Bust of a Veiled Woman(Felipe Vigarny)
FELIPE BIGARNY
(Langres, France c. 1475 1542 Toledo)
19. Bust of a Veiled Woman
Marble
43 cm (approx. 17 in.)
PROVENANCE: Galeria Caylus, Madrid
Evidently inspired by Roman models of female portraiture, this expressive bust of a veiled
woman was sculpted with a sense of torsion that allows it to be viewed from a variety of
angles, though it was probably made to be displayed in a niche. Since we have no concrete
evidence of the works original provenance, its subject must remain a matter for conjecture.
The idealized features and canonical proportions of this clearly Italianate marble sculpture point
towards a late Renaissance or Mannerist sculptor inspired by the antique. The sculpture was made by
Felipe Bigarny (Felipe Vigarny, Felipe Biguerny or Felipe de Borgoña), a Burgundian-born artist who
worked for almost his entire career in Castile and was one of the key figures responsible for importing
Italian Renaissance motifs into Spanish sculpture during the sixteenth century.
When the bust is viewed frontally, that is, squarely in line with the plinth, as it would no doubt
originally have been installed, the face and hairstyle appear perfectly symmetrical. However, if we draw
an imaginary line down the centre of the face, bisecting it along the vertical axis, we can see that the
parting of the hair is actually to the right of centre, almost as if the sculpture were wearing a wig that
had slipped. Bigarny appears to have deliberately included this asymmetry so that the image would have
appeared utterly balanced in its intended position, and probably worked the block of marble carving
from side to side, first from left to right, and then from right to left. On this same imaginary central
axis, we can also see that the artist divided the face into three equal zones: the forehead, the nose, and
the mouth and chin. The work, therefore, appears to have been based not only on classical models, but
also on classical technique, specifically in the use of point measurement in which the sculptor followed
a formal canon. This was often derived by directly measuring points on the surface of a successful
finished sculpture and working out a geometric formula of proportions to adapt its shape and
individual features to a specific size.1
Bigarny divided the head effectively into six sections: three from top to bottom that are bisected by the
central axis. The facial features are strongly delineated, and a clear curve runs from the brow along the
part of the thick waves of hair that frame the heart-shaped face. This primary curve is flanked by the
two great semicircular areas of the eyes and eyebrows. A third curve describes the jawline containing
the complex interplay of small expressive lines forming the lips and chin.
Bust portraiture, specifically of female subjects, was particularly popular in ancient Rome and reached
its technical zenith during the first and second centuries, partly because both the Julio-Claudian and draperies and facial features, and it is these stylistic variations
that allow us to date the work. The elegantly ornamental sense,
so typical of Bigarny, is evident in the thick serpentine waves of
the hairstyle, arranged in an almost guilloche border at the
brow and temples, before tapering delicately into tiny curls in
front of the ears: a standard formula in Bigarnys workshop.
Also, the almost countless creases and folds of the mantle,
evenly gathered over the shoulders and pinned with an oval
clasp at the centre, is another characteristic feature of Bigarnys
work, beginning with the sculptures at Peñaranda de Duero in
Burgos and continuing up until his death in 1542. These
elegant draperies, which are typical of this artist from 1536
onwards, are also seen in the 1536 choir stalls of the
Monastery of San Clemente in Toledo (Fig. 1), as well as in the
family tomb of Bishop Diego de Avellaneda (Valladolid, Museo
Nacional de Escultura; Figs. 2a, b, c).2
Clearly no cartouche was ever attached to the pedestal base
identifying the subject, as would have been the custom in the
sixteenth century, and the deep emotionalism in the face argues
against the work having been any sort of specific portrait. To
understand the works original context we would be better
served by examining it within the context of how such
sculptures were incorporated into different areas of
Renaissance architecture. The bust truncates at the upper torso
into a sharp curve, in the manner of Roman portrait busts or
tondos, and is slightly less than life size. As with Italianate examples that would have been installed in
niches, the head is pushed slightly forward, to make it more visible, but this pose also adds a sense of
expressive energy.
