Apollo and Daphne

Bernini Gian Lorenzo

(Naples 1598 - Rome 1680)

Apollo here is depicted in the act of running, with his right foot touching the ground and his left raised; the garment which covers his sides and left shoulder accompanies his movement. Having attained the goal of his chase, he places his left hand on Daphne’s body. At the god’s touch, the nymph immediately gives up her flight and with her raised arms and face attempts to turn around; yet her feet have already become roots and her hands and hair have been transformed into laurel branches and leaves.

The subject of the sculpture group is the tale told by Ovid in the Metamorphoses: taking vengeance on Apollo, Cupid strikes him with a golden arrow that causes him to fall in love with the nymph Daphne, a follower of Diana. At the same time, Cupid shoots a dart of lead at the maiden, inducing her to reject the love of the god. Daphne begs her father Peneus, a river god, to change her appearance. The sculpture captures the culminating moment of her metamorphosis into a laurel tree. Bernini gives the subject the air of a theatrical performance, allowing the viewer to follow the transformation.

The sculpture was originally placed on one side of the room adjacent to the chapel, where it rested on a lower pedestal than the current one: this arrangement increased the scenographic effect of the work and hence the emotional involvement of the observer.

Object details

Commentary

The subject of the sculpture group comes from Ovid’s Metamorphoses (I, 450-567): taking vengeance on Apollo, Cupid strikes him with an arrow of gold – the noblest of metals – which causes him to fall in love with the nymph Daphne, a follower of Diana. At the same time, Cupid shoots a dart of lead at her, inducing her to reject the love of the god. Daphne begs her father Peneus, a river god, to change her appearance, the cause of so much passion.

The sculpture captures the culminating moment of the maiden’s metamorphosis into a laurel tree. Bernini gives the subject the air of a theatrical performance, allowing the viewer to follow the transformation: having finally attained the goal of his chase, who is already undergoing the transformation of her feet into roots and her hands and hair into laurel branches and leaves. Apollo tries to grasp her, but his fingers find the bark of the tree rather than her body. From that moment, the tree became dear to the god, who wore a crown of its leaves around his head; the laurel wreath would in fact be considered an attribute of artists and poets.

Documentation that has come down to us allows us to follow all the phases of the execution of the sculpture group, beginning with the purchase of the marble block on 2 August 1622: various instalments were then paid to the sculptor beginning in 1624; in March 1625, a payment was made to Agostino Radi for the base; in August of the same year, the work was finally brought to completion; and Bernini received the last payment on 24 November 1625. In all, the sculptor was paid 1,000 scudi for his efforts (Minozzi 1998, pp. 437-40, docs. 61-78). The documents indicate an interruption in the work for nearly a year, during which the sculptor turned his attention to the creation of the David (inv. no. LXXVII), likewise commissioned by Cardinal Scipione Borghese.

Together with other sources, these documents also inform us the work was placed in Room 3, as Bernini had wished: the sculpture was meant to occupy a position in front of the wall that bordered the chapel and the spiral staircase. Here it would focus the observer’s attention on Apollo’s right side and enable her to follow the final phase of the god’s chase, the moment in which his initial conviction of having triumphed is changed into an expression of amazement on his face, as he observed Daphne’s metamorphosis. Thus did Bernini manage to capture an instant in marble which is both narration and emotional experience.

The group further demonstrates the sculptor’s extraordinary technical skill: his ability to carve fingers and toes that are being transformed into leaves and roots and hair that flows backwards; the delicate chiselling of the bark of the tree; and the various degrees of finishing to differentiate the surfaces of the garments from those of the skin of the two protagonists. His sagacious use of the traditional tools of the sculptor’s trade allowed him to render the tale in marble, a subject whose representation was hitherto believed to be possible only through the paintbrush. Analyses conducted on the occasion of restoration work in 1997 revealed that Bernini provisionally wrapped the thinnest and most delicate parts of the work in plaster ‘cushions’ to protect them from vibrations caused by successive stages of the project (Zatti, in Bernini scultore, 2002, p. 202).

In light of the astounding level of detail shown by the work, some scholars have suggested the participation of Giuliano Finelli, one of Bernini’s talented collaborators. While Finelli’s involvement is mentioned by Passeri, in the wake of careful examination of the sculpture modern scholars tend to exclude the possibility of other hands in the project (Minozzi, in Bernini, 2017, p. 178).

As in other works by Bernini, unpolished areas of the sculpted surfaces are evident here, which can be explained by the fact that the sculptor did not believe that they would be viewable, given the group’s intended placement. Yet at the end of the 18th century the family’s collections were rearranged and the rooms redecorated, in the context of the project ordered by Marcantonio IV Borghese. On this occasion, the Apollo and Daphne was moved to the centre of the room, together with the most important ancient statues of the family collection. While on the one hand its inclusion among this prestigious set of works attests to the esteem in which it was held – it was the only representative of modern sculpture – on the other hand the repositioning meant the loss of the privileged location that Bernini had envisioned. Indeed, in accordance with Vincenzo Pacetti’s recommendation (1785), the work was again moved to the position it still has today (in the past, viewers entering the room from the Chapel first saw the group from the back). Yet this arrangement necessitated another title block, to be placed on the side of the base that viewers would first see. This was realised by Lorenzo Cardelli in the form of an eagle with verses taken from Ovid’s Metamorphoses. The title block was meant to serve as the pendant of the original one, in the form of a dragon skin, which was placed on the base at the time of the work’s execution; it was inscribed with the couplet composed by Cardinal Maffeo Barberini: Quisquis amans sequitur fugitivae gaudia formae / formae manus implet baccas seu carpita amaras. The intention of the inscription was to stimulate moral reflection on the part of the viewer. Indeed as early as the late 15th century, Daphne symbolised virtue which flees from hidden dangers and remains pure and evergreen, like the laurel (Coliva, in Bernini scultore, 1998, p. 263).

In addition, the themes of Apollo and the laurel were intended to celebrate the cardinal and the construction of Villa Pinciana, a locus of art and pleasure. For the figure of Apollo Bernini in fact drew inspiration from one of the most famous ancient sculptures in the world, namely the Apollo Belvedere, which he reproduced with philological precision down to the god’s sandals (Coliva in Bernini scultore, 1998, pp. 261, 274 nos. 13, 14).

Bernini also drew on another well-known iconographic model: the detail of the Acis in flight in Annibale Carracci’s fresco Polyphemus, Acis and Galatea in Palazzo Farnese. Daphne’s face, meanwhile, shows the influence of the fleeing mother in the Massacre of the Innocents by Guido Reni, Scipione Borghese’s favourite painter. Critics have further noted similarities with Reni’s Atalanta and Hippomenes, painted for Ferdinando Gonzaga. Both works follow a similar rhythm: while one centres on separation, the other foregrounds reunion, giving rise to an allegorical representation of movement (Coliva, in Bernini scultore, 1998, pp. 272-273; Coliva 2017, pp. 140-144).