True Colors
Call them gaudy, call them kitsch, but archaeologist Vinzenz Brinkmann insists his eye-popping reproductions of ancient Greek sculptures are right on target
- By Matthew Gurewitsch
- Smithsonian magazine, July 2008, Subscribe
(Page 2 of 5)
Colored statues? To us, classical antiquity means white marble. Not so to the Greeks, who thought of their gods in living color and portrayed them that way too. The temples that housed them were in color, also, like mighty stage sets. Time and weather have stripped most of the hues away. And for centuries people who should have known better pretended that color scarcely mattered.
White marble has been the norm ever since the Renaissance, when classical antiquities first began to emerge from the earth. The sculpture of Trojan priest Laocoön and his two sons struggling with serpents sent, it is said, by the sea god Poseidon (discovered in 1506 in Rome and now at the Vatican Museums) is one of the greatest early finds. Knowing no better, artists in the 16th century took the bare stone at face value. Michelangelo and others emulated what they believed to be the ancient aesthetic, leaving the stone of most of their statues its natural color. Thus they helped pave the way for neo-Classicism, the lily-white style that to this day remains our paradigm for Greek art.
By the early 19th century, the systematic excavation of ancient Greek and Roman sites was bringing forth great numbers of statues, and there were scholars on hand to document the scattered traces of their multicolored surfaces. Some of these traces are still visible to the naked eye even today, though much of the remaining color faded, or disappeared entirely, once the statues were again exposed to light and air. Some of the pigment was scrubbed off by restorers whose acts, while well intentioned, were tantamount to vandalism. In the 18th century, the pioneering archaeologist and art historian Johann Joachim Winckelmann chose to view the bare stone figures as pure—if you will, Platonic—forms, all the loftier for their austerity. "The whiter the body is, the more beautiful it is as well," he wrote. "Color contributes to beauty, but it is not beauty. Color should have a minor part in the consideration of beauty, because it is not [color] but structure that constitutes its essence." Against growing evidence to the contrary, Winckelmann's view prevailed. For centuries to come, antiquarians who envisioned the statues in color were dismissed as eccentrics, and such challenges as they mounted went ignored.
No longer; German archaeologist Vinzenz Brinkmann is on a mission. Armed with high-intensity lamps, ultraviolet light, cameras, plaster casts and jars of costly powdered minerals, he has spent the past quarter century trying to revive the peacock glory that was Greece. He has dramatized his scholarly findings by creating full-scale plaster or marble copies hand-painted in the same mineral and organic pigments used by the ancients: green from malachite, blue from azurite, yellow and ocher from arsenic compounds, red from cinnabar, black from burned bone and vine.
Call them gaudy, call them garish, his scrupulous color reconstructions made their debut in 2003 at the Glyptothek museum in Munich, which is devoted to Greek and Roman statuary. Displayed side by side with the placid antiquities of that fabled collection, the replicas shocked and dazzled those who came to see them. As Time magazine summed up the response, "The exhibition forces you to look at ancient sculpture in a totally new way."
"If people say, ‘What kitsch,' it annoys me," Brinkmann says, "but I'm not surprised." Actually, the public took to his replicas, and invitations to show them elsewhere quickly poured in. In recent years, Brinkmann's slowly growing collection has been more or less constantly on the road—from Munich to Amsterdam, Copenhagen to Rome—jolting viewers at every turn. London's The Guardian reported that the show received an "enthusiastic, if bewildered" reception at the Vatican Museums. "Il Messagero found the exhibition ‘disorientating, shocking, but often splendid.' Corriere della Sera's critic felt that ‘suddenly, a world we had been used to regarding as austere and reflective has been turned on its head to become as jolly as a circus.'" At the Istanbul Archaeology Museum, Brinkmann's painted reconstruction of sections of the so-called Alexander Sarcophagus (named not for the king buried in it but for his illustrious friend Alexander the Great, who is depicted in its sculpted frieze) was unveiled beside the breathtaking original; German television and print media spread the news around the globe. In Athens, top officials of the Greek government turned out for the opening when the collection went on view—and this was the ultimate honor—at the National Archaeological Museum.
