1

28 Exhibition heads The armour Henry Moore saw in the Wallace Collection when he was a young artist made a deep impression on him, and this went on to influence his work throughout his life, as can be seen in a new exhibition there, says Curator of Arms and Armour Tobias Capwell

n about 1907, a schoolboy named Henry Moore visited the medieval church of St Oswald Iin Methley, West Yorkshire, for the first time. The profusion of stone carving found throughout this magical place made a profound impression on him. It was the future artist’s first experience of sculpture, as he later explained to photo- grapher and writer John Hedgecoe: ‘Methley Church… contains the first real sculptures I remember. I was very impressed by these recumbent effigy figures… [it was] the almost Egyptian stillness of the [female] figure that appealed to me, as well as the hands coming away from the body’ (from Henry Moore: My Ideas, Inspiration and Life as an Artist, published by Ebury, 1986). Two of those effigies represent knights – Sir Lionel, Lord Welles, KG (killed at the Battle of Towton in 1461) and Sir Robert Waterton, Constable of Pontefract Castle (d 1424). This was probably the first time Moore encountered life-sized images of warriors in armour, figures armed for eternity in the accoutrements of war worn in life. As a powerful, monumental work of funerary art, an armoured effigy was intended to express the identity, the prestige, and the power of its 2 subject. Armour augmented its wearer physically, but also changed 1. Carved alabaster the empty armour that Moore armour. As he told the documentary the way the world saw him. It funerary monument of would later contemplate at the filmmaker, John Read in his 1974 made him seem superhuman and Sir Lionel, Lord Welles, Wallace Collection, an effigy is a BBC television programme, Henry otherworldly, the glittering steel KG and his wife in the simultaneous visualisation, of both Moore at Home: A Private View of church of St Oswald in surfaces reflecting both the light the impervious armour outside and a Personal Collection: Methley, which Henry of the sun above and the power of Moore saw when he the vulnerable human being inside. ‘The armour idea is this hard God invested within. When carved was a boy; it was his On one level it is a sculpture within covering or shell, to something in alabaster, armour reinforced first experience of a sculpture, while on another, it inside it… And it is like, it’s the the viewer’s understanding of and sculpture. Photograph presents us with the tendency of same idea as the shell of a crab or connection to the subject, in order © Cameron Newham. armour to fuse with the person it a lobster or a snail, protecting a to ask for and spur on prayers for protects, creating a living sculpture. very vulnerable form inside it. It is the departed soul. 2. Henry Moore in 1967 Armour was a process, in which a fundamental form idea.’ with Helmet Head Even without fully understanding the artist transformed his patron During his combat service No 2. © The Henry such things, Moore felt the power of Moore Foundation. into a work of art. This idea of a during the First World War, Henry these images, human forms which Photograph © John form within a form, the kinship Moore cannot have failed to see also incorporated other, non-human Hedgecoe. between the armour and the how armour, through its form shapes – almost abstract sculptural wearer, was a constant inhab- alone, could project deep feelings extensions of the body inside. Unlike itant of Moore’s thoughts about and messages. The British ‘Brodie’

Minerva March/April 2019 29 Exhibition

helmet, which he wore while 3. Spanish Prisoner, fighting as a machine-gunner at 1939, lithograph. the Battle of Cambrai in 1917, was 36.5cm x 30.5cm. in its basic shape almost entirely © The Henry Moore Foundation. unlike the fearsome-looking M1916 worn by the Germans. The 4. Standing Figures, fact that Moore did indeed observe 1940, brush and ink, the visual and expressive qualities chalk, crayon, pencil, of the helmets of his own time is watercolour wash. proven by his incorporation of 43.2cm x 25.4cm. aspects of the German helmet’s © The Henry Moore design into Helmet Head No. 1, Foundation. 1950, and his later Helmet Head 5. Head Studies, circa lithographs, 1974–75. In 1980, 1935, pencil on paper. during a conversation with David 22.2cm. x 3.6cm. Mitchinson (his long-time assistant © The Henry Moore and former Head of Collections Foundation: gift of and Exhibitions at Henry Moore the artist 1977. Studios and Gardens) Moore said: ‘The idea of one form inside another form may owe some of its incipient beginnings to my interest at one stage when I discovered armour. I spent many hours in the Wallace Collection, in London, looking at armour’ (from Henry Moore: Writings and Conversations, published by Lund 3 Humphries, 2002). When he first visited the Wallace effortlessly. He could see perfectly side-effect. The makers, however, Collection during the interwar well that the form of an Italian could perceive this process in years, Moore had been well- Renaissance helmet was deter- action as they worked, and often prepared to see and understand mined by the functional demands sought to extend and enhance the the armour displayed there for informing its design, and yet it was aesthetic qualities of their creations the complex thing that it was – clearly much more than an answer to beyond the requirements of purely utilitarian equipment designed the physical problem of how best to practical application. for fighting, which somehow protect the head. When writing about a Renaissance transcended its function to become, A tool that is designed to function Italian helmet, Stephen Grancsay, at the same time, expressive art. He well naturally becomes beautiful. Curator of Arms and Armour at the seems to have sensed this naturally, Initially this occurs almost as a Metropolitan Museum of Art, from 1929–64, described it as ‘sculpture in steel’ (‘Sculpture in Steel: A 4 5 Milanese Renaissance Barbute’, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, January 1963). The modern mind often has trouble with the idea that an object can be both a functional tool and an expressive, even abstract, work of art. For many visitors to the Wallace Collection armouries, the pure sculptural qualities of armour beyond function and decoration can be difficult to see. But Henry Moore clearly saw them. In fact it is possible to follow him through the galleries, tracing the pieces that captivated him and which made their presence felt in his work. He spent hours studying certain, particular artefacts, while largely ignoring many others. What did these special pieces say to him? What did they make him think about? What did he see in them? In 1921, Moore moved from Leeds to London attend the Royal College of Art. At this early point

