: Donatello’s

David: A Prophetic Image

Challenging

Today’s Church

A Reflective Essay Based on

The Sculptural Complexity

Of A Renaissance Image

And How it Embodies

Scriptural Content

Mary John Zore

. Donatello’s David: A Prophetic Image

Challenging Today’s Church

By Mary John Zore

. I believe that Catholic art, for the willing pilgrim, has many possibilities of visual, and

intellectual epiphanies frozen in the timeless visual forms of paintings, sculptures, stained

glass windows or the architectural form of churches. A moment comes silently, as we fo-

cus on the visual form of the artwork, and by some granting of grace, a hidden meaning,

a revelation—comes to light, similar to the process of mental prayer and meditation.

My time in the classroom trying to encourage undergraduate students to experience

these revelatory moments has also made me painfully aware of how Catholic culture has

been impeded by ignorance of iconography over time. One example is the moment in

every semester in the basic ‘Art Appreciation’ course, which I teach to undergraduates,

when we look at the Renaissance and the ‘David:’ theme, so important to the sculpture

tradition of that time period and I ask the obvious question: ‘How many present know the

story from the Old Testament, which is the basis for these David and Goliath sculptures?’

So often, a pitiful, 4 or 5 students out of the 30 some present, may raise their hand. I can

only hope some are not being completely honest and are simply ignoring the question.

The duel problem of the basic ignorance of many students concerning biblical

themes and symbols as well as the challenge some students may have ,to become fo-

cused and simply look at one object for an extended amount of time in order to study it,

analyze it, assess it, and make connections and associations that have a sound basis,

certainly makes teaching the full meaning of these statues or any artwork, that much

more challenging. Catholic artwork especially has a trademark of being ‘metaphysical’ in

its nature making this process very important. In terms of ‘seeing’ the art. But even mod-

ern day scholars, I fear, can miss the mark, since we have fallen so far away from

‘remembering’ the tenants of our faith, which would have been so clear to artists of other

time periods. Many websites now proclaim that the Renaissance Italian artists were to-

tally secular humanists. These websites claim that religious imagery is only a cover for

political and social themes. I can understand that political/ social implications would be in

the imagery but not that the religious meaning is lacking or not there at all. Indeed the ap-

proach of these artists was closer to the idea of ‘incarnating’ spirit with form, something

very natural to a Catholic cultural-view based on a religion whose central teachings in-

cludes God incarnate in the person of Christ

One semester, as I was showing Donatello’s David on the classroom projector, I

purposefully zoomed in for a close-up on the helmeted head of Goliath laying at David’s

feet. While the students viewed the detail of the relief image, which shows the Ark of the

Covenant being stolen by the Philistines. I pointed to the helmet and out of my mouth I

heard these words, hardly knowing from whence they had come, “…and here, Donatello

has identified for the viewer just who he considers ‘Goliath’ to be, and it is anyone who

would steal the Presence of God from His people”. The words came quickly from my

mouth and truly I felt as if someone else was standing there speaking them, for they sur-

prised even me! Not missing a beat however, I explained what the Ark of the Covenant

was and the significance it had for the Israelites as it contained the sacred “Presence” of

God in their Tabernacle Tent. .

The ‘David and Goliath’ theme in the Renaissance has been argued over time and by

many modern scholars, all of whom, offer various interpretations giving the theme a con-

tent that is multi-leveled and complex, politically, historically, philosophically as well as

religiously. Much like scripture there seems to be a literal content to this art as well as

many other levels, which can be revealed through reflection and insight as layers of reli-

gious, political, even personal symbolic aspects become apparent to a viewer along with

the obvious literal interpretation. The reference to the Ark of the Covenant must have

been quite controversial during a time period prior to the Reformation when some de-

nominations would actually remove the reserved Eucharist and tabernacle from churches

and the belief in Christ’s True Presence was questioned and redefined in different ways..

.As I wrestled with the many different aspects of Donatello’s sculptural representation

of David I began to see more and more that it really is one of those artworks that stands

on the shoulders of art history with a message that rings as loud, clear and truthful in the

day it was created as it does for the present day viewer, I hope that I can share some of

my own reflections on how this amazing sculpture reaches into the heart of so many diffi-

cult and controversial issues.

