Saturday, February 28, 2026

 

Traditio, from painter to painter:Benozzo Gozzoli, Desiderio da Subiaco and Siciolante

Bonozzo Gozzoli(1420-1497) has been a Italian painter and he has, involuntary, suggested some stylistic characteristic to other two painters next Rome, these are Desiderio da Subiaco, in 15 century, and Girolamo Siciolante(1521-1575); to the first, this is Desiderio, he has given the typical folds of cloth(Figs.1-2), in Camerae pinctae of Caetani castle, that are one of a major appointment to Desiderio during his pictorial life; he has worked also in Affile(Fig.3) and Cori, in church of saint Oliva(Fig.4), other works in Sermoneta and other town of Lazio. What is influence of Benozzo on Desiderio? The cloth, as above said is directly influence of Benozzo, the confront to two manners is more evident(Figs.5-6), are model to Subiaco to his folds in Camerae pinctae of Caetani castle(Figs.1-2); we can date these frescos about 1492, when Desiderio in Sermoneta, dated the Universal judgement, painted in counter facade of cathedral of Sermoneta(Fig.7), in 1492, this is 32 years after that Gozzoli has painted the Virgin of angels, in same cathedral of Sermoneta(Fig.8), the angels below(Fig.9) has suggested to Desiderio the folds, that he used to Camerae, and same Gozzoli has suggested also the posture of a Saint Francis in same cathedral(Figs.9a-9b). After Benozzo, Desiderio has suggested to Siciolante from composition his frescos of Camerae pinctae(Figs.1-2), the iconography to his Virgin and saints(Fig.11), now in Caetani castle, and datable 1521; in fact Siciolante has took from Desiderio the niches and has translated to Virgin above mentioned(Figs.1-2), instead to saint Lorenz on right of Virgin, Siciolante has took a female figure on right of Moses of Michelangelo(Fig.12), datable abot 1513-1516, that after he has interpreted, but the model is this figure; but Girolamo didn’t lost other Virgin of Gozzoli in Saint Angel in Pescheria, Rome; the angels on sides has substituted the saints, but the curtain is present behind the Virgin; hence Siciolante has interpreted two masters of a century precedent to his, Gozzoli and Desiderio da Subiaco, therefore it is traditio, from Latin, that meanings pass on or hand down; it is normal in painting culture and humanistic sciences, but important is find these models, and this pledge is our. A note both historical, the saint on right, this is saint Lorenz, has a book instead usually stone as attribute, it is normal but this saint has almost always the stone, why here has alone the book? Simple, because this altarpiece has commissioned from Caetani family, lords of Sermoneta, that was informed about the disputes of Luther and his rules to Protestantism; therefore, the book that represents the Gospel is an homage from family Caetani to Church.  

Alessandro Lusana   


Fig.1
Fig.2
Fig.3
Fig.4
Fig.5
Fig.6
Fig.7
Fig.8
Fig.9
Fig.9a
Fig.9b

Fig.10

Fig.11
Fig.12
Fig.13




























  

Thursday, February 26, 2026

 

Ancient and modern errors: anonymous Magliabechiano

This name is very odd to strangers to art history, it is normal but it is a source important or so presumed to Italian art history and particularly Florentine, the name of this manuscript took from  Antonio Magliabechi (1633-1714) a Florentine bibliophile of 17th; the anonymous author uses ancient source as Pliny the Old, and his Naturalis historia, in fact doesn’t fantasy but follows directly the his source, and Pliny has said: “And the first was Gorgias, that today is unknown because we know a Gorgias from Lentin, Sicily, rhetorician(before Christ 483-376) and other rhetorician from Athens(1 century befo5re Christ) that, following the text of our anonymous could, in temple of Delphi, he has worked a sculpture of gold, that was after 40 years the foundation of Rome, it is impossible, because Pliny known alone the legendary date of foundation of Rome, because today we doesn’t know it, and it also impossible, certainly less important than the first, but we can consider, that a sculptor called Gorgias is never born. A sculptor called Butades that worked pots of earth and other things in Corinth”; it is usual legend, because today we keep sculpture of some thousand years ago, in Egypt for example; and continuing with this way: “…to motive of his daughter that was fall in love to a young, before that the father come to go away she took the shadow of his lover, and she with lines given a summary description and ended it, and hers father, after, give the earth and he given the form, and after he cook (so that it have a form and solid material)…”; the episode is false as the 7 euros, and Pliny has took it from Greek mythology, an episode when the girl, after the epiphany of his lover, by now dead, she worked a statue of the young, and when the sculpture dissolved in a fire she dived in fire; it is source of Pliny, and our anonymous follows with fidelity. We must give a compliment to this anonymous, that fortunately to him is again anonymous, otherwise a stake we could have to him very will; somebody says that Damarato, merchant of Corinth, escaped from Greece and he come to Tuscany, and where married an Tuscan woman and he was father of Tarquin Priscus, king of Roman people. And two sculptors Euciarpus and Eugromannus, and from them the sculpture in Italy is born...”; these bullshits are laughable, but a dynamic ground of truth is present, where is? Simple to trade of ancient Sicily during 5th century before Christ to Etruria, actual Tuscany and Rome, from this commerce is born the legend of Damarato. But neither is saved from these bullshits because the anonymous took also the painting: “Hygiaenon was the first that distinguished the man from woman in painting, and Eumarus from Athens portrait it to natural…”, he following the Naturalis historia follows the fantasy. About Phidias(before Christ 490-415) one of the major sculptor in ancient Greek, that sculpted the histories on sides of Parthenon, that in narration of anonymous has come to Rome and sculpted a Venus a Jupiter, certainly it is credible, but Phidias in Rome and in Italy never come. To medieval painters the told is improved because The life of painters sculptors and architects was published and may the anonymous could read the life of painters and to Cimabue(1240-after 1302), but evidently he hasn’t seen the frescos of Giotto(1267?-1337), because he had given the natural form to human body, while Cimabue remained to Byzantine form. The name Giotto is short form of Ambrogiotto or Ambrose, common error, and proof that the author has read the life of Vasari is in this step: “…(Cimabue) coming to Bolognas  and next to Florence while he passed  to a town called Vespignano, he seen a young that one a table he was drawing a sheep…” and Vasari in life of Giotto: “Cimabue while going from Florence to Vespignano he found Giotto, that meanwhile the sheep pastured on the cleaned table with a stone he portrait a sheep…”; the contradiction of anonymous is in following step: “And he(Giotto) leaved the Greek way, that Cimabue took,…”, but some steps before he has said the contrary, this is that Cimabue used the natural image: “He was(this is Cimabue), that has found the natural outline and the true proportion, fro Greek called symmetry…and he kept  the Greek manner…”, the Byzantine, or Greek manner isn’t natural but alone ideal; hence or Cimabue was natural of ideal, but certainly he not be both. These are errors of a manuscript of second half of 16th century, in National library of Florence, and can ascertain that he has copied Pliny and Vasari thereupon nothing of new he has added.  I hope that somebody is going to explain importance of this writer since he copied Pliny and Vasari. It isn’t a mystery of faith in conformity of Catholic mess, but alone a mystery of art history, and of art critic, because the Anonymous is very useless.

