ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI XXXV/XXXVI ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI XXXV/XXXVI 2010/11 ROMAE MMX-MMXI ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI XXXV-XXXVI © 2011 Accademia di Danimarca ISSN 2035-2506 Published with the support of a grant from: Det Frie Forskningsråd / Kultur og Kommunikation SCIENTIFIC BOARD Ove Hornby (Bestyrelsesformand, Det Danske Institut i Rom) Jesper Carlsen (Syddansk Universitet) Astrid Elbek (Det Jyske Musikkonservatorium) Karsten Friis-Jensen (Københavns Universitet) Helge Gamrath (Aalborg Universitet) Maria Fabricius Hansen (Ny Carlsbergfondet) Michael Herslund (Copenhagen Business School) Hannemarie Ragn Jensen (Københavns Universitet) Kurt Villads Jensen (Syddansk Universitet) Mogens Nykjær (Aarhus Universitet) Gunnar Ortmann (Det Danske Ambassade i Rom) Bodil Bundgaard Rasmussen (Nationalmuseet, København) Birger Riis-Jørgensen (Det Danske Ambassade i Rom) Lene Schøsler (Københavns Universitet) Poul Schülein (Arkitema, København) Anne Sejten (Roskilde Universitet) EDITORIAL BOARD Marianne Pade (Chair of Editorial Board, Det Danske Institut i Rom) Erik Bach (Det Danske Institut i Rom) Patrick Kragelund (Danmarks Kunstbibliotek) Gitte Lønstrup Dal Santo (Det Danske Institut i Rom) Gert Sørensen (Københavns Universitet) Birgit Tang (Det Danske Institut i Rom) Maria Adelaide Zocchi (Det Danske Institut i Rom) Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. — Vol. I (1960) — . Copenhagen: Munksgaard. From 1985: Rome, «L’ERMA» di Bretschneider. From 2007 (online): Accademia di Danimarca ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI encourages scholarly contributions within the Academy’s research fields. All contributions will be peer reviewed. Manuscripts to be considered for publication should be sent to: [email protected]. Authors are requested to consult the journal’s guidelines at www.acdan.it. Contents STINE BIRK Third-Century Sarcophagi from the City of Rome: A Chronological Reappraisal 7 URSULA LEHMANN-BROCKHAUS Asger Jorn: Il grande rilievo nell’Aarhus Statsgymnasium 31 METTE MIDTGÅRD MADSEN: Sonne’s Frieze versus Salto’s Reconstruction. Ethical and Practical Reflections on a New Reconstruction of the Frieze on Thorvaldsens Museum 61 ERIK HANSEN, JØRGEN NIELSEN, JESPER ASSERBO e TONNY JESPERSEN: Due cupole a Villa Adriana. Calcoli statici 83 JØRGEN NIELSEN A/S, TONNY JESPERSEN, JESPER ASSERBO: Investigazioni statiche sull’edificio romano della “Piazza d’Oro” a Villa Adriana 101 PETER DYRBY: Genre and Intertextuality as a Dialogical Narrative Strategy for the Migrant Writer 119 Sonne’s Frieze versus Salto’s Reconstruction Ethical and Practical Reflections on a Reconstruction of the Frieze on Thorvaldsens Museum by METTE MIDTGÅRD MADSEN Abstract. In the 1950s, Axel Salto undertook a reconstruction of Jørgen Sonne’s Frieze at Thorvaldsens Museum.Today, the appearance of the reconstructed frieze has, unfortunately, become rather uneven due to an irregular decomposition of the frieze’s fifty panels; whilst some of the panels are badly damaged, others appear almost intact. This article examines the possibilities of reconstructing sections of the cement-plastered reconstruction of Sonne’s Frieze. Since the use of existing conservation techniques, such as cleaning and retouching, do not allow for the recreation of the harmony in the frieze, the aim of this article is to explore the possibilities of reconstructing the most badly damaged panels in order to allow the frieze to appear as a coherent ensemble. More specifically, the current work provides an answer as to whether conservators today are able to make a successful reconstruction of Sonne’s Frieze, both in terms of substitute materials and contemporary expertise. Introduction Yet, the most remarkable thing about the The first public museum in Denmark opened exterior of the museum is the large pictorial in 1848. It was built to house the works of the frieze that adorns three of its outer walls and famous Danish sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen, covers an area of 260 square metres. It is this and today it contains nearly all the artist’s orig- unusual frieze which is the subject of this arti- inal models for his sculptures, drawings and cle. The frieze was created by the artist Jørgen sketches and his extensive collection of con- Sonne and caused quite a stir at the time of temporary art and collection of Greek, Roman its creation. Work on the frieze began in 1846 and Egyptian antiquities. Thorvaldsens and was concluded in 1850, two years after the Museum is impressive not only on account of opening of the museum. The technique, used its collection, but also on account of the mu- for the making of the frieze, is called ‘cement seum building itself. It is situated in the very mosaic’, or the ‘cement intarsia technique’. It centre of Copenhagen next to Christiansborg is described in some detail later in this article. Palace. With its vibrant colours and highly The frieze can be seen as a huge history original architecture, it is without doubt one painting showing Thorvaldsen’s