The first theme of Donatello’s ‘David”, which strikes us head on, has to do with the

sensual nature of the sculpture. No one, not even the most ignorant of viewer, can look at

this caste bronze image of a youthful nude male, with his adolescent curves, sensuous

pose, fluid hair, smooth, flawless skin and effeminate qualities, without considering that

there is some inherent theme of sensuality/sexuality present in the sculpture. Many mod-

ern scholars discuss this aspect related to the historic evidence that adolescent males

were often introduced to sexuality in the Florentine society by older males before they

were latter married in their twenties, despite the fact that this was a criminal act. This can

be seen in that court records from that time period, show that it was a commonly re-

peated scenario in Florentine society on the part of an older man, who would approach

and seduce the younger male, almost like a rite of passage. According to some accounts

this was done by the stealing of some form of personal property, often the hat of the

younger man (Michael Rocke’s accounts from court cases in the 1400s), which would not be given

back until the younger man agreed to the sexual act. (“Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality

and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence” by Michael Rocke, Oxford University press, 1996). Being

caught in an act of sodomy would have been a punishable crime for the perpetrator; how-

ever, it appears to some historians (Michael Rocke) as though society did not deem this act

as a crime that would tarnish a man’s masculine identity, but that it was seen as a crime

stemming from male virility. All this was quite common, according to author Michael

Rocke, who has written extensively about the fifteenth century night courts and their re-

cordings of this fairly common type of male-to-male relationship.. Perhaps this accounts

for the floppy hat so noticeably placed on the head of Donatello’s ‘David’.

Thus Donatello’s ‘David’ would have noticeably struck a cord in this culture as a tanta-

lizing visual representation of a major societal fault, a crime, that was almost habitual in

Florentine society and possibly something that Donatello, himself, had been accused of

behind his back by local gossips for he is known to have had youthful male companions

(artist workshops were normally filled with young male apprentices) One must ponder,

could the artist have made the sculpture partly as a way of answering those gossiping ri-

vals and critics by alluding to the truth or untruth of their idle talk? Was Donatello toying

with his critics and cleverly placing before them an image which confronted them, turning

their idle gossip into a taunt and even a form of accusation directed back at them.

Indeed, for some modern scholars who argue for their own purposes the normalcy of

homosexuality in other times and places, the Donatello ‘David” sculpture has become an

instrument for supporting their political/social ends. You can still find various scholars ar-

guing that Donatello did commit this crime, continuing the gossip of his own era. (Easy to

do when the dead person can no longer respond to your claims.) But I would agree with

others, that Donatello is taking a decidedly Catholic view and portraying this young David

as an adolescent who has avoided the temptation and the sin and conquered the source

of lust, which would have stolen the “Presence” of God from his soul. Indeed, the ‘David”

statue argues strongly for purity and chastity rather than for any sin of impropriety. How

do I support this point of view?

When scrutinized the sculpture has some clear clues in this regard. For one, the statue

clearly has that hat, so beautifully floppy and obviously secure on the young man’s head

while at the feet of David is the severed head of Goliath almost as a rebuke to any ac-

cuser. Another aspect of the sculpture to be considered is its original location and how

viewers would have approached it.

Donatello’s ‘David’ would have originally stood raised on a base, which placed it

above any viewer’s own head, in a garden courtyard of the Medici family as a central fo-

cus. (Sarah Blake McHam, “Donatello’s bronze David and Judith as Metaphors of Medici rule in Florence”,

The Art Bulletin, March 01, 2001). The curvaceous youth would have been placed in such a

way that viewers were well beneath it and would have been looking upward at the figure

of David, while at their eye level would have been the severed head of Goliath (McHam).

Donatello placed Goliath’s head in such a manner (eye to eye with the viewer) to show

them their own base nature, which would have been revealed by their very own thoughts,

if any of them even dared to look upward in a lustfully manner at the youthful David or to

entertain such improper thoughts about Donatello and his youthful companions. The

stone embedded in the middle of Goliath’s forehead seems aimed deftly at the viewer as

well, almost like a ‘seeing eye’, which reveals the inner truth of the viewer’s thoughts and

soul. Donatello’s ‘David’ is a sculptured as a mirror, and the viewer who gazes into it,

must reveal his own identity: and answer the question “are you a Goliath or a David?”.

Looking at the image further, we can see David as a symbol of a victorious pre-original

sin Adam, who has conquered the tempter’s trap and indeed destroyed the tempter

(crushed the head).. Like Christ, who crushes Satan’s head, this youthful ‘David’ stands

in the Medici garden free of the shame of any sin and unself-conscious of his obvious nu-

dity (this statue represented the first free standing male nude since antiquity). David’s vul-

nerability emphasized by the nudity and frontal, open pose, bespeaks of a compelling

statement about the ‘goodness’ of the human form, created by God in His own image.

