IDEA OF COMMON GOOD (EL BIEN GENERAL) IN THE SERIES OF ETCHINGS “THE DISASTERS OF WAR” (“LOS DESASTRES DE LA GUERRA”) BY FRANCISCO GOYA (BASED ON THE BOHDAN AND VARVARA KHANENKO MUSEUM OF ART FUNDS)

Ідеї Просвітництва (передовсім французького з найвідомішими його представниками Ж.-Ж. Руссо, Ш.-Л. Монтеск’є та М. Ф. А. Вольтером) не лише запліднили політичну сферу тогочасного світу але й знайшли своє відображення та взаємодію в мистецтві. Франсіско Хосе де Гойя-і-Лусьєнтес (1746-1828 рр.) був безпосередньо перечулений цими ідеями: він брав пасивну участь у наполеонівських війнах і безпосередньо перебував у колі спілкування з видатними представниками іспанського Просвітництва. Метою дослідження є аналіз взаємодію тексту й образу в серії офортів Ф. Гойї “Лихоліття війни” та з’ясувати рецепцію ідеї “загального блага” в офорті 71 “Проти загального блага”. Теоретико-методологічний інструментарій, необхiдний для дослідження цієї теми, пов’язаний як із специфікою роботи з наративним родом писемного типу джерел, так і зображальним (візуальним) типом джерел. Комплексний підхід зумовлений використанням Ф. Гойєю як позавербальних, так і вербальних (подвійні номери офортів та артионіми, екфразиси) засобів. Методологічну основу дослідження складають принципи комплексності, історизму та науковості. Основними методами стали: іконографічний та іконологічний; емпіричний; просопографічний; метод синтетичної та аналітичної джерелознавчої критики; порівняльно-історичний. Вірогідно, Франсіско Гойя, який так само критикував тогочасний обскурантизм в Іспанії (що особливо віддзеркалюється в серії офортів «Капрічос»), звертався до ідей французького просвітництва, що породило, можливо, й несвідомі ремінісценції та алюзії в його роботах. Таким чином, питання обізнаності Франсіско Гойї з ідеями Ж.-Ж. Руссо не відіграє ключової ролі в даній проблемі (хоча й і є вкрай цікавою темою для дослідження), адже найціннішим аспектом для нас залишається не прямі запозичення в автора, а саме експлікація просвітницьких ідей (у нашому випадку – в мистецтві), що контекстуально свідчить про їх стрімке поширення в Європі та активне впровадження в різномані сфери людської діяльності. Ключові слова: Гойя, Жозеф Бонапарт, Фердинанд VII, спільне благо, артионіми, “Лихоліття війни”, Просвітництво.

1 Francisco Goya observed as the terror of 1791 -1793 began with the slogan of progressive ideas of the Enlightenment, and the Inquisition was restored. The series of engravings "Caprichos" became the result of these experiences (mysterious disease, social crisis, the crisis of educational ideas and disappointment in the ideals of youth). "The Disasters of War" reflect the immediate events in the native country and native town of F. Goya (Shostak, 2008, pp. 7-18). In the 60's, F. Goya endured a discontinuity between liberal and educational attitudes and inhumanity, horrific cruelties (Bouvier 2011(Bouvier , p. 1110 2 Under the notion of "out-of-source knowledge" we mean "aggregate of factors of pressure on consciousness" of the author (Yakovenko 2007, p. 259). In such a case the idea, the subject is being acquainted with by means of autopsy, is not so important as its articulation in society. Participants of the peasant war of 1524-1525 did not necessarily have to get acquainted with the "Prague Manifesto" by T. Müntzer, although he calls for active actions there "all, who see this writing" (Müuntzer 1989, pp. 334-335). case, we have a direct interaction between text and image, due to the author's wish to nominate and verbalize the artistic image. The etchings are made in the technique of aquatintes. F. Goya's creative method was that he first found a concise and clear disclosure of the theme at the stage of sketches, and then "translated" them into the "language" of etchings and aquatinter (Babkin and Avanesian 2015, p. 33).
Francisco Goya created the series of 82 engravings between 1810 and 1820 as an allegorical protest against the war. The series of 82 engravings, created by Francisco Goya between 1810 and 1820, became an allegorical protest against the war as encroaching on the essence of a person, whose nature is the primary source of the phenomenon of social existence and of its sophistic organization. He portrays war that blurs the line between "Spanish heroes" and "barbaric supporters of the Old Order" (Smith 2014, p. 154). Goya returns to allegories and summarizes plots without documentary accuracy, which was not inherent to the contemporary images of military conflicts. The war in Spain was held under the slogans "for God, the homeland and the king"; the artist provided etchings with, first of all, universal character. The etchings numbers 65-82, completed presumably between 1813 and 1820, constitute a separate series with the original title of "emphatic fantasies" ("caprichos enfhticos") and depict the result of the restoration of the Bourbon dynasty in the country, that, despite the hope, did not provide peace and stability, having launched a reactionary policy (Warren 2015, p. 139).

