Author Topic: A note on the sitting position (Read 2190 times)

Jochen · « **on:** March 28, 2009, 09:11:54 pm »

Hi!

I don't know wether you have sometimes wondered about the sitting position of ancient figures. I for me have often
wondered about the special position how figures were sitting on thrones. It seems that they have regularly
used only the most frontal part of the seat.

Now I have heard that in former times this should have been the usual sitting position. Not before the time
of Biedermeier the people used the full seat and were sitting full against the back. The Biedermeier -
I don't know how this period is called in England or France - was the time after the restauration of the
Congress of Vienna 1815. The bourgeois people retired frustrated in private life and the attitude of the
aristocrats was no more the exemplaric model as before.

Therefore many of the Renaissance and Baroque chairs have been broken there where the back was
linked to the seat and complete and unrepaired chairs from this time are very rare and expensiv. We
have a chair from the Rococo and it is this very place were it was broken and repaired. I think this
would be an interesting cultural feature and worth to be shared.

I have added some examples to show this feature, but I think you can add much more.

Best regards

casata137ec · « **Reply #1 on:** March 28, 2009, 10:07:24 pm »

I have a few examples as well, my favorite being the Julia Paula. I always thought it looked uncomfortable to sit that way!

Chris

Jochen · « **Reply #2 on:** March 29, 2009, 02:16:43 pm »

Thanks for the pics.

curtislclay · « **Reply #3 on:** March 30, 2009, 01:57:05 am »

If seated figures are really shown perched on the front of the seat as Jochen says, I think this is only an artistic convention, not a reflection of reality as he supposes.

I find it impossible to believe that the Biedermeir period witnessed a fundamental revolution in the way people sat in chairs. Jochen, what is your source for this astonishing assertion? What could possibly have prevented earlier people from sliding their backsides further onto the seat and leaning on the back?

The more remarkable artistic convention in these seated depictions has been pointed out in another Forvm thread, I believe: for the sake of clarity the back of the thrones is twisted 90 degrees out of perspective and shown frontally rather than from the side, giving the impression that the sitters are sitting sideways on their seats, with the seat backs parallel to their right arms rather than behind their backs.

aj · « **Reply #4 on:** March 30, 2009, 05:09:52 am »

Leaning forward: making a point of intense importance to the sitter or perhaps listening with intent.
Leaning back: reflecting on what has been said or at ease with the situation.

Jochen · « **Reply #5 on:** March 30, 2009, 09:20:43 am »

Hi Curtis!

In the German tv there is a famous series about antiquities called 'Kitsch oder Kunst'. In this series people can present antiquities of their own and then they were discussed by specialists, scientists from museums or auction houses. The statement with the change of the seating position on chairs between Renaissance/Baroque and Biedermeier was made by Dr.Nagel from Nagel Auktionen Stuttgart if I'm right. The object was a Baroque chair later broken in the time of Biedermeier. It really doesn't cover the period from ancient times to Renaissance/Baroque. But immediately I thought of the sitting position depicted on Roman coins which I have wondered about from the first time I have seen it.

Best regards

slokind · « **Reply #6 on:** March 30, 2009, 11:02:50 am »

Kitsch oder Kunst is a good name for it! The British invented it, the US adopted it, and we both call it Antiques Roadshow. The experts do vary in their point of view. In my opinion, good chairs of all periods are strong--not to be abused, but strong in all proper uses. The most delicate-looking chair can withstand Baron Ochs, if the joinery and design are good. Greek chairs (there was a 20c factory that made careful replicas based on many vase-paintings showing the klismos) are as sittable as Barcelona chairs, now made by Knoll, designed by Mies van der Rohe. Pat L.

gallienus1 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 06, 2009, 08:04:16 pm »

This thread has inspired me to look at some ancient furniture on the net. My reasoning is that the design of ancient chairs should give an indication of how people would have sat on them. The Roman theatre seats, although they have backs, look to be so narrow the only way one could sit in them would be to perch on the edge. Going back a thousand years or so the Egyptian chairs (which must have had an influence on the later Greeks and Romans) look comfortable, although the distance between the back and the forward edge of the seat is so long it only makes sense if a lot of cushions were used. The Roman Wall Painting at the House of Menander shows a man lounging back in his seat much as a modern person might at home. Could it be you were expected to sit in a chair in a certain way if you were an important person, God or Goddess that was receiving visitors? Did sitting on the edge of your seat mean you were paying attention to those that had come to pay homage? The Athena on the back of the tetradrachms of Lysimachos or the Zeus on the back of Alexander tetradrachms look far more relaxed than the Roman deities perched on the edge of their thrones on Imperial denari. Is this a difference between Greek and Roman cultural expectations, or the fact that Athena and Zeus were “great” deities and a lot of the beings on the reverse of Roman coinage were personifications or “minor” deities?

Steve