Taking advantage of the occasion, Brinkmann set some of his showpieces up for photographers on the Acropolis: a brilliantly colored, exotic-looking archer, kneeling with bow and arrow; a goddess smiling an archaic smile; and, perhaps most startling of all, a warrior's gilded torso in armor that clings to the body like a wet T-shirt. The figures may have looked wrong against the bleached, sun-drenched architecture, but they looked fine under the blazing Mediterranean sky.
An American showing was overdue. This past fall, the Arthur M. Sackler Museum at Harvard University presented virtually the entire Brinkmann canon in an exhibition called "Gods in Color: Painted Sculpture of Classical Antiquity." Selected replicas were also featured earlier this year in "The Color of Life," at the Getty Villa in Malibu, California, which surveyed polychromy from antiquity to the present. Other highlights included El Greco's paired statuettes of Epimetheus and Pandora (long misidentified as Adam and Eve) rendered in painted wood and Charles-Henri-Joseph Cordier's exotic Jewish Woman of Algiers of 1862, a portrait bust in onyx-marble, gold, enamel and amethyst.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: Sculpture Greece
Additional Sources
Gods in Color: Painted Sculpture of Classical Antiquity (exhibition catalogue), edited by Vinzenz Brinkmann and Raimünd Wunsche, Stiftung Archäologie, Glypotothek Munich, 2007
The Color of Life: Polychromy in Sculpture from Antiquity to the Present (exhibition catalogue), edited by Roberta Panzanelli with Eike D. Schmidt and Kenneth Lapatin, The J. Paul Getty Museum and the Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles, 2008









Comments (31)
There are tests that can be done on the statues to determine how they were originally painted. The Greeks mainly used the colors red, blue, and yellow so I am not surprised that his reproductions are so eye popping.
Posted by Hayden on November 1,2012 | 09:26 PM
According to author Matthew Gurewitsch on “True Colors” classical antiquity means white marble. However, ancient Greek assumes, “their gods in living color and portrayed them that way too.” White-marble maybe the color of antiques which people collect them at the first time or the color they often see on the antiques, and it is also the color of a kind of precious stone that ancient used to make their items. Nevertheless, it is hard to determine what is the true colors of the temples, churches, or pagodas? Why did they choose to paint the church white, temple brown-red, and pagodas yellow? Maybe from the Renaissance, the first priests choose those colors and after that people continue to repaint. Repainted colors are never exactly original colors, but they are pleasure the eyes, and that the structures are to be saved, satisfying their owners. Similar to the author wrote, “Color contributes to beauty, but it is not beauty. Color should have a minor part in the consideration of beauty,” I like this article because it explains the value of colors to the structures, and colors are not absolutely contribute to the beauty. Contrary, the white marble, the natural color of statues is more importance. However, this article is somewhat hard to understand because it is not written concise.
Posted by Nghia Cao on July 5,2012 | 02:57 PM
This is quite interesting stuff, I had no idea that Thomas Bruce was responsible for bringing those tresures from Greece - unless I misinterpreted. I really don't know if I'm understanding the poem correctly, but it seems as if the author is bragging about someone that took things from Greece. The second poem was much clearer and profoundly worded. Right before I started this post - I was reading some other comments. And someone made a very good point, how do we know when the paint was actually put on these ancient treasures - very good question! The last sentence of the passage couldn't be truer,to take paint from any type of art - is equal to disfiguement. This was a very good article and very informative
Posted by Michael D. Jones on February 28,2012 | 05:59 PM
I saw the exhibit at the Sackler and it made me look at ancient and medieval art in a whole new light. Every once in a while now, I notice a tiny residue of paint on sculptured forms I would otherwise expect to be white. (In looking at cathedrals, I'm aware that many a statue is either a copy of an original damaged long ago or is an outright neo-gothic invention of the 19th century. Sometimes when you look at those buildings and think "how did this stay so sharp after seven centuries," the answer is, "it didn't.")