&&&
The Museum of Western and Oriental Art (nowadays "The Bogdan and Varvara <hanenko National Museum of Arts") acquired the series "The Disasters of War" (Fig. 2) in the spring of 1941 "from the citizen Sharonov", as it is mentioned in the act which was signed by O. Gaybel (presumably, an employee of the museum). Information about the one, who transmitted 160 F. Goya's works from two famous series ("Los Caprichos" and "Disaster of War"), arranged in two albums, is few. We assume that it was Mikhail Andreevich Sharonov (1881-1957) -a famous graphic artist, a teacher and a member of the museum's artistic council. It is still unclear how museum obtained the etchings: the word "purchased" means that a certain price had been set, but it was not specified in the act.
It should be noted that the "Disaster of the War", due to censorship, was published only in 1863 in Madrid. All numbers and inscriptions on the etchings were copied from the original sheets and transferred to the copper plates. The iteration of the fourth edition of 1906 is now kept in the funds of the Bohdan and Varvara <hanenko National Museum of Arts.
Register 1, file 44. Acts of acceptance, issue and transfer of exhibits of the museum. Lists of exhibits of the museum, 1925 -1941, 425 sheets &&& Historians of art evaluate Goya's reception of the ideas of Enlightenment mainly through aquatints of the Capriccios series (Los Caprichos) (Eisenman, St. & Crow, T. 2011, pp. 78-80). Eisenman and his co-authors divide "The Disasters of War" into three thematic blocs: 1) the victims and the horrors of war (sheets 2-47); 2) the hunger, the death, the dead (48-64); 3) "caprichos enfacticos" ("emphatic fantasies") (65-80). The third block Goya presumably created during the monarchical reaction (Eisenman, St. & Crow, T. 2011, p. 96). At the same time, the Soviet scholar I. Levin stated that the series of etchings can be divided into two parts: 1) the heroic struggle of the Spanish people against Napoleon and 2) the difficult years of the reaction of Ferdinand VII (Levin 1958, p. 198). Unfortunately, the research, although it was extensive, was carried out with a precise ideological bias of the time. Therefore, the scholar explained the whole cycle as a unity dedicated to the struggle of "the broad revolutionary masses against the French invasion" (Levin 1958, p. 198). Even Paul Bouwierre in his studio, where he analyzes etchings of the cycle "The Disasters of War" most extensively, ignores the etching "Against the common good" which, in our opinion, requires a profound analysis.
Let us note what was discussed in the discourse of the philosophers of the Enlightenment for the "common good". Though the concept roots reach in the ancient philosophy 1 , Seventeenth and Eighteenth century philosophers heavily revised it and elaborated on it in terms of the social contract (B. Spinoza, T. Hobbes, J. Locke, J.-J. Rousseau, D. Hume). For J.-J. Rousseau's "common good" is one of the most important advantages of the state and the conclusion of the agreement, for the sake of which each individual sacrifices part of his own natural sovereignty: "When, at a certain moment, we are convinced, that among the motives that push people towards mutual unity through the formation of voluntary bonds, there is nothing that corresponds to the essence of the union, then we will understand that the good of one, far from seeking common welfare, from which everyone would receive his own, turns into evil for another; when we finally see that, instead of joining together in the common pursuit of the common good (underlined by the author. -I. L.), people are getting closer to each other, only because they are all taken away from this good -then we must also understand, that even with the ability of this state to maintain its existence, it will be only a source of crime and poverty for people, each of which sees only its own interest, and is guided only by its own predispositions and hears only his own passions" (Rousseau 2001, pp. 167-168).
By the concept of J.-J. Russo, only "common will" can govern the state according to the main goal of its formation -to common good. The phenomenon of the "common good" does not deny the interests of individuals. On the contrary: it recognizes their presence, because the consistency of these interests made society possible to be established and to function.
The essence of this concept is reduced to the two components: the will and equality, since "any particular affiliation will mean that the state is deprived of power, which is equal to this dependence" (Rousseau 2001, p. 62), while freedom itself can not exist without equality. The connection between people shapes common interests, but "everyone, giving himself up to the power of all, does not give himself under any particular power" (Rousseau 2001, p. 20). J.-J. Rousseau concludes that "society should be governed only on the basis of this common interest" (Rousseau 2001, p. 31). However, one of the key questions is, whether people are able to identify themselves, what this "common good" should be.