Alessandro Lusana







Sunday, February 22, 2026

 

Urban iconology: Gozzoli

This title is very strange, some expert of art can say that it is an assay of a drunk; identification of an thing, that is hide allusion to something, a valor, a family, a own or other; but to a town and his representation could let to identify something? Certainly, in fact in Sermoneta(Fig.1), Italy, 43 miles from Rome, was painted with this town on legs; different interpretations some historical of art has given; a Virgin of misericord, a Virgin that has protected Sermoneta from an earthquake in 1455, hence Onorato 2th Caetani(1414-1491), has commissioned this altarpiece(Fig.2), to Benozzo Gozzoli(1420-1497) to keep memory of this miracle, and other opinions that has very scant possibility. This iconography is thought to costumer, this is Onorato Caetani lord of Sermoneta and thereupon every painted sign has his motive: the town is represented because lacks every coats of arms, the Caetani family has had the wave(Fig.3) is present in the castle Caetani of Sermoneta, in the cathedral of Anagni(Italy)(Fig.4), on the frescos with Last dinner of Litardo Piccioli((Fig.5), unique pupil of Livio Agresti, that in 1582 has painted in refectory of convent of San Francesco in Sermoneta, to commission of cardinal Enrico Caetani; the coat arms of family was also on a façade of a church of Sermoneta(Fig.6), and the coats of arms is also on the chapel Caetani in church of Saint Joseph, why on this painted no? Same motive to in Camerae pinctae, in Caetani castle of Sermoneta(Figs.7-8); because these Camerae were the private rooms lord of Sermoneta, and the hostess to habit were received in private rooms during the 15th century, hence it was normal that coats of arms aren’t, because the owner of rooms was these present and he was a Caetani member; why on this altarpiece hasn’t the coats of arms? Because the Sermoneta town represented on legs of Virgin(Fig.9), and the tiara(Fig.10) are attributes of reign on Sermoneta, thereby the reign of Caetani, and the tiara is sign of same domination but with allow of pope, that represented God in earth, thereupon the reign of Caetani on Sermoneta was guaranteed from God, it is explication is necessary to solve this iconography that can seems strange, but is easy explain after that we have considered these attributes, it is very easy. To style the Gozzoli seems turned back, because he used a style very long from chapel of Medici Ricciardi family(Fig.11), why it? Because the Sermoneta and other towns next of far were very strangers to new evolutions of painters, and the people would didn’t understand the esthetic valor of this altarpiece; hence Gozzoli have to approach to  people and the cultural traditionalism of this town, and following the requests of costumer has painted this underdeveloped altarpiece; in fact the face of Virgin(Fig.12), has took some record from Simone Martini(1284-1344)(Figs.13).

Alessandro Lusana

Fig.1
Fig.2
Fig.3
Fig.4
Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7
Fig.8
Fig.9
Fig.10
Fig.11
Fig.12
Fig.13






























Saturday, February 21, 2026

 

New era and new policy: Pope Martin 5th

The Constance council from 1414 to 1418 elected the new pope, Oddone Colonna, that has took the name of Martin 5th(1417-1431); this dates certainly don’t interest somebody, the answer after the read is: “I don’t give damn”; very right! But a date that historically can interest is the qualities of Church to pick the men, regard above all, the pope; an example is very recent, the last pope Leon 14th is moderate pope, to political strategy, he isn’t too to left or too right, he is in center, politically he is between right and left, after the Francis pope, to left and the Gregory too right, now was necessary to Church a pope in the middle of these two positions; Baron Ludwig von Pastor(1854-1928) the major historical man of popes in modern era, may unconsciously has given some indication to define this pope: “The new pope descended from noble and principal family in Rome, he has had appointed from pope Innocents 7th to Holy College in June of 1405…and in judgement he has had very much qualities that were necessaries to his high dignity, he was expert to canonic right, resolute and strong, naïve but very Spartan to life; he has took very few party during the fight of parties and he treated with way very friendly every member of council of Constance, so the relations of ambassadors  present to council are very full of compliment to pope…”, but other question, certainly more important than election of pope, in that framework, was vital to cardinals, this is reform of Church, after the French transfer; in that moment was necessary that a pope was strong but no much so that the reform doesn’t damage the familiar interest of cardinals, thereupon a pope was necessary but much moderate; in fact same von Pastor says: “The Christianity could give to happiness  without border to election of martin 5th, if he has treated with strongly to Church reform, that was nevertheless in great difficulties…but afrter his election to pope role it’s evident that it hope very scant to this matter”; it is motive to election of Martin 5th, he made few that the framework required and after the great schism, this is the fight between the legitimate popes and the against popes, that was cause to clashes in the Church, and cause of different and contrary ideologies; hence it is moment when was necessary the calm, thereby a man that has the moderate character and friendly was necessary to Church, because also a Church very weak allowed to enemies of Europe to attack and with some promise of power to future, the alliance would be very much; a man with inclusive wit would be ideal pope, because he could gather everybody and reunite the forces necessary to contrast an common enemy. Ulterior proof of this intention is step of von Pastor: "The pope promised then that the first, he is going to elect  cardinals, how much it is possible,  from all the countries of Christianity..."; it is certitude of above  said, because every country, incluse the French, could be represented; important was to Martin 5th reach the unity of Church, thereupon we are brothers more than in Christ in policy.The diplomatic and politic qualities of martiv5th are evident from an episode that seen Balthasar Costa, this is against pope John 23th, that in Milan was received by Martin pope and was appointed Archbishop of Tuscolo, after that he has renounced to his papacy and after he has honored Martin as legitimate pope, Martin could give harm his adversary, but Martin known perfectly the art of policy, thereupon an adversary in the clergy was more easily controlled, it is motive to election to bishopric. Other question, certainly more important and great describes von Pastor, when he describes the policy condition of other Italian cities: “Bologna was become an independent republic and the great part of Church state was prey of much aristocratic families. Martin needed an way to solve this context very serious to manage in diplomatic art. The first was reached an accord with the queen of Naples; in fact martin recognized to hers the rights to reign of Naples, hence the coronation but with accord that the queen have to aind martin to manage and consolidation of papacy power in Rome and the State of Church…To this accord the queen sent, in 6th March of 1419, hers general Sforza Attendolo that evacuate Rome. After Naples Martin, in February 1420, worked to Florentine, and he reached an accord with the bully Braccio da Montone, that had mid meridional Italy, and he was a formidable warrior. Braccio da Montone reached by pope, as vicar of Church the feuds of Perugia, Assisi, Todi and Jesi…, and in the July of 1420, he become the Bologna city to obedience of pope.”, but neither the papal family was exempt from this diplomacy strategy; in fact, in tel of pastor other particulars are important:"Martín V known reinforce his autority, using his family relations: he promosed the wedding of his niece, Catalina, to Guido Antonio de Montefeltro...The sister of pope, Paola, married Gerardo Appiani, lord of Italian city of Piombino, with its lands possessions; similar attestation of faithfull he given to family Malatesta of Pesaro his kin; therefore the pope leaded splendity the members of his family. In conclusion Martin 5th was the perfect pope.

Alessandro Lusana  


      

Friday, February 20, 2026

 

National papacy

During the Middle age, this is the centuries when the Church has had the universal power, usually we think that every men, and clericals above all, were subaltern to power and words of pope, an example is king Henry 4th to Canossa; today we would laugh to this episode and other, but then the papacy was very universal, at last in Europe. We must also consider that in same Church politic pression of a king as Charles 5th(1338-1380) although didn’t express as those of Philipp 4th king of Franche(1268-1314) certainly was present because this king have to renfornce the role of monarchy, and to this he was helped from building that he commissioned: “Charles 5th a notable builder. He gave Paris a new curtain wall enclosing a large number of buildings erected beyond the built by Philip Augustus in the twelfth century; same politic that in Rome and in Italy has followed both the popes and the aristocratic families, because the build is the evident signs of power and richness and the occasions to give jobs, because then the artisans didn’t lack certainly; but beyond the buildings and the luxury also a pope, that the France has had for 68 years in Avignon could be a motive of politic power, hence the words of Theodoricus fron Nieheim(1345-1418), are a motive to consider that the French monarchy, though he didn’t express it, but we must think that the habit of French to have a pope was by now consuetude, and the conclave that was almost all French, after the Costance council(1414-1418) all the conclave is going to be Italian fro centuries, but the papacy has lost much power, because the national states now began their reise; the Theodoricus says: “But after these beyondmoths cardinals, with same pope, that they called Clement, toward the city of Avignon come…”, this is they apointed other pope, in historiography called as against pope; thereupon although Charles 5th was very religious, the power, read the monarchy, is more important than prayer and faithful, because the state of French needs of power, thus the Pater noster is secondary; and the pope is very important to enforce the French and his king; it is motive to against popes in history; in fact the sign of reise of national states is to last against pope, this is Felix 5th(1440-1449); why he was the last against pope? Because the states were definitited to their politic power and, after Martin Luther(1483-1546), also religious power; thereupon the Chatolic power was almost nothing; an example is Henry 8th, king of England, that founded the Anglicanism. To turn to Middle age, the answer of Urban6th pope was the election of new cardinals, prescind for nationality, that in that context was important, because French cardinals has would invalided the decisions, but then danger more important was present, the against pope and above all the French, thereupon the conclave was a instrument to reaffirm the traditional Roman Catholic power. Anyway the process of laic wit is began during Middle age, this is during the more fervent religious partecipation; this is the anticatholicism is hidely began when the Chatolicism was dominant; it is the human history, because it is human kind.

Alessandro Lusana  






 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thursday, February 19, 2026

 

Real fiction: the life is a theater

Casting: Ambrose Amory(police man) and Anthony Barnum(producer), Ann(waitress), A voice behind the scenes

Ambrose (knock to door of a citizen): Good morning, I am Ambrose Amory, a police man; I must ask to you something, can I go in?

Anthony: Certainly, I was reading a script of a movie that I would produce, but I think that you are here because is important your question.

Ambrose: Yes very important, because I must ask about an homicide…

Anthony (interrupting the explication of Ambrose): An homicide?

Ambrose: Yes it is! An homicide, hence I must disturb you to it.

Anthony: I am at your disposal, please set here.

Ambrose: Thank you. Do you know Dominick Barrett?

Anthony: No, I don’t remember this name, do you have some image of him?

Ambrose(extracted from the san of jacket a photo and given it to Anthony): Do you know him?

Anthony(looking attentively the photo): Yes I recognize him! He is a modest actor that has recited in movie, very poor, that I have produced some years ago, a very dirty, but it is necessary to gain some money; I don’t remember the name but he, alone it remind that he was a very bad actor, in fact I remember…

Ambrose (interrupting): I haven’t interest to it; I want know if you have known or no and stop.

Anthony(looked intensely Ambrose): Yes, an indirect knowledge, because I wasn’t the director of this movie, sometime I looked the filming, but no other, anyway I can phone to director and aske to him

Ambrose: He is the victim of homicide.

Anthony: Albert Lytton is victim?

Ambrose: Yes he is it!

Anthony: My God, it’s terrible, and do you think that killer is…

Ambrose (interrupting): he is principal suspected but I can’t know if he is guilty, I must, in conformity with practice, find the proofs.

Ann: Can I give to you the tea? Although you have broke my balls!

Ambrose (looked Ann and speaking to Anthony): Dear producer can I present to you this bitch?

Anthony (smiling and looking Ann): certainly policeman and you must present her very well because she is a woman that doesn’t remember the cues and uses these expression, or not?

