still as they arnved at the port from vanous quarnes, there ISa block of Giallo aniico from Cherntou 10 modem Tunisia (drawing 27) This block has four columns roughed into It Each column has about two thirds of the shaft cut out The other third ISstill part of the stone connecting the four columns The quarry workers seem to have felt that the columns were too small to travel safely as Single pieces, so they carved them along the length of each comer of a squared block To complete the process, the block would have been sawed or split into quarters and the rest of each shaft carved If we look at the sequence of working the common column, an Item frequently produced 10 Impenal Roman times, we can see the process clearly The column ISroughed In the quarry from a long, redangular roughly squared block, as we know from the eVIdence of unhrushed shafts found 10 the Thasian, Proconnessian and Docimeum quarnes (Thasian ISthe modem name for tlus marble Proconnesian ISthe ancient name for marble from Saraylar on the Island of Marmara, Turkey, and Docimeum ISthe ancient name for a group of quarnes near Afyon 10 Anatolra, Turkey) The shafts go through at least two steps of carvmg In the quarry, being first roughed With a point clusel. and then more carefully shaped With a carving axe In the second stage the shape ISwell enough defined so that a Iip for the astragal ISleft at the top and bottom of the shaft This IS true only when the whole column IScut 10 one piece, when only sections are cut, the shaping ISa bit less precise and no hp ISleft (photographs 13 and 14) The columns are then shipped On the buildmg Site, the drums are cut to length and then ereded There ISno work done on the verb cal surfaces of the cylinder until after erection, although the astragal may be cut If tlus molding ISto have any fine decorabon on It, It Willonly be cut on those parts that cannot be easily reached after erecbon Unfinished columns at Sardis and Aphrodrsias demonstrate tlus clearly After the column has been erected, It ISfirst cut to a polygonal cylinder (photograph 11) The number of Sides of the polygon are equal to the number of spaces between the flutes Then, uSing a careful measuring system based on calipers, the spaces between the flutes are marked on each plane of the polygon The marking IS done by mcismg the lines With a metal POint These marks are so clearly incised that they are still visible In places on columns that have been conbnuously exposed to the weather such as those of the Temple of Vespasian In the Roman Forum When this IScompleted, the flutes are carved With at least two stages of roughmg With a POint and hrushmg With a Wide round-headed chisel On the most carefully carved fluting, there can be four stages roughing, shaping With a tooth clusel, smoothing With a flat clusel, and hrushmg With abrasives 13 Marking and carving flubng IS something of a process

Itself Within the overall

THE

ART

Drawing

STONEWORKING

2 Drawing

5 Drawing

process of carving a column and, like any other process, can be carried out more or less precisely and carefully. The markings on the columns observable in Rome generally show two vertical lines for each side of the interspace. The outer one is for the roughing of the flute, the inner one is the precise finish line. The two lines are 3 mm apart. The unfinished columns on the Agora Gate in Aphrodisias have only one line. Drawings 28, 29 and 30 show the process of column carving divided according to methods and according to the place the method is carried out. In drawing 28, the block (1) is roughed to a cylinder (2) and then the cylinder is refined to an approximate measurement (3). This means that the maximum diameter and length of the column drum have been established. One may assume that it would be unlikely for the minimum diameter to be much less than a few centimeters smaller than the drum as it exists in stage 3; otherwise the amount of work would increase greatly and there would be little point in carrying out the work in the quarry. The length will be decided by the ultimate height of the whole shaft of the column. It is interesting to note that the drums of a group of columns often vary greatly in height. In drawing 29, the ends of each drum are squared (4) and the drums are erected (5). Since the drums vary in height while the shafts of each column are the same height, one may assume that the squaring of the ends does not simply involve carving the surface flat but requires some measurement. In fact, the works' foreman must have to do some

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

Juggling to take twenty-four drums of varying heights and make eight columns all the same height In drawing 30, the column shaft IScut to a polygon (6) Then the fluting ISmarked on the polygon (7) Finally the fluting IScarved and hmshed (8) Each of the last two stages can be a process within Itself gOing through several stages A hrushed column IS one of the more complicated of standardized architectural products used In antiquity It IS mulh-block but can be seen as a dishnct enhty In the building A decorated molding IS not as distmct from the rest of the building and a column base or capital IS almost always one pIece The blocks of a smooth wall are obviously a standard product and, being much SImpler than a column, rrughl be expected to follow a less complicated route Instead, the standard building blocks of an ancient monument seem to follow much the same route as a column An analysis of the blocks of the Arch of TItuS In Rome shows that there are hardly any two blocks the same SIze The vanahon In dimension ISquite considerable, ranging from 05 m3 to 2 25 m3 There IS only a partial relahonslup between the SIZeand the position of the blocks matching blocks In the same position on different parts of the arch are not the same SIze It would seem that the blocks arnvlng on SIte were not quarned to a specifrc dimension Blocks found In quarnes, slupwrecks'" and at the port of Osha show that the surface hrush of marble, the stone most frequently shipped long distances In Roman hmes, ISthe same as that on column drums at the same work stage EVIdence In the quarnes shows that, unlike the archaic Greek usage, the block was quarned In a very rough approximate cube, to be squared after quarrying Thus, In the Roman penod, quarrying was more generalized and less precise than In earlier pen ods Further squanng, however, was earned on as a separate work process In the quarry The blocks that exited from the quarry were not SImply rough, unformed shapes, but well-squared pIeces Often the type of use they were to be put to - column drum, base, capital or buildmg block - had already been decided The large blocks of many dIfferent SIzes that arnved on a building SIte such as the Arch of TItuS had a more or less determined hnal use They were to be squared blocks on a buildmg and not column drums or capitals DeCISIOnsabout the specific Iunchonal deshnahon of a block were being made In the quarry, In contrast to both modem and medieval practice In which decisions are made In the quarry only In rare cases of outsize work There are many examples of unhmshed flat surfaces on erected buildings The Temple of Apollo at Didyma, the Agora Gate In Aphrodisias, and the Colosseum In Rome are all excellent ones In each case It ISobVIOUSthat the hnal surface of the flat walls was to have been carved In place As the squared blocks fIt precisely together, the carving for this fittmg must have been earned out before the blocks were mounted The blocks are of unequal dimensions and sometimes are not squared but rather have shapes particular to their place In the building It IS interesting to see how specifically this shape can be defined by the place on the buildmg Drawing 31 shows the profiles, top and front of the shapes of two blocks from the Arch of TItUS The shapes of these blocks as they had to be before placement In the buildmg are both specihc and complicated It ISclear that they had to be carved by stoneworkers working on site to specihc measurements There IS only one place In this speCIfIcbUIldmg that each of these blocks can go

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

I I

.. t.

I I I

.:'

~:.

~. flutes

Drawing 30

top

I 2

front

Drawing 31

It remains true, however, that the exterior finish was carved on the blocks after they were put into place. The surface finish on large areas of the Temple of Apollo at Didyma, the Agora Gate at Aphrodisias and on areas around one entry on the Colosseum are left carved with the point chisel. The Agora Gate is especially telling because the planes of the different blocks on the same wall do not yet make a flat plane. Each block has been set into place so that it fits the other blocks perfectly on all the joints where they meet, but its front plane is only very approximately the same as the others. Obviously this front plane was meant to be carved after the blocks were assembled. The smooth flat surface of a wall is thus not treated differently from a column. The Roman architectural stoneworking process during the first two centuries of the Imperial period was organized in the following sequence, with carving stages alternating with transportation. The first carving work was carried out in the quarry. The rough quarried stone was given a shape which defined in a general sense its final architectural function. It was then transported to the building site. The carving of each block to the shape and dimension appropriate to its place on the building and the finishing of interior surfaces placed against other blocks was carried out. Then it was moved to its place on the building. Finally, the finish carving of the visible surfaces of the block was done on the building or monument. Lest one think that the middle carving stage is a simple one of squaring a block, we

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

Drawing 32

can take an example from drawing 32, which shows three blocks of marble from the Arch of Titus. The lower one is the springing point of the arch on the left of the south face. Each block has a complex series of flats and curves which must be carved before it can be put in place. Numbers 1 to 10 show different planes and the letters" a" and "b" curves on the block. Of these 1,2,3,4,5 and 10 must be perfectly cut before placement because they are joins with other blocks. As the blocks must fit together on these planes, great precision is required. In ancient Roman stoneworking, or in any other period, preparation of the block for placement was frequently a highly skilled part of the work process. The descriptions of the process of architectural block carving given above are obviously generalizations and suffer from the weaknesses of the same. Changes occur according to time and place and even individual building sites. Nevertheless, they can serve as basic indications of process. The Roman Imperial process is interesting because of the flexibility built into the system. Although a block was categorized in a generic fashion in the quarry, its future destination did not need to be known. The quarry master could decide that certain blocks were to become column drums and produce roughed-out cylinders. A range of dimensions was possible for the final column that could be made from such cylinders. Of course, with something as large as the drums for the Column of Trajan. it is almost certain that the quarrying was carried out on order, but for normal dimensions, quarrying and initial shaping could be carried out routinely. A quarry would therefore have a more efficient, continuous production rather than working only to order. Another consideration is that the more work carried out in the quarry, the less the blocks would weigh. Marble weighs approximately 2,700 kg to the cubic meter. A column drum 2 m high by 1 m diameter weighs 4,241 kg. The same size cubic block weighs 5,400 kg. If we take a good-sized Roman freight ship as carrying 600 tons/5 then it could carry 141 column drums but only 111 squared blocks of the same dimension. The economy of cutting the cylinders in the quarry becomes evident. On the other end of the scale, there is a form of efficiency in finishing the surfaces in place. It is not necessary to spend nearly as much time in placement and there is much less risk in breaking finely carved finished details. A piece of molding, for example, is less fragile when only roughed out and the details are easier to connect to the pieces on each side if it is put in place unfinished. Even a squared block has comers that can be broken easily. It does not matter if there is a small break on an internal edge that will not be seen, but the finely cut comers that are visible on the surface must not be damaged, as can

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

easily happen when a block IS moved or put In place A close look at modem marble facing on buildmgs will show how useful acrylic resin IS as a glue or filler and how frequently It IS required when the process Involves no fmislung after placement 16 It ISalways easier to move a carver than It ISto move a carving Human beings do not weigh 27 tons per cubic meter and can move by themselves, they are generally less fragile than hnely carved details In stone 17 Tlus factor may seem too obVIOUSto menhon, but In my opinIOn It IStoo often discounted In terms of economy of hme and monon, the best choice has often been to have the carver climb the scaffolding to hrnsh lus carving rather than to move the hrushed work after carving The Roman system IS interesting for the dIVISIOnof the carving process In such a way as to achieve the economies of some work at the quarry Without the dangers of moving delicate objects The unhrushed statue found at Sile shows exactly how far the Romans felt they could go In quarry roughing WIthout endangenng the work dunng transport It IS easiest to see a piece of stone as gOing through a sequence of operations after quarrying that leads to a hmshed object Whether or not these operations are all earned on In the same place IS Important but does not destroy the sense of sequence of the process In comparing the three different treatments of the process of carving architectural blocks - Impenal Roman, medieval/Renaissance, or modem - what IS worth noting IS the fashion In which a process that seems relatively Simple can vary greatly according to penod Leaving aside complicated or delicate decorahon, the mere process of providing a smooth stone surface to a wall vanes considerably In the different penods The Impenal Romans used a system that attempted to accommodate the economies of pre-working to the dangers of moving delicate objects and the difficultIes of advance planning The medieval/Renaissance process cut blocks on site and to specific dimensions worked out dunng the building The modem process provides a veneered surface cut by machinery In a workshop usually far away from the building site 18 Each process proceeds step by step, but differs greatly from the others, not only as to material worked but In relation to many other factors Finely carved decoration ISproduced by processes that can also vary greatly The most common form of such decoration ISmoldings, which are found In stone architecture from archaic to modem hmes They can take many forms, but always have a few charactenshcs In common A molding IS almost mvanably a horizontal or vertical form that runs continuously from block to block It has a profile that IS some combmahon of SImple curves and straight lines Complicated decorative forms - whether abstract such as a meander or hgured such as a floral pattern - are carved Into the form of the profiled molding The baSICmethod for carving the profile of a molding has already been descnbed Drawing 33 grves some examples of molding prohles Numbers 1,2 and 3 are SImple moldings that could be found In most penods Numbers 4 and 5 come from Chartres Cathedral and are thirteenth-century French Gothic Number o IS the molding of the architrave of the Temple of Vespasian In Rome (not a scale drawing) Whereas the differences are evident. all are based on a combmahon of SImple geometric forms Moldings are often more than SImple profiles On the Temple of Vespasian, very ornate decoration IScut Into the profiled molding 19 The first thing that can be said about

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

Drawing

B Drawing

the process of working these more elaborate moldings is that however complicated the decoration, it is carved as a separate stage after the profile has been established. A particularly nice example of this is a column base in the Largo Argentina in Rome. Half of the circle of the molding of the base is only profiled, while the other half has a decoration carved into the central part of the profile. The molding has been completely cut all the way around, and then the decoration has begun as a discrete second step. The two phases - one finished, one partially carved - are very obvious. As will be seen, there are numerous examples of this distinction in the carving of decorated moldings. In the Tabularium in Rome, a section of the architrave of the Temple of Vespasian has been recomposed from fragments (photograph 12). The left-hand section is complete enough to allow one to reconstruct the carving process. Drawing 34 is a non-scale reconstruction of the block at the end of the architrave where it was originally attached to the Tabularium and was therefore left unfinished. With the exception of the top plane, which was sawed, the shaded portions were cut with a point chisel. The un shaded portions are cut with a round-headed chisel or a flat chisel. There is no attempt in this drawing to reproduce the decorative carving beautifully cut into the molding. This architrave seems to have gone through a four-stage process. (1) The quarried block has at least one face sawed. A strip of molding about 10 cm wide, with a precisely finished section 4 cm wide in the center, is carved from letters A to A. The 4 em section is bounded by two clearly incised vertical lines running the full height. This 10 em strip

100

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

ISeven cut Into the sawed outer plane of the block, so that no part of the quarned block would have shown If this end section had not been left unhmshed This molding IS precisely the same as the hnal molding letters B to B with the excephon that B to B IS slightly deeper and higher In the block (2) USing the stnp A to A as a guide, the molding ISroughed out with a POint chisel Tlus ISdone In such a way that the surface ISnot quite as deep as the surface of A to A (3) The molding at the level of B to B IScut This ISthe hnal profile of the molding and IS 2 cm deeper and higher than the guide A to A Other examples, such as one at Didyma, suggest that several of these guides might have been carved along the molding They serve to show the carvers exactly what the pro file ISto be (4) The decoration IScarved Into the cut molding As In the column base at the Largo Argentina, the molding IScompletely cut before the decoration ISapplied as a separate step A small fragment of tlus undecorated molding still remains In the area where the roughed-out portion borders the hrushed molding (darker shadowing In the drawing) At what stage In the process the stone was moved Into place on the buildmg ISnot sure Other buildings would suggest It was after roughing out With the POint chisel What ISmost mtereshng IS to see the use of a sample molding cut from letters A to A to act as a guide for the carvers By measunng WIth calipers, straight edge, and plumb line, they can reproduce the molding from the gUide before them The sequence of carVing the decorahon can be seen on several pieces of molding from Aphrodisias There are several stages, WIth both a foliate part and a form of bead and reel on the hmshed product We can reduce them to SIXstages (I) The molding IS cut With a POint chisel It ISa fairly SImple one WIth a small slanted step and a larger half-round (2) The runnIng mtertwme WIth flowers and foliage ISroughed Into the half-round WIth a POint chisel At the same hrne the bead and reel ISroughly outlined WIth a tooth clusel At this POint It would be dIfficult for the non-carver to recogruze the fohage If we did not have It m a more fnushed version (3) A senes of holes are dnlled to outline the design on both parts of the molding (4) The floral mtertwme IS dehned With a flat or roundheaded clusel These last two could possibly have been reversed In order, but other examples such as sarcophagi suggest this order (5) The background depths around and between the leaves and flowers are cut ThIS IS a matter of carving away the stone between the dnll holes (6) The decoration IShrushed With flat and round-headed chisels and rasps The most mtereshng usage In this sequence ISthe drill, which was used both to obtain shadows and to dehne the outlmes of the design It seems as If the decorative carver had a rough sketch of hIS design FIrst he roughed out the depths, then he used the dnll as an outlining tool Then he carved the outlined patterns There are large areas of the final carVing on the architrave of the Temple of Vespasian that were done USing the dnll for both outlirung and depth ThIS technique of dnll use ISone of the most frequently found In decorative carving It was extensively used by Italian medieval and Renaissance marble carvers on both marble and limestone, for example The tendency of some writers to view the dnll as an mdicahon of poor technique IS incorrect The use of the dnll for outlmmg and depth IS found on most of the finest decorative carving as well as some very hne sculpture, for example, the Temple of Vespasian and sculptures by MIchelangelo In the MedICI Chapel m Florence

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

101

Drawing 35

In medieval and modern Europe, moldings are normally cut using a template (or temp let), which is a pattern the exact size of the profile of the molding. It is now usually cut in metal, but wood was used in the Middle Ages. There are two kinds of template: a positive one which duplicates the whole profile of the molding and a negative one in which the pattern of the molding is cut as a negative into a strip of wood or metal. In drawing 35, number 1 is a positive template and number 2 a negative one. The positive template is held to the end of the prepared block and the outline marked on the block. The lines can be extended along the block with a straight edge or the molding can be carved by eye and tested with the straight edge. The positive template cannot be held up against the carved curves in the middle of the molding. The advantage of the negative template is that it can be run along the carved molding to test it for accuracy. If one looks along a molding carved with a positive template, the line usually wavers slightly. It is what some carvers call a "live" line. With a molding carved with a negative template, one sees a perfectly straight, unwavering line. This can be tested by putting one's head next to a pillar (not a restored one) and looking up in a Gothic cathedral. The vertical line wobbles very slightly. Positive templates were used for moldings in the Middle Ages. The carver first prepared his block by squaring it to the length, width and height of the architectural block the molding was to be cut into (1 and 2 in drawing 36). Then with a positive template the outline of the molding was drawn on one or both ends (3). The molding was cut step by step, using the method of reducing it to simple planes (4 and 5). At the end it was finished by eye. A straight edge could be held along the lines of the molding to test them (6), but I have the impression that they worked as much as possible by eye in that period. Templates were sometimes used on decorations more complicated than moldings. A decorative interlace around several doorways on the Basilica of San Nicola in Bari was put in place by using a template and then reversing it. Drawing 37 shows how a template is used for a decorative interlace.

102

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Drawing 36

Drawing 37

Number 1 is the template, 2 the template reversed, 3 the two used to outline the interlace and 4 a panel with the reversing interlace. After the interlace is laid out and the outlines carved, details can be added by eye. There is an obvious advantage to this system over the Roman one. Whoever is designing the moldings need only make one template, which can then be copied as many times as needed for the number of workers involved. With the Roman system the sample molding had to be cut into each block for the carvers. In either case the process involves providing the carvers with a sample or model to follow. This in turn means that at this stage of the working process the carver uses his eye to judge straight lines, but not to create designs.f" Moldings frequently have involved patterns carved into them. These patterns are also carved in a step-by-step fashion, as we have seen above. I do not know of unfinished medieval examples, but there are some interesting neo-Gothic ones in the United States. The Senate Chamber of the New York State Capitol in Albany was left unfinished when

ARCHITECTURAL

PROCESS

103

worked stopped m the 1880s Several decorated moldmgs were m a state that shows the different stages m the process, providmg a perfect sort of textbook demonstration 21 To the side of the observers' gallery, one fmds a moldmg which IS a succession of flowers On a Ime from left to nght we see the simple moldmg progress to the firushed flower The part of the moldmg to receive the decoration has been left cut with a tooth clusel, sigrufying that the moldmg carver knew that he was leavmg a surface unbrushed but prepared for the next stage Then the flower carver came along, first markmg out rough squares by cuttmg the areas between the flowers with a point chisel Then he roughed out flowers in the squares with a large round-headed chisel Then, as we move along, we can see him gradually sharpening the design wlule at the same time cutting deeper and deeper Step by step, he was domg two thmgs more or less at the same time gradually sharpenmg the edges, thus dehrung the forms, and addmg new depth One can see that dehrung the forms also mvolved roundmg them more and more, as they start out square and blocky and are gradually rounded to their hnal shape The low-relief slanting Imes at the back were only carved near the end The work process did not mvolve Simply statmg the design and then rehrung It, but rather a more fluid action of addmg new elements to the design while other parts were bemg more clearly dehned These flowers are carved m Knoxville marble The arches supportmg the roof carry a floral pattern m Giallo dr Siena marble This IS not so much a moldmg as a square-cut block, with only a IIp or notch cut along the bottom edge The Illustration shows four stages m the carvmg (1) The squared block with IIp IS put m place (2) The design IS blocked m with a tooth chisel Notice that the forms are kept large and Simple The acorn IS only a rough egg shape and the curl of the leaf above It ISa rectangle (3) The forms are defined so that what they represent ISbecommg clear but all the details have not been applied The depths to the background around the forms have not yet been cut (4) The carvmg IShrushed by cuttmg the depths and smoothmg the surface Tlus ISactually two different stages smce the hrst IS done With a chisel and the second With abrasives The acorn shows the process very clearly FIrSt It ISan oval, then the two baSICshapes of ItS form are cut, and finally the surface details are carved Tlus sequence of movmg from larger to smaller forms ISas common on complicated decoration and sculpture as It ISon cuttmg the profile of moldmgs Architectural carvmg process ISan mvolved and fascinahng subject which could Justify a book m Itself My purpose here ISSimply to describe the baSICapproach sulfrciently for the non-carver to understand It I have dwelt on this for several reasons In the hrst place, for most pen ods and places there was a much closer connection between architectural and sculptural work When architectural stonework was pnncipally the product of carvmg, the connection was obvIOUS More Importantly, stone sculptors before the sixteenth century were usually craftsmen tramed hrst of all m the art of stonecarvmg Tlus meant learnmg the craft from the bottom up as a studio hand or apprentice Just as a pamter used to learn to mix his own colors, the sculptor first learned how to square a block and then gradually added the more complicated techniques Even recently, the Scuola del Marmo m Carrara taught technique from the Simple to the complex"Simple" meanmg the techniques that every carver should know, such as carvmg a flat surface My hrst carvmg teacher m the United States insisted that I learn the technique for squanng a block and go on from there As he put It, If you do not know how to square

104

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

a block, how are you gOIng to cut a base for your own statue? Architectural carvIng was thus the techmcal basis for all carvIng In addition. the dishnchons that WIllbe discussed later between the carvers of different types of work were not so strong as they were after the sixteenth century Figurahve sculpture was not necessarily held to be a superIor knowledge to architectural decoration It ISsufficient to look at many medieval churches where foliate capitals are freely mixed WIth capitals beanng figurahve scenes, proVIng that no great dishnchon was being made between what we call architectural decorahon and what we call sculpture An equally good example IS the Marzupiru Tomb by Desideno da Sethgnano In Santa Croce, Florence The beautiful decorative carVIng on the casket ISclearly as Important a part of the whole as the hgures and required a master's touch The same technique was used here as on the hgurahve work and shows an equal passIOn for exquisitely rehned low-relief carVIng It IShighly unlikely that the carver of this decoration was considered a person of less Importance than the carver of hgures 22 Another reason for paYIng such attention to the processes of decorahve carVIng ISthe amount and quality of It that exists The appreciation of nne architectural decoration IS not very high In our hme Our own architecture has removed It from buildmgs, and therefore from aesthetic consideration, and has developed stone technology away from carVIng and toward saWIng Unhl the begmrung of tlus century, however, decorative work was an essential part of almost all stone buildings It had a long and conhnuous tradihon of technical mastery LoUISHInton, an English master carver who worked In the United States In the late nineteenth century, provrdes an mlereshng example of such technical mastery 23 Trained In England, he was brought to the Uruted States as a master carver and worked In Ithaca, New York CIty, Chicago and Albany He returned to London for a hme, where he worked and also conhnued hIS trairung by drawing from casts In the South Kensington Museum After relurrung to the United States, he was appointed to the techrucal comrrussion to represent the United States at the VIenna World's Fair In 1875 He eventually was the foreman/master carver of one of the hnest examples of architectural decoration of the runeteenth century the Million-Dollar StaIrcase In the New York State CapItol bUIldIng HInton's lIfe does not seem that dIfferent from that of a medIeval master craftsman He was a carver who worked hIS way to a foreman's pOSItIon,whIch Involved takIng part In deSIgn He was appOInted to techmcal commISSIOnsof some Importance and traveled WIdely As a sculptor he mIght have become more famous outSIde of hIS own trade, but one doubts that he would have become more prosperous or WIdely traveled, and probably not as respected for hIS techmcal abIlItIes The prInCIpaldIfference between hiS career and what we know of the careers of medIeval master masons ISthat there was no dIstInctIon made then between a master carver and a sculptor of stone, whereas In the mneteenth century there was WIth the example of a man who dIed In the twentIeth century, we can see that the long tradItIon of decoratIve stonecarvIng and master carvers contInues stIll DecoratIve stonecarvIng was the equal partner of sculptural stonecarvIng and the techmques and processes of archItectural stonecarvIng formed the baSISof them both ArchItectural decoratIon generally occupIes more space on a large monument than sculpture, and one therefore comes across more fInIshed and unfInIshed carvIng of thIS

ARCHITECTURAL

type

Generally

sometimes

more,

speaking, lugh-quality techmcal

proficiency

sculptural

carVing of a monument

therefore

to risk rrussing Important

For these reasons

It IS essential

decorative as sculptural

PROCESS

carving reqUires carving

105

as much,

To look

only

and

at the

picture and wluch affects the carving of the sculpture

IS to look at only part of the techmcal information

for students

of stone carving

techmque

their Interest IS directed toward sculpture - to study and understand architectural carving The two cannot be completely separated

- however

much

the processes

Notes In USing the term architectural process I am accepting a dIVISIOnbetween the cutting of stone for architecture or for sculpture, which IS a standard part of modem European/American practice Although It ISquite ObVIOUSfrom documentation, expenence and common sense that the work on a large project must be divided up In some way, It ISvery unlikely that the type of dIVISIonthat began In the Middle Ages In Europe can be applied elsewhere Both the preColumbian cultures and Hindu sculpture In India employ a style In which the architecture ISso much sculpture that It IS hard to see a stnct distinction between the two On the other hand, Islarruc sculpture ISWithout hgures and could all be earned out by what In the West would be considered an architectural carver The distinctions between roughing out and hrushmg, between carvers for architecture and carvers of freestanding work, and between workers In different materials would still remain 2 This statement applies especially to prachce Since the seventeenth century, as far as Europe IS concerned Before that time the sculptor might have to open up new quarnes In order to obtain material. as Michelangelo did In medieval Europe the architect or sculptor might have to pick stone at the quarry or even orgamze the quarrying In Greece and Rome we have examples of statues roughed out In the quarry and shipped to be hrushed on site (the Naxos colossus and the statue from the Sile wreck In the Istanbul Archaeological Museum) We do not know, however, If this was all done by one sculptor or If It was normal for one sculptor to work on site and another In the quarry 3 I have seen tlus process used With some vanahons on granite. marble or polishable limestone In Turkey, Greece, Belgium and the Uruled States, as well as Italy, and seen Illustrations or products of Its use from Norway, Finland, Sweden, Brazil. France, Great Bntain, Germany and India

4 Wled, 1981 pp 85-7 5 The most accessible sources for medieval and early Renaissance prachce In Northern Europe are Du Colombier, 1973 and Gimpel, 1982, from which the first two examples are taken There ISnothing Similar for Italy, although, for this period. the three best contemporary Illustrations by carvers of their tools that I know of come from Italy Andrea PIsano, La Scultura, Museo Del Opera del Duomo, Florence, Nanru di Banco, the Quattro Santi Coronah relief, Or San Michele, Florence, and LUIgiCaporu, the Tomb of Andrea Bregno, Santa Mana sopra Minerva, Rome 6 7 8 9

Gimpel, 1982 p 97 Du Colornbier, 1973 fig 7 Bacci, 1976 pi ur-un An analysis of the techniques of the Baptistry of Parma that IS still being earned out suggests that this method of work ISnot as universal as I had thought The capitals of the exterior seem to have been carved all at the same time and then put In place when needed In the construction process Whether or not this IS a unique situation remains to be seen I realize It ISunusual to put Italian Renaissance and northern medieval practice together In tlus

106

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

way Because of the separation that has existed between Italian marble and northern softstoneworkmg at least since the Baroque, It IS often assumed that the two have always been dishnct In the ongomg study of the sculpture of the Baptistry of Parma mentioned above (late twelfth and early thirteenth century), In which the stones carved are soft and hard limestone, I am convinced that the workshop orgaruzahon and process of carvmg were very close to that shown In studies of northern work such as James, 1985, Du Colombier, 1973 and Gimpel, 1982 Further evidence can be seen in the ease WIth which Norman architects, who at that penod were really master masons, adapted to working With mternahonal crews of carvers In Puglia and SICIly There are also other areas where one can see an mterrrunghng of working traditions WIthout any Visual conflict such as the Italian Tirol In a study done of the carvmg techniques of the Porta Pia m Rome, mid-Sixteenth century, I found that whereas the sculpture was executed With large blocks and techniques that were developing Into a dishnct Italian marble carvmg method, the traverhne architectural moldings were m small blocks and Similar to medieval methods I do not believe that Italian marble methods as applied to architectural carvmg, aside from the necessary difference in tools, separated from the medieval methods that conhnued m the north until the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century 11 Excephons to this rule are modem cathedral workshops in Europe and the United States These workshops are errhcr recarvmg Cothic details or creatmg neo-Cothic work so that the condihons are Similar to the medieval ones 12 Boschung and Pfanner, 1990 fig 15a 13 For a descnphon of this process on another monument in Rome, see Clandge, 1983 14 I have seen some of the blocks from the Sill' wreck For others, see Pensabene, 1978 15 Landels, 1981 p 164 16 For example the facmg in the mtenor lobbies of the Kennedy Center m Washmgton DC 17 This comment was ongmally made to me at the modem neo-Cotluc Washmgton Cathedral by the clerk of the works when discussmg the carving of the gargoyles that I designed for them 18 Veneenng, where the exterior marble IShung from a structure of bnck or cheaper stone, IS m fact a very old technique used in mtenors by the Romans and on ex tenors by the Byzanhnes followed by the Venetians It does not become a common practice throughout Italy unhl the seventeenth century Although It was used in Florence in the &fteenth century, in Rome the facades of the major churches were shll travertine in the late sixteenth century The marble exteriors of the medieval churches of Pisa and Lucca are structural The marble of the facade of Orvieto Cathedral IS at least &fty cenhmeters thick 19 A Simpler but similar effect can be seen m Purchase, 1904 pi IX,hg 5 20 The use of templates IS crucial to the carvmg of Cothic tracery, which cannot be imagmed in Its more complicated forms Without them It ISknown to most modem stone masons in both marble and soft stone technology It has, however, been at least partly modified by the complicated geometnc drawmgs that are now used by stonemasons in Northern Europe (see the drawmgs In Warland, 1953 and Purchase, 1904) The Roman technique IS no longer used anywhere to my knowledge 21 See the illustrations m RockwelL 1983 22 LUIgi Capom who took over Andrea Bregno's workshop m Rome m the begmnmg of the sixteenth century was, as ISObVIOUSfrom hiS tomb of Bregno as well as other works, a master of decoratIon but not of &guratIve sculpture - although the workshop dId both 23 ThIS mformatIon comes from Hmton, c 1926, his unpublished short autobIOgraphy wnHen for hiS son

Sculptural process

The working processes of sculptural carVing often seem more individualistic than those of architectural carvings Tlus ISat least superficially true As with methods, to the extent that a piece of sculpture IS an individual produd there may be individuality In ItS processes Nevertheless, there are many underlying uruhes Sculptural carving IS In essence a craft that IS passed on from generation to generation Statues that are stylistically different may be carved In very much the same way A Canova figure was In fad carved with very much the same techmque that Henry Moore's carvings were executed To begin with sculptural processes, I will descnbe the work sequence of three pieces an Egyphan relief a Greek metope and a Roman sarcophagus All are relief carvings, the first a low relief, and the other two high reliefs The Egyptian relief was carved on the wall of a tomb 1 The first thing to note ISthat on the left, no carving was done but there are red and black lines drawn The red lines are the placing lines because we can see hve horizontals related to the figure One ISthe base line, one passes through the knees, one at the waist, one at the shoulders and the last gives the height of the hgure These lines, wluch seem to be chalk lines, can be used to place a whole line of hgures and In fad the carved hgure IS Identical to the drawn hgure The red line was also used to outline the figure The black line, which was put on as a second step, ISa refinement of the red line In a few places the red line was slightly correded and for the rest, the mtenor details of the figure were done with the black line Thus before the carving began the design was placed and then refined In a distinctive two-stage fashion 2 The carving was also earned out In two stages The hrst was to use a flat chrsel so that the comer made a V-hke cut Into the stone along the lines of the hgure and ItS details Notice the way the hair beneath the ear and the beard are cut so that they are the same level as the shoulder They are incised lines Into the shoulder Even the outlines of the hgure were like this at the end of the hrst stage The carver worked along the black lines, making an incised drawing Into the front plane of the stone The second stage was the carving of the plane of the background, which was left moderately rough It was secondary to the front plane of the stone and was executed last Tlus relief ISa line drawing In stone The drawing ISearned out first and In a completed form The carving ISSimply executing the drawing In stone Equally Important ISto note 107

108

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

that the front plane of the stone, which IS there before any relief IS carved (this relief IS executed In a man-made cave tomb) and IS the product of an architectural carver, ISthe reference plane of the relief Things are incised Into this plane or carved back from It rather than having shapes nse from the background plane The second example ISsome &fth-century Be Greek melopes from the Heraion at the mouth of the nver Sele, near Paestum, now In the Paestum Museum (Italy) Many of these rnetopes are unfirushed (photograph 15), and they are all at the same stage of unhrush EVidently they were all put In place In the state In which they were found Taking two met opes, one finished and one not, we can see a two-stage process The unfinished relief shows the hgures outlined against the background The only figure details shown are those that constitute major outlines The outline of each hgure and the part of the drapery that creates a strong diVISIOn,both linearly and In terms of secondary planes, IScarved The whole pattern IS conceived In terms of planes that are parallel to the front and background planes of the relief The fuushed relief shows the same clanry of overall outline, but has the forms rounded and many small details such as the knees and the muscles of the arms and legs modeled In curves The forms are no longer all conceived as planes parallel to the front plane of the block We can see at least four steps In the carVing of these metopes (I) The block was squared (2) An outline drawing of the composition was drawn on the front face of the stone (3) This outlme was cut Into the stone by cutting all around It to the background plane It IS Important to note that the rear plane ISflat and the same depth throughout Dunng this stage the few mtenm planes between the foreground and the background were also cut It ISalso possible that there was an mtenm stage here In which the outline was incised Into the foreground plane In the same way as the Egyptian relief (4) The reliefs were detailed and the forms rounded Note that at tlus POint the plane that we become conscious of as the controlling flat plane ISthe background of the relief, not the foreground, the original front plane of the stone Stage 3 has therefore two functions to outline the pattern Into the stone, and to transfer the reference plane from the foreground to the background Once the background IScarved as a flat, even plane throughout the relief the carver can use It as lus Visual reference plane when continuing lus carving It ISpossible that a hnal stage of hruslung With abrasives was carried out on these reliefs The condition of the hrushed work does not show whether they were left With a flat chisel

hrush The work process of tlus Greek relief differs from the Egyptian one In three pnncrpa] ways FIrSt, the drawing on the stone ISnot as complete and all-controlling Obviously only the outlines are contained In the drawmg , the details cannot be drawn on the stone Second, the work can be carned farther by a carver of flat planes Stage 3 can be potentially carved by a carver trained to work In planes from set patterns In fact the outline of the composition could possibly be a template Third, the reference plane used by the carver was changed dunng the process so that the ongmal reference plane of the front of the block was discarded at the end of stage 3 In favor of the newly carved background plane The third relief ISthe lid of a sarcophagus In the Braccio Nuovo of the museum of the Palazzo del Conservaton In Rome (photographs 16 and 17) Tlus ltd was left at two unhrushed stages the left-hand Side was Just roughed out wlule the right-hand Side was

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

109

earned a step further The body of the sarcophagus was hrushed Tlus sarcophagus IS dated to the third century AD, and ItS techmque ISrepresentative of sarcophagi m Rome from the second through the fourth centuries Begmmng WIth the left side of the lid, we can see that roughmg out IS done WIth a point clusel mto the smooth surface of the stone 3 From the left are a horseman, a tree, two men holdmg dogs and then a tree and man Between the men holding dogs IS an urudenhhable uncarved area It IS necessary to list the objects m the composition because It ISnot immediately clear what they are Completely unhke the other examples we have analyzed, the roughmg out process does not clanfy the outlmes of the parts of the composition The point clusel was used to excavate the spaces around the figures WIthout any strong defiruhon In two places - the rems of the horse and the belt of one man's turuc - the point chisel was used like a drawmg tool to indicate a detail The lack of dehruhon may seem confusing. but It does allow plenty of room for changes Stage 2 ISseen on the nght SIde of the lid The carver used a flat clusel or round-headed clusel, freely carvmg most of the details of each element m the design Now we see a standing man and hunters WIth dogs dnvmg an ammal (a hare or a deer? the proportions are not done carefully enough to be sure) into a net The details of the figures are more clear than their outlmes Any part of a one person ludden by another in front was not carved at all The elements of the design - hunters, dogs and trees - are separate enhhes m a sort of turbulent sea of point chisel marks In fact there IS no background as such because the area between the figures was pomt-chiseled WIthout takmg away much stone so ItSdepth remams VIrtually unchanged The advantage of keeping stone for changes or addihonal details IS shll bemg mamtamed If we look at other unfinished sarcophagi we can see that the next stage was to add the details on a level behmd those already carved, such as the rear legs of the hunhng dogs, the lower parts of the men behmd the huntmg dogs and so on Only after this level of the hgures was carved did the sculptor carve the background The background ISnot in fact a plane of ItS own It ISonly the space that remams between the details The depth of the background vanes because It ISbased only on bemg further into the stone than the details nearest to It After the background was cut, the hnal process was to hrush the surfaces of all the hgures WIth abrasives All the details withm the hgures and planes were carved by the hrne the background was hrushed. smce the background was m fact carved last of all The carver's reference plane was always the front plane of the stone Most of the Important details such as the men's heads are on tlus plane If one looks at a sarcophagus relief from the SIde one can see what m effect ISalmost like a plate of glass that touches every detail of Importance from the top to the bottom of the relief It ISthe ongmal front plane of the stone Drawmg 38 ISa simplihed scheme of the differences between the three relief carvmg processes we have covered The top row represents the Egypban relief the second row the Greek one and the third the Roman Number I m each case shows the squared block of stone, whIch ISa prereqUIsIte or fIrst stage m each case because WIth these techmques, the sculptors never began from a rough mass of stone Number 2 ISthe applIcatIon of the deSIgn onto the stone In the fIrst two examples, the deSIgn ISapplIed as some fonn of drawmg, WIth proportIons and outlmes clearly delmeated, m the Roman case the deSIgn

110

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

D i fI I D aI 0 II 3

Egyptian

Greek

~~'~& :o-;,f ) 4â&#x20AC;˘

:I\~

---tr,~ ..::\.'\tJ~

.::::0'/)... '--'"::.

:~A:"-\& 2

~ ~: ~ ~ -c-

.:-;:::;

.s: ~

~~-~

(

Roman

:::

Drawmg 38

ISsimply roughed directly Into the stone (This does not mean that the Roman carver did not have a reference drawing of some kind Concerrung tlus we have no real mformahon ) Number 3 IS the iruhal carVIng stage on the Egyptian and Greek reliefs while on the Roman relief the figure IS detailed and at the same hme the background IS deepened where necessary Number 4 IS the end of the carVIng stages The background IScarved on the Egyphan and Roman reliefs, and the details of the hgure are carved on the Greek relief There are three areas of direct companson that we can see from this schernahzahon of the process the Importance of the rruhal drawing. the stages by which the carver moves back Into the relief, and the relative Importance of the frontal and the background planes to the carving process It ISquite evident that the ongmal drawing ISof crucial Importance In the first two processes It not only dehnes the outlines, but also gIves the proportions of the figures 4 ThIS ISobvIOUSIn the double drawing earned out by the Egyphan, and also WIth the Greek carver, whose composition ISorganized In such a way that the outline descnbes so much of the hgure that the proportions are evident Because hIS techruque does not allow the drawing to be an exact outline on the stone, the Roman carver must defme proportions. outlme and details as he goes along The stages of movement Into stone are different In each relief Although this ISpartly defined In the Egyphan relief by the nature of the low relief It IS also defined by the difference In the process Because for the Egyphan sculptor all detail ISdehned before the carVIng begins, once he has mcised the outlme hIS Interest In the background ISrrurumal unhl the end of the process For the Greek carver, on the other hand, the carvmg of the background, not the InCISIngof the design. ISa necessary prereqUIsIte for carryIng out the detaIls UntIl he has gone to the background there wIll not be space for the roundmg of the fIgures Moreover, he seems to see the deSign In terms of an outlIne pattern rather than a lIne draWIng such as the EgyptIan sees The stages of movement Into the stone are

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

111

progressively the stages of the process for the Roman carver He knows he IShrushed by the fact that he has no more detail to add deeper Into the stone The Roman process IS a purer excavahon of the stone than the others The relahve Importance of the planes of the foreground and the background IS also clear For all three sculptors, one plane or the other ISa reference not only for the depth of excavation, but for the control of the carving process, which ISmore Important The Egyphan always has the front plane Into which he incises the design and details as his drawing board The Greek switches part way through from the front to the back plane HIS process IS bUIlt around makmg tlus switch The Roman IS always conscious of the plane from which he IS excavating This concept of a reference plane for a stone sculpture ISan Important one for sculpture In the round as well as for bas-relief Unhl such hme as carVings became based on threedimensional models, they were almost mvanably based on a squared block of stone The face of the block then becomes the ongmal surface on which the sculptor or carver places the design It also becomes a sort of complex frame of reference for the execution of the sculpture This ISevident In the Egyptian relief we have discussed It ISequally clear for Michelangelo's St Matthew, which we analyzed earlier In the first case, the front plane of the block ISthe plane on which the relief ISincised and rernams the plane of much of the relief In the case of the St Matthew, the front plane of the block ISa reference, even when It ceases to exist, for the three-dimensional forms of the sculpture All the depths are In effect measured from this plane, as described In Vasan's metaphor of the raiSing of the supine figure from a bath of water This dependence on the face of the stone for a reference plane can be seen In many other examples One parhcularly interesting one ISthe claSSICEgyphan relief technique, where the figure details are incised Into the front and then rounded Within the outline What happens then IS that the surrounding, un carved plane functions Visually as the background Due to this technique, the optical effect of the plane ISchanged Without the chisel ever touching It The Naxos quarry figure and the Easter Island colOSSIshow an equal dependence on a flat plane or planes What ISImportant to recognize ISthat these planes are the carver's VISibleor invisible reference from which he can measure the depth and outline of the cutting Tlus IS a practical rather than aesthehc matter It IS worth reiterating that unhl the practice of copYing models In clay, wax or plaster became prevalent, the use of a plane of the squared block of stone as a reference was Virtually universal 5 Even after the mtroduchon of models It was shll frequently used, as we shall see The work processes of sculpture In the round are often Similar, although more complex, to those of bas-relief of the same penod The technique of the archaic Greek Kouros IS a good example, as numerous unhrushed pieces In vanous stages allow the process to be described 6 Stage 1 ISthe outlining of the profile design on opposite planes of the block Stage 2 ISthe carving of this profile In stage 3 the outline of the front view ISplaced on the block and In stage 4 carved through the block In each of these two carving stages, the forms of the stone are kept square and blocky, thus retaining the sense of the ongmal block Stage 5 Involves the gradual rounding and defmmg of the forms The forms are roughed out as geometnc Units, then the details are designed directly on the stone On the head

112

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Drawing 39

of the Kouros Illustrated m Bluemel (Illustrations 12 and 13) the two eyes are of different heights The lower, rougher one ISthe first and the hrgher one ISthe second The artist ISplacmg the details not in relation to some plan such as a drawing. m wluch case there would be no need to change the eyes, but directly onto the sculpture As he defines lus larger forms It becomes necessary to reposihon the details withm them The two Illustrations are the front and back of the same sculpture and show dIfferent stages in the process The back ISat the end of stage 4 The front ISm the midst of stage 5, which IS why It ISexecuted With a different tool, the carver's pick rather than the pomt chisel The forms are much more rounded as well The differences show that at this stage the statue ISbeing worked first on the front and then the back ThIS ISbecause It was lying flat, or nearly so If these Kouroi were worked standmg erect, the lack of a support such as a carved tree trunk, which IS found so frequently m Roman sculpture, would cause It to break at the ankles The Ram Carner from Thasos 7 represents something nearly at the end of stage 5 The forms are rounded and the legs are separated There IS relatively little left to remove Although the details of the hair have been carved, other details such as the ears are still SImply outlmed forms The use of SImple forms which then have details incised m them IS one of the most frequent features of this type of sculpture The head of Apollo from Olympia ISan excellent example 8 The harr ISdefined as two forms the round of the skull and the sausage-like form of the fnnge The fnnge ISbroken on each SIdeby the ear which ISa flat form WIth a curved profile The hair ISthen completed by mCISmgImes into the forms while the ear IScompleted by mCISmgand then rounding the forms ThIS technique mvolves the division of a large form into smaller elements, each of which can then be further sub-divided, and so on At any stage, each element tends to be a Simple geomernc form ThIS approach ISbaSICto several pen ods of sculpture Drawmgs 39 and 40 schemahze tlus technique The top row of drawmg 39 IS the profile. the bottom ISthe front view Numbers 2 and 3 show the profile drawn and carved into the block Numbers 4 and 5 show the front VIew undergoing the same part of the process Number 6 shows the rounding and defirung of the major forms Drawmg 40 outlines the way the details of the head are carved Notice the methodical nature of the way these carvmgs are carried out, the baSICmethods of block squanng and molding carving are being adapted to the carvmg of three-dimensional sculpture The method of moving from larger to smaller forms, always keeping the forms as SImply geometric as possible ISthe application of a baSICcarving technique to the human hgure

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

113

Drawing 40

In this sense the human fi.gure ISbeing abstracted to meet the requirements of a carvmg process It may be more reasonable and less polemical to say that the abstractmg suggested by the working processes and that of the style convemently coalesced Movmg backwards m time, It ISpossible to see that this outlmmg and simphficahon techmque and the work processes following It can be both much simpler and much more complicated than Its use by Greek archaic and early classical sculptors An unhrushed Cycladic carving from the Goulandns collection" shows how these small, Simply designed statues could be outlined and profi.led The carving was probably being rounded while It was being profiled Cycladic carvings seem to be usually carved Into pieces of marble that are broken from the bedding along natural break lines and not squared before working For Simple forms such as tlus It would not be necessary to work from a squared block The baSICmethod IS the same but the iruhal form can vary Tlus type of work process can be developed to a very high degree Both Egyptian drawings and unfnushed statues show a complex form of outlining In the fi.rst place, as In their reliefs, they used very detailed drawings executed In advance and applied to the surface of the stone Based on a precise rule of proportions, the fi.gure ISdrawn on a gnd so that each part of It falls In a particular place The gnd can then be transferred to the stone, and the profile and front view of the fi.gure or figures applied to the corresponding planes of the block These profi.les are then carved through the block On the unhrushed carving In the Louvre, shown In drawing 15, tlus stage IScompleted A standing fi.gure has been blocked out prmcipally In frontal and profile planes There are a few diagonal planes such as the forearms and the thighs and the stomach, but our pnncipal impressron IS that of a fi.gure created by a geometry teacher This form then becomes the baSISfor the application of further measured drawing on the surface of the stone A center line has been mcised down the front of the fi.gure and then honzontal diVISIOnsas In a gnd have been laid out Following this, outlines such as at the face and the ankles have been marked It IS easy to see that the geometncal simplihcahon of the composition IS an essential part of the work process The drawing on the surface would be virtually Impossible Without the planes The process ISreally one of a successive carving of smaller and more detailed planes for as long as It can be earned on In descnbmg sculptural work processes up to this POint, I have actually been descnbmg four different but related methods The fi.rst IS the use of a flat plane as a reference plane from which the outline and depths of the design can be carved The second ISthe use of profilmg The essential composition of a hgure or group of figures IS conceived as a profi.le which can be cut from one Side of the block to the other The third IS the use of geometncal simplificahon or abstraction of forms In order to allow mlenm steps between the nuhal pattern and the eventual fi.nalsculpture The fourth ISthe step-by-step nature of even the Simplest of the work processes These four methods are

114

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

parallel to methods used 10 decorative carving and architectural carvmg, and they all evolve from the ongmal squanng of the block It would be difficult to over-emphasize the extent to which sculptural carving and architectural carvmg are related To reiterate and clanfy the use of these four methods 10 the work processes of sculpture, as well as to show the extent of their use, we will look at some examples outside of the ancient world The use of the flat reference plane was essential to French and Italian Romanesque carvmg All of the rehef sculpture on the portals of the Basilica of San Nicola at Ban was created by drawing patterns on the frontal plane of the stone The camel with a leopard on his back (photograph 30) from the central portal of the facade ISa good example The plane of the architectural block IS the plane of the outer surfaces of both of the arumals The background IS cut away from tlus plane and the details are pnncipally lOCIsed mto It On the same portal, the two oxen at the base show the same dependence on the planes of the block In this case the pnncipal planes are the lateral ones The sides of the oxen are cut 10 direct relation to these planes and the heads are turned so that they are related to the narrower front plane The whole composihon ISforced to conform to the planes of the block A more complex and much later use of the block planes as a reference IS seen 10 MIchelangelo's bound pnsoners carved for the tomb of [ulius II The two nearly fnushed 10 the Louvre show how, even at this late stage 10 the work he retained the lme of the back plane of the block The forceful tWIStSof the pose stand out especially distmctly agamst this straight line The base also contains some reference to the ongmal block so that one still has some sense of the cubic form of the original matenal ThIS serves an aesthetic purpose It may have served Michelangelo a practical purpose as well, because the less-fnushed of the pnsoners have the forms excavated 10 such a way that the planes of the block are clearly retained 10 a fashion contrary to contemporary practice Both the depth of the forms and the drawmg of the outlmes stand out more 10 reference to the planes of the block, allowing the sculptor to see what he ISdomg MIchelangelo earned himself onward 10 the difficult process of executing a large carving by remembenng where he began The facade reliefs from Orvieto Cathedral. carved 10 the first half of the fourteenth century, have large unbrushed areas over the upper two-thirds of each pilaster 10 The scene of the Entry into Jerusalem, on the third pilaster from the left, clearly shows the use of prohhng The way that the unhrushed group of Jesus on the donkey stands out from the hrushed background shows that the carvers could see It as an outline on a plane The hgures to the nght of Jesus are even less hnished They are conceived as an outline drawing, carved With a carver's pick agamst the po mt-cluseled background plane The carvers were working more freely than Egyptian or archaic Greek carvers They were willing to allow faces to be 10 three-quarter view At the same time, they were establishmg a fIrm outlme for the group and the individuals which IS a line drawing cut out agamst the background Prohlmg In this sense does not reqUIre that the hgures be conceived In stnct profile What It does reqUIre IS the establishment of an outline to a composihon 11 One of the charactenshc advantages of prohlmg In bas-relief IS that It allows the background to be carved before the figures are firushed Tlus 10 tum means that a complex composihon can be broken Into a senes of smaller Units which can be

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

115

approached one step at a time This ISexactly what has happened In the Orvieto relief The mounted figure of Jesus can be carved without any more work being done on the other figures Thus these four methods can be mutually self-supporting The third method, the Simplification or abstraction of forms as part of the work process, ISseen In an unhrushed capital from the Cathedral of St Etienne In Toulouse 12 This limestone carving ISattributed to the sculptor Cislebertus and dated to AD 1120-50 The two figures on the carving's nght and the figure on the left have been blocked out In geometnc forms The forms are not flat planes or cubes, however They are pnncipally cylinders, cones and ovals or parts of the same The second figure from the left ISat an earlier stage, With outlines mcrsed Into a cylmdncal form The initial planes of the capital, an upside-down truncated pyramid, are still VISibleon the hand, upper arm and thigh The volute at the upper left corner also shows this plane Followmg the initial outlines, the sculptor would have created the more Involved pattern of cylinders, cones and ovals we see on the other figures Progression from this stage to the hrush would Involve the carving of details Into the larger forms To recapitulate tlus process the first stage ISto divide the area Into a group of long vertical cylinder-like forms, each representing a figure Then each figure IS defined according to ItS pose as a three-dimensional pattern based on cylinders The last stage ISthe inCISingof details Into the forms already created The pnncipal difference between this method and the one seen on the archaic Greek reliefs IS the total reliance placed here on cylinders and ovals In contrast to the earlier reliance on flat planes and rectangular cubes This relief ISeven more like the Apollo head from Olympia The snrularrty In the methods IS that the forms are Simplified and then gradually made more complex by a process of reverse abstraction The first forms are very Simple and abstract and become less abstract as they become more complicated 13 The step-by-step method of carrying out all of these carvings IS obVIOUSIn fact, It seems to be that the carvers develop the other methods In order to proceed In this way By treating the outer plane of the stone as a reference plane, or by uSing a profile to rough out the composition, or by simphfymg the forms, the carver IS able to establish intermediary stages between the original block and the fmished statue The distance between the two ends of the process IS too great to cover Without these aids The first three of the methods we have descnbed can exist together In the same process, although not necessanly so An example ISthe Roman carving method seen on sarcophagi This techmque was used by Roman carvers on many types of work for several centuries The use of profiling and Simplification of forms as earned out by their Greek predecessors was abandoned 14 The use of a major reference plane was kept, however, as an Important part of the process, while the step-by-step nature of their carving IS obVIOUSfrom the unfinished examples Thus we must not expect to see the same methods repeated In the same relationship, Just as we must not expect to see the same sequence of tools, from penod to penod All the sculpture we have discussed so far has been the product of what ISsometimes called direct carving In direct carving, a piece IS earned out Without the use of measurements from three-dimensional models When a carving ISbased on first creating a model In clay, wax, plaster, or some other flexible medium, the methods and process change In obVIOUSways The problems of what the hrushed pose will look like are solved before the carving begms More Important, the model ISalways there to refer to, so that

116

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

no references or drawings are required on the stone Itself This means that the whole onentahon of the methods changes "Direct carving" ISa term that needs some explanation because In some Circles It has become an emotional rather than objective one It has been used In this century by some artists or cnhcs as a means of making aesthetic value Judgments, or as a weapon to attack the work of others To some, the English sculptor and writer Enc Gill for example, the methods of direct carving give aesthetic quality to a stone sculpture This value Judgment can be seen In the scholarship of Carl Bluemel. who uses It to glonfy archaic carving and devalue that which follows It The term "direct carving" IS being used here as a descriptive term for a group of methods and processes that have existed and shll do exist In the techniques of the carving of stone sculpture and decoration No value Judgment ISIntended In the use of the term, nor do I Wish to Imply that a particular method or process makes better technique or sculpture than another While It IS only fair to admit that Iprefer to use direct carving methods In my own work Ihope to be objective In my descnphons of techniques The use of models may have begun as early as the second millennium BC There ISgood evidence that models were used for carving portraits of rulers In ancient Egypt 15 Nevertheless, their beginning In general use for statuary can most probably be attributed to classical Greece, where It seems to have been Introduced as a means of solving the problems that arose In the carving of pediments If one looks at an early pediment such as the archaic temple of Artemis at Corfu, one sees a Simple bas-relief The sculpture IS carved Into stones placed Side by Side like building blocks With time, however, pediment reliefs became deeper until they were three-dimensional sculpture, as can be noted In the fragments of the archaic pediment In the Acropolis Museum In Athens The pediment, while still always seen from one View, In fact developed from a bas-relief to a composition of three-dimensional hgures by the end of the Sixth century BC Tlus presents a whole senes of sculptural problems The figures, being at least life size when not larger, are most easily worked each In a Single block of stone, usually marble Since these figures overlap With each other In the design, the marble cannot be laid end to end but must overlap as well This means that the carvers cannot work With squared blocks but must use blocks that Willmeet In complex JOints Drawing 41 Illustrates the problem Even though It may be possible to combine several hgures In one block It ISshll necessary to overlap them If they are In the round Part of one block must go behind another, but the main portions of the front face Will remain on the same plane Number 1 of drawing 41 shows a pediment, number 2 the blocks If they do not overlap, and number 3 the blocks overlapping The detail shows the view from above The pediment Without the overlapping blocks IS a considerably different work Then there ISthe problem that each mdrvidual hgure must be composed In such a way that the pose can be reduced to a line drawing on a flat surface ThIS becomes progressively more difficult as the figures overlap With each other It can be easily noted that the Kouros figure shows ItS pose perfectly on a flat surface This ISnot true of all the hgures on the pediments at Olympia On the Parthenon pediment It ISeasy to see that these hgures are not SImply flat patterns on a plane They are composed as three-dimensional figures which cannot be reduced to a profile At some POint In the latter part of the Sixth century BC, some sculptor had the brilliant.