Posted by John D on September 17,2011 | 06:29 PM
Check out the book 'The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks' By Gisela M. A. Richter (New Revised Edition - 5th printing, 1967) New Haven and London, Yale University Press. Chapter IX Technique - P. 148 (c) Color. Richter was Curator of the Department of Classical Art at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art from 1925 to 1948.
As a semi-retired Artist and Public School Art Teacher, it was this book that peaked my interest in painted sculpture, and sent me surfing the web until I found the Brickman's" This is the kind of art/color/picture story that would spark my street-wise students to use the web creatively, and open up an exciting forum for lively debate: A major reason why we will always need Art in the classroom and in the lives of our young people of all ages!
Posted by Jose M. Feliciano on June 25,2011 | 09:52 PM
I just reread the original article and then went online to view the slideshow. I think the point the last prior commenter made -- that the Brinkmanns may be influenced to some extent by the vibrant colors found in the painted 16th century sculpture around their hometown, Munich -- has some validity. Even more so since the Italian Renaissance sculptors, led by Michelangelo, worked in white marble, while the painters did not.
Note a typographical error on the caption in the slideshow regarding the blue lion's mane: It should be "tufts" of hair, not "tuffs."
Posted by mark gruenberg on January 20,2011 | 12:19 AM
If this is indeed the truth and is widely accepted it will change the world's perspective on Ancient Greek art forever. Fascinating...
Posted by Anna on November 18,2010 | 10:53 PM
Check out this life size reproduction of Athena and Nike from the reproduced Parthenon in Nashville Tennessee: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nashville_Parthenon_005.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AthenaAlanpainting.jpg
http://www.nashville.gov/parthenon/
Posted by eric on September 9,2010 | 08:27 AM
In 2005 I was amazed when I viewed Vinzenz Brinkmann's work at the Munich Glyptothek. The next day, I was at the National Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh and felt that the statues and busts would certainly be livelier if they had a spot of paint on them. I can no longer view sculpture without envisioning them in full color.
Posted by Ted Paone on August 26,2010 | 02:12 PM
Wow, amazing! The patterns on the clothes look like Italian knitwear produced today by Missoni or Marcazzani. It reminds me of the statues of deities in India, which are clay or marble figures painted lifelike and decorated with expensive clothes and gold. Maybe in India this particular tradition of polytheistic divination has lived on, as it was practiced thousands of years ago in hellenistic times...
Posted by Mala on August 22,2010 | 04:18 PM
First of all, I am familiar with this research,and it is more than half based on speculation.But let's leave that aside...
Hundreds and hundreds of bronze statues have been found in mainland Greece, and none or at least none I have seen(and I have seen many) were golden yellow bronze,or low tin bronze, like this one (second photo from gallery)..But were dark liver,or dark grey bronze aka high tin...
Secondly no research can reveal true shade of color,especially in cases of details such as sleeve decoration???????? and due to all kinds of weather,oxygen etc effects... the color,even if someone wanted to paint them in this ridiculous manner, would be far less bright and much more washed away..Look at the fresco in orthodox churches,even in newly built ones, the painted stuff is much more..how to say,desaturated...
Posted by Vojkan on June 2,2010 | 01:42 PM
Traces of paint no doubt show that the works have been painted on. I do not know all the research done on this megaimportant question.
Has it been established just when they were painted? As asked above by Karl Young.
Is there not indications in contemporary classical literature that sculptures were without paint, or with very little? Who were the painters?
Posted by Oystein Loge on January 28,2010 | 07:27 AM
Then, dear Karl, how do you explain all these color traces in the kores found in Acropole in 1886....? Do you think that someone unearthed them, painted them and then buried them again!?
