DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.31769#0028
The Pacification oj Mars as the Taming of Manly Desire
It is of course possible to interpret Botticelli’s Mars and
Venus in broadly philosophical terms if one takes this
juxtaposition of god and goddess as an expression of the
harmony of two opposites.' 6 However, it may well be
that a fact-based interpretation could be more useful
and enlightening. Lucian can give us an mdication of
this possibility; the classical author precisely interprets
his own picture description (the ekphrasis), which was an
important source for Botticelli’s painting: “All this is
not idle fancy, on which the pamter has been lavishing
needless pains; he is hinting that Alexander has also
another love, in War; though he loves Roxana, he does
not forget his armor. And, by the way, there was some
extra nuptial virtue in the picture itself ... for it did
Aetion’s wooing for him. He departed with a weddmg
of his own as a sort of pendant to that of Alexander; his
groom’s-man was the King; and the price of his mar-
riage piece was a marriage.” 17
Thus the painting by Aetion which Lucian was de-
scribing was in itself a wedding picture, and the painter
was rewarded by Alexander and Roxana with a wedding
of his own. Since this literary source explicitly refers to a
marriage, the next step for art historians is to look at
Botticelli’s patrons to see whose marriage might have
been celebrated with a wedding piece showmg Mars
and Venus. And this line of enquiry is also the most
reasonable because it takes into account concrete
circumstances known to us from other works of art. On
closer examination of the work itself a significant clue
soon emerges in the shape of a small but important de-
tail: on the far right there is a nest with wasps swarming
out of it. This nest and the wasps themselves may be
26
Vespucci family coac of arms
It is of course possible to interpret Botticelli’s Mars and
Venus in broadly philosophical terms if one takes this
juxtaposition of god and goddess as an expression of the
harmony of two opposites.' 6 However, it may well be
that a fact-based interpretation could be more useful
and enlightening. Lucian can give us an mdication of
this possibility; the classical author precisely interprets
his own picture description (the ekphrasis), which was an
important source for Botticelli’s painting: “All this is
not idle fancy, on which the pamter has been lavishing
needless pains; he is hinting that Alexander has also
another love, in War; though he loves Roxana, he does
not forget his armor. And, by the way, there was some
extra nuptial virtue in the picture itself ... for it did
Aetion’s wooing for him. He departed with a weddmg
of his own as a sort of pendant to that of Alexander; his
groom’s-man was the King; and the price of his mar-
riage piece was a marriage.” 17
Thus the painting by Aetion which Lucian was de-
scribing was in itself a wedding picture, and the painter
was rewarded by Alexander and Roxana with a wedding
of his own. Since this literary source explicitly refers to a
marriage, the next step for art historians is to look at
Botticelli’s patrons to see whose marriage might have
been celebrated with a wedding piece showmg Mars
and Venus. And this line of enquiry is also the most
reasonable because it takes into account concrete
circumstances known to us from other works of art. On
closer examination of the work itself a significant clue
soon emerges in the shape of a small but important de-
tail: on the far right there is a nest with wasps swarming
out of it. This nest and the wasps themselves may be
26
Vespucci family coac of arms