The bust is strongly reminiscent of the aforementioned sculptures in the Palace of Peñaranda de Duero
in Burgos (Figs. 3, 4), a singular work of architecture built around 1530 by Don Francisco de Zúñiga
y Avellaneda, third Count of Miranda and Viceroy of Navarre and Naples. The palace is a wonderful
example of the so-called Plateresque style3 that swept Castile in the first half of the sixteenth century.4
Throughout the palace the elegantly proportioned arcades, storied courtyards, staircases and the
coffered ceilings of the halls were decorated with busts very similar to the present sculpture, all of
superb quality and apparently of the same facture, with one outstanding exception. According to
traditional accounts, there were two Roman busts placed in the portal of the palace. These had come
from nearby Clunia, the site of an important Roman city from the first century BC through the third
century AD. Situated between Coruña de Conde and Peñalba de Castro, in southern Burgos, Clunia and
its ruins later served as a quarry for the surrounding towns. At some time, Bigarny must have worked on the palace at Peñaranda del Duero, as the entire town was effectively a building site in the early
sixteenth century devoted to its construction. And though we have no documented proof to support
this, we do know that by 1530, when Bigarny was well established, he had already worked for the Prior
of Covarrubias, and either the brother or the son of the Count of Miranda, possibly even both.5
The entire palace, and particularly the main portal, was decorated in the Roman style, with pilasters
covered with garlands, laurel crowns and heralds, and an inscription on the entablature made reference
to the ancient busts from Clunia. These were installed over pilasters flanking the main entrance. One
of these sculptures has disappeared; the other, which is of limestone, is now so deteriorated it is
impossible tell whether it was even antique. But it appears most likely that its subject was noble, and
possibly ancient, because on the facade of the Collegiate Church, just opposite the palace, there are
three marble busts that appear to be Roman copies, which were brought from Naples by Franciscos
descendent, Don Juan de Zúñiga y Avellaneda (15861595) who was then Viceroy.6
In his work Ingeniosa comparación de lo antiguo con lo moderno,7 Cristóbal de Villalón Bigarnys
contemporary recounted seeing a sculpture from Clunia, a porphyry portrait of Brutuss wife Portia,
held by our master sculptor Felipe […] which he says once belonged to the emperor, made of the type
of marble that few men know how to work, not even if they had diamond tipped tools […] and all the
time in the world […] he [Bigarny] did not believe it could be the work of a mortal man […] pointing
out how natural the veins, wrinkles and so forth appeared. Bigarny was particularly shrewd in using the current reverence for the antique in order to promote his own
career, collaborating in the acquisition of antiquities for the nascent
royal collections. His knowledge of ancient art is also evident in the
style and techniques he employed in his own work. Along with
Alonso Berruguete, he was one of the first true Renaissance artists
working in Spain who fully appreciated and understood how to use
antique models to illustrate religious subjects, while maintaining the
essence of the ancient ideals without resorting to dry imitation.8
Villalón argued the pre-eminence of contemporary art over its
antique models and stated: Sculpture in todays Spain currently has
two masters: Felipe and [Diego de] Siloë, whose excellence
illuminates and clarifies our age, because neither Phidias nor
Praxiteles, the great sculptors of the antique, can be compared to
them. Bigarny particularly stands out amongst the artists referenced
in artistic literature published during the first half of the sixteenth
century, and his work was highly praised in his own day. He
consorted with erudite humanists, contributed to the most esoteric
discussions on the nature of contemporary art and art forms and
knew several important collections of classical coins, sculptures and
artefacts that were being formed by Spanish humanists at that time.