The nudity speaks of David’s innocence as well as his wisdom. Donatello is giving a small

homily here and the content is very much a ‘theology of the body’. Since David is the pre-

cursor of Christ who will also take the human form and die, naked, hung on a cross, Do-

natello is reminding his audience that the flesh and blood humanity of Christ, which came

from David’s lineage, is something to be honored as ‘blessed’ and not something to be

considered vile or shameful. The sculptural form seems to visually represent an unpol-

luted vision of man before the fall in the Garden of Eden, before Adam and Eve’s sin

clouded their ability to see each other as children of God made in His Divine Image..In his

nude depiction of David, Donatello allows only what is necessary in terms of clothing

details (the shepherd hat, open toed boots) which will add to this symbolic content and

theme of pre-fall innocence, as we will see later. I feel certain these meanings are there if

we take the time to find them while others may settle for some more common explana-

tion that the clothing of hat and boots was merely added to confound critics and were in-

tended as a way of making fun of their cries that the David sculpture was scandalous in

its blatant nudity . Certainly, am sure that Donatello did enjoy that game as well.

Donatello would jokingly say his statue ‘was not really nude’, for his ’David” did have

that hat and boots on after all! The nudity of “David” is itself a strong statement about the

shame-free innocence of our pre-original sin natures, and a strong assertion that man’s

physical being should be viewed as having been inextricably marked with a sense of the

Divine ‘Presence’ of God. This anti-Gnostic sculptural statement stands out in a per-

Reformation time period where some more Puritan views (stemming from Albigensian

and Neo-Platonism) continued in Puritanical philosophies extolling only the spiritual

realms as being truly ‘good’. The hat, so often stolen by older men to gain sexual gratifi-

cation, is topping David’s head so securely is like a victor’s crown, a sign that he is in

complete possession of his own sexuality.

The other thought, which occurs to a thoughtful viewing of the sculpture, is how much

this image of David merges the natures of male and female sexual genders into one.

Without the obvious tell-tale male genitals of the nude male adolescent which are promi-

nently displayed, one might be tempted to think this was the body of a young pre-

adolescent girl. The sensuous lines of a classical contrapposto pose, with one hip thrust

outward, along with the slight body build Donatello gives his David, the long flowing hair

and floppy hat trimmed with a festive garland, all add to the feminine nature of this ana-

tomically male figure. The hermaphroditic identity is indeed intriguing in terms of possible

interpretations, especially considered in regards to Genesis 3:15, the prophetically ac-

claimed passage of ultimate victory of good over evil, a theme so close to David’s battle

with Goliath, seen as the enemy of God’s people. Genesis 3:15 is a passage, which

prophesies the ultimate victory over the ‘serpent’ by the coming Messiah. But it is a pas-

sage largely addressed to Eve at the time of the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In

this passage the feminine identity of ‘The Woman” with “Her Seed”, are so intertwined,

that there have been theological disputes over the exact meaning of the phraseology.

What role does ‘The Woman’ play and what role is only that of ‘The Seed’? Various trans-

lations of this one verse show the struggle with sorting out if the final victory over the an-

cient serpent What aspect belongs to the ‘Woman”, the Seed” or ultimately to both? In a

common Protestant view, the ‘Woman’ may have been interpreted, as being the Church :

rather than a specific feminine person and the ‘Seed’, of course is Christ, as the victori-

ous Redeemer who conquers evil through His cross. The Catholic interpretation of this

passage has always tended to point to Mary and Christ as being joined in this battle,

Mary as being the Second Eve, the Woman, whose Seed, Jesus Christ,, as the second

Adam, delivers the blow crushing Satan’s ‘Head”. The Duay Rheims Bble translates the

verse as such, emphasizing the feminine to the point that it the words seem to point to

the ‘woman’ as the one who delivers the final crushing blow to Satan’s ‘Head”.

“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall

crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”

We can see that Catholics tend to allow for the other levels of meaning as well, the ‘woman’

can be seen as the Church, being the “Bride” of Christ and the baptized members being the “Seed”

of the Church, born through baptism. The theme of bride, bridegroom, and offspring are all signifi-

cant and real and the verses become multi-level in their meaning.

