Judith and Holofernes

Susanne Pearce has been thinking about the depictions of the story ‘Judith and Holofernes’. Susanne writes:

‘Her sandal ravished his eyes, her beauty captivated his mind, and the sword severed his neck.’ (Judith 16:9)

Early in August an email from the NGV made reference to an essay in Art Journal 53 about the Gallery’s pair of elaborately carved walnut wedding chests (cassoni).   The story depicted is from the Old Testament and shows how Judith saved the Jews of the besieged town of Bethulia by beheading the Assyrian general, Holofernes.  Judith is shown as a model of valour who maintains the proper feminine virtues of humility, piety and modesty, in keeping with the Book of Judith, and an exemplary figure for a bride to imitate. 

The item struck a chord because one of my favourite Baroque era paintings is Judith beheading Holofernes, 1620 by Artemisia Gentileschi and I had hoped to see it in April this year before the world turned upside down.  It is part of the exhibition, “Artemisia”, at the National Gallery in London which has been postponed to October.

Artemisia Gentileschi was born in Rome in 1593. She was the daughter of the painter, Orazio Gentileschi who was a follower of the revolutionary Baroque painter, Caravaggio.  (The NGV has The Mocking of Christ 1628-35 by Orazio Gentileschi.)  She trained in her father’s studio, in 1616 moved to Florence and around 1640 to Naples. She challenged conventions, made her way in a man’s world, and became one of the pre-eminent artists of the Baroque.

Judith Beheading Holofernes, c.1620 shows a strong, courageous and determined Judith in the throes of hacking off Holofernes’ head, her left arm is rigid as she holds down the head and her right arm taut with the effort of cutting.  The maidservant is no meek secondary figure but is another strong woman, fully involved in the action as she helps to pin Holofernes.  Holofernes writhes about.  The whole canvas is filled with action and drama, magnified by the intense contrasts in light and shade.  It is an excellent example of the trend in Counter-Reformation Baroque art to dramatic realism often with depictions of gruesome martydoms and scenes from the Passion of Christ being common. 

There is an earlier version from 1611-12 which will be on show in October alongside the more well-known 1620 work.

It is also a very powerful painting but is not as gory, (less blood), and shows less of Holofernes’s contorted body.  It was painted shortly after she was raped at age 18 by here tutor, Antonio Tassi, and much writing about Artemisia focusses on this act and the public trial that followed as a source of her anger. Today, Artemisia’s personal life along with her portrayals of Judith and other strong women has led to a view of her as a proto-feminist.  

To return to the 1620 painting. Along with the portrayal of Judith as the virtuous woman, Renaissance art often portrayed her as a violent seductress.  Gentileschi eschews both of these extremes and puts the focus on strong, powerful women. 

From recent readings I have come across a number of interesting elements. 

Medieval thinking developed the idea of Judith, the virtuous woman, as a pre-figuration of the Virgin Mary.  In the Renaissance era with its interest in reclaiming classical tales, Artemis, the Greek goddess of the hunt, was seen as a prefiguration of Judith (and thus also of Mary.)  Detail A makes such a link.  It shows Judith wearing a cameo bracelet which is thought to show depictions of Artemis (the earlier version omits this).  It is placed clearly on her forearm and its importance is enhanced by a spray of Holofernes’ blood which creates an arc in parallel to and just above the curve of the bracelet.  Artemisia’s name mean “gift of Artemis” so she may have been not only playing on trends in religious symbolism but also making her own mark.

The Book of Judith contains the words “now is the time to recover your heritage and to further my plans to crush the enemies arrayed against us”.  The painting would have been read in the 17^th Century as a political allegory of the Church’s striking back against its enemies – not only Protestantism but also Islam. Holofernes’ Assyrian nationality stands in for the encroaching Ottoman Turks.  Thus, the position of the sword upright at the very centre of the painting can be read as a Christian cross.   (See detail B) 

The spectacular spurts of blood in the 1620 version, also bring in another interesting element in that they may allude to Artemisia’s friendship with Galileo.   Artemisia was the first woman appointed to the Accademia del Disegno in Florence and became friendly with Galileo who was also a member. By 1620 he had developed the idea of parabolic trajectory, proved it mathematically, (although the work was not published until later) and illustrated it with drawings of the trajectories of cannonballs.  The blood in the painting follows similar arcs and the curve of blood over her arm above the bracelet would seem to emphasise this. 

Artemisia revisited the story of Judith and Holofernes in three other paintings.

As a final note, it is interesting to compare Artemisia’s version with that of Caravaggio, done in 1598.

Artemisia’s is full of action, with her women fully engaged in the struggle of this violent act. The emotions of the viewer are engaged. Caravaggio’s painting is more like a frieze – the figures appear frozen and the scene is less three dimensional.  Judith is beautiful and physically less strong.  She looks determined but also somewhat removed from the action, coldly viewing the scene with distaste – her brow wrinkles slightly.  The maidservant is old and grimly surveys the scene.

Give me Artemisia’s version any day!

Thank you, Susanne, for your fascinating insights into this well-known story.