In the treatise, one can find many contradictions, since J.-J. Rousseau argues that the "common will" can not be mistaken in determining the collective interest and at the same time proves the inability of people by their nature, even in the body of the sovereign, to make such choice. Society doubtless needs a "Legislator", who will have the highest legislative power, which has nothing to do with the power of human beings. J.-J. Rousseau recognizes existence of the universal justice, but this justice also needs sanctions to "return justice its object" (Rousseau 2001, 44).
The figure of the Legislator (one of the most important in Rousseau's concept) reveals his understanding of the notions of "freedom", "justice", "good" as the basis of a democratic state. These notions also play a major role in Goya's etching "Against the common good", where he depicts the devil, who creates unfair (according to the above-mentioned notions) laws against to the people's good.
&&& Fransisco Goya depicts figures in a gloomy, grotesque atmosphere; inscriptions to paintings are stingy, sardonic and ambiguous. Significant role is played by the ironic verbal game of original titles of etchings, that demonstrates the moral uncertainty of the time: the author uses Spanish proverbs, which do not have an unambiguous translation, and it creates an additional allegory. A special grotesque atmosphere is an important element of the series "The Disasters of War": in the works by Goya two worlds were interwoven -the old, "black" Spain and the ideas of the Enlightenment, which quickly spread in Spanish society. Claiming his certain liberal attitudes will undoubtedly be an exaggeration. In the saved Goya's letters, we do not find any information on his political attitudes (Simmons 2004). Nevertheless, he managed to depict vividely this struggle between "the traditional", "black" and "the brand new" Spain of Enlightenment. Goya's sensibility to the political and social issues guaranteed popularity to his engravings.
One of the brightest and meaningful etching, in our opinion, is the previously mentioned number 71 (Fig. 2), which the author named "Against the common good" ("Contra el bien general"). The artist portrayed a creature with a devilish appearance, which sits on a hill with an open book on his knees. Lifting up a long finger with a crippled curved claw, the creature illegally leads a pen with ink on the empty pages of the book. Hairless, with pterygoid ears and hunched back, he writes attentively, leaning forward and stretching his lips as if spelling the lines written. Behind the hill, the thin dim shadows depict the vague figures of people: one man seems to be lifting his arms upward powerless (the faces are depicted schematically, but the expressive lines are good for transmitting the emotion); other figures, tilting their heads, fall to the ground before the creature on the hill that slowly displays the letters.
In our opinion, the interpretation of the engraving lies within the context of those breakthrough events, which determined the artist's experiences and his long internal crisis. After the enthroning of Ferdinand VII, the king issued a number of orders that restored the Inquisition, abolished the Cortes, as well as the Cadiz Constitution of 1812, based on the principles of popular sovereignty and the division of power -seems to be the only progressive consequence of the Napoleonic wars (Benson 1966, p 80). F. Goya does not fail to bind the image with expressive and ambiguous titles: the etchings were created in a logical sequence; in the signature under the engraving the author put forward the thesis, which the image organically illustrates. People on the hill, where the devil sits, are forced to accept an unjust law, created by the one, who have lost his human face.
Francisco Goya seems to complete the previous plot with the etching 72 (Fig. 1): a paralyzed man lays on the ground, being pecked by the bird-like creatures with wings of a bat. Again, we are not the first to encounter these wings (similar elements appear in the series of engravings "Los Caprichos", in the 43rd etching entitled "The Sleep of Reason Produceses Monsters": bat-like creatures dominate according to Goya, when the human mind is sleeping 1 ).
Fantasy in "The Disasters of War" is an organic part of etchings, not just their outer masking. According to Sarah Simmons' "Goya. Life in letters", artist since the end of the nineteenth century began to turn to fantastic elements in the creativity, and in the series "Disasters of War", the demonic images flooded F. Goya's paintings, acquired more definite forms, however, most likely, in the subconscious of the artist (Simmons 2004, p. 206).
<nown art critic and explorer of "the black paintings" of Francisco Goya, professor Nigel Glendinning (1929Glendinning ( -2013 in the work "Goya and his critics" (1977) notes, that the source of the allegorical language of F. Goya could be the book of the Italian poet Giovanni Battista Casti, published in 1802 and translated into Spanish in 1813, "Talking Animals" ("Gli Animali parlanti"), in which the author strongly criticizes the authorities, which put an end to civil liberties (Matilla, 2008, p. 341-343). In the satirical poems of J. Castie, officials, crown advisers, lawyers are professional intriguers, which, having turned into animals (having lost in human likeness), decide the fate of ordinary people . We can see a similar plot in the aforementioned engraving of F. Goya "Against the common good." There are some extrapolations also in the etching number 74 "It is the worst!" ("Esto es lo peor!") ( Fig. 3), at which the wolf, with the monk sitting next to on his knees, on the background of exhausted people, forced to obey, writes down another order on the scrolls.