The translations and interpretations go back and forth between the Serpent, and the

Woman and her offspring---the inter-tangling of Woman and Her Seed and the fact that

both are in enmity with the serpent or tempter, tends toward the conclusion that victory is

a ultimately, a co-operative action between both, even when a masculine identity is em-

phasized. Like the David story, human redemption ultimately is a co-operation between

God and man. Christ is fully Divine and the Redeemer, but He has taken His humanity

from the Woman (Mary) and both His natures are involved in Redemption. The Church as

well, with its members, must co-operate with God, His Will and His grace in order to win

victory over evil in the world. During this time period other artists had depicted the David

figure in ways, which showed him as the predecessor of the Virgin Mary and linked him to

this feminine identity in a very conscious fashion. (Reference Laurie Schneider, “Donatello’s

Bronze David”, College Art Association, 1973)

Other evidence pointing to a hermaphroditic interpretation includes the other article

of clothing Donatello gives His David, which are open-toed boots-- an unusual way to

show boots, I would say. The open toes tend to make the boots into a form, which clearly

resemble sandals. This fact, along with the detail that there is a feather which rises up the

inner side of one of David’s thighs, open up an interpretation that these boots may refer

to mythological references to a classical god who also had winged sandals, namely Her-

mes, who was the messenger of the gods in classical mythology, sent to tell the wishes of

the gods to the people

Similarly, Christ, the Incarnate Word, is the messenger of the Father sent to tell all

mankind, the wishes of His Eternal Father. Since God is ultimately a genderless pure

Spirit, the reference to Hermes (who had a Son who was given a hermaphroditic nature)

is replete with theological implications. Christ, as Son of the Father (Divine, Pure, Eternal

Spirit) and Son of Mary (human creature, finite, perfectly redeemed and preserved from

sin by grace) is indeed an Incarnate Divinity encompassing the two natures in perfect un-

ion. Thus Donatello achieves a form that has nuances indicating this great theological

mystery ,and although we see only ‘David’, in the outward literal form, the sculptures has

within it the hidden identities of both Mary and her Divine Son for Christ is the ultimate

David. and the Old Testament counterpart to David would be Judith, whose song of joy

and victory after severing the head of Holofernes is directly echoed by Mary ‘s Magnificat

response to Elizabeth’s greeting in the Gospel of Luke. (an image of Judith was placed

close to Donatello’s ‘David’ in the Medici garden according to art historian Sarah Blake

McHam)

This is the amazing truth about Donatello’s sculpture! Looking carefully we can begin

to appreciate how much the hermaphroditic nature of the adolescent boy is suited to ex-

pressing the biblical prophecy in Genesis 3:15. Donatello’s ‘David’, thus masterfully

represents Jesus and Mary, the Bridegroom and the Bride, the Woman and her ‘Seed”,

Indeed, the Church and the Church’s Offspring born through Baptism are all present

metaphorically in this image. Look closely and you will find in David’s features, including

the long locks of hair, beardless, smooth face and effeminate slight build, the hidden form

of Mary, Christ’s Mother, the ‘Perpetual Virgin’, the Immaculately Conceived ‘Woman’

who is at enmity with God’s foes from the first moment of her miraculous conception. In-

deed Donatello (as were other artists of the time period) was well aware that Mary was

from the royal lineage of David the King, making this interpretation seems quite natural.

This connection between David and Mary, as I pointed out earlier, was part of the iconog-

raphy in other artwork of the 1400s (Laura Schneider).

This is an interesting iconographical consideration since if a ‘hermaphroditic’ beard-

less youth could have been used as a means of interpreting Genesis 3:15, the woman

and her seed, one is forced to consider the fact that John the Apostle is also often shown

in this way in Renaissance artwork, as a beardless fifteen year old youth. John is por-

trayed in his own Gospel as the one who stands beneath the cross at Calvary and it is

John who is told by Christ “Behold your Mother”, thus indicating a sense of lineage

(offspring) being established. The pattern is being repeated of union between masculine

and feminine. Could the iconography in Donatello’s sculpture of a ‘hermaphroditic’ youth

also be used to explain the feminine qualities, which often are used to portray John the

Apostle in such Renaissance artwork, as the Last Supper painting by Leonardo Da Vinci?