Ann: What do you are saying?

Ambrose: he is saying that you don’t cues and…

Ann (looking intensely Ambrose): I don’t must remember nothing, because it isn’t a movie.

Anthony(very astonish): What it isn’t a movie? What is hence?

Ann: (looked other side of room): it is reality.

Anthony and Ambrose(got up and looking one other): Stop, I have end here, because you are making fun of me, I go away.

(he go out from scene and the a man with camera follows him and he give indications)

Adrian: Ok, continue so, go away and stop.

Anthony(stopped): Who are you?

Adrian: Good morning I am director of this movie, and you are very skilled!

(a voice from behind the scenes): Adrian you must say: “You are very skilled! Compliment.” Ok?

Adrian: Excuse me, I didn’t reminded it.

(voice behind the scenes): Make up to Anthony; Ann explain to him what is reality and what is the movie.

Ann: Dear Anthony you have confused the reality and movie, because it is movie and before was alone reality, now you are actor.

Anthony: If before was reality now it is impossible that theatre.

Ann: On stead so it because the life is theatre and you are, now, protagonist.

Anthony: Until when?

Ann: Until you are going live. Compliment.

Adrien: Ann it is cue that I must say.

Ann: Ok.

Adrien(saying to Anthony): Welcome to reality.   



 

        

         

Wednesday, February 18, 2026

 

Librarian experience: Leon Battista Alberti

Flow theoretic have learned very flow from a discipline as Alberti(1404-1472): the treatise about de painter art is a sum of consideration that has forgotten the practical aspect, differently from Giorgio Vasari(1511-1574), that in introduction of his Lives of artists(1568) has descripted the practical aspect of art of painting, because he was a painter and architect, hence he keeps the practical experience; to Alberti is sufficient read his De pictura, to realized that he is alone theoretic painter; in fact he explain arguments absolutely useless. This theoretic nature of this author is evident in the first book of his De architectura, because he said: “About de drawings and its power and rule. We must write about drawings of building and we give to this book every better things that we know from ancient and that is written and these they seen making these building”; it is sufficient to indicate the theoretic nature; why? Simple Alberti describes alone the drawings, he have to describe the building and, as Vitruvius in De architectura, tell about constructions, technical way and material, and following the discourse the second confirm, because he says: “…that from our ancient we can know be written”, but way from ancient authors? Also why written? If you dear Leona Battista have experience in painter and architecture you need no certainly of description, because you have experience directly in art, or no? He would answer, no certainly! Further he following: “The edify is above all the drawings and construction of well”, fortunately that Alberti has explain this practice because otherwise we would don’t know it. Theoretical explication, through obviousness, following: “Where men have decided stop, they built her home and they decided that here they are going to sleep, here prepared the food and elsewhere they quit other; and after they begun to think that the roof and the wells…”; it is simply idiots, this is the obviousness that is a theoretical treatise; but the nature of intellectual and literate man emerges from the following step: “And hence anybody he was, or Vesta goddess daughter odf Saturn, or Euryalus and Hyperbius or Gellio…”, three personages of ancient mythology, that aren’t nothing connection with the house and architecture, but the intellectual vanity is preponderant in every writer. It is therefore a boring description of natural obviousness and stop; Alberti is and rests a theoretic alone, hence this treatise is absolutely useless.

Alessandro Lusana   






 

Tuesday, February 17, 2026

 

First empire and after faith

This essay took origin from a note of Ludwig Baron von Pastor(1854-1928), the more eminent historical of popes in modern era, and he has told, in the first volume of his opera on popes from 15th to 19th centuries, the return of pope to Rome, with election of Martin 5th(1369-1431), after the period that lasted for 68 years; during the Constance council(1414-1418), where the Church bore a reform very important to ecclesiastical customs and moral behaviors; but pastor has described also the imperial wills, this is Sigismund of Luxemburg(1368-1437), king of Bohemian, king of Hungary and Croatia, that in opinion of von Pastor: “To motive of this question born the vehement discussion about the reform, that Sigismund has defended with major conviction, and he didn’t save both menaces and flattery and insults, but he didn’t realize his intent”; we must also consider that then was born the idea and it developed the will of monks and religious men that the predominance, and thereupon the govern of Church must be of council and no of pope; why this opinion? Evidently after the Avignon period something, in theological conviction, was weakened, may that Rome isn’t the capital of Christianity, and the power of pope, this is the pope Clemens 5th that was French decided his residence to Avignon, therefore a man decided it and no God, evidently the Church could govern by men, and the council was composed by men that could govern; hence the Church becomes human, and the reform of Church, so much would from Sigismund, has had the purpose this reform of papal power, why? Evidently because Sigismund that has had a vast empire has had interest that the Church didn’t has a political role, that during Avignon period hasn’t because saved the interest of France, thereupon the Europe could enjoy of very much independence, and the imperators and kings could work to his country and their power both in his country and out; this is the time of Henry 4th, king of Germany, that in 1077 was kneeling on the snow to receive the pardon of Gregory 7th pope, because he was excommunicated, and the electors were against to him. This time I repeated, was very afield both in chronological scale and the laic wit that by now was born and developed; thereupon the request of predominance of council and interests of state were political motives to reform of Church; in fact Sigismund asked the first the reform and after the election of pope, it is other political motive, because with reform of power of Church, that become of council Sigismund would have had major possibilities  of condition the power of Church, as has made the king of France, Philip 4th , this is save his interest and his countries from papacy power. We can consider that this changement of wit is sign of modern time and think, the almightiness of pope was ended, and after 80 years Luther is going to reform, radically, the power of Church, although also that reform was alone to political motive and richness, but the common think about the Church was modified and very much. A short note of Medieval history; Beyond empire also the nation, now Italian or city as Rome because in chronicle of Theodoric from Niem the roman people asked that  the new pope: “saltem Romanum uel Italicum in Papam eligerent”, this is translated: “The new pope at last Roman or Italian”, we must consider that after 68 years of residence in Avignon, France, the first Italian pope, this is Urban 6th (1378-1389) is natural that a city as Rome, that was lived on the papacy wanted a Roman or Italian pope, it was an economic question of primary importance; hence the empire is important but to Roman was more important economic Rome.  

