Editing David (Michelangelo) (section)

==Political implications==
David the giant-killer had long been seen as a political symbol in Florence, and images of the biblical hero already carried political implications there.<ref name="Butterfield1995">{{cite journal |last1=Butterfield |first1=Andrew |title=New Evidence for the Iconography of David in Quattrocento Florence |journal=I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance |date=January 1995 |volume=6 |pages=125–126 |doi=10.2307/4603693|jstor=4603693 }}</ref> Donatello's bronze ''David,'' made for [[Cosimo de' Medici]], perhaps {{circa}} 1440, had been appropriated by the [[Signoria]] in 1494, when the Medici were exiled from Florence, and the statue was installed in the courtyard of the [[Palazzo Vecchio|Palazzo della Signoria]], where it symbolized the Republican government of the city. According to Levine, by placing Michelangelo's statue in the same general location, it is likely that the ''David'' was conceived as politically controversial before Michelangelo began work on it,<ref name="Levine197445">{{cite journal |last1=Levine |first1=Saul |title=The Location of Michelangelo's David: The Meeting of January 25, 1504 |journal=The Art Bulletin |date=1974 |volume=56 |issue=1 |pages=45–46 |doi=10.2307/3049194 |jstor=3049194 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3049194 |issn=0004-3079}}</ref><ref name="Lavin1993" /> as well as an artistic response to that earlier work. While the originally intended location for the ''David'' was high up on the cathedral, its location was still in question. The commission, consisting of the most prominent artists of the day, debated in great detail the best placement for the colossal figure to be seen and appreciated, with consideration for its ''aria'', ''moda'', and ''qualità'' (its aura, style, and excellence).<ref name="Poeschke199641"/> The political overtones led to the statue being attacked twice in its early days. Protesters pelted it with stones the year it debuted, and, in 1527, an anti-Medici riot resulted in its left arm being broken into three pieces. Giorgio Vasari later claimed that he and his friend [[Francesco Salviati (painter)|Francesco Silviati]], although just boys, braved the violence and saved the pieces, storing them in Silviati's father's house.<ref name="RubinRubin1995">{{cite book |last1=Rubin |first1=Patricia Lee |last2=Rubin |first2=Maurice |title=Giorgio Vasari: Art and History |year=1995 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-04909-1 |page=88 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-X4mnRJaJ_UC&pg=PA88}}</ref>

[[Machiavelli]] wrote of the long Florentine tradition that represented David as defender of the ''patria'', a convention most completely developed in the arts – especially in the series of statues, from Donatello's to Michelangelo's, depicting him as the protector of his people. Having returned the armour given him by King Saul, and choosing to fight Goliath with his own weapons – a sling and a knife – David personified the citizen soldier of Florence,<ref name="DeTolnay1995"/> and the city's ability to defend itself with its own arms.<ref name="Barolsky2004">{{cite journal |last1=Barolsky |first1=Paul |title=Machiavelli, Michelangelo, and "David" |journal=Source: Notes in the History of Art |date=2004 |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=32–33 |doi=10.1086/sou.23.3.23206849 |jstor=23206849 |s2cid=192941312 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23206849}}</ref>

Rather than placing Goliath's severed head between or underneath the ''David'''s feet, Michelangelo carved the stump of a tree on the back of the right leg, a device conventionally employed by sculptors in ancient times to help support the weight of a statue. In a contemporary document the stump was called ''broncone'', the same Italian word used for [[Lorenzo de' Medici]]'s personal emblem, or ''impresa'' – a dead branch of laurel sprouting new green growth. Soon after ''David's'' installation in front of the Palazzo della Signoria, certain adornments were added that have since disappeared: the stump and the strap of the sling were gilded, a vine of copper leaves was strung around the groin covering the genitals, and a laurel wreath of gilt bronze was added.<ref name="Lavin1990">{{cite book |last1=Lavin |first1=Irving |title=L'art et les révolutions: Conférences plénières {{!}} Tirage à part Strasbourg 1990 Congres International de histoire de l'art |date=1990 |publisher=Société alsacienne pour le développement de l'histoire de l'art |pages=135, 137 |chapter-url=http://publications.ias.edu/sites/default/files/Lavin_DavidSlingMichelangeloBow_1990.pdf |language=en |chapter=David's Sling and Michelangelo's Bow: a Sign of Freedom}}</ref><ref name="Paoletti2015155">{{cite book |last1=Paoletti |first1=John T. |title=Michelangelo's David: Florentine History and Civic Identity |year=2015 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-316-24013-7 |page=155 |chapter=Naked Men in Piazza |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4FuXBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT155}}</ref>

The gilt garland of leaves did not entirely negate the figure's erotic aura. Machiavelli penned a brief text in satirical vein describing the laws of an imaginary society devoted to seeking pleasure. Its people were required to violate all the normal rules of society and decorum, and were punished with even more pleasurable tasks if they failed to satisfy these demands. For example, women offenders would be forced to gaze at the ''David'' closely, "with eyeglasses" (a notable product of the city).<ref name="Günther201765">{{cite book |last1=Günther |first1=Hubertus |editor1-last=Williams |editor1-first=Robert |title=The Beholder: The Experience of Art in Early Modern Europe |year=2017 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-351-54598-3 |pages=62, 65 |chapter=Michelangelo's works in the eyes of his contemporaries |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Vy4rDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA65}}</ref><ref name="Paoletti2015180">{{cite book |last1=Paoletti |first1=John T. |title=Michelangelo's David: Florentine History and Civic Identity |year=2015 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-316-24013-7 |pages=180–181 |chapter=Naked Men in Piazza |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4FuXBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT180}}</ref>

According to Paoletti, a naked colossus situated in the primary public space of the city was necessarily politically charged, the ''David'''s nakedness being more than merely a reference to the sculpture of antiquity that inspired the arts in the Italian Renaissance. Standing at the entrance to Florence's town hall, it had power as a political symbol, using an image of the sexualized human body to represent the corporality of the Florentine [[body politic]]. As a civic metaphor, it resonated with the everyday life experiences of 16th-century Florentine people among all the social classes.<ref name="Paoletti2015183">{{cite book |last1=Paoletti |first1=John T. |title=Michelangelo's David: Florentine History and Civic Identity |year=2015 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-316-24013-7 |pages=183, 197 |chapter=Naked Men in Piazza |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4FuXBgAAQBAJ&pg=PT183}}</ref>