SCULPTURAL

~;;0c

-'-:

.-:

PROCESS

....

117

_. -

~KdJt1tr1\ilh~

~:'J·Mk~

,~c ..i--/-f~/· ••

Drawing 41

and to us, very simple idea that a carving could be conceived in three dimensions with the use of a soft modelling medium, such as clay or wax. By working out the composition beforehand and then taking measurements from this model, the carver arrives at the composition of the carved statue without reference to two factors that had previously been essential. First, the shape of the quarried block is immaterial other than that it be large enough to contain the final statue; it does not have to be squared. Second, the methods and processes of architectural carving no longer provide a parallel or foundation for those of sculpture. These two differences will become obvious as the work processes are described.i" The use of the model for carved sculpture is that rarity in the history of technology, a revolution in technique that can be pinpointed in time. It happened twice, once in late sixth-century BC Greece and again independently in the Renaissance in Italy during the fifteenth century. A clay model by Verrocchio survives!" Donatello may have used one but there is nothing in his work that requires it. Nothing that I am familiar with in Gothic sculpture requires anything more in preparation for the carving than a careful drawing.l" It is interesting that a work process based on models was invented both times in the ambience of marble carving. Whether or not there is a direct relationship here would be difficult to establish. The use of models for carving is now common in all materials, so the relationship to marble carving is not necessary. Nevertheless, the invention of the use of models for this stone does suggest a more subtle relationship of material to technique than is normally considered.

118

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Drawing 42

There are two basic processes for the use of three-dimensional models in marble carving. The first involves the use of the model as a guide for the carving of the final sculpture. In a 1642 print by Abraham Bosse, one sees a sculptor's studio. There are plaster models on the back shelves, and small sculptures in clay and wax on the tables at the left. The sculptor holds a small model of "his thought," which has been copied in the large stone statue on the right. The only tools for the copying that we can see are a pair of compasses. The sculptor and his assistants use their eyes with the aid of measurements. By using the evidence of unfinished work from antiquity as well as what can be observed from workshops that still copy by eye, it is possible to describe the sequence of this work process: (1) With the model. the carver selects a piece of stone of appropriate measurements. The stone does not need to be squared or shaped in any way but must only be large enough overall. (2) A method of transferring measurements is established, usually with calipers. A correspondence between the measurements of the model and those of the final statue must be established at this point. Bosselli suggests that a stick the height of the model and one the height of the statue be cut.19 Each of these is divided in ten and then each division is subdivided in ten. Thus any measurement on the model. 2 large and 4 small intervals for example, can be transferred to the stone in the form of 2 large and 4 small intervals on the larger stick. The transfer of measurements was often carried out with a plumb line and a pair of calipers (drawing 42). The plumb line could be held to a small knob on the model, on the center of the forehead, for instance. Then, using the calipers, the distance between the plumb line, in this case a hypothetical center line, and a detail or the edge of a form could be measured. In the same way the measurement could be transferred to the stone. It is also possible to do this on the stone by marking a center line, which becomes the equivalent on the stone of the plumb line on the model. (3) Working with measurements from the model. the overall size of the composition, then the larger forms and finally the proportions of the parts of the figure can be measured, transferred and carved into the stone. Because the work is carried on in three dimensions but the measurements are generally only two - height along the plumb line and width from the plumb line - there is always an element of approximation in this technique. The carver is assisting his eye with measurements, not copying a model. At this point one has a carving with the basic pose and forms of the composition but not the final finish and details. (4) The sculptor carves the details and puts the surface finish on the stone. The Egyptians in the second millennium had developed this method to the extent that they produced measured stone carvings. A square knob was left projecting from the forehead with a cross incised on it. Dropping a plumb line from this cross and using a

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

119

pointer to measure in from the cross, the carver could fmd any pomt on the profile of a head EIther a model or an outlme drawing on a grid could be the baSIS for the measurements It seems very hkely that for ancient Roman portraits a similar procedure was used, with hfe or death masks as models In tlus case, however, the hrushed portraits indicate that the carver used hIS measurements for establislung baSICfeatures, but then freely interpreted from these In comparing a hfe or death mask to Roman portraits It IS easy to see that they are not copIes Up to the end of stage 3 the work could be earned on by assistants A trained stonecarver has no trouble copymg a model in tlus fashion. but It will not be an exact replica The principal difference between tlus process and those descnbed as direct carving ISnot the accuracy of the reproduction, but the release from the constrictions of a drawing and flat planes The sculptor's thought IS freed to be completely threedimensional The difference ISeasily seen m the change from the frontal Kouros figure of the archaic to the more freely mterpreted figures of classical sculpture The figures are no longer confined by the rectangular block LImbs cross the body diagonally and the pose of figures does not have to be either a rigidly profile or frontal VIew In groups, the ngidrhes of the kmd seen m the Akhnaton couple are replaced by a freer composition The second use of the model IS a copymg method The finished carving becomes a more or less accurate copy of the small or large model The sculptor can therefore make a model and hand over the execution of the carving completely to an assistant Or a workshop can specialize in the making of copIes of statues from many different periods These are m fact the two pnncipal uses of the copymg methods to enable sculptors to work only on the model and transfer the carvmg problem to a workshop of carver speciahsts. or to enable a workshop to make reproductions of sculpture The former ISthe primary modem use whereas the latter was the standard ancient Roman use 20 The process of copymg from a model involves transfernng measured pomts from the model to a pIece of stone There are vanous different methods of hndmg these points The essential element ISthat each pomt ISestablished by the use of three measurements height, WIdth and depth ThIS means that If three points can be established on a model. and the same three on a pIece of stone, then any other point on the model can be triangulated and transferred to the stone ThIS system, as shown m drawmg 43, IS the variation known as the three-caliper system and IS used commonly m Italian workshops The first paIr m the drawing (1) shows the model and the stone WIth three points placed on them A measurement from one of these points to a fourth point, the ringed point (2), IStaken WIth the calipers and transferred to the stone The same ISdone from the other two primary points (3) If the three measurements taken do not meet precisely. more stone must be cut away When enough stone has been removed, the arcs made by the movement of the three calipers WIllmtersect on the pomt (4) ThIS pomt WIllbe the exact eqUivalent of the pomt on the model Normally the carver drills a small shallow hole here and marks It WIth a pencIl He does not carve to the fmal surface, but contmues WIth the process of fmdmg more pomts on the stone ThIS process can be carned on for as many pomts as deSIred The number of pomts taken by the carver WIll determme the accuracy and preCISIOn of the copy The more pomts, the greater the accuracy When a suffICIent number of pomts have been taken, the carvmg shows the baSICform of the model but IS covered

120

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

:!! •

• •

•

~ •

• 2

~ 4

Drawing 43 6

q 195 c!J3 :

,I, ~

\~'

Drawing 44

with small holes, each one signifying a measured point. The finishing stage involves carving between the points with a flat or round-headed chisel and smoothing the surface. The measurements can be enlarged by simply doubling or tripling the measurements given by the calipers before transferring them to the stone. There are also ways of increasing or decreasing the measurements to make fractional enlargements or reductions. The three-caliper system is the most flexible of the modem ones used by sculptural carvers. There are, however, many others now in use or which were in use between the eighteenth century and the present. Almost all of them are based on taking three measurements from an established point on the surface of the model and transferring this point to the surface of the stone."

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

121

o 5 Drawing

o 6

The most frequently used modern variation is the pointing machine, an apparatus invented in the first half of the nineteenth century (drawing 44). It consists of four pieces: A a base frame that looks like an upside-down T; B a clamp; C and D a pointer attached through a series of joints to a piece of wood which is clamped to the base frame. In drawing 44c' numbers , I and 3 are the brass joints which are loosened or tightened with wing nuts 5. Number 2 is a brass rod which can move in and out when joint I is loosened. Number 4 holds the pointer 6. The set screw 5 sets the depth of the pointer so that it can move out but not in beyond a set point. When the whole gadget is assembled, the frame can sit on three points drilled into the stone or set in a model. The pointer can be moved to touch anywhere on a three-dimensional sculpture. The joints can all be tightened so that the pointer can be set in a fixed position to touch any point on the statue or stone. The pointing machine is used as follows (drawing 45). Three points as small holes are set in both the model and the stone, as shown in I and 2 of drawing 45. The pointing machine can be mounted on the frame in different positions so that it is possible to set the pointer to touch any place on the sculpture. In 3 and 4 the pointing machine has been mounted on the model and the point set to a position above the right eye, and then moved to the stone. Note that the pointer cannot go into its corred place because there

122

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

IS too much stone In 5 the stone has been cut away so that the pointer reaches the necessary depth Then a small hole ISdnlled and marked Number 6 shows the stone after several POints have been placed In the same area The process earned out with the pomhng machine ISbasically the same as the three-caliper system and differs only In the accuracy of reproduction possible In contemporary stoneworkmg the POinting machine ISthe most accurate method for reproducing a model As we have seen, there are several other methods used or In use for reproduction The earliest ones essentially created a hypothetical box which was placed over the model. and Its counterpart was placed over the stone 22 This hypothetical box was created by a honzontal frame hanging over the model and another over the stone Plumb lines hanging down from the frame allowed measurements to be taken from them to the model With a pointer These measurements could be transferred to the stone by duplicating the procedure Thus the planes of a block of stone, even If Imaginary, were stili used to reproduce a model In the earliest modern reproduction system We have considerable evidence of some ancient Roman system for transferring POints to a stonecarvmg. but It ISnot consistent With the use of a poinhng machine There are no surface POints on unbrushed Roman work. and the knobs used for measunng are very few - for example, only three between the hips and the knee on a leg (photograph 18) Such an area would have at least hve times as many POints If the POinting machine were used Moreover, on undamaged pieces there are no signs of the holes on which a POinting machine could be hung We cannot even be sure If a model was used Most of the evidence from unbrushed. so-called copies would be consistent With taking measurements from either drawings or models In my OpiniOn,It ISnot possible to say what system was used In the Roman penod It IS only possible to say that It was not a pomhng machine and that It was not an exact reproduction system by modern standards This last can be seen from the small number of measured POints used on examples from Aphrodisias. Ephesus, Athens and Rome The Roman POinting system, the only one used In antiquity, cannot be directly compared to the modern one until we know more about It 23 Historically speaking, the great majority of stone sculpture was not produced by a copYing method The enlargement method bemg used m Rome at the time of Berruru would not have produced a faithful copy 21 Early forms of copYing systems were muse by the bme of Diderot's Encvclopedia Several vanahons had developed by Carradon's time, and were so thoroughly ensconced by the time of Rodm that the counter movement of direct carving developed m the beginrung of the twentieth century Still, because the POinting machine and other accurate copYing methods have been so prevalent over the last two hundred years, they occupy a disproportionately large area In the treatment of sculpture carVing process In the literature Furthermore, the viewpoint that sculptors must somehow carve from more or less precise designs In the form of drawings If not models IS very prevalent In the literature, pnrnanly, I believe, because that IS modern practice The more I study Roman monuments, the less convinced I am that they proceeded from hrushed models I have also watched carvers In Carrara produce hgures 2 m high from photographs only 10 cm high When hrushed, these hgures seem to be Virtual duplicates of others of the same type, yet the carver made few If any measurements It ISquite clear that neither models nor scale drawings were used In medieval practice I give

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

123

these examples because It IS Important to recognize that modem practice cannot be extrapolated to other penods except With great care and many reservations Carving practice In modem Carrara ISnot the same as practice In Vicenza, so how can we expect It to be typical of practice In other pen ods 7 Sometimes In sculpture each stage of a process Will be carved With a particular tool Roughing out Will be done With a POint chisel. the middle stage of clanfymg the form With vanous tooth chisels, smoothing With flat chisels, and hrushmg With rasps or abrasives Certainly, when a stage In the process relates to the amount of stone being taken off, It Will be bound to a particular tool Yet there are so many vanables that It IS difficult to make any generalizations In this matter Carvers of soft stone frequently do not use the tooth chisel. as In the unhrushed capital by Cislebertus Granite carvers usually use a succession of hner pointed bush tools that leave a more evenly pitted surface as the final stages are approached, but this does not leave a sense of moving from tool to tool at each stage of the process Marble carving IS the area In which there IS the greatest likelihood of seeing a relationship between tool and process stage The unhrushed Neptune by Baccio Bandmelli In Carrara ISa good example of this The lower parts of the carving at the back are roughed out With the POint chisel The legs at the front are worked more hnely With a calcagnolo or rough tooth clusel, while the torso ISworked more With a finer tooth chisel Each tool surface represents a more precise carving of the forms of the statue The succession of tools seems to follow the succession of stages of carving the forms Looking at the back of Cian Lorenzo Bernini's Truth Revealed, we notice the same effect of a careful succession of tools and stages In contrast, Michelangelo's PIth Tondo has a profusion of different tool surfaces which do not seem to give any sense of successive carving stages The same IStrue of all the unhrushed marble carvings of the hfteenlh century that I have been able to observe It ISpossible for two types of sculpture to show different tool techniques dunng the same penod An unfinished second-century AD statue of a barbanan In the Museo Gregonano Profano of the Vatican shows the succession on the back, from the head down, from POint to tooth to flat chisel following successive stages In the carving process On the other hand, a beautiful unbrushed second-century sarcophagus In the Museo Nazronale delle Terme has the typical technique of sarcophagi carved In Rome The carver never uses the tooth chisel at all The POint chisel ISused roughly and then hnely, followed by rough carving With the round-headed chisel and then hner carving With the same chisel Both carvings are typical of the techniques used on each type for the second century It IS thus clear that although on anyone carving there IS likely to be a relationship between tool and stage of process, this relationship does not necessanly extend to other carvings The belief that the marble carving process necessanly passed from POint to tooth to flat chisel IS an Inaccurate one, based on projecting modem practice onto all other penods Generally speaking, tlus has been the case from the sixteenth century to the present, but one only needs to read Cellini's descnphon of statue carving technique to see that even Within tlus baSICformula the tools have changed since his time The changes are the sort that seem small to a non-carver and very Important to a carver Looking at marble carving, one can make the generalization for European

124

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

stoneworking that on large statues In the round, Since the fifth century Be, carvers have usually used some form of tooth chisel for the middle stages of the carving process Almost always In marble carVing, the POint chisel ISthe roughing tool Some form of flat or round-headed chisel ISusually used for the final shaping before smoothing Beyond this one can only reiterate that each stage of the carving process ISrelated to a particular tool or vanahon on a tool - successions of finer tooth chisels for example - which tool IS used depends on a combination of material, period, type of work and mdividual preference Generalizations must be carefully circumscribed by specific references and a recogruhon of the vanables The best rule of thumb to follow IS to expect to find that specific tools Will be related to each stage In the carving process, but not to expect that this tool use Will extend to other places or penods Finishing shows very much of the same problem Each sculptural carving tends to be an object unto Itself as far as hrush ISconcerned This area has so many variants that the process of hrushmg the surface must be deduced through analysis of the mdividual piece Almost any tool, whatever ItS normal use, can be a hrushmg tool for an area of a statue Frequently, the same tool Willnot be used to hrush different surfaces on the same piece An example of this practice IS Bernini's Portrait of Costanza Bonarelli The flesh IS polished The blouse IShrushed With a rasp and chisels The hair IShrushed With a twotoothed chisel Therefore the hrushmg process Involves the selection and use of the tool SUitable for the detail Involved Other carVings have the same hmsh throughout Michelangelo's Pleta In the Basilica of St Peter In Rome ISpolished over the entire surface On some other large monuments, the Column of Trajan for example, there are different surface treatments In different areas, showing that the carvers expressed mdividual taste The hruslung process IS thus too vaned to be able to generalize easily The one difference from other parts of sculptural processes ISthat Since the stone may be divided Into areas receiVing different treatment, the step-by-step nature of process becomes broken up and applied selectively The statue becomes a grouPing of areas receiVing vanable treatment The hrush IS the end POint or last step of the process Some general observations can be summanzed now that we have studied vanous examples of the sculpture-carving process (1) The techniques of sculpture carving are closely related to architectural carVing The processes are often parallel to and follow from architectural carving practice Sculptural processes are better studied by begmrung With their contemporary architectural carving practices than With modem sculptural techniques Even today, tools, methods and practices developed In architectural work are frequently absorbed Into sculptural carving

Techmques are cumulative, t e , the more complicated techniques are based on the Simpler ones and presume a knowledge of these Tlus applies to sculptural carving as well as other forms

(2)

(3) The baSIClaws of processes apply as much to sculptural carving as to architectural carving (4) The processes of sculptural carving, Inasmuch as they differ from other processes, can be divided Into five types carving With no drawmg or model, carving With a non-

SCULPTURAL

PROCESS

125

measured drawing, carving with a measured drawing, carving with a model as an aid, and carving with a copYing system All the vanous processes will fIt Into these general categories Finally, sculptural processes must be viewed like architectural work processes - that IS as part of a larger process that Involves quarrying, transport, design and placement All of these affect the hnal product and so cannot be left out of the overall technical picture

Notes 1 This descnphon

ISa composite based on descnphons and Illustrations in Peck and Ross, 1978 and Robins, 1986 rather than bemg one particular relief sculpture 2 It should be noted that this ISa different method of laymg out a fIgure from that of usmg a gnd The relative proportions cannot be earned to such a level of detail with tlus system 3 We know from the many extant unbrushed sarcophagi that the form of the lid was carved first so that the sculptor of the relief only had to work on the relief Itself At the begmrung, the sculptor had a specific space With ItS frammg already carved 4 It would seem from these examples that there may be a close relationship between the use of a drawmg as an exact guide and the use of a system of proportions The Egyptians certainly had a precise and endurmg canon of proportions, although there are examples of provincial sculpture m which It was not followed The Greeks had a much more flexible one, for the proportions of the hgures of these reliefs are different (the heads are larger here) from those used for the metope figures on another later temple of Hera at the same site Yet even when the proportions were vaned in either culture, the laymg out technique was not Agam we have a chicken-and-egg problem the sculpture would not be what It IS without a canon of proportions, but the canon of proportions could not be expressed without the technique used 5 ThIS ISnot to say that It ISused in the same way It ISobVIOUSon a great deal of medieval low relief - Modena Cathedral for example - that the flat surface IS a plane on which quite a complex drawmg IS made The drawmg IS so complex that carvmg cannot be as simple a process as in the Egyptian or Greek cases On the other hand, the reliefs of the exterior of the portals of the Baptistry of Parma, in Verona red limestone, could easily have been executed usmg the Greek technique 6 Bluemel, 1969 Ills 6--7, 1:l-13 and 22 7 Ibid, Ills 6 and 7 8 IbId, ill 22 9 Dournas, 1981, catalogue number 65 10 See White, 1959 and Martelloth and Rockwell, 1988 for Illustrations 1:l A tympanum relief from Naumburg Cathedral (Bluemel.rooo ill 65) shows a technique that IS virtually the same as the Orvreto relief, although not in marble The hgures stand out as separate elements from the background The figure of St John shows exactly the same type and level of roughmg out as the rougher Orvieto figures The only difference IS that the background has not been hrushed before begmnmg work on completing the Christ hgure 12

Baudry and Bozo, 1978 p 157

13 This relief also shows mtereshng

srrrulanhes to the unfinished Iknaton statue in drawmg 14 To the modem sculptor It IS mtereshng to compare tlus with the process of abstraction used by either BranCUSIor Matisse They make progressively more abstract versions of the same head or figure, whereas thrs method of carvmg progresses Visually in reverse This capital also merits companson WIth the drawmgs of hgures and animals by Villard di Honnecourt, ErlandeBrandenburg, 1988, specifically the drawmgs in pis 35-8 Here there IS a related method of

126

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

drvidmg Up or analyzing the figure which IS not only related to proporhons but also to the problems of carvmg 14 The small unbrushed porhon on the Telephos relief from Pergamon in the Pergamon Museum m Berlin suggests that It had already been abandoned by Hellerushc carvers (see Bluemel, 1969 ill 55) 15 There are plaster masks and unbrushed stone heads that seem to be copies of the masks in the Egyptian Museum in Berlin The unfinished Neferhh head m the Cairo Museum has lmes on It which suggest a copymg method 16 My guess IS that the inventor of tlus technique was probably the sculptor of the first of the two pediments of the temple of Aphaia in Aegma The technique involved some taking of measurements, but not exact ones This can be seen from the correchons made on the back of some of the Parthenon pediment figures These were made because the &gures as carved would not &t into place together on the architecture, thus sigmfymg that either the models or the carvmgs or both were not measured correctly for the space 17 For the Forieguem monument in the Duomo of Pisloia 18 Although there IS now an mcreasmg amount of literature on the techniques of both ancient sculpture and Renaissance and post-Renaissance marble sculpture, there IS very little done on the techniques of Romanesque and Gothic sculpture in either marble or other stones This can be seen in Wlttkower's bnef coverage of the topic It ISnot necessanly for the lack of unhrushed work, because It does exist, as I have found in Parma It ISalso not that the techniques of Gothic design are not studied At present most scholars seem to assume, incorrectly in my View, that a knowledge of carving technique ISnot Important to the understanding of a work of medieval sculpture This lack of study has led to a certain amount of conservahve romanhcrzmg about medieval sculptors and their techniques Because they did not have power tools It ISpresumed that they were conservahve technicians Some students believe that modem tools - the air hammer for example - are mtnnsically unaesthehc and, projecting their own conservahsm on medieval stoneworkers, use them to show that modem technology should be avoided A careful study of the sculpture at Ban, Orvieto and Parma shows that the carvers had an interest m the latest technology and in developing new techniques It also IS very hard to see how Golluc tracery could be considered anythmg but technically adventurous in a way that IS the opposite of romantic conservahsm Study of medieval carving techniques would help us avoid rrusunderstanding their views 19 Boselh, 1978 20 This IS not exclusively true There are measunng points on two of the tondos from the hme of Hadnan on the Arch of Constanhne The unfmished Barbanan in the Museo Gregonano Profano in the Vahcan ISfrom the same penod None of these are normally considered copies Also, the workshops m Carrara which produce sculpture from sculptors' models also somehmes produce copies of sculpture of the past 21 Examples can be seen m both Diderot (Srcca and Tornasi. 1979) and Carra don (Carradon, 1979) Recently I found evidence dunng the cleanmg of the Trevi Fountam in Rome that the technique of usmg points was first employed in the 1750S (see Rockwell, 1991b) If tlus IStrue, Falconet. m DJderot. IS desCrlbmg the latest m modem technology 22 Examples of thiS system can be found illustrated m both Dlderot (Slcca and TomaSI, 1979) and Carradon, 1979 23 Amanda Clandge gave a Similar view to mme m an unpublished lecture at the Bnhsh School mRome 24 For a more thorough diSCUSSIOn of enlargement systems, see Rockwell, 1988a They are also discussed m Lavm, 1967, WIHkower, 1983 and by Well, 1978

Design and process

The process of carVing ISrelated to design and the methods of ImpOSing the design on the carVing The way the Idea ISconceived and the way It ISdeveloped before and dunng the work are part of the techmque of stoneworkmg This can be seen very easily In the differences descnbed In the last chapter between direct carVing and carVing with a POinting machine In direct carVing the design ISworked out to a greater or lesser extent dunng the carving of the stone, whereas when a poinhng machine ISused, the design IS complete before the carVing ISbegun Thus both the carving and the design processes are different When the sculptor makes a model that ISa complete design and transfers It to the stone, he works and thinks differently, and this affects the total technique An interesting example can be seen In the work of the modern English sculptor, Jacob Epstein He carved two heads of Augustus John's son Rorrully 1 The first was executed from a model USing the POinting machine It was left unfinished. so we can see the POinting marks as dnll holes In the tooth-chiseled surface The second was executed as a direct carVing Into the square block of stone The difference ISquite obvious the first, even If unbrushed, has already much rounder forms than the second, and the marks of the chisels are much more consistent It ISIn fact a copy of the head ongmally done In clay and cast In bronze The second ISmuch squarer, the forms are affected by the block shape, which shll exists In the lower porbon of the stone, the tool marks are related to the details carved rather than being consistent throughout Here we see the product not Simply of a different carVing process, but also of a different relahonslup of design to that process In the first Instance, the carver IS duplicating something already made and IS thus an Instrument or tool of the designer, In the second he IS to some extent desigrung while carving Sculptural carving ISnot the only type of carVing that exhibits differences In techmque linked to design Architecture based on complete scale drawings executed before construction reqUires another type of work than architecture In which the architect ISa buildmg foreman working alongside the workers on the project The difference ISagain one of whether or not the work IS vaned and adjusted as It goes along or whether It Involves copYing Stone buildings of the non-measured drawing type often show vanabons In detail as the building progresses which reflect the architect's changing viewpoint They also show vanabons that come from changes of architect more clearly than predesigned buildings John James's study of the masons of Chartres Cathedral gives 127

128

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

an excellent picture of the types of vanahons even m mmor details that come about m buildings where architectural design IS mformally earned on parallel to building 2 He demonstrates that simple and relatively unimportant moldmgs change when the architect or master mason changes In fact, this change of moldmg becomes a valid mdicator of a change m master mason/work crew 3 There are basically four ways of designing for stoneworkmg, wluch I shall call the followmg (1) rrurumal design, (2) lradihonal design, (3) design before execution and (4) design dunng execution No actual pIece of stoneworkmg will probably ever be a pure example of any of these four Nevertheless, one form or the other of design WIll predommate m any gIven pIece of work

MInimal design The term "rrurumal design" sigruhes that It ISrmpossible to have stoneworkmg done WIth no design at all Yet a stone wall built to divide two fields may have as small an amount of design thmkmg as IS possible The worker simply gathers hIS stone and proceeds to construct a wall to a satisfactory height from pomt a to pomt b The only design mvolved IS to place pomts a and b and to decide the height It may seem that this rrught be called tradihonal design, but tradihonal design can often be quite complicated and mvolve considerable technical skil! and choice MInimal design m contrast mvolves two Important factors the stone IS worked as little as possible, and the design mvolves followmg nature and exishng patterns rather than creating new patterns In meetmg the hrst of these condihons, It does not mean that the stone IS simply unshaped masses, but rather that the shapes are related to the natural breakmg of the stone rather than extensive workmanship In the moun tams above Verona where the red limestone ISquarned, there are still some stone fences made of slabs of limestone laid on edge one next to the other It looks rather like a rough stone veneer WIthout the wall behmd It The slabs are seldom Hucker than 10 ern, and are lugh enough to keep animals within the fenced area At first, tlus seems an unnecessanly dIfficult way of fencing, but there are several old tunnel quarnes m the vicmity where It IS possible to see that the stone naturally breaks m slabs of the SIze used m these fences The farmers SImply took the matenal at hand and used It as It came from the ground It ISmterestmg to note that the same matenal can be found on the roof of the Romanesque SIde portal of Verona Cathedral The roof slabs are the Saine stone m the same dimensions as the fencmg In both cases, the act of design IS to accept a matenal as It comes WIth as little actual stoneworkmg as possible Another example of exploiting the forms of nature ISthe so-called" cyclopean" walls The most famous are at Mycenae and Tyrns m Greece, others are found south of Rome at Norba and Alatn These walls are made of boulders wluch, VIewed from withm the enclosure, are usually uncut and unsmoothed The stone was broken from the lullside or SImply found m boulder form and put together WIth rrurumal cutting for hthng Only after It was put together was the front face cut smooth In the earliest examples, there was little or no attempt to make straight lines The walls follow the contours of the land m such a way as to get the best advantage m terms of making a high wall WIth the least

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

129

amount of stone The act of design was really an act of followmg as closely as possible what nature provided 4 An example in sculpture of minimal design IS the goddess figures of Cycladic sculpture On the marble Islands of the Cyclades, marble can be found near the seashore m large and small sliver shapes The natural break lmes of the stone come up at a sharp, almost vertical angle to the surface of the ground and the achon of the sea tends to eat down into the marble along these natural weaknesses The result ISthat one can break off slivers which tend to be slightly rounded in section Added to this ISthe fact that on the Island of Naxos there are deposits of emery, an excellent abrasive stone, that were worked in anhquity The Cycladic goddesses are m shapes that naturally anse from slivers of stone The baSICtechnique used was one of a little perCUSSIOn cuttmg and a great deal of abrasion One can easily observe, for example, that the separation between the legs IS earned out by abrasion In all these examples, the pnmary design factor came from the natural charactenshcs of the material. the geography or the matenals available for tools Time and expenence led to refinements which gave a more conscious, mtenhonal look to the work Traditional design ThIS IS usually neither SImple nor uncomplicated, unless the society It comes from ISsmall and uncomplicated or there ISlittle demand for stoneworkmg A large, wellorganized society may build extensively followmg traditional models An obVIOUS example IS the claSSICGreek temple the baSICelements of the design - a peristyle of columns on a three to hve-step base, supporting an entablature supporting a pitched roof - are repeated throughout the Greek world for several centuries The architect was not required to mvent a new form so much as to adapt a known form to specific conditions Traditional design affects work processes because the stonework also develops traditional patterns If a stoneworker speciahzed m carvmg capitals early m the fIfth century Be, there were basically only two types he needed to know Done and IOniC There would be vanahons in size and proportions and perhaps some differences in details, but the essential types were hxed In tlus sort of situation the workmg processes of stoneworkers are likely to become fixed and ngid With little room for imagmahon or vanety On the other hand, traditional design allows stoneworkers to refine their products When the same type of work ISbemg repeated, the result ISoften a slow rehnernent and delicate adjustment of details to make the proportions perfect, and curves Just right What might be called a craftsman's viewpoint IS promoted by traditional design The refinement of the entasis of a column or the preCiSIOnof the curve of an IOniCvolute IS encouraged because this IS the pnmary means of expressmg mdividuahty Expertise IS shown by perfect details rather than creative adaptation The beauty of the Parthenon epitomizes both the perfection and the sophishcahon of traditional design WIth the exception of the fneze and the pediment, neither the architect nor the carvers created new forms Instead, they created perfect rehnements of forms already long m use The Erectheion on the Acropolis IS an equally mtereshng example of the application of tradrhonal design to the stoneworkmg process Although the overall design ISunusual and certainly not traditional (WIth three facades), the details all follow

130

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

tradihonal carvmg forms The facade and the colonnaded porch both funchon as temple fronts The Caryatid porch has the simple vanahon of female hgures, which fIt perfectly mto the norms of their known carvmg processes, instead of columns The creahvity of the Erectheion architect lay m lus ability to take an unusual problem and break It down mto a senes of tradihonal stoneworkmg designs Traditional design practices bnng out all the advantages and disadvantages of ngid work processes in stoneworkmg A designer or client may demand and receive great refinement and preCISIOn,yet any design that reqUires a break with tradihonal practices IS unlikely When changes are made, they happen slowly and gradually Creativity m traditional design involves refinement rather than change I do not mean to say that tradihonal practices never change Yet where traditional design ISdominant, change ISalways slow and gradual, as in the slow evolution of the Kouros fIgure The baSICprocess that involved drawmg the outlme on the faces of the block hrruted the design of the standing figure to what could be treated in this fashion A twisting frgure ISextremely difficult to do with this techmque Therefore the difference between the early Kouroi of Cleobis and Biton m the Delphi Museum and the Sirangerford Apollo m the Bnhsh Museum ISone of rehnement within an established form Only with the development of the technique of working from clay or wax models was a change m the baSICform possible 5 Design before execution This ISthe common modern method for both architecture and sculpture The use of the three-point caliper method and the pomhng machme has already been descnbed In architecture, design that evolves from sketches to final measured drawmgs ISthe norm for any but the simplest constructions The methods are so obvious one hardly needs to diSCUSSthem Nevertheless, certain aspects of their relahonship to stoneworkmg processes should be noted Design as a hrushed act before stoneworkmg begms funchons best with mechamzanon The workmg of the stone IS simply the carrying out of orders supplied in the form of a model or drawings No taste or Judgment ISrequired or desired from those carrymg out the work Therefore the Ideal situation ISto mechamze the process as much as possible The same Job done by a machme and done by a stoneworker costs less by machme, If the quality IS felt to be the same, the obvious solution IS to mechamze A machme can usually be more exact and more relIable than a human worker An unfortunate result, however, IS that people are no longer tramed to work the stone, so deSign becomes trapped wlthm the confInes of what the mach me can do The lettenng on tombstones IS a case m pomt It can be done by machmes with more speed and economy, but with less refInement and mdlvldualIty than by a carver As a result, It ISnow extremely difficult to fInd good letter carvers, even when needed The tendency m both architecture and sculpture ISto aVOIdthose areas of stoneworkmg which cannot be deSigned easily before executIon The result IS both a more lImited range of produchon and a lack of stoneworkers tramed to deSign as they carve 6 The poslhve Side of the Issue IS the undoubted freedom given to deSign by thiS method A sculptor, an architect, or a clIent can work out a complete deSign, solvmg all the Visual problems before dealmg with the techmcal ones The careful deSigner may be

DESIGN

conscious

of techrucal questions

In the process

Techmcal

AND

PROCESS

131

as well, but It IS possible to leave all that to the next stage

and design

problems

can thus be completely

separated

from

each other ThIS advantage model

IS very obVIOUS In sculpture

The sculptor

Then If the piece IS very large, the technical

stone to use, how to put them together, to techrucians

can make a small plaster

questions

of how many pieces of

how to carve the difficult areas, etc, are all left

who are experts In this area Mistakes

and errors are avoided

The passage

of the work from design to hrushed object IS made as smooth and easy as possible Above all, the kmd of accident that can destroy

the whole work IS avoided

Just a small example

of the kind of advantage

this process gIves the designer IS shown by the kind of mishap that can occur m portraiture When Berruru carved hIS Portrait of Cardmal SCIPIO Borghese,

the marble

developed

a fault when

WIthout a three-dimensional

the piece was nearly

workshop

would be responsible

carve a new portrait

because

from the plaster model

protected

In expense

because

Pre-design

to rationalize

and/ or his foreman

century

for the marble's

freedom

from technical

and economize

traditional

can express their creativity

there has been a revolution

happen

together,

there would

be little Impetus

tlus type of mecharuzahon

Design durmg

Nevertheless,

building

of work

there are certain kinds

The difference

whether

tradihonal dunng

between

was the builders'

for the best

adapting

process

based

techniques

In a SOCIety USing design and execution

To some extent, almost every piece Incorporated

In the work process

where one can see that the onginal

or ongmal.

design

and the workers and their clients expect

the process

a Cothic

cathedral

acceptance

and a designed

building

such as a modern

that the design would take shape along With the

The same can be said of sculpture

second head of Rorrully or MIchelangelo's were carved

Certain

stone sculptures,

such as Epstein's

late Pietas, were clearly being designed

In a less obVIOUS way the same IS true of Virtually all medieval of the carvmg

major changes

the work, indrcate that tlus Idea was built into the process

dunng

to the block, or the sculptor's

as they

sculpture

Either the relahonslup The problem

execution

to make major decrsions skyscraper

thrs

since the late

of stoneworkmg

to production,

IS impossible

of any size has had design changes

IS only a concept

Thus

for this Where

ThIS IS the most difficult process to descnbe of stoneworkmg

by hunting

in the technology

approach

as much as

On the techrucal SIde It allows

and thus mecharuzmg the stone-working

designs

The sculptor

Given a certain fmished design,

In fact, this IS their true area of creativity

on seeking the most rational and economical to machinery

They would

quality

constraints,

quality and gIves hnancial protection

managers

way to carry It out nineteenth

the marble

the hrst and second carVings

the studio IS responsible

possible, guarantees the stoneworker

they provide

in terms of quality, m time because he IS not doing the carvmg, and

allows the designer

the production

working

Since the marble IS a copy of the plaster

model there would be no difference between IS therefore

Bernini,

over again, and the

If tlus were to happen m modern practice, the

second one IS slightly different and mfenor carvmg

hrushed

model, was forced to carve the portrait

WIth this form of design process

easy to Isolate as either tradrhonal

or pre-execution

IS that It IS neither design

Willingness as clear-cut

to make nor as

Few If any people WIll start

132

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

a major building or sculpture without some form of prehrrunary design Furthermore, parts of a binldmg - moldings on a Gothic cathedral, for example - are cut from templates, wluch show that they are designed before cuthng Both these factors may make It seem that design of some sort always precedes execution The POInt IS not whether some concept exists, but rather whether the concept IS expressed In a form, In the design stage, that can be translated directly to the work WIthout the worker's having to use hIS own Judgment A building or a pIece of sculpture based on a rough sketch on paper does not have enough pre-set design to meet this requirement In analyzing the reliefs of the Orvieto facade, one can see that the shape of the blocks, as well as the method of placing the design, changed during the working of the reliefs One also sees that there are srylishc differences between lower and higher areas on the same pilaster (the third for example) that could not have happened If there had been a model or measured drawing Involved One can make exactly the same statement about the Orvieto facade sculptures that James makes about Chartres The evolution of a great Gothic monument was fluid and organIC It was a process rather than an ad, In which the deCISIOnscarne from the immedrate situahon rather than from an exactly premeditated plan The building was a concept In hme the work of the moment, element by element, was the major governing reality 9

With areas, such as moldings, that are designed before execution, the question IS whether the desigrung precedes the immediate work or precedes all work on the buildmg A way to see tlus IS to study the extent to wluch moldings on similar places In the building dIffer or are the same On Chartres, for example, moldings, matching stairways and many other large and small design elements differ from each other The design of each element of the building was worked out as It was about to be built, so that design and execuhon are contemporaneous In terms of the overall building. even though speofrc details were designed before carvIng 10 None of the four categories of design IS seen In ItS pure form In any pIece of sloneworkmg They are, agaIn, Intellectual categories that help us analyze the working methods The actual working process WIll of necessity Involve usages that do not ftt mcely Into a framework For example, In the carVIng of a statue WIth a pomhng machme (one of the purest examples of pre-execuhon design), a macchia or black spot In the marble may occur In a disturbmg place, callmg for Instant redesign Traditional designs In Roman architecture. triumphal arches for Instance, clearly Involved a large amount of detailmg that was designed by an architect The sculpture on these arches also had to be specific to the hgure being honored In many cases It seems to be designed on the spot by the sculptors, who based themselves on only very sketchy deSIgns A large project IS so complex that It ISpOSSIblethat all of the last three categories of deSIgn process were used An equally complIcated SItuatIon anses when studYIng the large sculptural projects of Glan Lorenzo BernInI The angels for the Ponte Sant'Angelo all had deSigns In the form of draWIngs or clay models done by BernInI or copIed from hISOrigInals 11 Yet he actually carved only one of the angels himself the others were contracted out to other sculptors The angels dIffer from each other In many ways The hatr and WIngs vary from sculptor to sculptor One In partIcular, AntOnIO RaggI, took greater risks by cuttIng deep folds

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

1}}

Into the marble SInce Bernini had worked with all of these sculptors before, he must have known their charactensncs as carvers He would therefore have known that he would get different mterpretahons of his designs from them He seems to have mlenhonally chosen a compromIse between controlled design and design In execution These categones, wlule being useful, must be applied With care and caution and especially a recognition of the vanehes of mdividual treatment of the processes of design and execution 12 A further comphcahon ISthe means used to apply the design The will to design first may be there, but the means may not exist The portals of the basilica of San NIcola of Ban demonstrate the problem On each of the sculpted arches over the portals, one can hnd areas where sculptural details have been truncated or partially obliterated In order to fIt the blocks Into the arch The blocks were carved on the ground and then had to be modihed In order to fIt together In place ThIS mdicates that the methods of measurement were unequal to the task of pre-carVIng the sculpture on the arch blocks Apphcahon of the design ISprobably the major condihorung factor In the design-toexecuhon process The problems that can be seen on the portals of San NIcola are not unusual but only more obvious than others One problem IShow the design generates In relation to carVing, but another equally Important one ISthe methods used to transfer the design or any of ItSelements to the stone These methods can be roughly categorized as tradihonal, traditional With vanahons , non-measured drawings. measured drawings. models as sketches, non-measured models, measured models, workshop orgaruzahon. on-the-spot problem solving Some are practical techniques whereas others are forms of organiZing the work process Because of this they are not mutually exclusive The designto-execution process may Involve one alone, or else some combmahon of the above

Traditional In the tradrhonal method a carver IStrained to repeat certain forms HISworking knowledge ISsuch that all orders submitted to him Involve carVIng these forms A mason need only be told to cut a block to such-and-such dimensions for him to be able to do It There IS no need under tradihonal practices to submit any further design More complicated forms can be treated the same way Given a molding cut to the nght shape and told to carve an egg-and-dart motif, a decorative carver Willneed no further direchon so long as the proportions of such a rnoht are estabhshed by tradition One of the most obVIOUSexamples of traditional method and ItS advantages and disadvantages IS the production of monumental heads on Easter Island As can be seen on the unfirushed works In the quarnes, the process IS always the same The stone IS carved on the front and Sides while ItS back IS shll embedded In the rock The back IS shaped after the stone ISfreed from ItS bed The carVing ISessen bally completed before It ISmoved from the quarry area While the size and the shapes may vary slightly from one head to another, the baSICform or design does not change It ISknown to the carvers and reqUIres no other form of assistance such as a drawmg or model The traditional method ISbasically a rote method so that ItS hrrutahon IS the number of types that a carver or stoneworker can carry In lus head The worker ISnot expeded to be a problem solver, only a repeater of traditional patterns As long as the work problems or the design can be expressed In terms of these patterns, the process functions

134

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

If problems requIrIng new solutions appear, the method no longer works This IS why, except In very ngidly organized tradihonal sociehes where designs are repeated over and over agaIn, stoneworkers Willhave some other methods as well as the traditional one of transfernng design to execuhon 13 Another example of a tradihonal art fonn ISthe standardized relIgIOUSstatuary, such as Madonnas, shll being carved In Italy The carvers use only a small photograph of the statue type to reproduce It In any size The photograph IShardly necessary because the carvers are working by rote These carvings are so tradihonal In design and so often repeated that the carvers only need to know the height of the final carving In order to produce a Virtual duplicate The same carvers, If given an unusual design, Will need a model to measure from The relIgIOUSstatues are set, memonzed designs that can be churned out In any size Without measurements or other assistance Traditional With variations Tlus method Involves traditional designs but expects the carver to be able to Improvise on them The flower carver In Carrara, cultmg bouquet after bouquet of flowers for the Madonnas, IS a good example The baSICdesign IS tradihonal, but the carver vanes It according to the particular pose of the Madonna he ISworking on The low-relief marble sanctuary railmgs carved In Rome In the early Middle Ages are an example from a different era In the church of San Clemente, the sanctuary ISdelineated by a low wall of large marble slabs With carved low-relief patterns, tradrhonal designs that developed out of the late anhque There ISa sense of change In the patterns and In the combmahons that implies a certain amount of Individual development by the carvers They are not Simply rote work but are vanahons on a traditional theme It IS possible that traditional carvers had catalogues or sample books of drawmgs of their designs which they and their clients could refer to Yet my expenence of carVIng workshops and carvers makes me believe that this ISunlikely, given their normal working condihons Stoneworkmg IS a ground-floor operation. shown In many medieval illustrations In dirt-floored sheds set against the Side of the buildmg being constructed Modem workshops are often little better The conditions are Simply not very favorable for the preservation of drawings One should also note that, unhl modem hmes, paper was not a cheap, everyday material, and anything else that a design could be preserved on would be too cumbersome for ihnerant workmen, as carvers frequently were, to carry from Job to Job WatchIng the extent to which even modem stoneworkers Willwork from memonzed design patterns Simply Increases my Impression that, In a society where the designs were tradinonally based, and where cheap paper and easy reproduction did not exist, the carver probably kept more In hrs head than In any more tangible fonn 14 Carving from drawings Tlus method exists In two forms A carving can be made from a sketch or nonmeasured drawing or from a measured drawing Contrary to modem expectations, many major relief carvIngs were executed With the first method The studies made possible by the scaffoldmg of the major monuments In Rome have shown that many of these carvIngs were executed USIng sketches only The Column of Trajan IS an example The detailed analysis of the reliefs shows that the carvers had no measured drawing and were

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

135

not even sure how much space they had available Unbrushed sarcophagi from the second through the fi.fthcentunes also show a method based on very sketchy designs The carver drew his design onto the surface of the stone as a basis for very rough outlining with the POint chisel Then he worked his way Inward, adding and changing details as he went The looseness and freedom of the work as It evolved shows that If the carver had a sketch to refer to, It was only a very rough one The medieval drawings for sculptures with which I am familiar, such as the drawing of a pulpit preserved In the archives of Orvieto Cathedral, could not have been used as more than rough guides 15 For expenenced carvers who are trained fi.rst as carvers and later become sculptors, as they were In Roman and medieval times, carving by eye ISboth natural and considerably more rapid than taking measurements It ISwhen the designer, as In modem times, IS not a carver familiar with lus own tradition that It becomes Important to execute carvings from measurements Because to the modem observer It usually seems so difficult or unnatural to carve easily by eye, we have tended to discount what may be the most normal method In other pen ods of transferring a design to stone A Simple drawing on the stone or on a piece of wood, referred to by eye, ISboth the most natural and by far the most economical method for executing many sculptural carvings Measured drawings These are more commonly used In modem architecture than they were In earlier penods All elements and all details of a design are executed In scale or measured drawings before execution Anything to be cut or carved In stone IS completely expressed In the form of a drawing before sawing or carving begms An architectural molding Will pass through several stages of drawing The architect's measured drawing IStranslated In the workshop by a layout person Into drawings for the templates, which are then cut by the template cutter "The draughtsman, or setter-out as he IS termed, plays an Important part, and upon him rests a large share of responsibility In interpreting the drawings received from the architect "16 The most extensive use of measured drawings for sculpture was In ancient Egypt In tomb reliefs the design was drawn exactly onto the stone surface before the relief was carved, as descnbed earlier The Egyptian artists also used drawings prepared beforehand from which to take measurements for both reliefs and three-dimensional sculpture Drawing 46 shows a head with a gnd supenmposed from which each detail can be measured As the enlarged version shows, the gnd allowed the carvers to make any size carving from the drawing on papyrus or wood By SImply increasing the distance between the lines on the gnd, the proporhons of the design remained the same ThIS drawing could be transferred to the stone If It was for a bas-relief Once transferred, It could be executed by the carvers with exactitude ThIS type of drawing was frequently used as a means of preserving a design for further use, or of establishing the proportions for a design or type of figure or motif The drawings funchoned In the same way as plaster models do In modem-day Carrara They served as the baSISfor repeated versions of the same statue or motif Since the drawings could be enlarged by increasing the size of the gnd squares, they could be the baSISof statues of any Size, and were useful In large workshop produchon

136

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

-: ~

( f(\ f

M ,\

'11'--

1'-./ .:Âť:

'T r---- r----.-

Cr---- r--

Drawing 46

With a drawing for the profile view as well as one for the front, a three-dimensional carving could be executed. The carvers would continue to retrace the grid lines on the stone as the work progressed, as can be seen on an unfinished Egyptian carving in the Louvre in drawing 15. Again, by enlarging the size of the individual grid squares, any size statue could be measured from the drawing. Egypt is an exception to many rules of thumb in ancient stoneworking. In the first place, the extremely dry conditions allowed for the easy preservation of many things that cannot be preserved in Europe. In the second place, the Egyptian techniques were developed for workshop production demanding faithful repetitions of basic types. Established in fixed locations and intended to satisfy a small, conservative clientele who had an unchanging canon of beauty, Egyptian techniques remained relatively unchanged for centuries. The drawings for stone carvings demonstrate the extent to which measured drawings can be used as the basis for sculpture.

