Talk:Farnese Atlas

Comment

I would argue that the metopes from Olympia are both sculptures and older than this.87.202.37.185 (talk) 14:40, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Farnese Atlas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050123092730/http://www.cib.na.cnr.it/remuna/mann/mann.html to http://www.cib.na.cnr.it/remuna/mann/mann.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Sphere(s)?

@Paul August: I don't think it's correct to say the statue holds the celestial spheres. Only one sphere is visible, and while "celestial circles" are spoken of by Shaefer, the thing appears to be a celestial globe, rather than a model of the Aristotelian universe. Are you sure this isn't a mistake? GPinkerton (talk) 14:36, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Atlas holds up the Celestial spheres, plural. The Celestial spheres were understood to be actual physical spheres, nested one inside the other. And of course only the outer-most sphere would be visible, in any representation of this. He most certainly does not hold up the Celestial sphere (which would be an anachronism), since this is a modern concept, and is, in any case, an abstract sphere, not cable of being held up. Paul August ☎ 14:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for this? I'm speaking about the statue specifically, and I know what celestial spheres are: the issue I have is that the sources refer to a "celestial globe" (and in one instance, to a "celestial sphere" in a paper that refers to the object as a (celestial) "globe" more than 50 times). Another problem is that, although the sphere of the fixed stars is indeed the outer one, the holes that allow the starlight into the cosmos face inwards, and would not be visible from the outside, still less the shapes they formed. And what is the sphere of the fixed stars when turned inside-out? A celestial globe. I don't know why this should be considered an anachronism; it's already plain this is the oldest surviving example and all the sources refer to it as a "celestial globe" and not once as a series of fictive Matryoshka "celestial spheres". GPinkerton (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't have any sources which refer specifically to the Farnese Atlas, only sources for the mythology of Atlas himself. But the sculpture is dated to the the 2nd-century, and I believe the concept of the Celestial sphere is a modern, and, as I said above is, in any case, an abstract sphere, not a concrete one, and so cannot be held. I believe that the Farnese sculpture depicts Atlas holding up the so-called Celestial Spheres, since that is what the ancients thought Atlas held up. I suspect that the sources describing the sculpture are simply not distinguishing between the ancient "Celestial spheres" and the modern (and hence anachronistic) "Celestial sphere". But, that's only an inference of mine. If the only sources we have describe it as a "celestial globe" without defining what they mean by that term, then perhaps that's what we should call it in the article, with quotes, and with no link at all, since I think a link to "Celestial sphere" is misleading. Paul August ☎ 11:00, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

The statue holds a globe with the constellations on. That type of object is called a celestial globe, and that's how the sources cited in the article refer to it. I don't know why you think the idea of a celestial globe is a modern one. Furthermore, where are you getting the idea Atlas held up Aristotelian cosmic spheres? How could that be, since Atlas stands on the Atlas Mountains on earth, where he can swap positions with Heracles (and back)? Isn't it more normally understood that Atlas holds up the sky? Here we have a statue of a anthropoid titan holding up a model of the night sky. What's the model of the night sky called? A celestial globe. Globes may be terrestrial or celestial; this is clearly the latter. (Who knows, maybe there was a pair - Tellus holding up a terrestrial globe with the nations of the world on.) GPinkerton (talk) 13:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

The link should be to Celestial globe, not to celestial sphere. GPinkerton (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Well yes of course, you are correct that Atlas was said to hold up the "sky" or "heaven" (οὐρανός, e.g. Hesiod, Theogony 551–520; Pindar, Pythian 4.289–290). Although Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound 350–351, does say that Atlas "stands bearing on his shoulders the pillar of heaven and earth". How exactly these ideas were conceived of I don't really know. I've been assuming—perhaps incorrectly—that this was somehow related to the ancient notion of the "Celestial spheres". Depictions of Atlas holding up the sky date from as early as the mid-sixth century BC. Pausanias 5.18.4 describes a now lost depiction of Atlas holding "heaven and earth on his shoulders" on the Chest of Kypselos. There are also several preserved depictions of Atlas (the earliest on a Black-Figure cup by the sixth-century BC potter Nearchos) but I don't know that any of these help us here. In any case, my main objection here has been calling the globe on the scuptures' shoulders "the celestial sphere"—which I still view as incorrect—for the reasons I've given above. Calling it a "celestial globe" seems fine to me, since that is what our sources apparently call it. (And by the way I never said I thought that "the idea of a celestial globe is a modern one", rather it's "the celestial sphere" which I think is modern). However I'm concerned about linking it to our article "Celestial globe", since that article does not have any sources. Can we be certain that what our sources are calling a "celestial globe" is what is being described in that article? Paul August ☎ 14:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

So, my understanding is that the mythology probably predates the acceptance of a round earth. That's not to say that the myths weren't retrofitted to the Aristotelian model in the Classical/Hellenistic period or after, but I would imagine in serious philosophy the idea that the celestial spheres actually rested on anything except the plenum of the primum mobile (from which the starlight emanates through the holes in the sphere of the fixed stars) was dismissed as fable. Of course, that doesn't revoke sculptors' artistic licence, but I would have imagined that depicting the celestial spheres would always be done using something like the armillary sphere, which I think really would not be anachronistic. I'm quite sure that a celestial globe is a model of the stars from beneath just as the terrestrial globe a model of the earth from above. Reference to pillars I suspect has to do with the Pillars of Heracles and the Atlas mountains/Atlantic ocean/garden of the Hesperides concept. The inscription on the chest reported by Pausanias only says Atlas "οὐρανὸν ἔχει" so perhaps Pausanias is over-interpreting? GPinkerton (talk) 14:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps so. Paul August ☎ 14:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

See here. Pausanias 9.20.3 quotes Odyssey 1.152: "baneful Atlas, who knows the depths Of every sea, while he himself holds up the tall pillars, Which keep apart earth and heaven." Ovid had it that Atlas was turned to stone by Perseus, and the resultant Mount Atlas still held the sky apart from the earth. Frazer translates Apollodorus 2.5.119 as "celestial sphere", by Smith & Trzaskoma translate it as "sky". The key seems to be the rationalization of Diodorus 4.26.2: "For Atlas had worked out the science of astrology to a degree surpassing others and had ingeniously discovered the spherical arrangement of the stars, and for that reason was generally believed to be bearing the entire firmament upon his shoulders. Similarly in the case of Herakles, when he had brought to the Greeks the doctrine of the sphere, he gained great fame, as if he had taken over the burden of the firmament which Atlas had borne, since men intimated in this enigmatic way what had actually taken place." GPinkerton (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)