The series of prints "The Disasters of War" were highly biased. This evident political bias caused the postponement in publishing -they were published only posthumously. The scenes of war, whose victim and hostage is always a defenceless human being; the hunger, cruelty, poverty and deathall this barely combined with patriotic exaltation. Thus, it was inevitably perceived as a statement against the government, which refered to the "common good" and justified its own policy based on the principles of the Old Order ("l'Ancien Régime"). The key is that in the very title of the etching ("Contra el bien general") there is the notion of "common good", formulated as the integral concept by J.-J. Rousseau in the political treatise "On the Social Contract". Having based on the idea of S. Eisenmann and T. <rov, that the sheets 65-80 were created after 1814, one can assume that the depicted devil embodies the image of the ruler Ferdinand VII. At the origins of the Constitution of 1812 people there were close to F. Goya people: enlightener and political activist Jovellannos and Sean Bermudez (Juan Agustin Cean Bermudez, 1749-1829) -he was the first, Goya presented the album "The Disaster of the War" to. The abolition of the Cadis Constitution meant, firstly, betraying the ideals of the artist himself and of his immediate surroundings. Secondly, it finally confirmed the futility of the victims, of the blood and the struggle itself in Spain (1808-1814), and the newly established regime meant the abandonment of the common good, under which F. Goya understood, presumably, as J.-J. Rousseau, equality and freedom.

&&&
The events of the French Revolution, which could not fail to find a response to the Pyrenees, shaped significantly Goya's views. By that time he built a successful career in Madrid as a court 1 The image of a bat appears in F. Goya's series "Caprichos". Wing-shaped outgrowths of the figure on the etching 71 are set at the same place as auricles of an ordinary person are, and they are similar to bat wings. I. Lewin says that they are the wings of a bat (Lewin, 1958), but they are not in fact. Comparing to the wings of representatives of Chiroptera (Abelentsev & Popov 1956, p. 230) (and, also, to all normal limbs of other mammals), F. Goya's bat-like wings have one thumb more, moreover, when the first thumb takes the usual position -at the top of the wrist, then the second one, as we can see, is in the area of the elbow, which is curved into the other side, in comparison to reality. We can assume, that F. Goya did not aim to achieve the greatest similarity to nature, not because of ignorance, but, more likely, deliberately, because he could, of course, not to observe the bat's wing closely, but at least had to know what direction the elbow joints of mammals were bending to. painter of Bourbons. Despite his work at the royal court, Francisco Goya fell under the influence of the French Revolution ideals of freedom and tried to move away from the court ceremony, pomp, academic canons in art. However, it is difficult to investigate from the methodological point of view whether Francisco Goya was acquainted with the philosophy of J.-J. Rousseau, since there are no direct calls for Rousseau's ideas in the sources. But we have to take in account, that the artist was close to Gaspar de Jovellanos (1744-1811), a Spanish writer, lawyer and economist, who also took part in Napoleonic wars. He translated "The Social Contract" into Spanish and supported necessary qualitative transformations of the state. Probably, Francisco Goya, who also criticized the contemporary obscurantism in Spain (which is especially reflected in the series of etchings Los Caprichos), turned to the ideas of French enlightenment, which gave rise to, perhaps, unconscious allusions in his work.
Thus, the question of Goya's awareness of the J.-J. Rousseau's ideas does not play a key role in this problem (although it is an extremely interesting topic for research). The most valuable aspect for us is not direct borrowing from the author, but the explication of educational ideas (in our case, in art), which contextually testifies about their rapid expansion in Europe and active introduction into various spheres of human activity. The series of etchings "The Disasters of War" confirms vividly the statement of the English poet Alexander Pope (1688-1744) -"The proper study of mankind is man". Therefore, both Enlightenment and historical context pushed Francisco Goya towards invention of his specific artistic language, which focused on the nature and essence of humankind. Therefore, all the foregoing caused F. Goya's artistic innovation and his special artistic language, which placed the nature and essence of human with its complex organization, to the center of attention, having opened the pure breath of a new era in the "black" engravings.
We are grateful to Oleksiy Koshel (Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv) for the help with translations from the Spanish language; to Petro Buzunko, chiropterologist (T. G. Shevchenko National University "Chernihiv Colegium") for consultations; to Olena Shostak (the Bogdan and Varvara Khanenko National Museum of Arts) for her kind assistance; and to Taras Pshenychnyy, Candidate of Technical Sciences (Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv).