An art historian asks why ancient statues usually have only a small penis? The perfect body carved, polished and polished from white marble: tight calves, crunchy podex, tight muscles, the finest tendon strands, only the penis appears strange, disproportionately small between the tight muscles and clear contours. But why is that? Ellen Oredsson tries to uncover this supposed secret of art history in her articles. As she found out through research, the classic representation, for example in the penis of David by Michelangelo, corresponds to an average size of the penis in men and is therefore not really a characteristic to be emphasized. On the other hand, she claims to have found out that large penises in the ancient concept of art are otherwise less to be found as characteristics of heroism, but rather of paganism, simplicity and stupidity. This steep, at first glance somewhat limited thesis, I want to put aside the note that the large to erect penis is less in the shameful, courtly art, but more in the common people, far beyond resentment and obscenity, one cheeky, mischievous, roguish popularity enjoyed and swelled to the motif and symbol, which is always taken up again and again, above all popular freedom, cheerfulness and zest for life.
They have the perfect bodies, carved out of white marble: the ancient statues show the human body in harmonious to sublime perfection. The masterpieces glorify people with well-built, strong and healthy bodies, an artistic form of representation, especially of Greco-Roman antiquity, that in the Renaissance and among the Raphaelites (as well as the National Socialists of the Third Reich and the Communists in the Soviet Union) returned. But between all the idealistic or propagandistically charged perfection is striking: The penises of the ancient statues are rather tiny in proportion. But why did Michelangelo, Raphael and Co. only give their masterpieces a mini-master? For the best erotic art facts check us out
