SPECIAL EDITION

MICROSTORY OF ART ONLINE JOURNAL FOR ART, CONNOISSEURSHIP AND CULTURAL JOURNALISM The Salvator Mundi and the French Revolution

(19.12.2022) The readers of my New Salvator Mundi History might know that, personally, I do find the one notoriously famous Salvator Mundi version (version Cook; or the Saudi one, if you do like so) more interesting as a historical object, rather than as an aesthetical object. The journey of this particular version might teach us history, while – on art historical excursions during that cruise – we might also find that Bruegel and Rubens have made more original, more inventive contributions to Salvator Mundi iconography than Leonardo da Vinci, whose contribution is also a little suspect, due to its origins – the origins of the design, not that of the one painting – being probably a Dominican context at the time of the inquisition. An inquisitory gaze, given to Jesus Christ, is the one attribute Leonardo is responsible for. And one may question if this a good reason to praise Leonardo for (but Leonardo seems praiseworthy, to thoughless audiences, for anything, being the one outstanding European intellectual figure that, apparently, never has been deconstructed, since there seems to be a need for the Leonardo myth, as well as a need for a thoughtless genius cult).

One) The Imagery of the Old European Order

The Salvator Mundi iconography is, definitively, part of the imagery of the Old European Order. What do I mean by saying this?
During the period of time that, roughly, begins with Charlemagne and ends with the French Revolution, the universe was thought to be ruled by Jesus Christ, who was thought as a ruler and, more and more, also depicted as a ruler. The orb in the Salvator Mundi iconography is the one attribute of power, the attribute of a ruler, the imperial sign.
We may look back, from the days of Charlemagne, to the Roman Emperors; or we may look into the Book of Revelation, if we would like to get to know the sources from which this iconography is drawing on. (And we may as well look back to the actual historical Jesus, who had little to do with all that which was to follow his appearance on earth.)
But any Salvator Mundi iconography is not merely a depiction of Christ; it is a depiction of the metaphysical side of a whole Political Theology that, also, has a very earthly side. And this in two ways, because a) the earthly (universal) monarchy is thought to mirror Jesus Christ ruling the universe, and one does expect from the actual rulers to keep that in mind, and b) the actual rulers rule, on earth, due to the so-called Divine right of kings. Dei gratia, in Latin, which was a formula introduced by Charlemagne, and, in the wake, was to be found, as medievalists know, on countless charters, on any medieval charter issued by medieval rulers. Hence Jesus Christ, as depicted as a Salvator Mundi, is not just passively depicted, but shown as the one ruler of the universe from which earthly rulers actually get their mandate: Christ does pass this mandate, actively, to certain persons. Dei gratia they get this mandate. By divine grace; by the Divine right of Kings, which, of course, modern philosophers would refer to as being metaphysical rubbish, but this was Political Theology of the Old European Order, not only at the time of absolutistic rulers, but generally, and as such, as Political Theology, this ›rubbish‹ was a social reality. It did exist whether anybody did like it or not. And who did deny it, did face the consequences of denying it. The power of kings and queens was not a completely unrestrained one, since, as one has to add, also restraining powers of the earthly monarchy could be thought as institutions by divine grace.

Two) The Divine Right of Kings

The Divine right of kings is a historical subject which is taught in history classes at school, but it is a legal or philosophical concept that is actually little studied by professional historians. Why? Probably because it is ubiquitous and therefore rather banal, but perhaps the actual reason may be that it is demanding to work oneself through the whole era from Charlemagne to the French Revolution, following something that is rather ubiquitous. There seems to be one encyclopedical project that did, exactly, that, which makes this project more than valuable, and this is the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe encyclopedia, which assembles the histories that basic concepts of European history have, such as the notion ›monarchy‹. In volume 4, published in 1978, p. 133ff. one does get informed on virtually every writer who had something to say on monarchy, from the times of antiquity to the modern age, and here we find virtually anything that is worth to know as to the Divine right of kings (while we do not find this in Wikipedia; where, on the other hand, we may find the picture shown here, a depiction of Charles I, but also a picture illustrating the Divine right of kings).
So if we find Salvator Mundi pictures in Royal collections, in the possession of kings and queens, we should take this rather seriously. We do not find objects that are merely spiritual or aesthetical objects, but display the above, who display the Political Theology, by which kings and queens used to justify their power. Until the French Revolution (and partially also, beyond that watershed).

Three) The French Revolution as a Watershed

The French Revolution, in the history of art, means also two specific watersheds that are relevant here. Firstly the rather banal fact that Royal collections got plundered, dispersed – in the turmoil of revolution. But the turmoil of provenances is not the only aspect that concerns us here. The much more fundamental fact is that the Old European Order of things was history. With the French king decapitated, with the name of God being replaced by the name of the ›Supreme Being‹, the Divine right of kings was determined to end as philosophical rubbish (as modern philosophers have it). The new authority from with a New Order of things was derived was natural law, and natural law was also the authority from which new authorities, new political bodies, were, from now on, being derived.
As to the Salvator Mundi pictures in Royal collections, we may say that, depending of the context and depending on what people chose still to believe, these pictures were still, or could be still spiritual pictures, political pictures (that had to do with the Political Theology of the Old Order), but, from now on, such pictures could also be or become, with secularization progressing, merely aesthetical objects. If art historians of today, however, do chose to view such pictures as merely aesthetical objects, this also has consequences, with one consequence being that, if the specific iconography (the crystalline orb) is offering a very solid reason for dating, art historians with no actual historical knowledge are not able to see that, nor the reason nor that the suggestion for dating (1516-1519) is reasonable and solid, because this suggestion is based on very real political iconography.

Four) After the French Revolution

The French Revolution, among other things, did declare property as being something sacred. Whoever has watched, these days, the interesting four-hours broadcast that ARTE did produce on the notion of property, may learn that, whatever legal construction property is based on – it always has to do with the interests of people. And one interest, one concern, at the time of the French Revolution, was of course the interest of protecting whatever could be still protected, despite all the turmoil.
The Modern Order of things rests on the protection of private property, but the debate of any legal construction brings back the idea that there might be also a social obligation of property. This is rarely discussed in the context of art history, but one does sense that modern audiences do not like a notorious painting to be hidden by its owner. This particular painting, on the other hand, has seen the turbulences of modern day economic history, with enormous raises in its price, but this may be seen, in historical perspective, only as the last chapter in the biography of a painting that actually encompasses European history, from the Old Order to the New one and beyond. But to see this requires to know the history of the Old Order as well as the sources this history was based on and drew on, as to its imagery and specific political iconography, its Political Theology.

MICROSTORY OF ART
ONLINE JOURNAL FOR ART, CONNOISSEURSHIP AND CULTURAL JOURNALISM
HOME

Top of the page

Microstory of Art Main Index

Dietrich Seybold Homepage

© DS