Models as sketches The use of clay, wax or plaster models as sketches without a system to transfer measurements to the carving was, in the past, considerably rarer than the use of drawings. The models used for the carving of ancient Greek pediments were the basis for a system of measurements, even if it was neither exact nor without mistakes. In fact, models are often used for large sculpture precisely because the sculptor wishes to have some basis for measurements. The earliest example in the Italian Renaissance is Verocchio's model for the Forteguerri monument in Pistoia Cathedral.l" It is hard to see how anything more than the most general measurements could be taken from this model. Michelangelo's clay sketches, such as the one for Victory, are almost equally 100se.18 The seventeenthcentury model (preserved in Santa Maria in Trastevere) for Nicola Sale's relief the Resurrection of the Dead in the Bernini-designed Raimondi Chapel in San Pietro in Montorio (Rome) is more exact and therefore could be the basis for measurements, even though it is still so small that the measurement of detail would not have been accurate. A difference can be seen when we get to Canova. Many of his clay sketches and models have been preserved. He started working on a composition with drawings. From this stage he moved on to small semi-scaled clay sketches. From these he gradually moved up to full-size, exact-scale plaster models which formed the basis for the carving.l" This very brief review of Italian practice shows that the early use of models was as a form of sketch. These pieces, usually in clay, were used to work out the composition but were not the basis for careful measurements. In the course of the sixteenth century,

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

137

practice seems to have gradually changed so that these small models become more preCIse and therefore measurable, but not any larger This was Berruru's practice on the Ponte Sant' Angelo Durmg the latter part of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth centuries. the practice of making full-size models based on the smaller sketches developed 20 Thus there was a practice of makmg small sketches which were pnmanly for working out composihonal problems rather than for exact measurements These can be dishnguished from scale or full-Size models for carvers to copy This practice still exists among some modern sculptors, In the fonn of both prehrrunary scale models and unsealed sketches for sculptors who carve their own works

Non-measured models These models are different from models as sketches because they defme the fonn that the stone carVIng ISto take They are not tnal pieces, but dehruhve models, even If not to scale These models rarely exist In a pure fonn SInce the Renaissance, however, there has been a tradition of small, non-scale or only roughly scaled models that serve for only very hrruted measurement Jacob Epstein's mature practice ISmtereshng In tlus regard As far as we know, he prepared for large carVIngs more With drawings than WIth models The only models he seems to have done were those necessary for the approval of large commissioned works This suggests, as I would thmk true, that If exact measurements are not required a drawing may be as useful for many carvers as a model One rrught add that In the medieval and Renaissance penod there was a tradrhon of producing models for architecture The only known examples of these fonn the baSISfor an Idea of the composition and ItS proportions, but not for any accurate measurements for stoneworkmg These models appear to have been Intended pnmanly to inform the clients rather than the workers

Measured models These methods have already been described In chapter 8 There ISevidence for the use of measured models from only three penods In carVIng Egyptian carvers appear to have used masks, perhaps life casts, for portraits In the thirteenth century BC Begmrung With late archaic pediments In the end of the Sixth century BC, models were used by Greek carvers for a groWIng variety of sculptures The measunng system began WIth plumb hnes, and gradually developed Into the more flexible Roman system of measuring knobs, wluch was not an accurate pomhng system In the modern sense of the term The prachce seemed to dre out by the middle of the third century AD, but there may have been scattered appearances of It Into the fourth century 21 The modern pomhng system began sometime In the late seventeenth or early eighteenth century, and ISnow quite common Pnor to this. rough scale measurements were taken from models as a common practice, probably begmrung In the first half of the sixteenth century From this bnef review, It IS obvIOUSthat there are large periods In the history of Western carvIng methods when measured models were not used at all, and even extended periods when models of any sort were not used

138

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Workshop organization An orgalllZ1lhonal method for the transfer of designs to carvmg work can be seen on monuments for which the design seems to begin as a general fonn that ISdeveloped In detail as the work progresses by the workers responsible for each particular stage or portion My studies of the Arch of TItus suggest that the foreman or master builder devised the structural pattern of the blocks based on the sizes of blocks received from the quarry and on traditional design patterns Then some details of the decorative patterns were decided by the carvers doing the work Fmally the sculptors carVIng the hgurahve panels executed some of the design as they drd the work I suspect that the same sort of breakdown applied to much medieval work and explains, for example, the variety in design of capitals carved for many churches It IS very dIfficult to demonstrate this system completely or the extent to which It applied In anyone monument It certamly did not exist In a pure fonn but only m conjunction With somethmg like the traditional method Begmrung With a traditional overall design, the method assumed that each group of specialists would be capable of resolving the design problems that were hkely to arise at the level they were workmg The sculptors of the relief of TItus in lus chariot on the Arch of TItus had to resolve the problems of showing the chariot, m bgh relief, movmg forward led by a Victory and pulled by four horses Yet they did not have enough depth to put one horse behmd the other m the relief plane They resolved this problem by putting the horses on a diagonal. although logically tlus ISimpossible because the chariot ISIn profile In fact, from some views the chanot looks as If It IS turning This ISnot a rrunor effect because, as a result, the horses occupy a great deal of Visual space In the relief For a smaller detail on the matching relief of carrymg the spoils, the carvers modihed the geometry of the base of the candelabra In order to ht part of It behind the soldiers carrymg It These problems arose from designs so ImprecIse that they had to be reworked m order to fIt them to the particular space This method of design transfer ISbased on the orgaruzahon of the workshop Given that workmen are specialists, they can be expected to deal capably With certain types of problems It ISnot necessarily tradihonal design so much as traditional lrammg and work practices The orgaruzahon of workshops will be discussed m a later chapter, and the area of techruques can be descnbed more thoroughly there It IS Important to recogruze. however, that a design-to-execution method can be such that the act of desigrung IS drvided among speciahst workmen as part of the working process Problem-solving method The hnal method of transfernng design to execution IS also baSically an orgamzatlonal one the problem-solvmg method The workers are traIned to take some very SImple deSign concept and solve the problems of applymg the deSIgn themselves ThiS ISusually a method of small workshops and IS,m my expenence, a modern smallshop method For example, a chent asks for a certam type of fIreplace m a speCifIcmarble The marble worker has some of the marble but not m the nght sIze pieces He has no speCIfIcdeSIgn to copy HISmethod will be to adapt a deSign to the marble and the chent's speCIfIcations, solvmg the problem by creatmg a compromIse among the vanous reqUirements The method IS problem solVIng because the marble worker does not

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

139

consider himself a designer He IS simply a marble worker who must deal with the problems caused by others' designs not being adapted to the conditions Imposed by the matenals Problem solving ISobviously part of every other method No design, whether new or traditional, ISso perfect that It does not need some adaptive on-site work This particular method, however, ISdishnguished by the fact that It generally seems to exist where there ISno designer as such The chent Simply goes to the worker and explains what he Wishes Whatever design there IScomes In the form of "I want a Pompeian fountain bowl" or "I want a seventeenth-century fireplace In yellow marble" The translation to stone seldom Involves a design per se, perhaps there might be a sketch on a scrap of paper This IS an approach for those who do not care for, do not trust, or cannot afford professional designers Yet It ISnot Simply a lack of method As With many methods, It ISa reaction to the client's needs In almost any period, alongside the major monuments and sculptures there was also a market for smaller, less costly works for mdrviduals who could not afford the major projects In this situation, local workshops supplied objects that were not so much copies as adaptations of existing or traditional designs This ISa material form of popular culture It ISa demand met by small, usually humbler workshops or those away from the cultural centers Design IS by Imitation and the applicahon of design IS adaptive problem solving Although this method ISeasily observed In modem times, I suspect that It has always existed As a form of popular culture examples can be found In small towns and country places The example that comes to mind ISthe Romanesque capitals In several churches In the Casenbno Valley In Tuscany The towns of Strada and Sha have churches With capitals carved In a local sandstone which ISa relabve of pieira serena and seems to be a form of what In Florence IScalled pieira forte It ISused In these churches because it lS the usable, carvable local stone These capitals are simphficahons of designs, In some cases denved from ancient Roman ongmals, that are seen In the contemporary churches In the major centers The Preve In Arezzo, for Instance, has capitals from which some of the Casenhno capitals could be seen to be adaptations and Simplifications The Casenhno carver adapted the designs, not only to the stone and the building but also quite naturally to lus own training The details are never so precise. the design ISSimpler and the relief IS much less deep than the onginals These local carvers were most probably stonemasons rather than trained sculptors, and were typical of stonemasons In many areas In many pen ods They were carving sculpture of necessity as part of the Job of burlding a church Their design was tradition and memory of capitals seen elsewhere, so their technique Involved adapting tradition, memory and training to a specific Instance Tlus ISproblem solvmg as a form of design What I have descnbed above ISa method of material popular culture Underlying the expert work on the major monuments, there ISalways a layer of humbler, popular work In penods where the major works are impossible to execute It ISfrequently the popular areas that preserve technical practices This ISto some extent true of hne carving at the present bme because there ISso little demand for It on major works Techmques that seem to be extinct may lie hidden In urumportant or provincial workshops for a long time One fmal element remains In our descnphon of the processes and methods by which design ISpassed to stone This ISthe question of who ISresponsible for design A design

140

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

may be executed by an architect, a sculptor, a stoneworker, the client or his appointee or some group or committee that Includes all or part of the above A simple division IS between trained designer, trained workman and client, assurrung that tlus last person IS not a trained worker of some sort The design techniques are modified to some extent by the training of the person responsible for the design, and this training clearly has some effect on the working processes A Gothic cathedral, designed by a combination of untrained pnests and trained stone masons, but without an architect In the modem sense of the word, IScertainly different In execution from a nineteenth-century building, every detail of which was set out by a trained draughtsman It ISnot a part of this work to try to chart this effect, but It IS Important to recognize that such an Influence on the techniques exists Techniques do not exist In a vacuum In relation to desrgn or vice versa The designer ISsubject to the methods of execution, and different design processes result In different techniques A sculpture made In clay, cast In plaster and then executed In stone will be noticeably different from one designed while It IS being carved Equally, architecture executed from measured drawings Will exhibit Visual properties peculiar to tlus mode of design These differences In design technique tend to be charactenshc of penods The understanding of them IS Important for more than Just a study of the techniques That design does not exist In a vacuum IS obvious, what IS not always so obvIOUSIS the interrelationship of design and technique Essential parts of a stoneworker's training and technical baggage are methods and processes that relate to design The specific means by which design IStranslated to stone are techniques of the stoneworker These are limitations on the designer More Important, they are an Integral part of the lore passed on from generation to generation by the sroneworkers The way a carver deals With a design, the form In which he expects It to be presented, and the tools he Will use to deal With It are as Important as the way he holds hrs tools and the type of material he has at hand Moreover, each process he learns ISrelated to a form of design and ItS transfer to stone If you change one, the other must change as well In studying the techniques of stoneworkmg one cannot therefore neglect the processes of design Notes 1 Silber and Freidman, 1987 pp 1:;6-7 2 James, 1985 :; The difference between an architect-designed building and a master-mason designed one IS much deeper It IS a whole difference of penod and ethos In the workmg of stone and architecture It has especial Importance for restorahon where such work Involves the recarvIng of elements of the buildmg One of the pnmary differences between Cotluc and neo-Cothic lies In this dIfference and how It affects the carvIng of every detail 4 The stone Circles of Great Bntam and Brittany are In one sense examples of rmrumal design and In another not Their careful astronomical onentahon. and the need to bnng the stone from a distance both contradict the sense of rrururnal design that IS VISIbleIn the Simplicity of the placing and the lack of Involved workmanslup on the mdrvidual stones The term minimal design ISnot a pejorative term as used here MInimal design sigruhes the maximum Intelligent use of stone as It ISfound Modem workmanship which often Involves complicated processes could well use some of the qualrhes shown In minimal design

DESIGN

AND

PROCESS

141

5 It must be sard that the most endunng example of tradihonal design IS ancient Egyphan sculpture The presence of a virtually unchangmg canon of proporhons allred with a group of techniques that are perfectly adapted to the expreSSIon of that canon resulted m a conhnumg tradihon for over two millennia It ISbeyond the compass of this book to discuss them but It ISprobably true that the durability of traditional design ISdependant on pohhcal and cultural condihons more than technical ones 6 This IS a statement that IS generally true of the carVing of stone It IS so much easter to saw and machine polish, that very little work IS being designed for carving The result IS that outside of the areas of neo-medieval architecture and restorahon there are not a lot of professional carvers to be found 7 There has also been a counter revolution against this This ISnot only true of the direct carving method of sculpture, but also of architectural practice In Great Bntain and France Ihave met stonemasons from both countnes who realize that mecharuzation has meant a loss In quahty of architectural carving They are attempting to maintain and In some cases revive traditional prachces wluch aVOIdmachinery and make the carver less of a mechanical repeater of designs 8 A good example of this can be seen In the differences between four alabasters carved from the same design Illustrated In Baudry and Bozo, 1978 p 548 9 10 11 12 13

James. 1985 p 127 James, 1985 ch 3 For Illustrations see Well, 1974 ch 3 For a more complete discussion of tlus see Rockwell, 1988a Egyphan carving. although a tradition-on en ted technique, IS not tradihonal In llus sense because the carvers were always working from very exact drawings 14 Renaissance artists did at least In one case use a fonn of design book See Cavallaro and Parlato, 1988 This IS however not a book for paSSing on tradihonal designs, but rather a group of drawings of ancient sculpture to be mined for compositional elements 15 16 17 18 19

Carzelli. 1972 pp 3~41 Warland, 1953 p XVII Illustrated In WIUkower, 1977 p 89 Illustrated In Coldscherder.rcya pis 170, 171 Anyone Interested In following the process of desigrung large marble sculpture as used Since Canova's hme should VISItthe Museum of Canova In Possagno, near Bassano del Grappa (Italy) 20 On occasion full-SIzed models were made before the seventeenth century The purpose was to see If the statue would work In the place for which It was designed rather than as the basis for preCIse measurements Tlus IS true of Bernini's model for the statue of Longmus In St Peter's. Rome 21 It IS worth noting In this regard that In the only Roman sculpture carving shop that Iknow, at Aphrodisias, there was not enough space for keeping many models

The project

A large sculptural or architectural project ISan Interlocked senes of processes beginning with obtaining the stone and ending with the hrushmg touches on the erected work (photographs 19 and 20) Tlus Interlocked senes forms a larger process which I am calling the project We have seen how the method of design depends on, as well as Influences the techniques of stoneworkmg The same IStrue of the methods of quarrying, transport, workshop orgaruzahon and construction of stone The processes that together make up the overall project are Interrelated In such a way that a change In one will necessitate a change In the others Ultimately the methods of the individual carvers will be affected by the methods of any other group of workers In the process Quarrying In many penods tends toward obtaining large blocks of stone The SIZeof the block, however, ISlimited to the transport capability of the penod, and tlus In tum ISaffected by the mdividual Importance of the work Itself The Egyptians, for example, developed the techniques for manufacturing and moving granite obelisks to a high art, without pulleys and labor-saving machinery They did not produce obelisks by the thousands for every minor offrcral's tomb, the obelisk required a tremendous concentration of personnel and was reserved for the most Important works 1 Today, the transport of a gramte obelisk would not be as much of a challenge, but there IS no demand So the size of block, the transport and the Importance attached by the client are all factors that bear on the particular project Tlus example shows the Interrelated character of the processes In a project, but It IS In no way umque In the past there has been a tendency to concentrate on the major stone monuments created In the centers of a culture Tlus In tum means that the technology of stone IS viewed In relationship to these works Nevertheless, In anyone penod there may be large areas of stoneworkmg for more humble purposes The techniques of these lesser works are mvanably related to those of the ncher, more monumental works, either by denvahon or because a stoneworker's training tends to comprehend the Simple as well as the complicated, no matter how high a level he reaches In lus trade Cotluc and Romanesque builders built many different sizes and types of churches and chapels as well as smaller projects A project of a small tomb or statue may tell us as much of the overall running of their stone technology as the marvelous quarrying, transport and erection of a cathedral At least It shows us what they were both willing and able to do on an everyday practical baSIS The large monuments demonstrate the leading edge of the

THE

PROJECT

143

technology, and the everyday projects demonstrate more of the organization of stoneworkmg In the society In the context of this book and this chapter, everyday technology ISImportant Still, with the exception of modem stoneworkmg, It ISlittle known or studied The examples that I use are almost mvanably Important works In the analysis of stone techniques and especially the overall processes, the analyst must always bear In mind that the major monument builds on a foundation not only of ItS predecessors but also of ItS humble contemporanes A stoneworkmg project breaks down Into SIXstages of technical processes design. quarrying or obtaining the stone, transport, workshop process, placement, and finishing On large projects of architecture or sculpture, these stages are usually easily distinguishable On small projects they may be earned out by the same workers

Design ThIS has already been thoroughly discussed In the prevIOUS chapter In the context of large projects, design can Involve the design of equipment, the opening of new quarnes, or changes In the organization of work processes and more MIchelangelo, for example, had to open new quarnes on Monte Alhssimo In the Apuan Alps to obtain the best quality statuary marble Certainly the first obelisks required the creation of methods for quarrying and moving and erecting such massive objects These methods may have been adaptations of exishng ones, but they still had to be thought of In the design process Design may then Involve design of machinery and techniques as well as design of the stonework Itself 2 In general, design must Include a comprehensron of possible techniques The larger the project, the more likely It WIllbe that this WIllInvolve change and adaptation of exishng techniques to meet new needs Studies of Gothic flying buttresses have shown that they were Invented to meet a problem, Wind loading dunng storms, that arose after conslruchon 3 Design does not therefore necessanly end WIth the completion of the buildmg, and may Involve technological invention at any POint dunng the process Finally, to reiterate a POint made In the preVIOUSchapter, design ISnot necessarily the proVince of a trained specialist. or of one person The designer may not have thought of the act of designing as an Important part of the work Designing may be Involved In every stage of the work and may Include VIrtually every worker On the other hand design may be the proVince of one or more specialists who do their part before the other parts of the process begin Their on-SIte work may only Involve controlling that design ISbeing accurately followed Historically, design must be VIewed as a very Ilexible part of the process of stoneworkmg

Obtaimng stone ThIS ISnormally done by quarrying, but this ISnot always true The prachce of desporlmg earlier buildings for good stone was a frequent practice In vanous pen ods In western European stonework and has not yet completely dred out The travertine foundation blocks of the Arch of TItUSare reused, although we do not know from what monument Most marble medieval monuments In central Italy were made up wholly or

144

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

In part of reused ancient matenal The church of Sant' Agoshno In Rome was made with travertine taken from the Colosseum These are only a few examples Obtaining stone can be Simply a process of finding SUItable strata of stone for carving The cave temples In India or the temples In Petra In Jordan are examples The stone IS not removed from the ground In any way It IS used as the raw matenal for architecture and sculpture as It hes In the earth Although the work process In actually carving the architecture Into the hillside ISmore complicated than working With quarned stone, the builders have avoided the hme-consummg and expensive work of quarrying and transport 4 The material for modem work and probably the majority of ancient work has been obtained by quarrying Quarrying ISdependent on the nature of the bedding of the stone In the earth Therefore the entire nature of a project can be conditioned by the nature of the stone A stone easily found In large blocks IS likely to condition the designer to use large blocks On the other hand, a highly workable stone that IS only found In smaller blocks will have an appropriate effect on the final product In an interesting study, Amanda Clandge has shown that many Roman statues of Single hgures were carved In several pieces of marble, In all probability because full-size blocks were not available 5 One type of stone ISnot necessanly quarned the same way at different times Carrara quarnes produce uniformly larger blocks now than dunng the Renaissance Both the size and the uruforrruty IS Important Renaissance quarrying was often executed for specific projects whereas modem quarrying ISmore uniform and non-specific These differences echo In the techniques of stoneworkmg In general and on any large project In particular The conditions Imposed by both the material and the method of obtaining It are VISible In the place quarrying occupies In the total process The Column of Trajan was a highly speohc project, and the size of the blocks of stone required - 16 cylmdncal blocks 150 cm high by 1,100 cm In circumference - was unusual The size alone was not as great a problem as the number of blocks of that oversized dimension The marble also had to be of a quality that allowed the carvmg of a great deal of very hne detail Since there was little time In relation to the srze of the project, a very hard marble would slow the work down The choice of marble was then virtually lmuted to Luru (ancient Carrara) marble, the only one that met these conditions Pentelic ISvery hard and not quite as reliable for small detail sculpture, and Docimeum required extensive overland transport Many types of marble are difficult to obtain In uniformly large blocks because of the amount of natural bedding faults associated With It In the quarnes Carrara marble IS an excephon Thus obtaining marble blocks the size required for the Column of Trajan was a quarrying problem that conditioned the selection of the stone Any specific monumental project reqUIres both knowledge of the stone and knowledge of the hrruts of the quarnes The interrelationship of techniques will be discussed In more detail In the chapters on quarrying and In the studies of particular works Quarrying IS one of the most distinct parts of the process as a whole It ISgenerally earned out by specialists. and must be done before the transport, working and placement of the stone As such It has a much clearer and more comprehensible relationship to the whole than elements such as design The baSICmatenal must be obtained How It IS obtained, the condition It IS In, what can be obtained, are all Important considerations and vanables, but the essential problem remains

THE PROJECT

145

Transport This affects any project where the source or worksite of the stone IS not the same as the site of the hrushed work The specific techniques of transport are the subject of a later chapter In terms of the project as a whole, the problem of transport ISrelated to vanous problems of obtammg the stone and sethng up workshops In fact, desirable stones were often quarned at great distances from the worksite or construction site The Roman Empire, for example, transported stone from Greece, ASia MInor, Egypt and North Afnca to Rome The organized transportahon of both rough and worked stone was a major Industry at that hme 6 The method of transport orgaruzahon. the location of the work site, the distance and condihons of transport and the type of project all strongly affect transport Let us look at each of these In tum To some extent transport orgaruzahon can be charactenzed according to the distances Involved Some projects, the cyclopean walls of Lazro for Instance, are executed With matenal found on the spot, so transport ISa question of mOVIngthe stone short distances The builders themselves probably did the work Other major projects, such as the Parthenon, were executed With stone that came from less than twenty kilometers away Transport could therefore be organized In a more or less Informal fashion It required oxen and carts but not great capital outlay Projects such as the medieval Orvieto Cathedral, on the other hand, Involved bnngmg stone from vanous different sites The stone was quarned within the general area but from at least fIfty kilometers away Some marble on the facade IS reused marble which came from a Villa In the Castelli Romani more than one hundred kilometers away If the marble were quarned directly, then the nearest quarnes are In the Apuan Alps, over two hundred and hfty kilometers away Transport therefore required considerable organizahon

The Impenal Roman builders, like our own, had a quarryIng and transport system that functioned separately from specific projects When an Impenal Roman architect had a major project, he drew the material from the available stockpile rather than ordenng new stone 7 The Impenal works adrrurustrahon would then see to replerushmg the stocks For the Arch of Titus. for example, the stone may have been already in Rome waiting to be picked for some Important project The architect used two types of stone travertine on the foundations. Pentelrc marble for the rest The difference in material was to aVOIdusmg valuable marble where unnecessary On some monuments the transport can be considered the most Impressive technology m the project The stone CIrcles of Stonehenge are certainly an example of this The amount of surface workmanship on the smgle stones ISnot great, the sethng up of the stones ISnot difficult to Imagme It ISthe transport of these large blocks to this quarryless spot on thiS Wide plain that IS so Impressive to the observer If the type of project and the distance are Important for the transport, the locahon of the worksite ISas well Are the blocks for a project shaped m the quarry, at the building Site, or m some mlenm location? Transported stones can be either rough, semi-worked or hrushed If the worksite ISthe firushmg Site, then the transportahon problems are those of movmg a rough matenal Weight and Size, but not fragility, are the Issue If the worksite ISnear the quarry and the hruslung site distant, then transport problems are less

146

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

related to size and weight and considerably more related to fragility The third possibility ISthat the work will be partially executed in or near the quarry and then hrushed on site This m tum signifies an adjustment m the methods of transport The fourth possibility, unusual but Impressive ISthat the worksite, the monument site and the source are all one Transport IS no problem, but the technique of workmanship must become highly specialized The organization of a whole project will differ considerably accordmg to where the work IS executed Obvious differences such as those cited above tend to be associated With lustonc pen ods Thus m Europe, Impenal Roman work frequently involved some form of roughmg out of columns and capitals and even statues m the quarry Modem work mvolves hrushmg in workshops that are fixed in place and, wherever possible. near a major quarry site Medieval work was usually earned out on SIte The distance and conditions of transport have an obVIOUSeffect Quarnes near the worksite reqUire less labor and therefore less expense for transporhng the stone Greater distance, however, does not necessanly mean greater difficulty Quarnes near a good natural port on a major shippmg lane do not need to be near the worksite for relatively cheap transport The blocks are loaded directly on shipboard or only have a short tnp by ox cart to the port Ancient Proconnesian/rnodern Marmara or the Thasos quarnes are good examples On the other hand, quarnes, such as the Luru/Carrara ones, that reqUire bnngmg the stone down steep mountainsides, then transferring It to wagons and then to ships m an area Without a good natural port, created transportation problems m anhqutty and the Renaissance that seriously affected the expense of the whole project There IS an eighteenth-century drawing showing blocks bemg loaded on a ship at Carrara which gives a clear example of how complicated shipping can be 8 Because there was no port nearer than the Bay of La Spezia, over the mountains to the north, or Vrareggio many kilometers to the south, Ioadmg was carried out on the beach of Avenza A frame WIth block and tackle was constructed and the marble lifted mto the atr Then small ships were dragged onto the beach under the frame, the block lowered mto the ship, and then the ship dragged back into the water The tide m the Mediterranean ISso slight that It would not have been much help The capital expenditure and technical problems of building a port were so great that It was done only m the late runeteenth century after several centuries of this labonous and probably hazardous technique In contrast to Carrara, the ancient Roman quarnes of Ahkr on the Island of Thasos were on the edge of the sea There are marks showing where cranes were placed so that ships could be brought to the edge of the quarry and loaded directly There was no mterverung transport between quarry and slup 9 One major reason for the use of small blocks of stone m most medieval work IS transportahon and lrftmg Wlthm the direction that their tradition of stoneworkmg was movmg It was easier to design for smaller blocks than It was to solve the quarrymg and transportation problems for larger blocks 10 This was not a conscious decision, nor was It the only consideration Rather, a type of construction flows naturally out of the conditions Imposed m that penod as well as out of the desires of the designers and clients One Important condihon IS the transport facihhes and problems of stone The type of project ISImportant because the larger the project, the greater the strain on the normal lransportahon facihhes 11 Conversely, the more Important the project, the

THE

PROJECT

147

more the transport means can be extended The outsize blocks used for the Column of Trajan are a case In POInt Their SIze,being greater than was normally quarned, must have called for adaptation In transport Because the Romans had a highly orgamzed transportation system already In place, It would not have taken extensive changes to move these blocks 12 They would have required some special attention but not the creahon of new techniques An analogous example can be seen In photos of the mOVIng of the marble block for the upper portion of the obelisk for the Foro Itahco In Rome In the 1930S 13 H ISsaid to be the largest single block of marble ever quarned 1710 x 2 30 x 2 30 m To transport It safely, It was cut to shape In the quarry and crated there Then It was moved by ox team to the port because It was too large for the marble railway (At that hrne In Carrara, a normal block would have been moved un crated from the quarry to a workshop on the marble railway Then It would be worked, crated, and shipped ) Then It was earned to Rome on a specially built barge The normal techmques of transportation were rnodrhed for the occasion Certain projects are so Important that a method of lransportahon may be created Just for them An obelisk ISan obVIOUSexample Although we do not have illustrahons of the ancient lransportahon of an obelisk, there IS, In the Bnhsh Museum, a bas-relief of the Assyrians moving a monumentally large statue similar to others In the same museum The upright stonecarvmg. seemingly hrushed, has been placed on a sledge ThIS ISbeing dragged across wooden logs or slats placed In front of It to create a sort of roadway The dragging ISbeing done by long lines of men harnessed to heavy ropes attached to the sledge 14 There are several men USInga long lever at the back to help the movement As In a snrular Egyptian relief someone seems to be pOUrIng a liquid on the cross-slats In front of the sledge, probably to make them slippery Some men along the SIdes are holding ropes attached to the scaffolding around the statue These are probably Intended to stabilize the load as It passes over rough ground H does not take much imagmahon to realize the problems that would have ensued If the top-heavy load tipped over, mcludmg serIOUStrouble (such as execuhon) for the transportation manager ThIS sort of very slow-moving transportahon IS quite clearly a special project Even If there are several pIeces to be moved It IS not the kmd of everyday project that would have a standardized orgaruzatron to carry It out In contrast to the transportation of special objects, there IS the type of orgaruzahon that routinely moves large quanhhes of material Any penod In which major architectural stone building IS gOIng on WIll develop systems of transportation to meet ItS needs Roads WIll be constructed or ports developed to facilitate the movement of heavy material The Roman Empire had such a completely orgamzed system of transport that quarned and semi-worked blocks from Greece, North Afnca and ASIa MInor and then shipped them to such distant sites as Great Bntam These blocks have been found and worked In the MIddle Ages, the Renaissance and Into modem hmes Many such blocks have been found In the excavations of Osha AntIca, the port of ancIent Rome The transportatIon of stone IS thus affected by the sIze and type of project beIng carned out, as well as by the number of projects that the socIety wants Stone ISa heavy, concentrated mass of materIal H ISan unmalleable materIal that can be cut, broken and put together, but not materIally changed The rIght stone ISfrequently nowhere near the

148

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

place It IS needed All these factors combine to make the transportahon of stone an Important fador In the process of building or cuthng large monuments or buildmgs As the workers Involved must be conscious of the problems of moving stone, we must also be aware of this feature when analyzing their work Workshop process The process by which a stone IS worked has already been discussed very thoroughly There are three factors of overall Importance to be noted In the relanonship between the working processes or workshop prachces and the process of the whole project (1) The place of the working process In the overall process, (2) The ways In which the techrucal practices of the working process affect the overall work, (3) The orgaruzahon of the workshop Itself The actual techrucal prachces are a central Influence on the whole The type of work expected from the carvers, the type of machinery used, the type of hrush they are capable of are obVIOUSfactors In the overall project A workshop that relies mostly on saws, which are usually hxed, large pieces of equipment, expects stone to arnve In a different form than a carving workshop The complicated forms based on flat planes and nght angles of many blocks found In ancient Roman quarnes are due to the the fact that they have been prepared for saWIng by small saws In such a way as to lose as little matenal as possible An mtereshng contrast ISthe difference between the Egyphan sculptor's need of squared blocks of stone, and the modem carving workshop's relative lack of Interest In the squared block The Egyphan sculptor starts from the squared block In order to lay out his composihon If the block does not arnve that way, he must square It before proceeding The modem sculpture workshop uSing the pomhng machine or the threecaliper method can proceed without a squared block Since squanng IS somethmg done after the actual quarryIng In the modem quarry, a squared block costs more than an unformed mass Therefore, It IS financially advantageous for the workshop to buy un squared blocks for large cornrrussions Thus workshop prachce affeds techrucal elements of the project as a whole Finally, the orgaruzahon within a workshop affeds the whole project Are there specialists? Are the specialists organized so that they work together or In sequence on a piece of stone? Is the work organized around speed, accuracy, or refinement of detail? All of these WIllaffect what happens, how fast or economically It happens and the quality that IS produced A modem sawing workshop IS organized around the assembly-line concept A block of stone enters the workshop at one end and hrushed slabs exit from the other Each part of the process has a chronological place In the whole and must be carried out In ItS precise place A sculpture workshop In Carrara, on the other hand, IS organized so that It IS possible for several specialists to work on the same piece at the same hrne If necessary After the roughmg out, the carver of the face and hands and the flower carver can work at the same hme If the different parts are not too close together On the facade of Orvieto Cathedral, the carving of the flesh of the figures was a different speciahty from carvIng the hair Once the hgures had been roughed In WIth the point and carver's pick, It seems to have made no difference wluch specialist worked first Sornehmes the hair ISfirushed and the flesh not, sometimes the reverse In terms of the modem love of orgaruzahon, the assembly lme seems the most efficient Yet In carvIng

149

THE PROJECT

projects

where the number of specialists

while

the enhre project IS held up

work prachces vary accordmg

Therefore

In usmg the terms workshop of workshop

A workshop

they may be carrymg the cuttmg

may be hrruted, a ngid sequence

may mean that

they walt for some part of the project to be completed to the type of work and the type of workshop

prachces or processes I am not deEmmg the size or type

may be anythmg

from one to several thousand

out any type of stonework

Workshop

of the stone

IS divided

up and earned

the common

workshop

prachces

practices

out, whatever

workers,

and

means the way

the extent

of the

workshop Basically,

m any penod

are part of the accepted

prachce They are not thought out for each project and are not parhcularly questioned Only a large or special problem or senes of problems may bnng them into queshon and cause them to be changed workshop

practices

of the project Important,

As the cuttmg of stone IS the central part of stoneworkmg,

of stonecuttmg

at hand

WIll have an effect radrahng

Whereas

design and workshop

quarrymg, practices

hfhng and

transport,

the

out to all the processes hrushmg

are all

are at the center of the work

Placement ThIS IS basically a kmd of vertical transport

In almost any large project, blocks

of stone must be placed one on top of the other by hfhng types

of liftmg

difference related

into place

slidmg,

seems so general Egyptian

mvolved

cranes and pulleys and therefore

no hftmg

were

to hnd ways to place one block on top

awkward

probably

process

followmg

techniques

to each new problem

The method

architecture

and the monuments

A pyramid

drums becomes

verticality

beyond

the Parthenon Cathedral WIthout

more difhcult

totally

from our point of view

a rahonal

process

of placement

Certainly

ThIS

the

Of course

of adaptmg

does, however,

IS fairly easy to comprehend,

known

condition

the

a column WIth

there IS a combmahon

of height

and

wluch It IS not practical to go It would be difficult to Imagme buildmg

WIthout cranes, the Colosseum

It IS mtereshng

that could not be done by hand

on rollers, tilted, shd and rocked mto place, but

trymg

other WIthout hfhng. an extremely

several

this

block and tackle were not part of the equipment

meant that they were perpetually they

Although

m fact It can be

m overall technique

placement

Blocks were moved on sledges, probably

to themselves

Basically we can dehne two

or rollmg , or clean lifhng

and obvIOUS as to need little discussion.

to great differences

Ancient

hlhng

would be virtually impossible,

and Rheirns

impossible to apply the Egyptian

liftmg apparatus,

pIece than from several

It IS probably

viewpoint

to some problems

of stoneworkmg

much more efficient to make an obelisk from one

GIven that It has the tensile strength

not to split m the middle.

a large obelisk would be easier to slide up a ramp and hlt mto place than It would be to place one block on top of another to cut mto the unquarned

SImIlarly, a large complIcated

deSIgn would be easIer

rock face than to bUIld If IIftmg was reqUIred

In any case, It IS

easIer to move a carver than a carvmg LIftIng has ItS peculIar problems the sIze of block IS condItIoned

If bUlldmg technology

IS dependent

by the IIftmg capaCity of the machmery

The technology

of GothIC arches IS based on usmg many small blocks of stone, whereas technology

IS based

on a small number

of relatIvely

large blocks

on IIftmg, then ancIent Roman

m each arch,

thIS

150

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

difference ISdue In part to the different developments of the technology of cranes In the two cultures EIther the height of the construction or the weight of the material ISgOing to Influence or be Influenced by lifhng problems It ISinteresting to contemplate the extent to which the mvenhveness of Cothic arching must have been to some extent paralleled by mvenhveness In developing solutions to the problem of hihng stones onto high scaffolding and placing them A Gothic rib vault high over the nave ISa lifhng problem as well as a carVing and structural problem Delicacy In detail can also be a problem In hfhng A large block of stone lifted Into the air always has some horizontal move and sway The chance that It may hit another block and break a corner must be borne In mind For this reason the rule that It ISeasier to move the carver than the stone again applies Detail IS frequently carved In place because a carver can negotiate a scaffolding more safely than a block of stone can be moved Another problem related to placement ISthe metal pinS or clamps that are usually put between two blocks of stone In a structure Modern stoneworkmg uses metal pinS, clamps and special hooks to hang stone facing Ancient Roman conslruchon used various kinds of Iron and bronze pinS, three of which are shown In drawing 47 Number liS a pin placed between two blocks set one on top of the other The pin Itself (shown In black) ISsurrounded by lead, wluch provides a secure setting and tight fIt for the pin as well as preventing moisture from getting to It If moisture reaches an Iron pin, It WIllrust, expand, and break the stone while a bronze pin corrodes and leaks green onto the surface of the stone Numbers 1 a, band c show the same stone and pin In section from the Side, the lower block from above, and both blocks as seen on the hrushed face A small bit of lead shows at the front because the lead around the part of the pin In the lower block was poured along a channel cut In the stone before the block above It was placed Medieval and Renaissance workers, seeking the Iron or bronze pinS for the metal. used to find these lead POints and carve In along the channel to the pin ThIS IS the explanation for the many ragged holes In the facades of such buildmgs as the Colosseum and the Arch of Titus Numbers 2 and 3 are clamps called butterflies which are used to fasten blocks together horizontally Holes cut for holding clamps hke number 2 can be found on the Arch of TItUS Number 3 shows a clamp of the type used on the Temple of Vespasran ThIS ISa vanahon on the butterfly Sculpture can be part of the structure and therefore technically part of the structural process It can also be constructed Itself clamps and pinS are found frequently on sculpture because It was made In more than one piece They are also found In restored sculpture Number 4 In drawing 47 IS an example of the kind of pin found In ancient sculpture The pin ISIron or bronze set either In lead (In wluch case there Will be a pour or channel) or In some kind of binder or glue Number 5 shows the type of clamp used frequently In Baroque sculpture Bernini's statues of the four rivers, on the Fountain of the Four RIvers In PIazza Navona, Rome, all bear this kind of clamp, wluch ISreally a square If-bolt The clamp ISencased In lead and then a thin pIece of marble ISInset over It to hide It from VIew These clamps are always placed near the surface For our purposes, the Importance of the pinS and clamps In stone conslruchon ISthat

THE PROJECT

c:::J

151

Stone

c:::J

Lead

Iron

I_ T

"--------

Drawing 47

the holes for them, as well as the channels or pours cut for the lead, frequently allow the observer to deduce the sequence of block placement. This is true whether or not the pin or lead still remains. For example, given a pour channel parallel to the outer face (i.e., with no visible pour point on the outer face), the pouring must have been done before the block covering the end of the channel was placed. Pins and their pour channels can thus provide valuable clues for the analyst. Finishing The essential problem of finishing is the difficulty in fitting finished blocks of stone together so that all the edges match. Finishing a piece of stone is just a stage of the working of the stone. As such it presents no more of a problem than any other stage. There would seem to be no reason therefore to treat it as a special part of the process of a project as a whole. In fact, in modem practice, finishing as a separate stage is only the

152

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

fithng together m place of pieces that have been firushed m a workshop No further cutting or polishmg of the stone ISrequired Exammed from an histoncal perspective, fuushmg must be divided mto two different work processes httmg together and/or placement of the blocks which together make up the final product, and the hnal surface treatment of the stone The difference between histoncal pen ods ISfrequently Just as much the precise sequence of these two as It ISthe method of surface treatment Pitting together many blocks of an architectural project ISan mvolved and complicated process A major part of the process occurs m the design stage Whether or not the pattern of blocks goes together to create the designed monument or building IS first a problem of design and then a problem of Implementation When the design ISbeing In part created while the work ISgomg on, the hlhng together ISeasier because mistakes can be noted and solved as they anse An equally Important part of hthng together IS the problem of cutting the joints to match In modem construction, uSing precise saws, this IS not particularly difficult When carving was the method of workmg blocks, and especially when there was a wealth of carved detail, such as moldings, that had to fIt together, It was a considerably more difficult exercise Large statues mvolvmg more than one pIece of stone have always presented tlus type of problem In modem prachce they are the major mstance of ItS continued presence Histoncally, a frequent solution to the hthng problem has been the practice of fmishmg m place Put the blocks together and then carve the details There are several versions carve all the details after puthng the blocks In place, carve those details that Will be difficult to get at In place before the stone IS It! SItu, carve everythmg through the toothclusel or carver's-pick stage before placement and carve the fmal stages It! SItu, carve everythmg but the details that are near the JOints between the blocks before placmg the stone and hrush It! SItu 16 In my expenence, the first three solutions were used on vanous structures and statues In Roman and medieval work With a marked preference for the third The Column of Trajan ISan example of the first solution, the carved moldmgs on the Temple of Apollo at Didyma an example of the second and the extant sections of the fneze of the Portico of Tibenus at Aphrodisias and parts of the facade reliefs of Orvieto Cathedral examples of the third Whether the selection of a solution was ad hoc, local practice or defined by lustoncal penod IS difficult to assess From the evidence. a combination of all three IS the most probable In Italy dunng the early Renaissance there seems to have been a SWItchto the fourth solution fmishmg the dIVISIOnareas It! SItu Donatello's Caniona In the Museo del Opera del Duomo In Florence shows considerable mgenuity In avoiding hthng problems Without having to carve after placement The dIVISIOnbetween two blocks of the relief of dancmg puth ISplaced behmd one of the paIrS of columns Nevertheless, the row of half-shells forming the lower border below the puth relief has two unhrushed shells, which are on the dividing line between blocks of marble One Side of the shell IShrushed and the other not The carver left the one Side unhrushed to be done after placement so that If the fIt was not exact It could be masked In the hrushed carving Then, as not Infrequently happens, no one actually executed these hnal details In place In fact, the reason that we know that this kind of work was common ISthe frequent neglect of details that were left for In SItu carving

THE PROJECT

153

Fuuslung of the stone's surface ISJust a continuation of the work process of cutting the stone Frequently the final surface IS a carved one The flat surfaces of many of the monuments of the first to fourth centunes In Rome were tooth-chiseled Many medieval monuments were finished either with a toothed or a flat axe When a smooth surface was required, the finishing was carried out with abrasive tools or abrasives In modem assembly-line practice, finishing IS simply how far the working of the stone IS carried along the line The begmrung of the line IS the block of stone, the end IS the polishing machine Any piece IS taken out of the line according to whether the designer's preference IS for sawed, smoothed or polished stone The essential POint IS that finishing IS not a separate working process It IS part of a workshop process that begins With carving or sawing What distmguishes hrushmg ISthe last problem of hthng stones together A one-piece statue or architectural details that ht on one block of stone are generally finished as part of the carving process Statues or decoration that Involve more than one piece of stone often have the carving process divided at some POint so that one part ISearned out In a workshop and one part after the stone ISplaced I have tned to explain the sequence of the processes that make up the creation of a stone statue, monument or buildmg There IS a complex interrelationship of processes and people In a large project which means that no Job ISIndependent of the others It IS Important to try to understand the Interdependence of these people and processes If one Wishes to understand how a stoneworked object comes about Even a relatively small object IS charactenzed by these interrelationships The small unhrushed Europa and the Bull In the Aphrodisias Museum'" ISdependent on the presence of this particular type of black and white marble In the Aphrodisias quarnes, on the quarryers' seeking tlus marble, on the quality of work of the tool-making blacksmiths and on a workshop orgaruzahon that valued highly trained carvers capable of carving fine details If this IStrue of a small carving, It ISmuch more so of large projects In stoneworkmg One can get a good overall view of the total process of a major project by looking again at the painting of the Tower of Babel by Pieter Bruegel the Elder In Vienna 18 In the foreground on the lower left, there ISa group of men led by an Important person and by someone explaining and showing the workmen to him These two represent the design team, the ruler saying what he wants and the works manager organlZlng the project and desigrung the englneenng of the structure The design ISquite clear since we see It In a sort of cut-away There ISan Inner structure of barrel vaults, like spokes In a wheel and a facade of repeating bays The whole ISvaguely reminiscent of the Colosseum Slightly below and to the left of center, bare rock ISbeing cut away by workmen With quarry axes In the center of tlus spur ISa tunnel opening, and at the lower part there are several rough blocks of stone, representing quarrying Here, In fact, the stone the buildmg stands on IS also being quarned for the structure (this ISnot an invention of Bruegel's, as castles were frequently built this way) Transport ISrepresented on the one hand by the ships In the port, and we notice that there are several blocks of squared stone on the docks However large the spur of stone the building IS set on, It does not provide enough stone for the whole Transport IS also represented by the man In the center walkmg down the hill carrying a small cut slab on lus back The work process or workshop ISseen In the group

154

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

of stonecutters m the foreground who are squanng and cuthng blocks of vanous dimensions to SIze Perhaps the only truly unrealistic detail IS that the artist has placed this group farther from the building than expected, although on a project of this size there may have been no nearer space to gIve them There are also carvers working on the first level above the docks and m the house nght above the heads of the ruler and hIS entourage The buildmgs nght behmd this one seem to be blacksmiths' forges Lifhng and placement IS seen m the fascmahng variety of cranes that are being used on the whole project Other pictonal evidence (gomg back to the second century AD) shows that these cranes actually existed On the upper level of the facade bemg constructed above the left comer of the spur of stone, a group of workers IS movmg a block into place Firushmg ISbeing earned out before placement by the carvers m the foreground There also seems to be firushmg by plastenng the final surfaces (This was not as unusual as one might Hunk On the Temples of Paestum, the stone was all plastered for fnushmg ) It rather boggles the imagmahon to think of managing and fmancmg such a large enterprise It may be that thIS one was larger than normal, but It suggests the scale of projects such as the construction of the Forum of Trajan m Rome, the sequence of monuments built m fourth to sixth-century Constantinople, Arruens Cathedral, or any number of nineteenth-century stone structures Orgaruzahon and fmancmg are Important aspects of projects, and could well have been why the Tower of Babel was ultimately never completed

Notes 1

The same could be said of the standing stone circles of which Stonehenge IS the most famous example I am differentiating these monuments which are relatively few from those such as the Gothic cathedrals or Roman amphitheaters which reqUire equal organization and of which a great number of variants were produced A case in point IS the design of hftmg machinery for the stone of the vaulhng cathedrals It IS clear from contemporary Illustrations that the cranes used were more complex than those of the Romans It IS hard to Imagme the construction of Rheims or Arruens without the proVISIOnof cranes for Iifhng the stone into

of medieval mechanically of the vaults place

3 Mark and Clark,1985 4 Thrs type of carvmg IS,from the technical point of View, the ultimate statement of the pnnciple that It IS easier to move the carver than the stone 5 See Clandge, 1990 for a descnphon 6 For some Idea of the extent of the Roman quarrymg and transport of marble see Dodge, 1991 7 Thrs ISconfirmed by the stockpile of unused blocks found at the Docimeum quames, see Fant, 1989, as well as the stockpile of quamed stone found at the Port of Ostia Rome Itself had in the area of the ancient port, the Marmorata, a stockpile of ancient marble blocks that were still bemg found m the eighteenth century, and gave the name to the area 8 Mannoru and Mannoru, 1984 pI 149 9 I was shown these quames by Tony Kozeh The fmdmgs are published in Sodmi. J -P, Lambraki, A, Kozeli, T , " Ahla 1, Les Cameres de marbres 11I'epoque paleochretIenne," Etudes thaslennes, Athenes and Pans 1980, pp 81-137 10 An mterestIng companson IS the early thirteenth-century Baptistry of Parma and the Arch of TItus m Rome On the former the largest blocks are little over a metnc ton m weight whereas m the latter there are no blocks wluch are as small as that

THE PROJECT

155

Always excepting those projects carved in the living rock It must also be noted that the Romans had the ability to move much larger blocks than this, such as the obelisks or the gramte columns of the Pantheon 13 II marmo lerle oggt, 1984 pp 222-7 14 This ISnot so stupid as It may seem Until the mvenhon of the horse collar m the Middle Ages, man, harnessed was a more effective means of movmg heavy objects than horse See White,

1978 p 19 15 The northern European carvmg workshop orgaruzahon IS quite different Generally speaking in either England or France one stoneworker takes the block from ItS iruhally squared state to the fmal product The mterestmg question ISwhen this method began Ihad assumed that tlus was the medieval techmque wluch was modified m Italy sometime after the Renaissance In fact study of unfmished work at Orvieto and Parma shows that a considerable specializahon was used in Italian medieval practice The problem IS whether this IS true in the north as well As I have already suggested, I thmk that the separation between the two traditions did not become as marked as It ISnow until the Renaissance Only the analysis of unhrushed examples of northern medieval work might clear this confusion It IS possible that the workshop orgaruzahon in the northern traditions changed m the eighteenth and nmeteenth centuries under pressure from the mcreasmg dorrunahon of the architect and scale drawmgs 16 A solution frequently used in medieval practice and later, but not exactly one of the above, IS to carve the moldmgs before placmg and the sculpture that runs along the moldmg after placmg Examples can be found at sites as vaned as Fountains Abbey in England and the New York State Capitol building in the USA 17 Enm, 1986 p 146 18 Wled, 1981 pp 85-7 See also Manganelli. 1989 for a reproduction of the Bruegel as well as several other pamtmgs of the Tower of Babel

Quarrying

Quarrying ISan Integral part of the processes of stoneworkmg In ItS simplest sense, the purpose of quarrying IS to dig usable chunks of stone out of the ground The most rrururnal dehruhon of a usable chunk ISthat It ISa mass of stone with no faults or breaks In It Whatever the color or type of the material, It ISnot worth much for stoneworkmg If It IS gOing to split Therefore the first necessity of quarrying IS to supply whole, unfaulted blocks 1 Given this requirement, the" bedding" of the stone ISthe pnncipal fador that concerns the quarryers To stonemasons, the bed means either the surface on which a block of stone rests or, as In quarrying, It applies to the way the stone IS found In the ground Descnbmg limestone In lus book, Cambridge Stone, Donovan Purcell gives the following dehruhon "BED the deposits of stone are divided more or less horizontally into layers of different characterwhich have been formed under varymg condihons These layers are known as beds, and may vary considerably m form, colour and quality wilhm the same quarry even withm the same bed considerable vanahons may be found as an area ISworked over The term ISalso used to denote the horizontal plane on which a block of stone formerly lay in the quarry - the plane on which It should normally be used in buildmg "2 Marble, however, does not always exist In honzontal beds In the process of ItS metamorphosis, the onginal bedding ISsomehmes tilted to an angle from the honzontal Sandstones are sornehmes bedded on horizontals hke Iirnestone and sometimes on angled lines hke marble Not only are some of the stone's working charactenshcs provided by the bedding planes, but they also create natural breaklmes or faults In the stone These are particularly obvIOUSWith limestone Any block of quarned limestone must come from between the strong honzonlal lmes that characterize Its formahon Thus the height of the block Will depend on the distance between the natural break lines Stones In which the bedding breaks are very close together (for example slate) can be used In thin slabs for roofing, while those With the breaks far apart (for example travertine) can be used In large blocks for construction Crossing With the bedding, frequently but not always at mnty-degree angles, are often fault lines, which are less VISible Nevertheless, they are Just as Important from the

QUARRYING

157

Drawing 48

quarrying viewpoint because the stone is already broken along them. In limestone these lines are usually vertical. and can be used to define the side boundaries of the potential block. In certain types of limestone quarries, these verticals are so clear that one can see exactly the size and shape of the block that can be extraded by looking at the face. This is usually not very high-quality stone. In good limestone these lines are not visible and are not faults so much as a natural tendency to break more easily along certain vertical planes and not along others." The situation with marble is more complex. As its bedding is not always horizontal. its fault lines are not necessarily vertical either. Indeed, the faults often do not form tidy ninety-degree angles to the bedding. When one looks at a quarry face, the natural breaks often run in all directions in a confused profusion of fracture lines. This is especially true of the quarries in the Apuan Alps above Carrara, Massa, and Seravezza." It is often hard to visualize how any blocks can come out of what seems like a geological mess. Only when one sees a man or a piece of machinery against the quarry face does one realize how large the quarry is and therefore how far apart some of the breaks are (photograph 21). All the usable blocks of marble come from between these natural breaks. Sandstones that are bedded horizontally like limestone tend to have the same vertical plane type of breaking as limestone. Those that have angled bedding are similar to marble in having cross faulting running only very roughly in vertical planes to the bedding. Sandstone also has pressure knots sometimes or areas where the visible break lines surround a center, making a sort of ball of stone which is visually interesting but useless from a quarrying point of view. The vertical or angled lines often visible on quarry faces are the outer edges of planes perpendicular to the plane of the face and the bed. Crossing these are other vertical planes parallel to the quarry face. In fad the face usually represents the vertical plane that previous quarrying has uncovered. Sometimes the face shows work already begun to quarry back to the next plane, in a series of step-backs. Drawing 48 shows very schematically the type of limestone or sandstone quarry in which the natural break lines are both horizontal and vertical. The dotted line follows the line of the vertical plane which will delimit the back of the blocks. This type of quarry generally produces a lower quality of limestone because there are so many natural breaks that it is probable that there will be many faults in the stone or it will be very weak and friable.

