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 17^th; 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 5^th 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 16^th 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

 

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 15^th 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

 

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 5^th(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 14^th 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 7^th 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 5^th, 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 5^th, 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 6^th 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.” In conclusion Martin 5^th was the perfect pope.

Alessandro Lusana  

      

 

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 4^th 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 5^th(1338-1380) although didn’t express as those of Philipp 4^th 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 5^th 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 5^th 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 5^th(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 8^th, 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  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.   

 

        

         

 

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   

 

 

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 15^th to 19^th centuries, the return of pope to Rome, with election of Martin 5^th(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 5^th 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 4^th, king of Germany, that in 1077 was kneeling on the snow to receive the pardon of Gregory 7^th 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 4^th , 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 6^th (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