Alessandro Lusana        






Monday, February 16, 2026

 

Aristotelian semiotic

The semiotic is a science that interprets the sign that it is evident or no, for example a road sign is indication to travels that want come to a city or other town, and it is explicit, but on sign is written indication that are signs, distance and direction, that is indicate usually with an arrow, but an arrow is useless to who doesn’t know the significate of this indication, but a driver knows it and he knows interpret this arrow, or an architectonical style can says to us who is architect, and who is architect; all are some example that we see every day, but by now it are normal thereupon our attention is momentary because we know perfectly the mean of these signs, that are to their nature always signs, and the semiotic studies these significance; in art history, other example, is iconology, an address that studies the signs and the meaningful of determined objects that in art history are called attributes; Aristotle in his book The categories adopt this method, some example: “Homonyms, synonyms and paronyms. We call homonyms of things whose the name is common, but the definition is different, for example the animal is called both the man and the painting, their name is alone common but the definition is different; because if we give a definition to every to each has the own. Its called synonyms the tings whose  the name is common and the definition corresponding to name is same, for example; we can called animal both man and the ox; in fact each is called animal through the common name, and the definition is same, because the definition of each, what is to each being animal, we are going to give same definition is same. It are paronyms every things that differing to case but have took the name from things that is equal, for examples courage and courageous”; these examples are clear and very easy, and it seems haven’t importance to a semiotic, but we consider the last example; the courage is a substantive, but we can understand this quality from behavior in from of danger of somebody, the is a sign, but what means? That he has courage, and we to semiotic discipline we can think that this is courageous, hence he has courage; the name is same almost, but meaning is in subject, in opinion of Aristotle, and in semiotic the courage is own of man courageous, equal but different to nature, why? Simple because the courage is a quality, it is a virtue, but is a substantive that can be common to humankind, however it isn’t so; because the danger that is affronted can be much different, also assume the a responsibility is courageous, but it isn’t lethal, but in particular circumstance, when the reputation is shown, but it isn’t lethal; when somebody uses parachute to jump from an fly it is very courageous but is different in confront of reputation; but we can understand the courage of a man both to reputation and parachute, and although we can adjective these cases as courageous the frame is different, same difference that Aristotle sees and identify: “When the kinds are different  and no one under to other also the differences are diverse, for examples “Animal and science; in fact differences of animal are terrestrial, volatile, aquatic and biped, but nothing of these is difference of science because isn’t a science biped”; this difference is evident and the meaning is and can be different both the courage, because has courage in different frames, but every courage is, and the judgement is equal or is radical different because are things absolutely different, but the example of animal, that we have seen above is very fitting because the man is animal, therefore it is equal to every animal, but the difference is in form, in brain, in habit, whereby what is this animal? A man, that is biped, also the bird is animal and it is biped, but is different although it is animal and biped, the difference is both in Aristotle and in the semiotic, because if I buy bird food, without confess why, the cashier can understand that I keep the bird or birds, because prepared the dinner with bird food to a family or host is impolite beyond to jail; I haven’t tell because I am buying this bird food, but it is evident; the semiotic is study of association of meanings that we can take pick of the daily life or the philosophy or other; when we can’t make this association thereupon say . “I don’t know” or “I am not specialist”, it is so because to us is impossible make the bond and justify some cause; this exercise is natural in man, but it is science today, and this science is the semiotic, that in Aristotle is in the Categories also.

Alessandro Lusana  





    

Sunday, February 15, 2026

 