158

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Drawing 49

Drawing 50

Drawing 49 shows a quarry of good limestone or sandstone similar to a travertine quarry or to the English Portland quarries. In other high-quality limestones, the horizontal breaks may not be as clear as this. The dotted lines represent the lines on which the stone will be sawed out of the bed. The separate block shows how square the blocks are which can be taken from this sort of quarry. Neither of the vertical planes on which the stone is cut show as natural breaks in the stone. Apart from these natural break lines, the grain of the stone also affects the quarrying. The grain is a plane of the stone on which it breaks more easily. The grain in limestone is usually its bedding plane as well. This is why stone should be "quarry-bedded" in a building, i.e., laid as it is found in the quarry. The stone resists the vertical pressures of the weight from above if the grain on which it breaks most easily is at a right angle to such pressures. Conversely, as it is easier to break on the grain, it is easier to quarry following the grain. Where there are no horizontal breaks, the grain facilitates breaking. Stone has a minor as well as major grain. This means that there will be certain planes other than the major one on which it is easier to break the stone. This can be very obvious with marble. Splitting marble is relatively easy when working along the major or minor grain, but when one attempts to split across the grain the break will often shear off from the desired direction. The result is an uneven block. Drawing 50 shows a marble quarry where the break lines run in such an uneven fashion that it is impossible to quarry a square block directly. To get a large block, the quarryers must select an area where the breaks are not too great, extract the block along the natural

QUARRYING

159

break lmes and then square It on the quarry floor There are many vanahons to tlus process As IS usual In limestone quarries. there may be large beds In marble quarnes where the breaks on one or more planes are so far apart that blocks can be sawed out There are quarnes where blocks that are much too large to be moved are sawed from the face and dropped to the quarry floor, then broken down Into smaller blocks by sawIng and sphthng along the natural breaks In drawing 50 the letter a sigrufies a potential block to be broken from the quarry face b ISthe block after quarryIng and c after the same block has been squared, Tlus ISalmost always earned out in the quarry It ISeasy to see the high wastage that occurs In marble quarrymg In the difference between band c d and e show what happens If the block ISsplit In d the split lme follows the gram, while melt does not As the remammg pieces must now be squared, there IS a correspondingly greater loss of matenal In good granite beds, the size of block that can be extracted IS even greater than In limestone The unbrushed Aswan obelisk or the columns on the porch of the Pantheon m Rome are examples of the SIze that can be obtained Some granite has curved fracture lines that can be used m quarryIng There are ancient Roman quarnes in the Troad In Turkey In which one can see that the quarryers were USIng the curved fracture lmes to facilitate the quarrymg of columns 5 As ItS name Implies, columnar basalt has curved fracture planes, not planes so much as cylinders Each stone has ItSown peculiar type of fracture planes and ItSown type of grain These planes force certam charactenshcs on the quarryIng Generally speaking, all stone has natural breaking planes which form the honzontal top and bottom and the vertical front, back and Sides of the largest block that can be quarned Both the size of the block and the amount of wastage are directly related to the natural conditions of the stone Quarrying can be compared to harvesting a crop the type of crop largely dehnes the way the harvesting IS done In summary, the quarryers must exploit three breaking charactenshcs of the stone ItS bedding planes, other natural fractures that do not follow the beddmg, and the gram Each of these affects the way the quarry IS worked, the SIze of block obtained, and the amount of work required to obtain a usable block The more work required and the more wastage involved, the more expenSIve the stone Will be to the eventual user The quality of the stone ISobviously Important to ItShnal user As discussed In chapter 1, there are different types of quality the stone may be pnzed as a structural stone, or for detail carving, or In terms of color Color complicates the Simple problem of quarrying the largest usable block possible In some types of stone, metamorphic rocks and marble m particular, color ISoften not consistent With the bedding. nor ISIt necessanly umformly present m a quarrymg area Crarute, limestone and sandstone are more likely to be consistent in color over large areas When color IS an inconsistent feature and colored stone ISpnzed, the quarrymg WIllbe directed toward gettmg the best colors Stone that does not have the desired color may be rejected or at least graded according to qualIty after quarrymg In some pen ods, the taste for a certain color of stone WIllaffect the way m which a quarry IS worked Frequently a white marble IS streaked WIth grey or black or, as In Cipollmo, WIth green The streaks m a certain quarry may always run In a certain way but the taste for the way the streaks appear In the hrushed objects may vary For example,

160

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

~CJ Drawing 51

one period may prefer columns with horizontal streaks, another with vertical or diagonal streaks. The way the columns are quarried determines how the streaking will run in the finished product. Drawing 51 shows five blocks of marble taken from the same quarry face. The color is two-toned and runs in roughly horizontal streaks. Blocks I, 2 and 3 are columns with the color running horizontally, vertically and diagonally. Block 4 is all colored marble and block 5 is white. Looking at the finished work the uninitiated might assume that blocks 2 and 4 did not come from the same quarry as the others. Color can be seen as having the same effect on quarrying some stones as does the existence of fracture lines. It causes the quarryers to work into the stone face in certain directions rather than others. The same can be said of the way certain qualities of stone are sought. Carrara statuary marble can be found between black streaking so that, as in block 5 of drawing 51, it is quarried from between the streaks on the quarry face. Quarrying is therefore a function of knowing what you want as well as what you can get and how to get it. There is an interplay between the quality, the color and the size of block needed on the one hand, and the natural bedding and breaking characteristics of the stone on the other. The way any particular quarry is worked depends on the demands of the clients tempered by whatever natural factors are encountered. There are basically two methods of quarrying: you can cut out the exact block size you want, or you can break the largest possible block out from between the natural faults. The difference between them depends more on the way the stone is found than on anything else. No amount of modern technology will change the fact that marble has natural faults running through it that make it difficult to quarry out square blocks. The first method may take more initial work but is less wasteful of stone and avoids a step in the process. The block is broken out already squared or as a cylinder. In the second method, the squaring or shaping of the basic form is carried out after quarrying. Before cutting out a block the face of the quarry must be prepared. Normally the top or front of the quarry is cleared of the outer level of useless topsoil or unusable stone. Then a horizontal top plane and some form of vertical plane or step are cut. In other words, the top and front planes of the first block are already defined before it is quarried. Then a channel is cut around the other three sides. Finally, working with wedges or sawing, the block is split free along the bottom plane and pulled off the quarry bed. The sequence is shown in drawing 52. This method may be carried out by hand, cutting the

QUARRYING

161

Drawing 52

channels with axes as the Romans did, or with point chisels as in the peperino quarries in Marino. It can also be done by sawing, as in Carrara with the wire saw, or with a cutting torch as in modem granite quarries. Whatever the tools used, the process is basically the same. I have a small sandstone quarry in the Casentino, When I first saw it grown over with trees and blackberry bushes, it was not even recognizable as such. In order to carve a small rose window, I needed a block of stone large enough to contain a 90 em circle, 20 cm thick. After finding a place in the quarry with enough stone between the natural faults, I used point chisels and wedges to gradually open up the cracks that already existed. Finally, putting a large timber in the opening crack at the back, I wedged the stone out and pushed it over onto the ground in front of the face. The rose window was then carved before the stone was moved. As it looks at any point in time, the quarry is the product of the succession of user needs and the natural breaks in the stone, not of any planned development. In block breaking, the process of opening the quarry is simpler. The quarryers simply clear the surface and then begin breaking out the rough pieces that are the natural product of faults in the stone. Initially there may be no need to create a flat vertical face of the type seen in drawing 45. As the quarry gets larger it will inevitably take on a more organized aspect. In the beginning, however, it may seem nothing more than an irregular hole in the ground or hillside. There are many different shapes of quarries: pits, hillsides, steps, tunnels, and so on for as many possibilities as there are ways of cutting into the ground. Generally the type of quarry depends on where and under what conditions the stone is found. Most Carrara quarries begin as cuts into a steep mountainside. As the work moves inward, a flat area in front of the vertical space is created where the rough blocks can be squared or moved about. As the quarries progress, seeking the best stone, some continue deeper into the mountainside, while others extend down and become pit quarries. Still others, less frequently, become tunnel quarries. A relatively small opening is made in the mountainside and the vein of marble is followed by opening a cavern inside the mountain. At Carrara the tunnel quarries are more recent, whereas at Vicenza and near Verona, tunnel quarrying is at an earlier date. It is an ancient practice, there being on the Island

162

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

of Paros a tunnel quarry with a Hellerushc relief on the entrance wall Tunnel quarrying ISthe norm with Vicenza stone because the vein of limestone follows a honzontal plane Into the mountainside Taking all the nil off the top would Involve remOVing a whole mountain In order to get at a relatively small percentage of It Instead, the quarnes tunnel deep In along the vein, taking out the good stone and leaving huge pilasters at regular Intervals to hold the mountain above Eventually, a vast chamber ISformed, like a giant's hall, lit only at one or two working areas 6 Open quarnes are either the Pit or hrllside vanety an open-topped shaft runmng along the flat or Into the hillside, or a larger, more Irregular opemng where quarrying may be gOing on In several places at once The difference between them depends on the terrain where the stone IS found the Pit quarry ISusually cut on flat ground A step quarry IS a vanahon on the other types Instead of a Single Pit or an opentopped shaft running Into the hillside. the Pit IS stepped down or the shaft ISa form of ascending steps cut Into the mountain or hillside Since limestone ISusually quarned With vertical breaks between honzontal beds, most limestone quarnes Willshow some form of steps The advantage of steps or different levels ISthat the quarrying can be carried on at different places at the same time Step quarnes have other advantages as well A medium-sized ancient quarry at Aphrodisias In Turkey, datable almost certainly to the hrst or second century AD, has three giant steps cut into the hillside 7 The lower step has two quarrymg areas one on the front face ISan undercut that could In time deepen into a tunnel The other ISa cutting at ninety degrees to the hrst There are two more levels above the first, each a Wide step that IS a higher extension of the Wide shaft bemg cut into the lullside There are the remains of a ramp for sliding blocks down to the quarry floor, and traces of a roadway into the area The overall picture shows a quarry With four working faces, an open area at the base where further work can be done on the quarned blocks, and arrangements set up for movmg blocks within and out of the quarry All of tlus nts m a relatively limited space Without mfnngmg on other quarnes on each Side This efficiency ISmade possible by the method of step cutting so that the same large face has In effect three crews, one working on top of the other Even With tlus orgaruzahon, each mdrvidual block had to be broken out of the rock and cut to some specific form and dimension by hand In modern quarrying, efhoency and speed are obtained by the introduction of machinery The mecharuzahon of quarnes ISa relatively recent phenomenon Looking at late mneteenth-century photographs of Carrara, one ISsurpnsed to see that much of the work was earned out In a fashion that differed little from earlier centunes 8 Blasting had been Introduced, but little else appears that was new until the introduction of the wire saw The use of ox-drawn wagons, huge two-man hand saws and pomt-clusel squanng of blocks seems to have been continued Into the twentieth century A report by Louis Hinton on the Vienna Exhibition of 1875 shows that machinery for quarrying existed by that time 9 Still, the introduction of this machinery, either for cost reasons or conservatism, seems to have been slow In the quarrying Industry compared With construchon Five years ago, Within forty kilometers of Rome, It was still possible to hnd quarnes being worked by hand carving blocks from the rock, USing a techmque that has vaned little over two thousand years 10 Histoncal differences between types or methods of quarrying are poorly documented

QUARRYING

163

In many cases, modem quames obliterate past evidence 11 Equally unfortunate, however, has been the scholarly neglect of the history of quarrymg Now that It ISbegmmng to be studied, evidence of the relationship between changmg needs and technological development ISbegmmng to emerge The ancient Roman quarnes at Aphrodisias, where there has been very little modem quarrymg, are a good example of the possibihhes for studying histon cal change Four types of quarnes are found 10 a relatively small area, no more than four square kilometers The most pnrruhve type ISfound high up on a hill overlookmg the pIam Followmg the natural break lines of the stone, marble was broken 10 vanous size blocks from the surface There are a few signs of cuttmg with a point chisel, but there are holes cut for wedges The stone could be easily slid down the hillside to a gully where ox carts could pick up the blocks There are no signs of care 10 orgamzmg the quarrymg The second type of quarry ISfound on the hillside below the first type as well as on two other hills These are small quarnes excavated mto the hillside. but no more than three or four meters deep Only one crew could work 10 the space, but there ISa quarry floor which allows space for work on the blocks after they are broken from the quarry face Little or no attempt ISmade to seek better marble at deeper levels The third type ISrepresented by lullside quarnes found on the east Side of the low hill that IS the main quarrymg area for Aphrodisias These quarnes are open-topped shafts dnven mto the lullside When the shaft gets deeper than four or hve meters, It steps up, glvmg an effect similar to the begmnmg of a giant's stairway The workmg head of the shaft goes into the hillside far enough to get below the poorer quality surface stone and to the vems of pure white marble The shaft ISWide enough to allow only one crew to work at a time The fourth quarry type ISon the west Side of the same lull, where there are three large quarnes and two medium ones, broad fronts cut 10 a more or less flat crescent into the hillSide They are quite deep, With vertical faces as high as thirty meters Behmd them are large mounds of quarry waste The size of the quarnes must have allowed several crews to work at once The depth of the quarry means that they were able to follow vems of excellent white marble It ISnot possible to date these quarnes exactly, but It ISpossible to establish a relative chronology of the types The first and second type ISSimilar to classical and Hellerushc quarnes on the Island of Thasos 12 The third type of quarry could have Yielded the quality of stone necessary for a monument such as the Zoilos Fneze from the time of the Emperor Augustus When major building projects requmng large amounts of white marble, such as the Sebasteion, were built after the first half of the first century AD, the only quarnes that could supply the amounts of marble necessary were the fourth type It ISnoticeable that from the end of the third or begmnmg of the fourth century, the quality of marble and size of blocks 10 the sculpture decrease More of the statues are smaller, and carved 10 the blue-grey marble found near the surface Tlus suggests a decadence 10 quarrymg techmque This chronological arrangement of the quarnes, although provisional. shows that It IS possible to subject quarrymg to lustoncal study and analysis, which 10 tum assists 10 the historical understandmg of stoneworkmg 13 We have already seen that quarrymg ISan mtegral part of the stoneworking process The way stone ISquarned depends upon design and working as well as on the conditions

164

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

of the stone As we saw with archaic Greek statues, Egyptian obelisks and Easter Island heads, a great deal of shaping was camed out as part of the quarrymg in order to produce large monolithic objects A society such as the Impenal Roman or the high Renaissance m Italy, m which large statues m single white marble blocks were produced, required quames that could obtain the necessary Size, quality and quantity of stone In contrast Romanesque and Gothic architecture and sculpture used much smaller blocks, which tells us somethmg about their quarrymg methods The quarrymg methods used to match the conditions of the stone With the requirements of the society are an absorbing area of study Carrara has traces of quarrymg from every penod of ItS history These quames are mterrruxed With modern quarrymg in a fascmatmg and confusmg array Ennco Dolo's book, Carrara cave antlche,14 enables the mterested student to fmd the ancient as well as more recent quames, but It ISsurpnsmg how little interest people show m these remains I have found that few art-his ton cal studies and conservation reports mclude attempts to relate the carved work to the quarrymg process or place 15 Quames are largely untouched archaeological sites In the overall framework of stone techniques, quarrymg ISonly begmmng to receive the attention It ments 16 If the methods of quarrymg or obtammg stone for a major project are not studied, then we do not completely understand the choices, problems and solutions of the project Pnmanly, I hope that" quarry wandenng" Will become a habit of students of stone techmques

Notes 1 "Unfaulted" can, however, be a relahve term Stones such as onyx are so valued for their color that the presence of faults does not prevent their use Some stones are so delicate that slabs are now coated WIth a remforcmg material at the back before polishmg They can be sawed but not handled safely WIthout this 2 Purcell, 1967 p 107 3 See Purcell, 1967 Ills loa, rob, and 11 for good examples of thIS 4 Il manna len e aggl, 1984 pp 108-54 provides a senes of very mteresbng photographs of marble quarrymg in the Carrara area 5 Conversations WIth Cranm Ponti 6 There are a great many large, tunnel quarnes m France and Great Bntam, pnmanly of soft limestone, as at Vicenza The large city of tunnels that make up the Bath quarnes ISone of the most ImpreSSive In France there are many areas where the quarnes are underground Some of the limestone quarnes of Pans were tunnels (Noel, 19b5 p 79) In Proctor Vermont and near Marble CIty Colorado (USA) there are large cavern marble quarnes The reason in both of these cases IS in part to enable quarrymg during the winter months, which would be more dIfficult in an open pit quarry Greenwell and Esden, 1913 pp 163-210 IS a discussion of reasons and methods of underground quarrymg 7 There are several other step quarnes in the zone In 1989 we were able to date one of them to the first century BC Sad to say anotner excellent example has recently been destroyed by modem quarrymg 8 As strange as It may seem, much of the mecharuzahon of the Carrara working systems seems to have been carned out by the English English hrm names for what had become entirely Italian firms. such as Cripps and Walton, were not uncommon m the 1960s In comparIng

QUARRYING

165

photographs of Carrara quarnes with the information In Greenwell and Esden, 1913 It would seem that at that time northern European quarnes were more mechanized than Italian This IS no longer true 9 Hinton, 1876 10 The same IS true of some of the quarrying shown In Purchase, 1904 11 Thrs IS an ever recurring phenomenon which has destroyed evidence of ancient quarrying methods In many countries One must thank the Commune of Carrara and especially Prof Ennco Dolcr for the fact that a museum of quarrying history has been established and a census has been made of ancient quarnes The Fossacava quarry has been protected as well so that no modem quarrying can be earned out there 12

13 14 15 16

In 1989 we discovered a small quarry of the second type In which an unhrushed column drum IS still attached to the rock This drum can most probably be dated to the first century Be For the orgaruzahon of Roman Impenal quames see Dodge, 1991 and Fant, 1989 Dolci, 1980 Purcell. 1967 on the stone of Cambndge IS a valuable exception Since the time when llus was written In 1988 the situation has changed considerably, see vanous articles In Fant, 1988, Herz and Waelkens, 1988, Waelkens, 1990 and Waelkens, Herz and Moens, 1992 as well as Fant, 1989 and Dodge, 1991 In fact, It now seems as If quarrying IS getting all the attention, In companson With other parts of the stoneworkmg technology of the ancient world

Moving, transport and lifting

With the exception of those monuments which are cut Into the "Irving rock" a block of stone once quarned must be moved Marble weighs an average of twenty-seven quintals or three English tons to the cubic meter The methods and orgaruzahon of mOVing are then the problem Moving, long-distance transport and Iifhng of stone all have a technology appropriate to the conditions of the civihzahon domg the work Although a considerable amount of evidence does exist, common sense and observation Will discover the techmques or a reasonable hypothesis where exact evidence ISunavailable There has been a tendency to Invent fantastic or complicated explanations of how supposedly-primitive societies moved large blocks of stone It ISa condition of modem society that we have machines to do most of our work for us Because we do not have to think much In order to move large weights does not mean that others were Incapable of such thought Our tendency to look at our society as the most technologically developed that ever existed makes us assume that others could not have solved what we do not see an easy solution to Most people looking at the moving of stone In the ancient world are unaware of the extent to which small modem stone shops move stone With very httle sophisticated equipment If you have ever watched three or four workmen USing a geared lack and rollers to move a several-ton block, you realize that sophisticated equipment IS not a necessity The solution may be less fascinating than what fantasy suggests, but It ISgenerally more likely to be true The simplest form of mOVing stone IS to pick It up and carry It Tlus method IS extremely limited In ItSapplication because of the weight Involved Still, especially In the Middle Ages when small pieces of stone were used, It was common on construction sites The worker who ISleaving the foreground work site In the Bruegel painting The Tower of Babel has a carrying frame on his back With a cut slab In It Carrying frames of one sort or another are often shown In medieval Illustrations I Another simple way to move a block IS to roll It The first tool of Importance ISthen a lever The huge lever being used In the ASSyrian relief of the mOVing of a monumental statue at the British Museum" IS a large example of what can exist In almost any size With a lever, stone can be rolled, hfted on one Side, pushed, and gently edged Into place One often sees small, shallow square holes on Roman Imperial stonework that gave a footing for a crow-bar so that a stone could be pushed Into place In a building A good 166

MOVING,

TRANSPORT

AND

LIFTING

167

w 14a

15a

Drawing

LJ Drawing

example is in the travertine blocks, numbers 13a and 14a in drawing 53, on the northwest comer of the Arch of Titus. There are six holes (small black squares) showing under the edge of the corner stone of the row above (dotted line). Each hole is about two inches square and slightly less deep. Since the comer stone of the row above was the last of that row to be placed, it would be difficult to get it into place against the faces of the stones it fits between. These small holes are for six workers, two on one side and four on the other, to place their crow-bars and push the block into place." The crow-bar or lever is still a basic tool for moving material in all types of stone workshops. One may presume, however, that it was the basic construction tool for work such as the so-called cyclopean walls of the towns of southern Lazio and Greece. So long as the stone could be quarried above or on the same level with the walls, nothing more was necessary. Following the lever is the jack. In Italian stoneworking, a type of jack called the binda is one of the basic workshop tools. The binda does more efficiently what a lever can do. It is a geared jack which has a lifting point at the base and another at the top (drawing 54). As this drawing shows, the toe can be used to lift the stone so a roller can be placed under it and then the point can be used to push the block along the ground. Any kind of jack, the binda in particular, is a versatile tool that allows a small workshop to move large blocks, tum them, or set them up on a stand, so that a heavier lifting device is not strictly necessary.' The binda goes back at least to the eighteenth century; it can be seen in the illustrations of a sculptor's workshop in Diderot."

168

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Place a large block of stone on wood or steel rollers and It can be moved about the workshop or quarry with relative ease If the rollers are placed correctly It can also be turned In another direchon Rollers were probably used before the invention of the wheel It ISamaZing to watch the ease with wluch a block weighmg several tons can be moved about with nothing more than a set of rollers and levers A wooden sledge IS the next tool In order of Importance for large stone movement Often the sledge takes the form of two long runners The stone IS lashed onto these runners or an actual sledge, the pulling force (men, oxen, etc) ISharnessed to the front, and workers WIth levers push at the back As can be seen In the Assyrian relief mentioned above and In Egyptian reliefs, the sledge normally runs across a bed of cross-pIeces placed to make a road and made slippery by pOUrIng a liquid over them ThIS form of stone movement was still used In a modihed form called la lizza In the 1960s In Carrara In photograph 22, you see the stone lashed together on two runners It was being lowered down a steep, rough pathway on the mountainside Wooden crosspIeces were placed under the runners at the front, taken out at the back after the sledge went by, and passed forward to the front again The weight of the stone and the steepness of the mountainside kept the stone mOVing, wlule restraining cables kept It from getting out of control The cables were Cinched about large wooden stakes driven Into holes along the pathway When one cable reached full extension, a second was attached, and the first earned downhill for further use The most affecting part of watching the lizza was the eene, yodel-like cnes that the foreman, who was placing the cross-pIeces nght under the front of the runners, used to direct the crew uphill as they Cinched and un Cinched the cables to control the movement of the load The evidence from the Aphrodisias quarry descnbed previously suggests that the same or a similar system was used for lowering stone from one step to another of the quarry There ISa slipway on the Island of Thasos for the same kind of work 6 Whether the power IS gravity or man or draft animals, the baSICusefulness of the sledge for mOVing stone has endured for rrullenrua Extremely large objects, such as obelisks, which weighed so much that they would have crushed wooden runners, could be cut smooth enough to be moved WIthout runners The weight would be evenly-enough distnbuted so the cross-pIeces would not be crushed The closest Illustrations we have of tlus are the photographs taken for the mOVing of the obelisk for the Foro Itahco The block was crated and brought down the mountainside by the lizza method, then oxen were harnessed to It and It was dragged over a bed of cross-pieces to the port, where It was placed on a specially built barge Other than the use of oxen Instead of men and the crating, there ISlittle baSICdifference between this and mOVing an Egyptian obelisk 7 Ox carts are known to have been used by ancient Greek and Roman stone movers There IS a small gravestone In the museum at Afyon (Turkey) showing an ox cart WIth two blocks of marble on It Wherever nver transport was unavailable and the blocks were not too large, oxen were the baSICform of cartage There ISphotographic documentation from early twentieth-century Carrara showing ox carts WIth solid wood wheels and techmques unchanged from annqurry 8 Boats, In the form of barges or ocean-gOing merchant slups, have been an essential element In long distance transport of stone for rrullenrua Transportation by water, when

MOVING,

TRANSPORT AND LIFTING

169

Drawing 55

possible, easily resolves the problems that the bulk and weight of stone create. Not only can boats carry a large load, but, not being dependent on the quality of roads, they can carry it faster and with a great deal less manpower than any form of land transport. This is an obvious but important point: any quarry that was near the sea and had easy access to a port, prior to modem rail or road systems, had a tremendous advantage of convenience and expense over a landlocked quarry. If both the quarry site and the building site had easy access to a port, the building process was facilitated tremendously. Compare two large quarrying areas of the Roman Imperial world, the Proconnessian quarries on the island of Marmara and the Luni quarries in the area of modem Carrara. The Proconnessian quarries are all located on the lower and middle slopes of the low mountain spine of the island. The slopes are gentle enough that the quarried blocks could be placed directly onto ox carts in the quarry and moved to one of several natural ports on the coast below the quarries. Loading could be carried out easily with cranes directly from the carts to the ships. The ancient Luni quarries are all high on the slopes of the Apuan Alps, reached by mountain paths until roads were built after the Second World War. The quarried stone had to be lowered by means of the lizza, a time-consuming and dangerous job, to the valley where it could be placed on an ox cart and thence taken to the port. There is no natural port near at hand, so the Romans constructed one at Luni which is at least four times farther from the quarries than the port at Proconnessus. In the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, after the port at Luni had silted up and been abandoned, the boats were loaded by the elaborate process of beaching the boats, lowering the stone into them and then dragging the boats back into the sea. Thus, even though the Luni quarries are not far from the sea, the complications caused by the alpine location made the marble much more difficult and therefore expensive to transport. With the advent of the railroad and then the modem heavy truck, stone transport problems have by and large been resolved, but only very recently. Ilario Bessi's photographs of Carrara in 1920-309 show the extent to which the stone was still moved out of the quarries in the ancient fashion. The first dock with a crane for loading ships was built in Carrara in the 1850S. Before then the ancient transport systems of sledge, ox- or horse-drawn cart, and barge or ship pertained to all stone transport. Lifting anything as heavy as stone is a problem. Before the invention of the block and tackle, lifting stone almost always meant lifting by hand and obviously being limited to small pieces. Moving stone up or down meant the use of inclined planes and tilting. That blocks of considerable size could be moved and raised into place without lifting is obvious from both Stonehenge and the Egyptian obelisks. Although dragging a heavy stone object up an inclined plane was possible, albeit time-consuming and labor-

170

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

Drawing 56

intensive, it would seem that the lifting problem was primarily a construction problem. The construction of one or a series of inclined planes sufficiently slanted and smooth would take time, material, and personnel. The limitations on the size of the block that could be put in place were constructional and organizational rather than material. The pulley, drawing 55A, is the great invention from which the other inventions or developments for lifting stone derive. The pulley allows stone to be lifted from a single point above it. Also, by passing the rope through a wheel, it reduces the force needed to lift the weight. No other development has had such importance for the lifting of stone. It obviates the need of inclined planes and all the paraphernalia for raising stone that they entail. The simplest increase in power after the pulley is the great wheel. This is a large openwork cylinder set on its side and suspended from an axle. The inner curve is made like a ladder so that people walking within it cause the cylinder to go around. Because of the great diameter of the cylinder and the weight of the people within, the force exerted on the rope attached to the outside is considerable. Number 1 of drawing 56 shows a great wheel lifting a block of stone. This basic form shown in the drawing is found in the lower right of Bruegel's Tower of Babe1.10 The great wheel is found more frequently as the power source for a crane than it is in the form illustrated hereY The capstan is a sort of horizontal great wheel. The rope from the pulley is wound around the wheel of the capstan, drawing 56 number 2, and the worker pushes the handles attached as he walks around the wheel. The mechanical advantage is considerable and more than one worker can push the spokes of the wheel. Number 3 shows the capstan from the top. The windlass, drawing 57, combines the principles of the great wheel and the capstan. Take a capstan and turn it upright, set in a low frame. Then the workers tum the wheel by pulling on the handles one after the other. In principle it is the beginning of a block and tackle because the rope is passing over two wheels and therefore further reducing the force needed to lift the weight. The force given by the leverage of the length of the spokes is an additional aid to lifting. Both the great wheel and the windlass were used in Gothic construction. The first could lift greater weights, whereas the second required much less framework constructed

MOVING,

TRANSPORT

AND

LIFTING

171

Drawing 57

to hold it. The great wheel could of course be operated with a pulley, although we know that it sometimes was not. The great wheel is assumed to give greater lift, but to be used less because of the greater building problems involved. There is no doubt that both existed in the ancient Roman world. Mechanically, the block and tackle is a step beyond the pulley. This seems to be an ancient Greek invention. We can almost certainly say that block and tackle were used for the construction of Greek temples because the weights involved in column drums were greater than a simple pulley with a windlass could lift. Like the pulley, the block and tackle both reduces the weight and allows it to be suspended from a single point, so the stone can be raised and moved horizontally at the same time. Blocks of stone can be raised to load carts, columns can be erected, ships can be loaded, cut blocks of stone can be lifted into place in an arch or vault. It would be hard to overemphasize what an important invention this was for stoneworking. For the ancient Greek and Roman world, lifting was a much greater technological bottleneck than transport, as the Mediterranean and its tributaries were such excellent natural road systems. The invention of the pulley, block and tackle and their derivatives opened the way to new building possibilities. Drawing 55 B, C and D shows a block and tackle. Number 1 is the hook to attach to the support, number 2 the wheels that the rope passes through, number 3 the hook to attach to the load and number 4 the rope. The principle is that the more times the rope is passed over the wheels, the less force is needed to lift the weight. Thus D would take longer to lift, but require less force. The advantage of this in lifting stone is obvious. The fact that a pulley or a block and tackle allows stone to be lifted from one point is very important. Cranes are made possible by this characteristic. A crane basically lifts an object and then moves it horizontally while it is suspended. Without a center lifting point, this would be difficult if not impossible. The fact that a pulley or block and tackle is used also increases the amount of weight that can be lifted. Landels gives a very useful discussion on the cranes used in the ancient world and the uses and problems of cranes.12 Cranes in construction are a fascinating subject. I will discuss three because of their importance and use in stoneworking. These are the tripod, the tripod with a moving boom and the Roman version of the great wheel crane. (There are other versions of cranes and lifting devices that are used in stone; the present discussion is meant to be general, not complete.) The tripod (drawing 58) is the basic simple crane for vertical lifting. I have seen it used frequently in small workshops. It is easy to move because the legs can be folded together

172

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Drawing 58

Drawing 59

so that it is just three long poles. For vertical lifting, placing statues, loading carts and similar work it is the simplest and easiest crane. Its advantage is that it can be moved from place to place with a minimum of setting up and taking down. Its disadvantage is that the crane allows only the most minimal lateral movement of the stone. For loading and unloading, the block must be lifted, the vehicle brought under the load and then the load lowered. This seemingly cumbersome method, adapting the tripod principle to four legs, was used at Carrara for loading ships until the mid-nineteenth century. It was still commonly in use in small workshops in Italy in the 1960s. The minimal equipment and mobility of the tripod crane means that its use has been greatest where highly developed technology is least likely to be found: small workshops and simple worksites. The tripod with moving boom (drawing 59) is an obvious derivation from the simple tripod. It is a standard crane existing from antiquity. Traces of footing for it have been found in ancient quarries on the island of Thasos.13It remains, using steel and motors, the most standard quarry crane in use today. It can be used for loading ships, for lifting blocks out of quarries, for setting blocks, etc. The great advantage is that the movable arm allows both lateral and back-and-forth movement of the load after it has been lifted. When the arm is raised, the load moves back; when it is lowered, the load moves forward; it can then be pushed from side to side. The block and tackle at the end does the lifting. This crane is a very simple device, using only four poles and two blocks and tackle. Smaller versions are quite movable and therefore highly adaptable. For this reason it was popular in the ancient and medieval worlds, where technology was oriented towards high mobility and adaptability at low expense. This crane will not lift as great a weight as the tripod. The farther out the arm

MOVING,

TRANSPORT

AND

LIFTING

173

Drawing 60

moves, the more strain is put on it, and the more unbalanced the weight. This is the crane's primary limitation, the combination of simplicity and lateral movement its advantage. The Roman version of the great wheel crane is illustrated on the Tomb of the Haterii. Drawing 60 is a schematization of this crane. Number 1 is the lifting wheel powered by workers walking inside. Number 2 is the lifting cord or cable. Number 3 is the lifting block and tackle. Number 4 is the arm of the crane. Number 5 ( x 4) are the cables with block and tackle which move the arm back and forth or side to side. Number 6 is the block of stone. This type of crane allows slow lifting of considerable weight. Depending on the height of the arm and its girth, and the amount of times the lifting cable goes through the block and tackle, large column drums or entablature blocks can be clean-lifted and put into place. Considerable training and coordination is needed because five separate groups of workers function together. The lifting crew lifts the block, then four other crews handle the four cables that control the arm. The complicated form of crane was, one assumes, compensated for by the weight that it could lift and move. Certainly the impression given by the crane on the Tomb of the Haterii is of a massively large and powerful type of crane. A group of ten Pentelic marble blocks from the Arch of Titus show by their lewis holes that they were raised with a lifting device rather than slid or tilted into place. In their finished state, they weigh between 3 and 16 metric tons, which gives us some idea of the lifting capacity of this type of crane. Medieval and Renaissance illustrations of building sites depict many variations on great wheel cranes. The most advanced is shown on Bruegel's The Tower of Babel. It is a fixed-arm crane with a heavily braced arm, attached, in this case, to two great wheels, one on each side. The lifting cable goes through a block and tackle. The greatest innovation

174

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

ISthat It IS set on a turnmg Circle of some sort so that the whole crane can revolve 360 degrees Except for the power source, this IS, m effect, a modem crane In the same pamhng. on the level below the first crane IS an example of the simplest form of great wheel hfnng a block of stone, next to It ISa windlass working With a fixed arm and block and tackle Both of the latter types are generally assumed to have been m common use m medieval architecture The simple great wheel was often placed high up at the working level, the Roman version, m contrast, IS ground-based 1! In companng l.ftmg devices, It IS Important to note the major difference between Roman and medieval stone masonry Roman work IS often earned out With massive blocks of stone whereas medieval work generally uses much smaller blocks Fitchen estimates the weight that scaffoldmg had to hold dunng the buildmg of a Cotluc vault as less than a ton 15 This would have been more than one block Compare the Arch of Titus, where clean-lifted blocks weighed from 3 to 16 tons The Column of Trajan was made possible by devices that could lIft blocks that probably weighed over 20 tons It IS fair to assume that the Roman form of a great wheel crane was designed for hfhng great weights, whereas the medieval, and to some extent the Renaissance cranes, Iifted less weight but needed greater maneuverability How was the block attached to the hfhng cords? The simplest way ISto pass ropes or chams around the block and over a hook in the block and tackle It depends on the tensile strength of the rope, as does the lifhng capacity of the block and tackle, and on the knottymg skills of the workers This system, however, has a weakness that becomes especially evident as the blocks get larger and heavier When a block With cords around It ISput mto place, It must hrst be rested on small, usually wooden, blocks which raise It up enough so that the cords can be pulled out from underneath Then a way must be found to extract the small supporting pieces from under the block ThIS can be quite difficult If the block ISheavy It ISfrequently done With crow bars, but they tend to clup the comers of the stone blocks It IS much more convement for the whole process If the stone can be lowered directly into place Without enveloping ropes One solution to this problem IS to leave knobs projechng on the Sides of the block Ropes can be passed around these knobs and over a hook so that the block can be placed Without the need to remove resting blocks from underneath Another solution ISa form of Iron or steel forceps, designed With a cham between ItS smaller, upper arms When the cham ISpulled up, It draws the points of the larger, lower arms together 16 These points are set so that they gnp the stone m shallow holes cut into ItS Side which prevent the forceps from slidmg off The block can then be set directly m place Without the mtervemng blocks of wood for removing cords Drawing 61 shows both cord hfhng and forceps hfbng In forceps hfhng, the weight that can be lifted ISlimited by the strength of the metal arms of the forceps Considerable stress IS placed on these arms, as well as the cham pullmg them together Another drawback ISthat there must be space for the forceps and their removal This means that If the block ISpart of a wall, the forceps must gnp the front and back faces of the block As a result, either the front face must have an unsightly hole m It, or stone must be left to be cut away after placing Lifting-knobs on the blocks have the same disadvantages Although there are several versions of forceps and Similar devices, they all suffer from one drawback or the other

MOVING,

TRANSPORT

---

----

AND

LIFTING

175

..Jl

Drawing 61

....... ;: ' '.. '.'

..........•..•

'....•.

..............•....•..

.•.......•.............•.........

:'-':--,.'::

~ 2

Drawing 62

Drawing 62 shows lifting with cords and knobs on the block. This method seems to have been the major method used until the beginning of the first century AD. It is not known exactly when this method fell out of use. It was, however, certainly used on many Greek and Hellenistic monuments, including blocks found on the Acropolis in Athens and blocks in place on the Temple of Apollo at Didyma. Buildings erected in the first century AD, such as the Sebasteion in Aphrodisias and the Temple of Vespasian in Rome, show the use of the lewis (see below) for lifting, so it seems that lifting knobs had gone out of fashion as less efficient by that time. The ideal solution is to be able to lift by attaching the lifting apparatus to the top face of the block. A device known as the "lewis" was invented in answer to this need. The lewis has six pieces that fit into the center of the top face of a block of stone, providing a ring to which the lifting cord or hook can be attached. In drawing 63 the pieces are as follows: (1) a Ll-bolt. (2) a straight bolt; (3) a nut; (4), (5), (6) three pieces, two slanted and one straight, which together make a trapezoid. At the top of the trapezoid is a transverse hole through which bolt 2 can pass. The lewis is mounted as follows: (a) a trapezoidal-profiled hole is cut into the center of the top plane of the block; (b) pieces 4 and 6 are placed in the hole and pushed out so that there is space for 5 between them; (c) 5 is placed; (d) U-bolt 1 is placed so that its holes line up with the holes in 4, 5, and 6; (e) bolt 2 is placed and nut 3 is screwed onto it, thus holding all the pieces in place; (f) a hook can be placed through the V-bolt so that any cord or cable can be attached. The strength of the stone resisting the iron trapezoid is greater than the force of the weight of the stone. A block can thus be lifted from a centered point."

176

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

n 2~

Jil 4

â&#x20AC;˘

Al 0

4,5,6

Drawing 63

With the lewis, there are no projections or cords to be removed. so the block can be placed without the difficulty of removing stone or of placement in close proximity to other blocks. The lewis, still used today, was the favored technique for Imperial Roman builders. Its presence in Imperial Roman buildings can often be used to determine when carving was carried out in relationship to the placing of the blocks. On the Arch of Septirnius Severus, for example, the carvers of the relief sculpture went so deep, in at least two instances, that they broke into the hole cut for the lewis. If the relief carving had been carried out before placement, this could not have happened: first, they would have known where the hole was because the top of the block would have been visible and they would have avoided carving so deeply. Second, the lewis would have slipped out of the broken hole and thus would have been unusable. Generally speaking, the holes cut by builders on the top and sides of blocks can give a great deal of information about building processes and sequences. In summary, the means used to hold a block for lifting has an effect on the building process and also the carving process. Without the lewis, large blocks usually require some reworking after placement. Knobs must be carved off or holes in the side of the block must be masked in some way. If blocks are small enough to be moved about easily on the scaffolding while being placed, then using cords is not a problem. Therefore the size of block affects the lifting method and the building processes. If studied carefully, the objects themselves often give evidence of the way they were moved. Anyone wishing to analyze the techniques of a monument should be conscious of the problems involved in stone movement.

MOVING,

TRANSPORT

AND

177

LIFTING

Notes 1 Gimpel, 1982 pp 35 and 97 and Du Colombier, 1973 hgs 21 and 31 2 A drawmg taken from this relief as well as one from an Egyptian one are in Schmidt, 1922 3 I have been told by restorers that they have found evidence on some Roman buildmgs that a thin layer of clay was placed beneath the stone to be moved to facilitate ItS shdmg into place 4 When a brnda was unavailable m the United States, I have used small Jacks made for changmg the tires of trucks 5 6 7 8

Sicca and Tomasi, 1979 pI 74 P 191 IS an excellent Illustration of the brnda Tlus IS in the Vatlu quames and was shown to me by Tony Kozeh Good Illustrations of this can be seen in II manna ten e aggl 1984 pp 222-7 Illustrations of ox carts may be found on pp 174~ m II manna ren e oggl 1984

9 Bessi. 1989 10 Wled, 1981 p 85 11 Gimpel. 1982 p 79 12 Landels, 1981 ch 4 13 Shown to me by Tony Kozeh 14 For a diSCUSSIOn of the cranes found in the Bruegel paintmg see Klem, 1978 15 Frtchen, 1981 p 222, note 159 16 For an Illustration see Purchase, 1904 pI II, no 31 17 Two vanahons on this descnphon of the leWIScan be found in Purchase, 1904 pI and 30

II,

nos 29

13 Workshop organization

Workshop orgaruzahon ISthe drvision of labor within the process of working a block of stone, whether In one workshop under one roof or divided among quarry, workshop and building DIVISion of labor Implies some form of specialization When I was learning to carve I spent some time In a carving shop In Carrara At the time, much of the work was religious statuary of the most everyday type The carvers worked from a catalogue of saints and Madonnas Begmrung With the small photograph In the catalogue, a carver would rough out the form of the statue, then the specialists would go to work There was a carver of hands, feet and faces, a carver of flowers, a carver of drapery (sometimes the same as the roughing-out carver), a letter carver for the mscnphons, and a polisher when necessary None of the carvers mfnnged on the work of the others The diVISIOnof labor according to specialty clearly facilitated production At the time, I assumed that this type of workshop orgaruzahon was a peculiarly modem phenomenon My prevIOus expenence was only With small Amencan carving workshops where one worker does all, so I assumed that specializahon was unusual In the history of carving In fact, evidence from monuments of all penods, as well as vanous traditions In areas where larger carving workshops still exist, show that divisron of labor along precise and traditional lines IS often the norm 1 Modem workshops In london, Wells and Salisbury that I have VISitedshow a different form of division by specralizahon The work on one piece of stone ISnot divided among different speciahsts One carver takes a squared block of stone that has been cut to the dimensions required and carves It to the finished molding Where there ISspeciahzahon, It IS between the types of work of sculpture or architectural masonry A sculptor Will carve a statue, a sculptural carver carve flowered capitals or moldings and a masonry carver cut moldings 2 Tlus specializahon ISdifferent from the Italian for vanous reasons For one, as the northern workshops are working In unpolishable limestone or sandstone there IS no need for one speciahst. the polisher Another IS the type of work normally expected of the workshop In Italy and for marble In general, architectural work ISearned out almost entirely by machine The carving workshops specialize In sculpture In northern Europe, a great deal of architectural work still Involves carving Almost all professional carving Involves medieval or Renaissance denved architectural carving 3 Workshop orgaruzahon IS essentially facilitated by, and follows the lines established by the step-by-step orgaruzahon of stoneworking processes It IS theoretically possible

WORKSHOP

ORGANIZATION

179

to have each step earned out by a different specialist, but few workshops have enough workmen to divide this up quite so neatly The specialties are based on somewhat broader differences, for example sawing. carVing and polishing In general, speciahzahons are established In two ways The first IS chronological, taking the natural stages of the work process and assigning them to different people, who become experts In quarrying, or squanng blocks, or hruslung In place The second IS linked to the type of work Today, specialization ISpromoted by the fact that different workers must learn to run different machines, such as saws and polishers Within the area of carvmg. there IS a traditional division between the carvers of architectural decoration and the carvers of sculpture English workshop orgaruzahon creates a tnparhte division between the stonemason, the stonecarver and the sculptor The stonemason IS an architectural carver who carves blocks for hthng, moldings and Similar conhnuous decoration He IS essentially a carver of abstract architectural forms which are controlled by geometncal patterns The stonecarver cuts decoration such as floral Interlaces, leaf capitals and Similar work It ISnot geometncally controlled carVing and reqUires a certain amount of fantasy on the carver's part The sculptor carves statues Although these distinctions may become foggy In the actual life of a workshop, they are generally accepted as a dehruhon for trairung and orgaruzahon The existence In the past of this kind of distinction ISsuggested by the way In which unbrushed work can be seen to follow a sequential pattern When we can hnd unhrushed architectural work, It generally shows a very clear distinction between the carVing of the molding Itself and the carVing of ItS decoration In the unhrushed floral moldings In the Senate Chamber of the New York State Capitol In Albany, the molding was completely prepared except for the flowers, and then the flowers carved as an entirely different stage A column base In the Largo Argentina In Rome has a molding carved on one Side but no decorations In It, on the other Side, the repeating patterns have been carved Into each form of the molding In both cases, the distinction between the two as separate phases In the work suggests a division of labor not unlike the modem English one On the church of Or San Michele In Florence, the ruche containing the statues of the Quattro Santi Coronah has a relief of four stoneworkers to show the guild that cornrmssioned the work These four workers are, left to nght, a stone layer, a worker dnllmg Into a column (who ISmost probably prepanng to hll It In WIth colored stones for a mosaic), a carver working on a capital, and a carver working on a statue The two lefthand workers wear short tumcs and small hats and are standing wlule they work The two right-hand carvers are seated, wear longer tumcs and more elaborate hats The distinctions between the type of work being executed on the one hand and between their dress and posihon on the other suggest not only specializahon but also rank, WIth the carvers portrayed as more Important than the others The two carvers of equal rank are following the division of labor farruhar to modem workers Almost as interesting as what we see In this relief ISwhat ISleft out What we rrught call the prole tan at of stoneworkers, those who square and rough-out, as well as move the stone, are not shown at all All four workmen are specialists In hrushmg, by Implication the upper class of highly trained experts The great majority of the common workers In stone ISnot represented at all We rrught say of these two forms of specializahon - according to chronological stages

180

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

In the sequence or according to type of work - that both are probably equally ancient and equally common The first ISa natural consequence of the fact that stoneworkmg so easily breaks down Into stages The second IS a product of the need to organize large projects effiCiently Generally speaking, the second type 1Snot found In small workshops where there are not enough workers to divide up the types of products this way Any large project or area where considerable stone working ISbeing done will almost certainly have both Specializahon can be divided by location, With each specialty being earned on In a different place If a block of stone IS quarned and squared In one place, prepared for sethng In another, and hrushed after sethng. then each activity will almost mvanably be carried out by workers speciahzmg In that part of the process Just as the natural tendency of process In stoneworkmg ISto break It down Into steps, so the natural tendency ISto carry out these steps In the easiest place and With specialists In each location Therefore the type of specializahon related to the steps of the process ISoften also a geographical distnbuhon of the speciahsts It IShighly unlikely that workers will follow the block as It moves from place to place If great distances are Involved The recorded Instances that we have are of the director of the work. the architect - or In the Renaissance and after, frequently the sculptorgOing to the quarnes to select material or oversee operations He might bnng a few trusted workmen, but the great mass of workers would be local Michelangelo went to Carrara himself and employed most of the workmen on the spot By the seventeenth century, Bermru was ordenng marble from merchants based In Rome Speciahzahon also results when a commercial workshop must produce vanehes of work for exigent clients This ISan area where observing modem stoneworkmg does not help much, because the market for high-quality stone products ISnot very great today, so the shops that produce them are usually small and the quality not always very high 4 In Impenal Roman times, however, the market was considerable and the workshop organization complex In Aphrodisias It ISpossible to dishnguish between three different types of sculpture (1) portraits and statues of mythological themes, (2) architectural reliefs, and (3) sarcophagi The differences In technique show that each was done by specialists who had their own particular tool methods and processes For example, groups of measunng knobs are found only on the first group Two examples of SIngle, centrally placed measunng knobs can be found In the architectural reliefs None are found on the sarcophagi In the first type, hrushmg was usually done With very hne abrasives If the drill was used, It was carefully masked The second type was often fnushed With carvIng tools, and a slightly roughened surface seems to have been preferred, the dnll was frequently used and not always masked In the third type there was almost no consistency of hrush frequently Sides and back were left very rough and dnll work was left very clear Sometimes, a parbcular area became famous for a parbcular kind of hrushed work The bulk. weight and delicacy of hrushed work In stone, however, makes It difficult and expensive to transport Tlus factor reduced the likelihood of a speciahzahon based on production In one place for export On the other hand, there are several marble statues found In Rome Signed by Aphrodisian sculptors, which bnngs up the possibility that Aphrodisias exported sculptors as well as sculpture

WORKSHOP

ORGANIZATION

181

The extent to which specializahon ISdefmed by tradihon and the extent to whrch It ISprescribed by the parhcular problems of the Job ISa different and mterestmg queshon Tradihon lmked to design and practicality has a strong influence on speciahzahon and trammg as well, but there ISno doubt that speoahzahon also changes to meet demand The Carrara carvmg shop descnbed above no longer has a flower-carvmg specialist The market has changed, the shop does much more work for sculptors who bring models to be copied With the pomhng mach me or calipers, and very few produchon-lme religious Images Therefore the orgaruzahon of the workshop has also subtly changed Where the work required IS tradihonal and relahvely unchanging. specialization and the attendant orgaruzahon of the workshop ISlikely to show little change over hme This IStrue of English stoneworkmg shops, especially the cathedral shops doing recarvmg for restoration, although even here a change m the process alters the orgaruzahon The mtroduchon of power saws means a different specialist domg the iruhal preparatory work As sawmg can replace many of the earlier stages of carvmg and do them much more rapidly, orgaruzahon of the work has changed In modem workshops, orgaruzahon changes to meet the eXigenCIes of quality and cost, WIth hme and expense often being the most Important factors Although stoneworkmg often seems a very tradihonal occupation, It has generally shown great Ilexibihty in developing changes m work patterns to meet the realihes of changmg machinery and clients' demands Whether this has always been true ISanother matter Some examples shed light on the problem of the relahonslup between tradihon and necessity in the orgaruzahon of an aent workshops EVIdence on the Column of Trajan suggests a two-fold type of orgaruzahon of the relief carvers FIfSt, the relief was divided mto sections, each generally about 1 to 18 meters long Stylrshc and technical analysis indicates that the sechons were assigned in groups to individual sculptors Sculptor A had scenes one to four, sculptor B had scenes hve to ten, and so on In the begmrung there were three sculptors, so that after sculptor A had hrushed his section he moved on to a group of three or more scenes after those bemg worked on by sculptor C In this fashion, mihally three, and later hve sculptors could work simultaneously Without disturbing each other and more or less at their own pace This ISa tradihonal system of orgaruzahon Something similar can be seen on the frieze reliefs from the Mausoleum of Hahcarnassus in the Bnhsh Museum It ISSimply an adaptahon to a conhnuous relief of the orgaruzahon that would naturally apply to a senes of separate reliefs On the Column of TraJan there IS ample eVIdence of organizatIon accordmg to speCialtIes as well The background on the reliefs ISsometImes not synchronized WIth the foreground A soldIer has one knee on the battlement of a wall and the other on the outer railing of a brIdge projecting from the wall A soldIer lYing dead on one Side of a fence IScut so that the fence goes behmd hIS arm rather than m front of It There are enough of these dIscrepanCies to show that the background was carved by one of several carvers who are not the same as the fIgure carvers Smce It ISeasy to show that the fIgures were carved fIrst, we must presume that the backgrounds were done by speCIalists who were sometImes mattentIve There were many places left for metal axes, swords, spears, etc, to be placed In the soldiers' hands Not all the spears were metal, and of those places which were left for metal, not all were fIlled Over a thIrd of the pOSSibleplaces are empty and there ISnot even a hole or other fIttmg for holdmg the Implements The condItIon

182

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

of the stone In many Instances IS good enough to show that a metal Implement could never have been Inserted The result ISthat a poor soldier ISleft shaking hIS hsts futilely at a tree wlule hIS mates have axes In their hands and are cuthng other trees down This Indicates that the speciahst. placmg the metal Implements, was not gIVen enough of them, so he had to pick and choose as he went along, showing considerable freedom of selection on lus part Thus there are two kinds of workshop division here one shanng the work among equals, the other according to specializations. but not always very well coordinated The most likely conclusion IS that the hrst IS a traditional system and the second at least a partial adaptation to the necessity of carVIng a very large Job In a relatively short hme The fourteenth-century reliefs on Orvieto Cathedral show many signs of specializahon Over some areas, the foliage Interlace IS hrushed whereas the sculpture that It surrounds ISnot On many reliefs the background has been hrushed but the hgures are clearly not On several figures on the hrst as well as the tlurd pilaster, either the flesh IS firushed and the hair not or VIce versa Again tlus IS quite noticeable The dIfference between foliage and hgurahve reliefs could be between two established specialties It IS very doubtful that the difference between background and foreground or between harr and face shows the workings of a traditional speciahzahon being applied by tlus workshop I thmk a much more likely explanahon ISthat the carvers are adaphng to the necessity of a large Job, defmmg each part of the process Into a separate step so that It can temporanly become an area of specializahon The tombs produced In late fIfteenth-century Rome are another example of specializahon In the hrushed work There are several excellent ones In the church of Santa Mana sopra MInerva Many of these Renaissance tombs are attnbuted to the workshop of Andrea Bregno, but parts of them may also be attnbuted to Independent sculptors funchorung as temporary members of the workshop The division of the carved elements was generally very carefully done The vertical frames WIth decorative carvIng are one or two pieces WIth the edges of the piece corresponding to the edge of the frame Each hgurahve element IS on one pIece, separated from other figures In the composition, so that, for example, a Madonna and Child WIth two angels was divided Into three pieces, one for each angel and one for the Madonna Usually the biggest piece of stone was the top of the sarcophagus With the recumbent hgure of the dead person, so that this hgure did not need to be divided In two The advantage of tlus sort of careful separahon of pieces ISthat It allowed the whole composition to be executed In a workshop As few elements cross from one pIece to another, It was easy to divide up the work and set each carver to work Independently on his own sechon Furthermore, It was easy to split the work among specialists Both MInO da Piesole and LUIgICapponI worked WIth Andrea Bregno, MIno da FIesole was excellent at carvIng the Madonna, for Instance, so that part was aSSIgned to hIm LUIgI CapponI, as can be seen from hiS own work, was a very fIne carver of decoratIve frames but not so good at fIguratIve statues, so he was aSSigned the work he did best The deSIgn of these tombs, both stylIstIcally and In the organIzatIon of the blocks, was perfectly adapted to the organIzatIon of a large workshop AdaptabIlIty was freely allowed as long as the elements of the deSIgn stayed WithIn IndiVIdual blocks Compare the late thIrteenth-century GothIC Tomb of Guglzelmo Durand by GIOvannI

WORKSHOP

ORGANIZATION

183

Cosma m Santa Mana sopra Minerva This tomb IS obviously different from the Renaissance examples, but It ISvery similar m precisely the charactenshcs that show the relahonslup of the blocks to the design As much as possible, the blocks are made to conform to the different elements of the design, so that each part can be carved separately m a workshop, then brought to the site and mounted Tlus means that a type of workshop orgaruzahon, which for Rome seems to form m the later thirteenth century, conhnues through changes of design well into the sixteenth century Tlus may be the cause of a conhnurty m design of marble tombs m Rome that extends through penods of styhshc change As long as a requirement of the design was that It be adaptable to a certain type of workshop orgaruzahon there was a hrrutahon on styhshc change Following the tomb through the centuries, It ISmterestmg to see the extent of freedom and adaptability on the baSICpattern that exists It ISequally mtereshng to see the extent to which this type of block-to-design formahon, which ISso well adapted to a particular form of workshop orgaruzahon, endures In contrast to the Column of Trajan or the Orvieto facade, tradihonal practices m the execuhon of tombs do not seem to change easily Instead they Impose certain hrrutahons on design that are broken only by Berruru m the seventeenth century It would seem that tradihon wins over mnovahon, especially when It provides the most efficient answer While the modem Carrara workshop shows an adaptabihty to condihons that, in lieu of further study, seems to be a good example for other penods as well, we should bear in rrund that tradihonal practices under certain condihons are very tenacious In a society that shows great unwillingness to break With other tradrhonal practices, the orgaruzahon of workshops Will probably be tradihonal as well Where traditional practices have a value other than their mere longevity, they may endure for a very long hrne indeed Egyphan technique IScertainly proof of tlus For over two thousand years they followed certain baSICstonecarvmg practices With little major change In general, It ISgood to bear in rrund that fme carvmg ISbeing executed by an expert elite, as such they may be more hkely to be free of slavish adherence to tradihonal practices than the norm, but also more aware of the value of some traditional practices Workshop orgaruzahon ISessentially a product of practical needs added to a desire for excellence Speciahzahon can produce excellence by promoting experhse The specialist knows the techniques that produce the best results and has the expenence to carry them out Workshop orgaruzahon around specializahon IS also more effiCient When large amounts of stoneworkmg need to be executed, effiCiency lIes m dlvldmg the work up both sequentIally and accordmg to type Fmally speCialIzatIon and ItS attendant organizatIon compartmentalIzes and makes more effiCientthe educatIon of stoneworkers From what has been adduced of such organizatIon, It eXists m some form of speCialIzatIon m every major penod of stoneworkmg The most mterestmg examples of stoneworkmg that can be studied for workshop organizatIon are those large projects where normal practIces have to be modifIed to meet production needs It does not take much ImagmatIon to picture the strams on normal workshop practices a large project would produce Merely consider the problem of movmg the stone around to the nght Side of the monument, or of placmg the carvmg shops near the appropnate worksltes while allowmg space for all the other activItIes The Parthenon sculpture represents a major product carned out m a lImited area and