Posted by Tasos Kakamanoudis on May 31,2009 | 08:26 AM
How do we know that the paints were applied at the time the statues were made? Maybe the paints were applied at a later date by idiots who thought that white marble was too boring. Perhaps there was a "realism craze" in ancient Greece where everybody started to paint all the statues. Some of the statues would have been skillfully painted by professionals. Others would have been painted by do-it-yourselfers, which would explain the ugly creations being discovered by Dr. Brinkmann. Honestly, we know that Greeks were skilled artists; they were reportedly master painters also. How do we explain such crudely colored sculpture?
Posted by Karl Young on April 10,2009 | 11:39 PM
40-odd years ago at University of California at Davis, Dr. Howard taught us that the Greek statues were polychromed. I had always wondered how they must have appeared. What joy to see some examples. How striking and beautiful! I do wish that all works mentioned in the article had been illustrated.
Posted by Katie Harris on March 9,2009 | 02:00 PM
I just finished reading the July issue of Smithsonian Magazine and am VERY curious about the colorful depiction of leggings, especially, that appear to represent knitted patterns - from an era long before I thought that 'knitting' was believed to have existed. I am sure that textile experts have commented on the representations - perhaps Koch-Brinkman is one herself? On page 67 the archer's arms and legs have pattern and form-fitting characteristics of multi-color knitting such as in a Fair Isle sweater. On page 71, the lower left figure has tights that look like a knitted lace pattern. Please, is there a way to learn more of the Brinkman research regarding the textile depictions? Sincerely, Kati Meek, Northern Michigan handweaver and textile history buff
Posted by Kati Meek on November 23,2008 | 01:53 PM
Reading this article, I could dream about walking through the bright colors in Classical Antiquity.
Posted by Laura Dalrymple on September 17,2008 | 11:26 AM
Was ultraviolet photography used for this research? The article is unclear; it suggests that a UV source makes the original etchings visible to the naked eye. But I presume that a much more detailed record would be needed, hence the need for photographic documentation.
Posted by Lloyd Chambers on July 13,2008 | 11:17 AM
As a professional Artist/Sculptor, I am asked sometimes to scale down a classic sculpture. I usually request a simple stone finish to complete the project. This article sheds new light on what could have been. As a young art student, I remember touring the British Museum and viewing the Elgin Marbles. I seem to recall seeing the slightest hint of paint and pointed this out to my teacher who rebuked my observations outright. It always made sense to me if ancient cultures like the Egyptian and and the Chinese adorned their temples and public buildings with jewels and paint why not other great empires. Cheers! Liam
Posted by Liam Manchester on July 13,2008 | 10:09 AM
The article cites other cultures and time periods who polychromed their sculptures, but neglects to mention the remarkable, painted sculpture being made in the Bavaria-Franconia Region of Germany in the early 16th century, at the same time as the unpainted sculptures of the High Italian Renaissance. Tilman Remienshneider, Veit Stoss, Nicholos Gerhardt, Hans Leinberger, and Master H.L., to name a few, were Early 16th Century German Sculptors from Bavaria who painted their work. Munich the Brinkmanns' home town has a lot of this sculpture in their museums. I cannot help but wonder if their research has been heavily influenced--inspired--by these marvelous sculptures in their own backyard.
Posted by Michael Ananian on July 7,2008 | 09:53 AM
Thank you for putting more photos online. I did not remember from college art history classes that these sculptures were orginally coloured. Your magazine is terrific; I really enjoyed this article and the entire issue! So thanks!
Posted by Alison Swann on July 5,2008 | 11:26 PM
I have a UC Berkeley undergrad degree in Near Eastern History and Archaeology. Having studied the culture and art of the ancient world, I have to say that it's about time we see what the ancients saw in true living color. We can now more closely relive the reconstructed past. This enriches us just like discovering long lost scrolls and gives our present cultures continuity with our roots. As romantically beautiful stark white marble sculptures are, the truth of what they were meant to portray tells the real story. What we largely see today is merely a shadow of what was. We are looking at scaffolding which is supposed to support living color and the real face of the ancient world. True archaeology seeks to uncover the truth otherwise it's not a legitimate science, but a biased opinion that erases, disfigures and obfuscates the past. I was surprised when people complained that the Sistine Chapel restorations were gaudy. Imagine covering current murals with grime or scraping much of the paint off. They would look wrong and sculptures without their paint look wrong now. They are inaccurate. I would like to see all ancient marbles restored to their true colors as much as possible. What should be avoided is guessing what the colors might have been. Why make something up? Maybe spectral analysis might discover minute traces of true pigments embedded in the marbles. That's real science.
