Mobile Logo
2018-09-27
True Stories

Lorenzo Giuntini and the Great Turtle

by Andrea Felice

In the second half of 1882 Alfred Percival Maudslay (1850-1931), the famous English archaeologist and explorer, was laboriously busy in preparations for his new expedition to South America, Guatemala and Honduras to study the Mayan sculpture. After reporting a series of photographs, reliefs, measurements and ‘Paper Squeezes’ from previous expeditions to Quirinuá, Copan and Yaxchilan, Maudslay realized that the best and most effective way to acquire faithful copies of Mayan monuments was to execute very detailed plaster casts. More would be accurate the copies and more would be accurate the drawings useful to scholars. From the experience obtained with the Paper Molds, Maudslay intuited that it was necessary to make Plaster Molds.

Of course the plaster mold represented an extremely difficult work to apply in the middle of the forest; where to take materials and equipment would involve a large amount of energy and money; as well as to turn back the heavy molds of plaster composed of hundreds of pieces. And then, it would be essential to work with a very experienced mould maker to be recruited in England. A man enough foolish to follow him into an enterprise like that.
In the rising of this new interest on the plaster casts, Maudslay visited the South Kensinghton Museum (now the Victoria and Albert) in London. Admiring the magnificent casts of the monumental Cast Court including the Portico de la Gloria of Santiago de Compostela made by Domenico Brucciani in 1866, he knows of the most famous plaster casting workshop in London, the D. Brucciani & Co. at Galleria delle Arti in Covent Garden with a selection of over 1,200 casts in catalog.
Maudslay became very convinced of this choice, the plaster molds would have resulted in extremely accurate casts of Mayan sculptures in Quiringuá and Copán.

Alfred Percival Maudslay
in his room at Chichen Itza. 1889

The plaster mold there would be no limits to all those details and undercuts that had not been able to reach by the paper molds. The Squeezes (so were called paper moulds) would still be useful for molding inscriptions and hieroglyphics.
So, for the new mission the archaeologist engaged Lorenzo Giuntini (Andrew Lawrence “Lorenzo” Giuntini, Cheltenham 1843 – London December 29 1920). Giuntini was an expert mould maker of Italian origin who had learned the craft from his father Andrea Giuntini born in Italy in 1808, and had taught to their children. Soon reaching a remarkable reputation Lorenzo also worked at the famous workshop of Domenico Brucciani.
Over 4 tons of plaster of Paris, stored in metal-linen barrels and the rest of materials, tools and equipment were sent to Livingston for departure by boat.
Alfred Maudslay and Lorenzo Giuntini embarked aboard a steamer in early January 1883 directed to Berlize. On February 18 they reached Yzabal. With the valuable aid of Gorgonio Lopez and his son Carlos Lopez, along with twenty Kekchi mozos of Coban. All heavy materials, equipment and plaster now packaged in water proof bags was transported for days on the shoulder and back of a mule up at Quiriguá in Guatemala. Maudslay and Giuntini traveled on horseback but with some difficulties: Giuntini soon resented the fatigue of the hard journey to which he was not accustomed. However he was very happy soon as he saw the large sculpture that was ready to mold in a few days, a suitable shack protection was already mounted in order of the enormous sculpture. The archaeological site of Quiringuá was full of monuments, very tall steles and imposing sculptures called Zoomorph. The zoomorphs at Quirigua are designed to provide information about the ruler, their power and their conquests. Almost every square inch of these highly decorative monuments is dedicated to imparting information. The largest is Zoomorph P or Great Turtle, which weighs in at 20 tons and provides a surface area of 40 square metres totally engraved.

Lorenzo Giuntini how he looks some
years before meeting Alfred Maudslay

the Great Turtle or Zoomorph P at Quiringuà

The monuments at Quirigua were built to celebrate the completion of 5 Tuns (or a quarter K’atun), which is a period of 1800 days – roughly 5 years. The four large Zoomorphs were built consecutively, starting in 780AD, and are almost certainly linked to the Maya Creation Myth in some way. There are also two smaller zoomorphs, of which the function is uncertain.
The heavy monoliths were carved in which they were dug out in the area but from enormous blocks transported for miles.
At early March Lorenzo Giuntini began working on large monolithic sculpture named the Great Turtle (then called Zoomorph P and subsequently Monument 16) an enormous rock of granite stone finely carved with the surface completely covered by a pad full of figures and dense inscriptions. Many undercuts had to be cleaned of vegetation and from the lichens attack which obstructed the correct reading. The work of molding was very difficult and exhausting, because the size of the monument, the difficulties of working in a hot and humid environment not well adapted to the hard work of moldmaking.