184

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

requmng very high quality carving The seruor sculptor, Phidias, solved his problem by having three different types of sculpture represenhng different techrucal soluhons The pediment sculptures, although meant to be seen as very high reliefs, are In fact carved In the round This means that they must have been carved before placement because there was no room for carving the backs In place Furthermore, at the back of one of the pediment hgures, there IS ongmal pomt-chisel work earned out after the statue was cut In order to allow a place for tlus figure and the next to nt together In other words, the hgures were carved separately on the ground from some form of model, probably wax, and USIng a measunng system The measunng system was not sufficiently accurate to aVOIdrrunor mistakes In nttIng which had to be quickly corrected wlule the statues were being placed, thus the pomt-chiseled depression on the back 5 The metopes of the Parthenon were carved USIng a very traditional system ThIS system can be seen on the unbrushed metopes from the Heraion on the mouth of the Sele, wluch are now In the Paestum Museum (photograph 15) The composition was carved Into the prepared stone on the ground as a geometncal simplihcabon and then put In place and fnushed We can see that this same techruque was used on the Parthenon from the unbrushed centaurs' tails In several metopes The major difference IS that the Parthenon carvings are blocked out In rounded forms rather than the cut-out, flat patterning of the Paestum examples The sculptors of these metopes are very tradihonal indeed. employing a technique that must have been over 200 years old at the hme The Parthenon fneze IS not tradihonal at all Unlike the metopes, It was carved In place The way In which the design ISnot fitted to the block separahons makes this clear Moreover, It must have been carved from a drawing, as Indicated by the preCISIon of overlapping detail Yet the drawing could not have been blocked out on the stone In the way It was done WIth the metopes The bas-relief IStoo low for this The relahve depth of relief of any detail ISnot consistent In relation either to the background or to a sense of ItSreal proportions In fact this ISa " carved drawing" In which each detail occupies the available space provided by the difference between the front of the block and whatever ISbehind the detail If another horse ISbehind a horse's leg, the leg ISthmner , If there IS nothing behind but the background, It IStlucker A bas-relief WIth depths relatIve to the ImmedIate surroundIngs IS an InnovatIon In Greek sculpture at thIS tIme 6 The carvers must have had to break from theIr tradItIonal practIces and develop new technIques to meet thIS demand Moreover, the carVIng could not have been executed by SImply draWIng the outlInes on the stone and workIng from there The overlaps are too complIcated Some of the parts of each sectIOn had to be carved by eye, perhaps WIth the draWIng to look at Not beIng able to work from a draWIng placed dIrectly on the stone IS equally an InnovatIon Space ISanother problem of on-sIte workshop organIzatIon GIven the sIze and shape of the AcropolIs, nndIng space for the necessary stoneworkIng would have been qUIte dIfficult 7 The sculpture was so arranged that the longest relIef was carved In place WIth the pedIment sculpture, conSIderable roughIng out, If not nnIshIng, could have been executed In the quarnes ThIS left only the metopes, whIch probably had to occupy some on-sIte space whIle they were beIng cut to the precise measurements of the archItectural space and the relIef roughed out On-site use of space for sculpture was thus kept to a mInImum before the stone was placed

WORKSHOP

ORGANIZATION

"185

The deployment of human resources was well orgaruzed Three groups of hgure sculptors were set up One group had a traditional problem m the rnetopes. those working on the pediment sculptures followed a technique that had been developing over at least sixty years, only the frieze required the individual sculptors to follow new techrucal solutions Given the normal hkehhood of any workshop's having a certain percentage of conservative and progressive workers, this seems a very wise division of labor While there IS a certain amount of conjecture In this analysis, the basic techmcal divisions are clear What IS evident IS that the orgaruzahon of a large stoneworkmg project ISa complicated problem that can be done well or badly It ISworth studying the evidence mdividually m each case It ISalso worth considering whether those monuments that were unbrushed or had great difficulty m bemg hrushed - Michelangelo's Tomb of }ulllls II for instance - may not have been troubled by orgaruzahonal weakness MIchelangelo's seemmg mabihry to delegate and organIze carvmg responsibihhes. or lus desire to carve all the hgures himself, may have been an Important factor In the collapse of the project Conversely how much does the orgaruzahon of the workshop affect the techruque and resolution of the whole? We should recognize Phidias as not only a great sculptor but also a great organIzer 8 Notes Recent unpublished studies on the unhrushed sculpture of Orvieto Cathedral In whrch 1 participated confirm this The type and sequence of unfirush on the Temple of Vespasian In Rome IS another case In POInt, see Rockwell, 1988c 2 The actual names for these speciahsts can vary greatly from place to place, Just as the American names are dIfferent from the Enghsh 3 It could be argued, 1 think, that the dIfferent traditions between the north and south of Europe are the result of this dIfference combined WIth the differences In the stones bemg worked Certainly in nmeteenth- and early-twentieth-century North Arnenca, no such strong difference was recognized The different stones were bemg carved on the same buildmgs by carvers who moved from stone to stone On the New York State Capitol buildmg the division of labor was between stonecutters (flat work and SImple moldings etc) and stonecarvers (the decorations on the moldmgs. sculptural medallions. etc) and sculptors (non-carvers who made models for some of the work of the stonecarvers) Italian, Enghsh, Irish and German carvers all followed the same orgaruzahon At present the two neo-Cothic cathedrals stili employmg carvers m the United States follow different workshop orgaruzahons The Nahonal Cathedral in WashIngton has Its carvers copyIng sculptor's plaster models USIngthe pOIntIng machIne The Cathedral of St John the DIVIne has started a new carvIng shop based on modern Enghsh practIce and traInS ItS own carvers from the begInnIng NeIther of these workshops IS really tradItIonal In the sense that It IS follOWIng a local tradItIon or that the workshop practIces are those used one hundred years ago 4 ThIS mIght be conSIdered an arguable POInt, whIch the workshops themselves mIght debate Generally, the economIc pressures to get work done qUIckly together WIth the smaller number of workers tends to lower the quahty of modem carvIng The exceptIon ISsome cases of fakIng where the long tradItion of ÂŁme workmanshIp, the challenge to the workers' abJilties and the hIgh pnces paId can contnbute to very hIgh qualIty workmanslup 5 ThIS analySIS of the Parthenon sculpture ISbased on personal observation 1 am aware that It ISnot mime WIth some modern scholarshIp A great deal of the scholarshIp on stoneworkmg 1

186

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

does, however, have the tendency to be earned out by persons with no technical expenence USing Incomplete and/or confusing documentation My observahons are based on USing the worked stone object as ItS own documentahon 6 I have not been able to find any earlier examples of this technique In either Delphi, Olympia or the museums of Athens 7 One must remember that this was not the only construction project gOing on at the Acropolis at this hme 8 Some of these same considerations might be applied to monuments of other penods In other stones Is It not possible that some of the Gothic cathedrals which took more hme to build might not have suffered from poor organizational abihhes on the part of their builders? This may be only one factor, but It ISa factor which could have Just as much Importance as pohhcs or economics

Carving without quarrying and the reuse of stone

I Carving without quarrymg ISone way of descnbmg the techniques that are used for creating architecture or sculpture directly m the mountain or hillside In which the stone ISfound Although It ISrelatively unusual In Europe to fmd monuments which are worked In this way, It IS a technique by which large and Impressive monuments have been created In other areas One needs only to look at the rock-cut sanctuanes of Ajanta, Ellora or Mahabalipuram in India or the Roman-penod architecture at Petra m Jordan to get some Idea of the size and quality of the architecture that can be executed in this way The largest statue In the world, a Buddha fi.fty-three meters high, IS carved Into a chff face at Bamyan m Afghanistan In Indian and Chmese art there are cave temples and In Hittite, Persian and Parthian cultures there was a tradition of carVing relief sculpture directly mto the hillside Rock-cut architecture and sculpture, however unusual m European stoneworkmg, are Important components of the remains of many other cultures I In the northern part of the regIOn of Lazio m central Italy, mainly concentrated In the province of Viterbo, there ISevidence of a more than two-thousand-year-old tradition of both architecture and sculpture carved directly into the lrvmg rock Most of this ISwhat might be termed folk art, but In two pen ods, the Etruscan and the High Renaissance, Important monuments were created With tlus technique They can thus form the baSISfor a bnef diSCUSSIOn of the techniques involved In cutting architecture or sculpture Into the lrvmg rock 2 Most of the examples of carvmg directly Into the Irving rock m Lazio are Simple and humble openmgs In the hillside There are rooms on the outskirts of most of the towns carved Into the rock which are used by farmers as storage and for livestock They are pnncrpally carved into tufa, but a few examples In pepenno can be found They are usually more or less rectangular spaces which are larger than the opening used as a doorway There ISusually Just the one openmg of the doorway, although there may be examples WIth wmdows The shape of the rooms and of the doorways as well as their relative sizes makes It clear that these are not caves, but mtenhonally carved rooms There ISno date to most of these rooms, but some of them onginated as Etruscan tombs and so are more than two thousand years old It ISImpossible to tell when the technique went out of use Given the relative poverty of this area until after the Second World War, as well as the

188

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

continued use of these spaces by the coniadnu, It would seem likely that the technique was shll In use In the last century More complex than the above descnbed rooms are the Etruscan tombs of which Cerveten and Norbia are some of the best examples The tombs In Cerveten are of many types and sizes Frequently the larger ones have an entrance passageway on each side of which ISa smal1 bunal chamber At the end of the entrance way ISa larger room which acts as an anteroom to two or three smal1er "bedrooms" which are placed paral1e1and are entered from the opposite side from the comdor The main room and the "bedrooms" are frequently decorated In Imitation of architecture such that the whole IS clearly meant to represent the equivalent of an Etruscan house In one case the main room IS decorated With throne-like seats and shields on the wal1s as wel1 as benches In another there are columns With capitals In the central room The whole IS carved directly Into the rock although the passageway entrance IS often roofed In cut stone Although there IS some extenor carving at Cervelen, It IS at Norclua that the more Impressive examples are found Two tombs were cut Into the rock With facades In Imitation of colonnaded temples With sculpted pediments The remains as wel1 as reconstructions show that they were careful Imitations of temple architecture 3 There are other less complex carved facades In the same area Like al1work of this sort, which IScarved directly Into unquamed stone, the technical problems are sculptural rather than architectural The problem IS not how to make something out of many pieces, but how to carve something out of or Into one mass of stone Tills means that the planning ISsimplified In many ways no quarrying, transport, lifting Into place, or putting together, no need for the structural planning other than that which ISnormal for ensunng that the stone will not be carved too thin to hold together This highlights the great technical advantage of this sort of work organizational and technical simplicity Only one class of workers IS necessary, carvers Al1 the rest have been made redundant by the choice of carVing Into the lrvmg rock 4 Another technical problem that ISsolved by this type of work ISsize It ISno accident that the largest statue m the world ISin this technique The structural problems are solved by the selection of the site The cliff face IS nearly vertical, the bank of stone IS large enough both vertically and In depth, and the quality and consistency of the stone IS sufficient to allow a carvmg of this size A technically unsophisticated society can create a larger monument than It could by any other process It ISalso true that m a society With the technical sophistication to create large monuments by construction, It can still be cheaper and easier to make them by carVing direct Into the rock There are thus general1y two major technically related reasons for the use of this technique The first IS technical simphhcahon It IS pnmanly a carving problem so that only one type of worker ISneeded The second IS that greater size can be achieved, or achieved at less expense, than by construction On the other Side of the scale there are four major technical constraints on this type of work 5 The first IS the one of sihng Clearly one can only site these monuments where the stone ISavailable and in a posihon such as to be useful The travertine quames of Tivoli which must be quarned by excavation Into a flat piam would not be easily adaptable to this kmd of monument however good the stone This IS perhaps the most Important

CARVING

WITHOUT

QUARRYING

AND

THE

REUSE

STONE

189

hrrutahon, that the site ISselected by the accidents of geology rather than the mtenhons of man The second hrrutahon mvolves the quality of the stone Especially with large monuments such as the architecture and sculpture at Mahabaltpuram In India or the Buddha at Bamyan, there must be large banks of relatively consistent and carvable stone Frequent faults In the stone would make It too structurally weak or likely to break for a large monument ThIS problem makes It more probable that either granite or limestone would be the material for tlus work, since marble ISnotoriously inconsistent m color and quality over short distances m the quarry ThIS IS not a problem that could have been resolved other than by expenence It ISstill difficult to know before quarrymg the extent of a bed of good stone The third hrrutahon ISthat of time A structure that ISmade entirely by carvmg from a mountainside cannot be organized so that the work ISearned out by teams workmg at the same time in the way that a constructed bmldmg can Even With something so relatively small as the two-chambered Capanna Tomb at Cerveten, the second room could not be carved until the first had been excavated 6 The work process IS therefore constrained by a cornbmahon of the chronology of actual carvmg of each section WIth the sequence of the extenor and mtenor spaces If room B IS entered from room A It cannot be carved unhl room A has been carved because no entrance exists to It ThIS IS obviously not true WIth constructed architecture Also, as the architectural design becomes more complicated. With a greater succession of rooms and details, the problem mcreases A fmal problem ISthe sheer amount of stone that must be taken away The larger the spaces in the monument the greater the problem, since each space ISmade by carvmg out the mtenor There IStherefore not only a wastage of hme, but also a wastage of material Tlus wastage then mvolves the problem of removal which ISmade more difficult by the fact that the passageways for removal are designed for the monument and not the carvmg work The doorways of the Etruscan tombs are designed for their purpose as tombs and tlus may not make a very convenient passageway for removmg carvmg waste There are two more detailed technical problems that distance tlus method from carvmg m general In the hrst place, spaces must be seen from the mside out A practrcal method must be developed of carvmg a room from the entry into the center and out to the walls which allows the workers to control the size and shape of the room A method of controlling the sequence of mtenor spaces so that they follow the design IS equally necessary The problems mcrease when there IS a space such as the tntenor of the Buddhist Caytya hall which has two mtenor colonnades Since most methods of controllmg a construction process are based on bemg able to measure from the ground up, carvmg out a space Into a mass of rock creates the problem of where you measure from and how Whereas we cannot be sure exactly how Hus was done, lookmg at sechons and ground plans of one of the earlier tombs in Cerveten can give us some Idea The Capanna Tomb ISmade up of an entry passage With two enlargements at the far end followed by two chambers m succession 7 The first thmg notable IS that there IS a clear design bemg followed With some geometnc clanty The passageway and mam chamber steadily get

190

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

wider as they progress into the tomb m a way that shows that tlus IS mtenhonal The designer began with a width and a rate of enlargement, If not a planned length The fact that there seems to have been a slight mistake at the end of the nght-side enlargement which IScorrected by the doorway shows that there was a plan The carvers could follow this well enough to see that a mistake had been made and correct It The height of the two chambers also seems to be planned The floor of the first IStwo steps down from the entry passage The low platform, presumably for holding the bodies of the deceased or the containers for their remains. IS the level of the floor of the passageway Thus the carvers could carve mto the space, cut a smooth floor at the same level as the passageway, mark out the outline of the platform, and then carve down to the level of the new floor W orkmg out the carvmg of the forms and decorations of the mtenor spaces ISa carvmg problem which IS simply a reversal of the normal carvmg process Instead of workmg from the outside. one works from the mside ThIS ISmore dIfficult conceptually, because we are used to thmkmg the other way round A more Immediate problem for the carvers m Hus type of work IS the necessity of working in cramped spaces often in uncomfortable positions A ceiling can only be carved by working over one's head A diffrcult-to-reach comer for a nght-handed carver must nevertheless be carved unless someone left handed ISaround 8 On occasion I have had the impression that the carvers of these mtenor spaces had to VIrtually stand on their heads to do some detail In sum, there are technical advantages to carvmg directly mto the rock face as well as distinct disadvantages There are no problems however which make the techmques greatly different from those of carvmg m general With the exception of the greater size and less technical soplushcahon required, none of the technical aspects are Important enough to have influenced decision making In northern LazIOI have the impression that the decision was a cornbmahon of convemence and religrous reasons An easily carvable stone allowed them to carve a sculpted mtenor that was not used in other areas such as Tarquirua or Volterra In India, where much larger monuments were created, the advantage of SIze Without structural complications as well as religion and tradihon all seem to have contributed to the continuation for over one thousand years of a highly sophisticated technology of rock-cut architecture and sculpture There are two high Renaissance monuments m the same region of LazIO which are carved into the local rock They are both from roughly the same penod m the middle of the sixteenth century One ISthe monster Garden of Bomarzo, and the other ISthe Fonte Papacqua m Sonano in Cimmo Both of these involve large-sized sculpture carved directly into the rock In both cases the rock ISpepenno, an Igneous stone which ISthe product of volcanic ash It ISa soft, easy to carve matenal wluch does not. however, carve easily to fine detail The monster Garden of Bomarzo IS certainly the larger assemblage of sculptures, however the Fonte Papacqua seems to be the largest single composition So little ISknown about the authorship both m terms of the design and of the actual carving of these monuments that It ISnot known whether there ISany connection However, there are so many technical sirrulanhes and they are so close m time that It IShard not to believe that there ISsome connection It may be only that the artisans who worked on them all came out of a tradihon m which both pepenno and carvmg mto the natural rock were common

CARVING

WITHOUT

QUARRYING

AND

THE

REUSE

STONE

191

I am presummg that wherever the sculptor designer may have come from. that person would of necessity have been backed up by a team of artisan carvers m the execution With the excephon of one of the larger sculptures at Bomarzo, the large face m which the mouth ISa doorway leadmg to an mtenor room, all of the work IScarving from the outside m The techruque ISsomethmg of a mixture The baSICstructure IScarved directly mto the rock but some elements or details are added With separate blocks of stone As rock-cut work It ISnot so pure as the cave temples or statues of India Nor ISthrs a society which ISnot capable of building large and sophishcated structures by construchon The subject matter, the" monstrousness" of the hgures which seem to grow from the lullsrde, certainly suggests a reason why the hgures are carved from the natural rock Tlus may have affected the choice of techruque However, the convenience of an easy to work local stone and a local stonecarvmg tradihon are likely to have been more Important The choice of techruque IS m any case mtenhonal and not the product of CIrcumstances The two most Important technical choices in relationship to other sculpture of the hrne are the relanve roughness m the treatment of the surfaces and the accommodation of the design to the natural pre-existent forms of the rock In the hrst case, pepenno ISnot a stone that can be carved as dehcately as marble or many limestones However, both of these monuments show a tendency to leave the stone rougher than the decorative carving at nearby VIlla Lanle. which IS m the same stone and from the same penod One has the distinct sense that the director of the works has made a decision to have the surfaces left rougher than was strictly necessary The second choice was to have the shape of the natural rock surfaces in part control the shape of the sculpture That this IS a choice IS parhcularly obvIOUSwhen one sees pepertno quarnes It ISvery easy to cut pepenno mto square blocks and thus to shape the hillSide Itself It ISespecially clear With the Fonte Papacqua that a choice has been made to have the shape of the rock cliff-face dictate the shapes of the composihon In fact the fountain background to the large Say tress ISa group of reliefs which are done so that It IS clear that each one IScarved from a natural rock shape Both of these choices assert the rusbcness of the place and the sculpture They are techrucal choices dictated by aesthebc considerations They are carried out m such a way that the technical mconveruences for the carving are rrurumal In tlus sense they are quite different from the Etruscan work in the same technique With the exception of the room behmd the monstrous face at Bomarzo there ISnothmg that presents any more difficulty than carvmg a normal sculpture It would seem quite clear m these cases therefore that we are looking at sculpture carved mto the natural rock for aesthehc rather than technical reasons Carvmg in the natural rock does not reqUire radically unusual technology In fact m many cases It seems to reflect a very Simple technology based on expert hand carvmg alone It has advantages m terms of size and SImplICIty of organIzatIon It has disadvantages m sItIng, tIme and awkwardness for the carvers It ISa technology that IS most lIkely to be convenIent for technologically unsophistIcated societIes wlshmg to create large monuments However, as Mount Rushmore shows, It ISattractive even m a tIme of highly advanced technology when very large Impressive monuments are deSired Fmally, conSideratIons of technological convenIence are secondary, espeCially for thiS technique, to relIgIOUSor polItIcal SIgnIfIcance

192

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

II Technological convemence can be an extremely Important factor in choice of material and technique When I was in art school m Philadelphia, It was very difficult to obtain any kmd of marble, let alone white marble, at a pnce we could afford My teacher and I tned gomg from cemetery to cemetery and askmg If they had old memonals they wanted to get nd of In many cases there were rrud- to late runeteenth-century pieces, usually obelisks, that had fallen over or were hlhng and endangenng other memonals They were always of good Carrara white marble that had weathered so much the mscnphons could not be read We had an old flat-bed truck With a hand winch. so we could easily load the pieces on It We took them back to school and sold them at cost to the students The marble was so weathered that one had to carve away the outer 7 cm to get to good stone, but after that It was an excellent carvmg matenal I had no Idea that I was followmg an old and hallowed tradition (although perhaps barbanan to the modem conservator's view) 9 Thmkmg at the time that we had found a good way to obtain marble cheaply, we had no Idea that the same Idea had been occurnng to stoneworkers for thousands of years The city of Rome has an almost conhnuous history of the dismantlmg and reuse of statues, buildings and monuments Tlus tradition IS iruhally disparaged as a dubious form of scavengmg the Arch of Constantine ISnot as noble a monument as other tnumphal arches, because so much of Its sculpture IStaken from other monuments In saymg tlus we neglect to see that they were followmg a well-established practice of stone scavenging Reuse of stone ISa much more common architectural expedient than ISnormally thought It ISa natural product of the combmahon of the beauty and quality of some stones, their ranty, the difficulties of transport, and the problems of quarrymg When enough of these factors cannot be economically met by usmg new stone, old sources Will be scavenged Some of the travertine foundation blocks of the Arch of Titus are reused material. as can be seen from the way they are worked In certain italian cihes m the Middle Ages, Vemce and Rome for example, reused stone was a baSICbuilding material Later, dunng the Baroque, certain pnzed colored marbles could only be obtained by scavenging from earlier work Neither porphyry, Afncano nor Giallo anftco could have been obtamed in any other way Whether or not It ISa hallowed tradition, It has technical problems and solutions, some of which have taken on a whole tradition of their own Like several other areas m stoneworkmg technology tlus topic has received little attention Yet the method was so frequently used that certain techmcal charactenshcs of some monuments are comprehensible only If one recogmzes that the matenal was obtained by scavenging Stone has been reused m three ways usmg the pieces as they are, for example taking a statue or a block and mcludmg It m another building , recuttmg blocks from one buildmg or monument, for use m another, or creatmg a new style of design based on adaptive reuse of already carved stone matenal l" Each of these categones has ItS own particular techmcal problems The first category ISmost obviously represented by sculptural examples such as the Arch of Constantine or the large reliefs on the stairway of the Palazzo del Conservaton m Rome, as well as statues and mscnphons found set into walls m many places mold

CARVING

WITHOUT

QUARRYING

AND

THE

REUSE

STONE

193

Rome Examples are to be found on medieval buildmgs as well Greek and Roman carvings are Incorporated In the structure of San Marco In Venice, and an ancient marble vase (the vasa del talenta) stands near the doors of San Ramen on Ptsa Cathedral The purpose may be purely decorative, or It may have some other meaning The technical problems were those of mOVing and transporting a hrushed object WIth details that could easily be broken It was thus a more delicate operahon than SImply moving squared or uncut blocks The carVing was most probably crated to protect It and then transported WIth extra care As the Romans had moved many statues from Greece to Rome, It obviously was not a senous problem for them A more difficul! problem was that of dismanthng monuments to get at the relrefs or statues they WIshed to reuse On the Arch of Constantine there are reliefs from monuments onginally erected In honor of Trajan, Hadnan and Marcus Aurelius. as well as over-life-size statues of barbanan caphves from the Forum of Trajan The eight reliefs from the monument to Marcus Aurelius are over 3 m high by 2 m Wide and at least 50 cm tluck Roughly estimated, the weight ISat least SIXtons Each relief was set Into some structure, almost certainly a stone one, and was held WIth Iron pinS cased In lead set Into holes In the relief and the surrounding blocks Removing these reliefs Without damaging them required engmeenng skill Yet only one shows SIgns of such damage 11 The only way to remove this sort of work would have been to construct a scaffolding around It and to hold the relief In place while the stones around It were removed Then, WIth the relief securely held In place, the pms In the blocks beneath It would have been broken out, and the relief lifted and placed on the ground At tlus POint the pinS In the relief could have been removed Only someone who has tned to pry a firushed object out of a wall Without damaging It can understand how difficult tlus process was What IS surpnSIng IS that only one was damaged The mOVing of large stone objects continued Into early Chnshan hmes Most of the early churches of Italy reuhhzed columns from ancient Roman monuments The techniques of removal and mOVing were clearly part of the knowledge of fourth- and frfth-century stoneworkers The second aspect IS the reuse of stone as a baSIC material It does not present particularly dIfficult problems of removal because the mtegnty of the block or ItS details ISnot a pnmary consideration A hrushed stone object, whether sculpture or monument or building, ceases to be thought of as a hrushed object and IS VIewed merely as a sort of quarry Its Importance Ires In ItS quality as material or In ItS SIze rather than the way It has been worked Fine workmanship, If It cuts Into the size of the block IS a disadvantage rather than an advantage DIsmantling the onginal is still a problem, obviously the larger blocks have greater value If they are Intact, because the possibilitres of adaptation are greater Another problem ISthe adaptation of blocks cut for one purpose to an enhrely different purpose The blocks from the dismantled building may have shapes that are very drfficult to frt Into the new design An example of this can be seen In the plan of the blocks of the second pilaster on Orvieto Cathedral The block shapes are somehrnes Irregular and, worse shll, are of many different SIzes One sees an almost haphazard effect, especially on the lower half, long, thm, vertical pIeces are surrounded by smaller pieces that do not even frt Into regular rows One gets the ImpreSSIOnof sculptors who are trymg to hnd a way of hthng

194

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

many disparate blocks, with a rrurumum of recutting, mto a design that they were not made for The shield-and-swag decoration on the outside of the Porta del Popolo m Rome shows an even more Illogical block composition Small pieces had to be fitted m to adjust the carved pIeces to the desired curve The shape of the ongmal pieces bears little relationship to the new design It ISImportant to note these charactenshcs of the block arrangement It ISusually possible to see when scavenged stone ISbemg used by the lack of rational relationship between the design and the block shapes, one tends to find little pieces bemg fitted in to make up for the fact that the big ones are not quite the right shape Not only ISthe carvmg hme mcreased by the number of little adjustments that must be made, but the color of the stone may present a problem On monuments where reused stone IS the material, there Will be changes m tone and slight changes m color because different kmds of white marble are bemg used This IS frequently the case in the late fifteenth-century tombs in Rome A piece of grayish Proconessian marble may be placed next to Docimeum marble, more IVOryin tone, which m tum may be next to a piece of Carrara marble They are all white marble but the differences m color show clearly If the monument has been recently cleaned 12 For sculpture m the round, the greatest problem ISfindmg blocks large enough Tlus can be a problem even With newly quarned stone, so It ISnot pecuhar to the techmques of reused matenal It would seem that sornehmes convemence suggested using something already close to the desired dimensions There are at least three portrait heads m Aphrodisias that have been carved mro earlier portraits Two of them are fimshed heads on which one can see that a new portrait has been carved into an old one, due to the smallness of the head and ItSdifferent style m relationship to the figure Or there may be a peculiar lme Just below the hairlme where the new facial mask has been carved mto the old Without changmg the hair, thus makmg the forehead a different level from the hairlme The changes m the third head are not complete The new face ISroughed m, but the fimshed ears and hair of the old are still there The resultant small face With large ears ISboth slightly ridiculous and an excellent demonstration of tlus method for obtammg stone It was not always dJiticult to obtain a block that was large enough The back of the Barbenni Pzeta m the Gallena dell'Accaderrua m Florence shows a small bit of architectural moldmg runmng vertically A large Roman block, probably from an architrave, was taken and placed on one end A much smaller version of the same method IS the unbrushed figure cut mto a column drum, m the cloister of San Crovaruu Laterano m Rome The carver took a rather fine piece of column and, leavmg It upright. Simply started to rough out the figure of a prophet into It The most sigruhcant problem With this technique IS that the stone may have some weaknesses due to weathenng or other stresses placed on It Generally speaking, the outer surface of a piece of marble that has been weathenng outdoors Will be eolia, that IS,very fnable In order to get to the good stone, the carver Willhave to carve away the outer 4 or 5 cm It IS also true that a block that has been under stress due to ItS posrhon m the architecture may develop faults along the lmes of stress In this case the matenal IS likely to be very unrehable because It could split Nevertheless, an

CARVING

WITHOUT

QUARRYING

AND

THE

REUSE

STONE

195

Drawing 64

experienced stoneworker should be able to see these faults before beginning work on a block. The reuse of stone blocks as if they were newly quarried ones presents several minor technical and visual problems. Yet, as long as they are not as great as the problem of obtaining new blocks, reuse will be the main source of stone. A large number of dismountable ancient buildings at hand will retard the opening of new quarries. In Rome the Colosseum, among other buildings, was such a good source of travertine that there was no need to reopen the Tivoli quarries, less than thirty kilometers away, until the sixteenth century at least. In the middle of the sixteenth century, the tiara, shield and swags of the Porta del Popolo were still being made out of reused stone. The continued adoption of reused stone meant that the stone workers became experienced in the technical problems that this method presents. I suspect that a fifteenth-century Roman or Venetian stonecarver was very experienced indeed in judging the quality and problems of marble blocks removed from ancient buildings. A Florentine carver of the same period would have much less experience in this area because they were obtaining marble from the Carrara quarries. Working with reused stone was an adaptive technique brought about by economic necessity.P The third category involves the creation of a style based on the reuse of stone. The Cosmatesque floors of medieval Roman churches are a good example. The designs tend to radiate out from circular pieces - porphyry or verde antico - which were obtained by sawing cross-sections off columns. The smaller pieces, usually square in form, originated as flooring or interior cladding on ancient buildings. The stone slabs were dismounted from their original settings or were found in fragmentary form. They were then broken down into mosaic tesserae. The two methods of cutting are shown in drawing 64. The techniques of this type of mosaic floor are not in any way unusual. The first is simple sawing, which can be done on very hard stone such as porphyry by the same technique as marble. Although the technique of carving porphyry was lost, the technique of sawing, requiring no unusual tools, was not. There is an ancient illustration in the Ostia Museum of workers breaking tiles for mosaic, using the second technique. What is interesting is the creation of a style through adapting to the stones and shapes available for reuse. Of course the amount of beautiful colored stone to be found in Rome was very large, but the pavements of San Marco in Venice are also the product of a great deal of

196

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

reused material from Aquileia and other ancient Roman sites The style of the pavements IS a product of the material and tools available to the workers at a particular hrne and place In this case reuse was a causahve factor m style In this discussion of the reuse of previously cut stone, It IS possible to see that such stone can have a vanety of purposes It can be used unchanged for decorahon, or as a source for blocks, or It can become the source for a style Techmcally speaking, It requires no new tools, but rather a refinement or new direction to old tool uses The most difficult problem In fact IS not the reworking, but rather the safe dismanthng of the ongmal monument Analytically, It ISImportant to recogmze the SIgns of reuse because they can explam seeming irrahonality m the placement of the blocks of the new work Fmally, a study of the techniques and use of reworkmg stone helps to demonstrate the adaptability of stoneworkmg technology and stonecarvers In particular

Notes European traditions may not Include this sort of carving, but a new tradition seems to be starting up In the Uruted States where Mount Rushmore with the faces of hve presidents has been followed by an Indian Chief on a nearby mountain, and the major Generals of the Confederacy have been carved onto a cliff face In Georgia 2 The problem of carving Into the hvmg rock ISsuch that certain baSICtechruques must anse, In whatever culture the monuments exist It has seemed to me better to pick examples that can be studied In place - even If these are of lesser Importance than the monuments of the near East and ASia - than to try to deduce from photographs the techmcal solutions I am not aware of any attempt to analyze the techniques of tlus type of work 3 Wetter, 1962 p 180 4 As the result of a recent tnp to India, Hus statement should be quahfied Although only carvers are required, there IS still room for considerable diVISIOnby specialrzahon Within this group The unhrushed Temple at Kalagumalai In Tamil Nadu, shows that there were at least three drvrsions according to the state of hmsh of the area being carved While some carvers were roughing out the overall architectural form, others were roughing out sculpture and still others were hruslung both sculpture and architectural detail The fact that when worked stopped all three types of carving were gOing on strongly suggests that there was thrs dIVISIOnof labor 5 It should be emphasized that only the technical reasons are being discussed here Obviously there are cultural and religious factors which may be the most Important reason a monument ISrock-cut In the case of the Mount Rushmore Memonal In the Umted States the ego of the artist may have been the major reason for the selection of the site and technique 6 However, It was still possible to organIze teams according to the type of carving being executed, see note 4 above 7 The plan and elevations are In Boethius. 1962 p 66 8 The Issue of left- and nght-handed carvers IS brought up In Fret 1984 pp 41-2 In asserting that most archaic Greek carvers were left handed he has failed to note that If archaic tombstones were carved laying flat there would be no need to POSit left-handedness In the carvers I doubt that It IS possible to fmd any evidence that left-handedness was treated any dtfferently among carvers than In any other section of society It remams however true that certain mtenor comers are much easier to get at for a left-handed carver It would have been convenient to have one on every crew 9 Exactly how old and hallowed I am not sure It certainly was In use In Roman times, as some

CARVING

WITHOUT

QUARRYING

of the interior walls of the Colosseum demonstrate history of this technique

AND

THE

REUSE

STONE

197

Ido not know of any study done on the

The conhnuous redesign and adaptation of earher work that has occurred In large church construction since the MIddle Ages In Europe rrught be considered adaphve reuse of already worked stone Since It might be said In these cases that It ISthe architect and the design which must be adapted rather than the earlier stages of the construction. It ISnot to be considered part of the techniques of reuse

ThIS IS the second from the nght of the facade facmg the Colosseum The theory that It was damaged In transport or deconstruchon IS my own, based on close observahon camed out dunng the recent cleaning and restoration

The tombs In the courtyard of Santa Mana sopra Minerva are good examples of this The problems the carver/designers encountered are often hard to see because so few of the tombs have been recently cleaned 13 The lack of adaptive reuse of stone m Northern Europe can be attnbuted to a combmahon of smaller amounts of Roman stonework, WIth a tendency to use stone that was not durable In a climate that caused heavy weathenng

The history of stoneworking technology

The history of stoneworkmg technology has not yet been written The basic research in this area ISso fragmentary that a real history cannot be written at this time 1 It ISpossible to make some comments about the chronology and history of this technology If we focus on certain areas stone technology and, more specihcally. stonecarvmg m the tradition that flows from Ancient Egypt m the begmnmg of the third rrullenruum Be to present times Obviously there are traditions m ASia, Afnca and the Amencas that this discussion does not even touch upon, but no disrespect ISmeant by this neglect Rather the opposite m fact I have too much respect for what little I know of the stonecarvmg of preColumbian Central and South Amenca and stonecarvmg of the Indian sub-continent to try to force It under the umbrella of the Mediterranean and European technology The basic premises of material, tool and process apply to these other stone technologies, but how these factors work themselves out in history and are changed by place and CIrcumstance ISbeyond the scope of tlus study Stone technology of a very practical sort existed from the first making of tools After all, the terms "paleolithic" and "neolithic," meanmg old Stone Age and new Stone Age, apply to the use of stone for tools When stoneworkmg m the sense that we are usmg the term began, there were thousands of years of expenence of making stone tools as a background The history of stoneworkmg did not begm in the third rrullenruum m Egypt, but It took on another character Stone became a medium for the making of monumental and beautiful objects It did not cease to be used as a tool, but It did take on a totally new sigruhcance Techmque became at least m part directed toward aesthetic ends At the same time, this new direction was built on great farrulianty with stone, much greater than our own It IS worth considering briefly what It means to use stone for one's everyday tools Stone can serve for hammers, axes, knives, arrow and spear points. gnndmg grams for flour, as well as many other everyday uses None of these tools are particularly complex in form The knowledge of which stone Will work for which type of purpose does however, take on a certain complexity Knowmg which kind of stone can make an arrowhead and which function for gnndmg must include knowing how to work these stones into the necessary useful shape Sensibility to stone and ItS possibilihes and reactions can begin to take on a certain complexity If many of the tools of everyday life are made from stone In dealmg with the history of stoneworkmg It IS Important to

THE

HISTORY

STONEWORKING

TECHNOLOGY

199

remember that stone technology as we know It was preceded by this earlier technology of sensihvrty The technologies used by the Egyptians to create architecture and sculpture were direct descendants of this earher technology Technically, Egyptian carving Involved two techniques granite working and limestone working These stones are so different that the tools and methods differed Although the processes for sculpture were applied to both materials. as granite was the more Important sculptural medium, they are more closely related to gramte-carvmg techniques The methods of carVing reliefs and statues In the round were actually more ngid than hrnestone would reqUire, but the dominance of granite and the desire for a uruhed sculptural process enforced tlus on limestone Only In the refinement of detail does one sornehrnes see limestone coming Into ItS own Carving developed In the Near East as well, but It never had the same dominance over other media that It did In Egypt Only WIth the Assynan and then the Hittite civilizahons do we see high quality sculptural carving techniques that developed Independently of the Egyptians The Assynan alabaster palace reliefs show, for the hrsl hme, the kind of flUldlty of form that mdicates that the carvers were taking full advantage of the speed and freedom to correct errors that soft stone gives Peniunenlt are occasionally visible, and the unhrushed work shows a freedom In developing cornposihons as the carVing progressed Much later, In the Middle Ages, this became something of a charactenshc of carving technologies that developed from soft stone Hithte carVing was more pnnuhve than Assynan carving. but lt did develop a high rehef technique that seems to be the most hkely precursor of the Greek metope technique In fact, the connections between Hittite and archaic Greek carVing techniques seem to me to be much closer than those between EgyptIan and Greek techniques A com pans on of the unbrushed metopes In the Paestum Museum With Hittite reliefs shows a great deal of technical sirrulanty The design IS based on a Simple outline drawing and the relief IS deep In contrast, Egyptian relrefs are very shallow and dependent on detailed drawings 2 Marble carVing as a separate technique ISthe product of the Greeks, probably because white marble was the only high-quahty stone available In the Aegean basin In Sicily and southern Italy, the Greeks built With and carved sculpture In limestone because that was the available stone 3 Beginning With a tool technology Similar to the Hithte, by the end of the Sixth century Be the Greeks Invented a new type of chisel, the tooth chisel. and developed a technique SUitableto marble Tlus technique developed throughout the fi.fth century, and by the end of the fourth century there was little more to be Invented I cannot think of any tool that was available to Michelangelo or Bernini that was not available to Lyssipus 4 All types of surfaces were possible and a fairly complete understanding of the possibilities of the material was achieved Anything after this was not so much the discovery of a new technique as the renewal or rediscovery of an old one The tooth chisel was not by any means the only mvenhon of tlus penod, although It rapidly became part of the baSICequipment of carving The methods of pohshmg marble, including carving In such a way as to aVOIdbruising the stone, were also developed at tlus hme Furthermore, and of greater Importance for the history of sculpture, methods were developed for carving sculpture In the round by designmg With models In a

200

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

modelmg medium These methods caused a revolution m carved sculpture that has still not ceased The vanous uses of the pomhng machme invented m the nineteenth century are the distant products of tlus revolution (" Direct carvmg " and" truth to material" have been by and large unsuccessful attempts at a counter revolution) Finally, the pulley and Its developments, If not mvented m this period, certainly seem to have been adapted and developed in stone architecture They constitute a major revolution m the way stone buildings can be built and thus ultimately in what ISbuilt The result of all this mnovahon was that between the early sixth or late seventh century BC and the begmnmg of the third century BC, major technological changes came about m the Aegean area which permanently changed the technology of stoneworkmg in the European world These changes affected both architecture and sculpture The methods were never totally lost, and both Gothic architecture and Renaissance sculpture were ultimately dependent for their development on one or the other of them The overall effect was that the baSICculture of stone technology was changed Stone technology became a much more machme-based work Techniques became exportable Pulleys are easy to make, as are simple cranes once you know how A small group of expert workers could be Imported to tram others With the help of machmery the tremendous numbers that were needed m Egyptian or Assynan monuments were no longer necessary Equally exportable were the methods of developmg a large sculpture from small models Hellenistic conquest and Roman civihzahon spread this technology both geographically, throughout the Mediterranean and Western European world, and technologically by adaphng the changes to whatever stone they came across Granite carvmg In Egypt and hard limestoneworkmg m Istna or around Verona were equally susceptible to the new methods What could perhaps have remamed a methodology confmed to a particular area or to marble became a universal technology m the Roman world and ItS crvihzed neighbors Roman tecbrucians themselves can be credited WIth four technical mnovahons The first IS the coordmahon on a large scale of the vanous aspects of stone production Monuments could be roughed out m the quarry for hrushmg hundreds of miles away ThIS level of competent coordmahon allowed them to build structures and groups of structures which have never ceased to be lrvmg examples to architects and sculptors of the possibilities inherent m working WIth stone Tlus exemplary quality of the mfluence of Roman technical excellence on later pen ods was extremely Important After all, Roman and Hellenistic sculpture, not archaic and classical, were what Donatello, MIchelangelo and Berruru knew The second Roman mnovahon IS the most obVIOUS the development of the techniques mvolved m the massive stone arches and vaults of buildmgs such as the Colosseum and the vanous triumphal arches The technology of vaulhng was also paralleled in bnck construction, and so was not a pure stone technique To gIve Just two examples, however, the arches of the outer CIrcleof the Colosseum and the marble arch of the Arch of TItus are structural stone arches The sheer mass of the stone and the technical VIrtUOSItyof the hthng have Impressed and mfluenced all later stoneworkers The solution of the static problems, while less mnovahve than the solutions m brick. remam a permanent example of possibihhes and solutions to builders m stone

THE

HISTORY

OF STONEWORKING

TECHNOLOGY

201

The tlurd Roman mnovahon was the development of techniques of decoration with colored stones, which eventually led, by way of early Chnshan mosaics. to the great art of Byzantine and medieval mosaics Although the Romans did not invent mosaic work, they developed It into a relatively mexpenslve way of covenng very large surfaces, quarrymg the necessary stone m large masses for tlus purpose The technique of sawmg thin sheets of colored stones of widely varymg hardness evolved as part of tlus development, and never seems to have been lost m the followmg centuries The fourth Roman mnovahon was the refinement of the carvmg of high reliefs, denved from the techniques of Hellenistic high reliefs, such as the Pergamon [neze At the end of the hrst century AD, carvers m Rome developed a method of carvmg lugh reliefs expressiorushcally, usmg only sketchy drawmgs and dependmg on technical virtuosity and sheer excitement Models were not used as they were m Hellenistic reliefs, and proportions and rehnement of composition were less Important than fast, lively carvmg Although this technique might be considered as a method of carrymg out large reliefs quickly, It also has an aesthetic emphasis on stonecarvmg rather than composition and thus demotes design in favor of qualities of execution 5 The hrst, fully developed examples of tlus technique are the reliefs on the Arch of Titus and the Column of Trajan m Rome and the Arch of Trajan m Benevento It became the standard sarcophagus relief technique m the second century It seemed to " go underground" dunng Hadrian's reign, but emerged agam on the base of the Column of Antonmus PlUS,the Column of Marcus Aurelius and the Arch of Sephmius Severns It was seen m Rome m the fourth-century reliefs on the Arch of Constantine. and remamed the baSICtechnique for sarcophagi until the late fourth century Tlus technique can easily be followed through the numerous unhrushed sarcophagi survlvmg from this penod The baSICtechnical Idea of tlus method ISthat the background ISthe last thmg carved The carver works from the front plane of the stone, carvmg the hgures of each level as he proceeds into the stone The background ISusually the stone left at the back after the hgures have been completed The result ISoften a very crowded scene full of Vitality It has very little sense of bemg grounded into a realistic physical environment After a long hiatus, tlus technique was reinvented by Nicola Pisano for the pulpit m the baptistry of Pisa From there It can be followed through his work and the work of his son, GIOvanni, who transferred the technique from reliefs to sculpture m the round m lus work for the facade of Siena Cathedral The technique seems to have Virtually died out in the late fourteenth century, to be brought back by Michelangelo m the battle of the Centaurs and Lapiths relief m the Casa Buonarroth The last development m Western European art of this technique ISMichelangelo's later work, from the unbrushed slaves to the late Pietas Technically speakmg, these carvmgs are lmeal descendants from the great first- and second-century carved monuments m Rome Tracmg this technique chronologically has served to emphasize the extent to which a carvmg technique can Jump lustoncal penods It seems to die out, and IS then rediscovered by later carvers through observation Stone, bemg an endunng material. remams as a Irving example of technical solutions that can be read by later stoneworkers Stonecarvmg, m the form that It followed for almost a thousand years, Virtually died out m the end of the fourth and beginrung of the fllth century AD Nevertheless, stone

202

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

buildmg and stoneworkmg remained The techniques of dnllmg, saWing and polishing became more Important than carVing Byzantine techniques are of a very high quality, but emphasize different effects In the West, the carving that remained became simplified, low-relief work The tools were reduced to two the POint chisel and a form of flat chisel Similar to the modem channeling tool This ISa continuation of the tendency In sculptural carVing In Rome from the second century on, when the tooth chisel began to lose favor among relief carvers In the carVing revival that occurred In Rome In the eighth and ninth cenlunes, the only tools I have observed are the POint and narrow, flat unghieitÂť The most delightful example from thrs penod ISthe signed self-portrait of a carver named Ursus on the altar of the abbey church at Ferenhllo (Italy) Tlus carving IS a living reminder that carvers' egos remained ever rampant, even In this supposedly dark age The revival of sloneworkmg technique In the West took place In two different areas soft-stone carving In northern Europe and marble working In Italy 6 The latter was a technical mixture of methods relying highly on reused stone, techniques from Constantinople and some Influences from northern-European stonecarvers Its marbleworkmg techniques were also applied In Lombardy and the Veneto to pohshable hard limestones such as Islnan stone and, more Importantly, Verona red Because of the different availability of matenal and the polihcal fragmentation of Italy, the techniques vaned markedly from regIOn to regIOn Emanating from Pisa was a technical tradition based on mnovahon and white marble In Rome, there was a very different approach based on the preservation of very traditional techniques and on Rome's Immense resources of reusable stone This traditional technique was then added to and modified when Arnolfo dr Cambro set up shop In Rome In the late thirteenth century Venice had yet another tradition, based on the use of hard limestones and reused stone, but also Influenced by the arnval of Tuscan and Lombard carvers Due to the movement of stonecarvers from Job to Job, the mdividual technical traditions have been continuously cross-fertilized In Italy The more Important technical innovations by far occurred In northern Europe These were largely techniques of working soft limestones and sandstones A combination of many factors created a real technical revolution Interestingly enough, two of the simplest were also the most Important The use of soft stones as the pnmary material, rather than In Imitation of harder stones (as was usually true of ancient Egyptian, Greek and Roman work) led for the first hme to the creahon of a true soft-stone technique The rapidity With which accurate, refined carVing can be executed In the soft limestones of northern France ISa marvel to an expenenced marble carver As the stone ISsoft and no polish IS possible. the carVings can be finished more rapidly than marble One of the results of this change of matenal is a change In tools, for example axes are used more frequently The other IS the possibihty of carVing much more complex designs In a far shorter hrne The second factor was the use of small stone blocks In construction When one compares the size of blocks used In Greek and Roman architecture to the many small blocks of a Cotluc vault, one sees a major change The change ISseen particularly In the ease of lifting and construction By carving much smaller blocks, which was made possible In part by havmg much softer and faster stone to carve, the architects acquired

THE HISTORY

OF STONEWORKING

TECHNOLOGY

203

some of the constructional advantages of bnck with the detail advantages of stone From such seemingly small differences, major revoluhons are made Technologically speakmg, marble carVing In Italy never really adapted to the Gothic revolution The tradihons of carving developed gradually and were unbroken from the eleventh century to the High Renaissance The change brought about by the Prsanos, father and son, was modified and simp lihed by their followers unhl on the Orvieto facade and In the work of Andrea Pisano we see a carving process that returned to a form of cutting directly to the background, Similar to the Romanesque technique but much more soplusncared m the use of tools In the early Renaissance, Donatello developed the nheoo schiacaalo by centering the technique on the use of a very sharp, nne, flat chisel an adaptahon of letter carving techniques to bas-reliefs The techruque was then refined and developed by his followers Throughout this penod In Tuscany and the Veneto there was a sense of an ongoing tradition of craftsmen who gradually modified their techmque, accepting mnovahon, but not revolution Rome, on the other hand, lost ItS techrucal tradihon so that when patronage returned m the nfteenth century a whole new techmque arnved With Tuscan and Lombard stonecarvers The same sort of development went on In the north Each area developed ItS own tradrhons based on the local stone most frequently used These tradihons often crossferhlrzed With others as the most expert craftsmen moved from area to area followmg the major comrrussions On the other hand each tradihon had ItS own conhnumg base m the local arhsans who made up the proletanat of the work force on any stone monument Something of the variations that developed can still occasionally be seen in the techmques used in the different cathedral workshops In England In Italian marble carving a revolution carne at the begmrung of the sixteenth century, but It was, to a great extent, a failed revoluhon Michelangelo based lus carVing on redeveloping the sort of expressiorushc techmque that Grovanru Pisano championed He concentrated hrs energies on extending the roughmg-out process as long as possible, making It very creative but also very dependent on the carver's own expressive force The methodical, sequential character was suppressed In favor of a more inhuhve approach The design was allowed to change so long as there was room In the stone to accommodate It Only In hrushmg did he revert to the methodical After the St Peter's Pleta, hrushmg seems to have bored him 7 Most other carvers were following a completely different path the development of the Idea of the composition hrst In drawings. then in models, so that carVIng only began when the composihon was complete This methodology had begun In the nfteenth century and conhnued Inexorably despite the adrrurahon for Michelangelo's sculpture The difference between the two methods IS equally great In tool working Michelangelo treated tools very freely, USingtooth as well as POint chisels as a means for making changes In the composition The other carvers basically saw the tooth chisel as a means of clanfymg the forms expressed by the point chisel When Vasan and Celhru descnbe carving techniques, they are not descnbmg the techniques of Michelangelo but of the "mainstream" carvers Techrucally speaking. Michelangelo looks like a failed revolutionary The techmques of ItalIan marble carvmg gradually came to dommate sculpture throughout Europe GothiC techmque as well as style was pushed aSide by the Itahan

204

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Renaissance In architecture, the use of stone as a veneer over bnck became more and more the norm, although solid stone construction never entirely died out The result IS that saWing rather than carving took on more Importance The seventeenth century was not so much a penod of technical innovation as a penod of virtuoso carving based on tools and techniques already developed Clan Lorenzo Bernini, however much of a geniUS at design, left space for creative carVing by his assistants The methods of accurate transmission of measurements from a model to the stone were developed after his death 8 Although Bernini clearly decided the pose, many of the details were the carver's responsibihty, as close inspection often reveals The techniques of copYing from a model were developed very quickly after the lateseventeenth century, Since by the third quarter of the eighteenth century they were well

established Bernini was technically a supreme organizer rather than an Innovator In fact, because he was so Interested In virtuoso carving he was somewhat conservative In the use of models He made them, but did not rigidly follow them In the execution of the carVing The eighteenth century was more concerned With asserting the designer's position and separating him technically from execution than any prevIous penod The development of methods for transmitting Ideas from the designing mind to the executing hand was the major contnbuhon of the century to stoneworkmg The division between design and execution became dehrute by the end of the century The architect was no longer a "works' foreman" coming out of a carVing tradition and the sculptor no longer needed to know how to carve The modem-day distinction and barner between the designer and the maker, as well as the modem production-line approach to stonecarvings was a natural development from eighteenth-century measunng tools The nineteenth century built on tlus rahonalism With a tremendous outpouring of sculpture and carved decoration On the one hand as sculptors no longer carved their works themselves, there were no technical lnrutahons to producing many copies and vanahons of the same design On the other hand, the architects could depend on highly trained techrucians to reproduce their decorative designs In almost any type of stone Large stone buildings covered With exquisitely detailed, carved decoration were produced all over Europe and the Amencas Some of the hnest carved floral decorative fnezes I have ever seen are on Victorian buildings In the United States By allowing the carver to concentrate solely on lus technique and the designer solely on desigrung. and given patrons With enough money, unparalleled production was possible The New York State Capitol had 1,100 stonecutters and 200 carvers, all working at the same time In the I880s These decorative carvers, With no pretensions to being artists, produced some very fine art Indeed Stone sculpture and architecture developed the separation between concept and matenal that has charactenzed most of It ever Since As the sculptors became more and more concerned With design and less and less Immediately farruhar With the material, the tendency to produce cold, perfectly hrushed surfaces Increased The carver became a technician continually watched over by a non-carver to make sure he reproduced the designer's model exactly The result ISthat surfaces on sculpture became more and more based on polish or very smooth hrushes Even when rough surfaces were intentionally produced, they were Uniform and showed no relationship to changes In the form or