Posted by Bill Hernandez on June 29,2008 | 02:43 PM
It's reasonable to assume that the painting on the figures was at least as sophisticated as the figures themselves. By the time of the Alexander Sarcophagus the subtlety of the sculpture has far outstripped the colors identified and applied by Brinkmann. This does not mean that Brinkmann has left the path of accurate reconstruction; it may mean that his ultimate goal is impossibly distant. The colors he has identified on later pieces are clearly just underpainting for a far more realistic final finish. This was the process used in Renaissance oil paintings of equivalent visual sophistication. The assumption that the painting was as sophisticated as the figures is an extremely conservative one. The artistic and manual skills required for realistic sculpting are far greater than those required for life-like painting of a finished figure. And the painting task was a relaxed one, far more amenable to messing around until the artist got it right. So painting was easier, less risky and, because of weathering, constantly in demand. It is reasonable to conclude that until sculpting reached its zenith, painting of figures was substantially more sophisticated than the figures themselves. With luck, Brinkmann will eventually find a piece with all the layers intact.
Posted by Gregory Meeker on June 29,2008 | 10:22 AM
Perhaps the vivid painting of statues led the way to the painting of sacred icons in the Greek Christian world.
Posted by Augustine Serafini on June 29,2008 | 09:03 AM
Wow, Loved the article, loved the slide show even more. Maybe I still prefer the Renaissance white marbles, but it is great to have a clearer view of what these Greek artists intended.
Posted by Darrah Hopper on June 28,2008 | 09:17 PM
I've occasionally wondered why early Greek statues weren't painted as much as the Egyptian statues their shapes so clearly resemble, and now Herr Brinkman's careful observation shows that they were! Thanks for the great photos.
Posted by Sarah Gill on June 27,2008 | 11:02 PM
Not to put too fine a point on the matter, but your description of the "repainted" classical sculptures contains an error. On the caption for the grave stele of a warrior, your refer to his yellow "leather or bronze" armor. Actually, at this time (5th century BCE)Greek armor was predominantly made of many layers of linen of linen glued together -- a sort of ancient kelvar. On vase painting of warriors arming, the shoulder guards are sometimes depicted as standing on end until lashed down, which affords clear evidence of the mode of construction. Modern students of ancient armor have taken to calling cuirasses of this kind "linothoraxs."
Posted by Eduard Mark on June 27,2008 | 10:09 PM
Now I have a better idea of where the interior decoration styles of Eastern Orthodox churches originated as well a much Latin American Colonial Era Catholic church decorations. Also, perhaps, the interiors of the house on Long Island shared by Alec Baldwin and Michelle Pfeiffer in the film "Married to the Mob..."
Posted by George Alexander on June 25,2008 | 02:06 AM
Terrific article. Kitch lives in style. :)
Posted by remoran on June 25,2008 | 11:53 PM
Nice article, interesting subject - but like so many essays, articles and books about art, too many of the works mentioned in the article are not illustrated with a photo, robbing the story of its fullest value for artists and art lovers. If a work is worth mentioning in the text, it is worth a photo as well, particularly in case like this where finding photo's of the unillustrated pieces will be difficult or impossible.
Posted by DESandberg on June 25,2008 | 09:19 PM
gaaudy,not aaat all. i think they are magnificent.
Posted by herbertjmiller on June 25,2008 | 03:11 PM
As a kid I always wondered about those lifeless eyes in ancient sculptures. Now I know--they were not! Every now and then something comes along and smacks you upside the head and makes you just say "far out!" Now what if Michaelangelo? What if Bernini? What if Rodin? Simon Schama, please take note.
Posted by Terry Franklin on June 25,2008 | 10:34 AM