Minerva March/April 2019 Exhibition

order, as he said, to ‘penetrate our deepest feeling’. With interests such as these, it is perhaps not surprising to discover that Moore was fasci- nated by armour, and helmets in particular. He sensed that they were ‘objects of power’, sculptural forms whose vitality flowed from their function – to protect another. At the same time, armour also appealed to Moore’s awareness of the fundamental importance of anatomy. As he put it: ‘The human body is the basis of all sense of form that all of us have.’ As an artificial exoskeleton, armour is an augmentation of the human anatomy, a sculpted shell accentuating some aspects of the human form while minimising others. Moore’s numerous visits to the Wallace Collection Armoury during the 1930s and 1940s produced a large number 6 of helmet studies drawings made both during and after in his artistic career, Moore had 6. Sheet of Heads Moore remarked that ‘there are trips there. His interest in helmets already been influenced by the Showing Sections, universal shapes to which everybody began to manifest in the mid-1930s writings of the critic Roger Fry 1940, watercolour is subconsciously conditioned, and and, along with it, his fascination wash, crayon, pen (1866–1934), an early advocate of to which they can respond, if their with the relationship between a and ink on paper. non-European art, who introduced Framed: 52.3cm x conscious control does not shut helmet and its interior contents. the idea that an abstract sculptural 61.2cm. © The Henry them off’. Moore’s earliest identifiable helmet form could provoke an emotional Moore Foundation. Universal organic forms have forms are found in a sketchbook response. At the same time, Moore subconscious appeal, an effect dating to circa 1935. The sketches was deeply moved by the work 7. Helmet Head No 1, Moore felt he had to explore in were quickly drawn, recording of late medieval and Renaissance 1950 (cast in 1960), artists, foremost, Albrecht Dürer bronze. 40cm x 35cm x 7 30cm. © Tate London. Moore was fascinated and Michelangelo. His sources of inspiration were diverse. by armour, and In 1929 Moore set up a studio in helmets in Hampstead, which put him within easy reach of the national art collec- particular. tions, which he frequented with enthusiasm. His study visits to the He sensed British Museum and the Victoria that they and Albert Museum are famous. Less well-known is his love of the were ‘objects Wallace Collection, which was of power’, effectively his local art museum. In his correspondence and in sculptural interviews throughout his life, forms whose Moore referred to the ‘many hours’ he spent at the Wallace Collection, vitality flowed and he is explicitly clear on his reason for coming here. He came from their for the armour. function – to Yet, the study of natural forms was the basis of Moore’s creative protect another process, as he explained in 1951 vulnerable ‘…rocks, shells, bones; natural forms as these, along with the structure inside human figure which has been the basis of most of my sculpture.’ Elaborating in 1958 on his study of bones in particular,