THE HISTORY

OF STONEWORKING

TECHNOLOGY

205

quality of the stone Compare a Bernini portrait with a Rodm or a late Henry Moore carving to see the difference In surface treatment that was brought about by this change in technical organization The effect on all sroneworkmg, whether for architecture, sculpture or even decorative objects of the revolution In technique has been Immensely Important Whereas In other penods there was always a relationship In training and workshop practices between design and execution, tlus change divorced them The carver IS trained In a carving school and learns no design, the sculptor IS trained In an academy and seldom learns anything about the act of carving The stoneworker IS trained by apprenticeship In the workshop and the architect IS trained In the university The result IS that both the architect and the sculptor are no longer the leaders, but rather the followers, in technical innovation In stoneworkmg The new techniques that are being developed are for the purpose of allowmg cheaper faster work not for better expreSSIOn, as was the case before the middle of the eighteenth century The revolution IS a major one which has almost completely changed the relation of design to production In the nineteenth century there was a revival of Interest In the techniques of northern soft stonecarvmg The restoration of medieval architecture, which often meant the recarVIng of statues, as well as the medieval revival styles brought about a greater Interest In the northern traditions Thrs In turn brought about a re-evaluahon of these techniques as opposed to Italian marble carVing It ISnot that these techniques were ever lost, but they tended to be cast Into obscunty for a bme by marble techniques The twentieth century has been charactenzed by the replacement of carVing technologies where possible by saWing and machine technologies The amount of stone being quarned and used ISmuch greater than In the nineteenth century, but almost all of It IS used In polished slabs for cladding Carving ISby no means dead, but It has been reduced to a marginal technique In stoneworkmg Most sculptural carVing IS done as a copYing technique There have been and still are vanous attempts to bnng sculptors back to carVing They have been by and large marginal to the main currents of modern sculpture Sloneworkmg ISnow prmcipally a highly mechanized expertise 9 ThIS wlurlwmd passage through the history of stoneworkmg technology may be useful as a very general frame of reference It ISbased largely on personal observation, because many areas covered have received no formal study by historians It IScertainly biased toward work In Italy, given the lack of written studies I am forced to depend on personal observation As always, It IS Important to bear In mind that stoneworkmg IS done by people who are highly trained, and the Jobs they are gIven often reqUIre intelligence and mnovahon Overgenerahzmg about the history of their work tends to obscure the vanery of the work and the mtelligence, the adaptability, and frequently the genius WIth which It was carried out

Notes 1 Bluemel. 1909, Wlttkower, 1977 and Bessac, 1986 all in some way attempt to consider the history of stonecarvmg techniques Each one however has flaws which make thrs part of their work unreliable Bluemel IS too concerned With connecting techruques With Ius own value Judgment that archaic sculpture ISsupenor to other pen ods Wlttkower ISnot concerned With the history of stonecarvmg except as It applies to sculptors He also lacks technical knowledge

206

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

of the medium Bessac tnes to use specific descnphons of the tools of France as a basis for a bnef hrs ton cal survey without m my opmIon sufficient evidence and documentation from other areas 2 I am aware that this IS a viewpoint that IS not accepted by most scholars There IS Herodotus as evidence in favor of the Egyptian connection and no evidence of any connection between the Greeks and HIttites as well as no evidence that the Greeks knew of the Hittites On the other hand large HIttite rock reliefs still remam in Turkey near Marusa and at the Karabel pass on the present route from Ephesus to Sardis That the latter was known to the Greeks ISclear since It ISmentioned by Herodotus, and altnbured by him to the Egyptians I I am walkmg on thm Ice, possibly trying to walk on water, m my assertion of the mfluence of HIttite on Greek carvmg technique It still remams true that technically HIHIte and Greek high rehef techniques are surpnsmgly sirrular, whereas Egyptian and Greek are very dIfferent 3 The simphcity of this statement has been to some extent complicated recently by the mformahon that the marble from LUnI(Carrara) was bemg continually quarned and carved on a small scale from the rruddle of the SIxth century BC (Bonarruci, Mansa, "Il manno lunense in epoca preromana" in Dolci. 1989 pp 83-113) EIther the availabihty of a good marble nearer at hand was not noticed by the Greeks in south-central Italy, or they were tradihon bound to Greece when they wanted to use marble The local stone would serve for anythmg that didn't reqUire marble 4 The possible exception to this IS the vanety of types of dnlls available to Berruru The dnll existed in the fourth century BC, but not in such vanety as It did by the late Renaissance 5 Some of the documentation of this analysis IS contained in chapters 16, 17, and 18 The conclusions are entirely my own 6 This ISnot to say that there was not marble and hard-stone working m Northern Europe (see Mont-Samt-Michel in Normandy and the workmg of Belgian black limestone) or soft-stone working in Italy (see the sculpture m Vicenza stone in the Baptistry of Panna or the churches of Leece and the Salento peninsula) However, m Northern Europe the pnncrpal technique was soft-stone working and m Italy It was marble and hard-limestone working 7 It IS possible that the unbrushed statues can be attributed to the fact that for one reason or another he was not gomg to be pard for them On the other hand It IS worth noting that he IS the only major sculptor to have go Hen himself into such a posihon It IS not as If he were either poor or an unrecognized geniUS If the unhrushed pIeces are such because of contractual problems, then he seems to have been peculiarly incompetent in arrangmg workable contracts 8 Rockwell, 1991b 9 ThIS pomt would be debated by those, espeCially m England or France, who are mvolved WIth restoration where a great deal of carvmg ISdone In my opmIOn most of thIS carvmg, however technically expert, ISstill done as an execution of eIther an architect's very preCise drawmg or as a copy of earlIer work Therefore I thmk that my generalIzation still holds

16 Documentation I

Introduction Until recently most studies on stonecarvmg techniques have been earned out for an ultenor mohve Carl Bluemel's purpose was to show that the techniques of Hellerushc and Roman sculpture were different from the techniques of archaic and classical sculpture, which he thought arhshcally supenor Sheila Adam wrote her book, The Technique of Greek Sculpture, to rebut Bluemel's thesis John WhIte's excellent article on the Orvieto Cathedral facade reliefs IS hIS attempt to idenhfy the sculptor of these reliefs The presence of dnllmg IS also sornehmes used as a means of datmg Roman sculpture WhIle It may be true that an analysis of techniques can help demonstrate somethmg outside of the immediate area of the techruques, the analysis can be biased by the desire to prove a point Unfortunately, relatively little has been done in the way of comparative study of stoneworkmg techniques. m fact, very little m the way of accurate, unbiased data has been built up to enable comparative study to be earned out, nor have standards for documentahon of data been established In order to study the techniques of stoneworkmg systemahcally, the tool marks and other relevant marks on stone surfaces must be recorded in such a way that others can use the mformahon It ISImportant that It be done as objectively as possible Many major monuments are currently bemg restored and conserved throughout the world, usmg scaffoldmg that enables the surfaces to be examined close up Careful and accurate documentation of the worked surfaces can provide a body of mformahon for future scholars who may not have the opportunity to study the surfaces so closely For these reasons It IS Important to understand the vanous forms of documentahon, their pOSSIbIlItIes,hrrutahons, and methods Just as the histon cal study of stoneworkmg ISm ItS infancy, so IS the understandmg of the methods of documentation After several years' expenence on monuments m Italy, I have gradually developed some methods, WIth the help of conservators ThIS held ISshll evolving. and there ISroom for more expenence and Improvement Documentation IS first of all recordmg the sIgns of tools on the surface of a worked stone object Notmg the tools used to hrush the surface ISthe obvIOUSplace to begm The frequency of unbrushed stonecarvmgs as statues or even sechons of buildings ISsuch that the documentahon frequently reveals considerably more than just the methods of surface 207

208

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

hrush The stages that a work process went through and the relahonship of design to work IS frequently revealed by elements of unhrush Another area of factual documentation IS the type of stone used In the case of white marble, this ISfrequently difficult to know for sure Visual idenhhcahon IS unreliable, and more accurate idenhhcahon requires takmg samples, which IS often Impossible The second area of documentation focuses on works made from more than one piece of stone As discussed earlier, considerable Information about the workshop orgaruzahon as well as the processes can be obtained from an analysis of the sizes and relationships of the blocks and the methods of putting them together A third area ISmore Interpretive, because It regards the sculptural orgaruzahon of the work By analyzing the composihon of the sculpture, It IS sometimes possible to demonstrate something of the processes Involved While differences In process between an archaic relief and a Roman Imperial sarcophagus are quite obVIOUS,the analysis of more closely related works or large, complex pieces becomes more complicated and speculative It IS worthwhile to attempt to define In each work the extent to which elements of form and composihon demonstrate technical processes and record one's observations Several examples of documentation of stonework of varIOUSsizes and penods Will show the value of documentation, as well as some of the methods I hnd useful They are divided Into five groups

Wntten documeniatum Because of eXigencies of time or conditions, or because the work IS Simple enough to make this kind of documentation suffioent. only a written descnphon of the evidence of the work may be made Generally, however, It should not stand alone The evidence may be lucidly presented, but until there IS a standardized way of descnbmg tool marks verbally, a written descnphon can easily be rrusmterpreted

Photograpl11c documentauon In such areas as tool marks, photographs are certainly an Invaluable supplement to text or drawings

Draunngs Craphic analysis of the tool marks on a carved work IS often the best and Simplest way to provide mformahon for the study of techmque This ISespecially true of works by more than one hand, where different tool-working In different areas IS Important Information Drawings that map these differences are one of the most useful forms of documentation They are of course best when used In conjunction With photographs of the tool marks Drawings of larger, multi-block works are an Immediate way to demonstrate relative sizes of blocks and the orgaruzahon of the block placement Drawings take many forms, from a sketch as a form of note-taking to measured surveys Different colors or symbols Indicate the varIOUStool surfaces found It ISoften

DOCUMENTATION

possible

to analyze a large composition

like the way a fresco can be a good grapluc

divided

record of worked

graphically,

209

so that It IS broken down somewhat

Into giornale Several means are

available

to create

stone surfaces and block placement

Measurements and related injormauon Block measurements, differences in the proportions of hgures and any number of other

discrepancies

recorded

What IS Important

the stoneworkmg

between

one area of a carvmg

to document

usually depends

and another

and what mformahon

on the particular

can be usefully

can be used m analyzmg

work concerned

The computer This IS an obvious m dealmg graphics

tool for compilmg

With monuments and databases

which

Involve

data It IS especially

and organIzmg large amounts

allow us to organize,

of diverse

store, display

data

and analyze

useful

Computer mformahon

effectively As stoneworkmg achieve

IS ultimately

a certain

thorough

reducible

effect, documentation

documentation

aVOId the temptation

to a tool or tools of tool surfaces

applied

to the stone

IS of first pnonty

of all the marks found on the stone IS Important,

to use the evidence

Moreover, in order to

only to prove one's own theones

One must

stnve to be as careful and objechve as the CIrcumstances allow WhIle we must often be content

WIth somethmg

The followmg

less, the Ideal should always be kept m mmd

studies are organized

accordmg

to types of documentation,

begmnmg

This presentation also mvolves a certain progression from SImpler to more complex pIeces I have tned to cover as WIde a range of penods as possible, but as I have had more

With the Simplest

opportunity studies

form and progressmg

section

m marble,

also as a result of opportunity

the carvmg problems

and analysis problems

this

complicated

to study Roman works, there IS a preponderance

are of works

opmIOn, although In

to the more

this

area Most

Nevertheless,

of the In

are different m other stones, the documentation

are the same Therefore,

are applicable

or complete

the documentahon

methods

demonstrated

to any stone monument

Wntten documentation AntOnIO Canova

Stele del/'mclsore Giooanni Volpato AD 1807

Rome, Basilica del Ss Apostoli

Matenal statuary

marble

clearly because

The stone

IS white marble

The marble IS m excellent of ItS well-protected

Tool Marks

Tooth

position

It seems to be a good quality Carrara

condihon.

showmg

all the tool marks very

m the porch

clusel, two SIzes, round-headed

chisel. rasp, scraper,

and

dnll The tooth clusel IS found on the lower margm of the relief, the" floor" on wluch the

210

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

chair and the feet of the female hgure rest There are also some signs of a hner tooth chisel on the woman's dress where It extends below her cloak near the feet The round-headed chisel can be seen on the same area as the hne tooth chisel Most of the sculpture IShrushed with a very fine rasp, and the hrush ISvery uniform throughout There may be some use of abrasives on the background The hrush, while showing fine raspmg, may also have been gone over lightly with pumice afterward There are a few signs of a toothed scraper or a very hne tooth chisel used as a scraper on the cloak of the figure near the Waist The dnll ISused m two ways as an assistance m shallow channels on the dress where the hne tooth and round-headed chisel are used, and for making very fine holes for measunng points In the first instance, the dnll was probably a cord dnll A drawing by Francesco Cluarothru m the Museo CIVlCOof Udme shows Canova's studio With workmen usmg cord dnlls The small measunng-point holes were probably made by a very hne, pointed dnll spun between the hands Techniques At least twenty small holes With a black mark m them are clearly measunng points On the cloak below the figure's thigh there are enough of them to show that they are arranged along more or less parallel honzontal lines or m a gnd pattern The points are between 2 and 3 em apart horizontally. 5 and 6 cm apart vertically The whole relief was probably worked from a plaster model by placing points in a gnd pattern on the model and then transfernng these points to the marble With a measunng system It IS also likely that on the portrait the points were closer together both honzontally and vertically Several examples of plaster models used for marble carvmgs can be seen m the Canova Museum m Posagno We cannot be sure of the exact system used for taking the measurements, but a good Idea of the possibilities can be obtained from the Illustrations m Carradon's treatise on sculpture Most of the surface of the sculpture would be very easy to carve, given the measured points The only exceptions are the two areas that are carved to show the texture of the dress under the cloak The mixed tool work of hne tooth clusel, round-headed chisel and dnll would have to be done by eye With only the overall depth given by the measunng points The subtle changes m tool and depth of relief on tlus texture would reqUire far too many points. as the exishng measunng points show Conclusions This IS a very typical example of nineteenth-century work The use of the measunng-pomt system gives a telltale exactitude and control to the carvmg and a Uniformity to the surfaces It would not be necessary to find as many measunng points as there are to know that It was carved WIth this process the umiorrrury of surface treatment IS a srgruhcant mdrcahon The sculptor's workshop can be assumed to have functioned as follows the sculptor produced a plaster model A carving assistant then placed the measunng points on the model and carved the marble accordmgly The hnal surface was worked either by the sculptor or by a carver whom he trusted to do a certain amount by eye the dress texture and hne details of eyes and other facial features The whole process and orgaruzahon was controlled by three thmgs a highly hrushed model, a careful division of labor mto specialties, a hrm sense of surface hrush The sculptor mamtamed quality by ensunng that

DOCUMENTATION

211

each part of the process was very clear and was earned out In a preCIse manner He was a designer and manager The carvers working for him had well-dehned subsidiary responsibilihes Cian Lorenzo Bernini La Venta Svelata c AD 1652 Rome, GalIena Borghese Materia! WhIte marble, probably a Carrara Statuary marble The hneness and delicacy of some of the carved detail supports this idenhhcahon The marble surfaces are In excellent condition because the work has always been preserved Indoors Some sort of surface treatment or treatments have been applied to the marble which have given It a brownish color wluch ISnot the natural color of the marble As usual when white marble ISWIthin easy reach and tempting to touch, the most accessible areas have a sort of greasy shine from being rubbed by passersby Tool Marks POint chisel. tooth clusel at least two types, flat chisel. roundheaded chisel. channeling tool. rasp, dnll and abrasives The pomt-cluselmg on this statue gIves us an especially good Idea of Berruru's use of tlus tool ThIS IStrue whether we presume the carVing was earned out by Bernini or by an assistant following the master's instruction On the back of the statue there are very large forms roughed out WIth the POint clusel It was used to remove a large amount of matenal quickly On the back of the drape behind and above the nght elbow, the same tool was used to remove less stone but to define the shapes much more clearly On the forms making up the seat of the hgure, the POint clusel was used as a frmslung tool, gIVing a particular texture and tone to these forms The tooth chisel was used In two ways as the mterim tool between POint and flat chisels on the back of the drapery behind the nght arm, and as a hrushmg tool. on the globe under Venta'sleft foot In the latter case, the tool was held at a greater angle to the surface being cut, which gave shorter lines cut Into the stone The tool had flatter teeth than the one used at the back of the drapery Vanous flat chisels were used on the hair, carving the surface and inCISingthe lines, as well as on the back of the sun In Venta's right hand The flat clusel was also used on the rear drape after the tooth chisel, In the process of carVing the forms The round-headed clusel was used somewhat on the hair and on the drapery at the back In conjunction With the flat chisel The rasp was used on the partially hrushed drapery section as the smoothing tool after POint, tooth, and flat clusels It did some hnal delicate shaping as well The channeling tool's marks can be detected In the depths of some of the drapery folds Its use In these areas ISmore VISIblethan the drill's The dnll was used for the mtenor holes of the curls of hair over Venta's nght shoulder Abrasives of several levels of hneness were used to polish the figure and the polished portions of the drapery >-

Techniques

There are no signs of any measunng POints or other marks for

212

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

measurements Since there are areas m virtually every state of unhrush, we would be sure to fmd signs of a measunng-pomt system If It had been used This does not mean that models or some method for makmg basic measurements did not exist, but there are no signs of a method of copymg from a model This absence presupposes a very different relationship between Berruru and lus assistants from that of Canova to his workshop Berruru's assistants had to work by eye and be capable of mterprehng the small forms of the model into larger forms Berruru must have intervened directly in the work, either by doing some carvmg himself or by watching and mstruchng the carvers from time to time He could not SImply start the maclune gomg and then let It run by Itself Berruru used the carving chisels both m the process of reducing the stone and shaping the forms and as hmshmg tools for certain areas the point hrushed the forms she ISsithng on, the tooth the globe, and the flat and round-headed chisels the hair Each tool was both part of a process and valued for the special qualihes It could gIve to the surface The unhrushed area at the back of the drape behmd the nght arm gives an especially good VIew of Berruru's carving process The carvmg of the large forms and then iruhal rehnement in two or three stages WIth the point chisel was followed by clanhcahon of the details of the drapery WIth the tooth clusel, smoothmg With the flat chisel and then the rasp This method ISvery close to the modem method, in wluch each tool has ItSplace in the process There are several supports left in place on the left hand between the hngers, and between the thumb and the breast In the area of the sun and nght hand, there are three kinds of supports (1) the wnst has a rectangle of stone left on the back, which reinforces It where It turns back, (2) there ISa large support between the sun and the drape, (3) there are still some small supports m place between the rays of the sun Such supports are left m to strengthen the stone against the shock of the carvmg until the work ISalmost fmished They were an essential part of Berruru's process because they allowed him to put delicate details out mto space, away from the mass of the stone Also, these details could be hrushed after the main bulk of the statue was completed The smaller supports could be sawed out and the one behmd the right wnst could be removed by carvmg along the arm toward the mass of the block Thus a rrurumum of stress IS placed on the marble in removmg the supports The correct placement of supports ISpart of the rational tlunkmg and planning mvolved m a work of tlus sort The hgure and much of the drapery facmg the front ISpolished, while other parts of the statue are unbrushed VISIble from the front as unfinished are the supports left in the hands and foot Polish ISusually the final stage in the carvmg process It does not involve hammers, so there IS very little stress placed on the material ThIS presence of VISible elements of unhrush together With a highly poltshed surface ISvery unusual m BernIm's work It ISalso known that the work remamed unhmshed m the studiO after hiS death I am mclmed to wonder why the poltsh was carned out before the rest was hmshed Could It have been poltshed only after BernmI deCIded that he would not execute the other hgure m the group 7 Or could It have been poltshed after hIS death 7 ConclUSIOns Unhmshed works by Bernml are rare, thIS piece IS therefore Important for understandmg hiS methods As a carver, he was more fleXible m the use of tools than Canova He also expected more sculptural abIltty and less of a mechamcal

DOCUMENTATION

213

attitude from his assistants, as can be seen from the lack of measunng signs On the other hand there ISa dehrute methodology In the sequence of tools used There are no signs of the changes of mind that can be seen on Michelangelo's unhrushed carvings One has the ImpreSSIOnof a logical process and sense of organization, based on having trained assistants The only uncertainty ISthe question of when the polish was earned out This question could be answered only If we knew considerably more about Bernini's carving procedures These two wntten descnphons of carvings are examples of the possibilrhes and lurutahons of this form of documentation It works well enough on a carving as Simple and With a technique as straightforward as the Canova The documentation of the Berruru carving IS not satisfactory, and would be helped by some grapluc documentation In general, where the carVing IS Simple and few tools were used, a verbal descnphon may suffice, but anything large, complicated, unhrushed or mvolvmg a vanety of tool use needs more thorough documentation Photographic documentation I am rather skeptical about the value of photographic documentation alone for the analysis of stoneworking One reason ISthat It ISoften very difficult to obtain good photographs of hne tool marks, even when they are reasonably easy to see The other reason ISthat bias may be Involved It ISso easy to photograph only what ISmtere sting or obvious to the observer, or only what proves a POint the analyst Wishes to make Photographs appear to be objective, yet their organization ISnot necessanly so It ISalso frequently true that one ISstrongly inclined to take only those shots which Willcome out well, avoiding areas that may be VISibleto the naked eye but not to the camera's lens One often loses any sense of the extent and vanety of tool use In this way Therefore, as photographs provide only part of the necessary documentation, they should be paired With graphics that provide more overall information It IS, however, true that there are times when more ngorous documentation IS not possible, and therefore photographs must serve The work can be useful and objective as long as It IS borne In mind that this IS a form of sampling rather than complete documentation The following ISan example of the use of photographs for documenting technique on an area of carVing that IS normally inaccessible Since there was only a temporary scaffolding on the monument, there was no time for more thorough documentation Therefore, It IS a form of prelirrunary report on the techniques of one small area of a large monument Arch of Trajan, Benevento A section of the fneze from the northwest face Second decade of the second century AD This section of the fneze depicts a sacnhcial bull and a man, one scene from the tnumph of Trajan after the Dacian Wars The frieze ISabout 10 m above ground level and around 40 cm high Maienal

The matenal is white marble From the quality of detail It can be seen

214

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

to be a high-quality carVing marble Allowing for the age of the monument, the marble IS In excellent condition Many tool marks are easily visible In vanous places the marble has one or more levels of coating on It Surface dirt occasionally makes the tool marks hard to read The relief under consideration IS all on one block of stone Tools Tooth chisel. several widths of flat chisel, round-headed clusel, toothed scraper, rasp and dnll The tooth chisel can be seen In photograph 23 at the front of the leg between the folds where the leg and the chest meet This IS rather delicate tooth chiseling and may be considered hrushed work A wide flat chisel was used to carve the background In front of the man's head (photograph 24) The man's beard, his eyelids, the bull's eyelid (photograph 25) and some of the channels In the hair show flat chiseling In the case of the channels In the hair and the curls of the beard, the comer of a narrow sharp flat chisel was used The round-headed chisel was used In the man's hair and the leaves of the molding above his head (photograph 24) and In shaping the bull's eye socket above the eyelid (photograph 25) The tool surface found most frequently on the carVing IS the toothed scraper Practically all the signs VISibleon the bull's body and the background behind the bull were made With this tool (photographs 23 and 25) It can be found In places on the man's body, especially the neck, although these are not particularly visible In the photographs Tlus tool seems to have been the preferred surface hrushmg tool for these sculptures There are some signs of the rasp on the bull's body, In the folds of the neck and under the eye (photograph 25) The dnll has been used In the bull's nose and harness (photograph 23) and In the man's nose and the depths of the channels of Ius hair (photograph 24) There IS no sign of any abrasives having been used In hrushmg and there are no remains of unbrushed tool working Technique It IS remarkable that the carving, although at some height, IS so carefully finished overall This applies even to parts such as the hooves of the bull which are mvisible from ground level Since the combined height of the relief and the size of the hgures mean that details are not VISibleto the observer, except from a scaffolding, we must assume that tlus level of craftsmanship IS based on other cnlena than Immediate VISibility The use of the toothed scraper for such large areas of the carving shows how Important a tool It was for these carvers (It IS also found on many other areas of the monument) Its use here allows us to see ItS place In the sequence of carVing It would seem that It was the penultimate tool. after the chisels but before the rasps From the neck of the bull and the neck of the man, It can be seen that certain detailed areas were refined With the rasp whereas the larger areas are considered hrushed With the scraper Marks of the toothed scraper are also found on monuments In Rome Both the Ara PaCIS of Augustus and the Tnumph of Marcus Aurelius relief In the Palazzo del Conservaton, Rome, show traces of tlus tool Yet the traces are not nearly as frequent, nor ISthe condition of the stone as good On these monuments the hrush ISmuch more

DOCUMENTATION

215

frequently done with a rasp It seems hkely that the Benevento carvers chose to leave a slightly less rehned hnal surface to their carvings than was normal In Rome, although, as noted above, the work ISshll highly and uniformly hrushed, considering It would not be viewed from close up The high relief of the bull In contrast to the low rehef of the man behind him gives some mdicahon of the carVIng process The bull was outlmed on the stone and roughed out to a level Just above the outer level of the man ThIS ISrather like the technique of archaic Greek carvings. and It ISpossible that It was done before the stone was put Into place Then the details of the bull were carved and the man was outlmed and carved ThIS technique ISrelatively rare on Roman reliefs of this penod, but can be seen on the fneze of the Forum of Nerva As on that fneze, It presents the advantage of allowing the iruhal roughmg out to be carned out on the ground, If necessary The fneze ISthe only sculpture on the Arch of Trajan at Benevento that shows tlus type of roughmg out COHch/SIGHS One cannot draw very many conclusions about a monument the size of the arch from such a small sample Nevertheless, as the techniques Illustrated In llus sample are not contradicted by a visual observation of other parts of the arch, two Important conclusions can be drawn The first ISthat the level of surface hrush does not vary greatly throughout the monument Thus, It must have been dictated as an overall design decision, rather than being based on the distance from the observer or the mdividual carver's style, as on other monuments of tlus penod The second conclusion concerns the process of roughing out the fneze, which ISsimilar to the archaic Greek In contrast, the large relIefs on the two main faces of the arch and the two large reliefs on Its mlenor are roughed out WIth a technique similar to Roman sarcophagi ThIS shows that the carvers, although normally USIngone technique, had not lost the knowledge of the older one and could use It when CIrcumstances made It more practical It ISImportant to note tlus flexibility of response to practical problems on the part of Roman carvers, as well as the retention of older methods as part of their techrucal arsenal

17 Documentation II

Documentation drawmgs Documentation drawings are the most understandable and complete way of showing the extent of each type of tool work on a carving The area worked by each tool can be shown where the marks are VISIble,thus providing Invaluable mformahon on both the tool working and the process EIther black and white or color can be used Color can be expensIve to pubhsh, but IS the clearest form of commurucahng the results 1 The fc llowmg analyses show two different types of drawings from studies of two drfferent monuments and penods Marble Relzef of a

VIctOriOUS

Boy Afhlefe

470 Be

Athens National Archaeologrcal Museum Drawing 65 ThIS ISa fragment of a small early classical relief The condihon of the remaImng stone ISgood, so the tool marks can be very easily read Malena!

WhIte marble Provenance unknown

Tools The symbols used on the drawing are as follows to ch = tooth clusel. fl = flat chisel. nl = rasp, elrho = dnll holes, abr = abrasives, and pt ch = POint clusel, rh = round-headed chisel The POint chisel was used only on the back of the stone and therefore does not pertain to what we can document of the techniques of the relief The tooth-chisel marks are hner and create a smoother surface than the flat-chisel marks The area between the face and the arm marked "Il r " sigruhes that this area ISunbrushed The flat-clusel working was clearly prehrrunary to the tooth chiselmg VISIbleon the other areas of the background The round-headed clusel and the dnll were used only on the hair The body was hrushed WIth abrasives Techniaues The use of a nne tooth chisel as a means of smoothing the stone after moderately rough flat chiselmg and before either the rasp or abrasive ISunexpected, 216

DOCUMENTATION

217

'I \ \

,, ,-,

BackK PTCH SIde To CH + ABR ToCH +ABR ToCH+ ABR

Drawmg 65

because the normal sequence IStooth chisel before flat chisel Possibly this ISa tool usage that preceded the Roman use of the toothed scraper The fact that the flesh was finished with abrasives, and the background with file or tooth chisel followed by light abrasive work, shows an interest m distmguishmg areas represenbng different matenals by varymg the texture Conclusion The most Important feature of the techmque of this relief ISthe use of the tooth chisel as a near-fimshmg chisel This should not be taken to mean that Greek carvers did not know about the use of the tooth chisel as an mtenm chisel (The unbrushed archaic head from Naxos m the Glyptothek m Mumch shows that they did) Rather, It shows a flexibility in size and function of the tooth as well as showmg at least one funchon for the tool that does not exist m modem bmes Smce Ifirst studied tlus carvmg, Ihave noted the same tool marks on carvmgs m the Athens and Delphi Museums, but not elsewhere This suggests that It may have been a parbcularly Atbc techmque The baSICtechnique, usmg a tool with a single lme of teeth to smooth a surface m preparabon for rasps or abrasives. or even as a finished surface, ISclose to work found m Rome m the first and second centunes AD The next two examples of documentabon drawmgs are computer-generated drawmgs These drawmgs were made on a Macintosh computer usmg Superpamt as a drawmg program and a tracmg hardware to trace over photographs The iruhal drawmgs were used as the baSISfor note taking on the scaffoldmg at the Bapbstry The final drawmgs were made from these notes Advantages of this fonn of documentabon are ease of storage and reproduction and the ease with wluch changes can be made

218

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

point chisel

1.-.1

tooth chisel

scraper

1ÂŤ1

abrasive

flat and round chisel

~~mflat chisel

a round _

drill

picchierello capital

Drawing 66

The Baptistry of Parma Three interior capitals First quarter of the thirteenth century Drawings 66, 67 and 68 Material The Corinthian capital in drawing 66 is in Verona red limestone. This is a very hard and polishable limestone obtainable in large blocks that is dark red in color. Although relatively little of the work on the interior is of this stone, the exterior walls, columns, capitals and most of the sculpture are carved in it. The capitals shown in drawings 67 and 68 are Vicenza limestone. This is a soft, buff, easily workable limestone. Most of the sculpture of the interior of the Baptistry is carved in this stone. Tools On capital number 6 the sculptor's pick, the tooth chisel, the flat chisel and abrasive. On capitals number 8 and number 10 the flat chisel, the round-headed chisel and the drill. On number 10 there are some signs of the tooth chisel on areas in the rear (see note 4 on the drawing). The drill is used on capital number 10 both for opening deep areas and for decorative punctuation on the leaves (note 2 on the drawing). The most notable characteristic of the tool usage is the difference between the two types of stone. The Vicenza stone is finished with flat and round-headed chisels and the drill. The Verona red stone is finished with abrasives. The differences are also seen in the unfinished tool uses as the sculptor's pick is found extensively on the Verona red and not on the Vicenza. The use of the drill is interesting both for the lack of its use on the Verona red stone as well as its dual use on Vicenza stone. In other periods the drill has been frequently used on marble, which is similar to the Verona red. In the case of these sculptures it seems to be seen as primarily a tool for soft stone.' Its use on soft stone is as a multi-purpose

DOCUMENTATION

point chisel ~ tooth chisel ~ t~/'~~flat chisel

1••• 1 drill

mrrm

round

scraper

abrasive flat and round chisel

picchierello capital 8

Drawing 67

-.. ----~4

point chisel

tooth chisel

~;;mJ flat chisel § _

round picchierello

1.·.1

drill

scraper

Hod

abrasive

flat and round chisel

Drawing 68

1 Pupils carved flat. 2 Drill used before chisel to open the hole. 3 Carving quality is affected in places by porosity in the stone. 4 Some areas in rear left roughly carved.

capital

219

220

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

------Drawing 69

tool. It is used to open out deep narrow areas, to initiate channels and most often as a form of decorative punctuation on the foliage of the capitals and other sculpture. Although this chapter is concerned with documentation drawings, the three uses of the drill can best be seen in photographs. Photographs 26, 27 and 28 show respectively drill holes used for punctuation, drill holes used to open a deep narrow space and drill holes in a line for making a channel. What we know of the drill and the way it is used suggests that the form used here was the pump drill. The use of the sculptor's pick on the Verona red denotes a technique similar to that found on the marble carvings of Orvieto Cathedral a century later. It is a technique normally associated with granite carving. As Verona red is a hard stone which tends to blunt tools easily, it is not a surprising development. We cannot be sure whether different sculptors were carving the same stone or the same sculptors were carving both stones, although there is some stylistic evidence which suggests this for the exterior. In the former case the difference in tool use would suggest that carvers and sculptors associated themselves with specific stones, thus probably coming from the area the stone is quarried and most frequently used. In the latter case, which seems to be the more likely at Parma, the technical knowledge of the carver / sculptors is sufficiently sophisticated to include a working familiarity with different stones. Techniques The methods of carving these three capitals partially reflect the differences in tool use. Since the sculptor's pick is used on capital number 6 we can see that the final forms were carved in a slower, more methodical way than on the other two. This tool shatters the stone rather than cutting it so that the carver proceeds at a slower rate taking off thin "skins" of marble one after the other. With the other tools the skins are likely to be much thicker. This effect is accentuated by the relative hardness of the Verona red stone. The evidence of the sculptor's pick is reinforced by a small amount of unfinish that is visible on the lower leaves of capital number 6. The final outlining of the scallops of the leaves on the left is not finished as it is on the rest of the leaves. It is such a minor detail

DOCUMENTATION

�

point chisel

tooth chisel

221

m~J flat chisel E3 _ 1 •••

round picchierello drill

scraper

1<1

abrasive

rrrnm

flat and round chisel

5 1 2 3 4 5 Drawing

Pupils carved flat. The stone is broken here. 1::::1:;:3 signifies rough flat chisel work. The chair overlaps the base at these two points. The feet do not touch the base plane.

that one would have expected it to be carved while working the surface of the leaf. It shows that the carver of this capital was proceeding by very small steps, completing each one before moving on to the next. There is no evidence of a similar particularity of procedure on the other capitals. The techniques for the larger process of roughing out the capitals is not affected by the difference in materials. All capitals follow a procedure in the carving of form that varied little over a long period of time. The carver starts with a cube or rectangular cube the height, width and depth of which is approximately that of the finished capital. Then the rough form of the capital is carved into this cube. Drawing 69 shows this rough form for capitals number 6 and number 10. All of the capitals on the exterior and interior of the Baptistry of Parma are based on these two rough forms. There are many variations carried out within the confines of these forms, but the basic form does not vary. There is no noticeable variation in the form according to material; capitals number 6 and number 8 are derived from the same form although some of their details are different and they are carved in different stones. The simplicity of the rough forms contrasted with the variety of difference in detail and finish between the finished capitals suggests a division of labor in the workforce. The roughing out of the capitals was done by a group of stonecutters following two basic formulae, possibly under the direct supervision of the master carvers who were to finish

222

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

the capitals Then the mdividual sculptor/master carvers would take these roughed capitals and execute the capital Tlus would be an efficient means of carrymg out the work It ISan explanation that helps to explam the combmahon of simplicity of baSICform and variety of fmal form that IS charactenshc of the capitals at Parma Conclusions In lookmg at the technique of these capitals one ISImpressed by the sense of an overall organization which combmes order and considerable diversity The order ISm the simplicity of the baSICforms wluch allows a dIvISIOnof labor as well as m the fad that each type of stone has a hrush based on the tools most adapted to workmg that stone The diversity ISseen m the the vanety of hrushed capitals that were carved The carvers are expenenced With a vanety of tools that ISroughly equivalent to either the Roman Empire or the italian Renaissance They know how to adapt these tools to different stones With different carvmg charactenshcs What we see ISa well developed and established technology of sloneworkmg A statue m the round presents more problems of documentation than a bas-relief or a capital The bas-relief ISessentially one Sided and the capital usually has the same design on all four of ItS SIdes A statue, especially a hgurahve one, ISnot the same on all four SIdes The followmg shows the documentation of a statue that reqUires more than one drawmg The Baptistry of Parma Gennaio FIrSt quarter of the thirteenth century Drawmgs 70 and 71 Material The material IS Vicenza limestone unusual charactenshcs VISiblem tlus statue

There are no faults or other

Tools The tools are the tooth chisel, the round-headed clusel and the flat chisel The surface hrush IS almost entirely executed With the flat chisel This tool was probably used as a scraper for some of the fmal smoothmg There are some areas, which have been noted on the drawmgs, where the flat chisel was used m a rough way These areas would be virtually mvrsible If the statue were placed above eye level in a niche or against a wall Technique The techruque follows a succession of tools from tooth clusel to flat chisel used roughly to the same tool or the round-headed clusel used for fnushmg Small areas which would be mvisible to the observer even from the front are left WIth a rougher

hrush What makes tlus statue mtereshng technically, and reqUires more than one documentation drawing, IS the fad that the back of the statue IS left unfirushed The earlier stage of carvmg takes two forms dependmg on the type of work to be executed The upper part ISthe hgurahve head, the lower part ISthe back of the bench that Gennaro SItSon Particularly unbrushed ISthe second, rear-facing head of Cennaio, which clearly shows an earlier stage in the progressIOn of carvmg the hgurahve forms The rear-facing head IS carved WIth the flat chisel The facial features are nearly

DOCUMENTATION

22}

2 ~

point chisel

tooth chisel

round picchierello

m~:~ flat chisel _ 1 •••

drill

scraper

abrasive

IIIJ]]J

flat and round chisel rough flat chisel work

1 The pupils are carved flat. 2 The second head at the back is unfinished. 3 A, B The back of the chair has two diagonal lines forming an x going from A right to B left and from B right to A left. They mark the position of the chair. Drawing

finished, but the beard is just roughed in. It has been cut using the flat chisel to rough out the basic form and sketch a few lines into it. There are no signs of marking lines or guide lines. The sculptor is carving quickly and by eye. This small head shows an impressive ability to carve rapidly and directly into the stone without either noticeable hesitation or pre- planning. The back of the chair on which Gennaio is sitting is carved with the tooth chisel. Following that the carver has incised a large "X" into the stone - the four points of which are the four corners of the chair. This shows that the sculptor wished to be sure that the chair was correctly placed in the mass of stone. It would seem that since the chair is a sort of architectural form, it is placed carefully into the stone. The sculptor does not allow himself the freedom that he does with figurative details. It should be noted that in every case where there is an incised line on these sculptures at the Baptistry it is always incised into a tooth-chiseled surface. These surfaces are always Simple, large geometrical forms. It would seem that the carvers were always free to develop the details freely as they carved. Conclusions The first conclusion is to note the importance of the profile drawing for the documentation. The unfinished areas would be undocumented if only the front face were used. The second conclusion is that the actual designer of this statue as far as the surface details of figurative design are concerned - is the person carving. The

224

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

details of the unhrushed

head are roughed

some preceding

In contrast

design

laid-out

with incised lines

carving

and all the smaller details decided

between

overall designer

analyzed

and carver/sculptor

Presumably director

we have here the division

The ongm

used for paintings

Restauro

The first applicahon

as I know, results

group

However,

thus to further vanety

drawings

of this techmque sculpture

It was begun

of form and detail

the designer

or overall

more freedom

technique can be seen In the Iollowmg

used In this way IS an adaptation

In fresco that IS used extensively

on the facade

restoration

of dehruhon between

This diVISIOn allows considerably

documentation

of documentation

technique

the

Imposed wluch dehnes the baSIC formal

of responsibility

and the actual firushmg carver

between

tlus sculpture and the capitals previously

to the firushmg carver than IS VISible In modern chapter

before

If there IS a diVISIOn of labor

It IS VISIble In the difference

there IS a great vanety

Further use of black-and-white

head

to note the sirrulanty between

WIthin that pattern

that the pose IS decided

while carVing

In both cases there IS an overall pattern

composition

to be copies of

wluch IS part of the basic posihorung

This gives the impression

pose and the details on the unbrushed It IS interesting

out with too great a freedom

an element

by the Ishlulo

to stonecarvmg

of Orvieto

USing colored

Cathedral

drawings

of a

Centrale del

tool surfaces was, as far by myself

and

C B C

and these still give the best

econorruc factors have led to more and more use of black and wlute and expenmentahon

of monuments

Documentation

drawings

have been carried out on a

In Italy I am not aware that they have been used outside

of Italy

except by myself Drawing

documentation

the great advantage photographic stration

documentation

of a particular

These drawings

It IS obviously

than an mdicahon between

thesis.

of studying

too directed

or too dIfficult to understand In a symbolic which

IS the carved,

In an Image form It can give some sense the areas worked WIth particular

has

Wntten

and

tools

toward

worked

the demon-

to be generally

form of a three-dimensional

not the reality, nor IS It Intended

of that reality

technique

than the actual documenter

IS either too particular,

are a representation

two dimensions presented

of tool marks on stone as a method

of being useful to others

useful

surface In

to be anything surfaces

of the placing

Because

It IS

and relahonslup

Since It IS a representation,

It IS useful as

an aid to analysis, but not as a replacement The base drawings drawings.

although

that are used for this documentation

to make for confusion

when the symbols

IS to use the base drawings As interpretation

the stone or the passage work In groups

for tool use are added

on the monument

notes can then be transferred completed

do not need to be exact scale

tlus IS certainly useful They should not be too detailed as llus IS likely The easiest way to work

for note taking WIth colored pencils

of tool marks IS frequently

of successive

dIfficult due to the condition

tools over the same surface, It IS always good to

rather than mdrvidually ThIS makes for more accurate

Always remember

These

to a fmal form In black and white after the note taking IS

that tlus IS documentahon

documentation

that others WIll tend to take as facts If you

are unsure of what the tool marks mean say so or leave the area blank

DOCUMENTATION

225

Notes 1 The eXIgencies of publislung have not allowed the use of color m this edihon For examples of color documentation drawmgs see La Rocca, 1986, Martelloth and Rockwell, 1988 and Rockwell, 1991b A further study bemg carried out on the exterior sculpture of the Baptistry of Parma (summer of 1992) shows that tlus distinction ISnot as complete as presumed from the mtenor carvmg Some of the sculptors workmg in Verona red on the sculpture of the extenor did use the dnll both as decoration as well as for channelmg This suggests that the use of the dnll was more an mdrvrdual choice for Verona red stone whereas It was a normal tool for all the carvers of Vicenza stone 3 See also Rockwell, 1990C In this essay vanous levels of unfimsh are compared for the same monument The use of documentation drawings ISa necessary method for such a companson

of similar objects

Documentation of major monuments

This chapter will focus on two monuments, the central portal of the facade of the Basilica of San NICola of Ban, and the Column of Trajan In Rome, my aim being to show the POssibilities of more extensive documentation uSing a combination of the methods previously discussed Other Information obtainable from the monument will also be used where applicable to the problem of descnbmg the techmques and processes of carving and constructing a stone monument I Drawings used together with photographs go some way toward overcoming the drawbacks Involved In uSing either separately Drawings can serve to indicate the location of details depicted In the photographs When a large monument ISconsidered, the drawing should also Include a plan of the orgaruzahon of the separate blocks

Ban the central Portal of San NIcola Legend for the tool surfaces drawmg ~

point chisel

Ivv v v vI tooth chisel

~I~ ~~ flat chisel 1:::::1 dnll

1= :1 scraper 1:.\路1 tooth and flat chisels 1,,",,":1 tooth chisel and scraper Iml flat chisel and dnll ~

226

flat chisel and scraper

DOCUMENTATION

MAJOR

MONUMENTS

227

Drawing 72

Considerable information is obtainable in this way, especially concerning the construction process. The stylistic differences between carvers may be quite obvious on a monument, and can be helpful in technical documentation and analysis. It is important to be very cautious, however. Technical analysis is ideally best kept at a distance from stylistic analysis. In this way it can work as another area of information to be considered in relation to the study of the style.

228

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

San NICola of Ban, central portal of the facade Twelfth century AD Ban, Italy Drawing 72 This IS a large, multi-piece stone doorway It mcludes three-dimensional sculpture, large amounts of bas-relief and architectural carving The documentation and analysis IS directed toward the whole work and does not attempt to differenhate technically between the different carvers except In passmg Maietta! The material is white marble It ISpossible to see from color, crystal size and types of damage that there are vanous different types of white marble used in a random fashion For example, the right-hand door Jamb of the central portal ISa gray stone that looks like Carrara marble The stone on the left Jamb ISIVOrywhite and broken In such a way that It suggests Pentelic marble My ImpreSSIOnISthat there ISProconessian marble m the portal as well There IS little attempt to match the tones of the vanous blocks to each other The variety of provenance, as well as the random lengths of the blocks, pomts to the stone having been reused Tlus would be consistent With what IS known of medieval practice, and also With the obVIOUSdifficulties of obtaining marble from the quarries In this penod The marble ISIn poor condition The areas left In white In the drawing are so damaged that no tool marks are visible Our view of the tool work IStherefore very fragmentary Tools The different tools are indicated on the drawing The separations between blocks are Indicated by heavier lines The tools used on this portal were the POInt chisel. tooth chisel, flat clusel. scraper and dnll There are no signs of the use of either rasp or abrasives or of polish Neither ISthere any sign of a true round-headed chisel There IS some indication, however, that the comers were rounded on some flat chisels The POInt chisel (photograph 29) was used for roughing out The only place where this has been left IS on the WIng supports of the sphinx The tooth chisel (photograph 30) ISfound on the splunx, underneath the chests of both oxen, and partially erased by a flat chisel or scraper on the nght Side of the upper arch There seems to be some stylistic consistency between the sculptures where this tool IS found, which could suggest that It was a tool used by only one of the carvers The flat chisel (photograph 31) IS used In several Widths It seems to have been the pnmary hrushmg tool Since, except for the places mentioned under tooth chisel. there are no signs of the tooth under the flat, It seems likely that the other sculptors passed directly from the point chisel to the flat chisel The tool ISused to cut curved as well as flat surfaces, It ISused to sketch In form as well as to hrush It The corner of the flat chisel ISused to cut the many incised lines Generally the tool ISused to cut along the form m the ancient Roman fashion rather than across It In the Renaissance way This chisel ISthe tool most used by these carvers There are some signs of the scraper being used to smooth surfaces after they were

DOCUMENTATION

MAJOR

MONUMENTS

229

cut-away side view

drill a line of holes

round-headed cut-away

chisel side view

carving between the holes

cut-away

side view

finished channel

Drawing 73

carved. It may have been only a flat chisel rubbed along the surface or it may have been a species of ferra siorio (a tool bent at a thirty- to forty-five-degree angle about 5 to 10 cm from the cutting edge). There are extensive signs of drilling on the portal. but no signs of the running drill. While there is evidence for a pump drill in medieval carving, there is no evidence of a strap drill before the sixteenth century, so it is most likely that the tool in question was a pump drill. There are three distinct uses of the drill. The first is decorative (photograph 32): the drill is used very extensively to give dark points that accentuate line and form. The placing of the holes show that the drill was used after the form was carved. This is not unlike the late antique use of the drill. Channeling in the hair of the sphinx and on the proper left pulvino was cut by drilling a series of parallel holes vertical to the surface (photograph 33). Usually the holes would be united by a narrow flat chisel. but sometimes this was not done, which enables us to see the method clearly (drawing 73). This technique is the standard medieval and Renaissance method of channeling. On the proper left capital of the portal, the leaves are separated by drill holes slanted at a diagonal to the surface of the stone (photograph 34). The holes are paired diagonals which form a "V" in the stone, leaving small connecting bridges of marble above where they meet see drawing 74a number 2. There is some use of the same technique on the leaf moldings in the coffers on the insides of the arches. The tool use on this monument is sophisticated, especially the use of the drill. Abrasives, however, are limited to the scraper. Everything is carved to its final finish. The use of the tooth chisel is especially interesting, because it was known but not very frequently used in medieval marble carving. (We do not know if it was used by certain

230

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

2 )

="==<::::>:'=="c::::

~Vi'W

c:s

top view

.:'.

top view

Drawing 74a

Drawing 74b

individuals or in certain geographical areas, spreading as carvers moved about. It does seem true that not all the carvers on a monument necessarily used the same tools.) Techniques The sculptural techniques are all variations on the technique used on archaic Greek or Egyptian reliefs. The work is begun by drawing on the plane of a squared block. This is true of the oxen and the sphinx as well as the bas-reliefs. The only exceptions are the capitals, which are free-hand copies of ancient Corinthian capitals. The basic technical sequence of the bas-reliefs is as follows: The block was prepared to its architectural dimensions. Door jambs and lintels were squared to their final form, and the blocks forming the arches were given their more complicated shapes. 1.

2. If the block was part of a molding, such as the arched, outer moldings over all the doorways, the shape of this molding was carved. This is clear from the way in which the carved leaves, interlaces and fantastic figures never extend in relief out of the basic form of the molding that contains them.