One reference to Bigarnys knowledge of ancient Rome relates to
Antonio de Guevara (1480?1545),9 who was himself Burgundian, a
collector of art and antiquities, and one of the great authorities on
the antique. Guevara had close personal contacts to several of
Bigarnys colleagues in 1530s Valladolid, and in his Epístolas
Familiares10 he recounts several archaeological curiosities and
references to current artworks, as well as a long-winded account of
Portias suicide (according to tradition, she swallowed live coals). It
was largely due to figures such as Guevara11 that Spanish artists like
Bigarny could reinterpret lesser known ancient subjects (like the
death of Portia) at this early stage of their Renaissance.12 Equally,
however, Bigarnys appreciation of the antique must have been
informed by direct access to collections, such as those belonging to
the Dukes of Medinaceli and housed in their Palace of Cogolludo in
Guadalajara, near to Peñaranda del Duero.13 Not only did these
collections provide artists like Bigarny with models for architecture,
sculpture and painting, they also served to advertise the cultural
status and gravitas of their owner; such an informed and educated
figure as Bigarny would have been all too aware of how this latter
purpose might be used to his own advantage.
While Bigarny must have based the exhibited
work on an antique model, he nevertheless
sculpted the face according to his own
interpretation of the subject demanded. In effect,
the work is partly a copy after the antique and
partly a variation on an antique theme. It is a
sculpture that is theoretically antique in that it
illustrates a classical ideal of feminine beauty, in
which the artists implicitly adhered to formal
principles of proportion and symmetry. One of the
first theoretical treatises in Roman art was written
in 1526 by Diego del Sagrado. In his work
Medidas del Romano, Sagrado held Bigarny up as
a master of sculpture, defining him as a true
modern, and this, before the nature of the antique
had even been clearly defined in Spanish art.
In this sculpture, Bigarny captured the measured
refinement, the mathematical relationship
between the various parts and their symmetrical
harmonious convergence into a whole that is the
very essence of the antique. Based on similarities
with reliefs by Bigarny depicting other feminine
subjects, the bust should probably be dated to
after 1536 and may have been thematically
inspired by Bigarnys participation in one of the
humanist circles of the time. With his knowledge
of ancient forms and technique, Bigarny could
easily have made a faithful copy after a Roman
model, but, instead, added manifold details and
variations to an antique form, focusing on each
individual part of the work throughout the
creative process. It is perhaps for this reason that
he arguably eschewed frontal symmetry in the
face, though this could be the result of an error in polishing the marble. It is highly unlikely that this
work is a workshop copy made after one of Bigarnys own models. While the point-to-point technique
was well known in his workshop, the variety of incidental detail throughout the work (the tendrils of
the hair, the drapery folds, the calligraphic lines and volutes that delineate the facial features) point to
the autograph hand of Bigarny himself. Such a level of detail would have been remarkably difficult to
reproduce in a copy, and possibly pointless if such a work were reproduced in multiple copies, to be
used as architectural motifs, for example.
1 The first theoretical Spanish treatise on the subject was
written in 1526 by Diego del Sagredo in his famous work
Medidas del Romano in which he sets out the fundamental
principles of canonical proportioning of the human according
to the 9:1 ratio of Polyclitus and cites Bigarnys improvement
of this classical formula by increasing it by one third.
2 Tomb of Don Diego de Avellaneda and Isabella de Proaño,
Madrid, private collection, c. 15361542.
3 This ornate architectural style was derived largely from
late Gothic styles in the Low Countries, namely the Florid
and Brabant styles, and is characterized by ornate surface
decoration. It was particularly popular in Salamanca,
reaching its peak in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth
centuries, and was later transferred to Spanish-owned
colonies in the Americas. It is considered to be the last phase
of Gothic in Spain before the adoption of Italianate forms.
The term means in the manner of a silversmith (plata
meaning silver in Spanish) and was coined by Cristóbal de
Villalón around 1539 in his description of the facade of the
Cathedral of León.
4 In 1531, the Grandee of Spain was invested in the
Cathedral of Tournai. One of his sons, Juan de Zúñiga y
Avellaneda, was tutor to Prince Philip from 1535 until his
death in 1546.
5 I. DEL RÍO DE LA HOZ, El Escultor Felipe Bigarny (h.
14701542), Junta de Catilla y León, 2001, pp. 327328.
6 M. JOSÉ ZAPARAÍN, El arte en la Ribera del Duero.
7 This book is in the collection of the British Museum. Cited
in F. J. SÁNCHEZ CANTÓN, Fuentes Literarias para la Historia
del Arte Español, vol. I, pp. 27, 29. Villalóns treatise is
basically a dialogue in which he debates whether there were
wiser, more inventive figures in the sciences and arts, in the
ancient past or in the present.