arrival in of the most remarkable and distinctive build- Copenhagen in 1838, after he had spent more ings in Denmark. The museum’s architect than forty years in Rome. But it can also be was the young Michael Gottlieb Bindesbøll. seen as a symbol of the political movement He designed the museum with an interior in- at that time and the emerging middle class spired by Roman wall paintings in Pompeii in Denmark. However the best descrip- and Herculaneum, while inspiration from tion of the frieze is perhaps that it show Greek polychromy is evident in the exterior.1 “scenes that celebrate the saga of its foun- 62 METTE MIDTGÅRD MADSEN dation”.2 The importance of this descrip- seum’s foundation must be seen. It is a context tion will become obvious in the following. involving not just a long and eventful story Although some people found the building about the creation of Denmark’s first muse- and the frieze tasteless in 1850, Bindesbøll and um building designed as such from the start. Sonne are now recognized for having created It also reflects Danish society at the time, in- one of Copenhagen’s most distinctive land- cluding the strong political trends that were marks; a landmark which, in order to maintain then coming to the fore. After the state bank- its characteristic appearance and its artistic ruptcy in 1813, there was value, has been restored again and again ever an troubled atmosphere in since its creation. The most extensive restora- Denmark, and when first tion of the exterior of Thorvaldens Museum the fleet was lost and then took place from 1950 to 1959. The coloured Norway next, many Danes plaster on the walls was renovated, and the felt that the only thing frieze detached and replaced by a reconstruc- that Denmark could take tion produced by a team led by the artist Axel pride in was her world- Salto. This rather drastic restoration was un- famous sculptor Bertel dertaken because the building was very dirty Thorvaldsen. Thorvaldsen Fig. 1. Salto’s and dilapidated, and the frieze had become so was much admired both Reconstruction; portrait of Thor- decayed that a large part of its important figu- in monarchical circles and valdsen (photo: rative elements was no longer recognizable. by the middle class. He author). Today most of the building stands in clean was particularly popular bright colours, as the facades have just un- with the National Liberals, a new politically dergone a new conservation treatment. The engaged part of the middle class, who had treatment was undertaken in 2001 and in lost patience with the absolute monarchy and 2006-2008, when the exterior was cleaned, wanted a constitutional government. To this repaired and consolidated. However, since group Thorvaldsen, who came from the lower weather, wind and air pollution have caused classes in Copenhagen, was a role model: he severe decay in some areas of the frieze, the had prooved that talent could be found within conservation treatment has proved insuf- any class, and not just within the aristocracy. ficient to restore the reconstructed frieze to So it was not only among the supporters of its former glory. So the question that this the monarchy, but also among the emerg- article explores is whether it is a viable op- ing middle class in Denmark that there was a tion to carry out a new reconstruction, either significant interest in creating a museum for complete or partial, of the frieze, and thereby Thorvaldsen’s works. And when Thorvaldsen restore the vividness of its polychromy and decided to leave his sculptures and art collec- its clear figurative narrative. In other words, is a reconstruction practically feasible and ethically acceptable? And, if so, do con- temporary conservators possess the knowl- edge, skills, and materials to undertake such a reconstruction with a successful outcome? Thorvaldsens Museum To understand the significance of the Thorvalsen Museum, and hence the reason why the frieze should not be allowed to decay beyond recognition, it may be useful to briefly Fig. 2. Thorvaldsens Museum, the west facade after the outline the historical context in which the mu- restoration in 2006 (photo: author). SONNE’S FRIEZE VERSUS SALTO’S RECONSTRUCTION 63 tion to the city of Copenhagen in 1838, the time: namely, a polychrome frieze, showing bequest was widely hailed as a great triumph.3 Thorvaldsen’s homecoming to Copenhagen Most of the resources for the construc- in 1838. Bindesbøll chose the painter Jørgen tion of the new museum were collected by Sonne to design the frieze. Bindesbøll and the middle class through a public fundrais- Sonne had been fellow students at the Royal ing campaign. The site for the museum was Danish Academy of Fine Arts and had spent donated by King Frederik VI in the form of time in Rome together. Yet, it is possible an old building housing the royal coaches on that the decision to choose Sonne was not the canal bank next to Christiansborg Palace.4 just Bindesbøll’s, it was also based on advice As mentioned above, the architect Michael from the influential art historian, Niels Laurits Gottlieb Bindesbøll, who knew Thorvaldsen Høyen.