DOCUMENTATION

OF MAJOR

MONUMENTS

231

The peaked roof molding and the lmtel of the doorway present a complication of this techmque because they were not carved from a Simple runmng molding The form ISa slanted moldmg punctuated by protruding knobs or flowers In this case the molding was cut leaving square protrusions for these elements 3 The carver used some form of a drawn pattern which he applied to the flat or rounded surface of the stone (Obviously, It need not necessanly have been the carver himself who prepared the pattern) This drawing or pattern clearly delineated all the hgures and VIne Interlace against the background, but did not define the details withm the outlme 4 The sculptor cut the outlme and cleared away the stone In the empty spaces to the depth of the background This left him With a two-level surface The surface level was an outline of the design, the second level was the background around the elements of the cutout design 5 FInally he rounded the hgures and added whatever details and form he Wished to the outer surfaces Bas-reliefs worked With this techmque always have a very concise design standing out from a level background (photograph 35) The technique for the oxen and the sphinx was a vanahon on the bas-relief one The major outlme of the sculpture, the profile In both cases, was drawn on the appropnate plane of the squared block This outline was then carved all the way through the stone The result ISsimilar to cutting an outlme In a piece of wood With a Jigsaw Next the same process was earned out on the front face of the block At this POInt the design was In the block, the carver needed only to round the surfaces and add the details Construction On tlus portal the sculpture was carved before It was put In place In the building This ISobVIOUSfrom the number of places where the carvings did not fIt and had to be adjusted Two types of corrections were made here The Simplest solution was to shorten one block Tlus ISfound near the keystone of the upper arch All but one of the coffers on the inside of thrs arch are the same That one has ItS flower almost cut In half (photograph 36) In order to fIt the block In place, which was too large for the arch The second form of correction ISmore subtle It Involves adjusting lmes or details that do not quite match In the man (Hercules or Samson) and lion wrestling (photograph 35), the man's nght leg was slightly changed because It did not ht together Tlus sort of rrunor adjustment ISnot VISIblefrom a distance There are quite a few adjustments of this sort It ISsurpnSIng how little Interest there was In concealmg mistakes The halved flower of the coffer IS a good example because It IS so easily noticed The designer/constructor also did not have a system of taking and carrying out accurate measurements Both the Inner and outer arches show measunng mistakes In laymg out the blocks which could only be corrected by shorterung one of the blocks after the sculpture had been executed Thrs problem was encountered on all the other portals of the basilica, so It was one of which they must have been aware It IS something of a mystery that no steps were taken to correct this problem It ISpossible that the designers, being aware that their ability to measure was limited, always laid out the arches With some material to spare They may have felt that It would be easier to correct by cutting down than by adding Inserts, In all the portals there are no examples of Inserts, only of subtractions

232

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Workshop organizauon Although evidence of workshop orgaruzahon ISnever as clear as tools and construction, the following observations can be made 1 There was probably a dIvISIOnof labor between the squarIng and molding carving of each block on the one hand and the sculpture on the other Two different kinds of work were Involved The block preparation IS the same work as that done on all the architecture In contrast, the carving of the sculptural decoration ISa separate techmque Therefore It ISlikely that the blocks were cut to shape by the stonecutters who earned out all the architectural cuthng, then the sculptors executed the sculpture

Whenever one can find dehrute, separable stages In a work process, It ISpossible that each stage was carried out by a separate carver Therefore, It ISpossible that the design was done by one workman, the outline carVing by another, and the firuslung by a third 2

3 On almost all the moldings, the dnllmg for decorative color seems to have been done after the hamrner-and-crusel carVing was completed In some cases the holes are slightly out of alignment With the carved forms, as If the driller was somewhat carelessly following a formula Tlus suggests a different hand 4 The two use of the exclusively technically

capitals were earned out by different hands There ISextensive and elaborate dnll on the right one, whereas the left has a lower relief decorahon cut WIth a flat chisel (photographs 34 and 37) The two pulvmos are also different but tlus IS less obvIOUS

5 On the outer arch, the nght Side seems to have been carved by a different carver than the left On the nght there are signs of the tooth chisel but not on the left There ISalso a sharper outline With the flat chisel as well as a much clearer rsolahon of one group from the next and from the Vine Interlace Summing up this evidence, one sees two types of workshop diVISIOn a diVISIOnof labor between two specialists on different areas ISindicated by the two capitals and the differences between the two Sides of the outer arch, a dIVISIOnof labor In the stages of work on the same object ISindicated on the moldings, which seem to have been executed by dIfferent workers speciahzmg In molding cutting, then decorative carVing, then dnllmg Design The fact that the capitals are so different and that two Sides of the same arch dIffer would argue for a very loose design presence Another mdicahon of this ISthat the JOining errors are not masked No one IS so committed to the overall design as to want to make sure It funchons perfectly In all particulars Nevertheless, the carving of details IS executed WIth care, as In the camel and tiger scene The looseness In design responsibihty suggests that a group of carvers were given a Simple design and shared equal responsibility for ItS execution Conclusions ThIS portal shows a great sense of prachcahty combined With considerable freedom for the mdividual carvers The solutions are SImple and straightforward If something does not fIt, you shorten It, WIthout worrying too much about the appearance There ISalso no sign of an attempt to enforce a uruforrruty In tool use Thus we see an uncomplicated and practically oriented workshop orgaruzahon

DOCUMENT AnON

OF MAJOR MONUMENTS

233

On the other hand, we see a division of labor between the block preparation and the bas-relief carving that IS probably based on traditional practice The group of stoneworkers, probably Followmg traditional divisions of labor and shanng responsibility for the particulars of design, were loosely organized under a hgure more closely resembling a foreman than an architect The carvers for a project as large as this basilica or even Just the portal were unlikely all to be local The freedom and vanety In tool use may be explained by the looseness of organization that allows each worker a relatively large amount of freedom within a shared craftsman's sense of organization The Column of Trajan ISsuch a large monument that a complete study ISImpossible here Yet It gives us an opportunity to Illustrate some further examples of documentation For a bigger and more complicated monument, documentation used to explain ItS techniques can expand proportionally Photographs can be used to demonstrate more than one factor Measurements can supplement grapluc documentation Put together, they help to provide a picture of the technique The Column of Trajan, commemorating Trajan's victory over the Dacians (modem Romania) c AD 106 to 1132 Rome The following documentation ISprovided 1 Measurements of vanous dimensions of the column are organized In three tables Table 1 Spiral heights along vertical lines faong the Colosseum and the Monument to Victor Emanuel II Table 2 Spiral measurements along hve spirals Table 3 Head and body heights of hgures from three spirals

A drawing of one full spiral of the column starting and ending along the line of the Windows facing the monument to Victor Emanuel II (drawing 77) 2

3 Two drawings of the tool surfaces from spirals 3 and 8 (drawings 75 and 76) 4 Photographs of details For purposes of onentahon, the column ISdivided along the four vertical axes formed by the Windows Into the Inner stairway These are as follows axis A, southeast In the direchon of the Colosseum, axis B, northeast, roughly facmg Via Magnanapoli, axis C facing Palazzo Valentini, and axis D, facmg the monument to Victor Emanuel II The spirals begin at axis A, and the end of the last spiral ISbetween A and B Maienal The matenal of the column IS Carrara marble (called LUnI In antiquity) It IS a very good white marble, as can be seen from the high quality of the detail carved The actual carved shaft of the column Includes nineteen pieces of marble (This Includes the cushion at the bottom which makes up one piece With the lower part of the shaft and the capital which Includes the very top of the column It does not Include

234

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Drawing 75

either the square base at the bottom or the base of the bronze statue at the top.) The shaft is thus made up of seventeen column drums, approximately 150 cm high by 350 cm in diameter, plus the base and the capital. A circular stairway is carved inside the entire shaft. In this study we are concerned here with the relief that winds in twenty-four spirals around the outside of the shaft. To have some idea of the immensity of the material problems of the project, it is enough to know that each drum weighed approximately thirty-nine metric tons before the stairway was carved. Even if the stairway was carved before the drum was lifted into place, as I think it probably was, no more than twenty-five percent of the mass would have been removed. Thus the construction involved lifting blocks weighing some twenty-nine metric tons into place, as well as the problem of quarrying and transporting such large blocks to the site. The condition of the marble is not particularly good, and there is a great deal of surface loss. There is enough of the surface remaining, however, especially on the northwest face,

DOCUMENTATION

Drawing 76

Rome: Column of Trajan (2 drawings) Legend for the tool surfaces drawings. flat chisel round-headed

1:::::\

rasp

•••

drill

chisel

channeling tool

MAJOR

MONUMENTS

235

236

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

to enable one to read the tool marks quite easily On most of the other areas It ISpossible to see the design even though the outer surface IS eroded Considering the age and exposed situahon of the monument, It has survived remarkably well

Tools

(drawings 75 and 76) The tools that we can record used on the column were the flat chisel. the round-headed clusel, a channeling tool, the rasp, the dnll and the toothed and flat scrapers 3 These tools were used In a very rehned fashion throughout In fact, one of the most Impressive elements of the carving ISthe consistent high quality and refinement of the sculpture from the bottom to the top of the spirals Generally speaking, although this ISnot always true, the rasp was used to hrush flesh and cloth and sometimes to smooth flat backgrounds The flat chisel and the roundheaded chisel were used for armor, hair, and backgrounds that have architecture. trees, and hills There was a very consistent attempt to show texture through tool work, for example, a rough sea or hillside. was carved WIth a round-headed chisel The dnll and channeling tool were used for outlining and emphasis The dnll was used a great deal In the leaves of the trees Only occasionally IS the scraper found, and SIgns of the tooth chisel are rare Further study may show that the only tools that were used which suggest the different carvers' preferences are the dnll and In particular the channeling tool The latter was frequently used In some areas and In others not at all At this POint In the study of the column It ISnot possible to tell whether this indicates an mdrvidual carver or not The column was obviously carved by a group of carvers The first documentation of tool marks on two limited areas ongmally suggested that It might be possible to delineate different hands from tool use Further documentation shows that this IS unlikely The vanehes that do exist In tool work do not seem to follow any organized pattern However, It IS too early In the ongoing documentation of the tool marks to be sure The tool mark documentahon shows a consistent level of detail and surface hrush throughout the monument, the consistent high quality of the carVing suggests a correspondingly high level of responsibility assigned to the mdividual carvers One of the most remarkable characteristics of tlus carVing ISthat the detail IStaken to such rehnement from beginning to end Considenng that the column IS 100 Roman feet high (I foot = approx 29 em), and the normal height of a figure ISbetween 60 and 70 ern, the higher hgures are VIrtually mvisible from the ground Even If observers could have stood on the roofs of the basilica and the hbranes, wluch were the nearest buildmgs to the column, they would still have been unable to see the details of the carvings Today, they can only be observed when the column IS scaffolded We Will examine some examples from all levels of the monument Table 3 gives an Idea of the scale of the following photographs a horse and man from drums 12-13 (photograph 38), a horse from drum 17 (photograph 39), a portrait of Trajan from drum 13 (photograph 42), a detail of a Dacian's hand from drum 12 (photograph 40) and a hand and armor of a Roman soldier from drum 9 (photograph 41) The shield on the horse In photograph 38 or the mouth and nostril of the horse in photograph 39 show an attention to detail that would be ImpreSSIve even m a carvmg we were meant to see quite close up Even though the outer surface of the stone ISeroded on the head of Trajan, photograph 42, It shll conveys the same lovmg attention to detail as well as proportions and the feel

DOCUMENTATION

MAJOR

MONUMENTS

237

of flesh We are lookmg at a head about 10 em high Photographs 40 and 41 Illustrate the carver's method of showing all The thumb m photograph 40 has the joint and thumbnail carved In photograph 41 we see the ZIgzag of the cham mail and the wrist strap and ItS attachment to the shield where the soldier grIpS It Such details are consistent throughout the column Photograph 40 can serve as an example for the fact that this work required mdrvidual responsibility on the carver's part Unlike neo-classical carving, which. as discussed m the Canova example, shows a much greater tendency toward a highly smoothed surface, few SIgns of carvmg marks, and many measurmg points. the carving on Trajan's Column IS full of texture The thumb and texture of what underlies the thumb are quickly and freely carved The clusel ISbeing used first to cut a plane, then turned so that the comer cuts a V-shaped curve between two forms, then turned agam to cut a hollow between two lmes Only the skill of the carver himself can bring tlus about As m free-hand drawing, you cannot force someone to do tlus by having them follow certain mechanical processes One has to have the hand for It The background does not show an organized pattern m the relahonship of tool to detail A carver workmg freely does not always pick the same tool for a type of surface because he IS following the action of his carvmg rather than a preconceived pattern of tool use, whether that pattern IS an mdividual or group choice ThIS free-hand method was accompanied, however, by a deCISIOn,whether by the group or by some designer or foreman, that the carvmg should always go to the highest level of refinement of detail possible for these tools on work of tlus SIze Another consistent choice ISthat carving tools (chisels. drill and rasp) rather than polishing tools (abrasives of varIOUSlevels) were used for hrushmg Techniques The consistency of hrush makes It dIfficult to see from direct evidence the progressIOn from rough to hrushed on these carvings There are two places, however, where some Idea of the process can be seen (I) On drum 13, between axes C and D, the two spirals become enmeshed WIth each other (photograph 43) The lower spiral shows Trajan and his officers m a fortress The spiral above depicts a battle scene The head of the defeated Dacian above ISvery close to the head of Trajan below (2) On drum 17, between axes C and D, the background around two heads of Dacians among trees ISleft unbrushed (photograph 44) In both these areas we can see that the carvers worked the heads WIthout carving the background The stone on the background ISthe same level as the heads, mdicahng that the background was to be carved later In the first example, slightly above and to each SIde of Trajan's head, there are two small, square depressions cut into the stone wluch are the same depth as the background where It has been cut lower down In the second example, the unfInIshed background was cut WIth a WIder flat chIsel and the channel that proVIdes the profIle for the head was cut WIth a narrow flat chIsel A few other places show that the flat chIsel marks could be recarved m a smoother way for texture or rasped to smooth the surface From these two examples we can deduce the technique of carvmg fIrst, the fIgure carver cut the compOSItion mto the stone m a way very SImIlar to that of sarcophagus relIefs Workmg WIth a flat chIsel he refIned the details of the fIgures, but carved background stone as lIttle as pOSSIble He dId not carve those areas of the fIgure that

238

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Involved background, legs behind trees and so forth Before he moved on, he cut small reference squares In the stone to signal the depth of the background to the next carver (the small squares In 38) Next the background carver worked the background Then either the hgure carver or a hrusher went back over the hgures to hmsh edges and areas that could only be completed after the background The tools the carvers used were pnmanly flat and round-headed clusels after a first very summary roughing with a POint chisel The tooth chisel was probably little used, If at all The sequence of tools basically followed that of second-century sarcophagus carvers POint clusel to rough flat chiseling to fine flat and round-headed chiseling to rasp In photograph 43 we see an area where the hrushmg could not be completed because the figure carver carving the battle brought lus scene too close to Trajan's head, and there was no room to complete the background according to the signal squares In photograph 44 we see an area where the background carver never got around to hrushmg the background In both cases the hgures were hrushed In the hrsr case, the hnal state exists because of carelessness In the placing of scenes above each other on successive spirals In the second case, the unhrushed state ISprobably the result of the background carver being careless or forced to work quickly There are other signs on the last two drums of rushing to hmsh quickly Photograph 43 IS one of several examples that show that mdrvidual scenes were composed as freely as were their details Only carvers working quickly and free-hand would be likely to place the two scenes too close together as they have done here In addihon, the figures and scenes are not conceived with their feet on a hxed ground line aligned with a preconceived background Instead, the scenes are composed by roughing In the torsos and heads of the main figures first and then proceeding down and out to the extrerruhes Scenes are thus carved from the center out, rather than from the ground up Tlus explains the many problems the carvers had In placing the lower legs and feet of the hgures Into the background Consiructton The construction can be divided Into two parts the putting together of the blocks, and the ongOing process of carrying out the relief carVing The height of the blocks ISremarkably consistent all the drums are Within a few centimeters of 150 cm high The stairway IS cut so that there are always eight steps and the top of the last step ISthe plane of the top of the drum Tlus means that the passage In shape and area of the stairway IS the same In each block Given that column drums were cut as cylinders In the quarry, It ISprobable that the drums were roughly cut to measure In the quarry and the stairway was cut before the blocks were mounted The Windows, In contrast, must have been cut after mounting Several Windows cross from one drum to the next They are all aligned perfectly on their verb cal aXIS This preCISIOnwould have been VIrtually impossible before placement The actual construction of the column shows a fairly careful attention to measurements The drum height, shape of stairway, number of steps per drum and placing of the Windows all carefully follow a consistent pattern The surfaces of the walls and roof of the stairway are all cut With a tooth chisel In a Uniform fashion It ISnoteworthy that the consistency of measurements found In drum heights does not carry over to the spirals Table 1 shows that the spiral heights are not consistent on a

DOCUMENTATION

OF MAJOR MONUMENTS

239

vertical aXIS,nor are they the same throughout each spiral, as can be seen m table 2 The band from D on spiral 2 to the same axis on spiral 3 begms at 117 5 em, descends to 110 5 ern. and then nses to 123 cm - a vanahon of slightly over 10 percent Spiral 19 vanes between 108 ern and 77 cm - a difference of 30 percent Nor does the height of the spirals follow an organized pattern vertically From spirals 2 to 13, the height vanes randomly between 110 em and 125 cm From 14 to 20, the measurements vary from 95 cm to 115 cm on the axes measured but we know from table 2 that on spiral 19 the height goes as low as 77 cm Then the last three full spirals nse m height from 106 ern to 145 ern It ISvery easy to note where the pnncipal change comes m the sudden nse From Just beyond axis D on drum 17 to after C the base Ime of the hgures remams horizontal Just above the limit of the drum while the upper Ime of the spiral nses steadily Tlus means that the spiral height mcreases by about 40 em m half a tum around the column The height of the spiral thus undergoes considerable vanahon in a way that bears no relation to ItS distance from the ground or ItS place on the column Photograph 45 shows a large scene that ISdivided between two blocks The way the detail passes from drum to drum without a hitch shows that the carvmg was earned out after the drums were erected It IS sometimes quite remarkable the way that the carvers Ignore the separations between the drums a horse's nostnl may even be split by a drum diVISIOnTable 3 shows that the range of heights of heads and hgures and their relationship to each other does not change noticeably throughout the column Heads vary m height from 9 cm to 11 ern, with only a few exceptions There IS no visible relahonshrp between the figure measurements and the spiral ones The smaller figures do not lme up with the lower spirals The hgure heights relate to the eXigencies of the internal compositions How does one explain these vanous facts in terms of workmg process? Although the carvmg was carried out after the blocks were mounted, tlus does not mean that they were all mounted before the carvmg began There are other places similar to that on drums 16--17, but shorter and less noticeable, where the spiral lme follows the lme of the drum separation, thus distorting the normal slant of the Ime as It wmds upward What makes tlus especially obvIOUSISthat only one of the Imes (top or bottom, depending on which one IS along the separation) remams horizontal. so the band wobbles m size These Signify places where the carvmg arnved at the top of the level of placed blocks and the carver earned on a bit, keepmg the tops of lus figures within the block The carvmg was thus begun before construction was complete Two or three drums were placed at a time, and the carvmg followed along, always bemg a bit cramped Just before the placement of new blocks The measurements that were Important to the carvers were not the spiral heights, but the hgures Architectural elements such as the wmdows were also unimportant scenes were m no way accommodated to them The carvers were concerned With the scenes they were carvmg withm the context of a loose sense of minimum and maximum hgure heights The architectural or overall design factors of spiral height and consideration of the already placed wmdows were secondary Thus the spiral height had to accommodate Itself to such factors as rate of drum placement, speed of carvmg and needs of space for a specihc scene

240

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

Workshop organizalton Briefly. It would seem from the above that there were probably two teams One earned out the architectural carving of drum placement, stair carving and window carving Like most architectural carvers, they were following a design carefully The second team, the sculptural carvers, followed their own schedule as much as possible and their own, much less structured patterns Design The great conundrum of llus monument IS the nature of the design process Much has been written about the "master" of the Column of Trajan, Implying that the design was, In a modern sense, the responsibility of one person who had the means to keep the work of all the vanous carvers under careful control It IS hard to Imagine that such a large and lugh-quality work. which smoothly tells the story of two wars from beginning to end, could not have been under the direchon and quality-control of one person We can note several features that argue both for and against such a presence Three elements show central control equality of detail throughout, Uniform surface firush and the consistent depth of the bas-relief from beginrung to end The length of the scenes IS also fairly closely controlled Somehmes, In fact, the figures are Jammed together With the possible excephon of the last two spirals, scenes never take up more space than seems absolutely necessary If, however, we look at the drawing of D to D, spirals 2-3 (drawing 77), we see some elements that belie tlus sense of overall control The solid triangles show areas where the band ISso Jammed against the one above that details move Into the one above or force the spiral line to Jog upward The sohd squares show areas where the foreground and the background are not synchronized Tlus can take the form of a hgure who ISnot standing on the ground or who, while In the background, has part of hIS body In front of a background element The solid CIrclesare places where the carver left a hand ready to receive a metal Implement Soldiers on the column were often shown WIth metal tools or swords or spears Where there ISa " + rr mark In the Circle,there ISa hole for placmg the metal Where there ISno " + t r there ISno hole and therefore no Implement could have been placed For example, one hgure In a tree-felling scene has the holes for an axe, another does not The stone IS In good enough condition to show that he did not have an axe carved In marble Discrepancies such as these are found throughout the column They represent either great and persistent carelessness In carrying out a design or one that IS so rough and unclear that It does not provide enough detail to aVOIdthese mistakes It does seem very careless that a designer would provide a large number of places for metal Implements and then provide only half the Implements required It also seems odd that he would not ensure that the carver's compositions had enough vertical space to prevent several verncal overlaps or nonceable Jam-ups There are also clear signs of different hands One carver tends to make hIShgures With VISiblylong torsos, whereas In other areas the hgures have perfectly normal proportions These figures are grouped rather than seen Singly The compositions also show at least two types One type can be seen In the spiral drawing Trajan WIth two officers In the center of a composition On one Side he has a group of four soldiers. on the other, two Romans force a Dacian forward toward Trajan Above Trajan are two SIngle soldiers The

242

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

composihon IScentralized and organized mto li.ve distinct groups that could have been carved separately This type of composihon can be divided up rather like the way frescoes can be divided into giomaie The other type of composition involves long rows of figures, often with one row separately above the other The composihon almost always moves from left to nght and IS not centralized at all Frequently these types of ccmposihons are m groups, a group of centralized ones and then a group of lmear ones EVidence ISstill bemg collected on the column, and cannot yet be neatly organized mto one clear view of the design process or ItS relationship to the carving process It does, however, cast doubt on the likehhood of a single controlling designer In my View, the evidence suggests a team effort as well as a loose organization Similar to a medieval workshop Conclusion Conclusions are not so much in order as the recognition that more study ISneeded of the mformahon collected recently while the column was scaffolded Although there ISan obvIOUSmdicahon of both overall control m the architectural form and the quality of hrush. the design process and execution are not at all clear In terms of the techniques that a carver had to know, It ISImportant to understand tlus process Were the carvers of the column executors of a prepared design or were design responsibihhes part of their work? This ISa very Important distinction for understanding the demands made upon the carver and the technical climate he worked m If as the evidence suggests, the carvmg and construction were earned on at the same time. tlus too ISImportant for an understanding of Roman technology I thmk It clear that documentation of the Column of Trajan can provide considerable mformahon concernmg Roman stoneworkmg technology Notes The descnphon of the central portal of San Nicola di Ban ISbased on Rockwell.1986, Trajan's Column on Rockwell. 1985 2 Amanda Claridge argues m an article soon to be published m Journal of Roman Archaeology that the date of the fneze on the column ISlater than the erechon of the column, that It was actually carved dunng the reign of the Emperor Hadnan In tlus case the fneze was carved between AD 119 and 135 3 Both the point and the tooth clusel are VISIbleon other parts of the column such as the mtenor stairway and the tomb chamber at the base There can be very little doubt that they were the prehrrunary tools for roughmg the cylmder of the column and the reliefs However, the reliefs are so entirely finished that there IS no evidence of their use 1

19 Computer documentation

For documenting larger monuments, the possibility of uSing computer databases to manage the information comes to the fore This ISespecially true where there ISa great deal of information that ISnot usefully or necessanly displayed In a drawing form Even where a drawing ISuseful, computer graphics programs offer possibihhes that may meet the needs of documentation Computer documentation has three great advantages Ilexibihty, the capacity to manipulate large amounts of data, and retnevability In either graphic or informational modes, the computer provides flexibility because of the speed which solutions can be tned, adapted, and revised This ISa great advantage when one ISexpenrnenhng In ways of making the information accessible Calculations of data, such as the cubic meterage and weight of blocks. can be earned out automatically The speed with which a form of orgaruzahon can be tried, modified. and added to ISa considerable convenience to one's work Finally, computers put information In a form that can easily be used by others, as opposed to other types of documentation that are more bulky and difficult to use Within the range of a computer's hrrutanons, It provides easy access and transport It IS abo another form of documentation, like drawings, that allows vanehes of analysis The ongmal documenter ISnot the only person who can use the data and ideally the data can produce analysis quite different from that Intended In the onginal study This chapter IS a bnef review of the use of the computer that I have made In recent years In documenting and analyzing monuments Starting with an experimental study of the techniques of the Arch of Titus In Rome. the attempt has been to hnd a usable method of collecting data In both graphic and database systems A pnmary consideration has been that these data must be collected on scaffolding dunng restoration by persons who generally have little trammg with computers This means that both the hardware and the software must be obtainable and manageable for the serru-iruhated The conditions that exist on a normal restoration project reqUire this A further consideration has been that the only funding for tlus development has been contracts for studies of the techniques of the monuments In question The costs of any expenrnentahon or development has to be htted mto a contract that did not Include as an Important part expenmentahon or software development This can act as a positive force by keeping everything Simple and useful 243

244

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

In order to meet these condihons, and partly out of personal preference, the hardware has been the Macintosh, starhng WIth a Macintosh plus and mOVIng to a Macintosh SE The software has been that easily available on the market and least complrcated to use However attractive It might be to move Into more highly developed hardware or software, the recogruhon that this would prove unusable and therefore unused by the people for whom the documentation was being developed dimmed the attrachon The four monuments studied for their stoneworking techniques were the Arch of TItus In Rome, the mtenor sculpture In the Baptistry of Parma, the Trevi Fountain, and the Temple of Hercules VIctor In Rome For the convenience of descnphon the use of graphics WIllbe discussed hrst and the databases second The Arch of TItus was studied as a means of expenmenhng With computers In documentation Only a small number of blocks were documented The Baptistry of Parma and the Trevi Fountain were studies of over a year's duration and the use of a database was essenhal to the study The third study was on only four columns of the Temple of Hercules VIctor but was treated as a means of developmg a database that could serve for the documentahon of carVIng and construction techniques on all the monuments under control of the Supenntendency of Monuments of Rome For the study of the Arch of Titus several different uses of computer graphics were tned The software used was "MacDraw" and "Superf'aint "The two most useful results are shown In drawings 78 and 79 Drawing 78 shows the plan of the blocks of travertine which are the foundations of one of the two pillars of the arch The block posihorung and approximate sizes are shown WIth a numbenng rdenhhcahon that IS also used In the database The holes In the blocks and their ongmal use are also documented ThIS drawing IS a useful form of visual documentation Its advantage over a non-computer generated drawing IS the ease of the marupulahon of the parts and the ease of reproduction Drawing 79 shows a graplnc dernonstrahon of the relationship of carVIng types (columns, mscnphons, moldings or sculpture) to the dIVISIOnsbetween the blocks It ISa documentation of two different types of mformahon combined WIth a demonstrahon of their relahonslup to each other Drawing number 1 shows the types of carVIng, number 2 the diVISIOnInto blocks and number 3 puts the two together ThIS type of drawing IS possibly more useful as analysis than as documentation, SInce It shows neither the tool marks that are a central purpose of drawing documenrahon nor does It contain the amount of inforrnahon that a database permits The study of the mtenor sculpture of the Baphstry of Parma was designed to use both graphic and database computer-generated documentation The graphic documentation consists In an outline drawmg of at least one face of every piece of sculpture that was part of the original architecture of the Intenor The base draWIngs were executed by tracIng the outlInes from a photograph dIrectly Into SuperPaInt Then hllIngs were selected to symbolIze each type of tool surface Where there was InformatIon that could not be Included In thIS form, notes were added dIrectly to the draWIng In order to make the documentatIon clear, the outlIne draWIng WIthout the documentatIon was Included next to that WIth It A numbenng system coordInated WIth the database and photographs was also Included on each draWIng DraWIng 80 ISan example documentIng one of the blocks of a tympanum The basIC

COMPUTER

lla

DOCUMENTA

nON

245

~;l lOa

[.EJ

9a Holes for:-

[E]

lSa Sa travertine

â&#x20AC;˘

level 7a

16a

[E]

metal pins lead pours

â&#x20AC;˘

levers

wet clay

butterfly

pins

17a

Sa 2a

3a ~~--~---1

[E]

I ----.J

Arch of Titus: Foundations Drawing

problem with this form of documentation is the size of the format. While it works for relatively small sculpture it becomes unclear for large sculpture or architecture. The number of blocks is too great to be seen clearly in a small format. This problem could be solved with different hardware and software, the reasons against this change have been noted above. Another problem is that color documentation is usually clearer. Given these two problems I have made no further experiments with graphic documentation using the computer. Whereas many interesting possibilities present themselves for the use of computer graphics in documentation, at this point traditional drawings are more flexible and easier to handle. The most obviously useful direction would be towards the use of databases that can work directly with graphic documentation. At present the greatest advantage of computer graphics for documentation is in the amount and ease of storage. I think that crucial to the future development of this area is a more general appreciation of the value of drawings for documentation. Following some experimentation with a variety of databases Microsoft Works seemed to best fit the conditions and requirements. It has sufficient flexibility and analytical power combined with simplicity and ease of use. A simple form was tried on the Arch of Titus which documented the use of metal pins and the size of the blocks. It became clear very quickly that the computational ability of a database made it easy to calculate the size and weight of the blocks of stone. This in tum made it possible to make estimates of the total amount and weight of stone used in the monument. These results were an

246

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

IIIIIIIIill

column

moulding

decorative

rnnm

sculpture

figurative sculpture inscription

Drawing

obvious advantage to the use of the database, as previously, the time needed to obtain them would have been prohibitive. The second use of the database was for the interior sculpture of the Baptistry of Parma. For this study a database form was developed to document more information than the previous form. This form is illustrated in table 4. The measurements of the blocks, their placing in relation to other blocks and a variety of information concerning the sculpture type as well as the use of tools was included. The information at the top of the form relates to the graphic and photographic documentation. The possibilities of analysis are suggested by the list contained in table 5 and the graphs in tables 6 and 7. From table 5 it is possible to see immediately which tools were used on Verona red stone. Tables 6 and 7 analyze the relationship between the weight of the stone and the type of sculpture carved. The database allows one to quickly make use of the data placed in the form. The database is excellent documentation on a block by block basis. It does not document differences within the block. This lack was supplemented by the documentation drawings done for each piece of sculpture. These two sets of documentation fit together quite well for this study because most of the sculptures were carved on one block. Noting

COMPUTER

DOCUMENTA

247

nON

2 �

point chisel

tooth chisel

~m~J

flat chisel

round picchierello

_ 1 •••

drill scraper abrasive

mJ]]]

flat and round chisel 1 Pupils are carved flat. 2 These areas are carved deeper than the background. 3 Rough flat chiseling in these areas.

Drawing 80

from the database that the point chisel is used on a specific carving, one can move to the drawing and see the area and something of the way it was used, then move on to the photographs (not in computer storage) to see the tool marks. It is a documentation that facilitates study without too much difficulty. The weakness with this form of documentation comes about when documenting work which includes sculptures each of which is made up of several blocks. This was precisely the problem with the Trevi Fountain. Some sculptures were made up of as many as twenty blocks. Documentation drawings cannot work on a block by block basis but must be of the whole sculpture. The database information on a block by block basis does not give a clear picture of the whole sculpture. To resolve these problems with computer graphics within the limitations both financial and temporal of the study requested did not seem possible. Therefore, a Microsoft Works database was used, but the documentation drawings were done without the use of computer graphics. The database form used for the Trevi Fountain is shown in table 8. Experience with the Parma sculpture showed that the three areas which could be best documented using a database were the dimensions of the blocks, the use of pins and other materials on the stone and the tool marks. Additional information about the structural position of the blocks, the state of finish and the presence of measuring or design marks was also

248

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Included Most of the information about sculptural types or forms of roughing out that was Included In the Parma database was not Included as It was either too mdehrute or not given to clear documentation The types of analysis remained the same as for the Parma study As the number of blocks of stone was much larger, 836 Instead of 86, the analysis provided by the database was something that would have been much harder to obtain In any other way Table 9 shows an example of llus analysis The list shows the largest blocks of stone In descending order of volume The type of stone, the sculptor and the title of the work are Included It ISthus possible to see that seven out of the ten largest blocks are the product of one sculptor Whereas this ISinformation that could be obtained from looking at the drawings It would be much more difficult to do so and the information would probably be less accurate The problems that were most evident from these uses of a database were establishing what information can be documented With a database, what information was most useful from an analytical POint of VIew and developing methods for recording the information In the first case, the idenhhcahon of matenals and the use of tools ISobviously necessary It IS the essential data required In order to study stoneworkmg The dimensions of the blocks which ISnot something that had appeared Important previously became, because of the ease of calculation, an Important element While carrying out these studies It also br-carne clear that the use of pinS and other matenals In conjunction WIth the stone was useful both for documentation and analysis On the other hand, after some expenence It was evident that information that ISmore interpretive, relating to method and to process ISnot particularly useful In a database That which IS Simple and easily observable such as measunng POints ISuseful Other elements such as the roughed-out forms that can be seen In the hnal forms tend to be too easily subject to diversities of interpretation The problem With the database IS that anything put In It tends to look too factual, even If It onginates as an interpretation There IS no room for subtleties which can be explained only In a written analysis or wluch are understandable from drawings It IStherefore very Important for the designer to be clear about what IS factual and what IS the product of interpretation when establishing what to record for the database The need to establish what information can be analyzed by a database ISnot a stnctly documentary need However as one of the pnmary objectives ISto use the database for analysis In order to further our knowledge of techniques, It ISa waste of time to record that which does not contribute to tlus form of analysis An example of tlus ISthe relative area covered by the marks of each chisel It ISImportant information, but too difficult to dehne In the clear terms required by the database Exactly how does one charactenze the amount of area covered and ItS posihon In relation to other tool surfaces 7 Any answers left too much room for interpretive confusion Since this IS information easily recorded In drawings, It was better left there In contrast, the presence of tools, the dimensions of the stones and Similar information IS easy to record and can be usefully analyzed by a database The problem of recording the information ISthe problem of working In less than Ideal conditions Climbing about on scaffolding does not allow for large drawings or sheafs of paper The most recent solution which seems to function well ISto pnnt a blank copy of the database form This ISthen photocopied double In size on a large sheet of paper The

COMPUTER

DOCUMENTATION

249

persons recordmg mformahon on the scaffoldmg then record directly onto the photocopy This can then be transferred easily into the computer To some extent the mformahon recordable ISdifferent for each monument Measunng points were frequently found on the TreVI but never on Panna, as was to be expected Therefore each monument requIres a redesigned form This ISparticularly true when the purpose of the database ISthe analysis of one monument It restricts the analysis however because companson between monuments IS not possible m the database In an attempt to fmd a soluhon to this problem the documentation of four columns of the Temple of Hercules VIctor m Rome was planned so that the form designed could be used on other monuments ThIS form ISreproduced in table 10 The problem WIth a database form uhlizable for more than one monument ISthat the vane ties of possible vanahons m the mformahon are so great Under each headmg there are often a diversity of possibilihes For example" type ms" requIres a name for each type of metal insert that may be attached to the block In order to comprehend the vanety of names as well as to allow for the possibility of several inserts a code IS needed that abbreviates the rnformahon For each part of the form there are codes These codes are then explained in the form of mstruchon sheets for the recorders of mformahon Obviously the possibihhes of confusion and mistakes multiply WIth the increase of complexity The mstruchons must be correctly interpreted and the data correctly fed mlo the machme These are the problems of all uses of a database They become particularly Important m this context because once the scaffoldmg ISdown one cannot return to check the mformahon The present study usmg the Temple of Hercules VIctor ISan attempt to see If a database comprehendmg a senes of monuments ISfeasible The use of the database m documentmg stoneworkmg techniques ISuseful but remains somewhat expenmental There are obvIOUSadvantages for analysis and availabihty of matenal m havmg one form and database However, recordmg mformahon that IS clear and unequivocal becomes more difficult the greater the number and variety of monuments It IS obvIOUS that for storage, retrieval and analysis of information a computer can be of great service It IS yet to be seen whether the traditional type of drawmg documentation done for other studies can be economically transferred to computer graphics The possibilities of WIde access to mformahon and the ease of analysis of data seem to me to be the most Important advantages in the use of computers The study of stoneworkmg technology can only advance when stone works are well documented and the miormahon IS accessible to all The above descriptions gIve a rough Idea of some of the problems and advantages of usmg computer technology m the documentation and analysis of stoneworkmg technology A great deal more expenmentatIon IS necessary to develop methods and fonns whIch take full advantage of the pOSSIbIlItiespresented ThiS IS a useful dIrection to move m It ISnot clear Just how much It wIll replace the more tradItional methods of documentation

Conclusion

A piece of worked stone IS the most reliable document of ItS own making It bears the marks of ItS quarrying and working In ways that can be read by those who have learned to read them The purpose of this book has been to provide the information to make tlus reading possible to those who have no experience of working stone This information has taken several forms an appreciahon of the varieties of stone and their effect on ItS working, knowledge of the tools and methods, a descnphon of some of the processes that go Into making a firushed object whether It be a Simple squared block of stone or a complex architectural or sculptural form and li.nally a methodology for documenting the information on the piece of stone Into a form that can be read and analyzed by others The intention and hope ISthat this will enable the Interested observer to learn a new kind of literacy This literacy IS not the literacy of the stoneworkers themselves Learning to read a stone for ItS technical history ISnot learning to work the stone How that ISdone or has been done throughout history ISanother subject and one that has been little studied It ISnot a subject that has given Itself easily to wnhng It ISworth considering very briefly as a conclusion to explaining the techniques themselves How people have learned techniques helps explain something of the way they think about these techniques This may In turn help us organize our own thinking Stone working has always been a craft or "art" In the old sense of the word Tlus means that It IS something that has been taught by example A young person was apprenticed to a master There In the master's workshop training began by working In the Simplest ways, frequently cleaning the shop You were In the workshop and you were expected to watch what was gOing on Then work was allocated starting With the Simplest types and progressed according to the groWing capacities of the apprentice and In accord With the Jobs that arrived In the workshop Training therefore had a component of observation about It The apprentice was expected to learn by watching the more advanced workers while domg the more menial tasks Instruction as such happened when the apprentice needed to know, that ISwhen the knowledge was necessary to the work required Obviously an apprentice who learned more by watching and With less need for instruction not only moved on faster but was more valuable to the master worker In some periods and With some types of organization there are grades of posihon that the apprentice can move through from Journeyman to master, hrushmg In a form of hnal

CONCLUSION

251

exarrunatron. the production of a "master work" which IS dernonstrahon that the apprentice IScapable of working Independently Such forms are a late medieval creation and are not a necessary component of this type of training They are only the ofncrahzahon of a passage from beginner to experienced and capable worker, the completion of apprenticeship successfully IS, In whatever form It takes, Simply the demonstration of professional capability Learning by watching the masters work means also watching the step-by-step nature of the processes Learning by domg means directly absorbing the necessary sensitivity to stones and tools Both of these are practical rather than theoretical An apprentice working In a workshop only learns theory as It ISnecessary The structure that controls the process of education ISthe practical one of getting through the Jobs that are there to be done A workshop that works In marble ISunlikely to train ItSworkers In gramte This IS almost the opposite of modem education In which a theorehcal background IS considered Vital to practice Because a knowledge of geometry IS necessary to laying out stone working, sronecarvers have a considerable practical knowledge of the subject One can see this In some of the laymg out lines that are still VISibleon Roman and Medieval stoneworkmg It cannot be Said therefore that theory IS non-existent, only that It IS dependent on practice Somewhat the same can be said of the knowledge of history History In stoneworkmg shops ISstones which, whether true or not, explain something of the ways and traditions of tlus shop, this town, thiS area and this tradition Stones are a means of emphasizing ethics of stoneworkmg and teaching underlying values They are a way of paSSing on necessary knowledge or emphasizing what ISlearned by experience or watching Often It takes the form of aphorisms "A bad workman complains about lus tools" or, while tapping the Side of the forehead, "the only muscle you need to use when mOVing stone ISthis one "1 Frequently these aphorisms are connected to history by being credited to some past master "Old Ciovanm used to say" In a film made some years ago about the carvers of the National Cathedral In Washington DC a group of carvers sat around a table and traded stones about past carvers Tlus IS the history natural to stoneworkers It IS verbal and serves to underline the lessons of practice Training In stone carving ISthus verbal and by example, earned out In such a way that the trainee becomes a valuable member of the orgaruzahon In a relahvely short time There ISnot a period of education during wluch the student ISnot a useful member of the workshop, but a penod of training dunng which usefulness to the shop ISan Important factor This IS not a type of education that has lent Itself to being written down The handbooks written In the late nineteenth or early twentieth century such as RIco's Manuale del marmisia or Purchase's Practical Masonry are interesting to the already knowledgeable, but they would never work as teaching texts This continues to be true It ISnot easy to find books on the subject because It ISnot a subject that has ever lent Itself to the kind of Intellectual activity that wnhng Involves ThIS does not on the other hand mean that stoneworkmg IS Without ItS Intellectual Side If we dehne Intellectual as the ability and inclination to think about problems, then stoneworkers are quite capable of eXefClSIngtheir Intellects However, the Intellect works toward solving practical problems The problems can become complex and even

252

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Invented but the direction of the thmkmg IS from prachcal problems to proposed solutions The Intellectual capacity which IS at the background and IS most valuable to the stoneworker IS an ability at visual analysis Being able to look at an object and denve from It the methods by which It was made ISwhere an excellent stoneworker Will excel This IS what enables one to make something new Learning methods and followmg processes by watching others develops an ability to think Visually that ISnot part of the modem Intellectual education Weare trained to think verbally rather than pictonally Thinking In pictures ISan exercise of the Intellect that can become well developed To get some Idea of this In our differently trained minds we need to Imagine ourselves thinking With Images of forms changing step by step, Image by Image, trained by watching others work. and able to see In the mind an Image of a piece of stone at any POint In ItS working process To think about any piece then we need only leaf through the Images In our mind, lIke leafi.ng through a picture book, stopping at any POint to compare the picture In the mind With the piece In front of us Being trained to think Visually we can stop at any step and change the next step slightly and follow that succession of Images New Ideas or creations can come about by a small change at one step An example of this would be to take a Simple half-round convex molding With a floral decoration carved Into It Instead of carving It convex carve It concave Then carry on carvmg the floral decoration Into the molding Since all the decoration IS carved Into a reverse of the anginal form both the way of carVing and the result are different The difference In the process IS only In one step One can see this In the development of Cothrc masonry A SImple step, placmg a break in the center of a round arch creates a pointed arch This IS both VIsually - and In carVing terms - a relatively Simple step, perhaps mvolvmg only a few stones in the arch It IS the baSIShowever for a host of changes which can alter the whole nature of the style The essential parameters of this thmkmg are prachcality and process The stoneworker automatically, Virtually unconsciously, holds the pictures that the mtellecr IS leafi.ng through wrthm the methods and requirements of practical trammg WIthm those constraints one can proceed backward or forward m the workmg history of a pIece of stone Wlthm those constraints one can create new forms that naturally grow from the old The most flond of Cothic tracery and decoration always follows step-by-step processes, reshng withm the practical, to create what sometimes seems impossible It ISImportant to remember that tlus ISa form of thmkmg as well as domg The sketch books of VIllard d'Honnecourt are an example of this An architect, he has Jotted down a senes and sometimes a sequence of pictorial thoughts about a vanety of subjects, sometimes sculptural, sometimes architectural, sometimes engmeenng There are methods of making saws, methods of replacmg columns m a building and expenments WIth the geometric analysis of the human fi.gure All of them are thoughts can tamed withm the twm constraints of prachcahty and process that are Imbued by the trammg of the stoneworker I doubt If It ISpossible to learn this method of thmkmg Without the trammg that leads to It WIthout the habit of constrammg my thoughts to a pictonal mode and Without the habit of mmd of automatically staying withm the possible, my Ideas perpetually follow out leads WIthout considermg their prachcability Contemporary artists are not valued

CONCLUSION

253

for the pracncal constraint of their Ideas We tend to have Ideas and then make them practical Architects Imagine forms and then give the engineers the lob of making them function It ISalso true that our dependency on words divorces us from the pictonal mode of thinking We must express an Idea In words, we must be able to say what a visual Image means In order to gIve It validity The necessity of verbahzing makes the Image secondary as a form of thinking It ISprobably the dIVISIOnestablished In the last three hundred years between design and execution, between the designer who has Ideas and the maker who executes them, that has divorced us from pictorial process thinking The designer ISa social supenor to the maker and functions In a world where the verbal Intellect ISthe essential tool Now the maker, the carver or stoneworker must confine lus or her thinking to how to execute already exishng Ideas Contemporary conceptual art ISnot an accidental occurrence so much as a natural result of the gradual dominance of words over Images even In the visual arts Iam not working up to a sermon on the need to go back to some Romantically Ideal past, but only attempting to POint out the difficulty of comprehending verbally a culture that does not value words as hrghly as our own Stoneworkmg was and still ISto a great extent part of a pre-modem culture Its methods of working are based on ways of thinking that are alien to most of us If we Wish to understand the working of stone, we have to learn to understand and respect the thinking behind It My own emphasis on the documentation of stoneworkmg WIth drawings IS an attempt to explain stone surfaces visually because this approaches the onginal thinking processes of stoneworkers In a way that IS not approximated by words We may not be able to learn to think hke stoneworkers, but It ISImportant we learn to respect their thinking Sroneworkmg ISthe product of training that leads to a method of thinking not simply a method of doing ThIS way of thinking underlies what they do and the way they do It We cannot thoroughly understand the product WIthout respecting and trying to understand the thinking Note 1

Both of these aphonsrns were related by a gramte carver In Pluladelphia, John Cuarente The corollary or answer to the hrst one IS"A good workman always has good tools"

254

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

1. Axes: (from lower left to upper right) an Italian sculptor's pick, two Italian mason's axeheads, a Turkish quarry pick, an Italian bush hammer.

2. Hammers: (from left to right) an American mallet, a French metal mallet, two Italian hammers, an English finishing hammer. At the top is an air hammer.

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

255

3. Carving tools: (from left to right) a granite point chisel, a marble point chisel, two tooth chisels for the air hammer, two tooth chisels for a wooden mallet, a flat chisel for a wooden mallet, two flat chisels for a metal hammer, a round-headed chisel for the air hammer, a round-headed chisel for a metal hammer.

256

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

4. Tool marks: bottom right, point chisel; top left, tooth chisel. The material is Carrara statuary marble.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

257

5. Tool marks: the eyelid and the forehead are made by a carver's pick, the nose by a tooth chisel.

258

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

6. Tool marks: (from left to right) a fine tooth chisel below a scraper, a tooth chisel, a point chisel, a sculptor's pick. The material is Carrara statuary marble.

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

7. Tool marks: top and right, flat chisel; bottom, roundel. The material is Carrara statuary marble.

259

260

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

8. Tool marks: roundel. The material is Carrara "ordinary" marble.

THE

ART

OF STONEWORKING

261

..,1IIIIi'iW"------BBII 7

----~'.

9. Abrasion tools: (from bottom to top) strap or bow drill, toothed scraper, flat scraper in profile, three marble rasps, large soft stone rasp-cut file, (on right) chemin-de-fer.

262

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

10. Tool marks: (from left to right) polish with emery paper, rasp, toothed scraper, carved with flat chisel. Above and below cut with a tooth chisel. The material is Portuguese rose marble.

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

263

11. Two unfinished columns, Aphrodisias, Turkey. The lower part of the further column shows a preliminary carving stage in which a series of vertical planes were executed. Only at the top has the curve of the finished fluting been carved.

264

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

12. The Temple of Vespasian, Rome, a partially reconstructed section of the frieze. On the left several levels of unfinish can be seen including a guide strip giving the carvers the exact form of the molding.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

265

14. A quarried column drum in the ancient quarries at Aliki on the Island of Thasos.

266

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

15. An unfinished metope from the Heraion at the mouth of the Sele river, now in the National Museum at Paestum. This is an unfinished stage of the relief in which the outlines of the figures have been carved but not the details within these outlines.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

267

16. The left half of an unfinished sarcophagus lid, third century AD, Capitoline Museum, Rome. The relief has been sketched in with a point chisel.

17. The right half of a sarcophagus lid, third century AD, Capitoline Museum, Rome. This relief has the figures carved with a flat chisel while the background is still roughed with a point chisel.

268

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

18. Unfinished statue of a Barbarian prisoner, probably second century AD, Museo Gregoriano Profane, Vatican Museums. Several measuring knobs are visible on this figure: on the upper and lower thigh, below the knee and on the upper hand.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

269

19. A large building project: building a Roman fortress in stone, a scene on the Column of Trajan, Rome. Workers are carrying stone, placing stone, carrying dirt in a basket and hammering a wooden post into the ground.

20. A detail of a large building project: a Roman soldier carving the foundations for a stone fortress, above him is another soldier lifting a block of stone. The Column of Trajan, Rome.

270

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

21. A large quarry at Carrara, The large block on the floor of the quarry is over two meters high. In the upper part of the quarry diagonal fault lines are visible.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

22. The lizza, the traditional method of lowering quarried blocks down the mountainside on a wooden sledge; Carrara 1964.

271

272

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

23. The Arch of Trajan, Benevento, second century AD, the Processional frieze. This detail shows the shoulder of a bull that is being led to the sacrifice.

24. The Arch of Trajan, Benevento, second century AD, the Processional frieze. The head of a man carrying an axe below a leaf molding in which both the background and the leaf molding are carved with a flat chisel.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

273

25. The Arch of Trajan, Benevento, second century AD, the Processional frieze. The head of the bull whose shoulder is shown in photograph 23, the eyelid was carved with a flat chisel while on the neck are the marks of a rasp.

274

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

26. The Baptistry of Parma, first quarter of the thirteenth century AD, detail of an interior sculpture, Vicenza stone. The detail shows a flower held by an angel. The drill holes are used decoratively.

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

275

27. The Baptistry of Parma, first quarter of the thirteenth century AD, detail of an interior sculpture, Vicenza stone. The detail is a flower on a capital, the drill holes open out the space at the center of the flower. There are also decorative drill holes.

276

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

28. The Baptistry of Parma, first quarter of the thirteenth century AD, detail of the Christ in Judgement Tympanum, Vicenza stone. The drill holes are used to cut a channel.

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

277

29. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Point chisel marks on the supports for the wings of the Sphinx.

278

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

30. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Tooth chisel marks on the body of the leopard and the camel.

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

279

31. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Flat chiseling visible on the pulvino over the proper right capital.

280

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

32. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Drill holes on the leaf pattern of the molding.

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

281

33. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Drill holes for channeling in the hair of the Sphinx.

282

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

34. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Drill holes to separate the leaves on the proper left capital.

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

283

35. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. Both legs of Samson show a slight misfit between the two blocks on which the relief is carved.

284

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

~~ 36. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. One of the flowers has been mutilated in order to fit the blocks of the arch together.

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

285

37. San Nicola of Bari, twelfth century AD, detail of the sculpture of the central portal of the facade. In contrast to the proper left capital (photograph 34), the proper right capital is carved with a flat chisel and there is no visible use of the drill.

286

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

38. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drums 12-13.

AD;

detail

THE

ART

39. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drum 17.

287

STONEWORKING

AD;

detail

288

THE ART

OF STONEWORKING

40. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century

AD;

detail

from drum 12.

41. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drum 9.

AD;

detail

THE

ART

42. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century

from drum 13.

289

STONEWORKING

AD;

detail

290

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

43. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drum 13.

44. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drum 17.

AD;

detail

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

45. The Column of Trajan, Rome, first quarter of the second century from drums 12-13.

291

AD;

detail

292

THE ART OF STONEWORKING

Table

Height of the relte] spirals along oeriical axis A and D

The numbenng goes from the base to the capital, the measurements are expressed centimeters Spira! Number

ArrsA

AxIS

530

1300

870

1220

1310

1250

1210

1080

1140

1190

950

1130

1170

1090

1180

1060

1135

1150

1095

1070

1090

1205

1100

1255

1175

1155

1220

1175

114

1180

1200

1180

1260

121O

115째

1185

1230

째

1225

1185

1200

1110

1155

1220

125째

1175

970

THE

Table

2 Measurements

ART

STONEWORKING

293

along the spirul«

The measurements are In centimeters and Include the lower border They were taken approximately every ti.fty centimeters where the condition of the stone permitted with the exception of spiral 23 The difference In the number of measurements per spiral Spiral

caused by the varying amount of damaged stone 213

1175

1080

1°90

1060

1200

1115

1160

1080

1115

1°50

1335

1165

1°35

1°75

11°5

1380

1160

1125

1088

1085

134 °

1165

11°3

117°

99° 975

117°

1°35

137°

1100

1345 1380

105 °

1105

9°5

111O

845

1°75

114°

1255

1200

780

1120

1270

1180

770

1135

1115

133 °

925

1115

12 0

115°

1155

1375

1000

1180

1140

1340

119°

1005

1°55

1170

135°

1195

960

980

1210 1220 1205

1210 123

117°

1355

1°7°

1025

1220

132 °

1°35

1100

1175

1325

1035

1150

113 1200

135°

1°9° 105 °

1185

1200

13°0

1040

1195 122 ° 1222 1165 1110

1°35

1445

1160

1170

1440

1345 1320

145°

143 °

294

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Table 3 Comparison of head to body tmcludmg head) heIght on three spirals Measurements are in centimeters spiral 2-3

The body height

spiral 19

IJead

body

head

11O

670

110

695

11O 110

always an erect standing ligure

spiral

body

head

body

110

610

100

57°

110

640

100

655

5°0

105

590

14°

800

100

665

110

760

1°5

74° 71O

110

63 °

105

790

9°

645

115

665

10 5

74°

95 100

535

100

665

655

650

100

650

9° 110

685

65 ° 680

100

65 °

100

680

100

690

9° 80

540

110

600

615

675

10 5

675

610

100

660

7°5

100

585

100

Table 4 Database form for the inienor sculpture of the Baptistry of Parma

I Icard

In \1 Itype

Imatenall Iplace

Imf

type

Isculp , Iblock

type

ltrmsh

Iforegrd

Ilwgt IIsurf

Ithree

I yes

suprt coat 100

guarters round

I architectural

form

I abrasive I

rei

mal

reI

mil

Ilpleces

IIdlm dp 10980 lIattach IIdes

IIcan 004511cap

type

Ildlm

IpartIally

mrk no

I I place

sculp

cube 1026

rah tVD I short cylinder des tvo j conntfuan 1

I I

IIsup 100

I no

Ilcrs

OVer I no

440911

Ipolnt

I no

Itooth

I yes

I I I

cuts

IIwgt 1629 87

burlt Into wall

Ilund

I Itraditional

pIece I

Iflat

I l/comp

Idrl

num

type Ilona cube

Ildr

Itltle

bays 1 - 2

IIdlm wlo 520

I no

Irelief

Ibkgrd

Ilower level, betw

num Icap 01

Iphoto 11,2

red verona

I unfrnrsh Icolod

I hype

Idlm ht 10 515

I I

num

Icapital

I yes

Iround

Ino

Iplchlerello

I I

Idnll~no scra erl 00 labraslve

Iyes

I yes

I I

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

295

Table 5. Tool use on Verona red carvings in the Baptistry of Parma card num

material

point

pich

drill

tooth

flat

rnd

scrap

abr

inf 01 inf 06 inf 12 inf 13 inf 25 inf 26

Red Red Red Red Red Red Red

no yes no no no

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

no no no no no

yes no yes yes no yes yes

no no no no no no no

yes yes yes yes yes

no no

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

inf

Verona Verona Verona Verona Verona Verona Verona

no no

yes yes

Table 6. Graph of the block weights according to the type of carving in the Baptistry of Parma

Block weights n u m b e r

type

20 18 16 14 12

a f b I a

8 6

fino 100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

weights divided by 100s

o capital

~ free standing

~ projecting

Iilil tympanum

900

1000

over

296

THE

ART

STONEWORKING

Table 7. Graph of total stone weight according to type of carving in the Baptistry of Parma Weight

by Type

â&#x20AC;˘ capital ~ free standing â&#x20AC;˘

35.1% 19.1% 11.3% 31.5% 3.0%

pr oj

D tympanum l1li bit

Table 8. Microsoft Works database form for the Trevi Fountain

Ihitlel

Inum 11

Iwork

Idim w10.65

Idim d 11.02

Irework?1 Ifinished?1

Iweight

I ma12430.56

Iwieght

trv12243.59

Idim

I I

I measure

blkl no

Ilmat

bar! iron

Ilmat

pinlno

I Idesigner

Ihoothl

clamp lead

Inurn bad1

I yes

marks 1no

lround

Ifladyes Iraspl

pick I no

axe I no I yes

yes

II unghietto

insl no

sculp

Icalcagnolo

Ilmat

hnfill

Iisculptor Ibushl no Itooth

I I Isquared

Inurn ciampi 1

I pd no

Ilpoint!

