The story of the discovery of this sculpture is itself worthy of our attention. It was found, just as was the case with most ancient objects, by accident, while its finder was worthy of his name – Felice de Fedris. On Oppio Hill not far from the Colosseum, in modern times, there was a vineyard and nobody could have supposed that underneath there is a true labyrinth of rooms of the old, forgotten through centuries complex of Emperor Nero, the so-called Domus Aurea (Golden House). While working on a vine Felice (which in Italian means Happy), came across a cement coating, while digging further – an opening leading to old chambers. And here we can let our imagination run wild and imagine how with the use of a rope or a ladder, with a torch in hand, Felice descends to the mysterious interior. His eyes witness the great, delicate paintings, which cover the underground walls. When he reaches the floor, he goes on further and in the weak light, probably with terror, he notices this sculpture. These are not the treasures he dreamed of, when he descended into the dark depths, but it was this very discovery of Nero’s palace that made him famous.

Pope Julius II ordered the sculpture to be transported to the Vatican at the beginning of 1506, while the finder no longer had to worry about his vineyard since besides the 600 guldens reward he also received regular income in the form of a road tax, from the Porta San Giovanni. The sculpture was slightly damaged, it lacked one hand and leg of one of the boys as well as an arm of another, while Laocoön himself was also without an arm, however, rapidly (1533) they were reconstructed (in ceramics) by a student of Michelangelo (Giovanni Angelo di Montrorsoli). The figures received limbs, and Laocoön even got an exalted in its expression, outstretched arm, which in a decisive way for centuries influenced the perception of this work. Thanks to such an act the composition of the sculpture was based on a strong diagonal, moving from the man’s foot all the way to his hand seizing the serpent. The arrangements of the figures were slightly altered moving one of the sons towards the back. At that moment the work started its new life. It had an enormous significance for the then Italian art, and on the same token for all of European culture. Unknown until then dynamism, pathos and expressiveness of the ancient artifact stimulated artists to take a new look not only at antiquity, but also at their own work. It is difficult to imagine the courage of Michelangelo and his suffering and dying Slaves (Michelangelo's  Moses) or the scale in forming the figures of the vault of the Sistine Chapel without this particular sculpture. Did it not also give rise to Baroque?

At the moment of its discovery the group was not completely unknown. It was mentioned by a Roman historian from the I century A.D., Pliny the Elder (Historia Naturalis), who saw the sculpture in the palace of Emperor Titus. He did not hide his admiration for it – as he wrote – it surpassed everything that has been until now seen in Rome. Pliny also adds the names of three of its authors – sculptors from Rhodes: Agesander, Polydorus and Athenodorus. It must be added that in accordance with ancient tradition the sculpture was partially colored. The bodies of the serpents were colored, as well as the hair of the protagonists, and their eyes, mouths and even nipples; the head of Laocoön was adorned with a wreath.

What is then the discovered group, and where was it initially located? Generally it is believed that it comes from Pergamum. However, the time of its creation gives rise to contradicting opinions. Some believe that it is a Roman copy from the times of Pliny, others, that it is the original – an outstanding example of  Hellenistic art, from the end of the I century B.C., still others are convinced that it was made by Michelangelo, who was known for creating falsifications (see Michelangelo’s Pieta), and in this case fulfilled the dreams of the then humanists about the discovery of a sculpture known for its messages. In a period of fascination with antique art, which affected everybody in Italy, this was a great discovery indeed. For many months the adulation and attention of Roman elites was concentrated solely on it. The drama of the work was admired, while Laocoön himself, became for artists the perfect personification of suffering. A whole generation of painters and sculptors recalled him, searching for the appropriate form of their… martyrs. It was discovered anew at the turn of the XVIII and XIX centuries. It became a destination of veritable pilgrimages of educated European elites, while its copies were created in great number. Every court, but also many wealthier and artistically ambitious aristocrats desired to possess this masterpiece of antiquity in original dimensions, or at least as a miniature. It was also a graceful material for writers and poets. The grandeur of Greek art was talked about, but also the sculpture was interpreted in strictly ethical categories, praising the struggle, resistance and heroism of Laocoön, even underlining his care for his sons. Laocoön himself grew to the status of a romantic hero, gripped with passion and fighting until the very end.

Let us move on to the iconography of the work: Laocoön is fighting, as one of his sons seems to be already dying in the deadly grip of the serpent, while the second is still trying to free himself from another reptile. Laocoön’s face twisted with effort, feeling the jaw of the serpent upon his body, points to the fact that he will soon share the fate of the first boy. What does this dramatic scene really represent? There are numerous versions which attempt to provide the answer to this question, but the most popular one comes from the pages of the Virgo’s Aeneid. He describes the struggle of the Trojan priest Laocoön and his sons with two snakes, brought upon them by the unfavorable towards Troy and aiding Greeks, goddess Athena. Why? Laocoön warned about the wooden horse left by Greeks on the beach (Trojan Horse), which the overjoyed Trojans desired to bring into their city, believing that the invaders are finally giving up on the ten-year- long siege. They were also not surprised by the death of Laocoön, killed on the shore of the sea while making a sacrifice to Poseidon. It assured them, that the gods did not favor him and he was justly punished. They were not aware of the clever trap laid by Odysseus, which would allow the warriors hidden inside the horse, to open the gates of Troy, under the cover of the night, and let Greeks, who had earlier simulated retreat, into the city.

When at the beginning of the XX century in one of the antique shops by a lucky stroke and completely by accident, a piece of marble was found, which appeared to be the bent arm of Laocoön, a slight consternation took place. The work which was so deeply rooted in the European consciousness had to be not only once again reconstructed, but also deconstructed. However, nearly half a century had to pass, before it was decided upon. And so in 1960 the hands of the sons added during the Renaissance were removed, but most of all the outstretched arm of the father was replaced with the partial original. A thoroughly new composition came to life, which gave the assumption for new interpretations. There were discussions whether we are dealing with a unfaltering priest, or perhaps with a man who with terror surrenders to imminent fate. Is Laocoön a hero, or perhaps a powerless victim? If on top of this we add the hypothesis, that the priest was depicted exactly at the moment when Athena blinds him with the power of lightning, we will better understand, how it is possible, that this athletic man cannot deal with the serpent. It is not the snake that is the cause of the death but divine fate.

And thus one piece of an arm changed the perception of the work… But is that the end of it?

Laocoön and His Sons, h. 2.42 cm, group made up of 7  parts, Museo Pio-Clementino – Musei Vaticani