Jens Engberg and Thorvaldsen's Museum

Thorvaldsen's Museum in Copenhagen.

Jens Engberg (a Danish historian born 1936) was professor of history at Aarhus University for thirty years (1976-2006). His field of expertise is Danish history in the nineteenth century, in particular the labour and or the socialist movement.

A major study of Danish cultural policy from 1750 to 1900 was published in 2005. The title is: Power and Culture. It is in three volumes and it is in Danish. In volume 2 there is a chapter about Thorvaldsen’s Museum (pp. 112-128).

Engberg does not write about the numerous works of art that are on display in this museum. He has another angle. His chapter is divided into two sections.

In section one he explains how the museum was established during the nineteenth century. In section two he analyses the famous frieze that is painted on three of the four sides of the building.

The museum was designed by architect Michael G. Bindesbøll (1800-1856), while the frieze was created by painter Jørgen Sonne (1801-1890).

The ground plan of the building is a rectangle. On the short eastern wall we can see the frigate which transported Thorvaldsen and (some of) his works of art from Italy to Denmark in 1838. From this point we can go left or right. If we go right, we can see members of the elite (the ruling class) who are greeting Thorvaldsen in the harbour of Copenhagen. If we go left, we can see the workers who are carrying Thorvaldsen’s works of art into the new museum.

Thorvaldsen is greeted my the Copenhagen elite as he steps ashore.

On page 127 Engberg offers the following conclusion:

“On the sunny side of the building and of life the frieze shows the prominent members of the Copenhagen upper class who are greeting Thorvaldsen, while they are enjoying his art. On the northern or the shadow side we can see the workers who - at the risk of life and limbs - are carrying the elite’s works of art from the frigate to the museum.”

There is a problem with this conclusion. The Copenhagen elite is seen on the long wall facing the canal. But this wall is facing north, not south, so Engberg is wrong when he claims that the elite has a prominent position on “the sunny side” of the building.

The workers who are carrying the works of art into the museum are seen on the long wall facing Parliament (Christiansborg). But this wall is facing south, not north, so Engberg is wrong when he claims that the workers have been relegated to “the shadow side” of the building.

The workers are carrying the works of art into the new museum.

Engberg has lost his compass. He has confused north and south. How could this happen? He must have visited Copenhagen many times, and he must have passed the museum many times. He could have looked at the sun to determine the orientation of the building. He did not even have to go to Copenhagen. He could just look at a map.

If you look at a map, you will see that the rectangular building is located along an east-west line, not quite, but almost. The short end with the frigate is facing east, the long wall with the boats in the harbour is facing north, and the long wall with the workers is facing south.

Where did Engberg get this mistaken idea about the sunny and the shadow side of the building? When I contacted Torben Melander - a former inspector at the museum with special responsibility for the ancient collection – he had a suggestion. He said Engberg probably read it in a book about the old Copenhagen written by Broby-Johansen.

Rudolf Broby-Johansen (1900-1987) was a member of the Communist Party of Denmark, who was interested in art and architecture. The first edition of his book about the old Copenhagen was published in 1948. Several editions followed. The sixth edition was published in 1986. On pp. 53-54 of this edition, there is a short section about Thorvaldsen’s Museum. Towards the end there are some paragraphs about the frieze. Broby-Johansen notes that we have the elite with Thorvaldsen on one side and the workers carrying the monuments on the other side. Then he says:

“No Marxist can say more wittily that the ruling class belongs in the sun and the working class in the shadow; on one side we have a celebration, on the other side hard work.”

This is the origin of the mistake. Broby-Johansen lost his compass. He was confused about north and south. He thought the long wall facing the canal was facing south, which is wrong, and he thought the long wall facing Parliament was facing north, which is also wrong.

Engberg read this political interpretation and used it in his book without ever checking if it was true. It was an unfortunate oversight, because it is not true.

Klaus Rothstein reviewed Engberg’s book in Weekendavisen of 30 December 2005. His review, which is available online, includes a passage about Thorvaldsen’s Museum where he says:

“The pictures of the ruling class are placed on the sunny side of the building, while the workers are toiling in the shadow.”

As you can see, this is an almost direct quotation from Engberg’s book.

When I contacted Klaus Rothstein and told him that the statement is based on a misunderstanding of the compass, he tried to defend himself saying he was merely a reviewer; he had merely passed on some information from the book, so he did not think that he deserved to be blamed for this.

Rothstein fails to remember that the task of a reviewer is not only to tell us what is in a book but also to evaluate the truth of every important statement. And this statement is very important, because it is the conclusion of Engberg’s analysis of the frieze.

PS # 1. I wish to thank my friend and former colleague Johan Bender, who kindly supplied me with copies of Engberg's and Broby-Johansen's books.

PS # 2. As far as I know, Jens Engberg is still alive. I wanted to contact him and ask him about the case. Unfortunately, I was unable to track him down. He retired in 2006 and nobody at his old institute seems to have an email-address for him.

* * * 

For more information about the famous frieze, see my blog:

Thorvaldsen’s Museum

 

* * *