8 M. C. GARCÍA GAINZA, Alonso Berruguete y la Antigüedad,
in Boletín del Museo Nacional de Escultura, 2002, pp. 1521.
9 Bigarny was remarkably well connected in this respect.
Guevara, who was also Constable of Castile, was cousin to
the Count of Miranda and related to the Duke of Bejar, who
were also connected by their involvement in the Emperors
various military campaigns. See A. REDONDO, Antonio de
Guevara (1480?1545) et l´Espagne de son temps, Geneva,
p. 115, under note 128.
10 First published in Valladolid (1542), these are a collection
of essays on a wide variety of cultural and social issues and
their associated practices. While Guevaras writings were
often later criticized for inconsistencies and falsification of
sources, they were also treasured for their linguistic beauty
and sophisticated phrasings. Guevara is even credited with
having Latinized the Castilian language, that is, giving it
greater cadence and rhythm. See Obras Completas de Fray
Antonio de Guevara, Biblioteca Castro, Fundación José
Antonio de Castro, Madrid 1994, vol. II, pp. 1943.
11 SÁNCHEZ CANTÓN, Fuentes Literarias cit., vol. I, p. 155.
Guevaras main field of scholarship was archaeology and he
wrote a treatise on Roman coins. A collector of the diverse
and unusual, Guevara also made plaster casts of coins and
sculptures, and wrote a treatise on painting, Comentarios a
la Pintura.
12 An edition of Guevaras Comentarios a la Pintura was
published in 1788 by Antonio Ponz.
13 Archaeological excavations of the palace patio unearthed
a life-sized sculpture of a woman, signed Aphrodisias, and
dating to the second century. It is now in the Museo
Provincial in Guadalajara. Another Aphrodite from
Aphrodisias was found in Beja, Portugal, on the site of the
Roman settlement of Pax Julia. See P. NÖLKE, Zwei
unbekännte Repliken der Aphrodite von Aphrosias in Köln,
in Arkäologischer Anzeiger, no. 98, vol. 1, pp. 107131.
197
While Bigarny must have based the exhibited
work on an antique model, he nevertheless
sculpted the face according to his own
interpretation of the subject demanded. In effect,
the work is partly a copy after the antique and
partly a variation on an antique theme. It is a
sculpture that is theoretically antique in that it
illustrates a classical ideal of feminine beauty, in
which the artists implicitly adhered to formal
principles of proportion and symmetry. One of the
first theoretical treatises in Roman art was written
in 1526 by Diego del Sagrado. In his work
Medidas del Romano, Sagrado held Bigarny up as
a master of sculpture, defining him as a true
modern, and this, before the nature of the antique
had even been clearly defined in Spanish art.
In this sculpture, Bigarny captured the measured
refinement, the mathematical relationship
between the various parts and their symmetrical
harmonious convergence into a whole that is the
very essence of the antique. Based on similarities
with reliefs by Bigarny depicting other feminine
subjects, the bust should probably be dated to
after 1536 and may have been thematically
inspired by Bigarnys participation in one of the
humanist circles of the time. With his knowledge
of ancient forms and technique, Bigarny could
easily have made a faithful copy after a Roman
model, but, instead, added manifold details and
variations to an antique form, focusing on each
individual part of the work throughout the
creative process. It is perhaps for this reason that
he arguably eschewed frontal symmetry in the
face, though this could be the result of an error in polishing the marble. It is highly unlikely that this
work is a workshop copy made after one of Bigarnys own models. While the point-to-point technique
was well known in his workshop, the variety of incidental detail throughout the work (the tendrils of
the hair, the drapery folds, the calligraphic lines and volutes that delineate the facial features) point to
the autograph hand of Bigarny himself. Such a level of detail would have been remarkably difficult to
reproduce in a copy, and possibly pointless if such a work were reproduced in multiple copies, to be
used as architectural motifs, for example.
196
Galeria Caylus, Madrid