Could a feminized appearance of a young male be a way of showing the union between

Mary and Christ, between Bride and Bridegroom (Christ and His Church) and as such is

religious iconography, understood in its day as a way of to interpret Genesis 3:15? In-

deed various mystics, in particular Elisabeth of Schonau (1128-1164) had visionary ex-

periences including the following which seem to have a way of merging Christ’s identity

with Mary in a startling fashion:

“While we were celebrating the vigil of the birth of our Lord, around the hour of the divine service, I came into a trance and I saw, as it were, a sun of marvelous brightness in the sky. In the middle of the sun was the likeness of a virgin hose appearance was particularly beautiful and desirable to see. She was sitting with her hair spread over her shoulders, a crown of the most resplendent gold on her head, and a golden cup in her right hand. A splendour of great brightness came forth from the sun, by which she was surrounded on all sides, and from her it seemed to fill first the place of our dwelling, and then after a while spread out little by little to fill the whole world. “ (History Enlightened Blog, John Noyce,(http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/schonau.html)

According to “History Enlightened” a blog website by John Noyce, with information on

Elisabeth’s vision, she was given two explanations for this way of seeing Christ:.

“A ‘holy angel of the Lord’ told her: “The virgin you see is the sacred humanity of the Lord Jesus. The sun in which the virgin is sitting is the divinity that pos-sesses and illuminates the whole humanity of the Saviour. At the prompting of her (male) advisers, Elisabeth asked in a subsequent vision why this ‘humanity of the Lord Saviour’ had been shown to her in the form of a virgin and not in a masculine form. John the Evangelist responded by saying: The Lord willed it to be done in this way so that the vision could so much more easily be adapted to also signify His blessed mother.” (History Enlightened Blog, John Noyce, http://historye.blogspot.com/2005/08/elizabeth-of-schonau.html)

This account may or may not have been known by Donatello, but it is interesting that

so many of these artists have shown John the Apostle in this fashion as an effeminate

image, which merges male and female qualities. You may explain it as pertaining to his

youth (tradition puts John at 15) at the time of the crucifixion but it also may have a meta-

physical or metaphorical content, given the tendency of artists in that time period to load

images with such iconography.

Clearly Donatello’s David is shown as masculine in gender and his David is also a

forerunner of the second Adam, Christ, the future Good Shepherd and Messiah, who

would trammel on evil by coming in the disguise of a vulnerable human being destined to

die on the cross. Christ would die naked, hiding His Divinity to the point that He refuses to

call forth any army of angels or even whisper a word of complaint. Donatello’s David

theme is replete with the Christian belief that it is ‘the meek who will inherit the earth’ by

conquering evil through their humility, and their whole-hearted dependence on the Divine

power of God.

In a Church rocked with scandals and rift with division, I find the ‘David’ sculpture by

Donatello to be as compelling and moving today as it must have been to its Florentine

patrons. Indeed it stands prophetically before us—the helmeted head of Goliath stares at

us, with the half open eyes, and the stone planted dead center in the forehead. The

sculpture repeats its’ timeless query: “have we been complicit in that act of stealing God’s

Presence, whether it be through thought, word or deed?” Donatello’s masterful artwork

still challenges today’s Church to reclaim its innocence, and to uncover its mission as a

winged messenger of God’s Will for all peoples, by living the unconditional faith of the

long-ago shepherd boy, who like the Virgin of Nazareth, staked everything on the belief

that:” … no word shall be impossible with God” (Luke1: 27)

Recently the art history world has uncovered evidence that the political theme of

David, tied to Florence’s conquest of her rivals, was heralded by an inscription that was

formerly on the base of Donatello’s David “The victor is whoever defends the fatherland.

God crushes the wrath of an enormous foe. Behold! A boy overcame a great tyrant. Con-

quer, o citizens!" (Sarah Blake McHam)

The Bronze David stand as a prophet before us, and as Christians can we not hear

God calling to us through this sculpture once again, “Arise O Citizens”. Our fatherland is

indeed under attack. Have we lost our faith and courage? Have we become through ne-

glect of our traditions and faith the Goliaths? Have we lost the ‘Presence” of God, so evi-

dent in the ignorance of our faith in my classroom, through our neglect and our own lack

of zeal? Have we been separated by stealth from our belongings and seduced into a new

form of faith, which barely resembles the old? And most importantly, have we lost the

true sense of Christ’s humanity, a humanity, which was clothed by God, Himself, in Im-

maculately Conceived Mary, Ever-Virgin and the Second Eve?

Bibliography

Sarah Blake McHam, Donatello’s bronze David and Judith as Metaphors of Medici rule in Florence, The Art

Bulletin, March 01, 2001

John Noyce, History Enlightened Blog, http://historye.blogspot.com/2005/08/elizabeth-of-schonau.html)

Laurie Schneider, Donatello’s Bronze David, College Art Association, 1973

Michael Rocke, Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence Oxford

University press, 1996

“Lord, Show us

Thy Face

And we shall be

saved…”

Holy Face Studio