Minerva March/April 2019 Exhibition

8 9

variations of basic forms and 8. The Helmet, ‘…whether we know it or not, we are incorporating some early ideas for 1939–40, bronze. 31cm what would become the ‘Internal/ x 24.5cm x 15.5cm. emotionally affected by shape, pure shape, External’ concept. © The Henry Moore Foundation: The earliest signs of Moore’s by roundness, squareness, sharpness…’ interest in the relationship between 9. Helmet Head a hard, shell-like structure and a No 1 [helmet only] 10 soft, more vulnerable interior can 1950, lead. H. 34cm. be traced back to the ink, chalk © The Henry Moore and watercolour drawing Three- Foundation. Quarter Figure, 1928, according to Sebastiano Barassi’s essay, 10. , circa 1380–1400, North ‘A Master in the Making’, in Italy, medium-carbon the catalogue of the Becoming steel, air-cooled. Henry Moore exhibition at the H. 30.8cm. © The Hertfordshire studios in 2017 (Perry Wallace Collection. Green, Henry Moore Foundation). Nevertheless, some of Moore’s helmet vocabulary is already evident. The exterior form or helmet is roughly proportional to the length of the human head and neck combined, with a rounded apex or skull and gently recurving sides which narrow below the apex before flaring back out again at the base. Assuming that his initial experience of armour occurred largely at the Wallace Collection, which is almost certain, a specific group of helmets characterised by these same essential formal attri- butes can be identified. They are all Italian and are distinguished by their smooth, graceful forms and plain, undecorated surfaces. One is a bascinet, or barbut, dating from the late 14th or early 15th century,

32 Minerva March/April 2019 Exhibition

11 12

having a rounded skull brought 11. Helmet Head Collection armouries, but it is and we can follow his method as he to a shallow point at its apex and No. 6, 1975, painted unlikely that he ever drew a realistic took certain aspects of the form of a recurving profile following the plaster. 44cm x 46cm helmet or armour study, despite one helmet, and combined it with contours of the wearer’s head, with x 56cm. The Henry the fact that he was an accom- the face-opening of another. Moore Foundation: the base gently swept out to form a plished draughtsman. Instead, his We can sense him pondering the short neck-guard at the back. 12. , circa 1450, observations stimulated ideas for implication that a helmet must have Crucially, the sides of the helmet North Italy. H. 28cm. abstract forms, which he recorded contained something or someone, have been extended forward near © The Wallace in rough sketches, sometimes an inner nature now mysterious and the base in order to give as much Collection. accompanied by written notes. unknowable ‘…whether we know it protection to the sides of the These initial thoughts were then or not, we are emotionally affected wearer’s face and cheeks as possible, All images are progressed at a later time in more by shape, pure shape, by roundness, without hampering his ability to reproduced by advanced drawings. squareness, sharpness…’ permission of breath and communicate. Moore The Henry Moore This work formed the basis The crucial role played by appears to have made careful Foundation unless for his Helmet Head sculptures, specific helmets and armour in the observations of all of this helmet’s otherwise marked. works created both at the time and Wallace Collection on the work qualities – not just its overall form, in subsequent decades. The earliest of Henry Moore has remained surface and silhouette, but also the sculptural work directly inspired almost completely unknown, in lines traced by its edges and the shape by helmets in the Wallace Collection part because those objects have of the face-opening, the negative is The Helmet, 1939–40, which never been previously identified. space where a face ought to be. in turn was followed by Helmet While his general comments about Almost all of Moore’s statements Head Nos. 1–7, 1950–75, and by visiting the Wallace Collection are about armour cite the Wallace numerous other works, including familiar to Moore specialists, no Collection as the place where he Small Helmet Head, 1950; Helmet one has ever investigated the encountered it, with one exception. Head and Shoulders, 1952; and identities of the objects which In 1967 he told Michael Chase Nuclear Energy, 1967. most interested him. So the precise that the idea for helmet sculptures Remarkably, despite the highly connection between the Wallace may have come from ‘the interest abstracted nature of Moore’s Collection and the Helmet Head I had earlier on in armour, in work, he successfully retained the series and related work has places like the Victoria and Albert essence of the sculptural identity remained obscure – until now. n Museum where one used to wander of the objects that had provided round as a student in the lunch him with such vibrant inspiration. • Henry Moore: The Helmet hours’ (Michael Chase, ‘Moore on A comparison of Moore’s sculp- Heads is on show at The Wallace his Methods’, Christian Science tures and helmets from the Wallace Collection (www.wallacecollection. Monitor, 24 March 1967). Collection reveals much about the org) from 6 March to 23 June 2019. Moore never attempted to artist’s perceptions, his ways of • The accompanying catalogue is reproduce the real appearance of looking, his interests and his inten- published in paperback by Philip any of the helmets he studied. He tions. We can see which aspects of Wilson Publishers and costs £25. probably sketched in the Wallace these objects most appealed to him,

Minerva March/April 2019 33