Academical contradiction

The contradiction that here I want consider is so evident that nobody has seen, a academic painter that is against the academic tradition; who is? The reality about this brotherhood is given by John Ruskin, in an article to Times in data 13th may 1851, that underlines this absolute not sense of name and works, it is enough read this step: “These pre-Raphaelite( to I must give my compliments to name) they don’t desire and not exigent  to imitate the ancient painting. Who has this opinion manifests his ignorance to ancient painting, who thinks that is similar painting of these painters and ancient…the pre-Raphaelite don’t want renounce to some vantage that the actual  knowledge and inventiveness can offer to their art"; it is right cetainly, in fact Ruskin has made a synthesis, but the subject that Ruskin has considered, as who ignorant the ancient painter, to Ruskin he is impersonal, but identity of this person is John Ruskin(1819-1900), because he hasn't found the models of pre-Raphaelite brotherhood; hence Ruskin has written about this painters but hewas absolutely extraneous to pre-Raphaelite, and I think that he was extraneous also to Medieval Italian painters; anyway the judgemnet of Ruskin is true, they don't lost nothing of new way, they, as every painters before them, have took from past and they have translated with other style in they present; the name of brothrhood is very far from the truth, because before Raphael is the name alone; Dante Gabriele Rossetti(1828-1882), that despite his name was British but evidently influenced from his origin, because he was son of a Italian patriot Gabriel Rossetti, banned from Italy and exiled to London after 1821, instead to his prefered model, this is the wife of William Morris(1834-1896), Jane Morris(1839-1914) beautiful woman also today(Fig.1a), to her Rossetti has kept partial idealism, because he has modified the the lips, it is enought confront the photo and the portraits; it is a irrilevant particular, but it is means that Dante has wanted followed his idealism; hence the realism of pre-Raphaelit is now alone partial set side. The contradiction is in his style, because he want outrun the academic style but he uses it always, and the principal of his brotherhood, this is take the style and the spirituality of painter before Raphael(1483-1520) is a failed in painting because he took the academic style, because we must consider that he lived in Victorian British when the form was more important than essence; in fact he repeated same style to face and subjects: same face and subject (Fig.1), is sama face, whilethe posture Rossetti has took from Guido Reni(Fig.2); what is characteristic that bond these painting? The beautiful of drawing, the drafting of colors, the line very perfect; the cloth of model, that is the wife of Rossetti, Elizabeth Siddal(1829-1862), is perfect woman and perfect model, the similarities is due by the same model, but the cloth is different, and the academic culture of Rossetti is evident in treatment of this matter, that is silky may, we can think that this accurate definition of textile matter is due from influence of Beato Angelico(1395-1455)(Fig.3), that Dante could studied very much and take the cloth matter; and may from study of this painting Dante has had the idea of this brotherhood; but an influence certainly radical to cloth of Rossetti is that of Peter Lely(1618-1680), a portraitist painter that in London from 1640 has portrait major part of British aristocracy, and an painting, above all, could influenced the light and formal definition of Dante, this painting is Portrait of young lady(Fig.4) and the portrait of Nell Gwynne(Fig.5), that keep the refulgent light of cloth of Dante; the line and drafting are of Dutch origin; hence the style of Rossetti is a translation of academic model of British, this is he took the model that before and after the Raphael, because Lely lived on 17th century; thereupon the intent of ideal of the Pre-Raphaelite brotherhood is absolutely failed, because Dante took from after and before Raphael, fro contradictions it is very exemplar.Further is likewise contradictory models that a member of this brotherhood, because Peter von Cornelius(1783-1867), to his The Parable of Wise and Foolish Virgins(Fig.6), dated 1813-1816, he culls the model that changed to posture but, certainly, he took the Virgin in Universal judgment(Fig.7) that is took to central female figure, and Pontormo, this is Jacopo Carucci(1494-1557), is necessary to the female figures on right that embraced one other; and the return to Raphael and Athens school is to male figure on the center of same painting(Fig.11), because it took from other figure of Raphael(Fig.12); the architecture of Athens school was necessary to other building in Joseph Recognised to his Brothers(Figs.13-14)of same von Cornelius. The Raphael now is accompanied to Girolamo Siciolante called Sermoneta(1521-1575), because Friedrich Johann Overbeck, to his Joseph Being Sold by his Brothers, in 1816(Fig.15), to the figure on right from behind(Fig.16) followed two models one is in front of and other from behind, I intend two figures, the first from Siciolante, above mentioned, (Fig.17) and the second is from Raphael in mentioned School of Athens(Fig.18), that has suggested the from behind position.Some hint of history of this brotherhood given Steven Adams(The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, p.28) was founded in London in September 1848. Initially a secret society, there were seven founder-members: John Everett Millais (1829-96), William Holman Hunt (1827-1910), James Collinson (1825-81), FG Stephens (1828-1907), Thomas Woolner (1825-92), who was the only sculptor among the group, and William Michael Rossetti (1829-1919), a tax clerk by trade and the Brother- of Dante Gabriele. But the contradiction is constant to Pre-Raphaelite exponents because we can consider the models that Peter von Cornelius, has took to his The Last Judgement(Fig.18); he took from Raphael the Christ of Ascension(Fig.19), and the crow is directly took from Universal judgement of Michelangelo(Figs.20-21); we must also consider that sometimes also in Pre-Raphaelite is some coherence, because Edward Burne-Jones, to his painting The Mill(Fig.22) has took the cloth of Giovanni di Paolo, to painting the Final judgement(Fig.23), same finesse of sewing, and Giovanni di Paolo(1403-1482) is precedent to Raphael; and Jones encouraged from John Ruskin(1819-1900) gone to Italy, where he certainly could see the medieval painter of Italian, and Jones become a connoisseurs very skilled of Tuscan painters, hence he seen certainly also Giovanni di Paolo in Siena(Fig.24), but I think that Jones hasn’t lost the cloth of child of Madonna of milk(Fig.25) of Ambrogio Lorenzetti(1290-1348), same folds and intensity of cloth and the Purification of the Virgin(Figs.26-27) and the Annunciation in Scrovegni chapel(Fig.28) frescoed by Giotto(died in 1337) ; but to each virtue of coherence a sin of incoherence occurs, in fact the posture of three figures of Jones is took from The three graces of Canova(1757-1822)(Fig.29) and Thorvaldsen(1770-1844)(Fig.30). To Ford Madox Brown, Wycliffe Reading his Translation of the New Testament to his Protector(Fig.31), Brown has considered and developed to his iconography the Baptism of Christ of Piero della Francesca(Fig.32); he developed the right side with other figures, it is necessary to equilibrate iconography, that Piero has balanced with figure of Saint John Baptist and other figure on back that is stripping, hence the equilibrium is reached, but Brown have to paint other subject and other iconography, therefore he has took the composition of Piero and has conceived his composition, and the naturalism of Piero is present; the boy that is bringing the books on left side is a touch of naturalism the to wit has took from Piero, the figure on back, that we has seen in Piero, that is very natural, has a correspondence here to this boy, because he is natural, thereupon Brown saved the mystical representation and also the human nature. Raphael is present to composition and ideation of The Seeds and Fruits of English Poetry is suggested from Athens school of Raphael; we must give attention to this inspiration, because apparently nothing connection is, but two figures on high to center are directly from Aristotle and Platoon(Fig.34), and the crowd is took directly from same numerous below of same school(Fig.35), after all the intellectual subject is present also to painting of Brown, on stead be philosophy is poetry. To Sir John Everett Millais(1829-1896), that has painted Isabella(Fig.36), Michelangelo Merisi called the Caravaggio(1571-1610) is motive to composition, the Dinner in Emmaus(Fig.37) is ideation to composition, although Millais has composed with more figures, but the subject is different; it is enough consider the edge of table(Fig.38), that is directly kinsman of painting of Caravaggio, same ideation of space, the edge is stressed from leg of the figure, but composition is very similar, also because the waiter on right is correspondent to waiter of Caravaggio. Raphael is always ready to use, because Millais is convinced user of the School of Athens, because the Cymon and Iphigenia(Fig.39) is remade of two central philosopher Platoon and Aristotle(Fig.34) and the figures around. But Caravaggio turns to Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Ecce Ancilla DominiFig.40), although more terrain than Caravaggio, because in Annunciation of Nancy(Fig.41), angel is touching down whereas the Rossetti’s angel is on land, but same posture from behind is same, the posture of Mary is similar, although the composition is different because nneds of painters were different, and the times are very different. Always Raphael is useful to William Hunt(1827-1910) to Christ and two maries(Fig.42), onstead to one mary he has took the Virgin of Caravaggio(Fig.41); and same Caravggio, above mentioned, is usefull also to composition of The return of dove(Fig.43) of Millais, whose composition is directly took from Incredulity of Saint Thomas. Hunt after sees alone Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel because in his A converted British family sheltering a Christian missionary(Fig.45), he didn’t lost the appointment to Michelangelo and the very famous Chapel, because to figure from shoulder on right is took from posture of Sybille’s, on the vault of chapel above mentioned, and from the Christ in the church of