Inon connect Iyes, with scogliera

Ipinl no I Inurn pinlO lather inserd no I Imat hnfilllyes

Iidrilil

yes, behind horse tail yes

complete Iyes

Ibarlyes

Inum

Ivoil 0.93

Iclamp Iyes

Bracci

pieces 113 I Idim work hxwxd 13.68x6.45x4.90 I Iblock num101.01 I structure posl held in place with bar Iisawino

numl1

Idim hl1.41

Ilartisd

Tritone agitato

I marble

Imat

I no

head no no

abrasive

I no

THE

Table

ART

STONEWORKING

297

9 The largest blocks of stone used for the sculpture of the Trein Fountain

aut

opera

vol

mat

mls camp

Bracci Bracci

Tnione iranquillo

1362 682

Bracci Bracci Bracci Bracci

Oceano

marble marble marble

yes yes yes

marble marble marble marble

yes yes yes yes

breccia-trav" marble marble breccia-trav" traverhne breccra-trav" marble travertine marble marble travertine marble breccia-lrav" marble

yes yes yes no

Della Valle

Poldi-l-Pmc

Tnione agitate Tnione agitalo

Oceano Tnione iranquitia La Salute

Poldr-l-Pmc

Stemma Oceano Fertrlrta Stemma

Salvi

The rocks

Ludovrsi Della Valle

Fertrlrta de/ Campi La Salute

Salvi

Architecture La Salute

Bracci

Della Valle

Della Valle Bracci

Tnione

agltato

564 499 479 476 4,40 403 390 380 374 369 366 365 340 323 323

Salvi

The rocks

322

Della Valle

Fertrlrta

Poldi-l-Pmc

Papal Arms

Bracci

Oceano

319 315 305

yes yes yes no yes yes no yes yes yes

â&#x20AC;˘ Breccia-trav IS a term used for a stone that comes from north of Rome and, wlule It may be geologically traverhne, IS different both visually and in workmg charactenshcs from the usual travertme found in Rome

298

THE

Table

ART

MIcrosoft

IcntryllTA

OF STONEWORKING

Works form for documentaium of the Temple of Hercules VIctor, Rome

Ihocl roma

IImonl003

man tYPI temple el typi column blk no I drum

Iblk

blk forml cylinder blk htl0460 blk wi 0 B80 blk dl 0 880 voll03S62 blk WQtl92618 Icyl cvl cvl

radl0440

o zso

vetl

WQt 172742

Iposel,"

line

Ibad

conct

Icrs

over

Iyes,

I yes,

hole rework

I I

fan tools I abrasrv, other tls] no

IfotolyeSjldraWlng InumlOOOSO

restrdlno re wrk I yes r e c up] no

dr i l ll ro lp t I yes.r tooth I no round] no flatlves,r r a spjro abrasl yes

,lrnflllino

vertical

Isawlno

Iknobl no

not onqmat

Iblkl007

man datelliSC Imon dim el date IIIBC lei dlml9990 date usclen dim campi Yes [mat blk] marble

metal ansi no other ms 1no type ansi no mat ansi no le adl no connects I no holesl yes, 1

I Ityp

IIelel0006e

Iyes

Iidatel17/4/91

desrqn

mklno

Iflnlyes

Itl

markl yes

lather scrap

mkl yes'

I I

Iyes I

lnote

narne l Teresa

References

Adam, Jean-PIerre 1988 Earte dl costrwre presso I romam matenall e iecnuhe Milan Adam, Sheila 1966 The Technique of Greek Sculpture m the Archaic and ClassIcal Periods London Agoshneth, Cecilia Plana 1985 FOlltane a Vlterbo, presenze vIVe nella CIt/a Rome Alexander, Jonathan and Bmski, Paul. eds 1987 Age of ChIvalry London Anderson, Maxwell Land Nista, Leila, eds 1989 Radiance III Stone Rome Andrews, Oliver 1983 Lmlllg Matenals Berkeley, Los Angeles Andronov, Serge] 0 ,ed 1991 Alle ongtru di Canova Ie ierrecoiie della collezlOne Farseth Venice "Aphrodisias, la cIte de Venus retrouvee " 1989 Les DOSSIers darcheologie, no 139, June Arte Azteca 1979 Rome Asgan, Nusm 1973 "Roman and Early Byzanhne Marble Quarries of Proconnesus " Proceedings of the X Intemanonai Congress of Ciassical Archaeology, vol 1, pp 467-80 Ankara 1988 "The Stages of WorkmanshIp of the Connthian Capital m Proconnesus and Its Export Form" Classtcal Marble Geochemisirv, Technology. Trade, edited by Norman Herz and Marc Waelkens Dordrecht, Boston, London 1989 "Zwet Werkstucke fur Konstanhnopel aus den prokonnesischen Stembruchen " lstanbuler Mlftedllngen, vol 39. pp 4q-63 Ashurst. John and DImes, FranCIS 1977 Stone III Bwldlllg Its Use and Potential Today London BaCCI,Mma 1976 L'opera complela di Piero di Coslmo Milan Barbenm, Mana Ciulia. ed 1991 Sculiure III terracotia del barocco romano Rome Bartman. Elizabeth 1988 "Decor et Duphcaho Pendants m Roman Sculptural DIsplay" /imencan Journal of Archaeology, vol 92, pp 211-25 Basing. Patricia 1990 Trades and Crafts III Medieoal Manuscripts London Baudry, Marte-Therese and Bozo, M Dormruque, eds 1978 La Sculpture methode et oocabuiatre Pans Baur, Karl 1974 Der Stem m Archltektur und Plashk, em oergleichende Siitkunde Muruch Baxandall, MIchael 1972 Pmntlllg and Experience m FIfteenth Century Italy Oxford 1980 The Llmewood Sculptors of Renmssance Germany New Haven and London BernIen, AntOnIO 1990 Carrara dal marmo al mare Florence Bessac, Jean-Claude 1986 L' OuhIIage tradltzonnel du tmlleur de pIerre de /'anhqulfi nos Jours Pans 1988a "Influences de la conquete romame sur Ie traVaIl de la pIerre en Gaule medlterranee " Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol 1, pp 57-72 1988b "Problems of IdentIfIcatIon and InterpretatIon of Tool Marks on AncIent Marbles and DecoratIve Stones" ClaSSIcal Marble GeochemIstry, Technology, Trade, edIted by Norman Herz and Marc Waelkens, pp 41-53 Dordrecht. Boston, London

299

300

REFERENCES

Bessi. llano 1989 Lua di Marmo PISa Bianchi, Ciovanna and Parenh, Roberto 1991 "Gh strumenh degh 'scalpelhru' toscaru, osservazioru prehmman " Le pieire nell' archuettura struiiura e superjict, edited by GUido Bisconhn and Daniela Mretto Padua Bier, Justus 1982 Tilmann Riemenschneider HIs LIfe and Work Lexington, KY Bluemel, Carl 1969 Greek Sculptors at Work New York Boethius. Axel 1962 "The Etruscan Centunes in Italy" Etruscan Culture Land and People, pp 1-144 New York, Malmo, Sweden Borzone, Mana LUisa and Prayer, Vittorio n d Scolpire a Carrara Carrara Boschung. Dietnch and Pfanner, Michael 1990 "Les Methodes de travail des sculpteurs anhques et leur sigruhcahon dans l'hisloire de la culture" PIerre eiernelle du Nrl all Rhin, edited by Marc Waelkens, pp 127-42 Brussels Boselh. Orfeo 1978 OsservazlOm della scoliura aniica, edited by Phoebe Dent Well Florence Bresciaru, Edda 1985 VlVere neil'anuco Egltto Novara Broderick, Laurence 1977 Soapstone CarvlIlg Theale, Reading, Berks, UK Bruto, M LUisa and Vanrucola, Cmzra 1990a "Strumenh e tecmche dt lavorazione del marrru anhclu " Archeologica classlca, vol 42, pp 287-324 1990b "Ricostruzione e hpologia delle Crustae Parietal: meta impenale " Archeologica classica, vol 42, pp 325-76 Mano 1986 La Via dell'arte tra onenie e ocadenie due millenni di siena Florence Cagnoru, Romano 1987 Caro marmo Ospedaletto, Pisa Calla, Manahsa 1988 "Grarute Art It Isn't Just Tombstones" New York TImes, December

Bussagh,

11,

67 Cantor, Laurel Masten n d The Gargoyles of Pnnceion Umverslty Princeton, NJ Caponigro, Paul 1986 MegalIths New York Cardilli AllOlSI, LUisa and Tolomeo. Mana Crazia, eds 1988 La vIa degl: angelz II restauro della decorazlOne scultorea dl Ponte S Angelo Rome CardIlh, LUisa, ed 1991 Fontana dl TrevI la stona, rl restauro Rome Carradon, Francesco 1979 IstruzlOne elementare per glz StudlOSI della scultura, edited by Glanm Carlo SCIOlla Trevlso Cartel, Brunetto 1965 "II restauro delle tarsle mannoree " La pnma mostra nazlOnale del marmo e delle tecmche d'lmplego del marmo nell'edrllzla IIldustnallzzata, edited by Brunetto Cartel, pp 111-18 Carrara Casson, Stanley 1933 The Techmque of Early Greek Sculpture New York 1937 "Note on the Use of the Claw Chisel" Amerzcan]oumal of Archaeology, vol 41, pp 107-8 Catania, Corrado 1988 "Le rocche del rocchl dl rocCla " Bell'Italza ,no 22, February, pp 31-41 Cater, Ian n d Marble A Handbook London Cavallaro, Anna and Parlato, Ennco, eds 1988 Da Plsanello alla nasclta der Muser Capltolml l'antrco aRoma alla vrgrlra del rmasclmento Milan, Rome Cecchi, Roberto, Tarnpone, Gennaro, VannuccI, SergIO 1978 "Effeth delle tecmche dl nhmtura sulla pletra serena horenhna " Bollettmo deglz Ingegnerz, 1, pp 3-22 Cellini, Benvenuto 1907 MemOIrs of Benvenuto Cellml, a Florentme Artrst, Wntten by HImself, edited by Ernest Rhys London and New York 1976 The Treatrses of Benvenuto Cellml on Goldsmrthmg and Sculpture, translated by C R Ashbee New York Claridge, Amanda 1983 "Methods of Fluhng CormthIan Columns and PIlasters" Clttil e archltettura nella Roma rmpenale, analecta romana Rome 1985 "Sulla lavorazIOne del marrnl blanchl nella scultura dell'eta romana" Marml antrchl

REFERENCES

301

problemt dimpiego, d: resiauro e d'tdentijicazione, Studt miscellanei, vol 26, edited by Patnzio Pensabene, pp 113-26, Rome 1989 "Review of Two Books on Trajan's Column" AnhqUlty 1990 "Ancient Techniques of Makmg [oms m Marble Statuary" Marble Art Hisionca! and SClenhfic Perspechves on AnCIent Sculpture (Proceedmgs of the Conference on Ancient Marble), edited by Manon True and Jerry Podany, pp 135-62 Malibu Cole, Bruce 1983 The Renmssance Arhst at Work London Connors, Joseph 1989 "Alliance and Enrruly m Roman Baroque Urbarusm " Romtsches Jahrbuch fur Kunstgeschuhle, vol 25, pp 223-45 1990" Ars Tornandi Baroque Architecture and the Lathe" Journal of file Warburg and Courtauld lnstitutes, vol 53, pp 217-36 Connors, Joseph and Rice, LOUIse,eds 1990 Specchio d: Roma barocca una glllda inediia del XVII secolo Rome Consiglio, A 1958 II manno propneia, escavazzone, laoorazione, impiego Milan 1972 A Technical GUIde to the Rational Use of Marble Rome and Carrara Cook, B F 1985 The Townley Marbles London Coulston, J C N 1990 "Three New Books on Trajan's Column" Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol 3, pp 290--309 Coulton, J J 1988 AncIent Greek ArchItects at Work Problems of Structure and DesIgn Oxford Davey, Andy, Heath, Bob, Hodges, Desmond, Milne, Roy and Palmer, Mandy 1980 The Care and Conservahon of GeorgIan Houses London De Monte, M G, Filehcr, M G, Rockwell, P and Vischetti, F 1991 "II Ternpro dl Ercole Vmcitore al Foro Boano" Le pteire nellarchtieiiura slrutiura e superjici, edited by GUIdo Bisconhn and Daruela Miette, pp 633-45 Padua De Tolnay, Charles 1957 Complete Works of MIchelangelo Princeton, NJ Del RIcCIO,A 1979 Sioria delle pieire Florence Der Stemmetz 1982 Mumch Dodge, Hazel 1991 "Ancient Marble Studies Recent Research" Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol 4, pp 28-50 Dclci, Ennco 1980 Carrara cave anitche Carrara DOIeI, Ennco, ed 1989 II marmo nella clVdta romana, la produzione e II commerclo Carrara Donadoru, Sergio 1969 Museo Eglzzo Milan Doumas, Chnstos 1981 Cvciadic Art AnClent Sculpture and CeramIcs from the N P Goulandns Collechon Houston Du Colombier, PIerre 1973 Les Chanuers des caihedrales Pans Dworakowska, Angelma 1975 Quarrzes rn AncIent Greece Warsaw n d Once Agam on Mannor Luculleum Unpubhshed manusCrIpt Edwlck, DaVId 1986 "Itahan Aspects" Stone Industnes, vol 21 no 4, May, pp 22-5 Egbert, V W 1967 The MedIeval Arhsts at Work Pnnceton, NJ Emaudl, Kann Bull-Simonsen 1990 " 'Fons OIe1' e AnastasIO blbhotecano "RlVIsta de/'Ishtuto d'Archeologla e Stona delrArte, senes 3, year 13 (1990), pp 17~222 Enm, Kenan 1986 Aphrodlslas CIty of Venus AphrodIte London Erlande-Brandenburg, Alan, Pemoud, Regme, Gimpel, Jean and Bechmann, Roland 1988 VIllard de Honnecourt Dlsegm Milan Fscavazzone e lavorazlone della plefra dell' Ossolano n d MIlan "ExeCllhng the Largest Granite Bas-Relief m Amenca" 1976 The Nahonal Sculpture RevIew, Autumn, pp 22-5,31

302

REFERENCES

Fant, J Clayton 1984 "Seven Unedited Inscnphons from Docirruum (lscelusar). Turkey" Zeitschni! fur Papyrologle und Eplgraphlk, vol 54 1985 "Four Unhrushed Sarcophagus Lids at Docmuurn and the Roman Impenal Quarry System in Phrygia " Amencan Journal of Archaeology, vol 89, pp 665-72 1989 Cavum Antrum Phryglae The OrgamZJItlOn and Operations of the Roman imperial Marble Quames III Phrvgu: Oxford, 1989 Fant, J Clayton, ed 1988 AncIent Marble Quarrylllg and Trade Oxford Ferguson, E 1968 Blblrography of the HIstory of Technology London and Cambridge Fields, Curtis P 1971 The Forgotten Art of Buildtng a Stone Wall Dublin, NH Frtchen. John 1981 The ConstructIon of Gothic Cathedrals Chicago Focardi. Piero n d La pteira d: Ftrenzuola Firenzuola Forbes, R J 1963 StudIes III AncIent Technology, VII Leiden Forte, Paola Miruero 1989 Stablae pltture e stucchl delle Ville romane Naples Freart de Chantelou, Paul 1988 VlagglO del caoalier Bernlm III FrancIa Palermo Fret [m 1984 Death of a Hero Malibu Gallo Curcio. Antonmo 1986 "Ipotesi sulle modahta costruthve della Colonna Traiana " Manulenzione e conseruazione del cosiruiio [ra iradizione e IIlnovaZlOne, pp 778-83 Bressanone Carzelli. Annarosa 1972 Museo di Onneio Museo dellOpera del Duomo Bologna Geschicnte der Kunst und der Kunsilenschen Techntken 1965 Munich Gill, Enc 1908 "Inscnphons in Stone" Wntlllg, Illuminaung and Leiienng London 1929 "Stone Carvmg " Art Nonsense and Other Essays, pp 8D-95 London Gimpel, Jean 1982 Cosirulton di caiiedralt Milan GIUSti,Annamana. Mazzoni, Paolo and Pamploru, Annapaola 1978 II Museo dello OplfiCIO delle Pieire Dure a Firenze Milan GIUSti, Annamana, ed 1988 Splendon di pieire dure Lurie di corte nella Firenze del granduchi Florence GIUSti,Annamana 1989 "Firenze, Opihcio delle Pletre Dure dure rna belle" Art e DossIer, no 31, January, pp 4---<} Gnoh, RanIero 1971, 1988 Marmora Romana Rome Goldschelder, Ludwig 1940 Roman PortraIts London 1951 MIchelangelo Selected DrawlIlgs London 1954 MIchelangelo Pallltlllgs, Sculptures, Archltectllre London Gorehck, Leonard and Gwmnett, A John 1987 "The COIffures of Flavlan Women A Functional AnalysIs usmg Scanning Electron MIcroscopy" Archeomatenals, vol 2, no 1, Autumn, pp 3g-45 Gould, CeCil 1981 Bernllll III France An EpIsode III Seventeenth-Century HIstory London Greenthal. Kathryn 1985 Augustus Salllt-Gaudens Master Sculptor New York Greenwell. Allan and Esden, J Vmcent 1913 Practical Stone Quarrylllg London Handtools of Arts and Crafts 1981 Edited by the Diagram Group New York Hams, Ann Sutherland, ed 1972 Selected DrawlIlgs of Glan Lorenzo Bernllll New York Helzer, Robert Flemmg 1990 L'eta del glgantl I trasportl pesantl nell'antlchlta Venice Helsted, Dyveke 1985 LIfe and Death Masks III Thorvaldsen's CollectIon Copenhagen Herz, Norman 1990 "The PreSident's Report" Newsletter AsSOCIation for the Study of Marble and Other Stones Used III AntiqUIty, vol 3, no 2, May, p 1 Herz, Norman and Waelkens, Marc, eds 1988 ClassIcal Marble GeochemIstry, Technology, Trade Dordrecht, Boston, London Hmton, LoUISJ 1876 Report on the Worklllg of Stone, Vienna International ExlubitIon, 1873 Washmgton, DC

REFERENCES

303

c 1926 Autobiography (letter written to his son, unpublished) Hrstonsches Museum Bamberg 1991 Der Tumbau zu Babel Exhibihon catalogue Bamberg Hodges, Henry 1970 Technology 111 the AncIent World London Hodges, Peter 1989 How tile Pyramids were Built Longmead. Shaftsbury, Dorset II marmo len e oggl 1984 Carrara I marml italiaru 1939 Rome I musel 1980 MIlan I oecchi mesiien 1980 Milan James, J 1985 Chartres London James, T G H and Davies, W V 1984 EgyptIan Sculpture London lanse, H and de Vnes, E J 1991 Werk en merk van de steenhouuier Zwolle Janson, H W 1957 The Sculpture of Donaiello Princeton. NJ [enkms, J G 1982 Traditional Country Craftsmen London J H Fragonard and H Robert aRoma 1990 Exrubihon catalogue, Rome Kmdersley, David 1982 Eric Gill Further Thoughts by an Apprentice London, New York Klein. H A 1978 "Prefer Brueghel the Elder as GUide to roth-Century Technology" SCIentIfic Amencan, vol 238, no 3, pp 134-40 Koch, Guntram and Wight, Karol 1988 Roman Funerary Sculpture, Catalogue of the Collections Mahbu Kowall, Dennis and Meilach, Dona Z 1972 Sculpture Casting New York Krauth, Theodor and Meyer, Franz Sales 1982 Die Bau- und Kunstarbeuen des Sieinhaures Hannover La Rocca, Eugenio 1985 Amazzonomachia le sculiure [ronlal: del Tempio di Apollo Sosiano Rome La Rocca, Eugenio and C B C Conservazrone Beru Culturah 1983 Ara Pacts /vugustae 111 occasione del resiauro della [rente occidentale Rome 1986 Rilietn siena capitolmi Rome Laglotz, Ernst 1968 L'Arte della Magna Grecza arie greca m lialia mendionale e SIcilia Rome Landels, J G 1981 Engineenng 111 the Ancient World Berkeley, Los Angeles Lange, K and Hirrner, M 1957 Egypt Architecture, Sculpture, Painung 111 Three Thousand Years London Lanten, Eduoardo 1965 Modellmg and Sculpture, vols I-III New York Lavin. Irving 1967 "Bozzeth e Modelh Notes on Sculptural Procedure from the Early Renaissance through Berruru " Akten des lniemauonalen Kongressen fur Kunstgeschlchte III, pp 93-104 Draunngs by Ctanlorenzo Bemmi from the Museum der Biidenden Kunsie Leipug, German Democratic RepubliC Pnnceton, NJ Lazzanm, Lorenzo 1987 "I granIh del monumenh ItahanI ed I loro probleml dl detenoramento " 1981

Matenalz Lapldel, supplement to Bolletmo d'Arte, vol 41, pp 157-72 1988 "GenesIs and Classlncahon of Rocks" The DeterioratIon and ConservatIon of Stone, edited by Lorenzo LazzannI and RIchard Pieper Venice Lazzanm, Lorenzo, Moschml, GIUhano and Shevano, Blanca Mana 1980a "Contnbuto all'ldenhncazIOne dl mannl Itahanl, grecI e anatohcl mediante uno studio petrogranco e la detennmazIOne del rapporto CajSr " Quadernl della Soprllltendenza ar Belli ArtIstIcl e Stoncl dl VeneZia, vol 9, pp 8-33 1980b "Alcunl esempl dl IdenhncazIOne dl mannl anhchl mediante uno studio petrogranco e la detennmazIOne del rapporto CajSr " Quadernl della Soprllltendenza ar Belli ArtIstIcl e StonCl dl VeneZIa, vol 9, pp 34-58 Lepper, Frank and Frere, Sheppard 1988 Tra]an's Column Gloucester, UK, Wolfboro, NH

304

REFERENCES

Les Pierres de France pierres calcaires, roches marbneres, granii, gres 1980 Pans Logan, Wilham Bryant 1988 "Carving the Portal of Paradise" News of the Cathedral of St John the Dlvme, vol 4, no 1, December Lomarhre. Save no n d "Nota sulla tecmca dr Iavorazione del nhevi " S Abbondlo 10 spazio e 11 tempo, tradtzione sionca e recupero architeitonico Rome Lucas, A and Hams, J R 1962 AnCIent Egyptran Maienals and lndusines London Lugh, G 1957 La lecntca edilizia romana con particolare nguardo aRoma e LazlO Rome MacCarthy, FIOna 1989 Eric GIll London Macchiarella. G 1976 "Note sulla scultura In marmo aRoma tra VIII e XI secolo " Roma e reM carolingia Rome Malo, Elena, [ornaes, Blame and Susmno, Stefano, eds 1990 Bertel Thorvaldsen Rome Manganelli, GIOrgIO, Borges, Jorge LoUIs, Reau, LoUIsand TOSI,Alessandro 1989 "L'Ombra della torre" FMR, no 68,pp 1-24 Mannoru, LUCianaand Ttziano 1984 II mamlO, materia e cultura Genoa Mark, Robert and Clark, Wilham W 1985 "Spenmentazione strutturale nell'arclutettura gohca " Le SClenze, vol 34, no 197, January, pp 114-23 Marmi /sniich: 1989 Rome Marmo 2 1963 Querceta di Seravezza, Lucca Marta, Roberto 1985 /uchuettura romana iecniche cosiruiiioe e forme arcluiettoruche del mondo romano Rome 1986 Tecnica costruittua romana - Roman Building. Techniques Rome Martelloth, Ciovanna 1991 "II Carlo D'Angio Caprtolmo, nflessioru dopo II restauro " Arte medieoale, senes 2, year 5, no 2, pp 127-47 Martelloth, Ciovanna and Rockwell. Peter 1988 "Osservazioru sugli strumenh della scultura net nhevi della faccrala " II Duomo di Orvleto, edited by L Ricceth Ban Marvin, MIranda 1989 "Copying In Roman Sculpture The Roman Senes " Reiaining the Onginal Mulnple Ongtnals, Copies, and Reproducnons Studies m the HIstory of Art, vol 20, pp 2~45 Washington, DC Massa, Renata 1989 "Le pletre e gh arabeschl " FMR. no 69, pp 25-48 Mattei, Manna 1987 II Galata Capztolmo, uno splendldo dono dl Attalo Rome Matthews, Wilham H III 1982 Geology Made Snnple Garden CIty, New York McKee, H 1973 "Introduchon to Early Amencan Masonry Stone, Bnck, Mortar and Plaster" Natronal Trust/ColumbIa Ulllverslty Senes on the Technology of Early Amencan Bul1dmg, vol 1 New York MeIlach, Dona Z 1973 Contemporary Stone Sculpture New York Mezzatesta, MIChael P 1982 The Art of Glanlorenzo Bernllll Selected Sculpture Fort Worth, TX Michelangelo Buonarroh 1962 1, MIchelangelo, Sculptor, echted by Irving and Jean Stone Garden City, New York 1980 Complete Poems and Selected Letters of MIchelangelo, edited by Robert N Linscott Pnnceton, NJ Midgley, Barry 1982 The Complete GUIde to Sculpture, Modellmg and Ceramics Oxford Montagu, Jenmfer 1985 "Bernini Sculptures Not By BernIm " Glanlorenw Bernml New Aspects of HIS Art and Thought, echted by Irving LaVin Umverslty Park, London 1989 Roman Baroque Sculpture, The Industry of Art New Haven, London Muller, Werner 1978 Der Pergamon Altar LeipZig Natural Stone Directory 1985 Weir Bank, Berks, UK Nelton, Sharon 1990 "Master of AphrodlSlas " Archaeology, vol 43, no 1, January-February Newall R S 1977 Stonehenge London

REFERENCES

305

Newburger, A 1969 The Technical Arts and SCIences of the AnCIents New York, London Noblecourt, Chnshane Desroches 1960 L'anuco Eguio la rulOtJa monarchia e il penodo Amarna Milan Noel, Pierre, ed 1965 Technologie de la pierre de uulle Pans Oakley, K P 1972 Man the Toolmaker London Opderbecke, A and Wlttenbecher, H 1988 Der Sieinmeiz Mumch Padovano, A 1981 TIleProcess of Sculpture New York Palagia, Olga 1987 "Les Techniques de la sculpture grecque sur marbre " Marbres hellentques de la carriere au chef-d'oeuvre Brussels Parenh, Roberto 1987 "Una proposta dr classihcazione hpologica delle murature postclassiche " Conoscenze e stnlupp: ieonci per la conseroazione dt slstemliradizionau III muratura Bressanone n d "Nohzre scavi e lavon suI campo" Un vlllagglo d: mmaton e [ondtion dl meiallo nella Toscana del medioeoo San SI1Pestro (Camplglza Maniitmd), pp 387-401 Campiglra Manthma Pascohru. Aldo 1985 Usanze e tecniche nell'edilizui degl: anuchi romaru Rome Pasiru, Pier GIOrgio 1986 II TemplO Mulateshano Bologna Peck Wilham H and Ross, John G 1978 Draunngs from AncIent Egypt London Pensabene, Patrizio 1978 "A Cargo of Marble Shipwreck at Punta Scifo, near Crotone (Italy) " lnternaiional Journal of Nauiical Archaeologv and Underwater Exploration, vol 7, no 2, pp 105-18 Pensabene, Patrizio, ed 1985 Marmi anttciu problemt dtmpiego, di resiauro e d'ldenhficazlOne, Stud: mtscellanei, vol 26 Rome Pensabene, Patrizio and Menna, Dano 1977 Marmi dell'Asla Minore Rome Plen, M 1954 La scala delle qualzta e Ie vaneta nel manm Itallam Milan 1954 I marml d'Italza gramlr e pletre ornamentalz Milan Pmto, John A 1986 The Trevl Fountam New Haven Plamsclg, Leo 1946 Nanm dl Banco Florence Pope-Hennessy, John 1955 Italzan GothIC Sculpture New York 1958 Italzan Renalssance Sculpture New York 1963 Italzan HIgh Renalssance and Baroque Sculpture London 1980 The Study and Cnhclsm of Italzan Sculpture New York Preh, Alberto 1988 L'EstrazlOne deglz obellschl eglzl Tunn Proceedmgs of the New York State CapItol Symposlllm 1983 Albany, NY Purcell, Donovan 1967 Cambndge Stone London Purchase, Wilham R 1904 Prac/lcal Masonry London Quayle, N J T 1986 "Preservmg the Tal Mahal " Stone Industnes, vol 21, no 4, May, pp 26--9 Renwick, W G 1909 Marble and Marble Workmg London Renzo Mrlaru utellSllz per scultura n d (Tool catalogue Renzo Milam, Pomezzana dl Stazzema, Lucca) RIcceth, LucIO, ed 1988 II Duomo dl Orvreto Ban RICCI,Alessandro 1895 Manuale del marmlsta Milan RICCI,MaSSimo and Volpi, Angela Mana 1990 "Cenm sulla lavorazlOne delle pletre e degh ameSI uhhzzah " La torre dl San GlOvanm m Campo, pp 43-7 Florence RIch, J C 1963 The Materrals and Methods of Sculpture Oxford Richman, Michael 1976 Damel Chester French An Amerrcan Sculptor New York RIchter, Gisela 1955 AnCIent Italy Ann Arbor, MI 1969 Greek Art London, New York RIchter, J P 1970 The LIterary Works of Leonardo da Vmcl, vol 2 London RIdgway, Brunhilde Slglsmundo 1970 The Severe Style m Greek Sculpture Pnnceton, NJ

306

REFERENCES

1977 TIle Archarc Style m Greek Sculpture Princeton, NJ 1989 "Denning the Issue The Greek Penod " Relaming the Onginals Multiple Onginals, CopIes, and Reproducitons StudIes m the HIstory of Art, vol 20, pp 13-26 Washington, DC Ritchie, Carson L A 1973 Soft Stone Cartnng London Roberts, David 1992 "Magical Marble, that Gleaming Rock for the Ages" Smuhsonian, January Robins, Gay 1986 EgyptIan Patniing and Relzef Princes Risborough. Aylesbury, Bucks, UK Rockwell, Peter 1983 "Carving for the Ages" Proceedings of the New York State Capiiol SymposllIm Albany, NY 1985 "Prehrrunary Study of the Carving Techmques on the Column of Traj an " Marmi Aniichi problems dimpiego, dt resiauro e d'ldentljicazlone, Stud. Miscellanei, vol 26 edited by Palnzro Pensabene, pp 101-5 Rome 1986 "Relazione sulle tecmche di Iavorazione di cinque portah della Basilica di San Nicola" II Restauro del portal: della Basihca d: San NIcola dl Ban, edited by Antoruo [acobith, pp 55-64 Rome 1987-8 "Carving Instructions on the Temple of Vespasian " Rendiconii della Pontrjicla /uxademia Romana d: /srcheoiogia. vol 60, pp 53-69 1988a "Ch angeh di Ponte Sant'Angelo Le tecmche dello scultore " La Via degu angel: II restauro della decorazlOne scultorea dl Ponte Sanl'Ange/o, edited by LUisa Cardilh Alloisi and Mana Grazia Tolomeo Speranza, pp 91-127 Rome 1988b "Aspects of Stone Carving Technology" The Deienoralion and Conservation of Stone, edited by Lorenzo Lazzanm and Richard Pieper, pp 45-65 Vemce 1988c "The Techmques of the Triton Fountain" II Tnlone resiauraio, edited by LUisa Cardilh AllOlSI,pp 33-8 Rome 1989 Lavorare la pletra manuale per archeotogo, 10 stonco dell' arte e r1 restauratore Rome 1990a "Fnush and Unfirush In the Carving of the Sebasteion " Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary Serres 110 1, /vphrodtstas Papers Recent Work on Archdecture and Sculpture, edited by Charlotte Roueche and Kenan T Enm, pp 101-18 1990b "Stone-carving tools a stone-carvers view" Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol 3, pp

351-7 1990c "Osservazioru sulle tecruche scultore delle due statue di Bes della Porta Magica " La Porta Maglca, luoghl e memone nel glardmo dl PIazza Vlttono, edited by NIColetta Cardano, pp 118-19 Rome 1991a "AphrodlSlas Unnmshed Sculpture ASSOCiatedwith the Sculptors StudIO" Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary Serres no 2, Aphrodlslas Papers 2 TIle Theatre, a sClilptor's Workshop, Phrlosophers, and Com-Types, edited by Charlotte Roueche and Kenan T Enm, pp 127-43 1991b "Some Reflections on Tools and Faking" Marble Art Hlstoncal and SClentrjic Perspectrves on AnCle/lt Sculpture (Proceedings of the Conference on Ancient Marble), edited by Manon True and Jerry Podany, pp 207-21 Mahbu 1991C "Le temlche relative alia scultura ed alia costruzlOne" Fontana dl TrevI la stona, rl restauro, edited by LUisa Cardllh, pp 55-88 Rome 1991d "Lo schlzzo In marmo dl uno scultore ed I graffiti trovah all'lntemo della struttura " Fontana dl TrevI la stona, rl restauro, edited by LUisa CardJih, pp 8g-g1 Rome 1992 "La decorazlOne plashca Le temlche d'lntagho " Battlstero dl Parma, pp 21g-32 Parma 1993 "Tools In Ancient Marble Sculpture" Archeologla delle attrvltiI estrattlve e metallurglche, qumto CIcio dl lezlOm sulla ncerca applzcata m archeologla Florence Romer, John 1984 AnCIent LIVes Darly LIfe m Egypt of the Pharaohs New York Rosenfeld, A 1965 The Inorgamc Raw Materrals of Antlqlllty London

REFERENCES

307

ROSSI,Fernando and Martello, Ciunto 1984 La piiiura dl pieira Bergamo Rossr-Manaresi and Torraca, G 1971 The Treatment of Stone Bologna Rudd. Torn, Thompson, Ken and Cunningham, Ken 1989 Flatlanders Sculpture Supply 1989 Catalogue (Tool catalogue Flatlanders, Blissheld, MI ) Salvaton, N 1983 Stone Workmg Techniques Manna di Massa Sartono, Ciuseppina Pisani 1988 Mezu dl trasporto e traffico Rome Scarzella, Aldo 1923 II marmlsta MIlan Scheel. Bernd 1989 Egyplzan Meialioorking and Tools Pnnces Risborough. Aylesbury, Bucks, UK Schmidt, R W 1922 DIe Techruk m der Kunst Stuttgart Schuyt, MIchael 1980 Fantastic ArchItecture Cologne Sculptor's Catalogue 1987 (Tool catalogue, Tiranh, London) Sculptured Memorials and Headstones 1938 London Sellers, Eugerue, ed 1976 The Elder Plmy's Chapters on the HIstory of Art Chicago Semenov, S A 1964 Prehisionc Technology London Seths. S r La Regina, A , Agosh, G and Fannella, V 1988 La Colonna TraJana Turin Sicca, CInZIa Mana and Tomasi, LUCia Tongrorgi 1979 Carte e Yarchueitura collezione deitinciciopedia Milan SIlber, Evelyn and Fnedman, Terry 1987 Jacob Epsiem Sculpture and Draunngs Leeds, London Simms, D L 1983 "Water-dnven Saws, Ausoruus. and the Authenticity of the Mosella " Technology and Culture, vol 24, no 4, October, pp 635-43 Singer, et al 1958 A HIstory of Technology I From Early Times to the Fall of AnCIent Empires Oxford Slobodkm, L 1973 Sculpture Principles and Pracitces Toronto Stewart, Andrew 1982 Skopas m Mahbu Malibu Stewart, Doug 1988 "Cutting Rock Around the Clock" Snuihsonian, vol 19, no 7, October, pp 86--97 Stewart, Hilary 1981 Arlzfacts of the Northwest Coast Indians North Vancouver, Be, Canada Strong, Donald and Brown, David, eds 1976 Roman Crafts London Strong, Donald and Claridge, Amanda 1976 "Marble Sculpture" Roman Crafts, edited by Donald Strong and David Brown, pp 195-208 London Sweeney, Jane, Curry, Tarn and Tredakis, Yanrus, eds 1988 The Human FIgure m Early Greek Art Athens Tassoth. D 1963 Aspetlz e iecnica del marmo Genoa Thompson, Horner A 1959 The Stoa of Attalos II m Athens Pnnceton, NJ Torraca, GIOrgIO 1981 Porous Butidmg' Materrals Materials SCIence for ArchItectural Conservalzon Rome Trow & Holden Stone Cuttmg Tools 1990 (Tool catalogue Trow & Holden, Barre, VT) True, Manon and Podany, Jerry, eds 1990 Marble Art Historical and Snenlzjic Perspeciioes on AnCIent Sculpture (Proceedings of the Conference on Ancient Marble) Malibu Tylecote, R F 1976 A HIstory of Metallurgy London Varne, P 1974 Sur la tadle de la pierre antique, midll?vale et moderne Dijon Vasan, GIorgIO 1960 Vasarr on Technique, edited by G Baldwin Brown New York Waelkens, Marc 1985 "From a Phrygian Quarry The Provenance of the Statues of the Dacian Pnsoners In Tra]an's Forum In Rome" Amerrcan Journal of Archaeology, vol 89, pp 641-53 Waelkens, Marc, ed 1990 PIerre itemelle du NIl au Rhm, Carrieres et prefabrrcatron Brussels Waelkens, Marc, Herz, Norman and Moens, Luc 1992 AnCIent Stones Quarrymg, Trade and Provenance Interdlsclplmary StudIes on Stones and Stone Technology m Europe and Near East from the Prehlstorrc to the Early Chrrslzan PerIOd Leuven

308

REFERENCES

Walda, H and Walker, S 1984 "The Art and Architecture of Lepers Magna Marble Origins by Isotopic AnalysIs" LIbyan Studies, vol 15, pp 81~2 Walker, Susan 1984 "Marble Origins by Isotopic AnalysIs" World Archaeology, vol 16, no 2, October, pp 204-21 1985a Me'jlorzals to the Roman Dead London 1985b Catalogue of Roman Sarcophag: m the Brztlsh Museum London Ward-Perkins, J B 1971 "Quarrying In Anhquity, Technology, Tradition and Social Change" Proceedings of tile Bniish' Academy, vol 57, pp 3-24 1975-6 "Workshops & Clients the Dronysiac Sarcophagi In Balhmore " Rendtconti della Ponhfiaa /uxademta Romana d: Archeologia, vol 58, pp 191-238 1980 "Nicomedia and the Marble Trade" Papers of the Brztlsh School at Rome, vol 48 Warland, E G 1953 Modern Practical Masonry London Wasserman, Jack 1988 "Observations on Two Statues In the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo and the Porta dr Mandorla In Florence" Arttbus et Histonae, vol 17, no 9, pp 149-65 Wasserman, Jeanne L, ed 1975 Metamorphoses m Nmeieenth-ceniuru Sculpture Cambndge. MA Well, Mark 1974 The History and Decoration of the Ponte SanfAngelo Uruversity Park and London Well, Phoebe Dent 1978 "Bozzetto-Modello Form and Funchon " Orfeo Boselli, OsseruazlOm della scoliura aniica, edited by Phoebe Dent Well, pp 113-34 Florence WeUer, Enk 1962 "Studies and Strolls In Southern Etruna " Etruscan Culture Land and People, pp 163-230 Malmo, Sweden Whlke, J 1959 "The Rehefs on the Facade of the Duomo at Orvieto " Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol 22, nos 3-4, pp 254-302 Whlke, K D 1984 Greek and Roman Technology London Whlke, Lynn [r 1978 Medieval Religion and Technology, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London Whlke, Peter 1982 "The Temples of Angkor WIll They Survive?" Nahonal GeographIc, vol 161, no 5, May, pp 548-89 Wled, Alexander 1981 Bmegel MIlan WIldt, Adolfo 1948 CArte del marmo MIlan Wlukower, Rudolf 1977 Sculpture Process and Pnncipie New York 1983 Glan Lorenzo Bernml The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque Oxford Wurch-Kozel] 1988 "Methods of Transporting Blocks In Anhqurty " Classical Marble Geochemistry, Technology, Trade, edited by Norman Herz and Marc Waelkens, pp 55-64 Dordrecht, Boston, London Yorke, Malcolm 1982 Eric Gill, Man of Flesh and Spini New York Zanardi, Bruno and Bianclu. Alfredo 1988 Una sculiura d: Benedetto Anielami e I'mtltolazlOne dell' antlca Abbazza dl FonteulUo Ravenna

Index

abrasives 45-50,261, Berruru's use 211, Canova's use 210, for details 27, early cultures 12,31,45,49, 129, Greek use 216,217, Inset, In core dnll j y , medieval use 218, polishing with 21, 45, 49, stone 9, 46, 48--(), for smoothing 49, stone types and 23,24,27,28, see also diamonds, emery, sand, saws, tungsten carbide abstraction of forms 112-13, 115, 125 acid, polishing with 49, 50 acrylic resin fillers 98 Adam, Sheila 207 addition of pieces of stone to block 10--11, 72, 144, 150, 151 Aegma, temple of Aphaia 126

Afncano

192

Afyon 64, 66, 93, 168, white or honey marble 26, 28, see also Docimeum Agostino di DUCCIO 19 Ajanta 187 Akhenaton, pharaoh 11, 119 alabaster 18, 22 Alatn 128--() Amenca see pre-Columbian Amenca, United States ancient world see early cultures, Greece, Roman era angle of tool to stone 9, 23, 39, 56, 57, tool capable of being set to any 65, 67 animal skin, carving of 41, 278 Aphrodisias. Roman era Agora Gate 88, 93,94,95,96,263,

columns 93, 94,263,

Europa and the Bull 153, moldings 100, Portico of Tibenus

152, quames 34,

162, 163, 168, reworked

portrait heads

18, 194, sarcophagi 54, sculptors In Rome 18o, sculpture carving shop 122, 141,180, Sebasteion 163, 175, theater 51 Aphrodisias white marble 19, 20, 26, 28 Apennines, pieira forte 15,21 apprenticeship, stoneworkers' 250--1 Aquila limestone 24, 25 Aquileia 196 arches 200, see also under Benevento, Rome architecture bedding of stone 20, 158, choice of stone 15, 16, 17, decoration 98-103, drawings 127-8, hrushmg 42, (m SItU) 92, 97-8, 152, 176, Hellerushc 85, medieval process 91-2, 98, 99, 101-2,146, models 137, modem 80, 89, 90--1,98, 101-2, 179, process 8~106, restoration 18, rock-cut 144, 187--()1, Roman methods and process 85-6, 92-8, 132, 180, 200, / sculpture relationship 103-5, 114, 117, 124, 178, 179, standardization of methods 7~80, see also blocks, capitals, columns, moldings, pediments, placement, reuse, roughing out, and under tndnndual places archipendolo 51, 65, 67 Arezzo, Pieve 139 arrowheads, flint 8 Assyna 199, tools 47,61, transport 147, 166, 168 Aswan 80, 159 Athens archaic temple of Athena 116, Erechtheion 12~30, Parthenon 116, 126, 129, 145, 183-5, relief of athlete 216,217, Roman statues 122

310

INDEX

Attica 13-14 Ausomus 46--7 availability of stone 16, 21, 25, 144 axes 31-2, 64, 66, 254-,carving 26, 91, 93, masons' use 52, 66, medieval use 91, 153, 202, pichierello 53, quarrying 64, 67, Roman use 93, toothed 153 Aztecs 8 bamboo used as dnll 37 Bamyan 187, 189 Bandmelli, Baccio 71-2, 73, 123 barbarian, Roman statue of 123, 126, 268

Barbenni Pleta

194

Ban, Basilica of San Nicola central portal 226-7, 228-33, 277-85, channeling 66, 281, construction 133, 231, 232, 283, 284-,decorative Interlace 101, 102, relief techmque 114, 278, reuse of stone 29, 228, technology 126 basalt, columnar 159 Bath 52, Bath stone 19, 29, 30, 164 bedding 19-20, 156, 158, 159 Beer stone 26, 29 Belgium 33, 91, 206 Benevento, Arch of Trajan 201, 213-15, 272-3 Bernini, Gran Lorenzo design process 132-3, extended arms and hngers 27, hruslung 124, Fountain of the Four Rivers, Rome 150, 151, innovation 183, model for Longinus 141, Ponte Sant'Angelo, Rome 87,132-3, 137,

Portrait of Cardinal SCIPIO Borghese 131, Porirail of Costanza Bonarelli 124, Rape of Proserpine 41, supply of stone 180, tooth chisel 41, Truth Revealed 123, 211-13, workshop orgaruzahon 2째4, 212, 213 Bessac, Jean-Claude 4, 6, 52, 53 Bessi, llano 169

binda

167

blacksmithing 34 block and tackle 169, 171 blocks, architectural go-8, squanng 81,82-3,91-2,95,1째3-4,117,148,

10,

Roman 93, 94-,95, 96-7, size 144, 157, 158, 159, (gramte) 23, (medieval) 92, 146, 14g-50, 164, 174,202-3, (Roman) 154,174

Bluemel, Carl 4, 5, 116, 207 bolster 42, 58, 60 Bornarzo, Garden of, Lazio 19o-l bones, burned ammal 49 Boselh, Orfeo 34, 50, 118 Bosse, Abraham 118 brace and bit 36, 38, 62, 65 Brancusi, Constantin 125 breaks In stone, natural 128, 129 Bregno, Andrea 182, tomb 53, 65, 105,106 Bruegel, Pieter the Elder, Tower of Babel 67, 91, 153-4, 166, 170, 173-4 brursmg of stone 23, 42, 199 Buddhist sculpture 187, 189 bush tools 42, 60, 61, see also hammer, bush butterflies (clamps) 150, 151 buttresses, flying 143 Byzantine era 201 Caen stone 29

Calacaia macchia d oro calcagnolo 41, 70

calipers 51, 65, 67, for copYing 118, 119, 120, 130, 148 Canova, Antonio 1째7, 136, 20g-11 Canterbury Cathedral 29 capitals classical 129, medieval 105, 138, 218-20,221-2

Cap om, LUIgi 106, 182, tomb of Andrea Bregno 53, 65, 105, 106 capstan 170 Carradon, F 34, 36, 49, 50, 122 Carrara 270, Bandmelli's Neptune 71-2, 73, 123, Calacata macchia d'oro 28, carving shop 148-(}, 178, 181, 183, Fossacava quarry 165, lizza 168, 169, 271, Michelangelo and quames 18o, modernization of quames 162, 164-5, 168, Roman quarrying 29, 34, 64, 67, 144, 164, 169, Scuola del Marmo 103, size of blocks 144, transport, quarry 146, 147, 168, 169, 172, 271 Carrara marble 6, Bardigho 27, statuary 20, 26--7, 160, white or ordinano 17, 26, 27, 192 carver's pick 40, 64, 66, 257 carving Without quarrying 144, 187-(}1, 206

INDEX Caryatids 130 Casenhno valley 52, 64, 67, 139, 161 Caytya hall 189 Cellini, Benvenuto 87, 123,203 Cerveten 188, 18<}-90 channeling channeling tool 38, 44-5, 58, 59,63, 65, 211, 236, dnll aa, 66, 229, 230, 281, medieval 44-5, 63, 64-,66, 229, 281, Renaissance 63, 65, 211, Roman 44, 62-3, 64, 230, 236 Chartres Cathedral 60, 92, 98, 99, 127-8, 132

chemin-de-jer 22, 48, 61, 62, 261 Chemtou 93, 94 Chiarothru, Francesco 210 China 9,187 chisel, bullnose see roundel chrsel. claw see chisel, tooth chisel, flat 9, 42-3, 58, 59, 255, 259, Bernini's use 211, 212, Dark Age use 202, Donatello's use 203, Egyphan 11, 107, for fmal shapmg 124, Greek use 12,216--17, marks 259, 262, 279, 285, medieval use 218, 222, 228, 232, 279, 285, Roman use 58, 60, 1°9,214,236, 272, 273, smoothing 42, 89, unghletto 58, 59, used as scraper 60, 62 chisel, letter-carvmg 42, 58, 60 chisel, POint 9, 11, 39"""""40, 56, 57, 255, 256, angulation 9, 39, 56, 57, Bermru's use 211,212, carver's pick marks Similar 40, Dark Age use 202, Egyptian use 11, for hruslung 13, on granite 9, 39, 56, 57, Greek use 12, 40, on limestone 9, on marble 9, 28, 39, medieval use 13,228, 277, Michelangelo's use 70, Roman use 93, 109, 242, roughing out 39, 71, 89, 93, 109, 124, on sandstone 11 clusel, round-headed see roundel chisel, tooth 13,40-1, 57, 58, 255-8, 262, Bermru's use 211, 212, Canova's use 209"""""10, for dehrung forms 89, 124, dog-toothed 41, 43, for hrushmg 124, 153, on hard stones 23, 42, Greek use 13-14,199,216--17, medieval use 218, 222,228,229"""""30,276, Renaissance use 7°,2°3, Roman use 153,214,242, for roughing out 70, 71, see also under Michelangelo

311

Cipollmo marble 18, 159 clamps, metal 150, 151 claw chisel holder 60, 61 Cleobis and Biton (kouroi) 130 colored stone 10, 21, 46, 15g-60, 192, 201, see also mosaic colossal statues Assynan 147, 166, 168, rock-cut 187, 188, 191, see also Easter Island, Naxos columns flutmg 83, 84, 93-4, 95, 96,263, granite 23, 155, 159, placement 149, shapmg 80, 81, 83, 84, 86, 93, 94, 95, 96, 263-5 computer documentation 209, 242-\}, 294-8, computer generated drawings 217-24

conservatism 126, 136, 141 construction see architecture, placement copying With calipers 118, 119, 120, 130, 148, by eye 118-19, 135, 136--7,212, modem 2°5, Roman 86, 119, 122, 137, 180, 268, workshop orgaruzation 119, 210-11, see also drawings. models, poinbng machine Corfu, archaic temple of Athena 116 comers, removal of 38, 55-6, 56 Corselull sandstone 20, 22, 29 Cosma, Ciovanru 182-3 cranes 146, 149, 154, 169, 171, 172-3, 174, 200 Cycladic sculpture 12, 45, 49, 113, 129 cyclopean walls 128-\}, 145, 167 Dark Ages 44-5, 201 decoration. hnely carved 98-103 Desiderio da Sethgnano 104 design 89,125,127-41,143,153, before execution 130-1, 253, Column of Trajan 240,242, drawings 134-6, dunng execution 117, 122, 127-8, 131-2, 135, 232, and hthng together of blocks 152, mechanization and 130-1, methods of apphcahon 133-9, 183, rrurumal 128-\}, models and 127, 136--7,253, and quarrymg 143, specialization and conhnuily 183, and tradition 129"""""3°, 138, 183, training, effect of 139"""""40,and workshop orgaruzahon 138, 143

312

INDEX

detail, capacity of stone to take 20, 22, 23, 144 diamond, industnal 45, 46, 49, 91 Diderot, Derus, Encvclopedia 46,65, 67, 122, 167 Didyma , temple of Apollo 85-6, 95, 96, 152, 175 direct carving 115, 116, 117, 124, 127, twentieth-century movement 116, 122, 200 dismantling of monuments 193, 196 division of labor 91-2, 178 Docimeum marble 28, 93, 144, 154 documentation 7, 207-49, drawings 208~, 216--25, 253, major monuments 226--42, photographic 208, 213-15, stylistic analysis 227, tool marks 207, 20\rl0, 211, 224, written 208, 20\r13 , see also computer documentation Dab, Ennco 164 Donatello 117, 152, 203 Done order 129 drapery, deep-cut 44 drawings documentation 208~, 216--25, 253, Egyptian use 107, 113, 119, 135, 136, measured 122, 125, 127-8, 135, 136, medieval use 122, 135, nonmeasured 122, 124-5, 127-8, 134-5, prohlmg and 76, and reliefs 1째7, 110 dnlls 35-8, 62-3, 64, Berruru's use 211, bow 36--7, 38, 53, 62, 64, 261, brace and bit 36, 38, 62, 65, Byzantine use 202, Canova's use 210, for channeling 44,66, 229, 230, 281, cord 62, 64, core 35-6, 38, for hard stones 23, Greek use 53, medieval use 36, 66, 218, 220, 228, 229, 232,274-6,280--2, for outlmmg and depth 100, pneumatic 35, pump 62, 63, 64, 220, 228, 229, Renaissance use 206, 211, Roman use 100, 180,207,214, 236, (see also running below), roundel used as 37, 59, 60, runnIng 37, 38, 44, 53,62-3,64,230, staff 36,38, star 36, strap 36--7, 38, 261 drove 42, 58, 59 early cultures abrasion 12, 31, 45, 49, 129, flint working 8, see also Cycladic sculpture, Easter Island, Egypt, pre-

Columbian Amenca, Circles

Stone Age, stone

Easter Island 45, 77-8, 79, 111, 133, 164 Egypt ceremonial flint knives 8, conservatism 136, 141, 183, geometric analysis 75, 76, and Greece 199, masks 137, measunng 50, 65, 67, placement 149, profilmg 76, 113, squanng of blocks 148, see also under drawings. granite. gnds, limestone, models, obelisks, proportion, proportion, quarrying, relief. roughing out, tools, transport, workshop orgaruzahon Ellora 187 emery 24, 48, 49, 129, paper 49,262 England workshop orgaruzahon 178, 179, 181,