Romanesque Architectural Sculpture: The Charles Eliot Norton Lectures
Dale, Thomas, The Art Bulletin
MEYER SCHAPIRO Romanesque Architectural Sculpture: The Charles Eliot Norton Lectures Ed. and intro. Linda Seidel Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. 277 pp.; 70 b/w ills. $40.00
A decade after his death, Meyer Schapiro (1904-1996), the charismatic teacher and scholar of medieval and modern art, associated with Columbia University for almost seventy-five years, remains a source of inspiration and fascination. Schapiro has been canonized among the leading figures of the discipline by an ever-increasing body of critical historiography. New volumes of his selected papers and lectures continue to appear.1 The publication of the Norton Lectures on Romanesque sculpture some forty years after they were delivered at Harvard University in 1967 is particularly welcome, because they present his only broad synthesis of the field and of his own varied methodologies. Carefully edited by Linda Seidel on the basis of a fresh transcription of the original tapes as well as Schapiro's revisions of earlier transcripts, the text captures the author's voice, his passionate descriptions, his wit and erudition. Seidel's informative introduction to the lectures explains their genesis and place in Schapiro's oeuvre and provides a discussion of his exchange of ideas with the Harvard medievalist Arthur Kingsley Porter.
Schapiro's engagement with Romanesque architectural sculpture began with his master's and doctoral theses, completed at Columbia in 1926 and 1929, respectively.2 The subject of both is the sculpture of the church of St-Pierre at Moissac, France, but whereas the former focuses on stylistic development and sources, the latter, broader in conception, includes a reassessment of the rationales for reviving architectural sculpture, a positive characterization of underlying principles of Romanesque sculptural style, and a detailed analysis of iconography with reference not only to religious texts but also to secular music and literature. The dissertation establishes a fundamental premise for all his later scholarship: that form and artistic agency are the essential means of shaping and comprehending meaning in the work of art. Schapiro's breadth of approach has been obscured, however, because his subsequent publications on Romanesque sculpture concentrated almost exclusively on style. He initially published the chapters that concentrated on style, and then he continually republished the same excerpts in different forms.3 Even in his erudite study of the sculpture of Santo Domingo in Silos, Spain, discussions of content remain secondary to an argument about the genesis of a distinctive regional style of Romanesque as a dialogue between native Mozarabic abstraction and the influence of a more naturalistic style brought from neighboring Languedoc during the Christian reconquest of northern Spain.4 This emphasis might be partly explained by his pressing need to counter a competing vision of Romanesque formalism articulated by his French colleagues (see Seidel, p. xxxi). Perhaps more important, however, was his ongoing concern with contemporary art and artistic process and his embrace of Marxist ideas.5 All of these factors led him to champion the artist's role in shaping meaning and highlighting social tensions concealed by the official religious iconography of the Church.
The present volume, comprising seven lectures, displays a holistic integration of form and content, artist and audience. It opens in Lecture 1 with the crucial question of what motivated the revival of architectural sculpture in the eleventh century. Schapiro attributes the decline of public sculpture during the fifth century to the disruption of the highly centralized Roman state's artistic patronage.6 Monumental sculpture reappeared on the exterior of churches in the eleventh century in the wake of monastic reforms, he suggests, because the abbey of Cluny had emerged at the head of a newly centralized order that assumed the Roman state's former role as patron of public art. …