Armor Garniture, Probably of King Henry VIII of England (reigned 1509–47)
Image source
This piece was created with steel, gold, copper alloy, and leather by Hans Holbein the Younger. It is 73 inches tall and weighs 62 pounds. It was created in 1572 in Greenwich England, and is believed to have been gifted to king Henry VIII.
This piece was to be worn as armour and is extremely intricate. It has multiple pieces and parts that would have to be put on one at a time. It also is engraved throughout the majority of the piece depicting past battles. This is known to be the most decorative of the collection. The armour is made from gold and copper alloy making it look very luxurious and be shiny and not functioning as camouflage. All of the limbs are bigger, so even if the person in the armour did not have bigger muscles, it would appear they did. The piece also includes lots of horizontal lines, which are known to make the person wearing them appear wider. However, to compensate them the main chest piece slants into what appears to be a waistline, making the wearer look thinner. The armour's head piece also is opaque except for eye and eye holes, and also has a fin like structure on top. The shoe portion comes to a flat end and has spurs on the back. The gloves have a triangular metal piece covering the first joint of the fingers.
This piece was created for use in battle and tournament and was most likely given and used by the king. This piece has many aspects which would not be useful in actual battle, such as the color, shoes, and gloves, which reflect that the king did not actively participate in many battles in many battles but the gift was more ceremonial. The purpose of the engravings was for the artist to show the King/wearer that the country had reached where it was not on the backs of many sufferings and deaths of the people and that it was their sacrifice which made them what they were. This piece is starkly different than modern military wear and signifies that was used to be considered a true art form. In today's context, this would show that leaders are not the ones on the ground floor doing the dirty work and that they need reminders of what is going on outside of the immediate government.
I like how you included background information as to what the art was actually used for. It was cool that you analyzed it so specifically that I started to view the entire art structure in a different way. I think its important to understand the motivations and significance behind an art piece and you were able to analyze both effectively. These works of art are evident of how visually art can be symbolic of very important historical facts and understandings.
ReplyDeleteSome good thoughts here, but I definitely think more could be done with analysis- the what into the how. Using the questions provided in the post assignment would have fleshed out your response.
ReplyDelete