Minerva, of same Michelangelo(Fig.48); and the Sistine chapel is catalog of postures always present, because to the adolescent on ground, laid on ground the posture of legs is suggested from different figures(Figs.49-54); Ford Madox Brown took from Raphael and Madonna Sistine(Fig.55) to The Pretty Baa-Lambs(Fig.56), further the clot that to Raphael is evidently and dynamic in Brown is very splay, but the cloth dresses the figure as Raphael, almost an homage to Renaissance master. Hunt to The light of word(Fig.57) took again Raphael and the Athens school, to figure of Platoon(Fig.34); the naturalism(S. Adams, The pre-Raphaelites art, p.37) that is evident to much painting of these painters, is a address that in every painters in history of art, and the 19th century isn’t exception, but in this century is predominant, also in neoclassicism some time is evident that natural adherence, as Daedalus and Icarus(Fig.58), the figure of Daedalus is very natural old age. Same Hunt to his The awakening conscience (Fig.59) has took one reference, this is one Virgins that are seated in throne that in Italy are very much, I took in random of Perugino(Fig.60) and for the male may some figure of Universal judgement (Fig.61). Hunt to Isabella and the pot of basil(Fig.62) mixed two models from Raphael one if the Sistine Virgin(Fig.55) and the second is the Virgin on chair(Fig.63) to first model he copied the posture, and to second Hunt took the affect manifestation of a mother, with the cheek to head of child.To a painting of Edward Coley Burne-Jones, Dorigen of Britain Waiting for the Return of her Husband(Fig.64), Jones took directly or indirectly, through the engraving, from Federico Barocci(Figs.65-66), the posture is different but the idea of open arms is from Barocci; as The laus Veneris(Fig.67) directly from Cleopatra in Vatican Museums(Fig.68); other painting of Jones of Dorigen(Fig.69) same sculpture has suggested this posture, or may other ancient sculptures as the Campidoglio(Figs.70-71). Burn Jones Death of Arthur, (Fig.72) that took models from Roman Baroque, to architecture(Figs.73-74), he has took from colonnade of Bernini in Basilica of Saint Peter, Rome, that he used to representation of architecture on sides; the female figure on right with particular posture is suggested from the male figure on center of Athens school of Raffaello(Figs.78), and other figure of Sistine chapel(Fig.53), the female figures from behind are took from Giotto(Figs.79-81) and Sano di Pietro(1405-1481) from Preach of saint Bernardin in Siena(Fig.80a), the at last to this painting follows the name of brotherood, because Sano died two years before that Raphael is born; and the central composition is suggested(Fig.82) from Mantegna to Death of Virgin(Fig.83). To Rossetti the Dantis amor(Fig.84) the Sistine Madonna(Fig.55) is again usefull.William Hunt(1827-1910) to his The finding of the savior in the temple(Fig.85) took two painting of Raphael it are the Athens school(Fig.86) and the Dispute about sacrament(Fig.87), from the first is took directly the prospective to center and from the second crowd on the right side, it isn’t specular to postures and other but the idea is from this fresco. Rossetti seems not desist from Raphael and his Athens school, because to Wedding of Saint George and Princess Sabra(Fig.88), to posture of the saint he has took directly from a figure of Athens school(Fig.89), that somebody has pinted or drawn to him. Henry Wallis(1830-1916), painted The Stonebreaker(Fig.90) and to posture he has took a central figure in the Athens school(Fig.91); on stead the abandon of classicism and the grant of reality as to the model is to John Brett, The Stonebreaker(Fig.92), whose posture is suggested from Judith and Oloferne(Fig.93); John Brett to The stonebreaker(Fig.94) has took two models from Michelangelo, the first is the prophet Jonah(Fig.95), to posture of legs, and to hand up of young is inevitable Christ of Judice(Fig.94). Arthur Hughes(1832-1915) to his Ophelia(Fig.95) is very much pre-Raphaelite master, at last regard of model, because he has took the Mercury of Spring of Botticelli(Fig.96), the posture is too similar to be simple coincidence; but he become immediately Michelangiolesque to other Ophelia(Fig.97), that is suggested, to posture, from a figure of Universal judgement of Michelangelo(Fig.98). Dante Rossetti following the way of his colleagues also he took the suggest of somebody that has descripted or drown the canvas of Pieter Paul Rubens in Roman church of Vallicella(Fig.100), and he has painted the The beloved(Fig.99), the composition is different and it is evident but we must consider that this work of Rubens is alone descripted and Rossetti has took that was necessary; the figures that in Rubens work are distributed about here are collated around the central figure, that in Rubens is the Virgin, suggestion is valid and model is after Raphael. Same Rossetti has also granted the suggestion of a figure to Tomb of Arthur(Fig.101) bowed, this position is certainly come from Euclid of Raphael(Fig.102), the same position but different motives; instead for the decoration on below(Fig.103), is took, now directly from some Egyptian painted in the Victoria and Albert museum of London(Fig.104). To Ford Madox Brown, Christ washing Peter’s feet(Fig.105), he has took from Prophet Zachariah in the Sistine chapel(Fig.106) but the same figure is used also to Peter to counterpart, but to postures of these two figures Brown has took the same Michelangelo’s model. Michelangelo continued to inspirade Rossetti, because other painting has took, to indications of others, the posture of Jane Morris to this subject(Fig.107), that has took from Sibille Delphic(Fig.108), Cumana(Fig.109) and Eritrea(Fig.110).  Thomas Farrer(1819-1899), to his Gone! Gone!(Fig.111) the crying woman suggestion is from same female figure of Caravaggio(Fig.112); although the position is different the realism is certainly ordered from Ruskin, but the behavior is from Merisi.Sometime also the painter of pre-Raphaelite brotherhood took some model forgoing to Raphael, because the author the Woman with long hair(Fig.115), because model of posture of these hair is a  Virgin(Figs.116-119) of Middle age; to Evelyn De Morgan(1855-1919) a painter woman that to hers Flora(Fig.120) has took directly from The Spring of Sandro Botticelli(1445-1510), same female figure of Florentine(Fig.121), form same Renaissance painting De Morgan took the figure in the center(Fig.122), to hers Helen of Troy(Fig.123), with different posture but because otherwise it could be a copy; to hers Love potion(Fig.124) the posture is directly from Sibyls of Michelangelo in Sistine chapel(Figs.125-127); to hers Medea(Fig.128), instead she has took two models, the first is foregoing Raphael, this is female figure in the center of The spring(Fig.123), but to architecture((Fig.129) took directly from Athens school of Raphael(Fig.130). The appointment to Botticelli is fixed, because  De Morgan took same figure to The Crown of Glory(Fig.131), in counterpart, but same figure; instead we must outrun the time of Raphael and it must see to ancient Egypt, because hieroglyphic(Figs.132-133) in London have suggested the posture to Angel of death(Fig.134), the almost two-dimensional image, rigorously to profile is suggested from hieroglyphics in Museum of London; Evelyn has took now Raphael to hers S.O.S.(Fig.134a), the Christ of Ascension(Fig.19); to the Arianna quit to Naxos(Fig.135), she has took the posture of Conversion of Saul(Fig.136); after Raphael is posture of Hermes(137), because inevitable naked(Figs.138-140) of Sistine chapel, that she has took again to In memoriam(Fig.141); to Earthly(Fig.142) she has took allegory of Day of Michelangelo in de’Medici chapel(Fig.143). To The captives(Fig.144), Evelyn has chosen the same model of S.O.S., but now with an interpretation very original, it is evident sufficient confront to the superior side of Christ of Ascension(Fig.145); three figure below and one with open arms and all is evident; but a suggestion French-American is granted to Hero holding the beacon for Leander(Fig.146), why American? Because the sculpture of Liberty until 4th July 1884 has been to Paris, and this painting is worked in 1885, therefore Evelyn could see the sculpture, after donated to USA. Joseph Noel Paton,(1821-1901), to The Bluidie Tryst follows same painter to patter but two different  painting, the same painter is Caravaggio, and the paintings are The death of Virgin(Fig.149) , that he has took to corpse and to the female figure he has took the Christ of Conversion of Saint Matthew(Fig.150), the stretched out arm, both is Conversion and The death(Fig.151), follow Caravaggio and his stretch out arms. Ford Madox Brown(1821-1893) to his The Body of Harold brought to William the Conqueror(Fig.152), took from Giorgione, precisely from Madonna di Castelfranco(Figs.153-154), and he took also the flag, that is reused to his painting, the William the conqueror that is up the painting is from Giorgione, instead the figure on right(Fig.155), to posture of arm is took from Christ of Universal judgement(Fig.156). To The Lady of Shalott(Fig.157), John William Waterhouse(1849-1917) has took the hieroglyphics in some museum of London, the model of this suggestion we can imagine(Figs.158-159), the composition is very particular because a figure in boat is strange, therefore a model could be the holy Egyptian travel to Aaru, this is the ancient Egyptian paradise. Ancient Egypt is motive to inspiration very rich because also Frederick Sandys(1829-1904) to Morgan-Le-Fay(Fig.162), has took the other female figure(Fig.163), and we can say that these models are truly pre-Raphaelite, because are more than two thousand years before birth of Raphael. Sidney Harold Meteyard, The lady of Shalott(Fig.163), that is suggested from posture of saint Gerome(Fig.164) of Caravaggio.Rosseti, much times mentioned above, to his Dante’s dream(Fig.165) has took suggestion from Zurbaran(Fig.166) the long mantle of Virgin is too similar to curtain hold from female figures, the figure about of Zurbaran in Rossetti’s painting are differente but we must consider that it isn’t a painting whit holy subject. Walter Crane to The Lady of Shalott(Fig.167) followed the ancient Egypt and he mixed two iconographies(Figs.168-169), the mean is same, painting of Crane is similar to voyage to paradise, and he took the same funeral dynamic of Egypt, when the soul of pharaoh was brought to Aaru, the paradise.  