Stele at Quiringuà

The raw materials were limited and had to be used sparingly. The plaster mold that resulted consists of over 600 pieces and side panels should also remain robust to withstand transportation by mule and then by boat and at the same time as light as possible also to save material. On April 26, after nearly two months of work, the mould of the Great Turtle was completed by Giuntini. It was necessary no less than 2 tons of plaster for its execution. Giuntini had also performed the molding of a large part of two big monolithic monuments, while Gorgonio had taken the paper molds of numerous inscriptions.

Imagining the working conditions in an inhospitable place, the limited resources of that era, the effort and fatigue required from a work of this undertaking, the long journey in a far away land is easy to see what would become for Giuntini the enterprise to be told for a lifetime.

The mould maker in subsequent years accomplished other two missions, one in Mesoamerica with Maudslay and later, in 1892, a  new one mission to Persepolis in Iran with Herbert Weld-Blundell.

Lorenzo Giuntini moulding the Great Turtle at Quiringuà, 1883

Lorenzo Giuntini (with white hat) is trimming with knife the edges of a piece of the mold,  a young roundsman waving a fan for him and other two assistant are preparing materials.

The packaging and the transport of all pieces that constituted the heavy molds and of all the material turned out to be rather difficult. At last there were thousands of pieces of plaster with different shapes, delicate edges and various sizes in addition to large paper molds. During transport in the forest a violent storm that soon turned into hurricane took the convoy and some paper molds were seriously affected by dampness.
At the end of the mission were brought to London as many as 20 original sculptures, dozens of molds divided into tons of plaster (from which get the casts), 400 paper molds of bas-reliefs and inscriptions, as well as a multitude of photographs, films, drawings, measurements, maps, notebooks and mesoamerican textiles.
What to do with all of this material?
While waiting to fully understand what strategy to implement, if postpone the systematic study at the end of the explorations or immediately start the analysis of the findings, the execution of the plaster casts had to begin immediately. Giuntini began promptly at work and in 1884 Maudslay was able to present a good number of casts at Cambridge University Archaeological Museum, which had allowed him to make the expedition. Unfortunately the casts were bulky and unwieldy and the university declined the offer to accept them in their buildings.

Plaster cast of ‘The Great Turtle,’ or Zoomorph P made by Giuntini
on display at the South Kensington Museum in 1894

At the beginning of August 1885 Maudslay tried to get an agreement with the South Kensington in London to organize an exhibition with the casts, photographs and maps of archaeological sites of the Mayan areas explored. He also suggested that the museum donated the entire collection of casts and original works on the condition to keep them on display for the students and that the museum could cure the services offered by Giuntini paying the salary for his work and all expenses incurred by Maudslay.
So in January 1886 all plaster casts and molds were sent to the museum and Giuntini was employed for a temporary time. However in the following years negotiations continued with great difficulties and suffering, the museum continued to arrive every year new crates full of molds and in 1891 the administration of the South Kensinghton communicated to Maudslay that they were forced to stop the collaboration with Lorenzo Giuntini. Maudslay was able to get just an extension for him. In 1893 the museum advise that the entire collection would be transferred to the British Museum with which the agreement was reached to keep the originals on display while the casts were stored in the basement of the British Museum leaving them accessible to scholars.
In 1914, other expeditions of the same areas were held on behalf of the School of American Archaeology. The purpose was to continue the excavations after the past experiences, including those of Maudslay and to take back plaster casts of some monuments believing to get the most faithful reproductions of those by Giuntini.
As described in the reports of the expedition new campaign would be carried making moulds of gelatin, that is animal glue. In this way, the restitution of the surfaces would be more faithful, accurate and faster. In the report, about the new mould of the Great Turtle comparing 600 pieces of Giuntini’s plaster mould performed in 3 months, wrong date because the mould was made according Maudslay in two months; against the 11 parts of the gelatin mold performed in only 15 days.
However, according to the detailed description of the technique executive transcribed in the bulletin of the expedition, we can deduce that it was not a convenient choice.

