What's in a hand?

For as long as I can remember I have been obsessed with boxes. 

Old boxes to be specific, the older the better. 

This one I obtained from eBay and it was merely listed as an antique wooden box with metal and leather detailing. What really caught my eye was the design on the metal strip; the two outstretched arms and interlocking hands reminded me a little of The Creation of Adam as depicted in the Sistine Chapel in The Vatican by Michaelanglo.

The interior has been ripped out so I am planning on restoring it, however you can see it was once a rich blood red velvet.

Sadly, as there was no date with this purchase, I have been unable to find out anything about it's origin or time period. If anyone knows anything please let me know!

Personal response to the imagery - The image of the outstretched hands evokes a feeling reminiscent perhaps of romance, or of someone seeking a connection. The right hand side seems to have a firm grip upon the left who seems to be just resting their hand in return. Notably the right hand has the index finger fully outstretched as if it belongs to the dominant being.

Symbolism - In terms of symbolism hands are inherently useful, and they can reflect ideas of leadership and communication. The outstretched hand denotes the rule of power simply because the hand, or the arm, is powerful especially when it is stretched out. This idea evokes images of unlimited power or an infinite act, which is often reflected in biblical stories where it is suggested that miracles only come about when you lift your finger, or your hand, or in the case of Moses your rod!

Hands and gestures in art - Rudolph Wittkower, Allegory and the Migration of Symbols [New York: Thames and Hudson, 1977] 148: 

"We may..differentiate between three pictorial types of gestures, namely between descriptive, symbolic, rhetorical.

Descriptive gestures, like pointing, elucidate a story or narrative and are therefore needed when painting or sculpture have to deal with a literary theme.

Rhetorical gestures reflect and illuminate emotional conditions.

Symbolic gestures belong mainly to pre-Renaissance art; from the 15th century on they are, as a rule, confined to such attitudes as blessing. I call this symbolic gesture because, in contrast to the rhetorical ones, we are faced with a code which must be known in order to be understood."

Hand gestures can mean so many different things depending on the person, the situation, the culture, the society, the country etc. Speaking with our hands happens to us when we are not really thinking about it because it is just so natural. And historically hands in particular were important in art, especially painting, in order to communicate. 

For example, Leonardo da Vinci used hands in a very symbolic way, which in the 15th century would have made immediate sense to those viewing it, and for us today it is generally easy for us to read a scene; 

The Virigin of the Rocks holds a whole host of information obtained from the hand gestures alone.

The Virgin Mary's right arm is gently wrapped around the young baby John the Baptist in a protective embrace, whilst the baby's hands are clasped together and outstretched towards the baby Jesus in a respectful subservience. The baby Jesus has his arm raised with two slightly curved pointing fingers in return. This is an expression of blessing. Mary's left hand hovers over the head of the baby Jesus protectively, and the angel by the baby's side points towards the baby John [see NB below for additional information on the pointing angel!]. 

Virgin of the Rocks, Leonardo da Vinci [1452-1519]
Housed at The National Gallery, London.

Virgin of the Rocks, Leonardo da Vinci [1484-5]
Housed at Le Musee de Louvre, Paris.

The relationships here are shown through the hand gestures made by each individual, the symbolism of which reveals subtle communications to the audience.

Questions: What's in a hand? What do you think these hands symbolise? 

Do you have a favourite painting or sculpture that has some particularly interesting gestures/symbolism? Let us know in the comments below!

- VM

Extra information for fellow history/art nerds!

NB - Very interestingly there are two versions of this painting, one of which shows the angel pointing, the other where the angel is not. The first version was painted by da Vinci in Milan, which then acted as an altarpiece for the Confraternity of the Immaculate Conception in their chapel at san Francesco Grande. Some 21 years later he made an almost identical version of the same theme. Almost! The second version is more idealised, and the angel Uriel is no longer pointing at St. John. 

Firstly da Vinci was a famously slow painter, with patrons often complaining that he had yet to finish anything. So for him to have completed two very similar paintings has, for hundreds of years, confused and tantalised people. 

His original unusual composition has led to many idiosyncratic interpretations; Victorian writers John Ruskin and Walter Pater claimed to find evidence of da Vinci's alleged homosexuality in the pointing angel who was seen as an androgynous figure, and/or a proxy for da Vinci himself.

Author, Dan Brown suggests secret allegories highlighting da Vinci's contempt for the established church through a pagan Madonna-Christ role reversal, phallic rock formations and a concealed scene of the occult where Mary is holding an invisible head in her left hand for the angel Uriel to decapitate with it's dagger-like finger! Brown's book suggests da Vinci was discovered hence his second version sees the angel no longer pointing.

In truth however it has been rather unimaginatively suggested that the answer can actually be found within a financial dispute. 

Once he finished the original in around 1485 da Vinci decided that the price he agreed to was now too low. He petitioned his patron Ludovico and eventually sold it to someone else for more money [100 ducats]. The Confraternity then commissioned a replacement painting for their now empty chapel [the version now owned by The National Gallery]. This second version took much longer to complete, begun in the 1490's and not finished until 1508 [this was due to da Vinci being a slow worker, as well as the invasion of French troops which forced da Vinci's patron Ludovico from power and in tern saw da Vinci's swift departure from Milan. He returned in 1506.] 

To this day the painting still contains mysteries. The French version has undergone little restoration, whereas the London version has been recently cleaned giving it a truer, brighter sense of da Vinci's palette and tonal range, and it now offers us further exquisite details. There are a number of differences between the original and second painting, but perhaps most notably if of course the missing angel hand, which appears to have been suppressed. It is suggested that it was just simply omitted because it was potentially distracting as a gesture - and I must say when I see someone pointing I do wonder why that might be as it is often a negative gesture, especially in biblical depictions.