Alessandro Lusana  

Fig.1a

Fig.1b

Fig.1


Fig.2
Fig.3

Fig.4
Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10


Fig.11

Fig.12

Fig.13


Fig.14

Fig.15


Fig.16

fig.17


Fig.18

Fig.19


Fig.20
Fig.21


Fig.22

Fig.23


Fig.24


Fig.25
Fig.26

Fig.27
Fig.28

Fig.29

Fig.30


Fig.31


Fig.32

Fig.33

Fig.34

Fig.35

Fig.36

Fig.37


Fig.38

Fig.39

Fig.40

Fig.41

Fig.42

Fig.43

Fig.44

Fig.45

Fig.46

Fig.47

Fig.48

Fig.49

Fig.50

Fig.51

Fig.52

Fig.53

Fig.54
Fig.55

Fig.56

Fig.57

Fig.58


Fig.59

Fig.60

Fig.61

Fig.62

Fig.63

Fig.64

Fig.65

Fig.66

Fig.67

Fig.68


Fig.69

Fig.70

Fig.71

Fig.72

Fig.73

Fig.74

Fig.75

Fig.76

Fig.77


Fig.78


Fig.79

Fig.80

Fig.80a

Fig.81


Fig.82

Fig.83

Fig.84

Fig.85

Fig.86

Fig.87

Fig.88

Fig.89

Fig.90

Fig.91

Fig.92

Fig.93

Fig.94

Fig.95

Fig.96

Fig.97

Fig.98

Fig.100

Fig.99

Fig.101

Fig.102

Fig.103

Fig.104

Fig.105
Fig.106

Fig.107

Fig.108


Fig.109

Fig.110

Fig.111

Fig.112

Fig.113


Fig.114
Fig.115
Fig.116
Fig.117
Fig.118
Fig.119
Fig.120
Fig.121
Fig.122
Fig.123
Fig.124

Fig.125
Fig.126
Fig.127
Fig.128
Fig.129

Fig.130
Fig.131
Fig.132
Fig.133
Fig.134
Fig.134a
Fig.135
Fig.136
Fig.137
Fig.138
Fig.139

Fig.140
Fig.141
Fig.142
Fig.143
Fig.144
Fig.145
Fig.146

Fig.147
Fig.148
Fig.149
Fig.150
Fig.151
Fig.152
Fig.153
Fig.154
Fig.155
Fig.156
Fig.157
Fig.158

Fig. 159
Fig.160
Fig.161
Fig.162
Fig.163
Fig.164
Fig.165
Fig.166
Fig.167
Fig.168
Fig.169













































































































 







































































































 


































































































































































                

  Determination is sake: interchangeable semiotic When we are making something we have very clear the motive because we are busing, it is ...