The mould had certainly not improved by weight and a reduced size. Executing the same involved a series of major complications that made work much difficult. The animal glue was deteriorating quickly in the heat and humidity of the place. The process of work was very uncomfortable having to create and articulate a bulkhead of plaster to the base to contain the liquid glue during application.

Therefore it was made a layer of clay (corresponding to the thickness of the glue) on all the sculpture. Subsequently were carried out piece of mold in plaster equipped with fittings and reinforcements of bamboo rod.
All the plaster was dismounted, the clay removed, pieces of mould reassembled in their place and the empty space was pouring the hot liquid glue in a transaction not easy, having to keep the temperature constant even though tends to cool quickly and solidify. Often the glue cooled was to be replaced by another glue ready heated inside metal pipes on indirect fire or in boiling water, in a continuous slowdown of the work process.

The making of Gelatine Mould on Great Turtle, 1914

a piece of Plaster Cast just take out form the mould, 1914

On plaster were drilled holes for the expulsion of air, as the glue filled the chamber the holes were closed with clay.

Eventually any mould cooled in the hours of the night was dismantled, including the layers of rubber gelatine and then the statue cleaned.
The plaster casts were executed on site, not from the whole mould reassembled, but from every singular part of the mould itself. It was necessary to do the work in the early hours of the morning, as the sun’s rays softened surfaces of the gelatine. O the gelatine was spread some gypsum powder to remove the adhesive strength of the glue. Then alum was used as a release agent, and then was poured plaster in several layers to get the plaster cast. The temperature and the humidity made difficult the making of the casts. The plaster was affected by these agents and the set was too accelerated. It was necessary to use a lot more plaster than it would have been required under normal conditions. The various portions of the plaster cast were packed in wooden boxes covered with banana leaves. All casts will be reassembled after transportation to destination.
The plaster casts were executed on site, not from the whole mould reassembled, but from every singular part of the mould itself. It was necessary to do the work in the early hours of the morning, as the sun’s rays softened surfaces of the gelatine. O the gelatine was spread some gypsum powder to remove the adhesive strength of the glue. Then alum was used as a release agent, and then was poured plaster in several layers to get the plaster cast. The temperature and the humidity made difficult the making of the casts. The plaster was affected by these agents and the set was too accelerated. It was necessary to use a lot more plaster than it would have been required under normal conditions. The various portions of the plaster cast were packed in wooden boxes covered with banana leaves. All casts will be reassembled after transportation to destination.
In view of these information it is easy to deduce that there was no improvement on the casts made by Giuntini. It ‘well known that the Gelatine mould does not get a better surface than the piece mould in plaster, especially if made in difficultous conditions and not in a workmanlike manner. The quantity of usefull material to transport was greater than the Maudslay’s mission, it was needed a greater amount of Plaster of Paris for the moulds and and for plaster casts. Was required a large amount of clay and the gelatine, in addition to equipment. tools and wood. The only apparent advantage was the time savings during the making of the moulds, but it was necessary against the execution on site of the casts and even their transport.
Moreover, the manufacture of large casts independent elements to assemble compromised the dimensional accuracy of the cast compared to the original, non-issue in the casts of Giuntini executed in a workmanlike.
The casts were exhibited in San Diego, California during the Panama-California Exposition and then in the halls of the School of American Archaeology of Santa Fe, New Mexico, but the question remains of the real need of consuming so much energy and money when it would be sufficient to require the casts from existing forms of Lorenzo Giuntini.
Also, the making of large casts in independent elements to assemble compromised the dimensional accuracy of the whole cast compared to the original, non-issue in the casts of Giuntini executed in a workmanlike.
The plaster casts were exhibited in San Diego, California during the Panama-California Exposition and then in the halls of the School of American Archaeology of Santa Fe, New Mexico; but the question remains on the real need of hand out so much energy and money when it would be sufficient to require the same casts from the existing molds made by  the skilled mouldmaker Lorenzo Giuntini.

Painted plaster portrait bust of Dr Alfred Percival Maudslay
by Lorenzo Giuntini (active c. 1880-c. 1908)

Get the Face Back
Previous post
It’s an Inborn Thing
Next post