DOCSLIB.ORG

Reviews Summer 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reviews Summer 2020 Research Collection Book Review Reviews Summer 2020 Author(s): Marinazzo, Adriano; Vervoort, Stefaan; Allen, Matthew; Astengo, Gregorio; Smyth-Pinney, Julia Publication Date: 2020 Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000467888 Originally published in: Architectural Histories 8(1), http://doi.org/10.5334/ah.525 Rights / License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use. ETH Library $UFKLWHFWXUDO Marinazzo, A, et al. 2020. Reviews Summer 2020. Architectural Histories, 8(1): 11, pp. 1–13. DOI: +LVWRULHV https://doi.org/10.5334/ah.525 REVIEW Reviews Summer 2020 Adriano Marinazzo, Stefaan Vervoort, Matthew Allen, Gregorio Astengo and Julia Smyth-Pinney Marinazzo, A. A Review of William E. Wallace, Michelangelo, God’s Architect: The Story of His Final Years and Greatest Masterpiece. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2019. Vervoort, S. A Review of Matthew Mindrup, The Architectural Model: Histories of the Miniature and the Prototype, the Exemplar and the Muse. Cambridge, MA, and London: The MIT Press, 2019. Allen, M. A Review of Joseph Bedford, ed., Is There an Object-Oriented Architecture? Engaging Graham Harman. London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020. Astengo, G. A Review of Vaughan Hart, Christopher Wren: In Search of Eastern Antiquity. London: Yale University Press, 2020. Smyth-Pinney, J. A Review of Maria Beltramini and Cristina Conti, eds., Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane: Architettura e decorazione da Leone X a Paolo III. Milan: Officina libraria, 2018. Becoming the Architect of St. Peter’s: production of painting, sculpture and architecture and Michelangelo as a Designer, Builder and his ‘genius as entrepreneur’ (Wallace 1994). With this new Entrepreneur research, in his eighth book on the artist, Wallace mas- terfully synthesizes what aging meant for a genius like Adriano Marinazzo Michelangelo, shedding light on his incredible ability, Muscarelle Museum of Art at William and Mary, US despite (or thanks to) his old age, to deal with an intri- [email protected] cate web of relationships, intrigues, power struggles and monumental egos. In advanced old age, the celebrated William E. Wallace, Michelangelo, God’s Architect: The Story artist could not carve or paint as he once had; but he of His Final Years and Greatest Masterpiece, Princeton could draw, design, direct, deal, argue and negotiate. and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 328 pages, 2019, With this skill set, Michelangelo reinvented himself as an 9780691195490 architect, working without using his hands, piloting the completion of St. Peter’s and many other Roman build- After Michelangelo was appointed architect of the new ing projects, including those for the Capitoline Hill, the basilica of St. Peter’s in Rome, members of the so-called Palazzo Farnese, the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, setta Sangallesca — the group of architects associated the church of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini, the Cappella with the renowned workshop of Antonio da Sangallo the Sforza and the Porta Pia. Younger — wondered, ‘Was he even an architect?’ (76). With St. Peter’s Basilica Michelangelo inherited a work- Just several months earlier, in August 1546, Antonio da site with a long and complicated history, dating back to Sangallo the Younger had died, leaving vacant the post of 1452 when Pope Nicholas V commissioned Bernardo chief architect of the basilica. Michelangelo was over sev- Rossellino to begin reconstruction of the 4th-century enty years old when Pope Paul III asked him to take over basilica-form church that marked the burial place of the project, one of the most challenging of his long and Saint Peter. The project was advanced under the papacy legendary career. Michelangelo, God’s Architect, tells this of Giuliano della Rovere (1503–1513), whose cho- story, detailing the final two decades of the artist’s life and sen name of Julius II evoked the legacy of the Roman the struggles he faced, both personally and profession- emperor Julius Caesar. The pope entrusted the construc- ally, as he neared death. In this well-written, informative tion of St. Peter’s Basilica to the most celebrated archi- book, William Wallace casts light on this often-overlooked tect of the time, Donato Bramante. In the same period, period of Michelangelo’s life, revealing his mindset as a he commissioned Michelangelo to design and build his man and an artist (Figure 1). mausoleum, which was to be placed in the new church. Wallace is one of the foremost authorities on Although it would still be four decades until he assumed Michelangelo and has published extensively on his the role of architect of St. Peter’s, by the time the first Art. 11, page 2 of 13 Marinazzo et al: Reviews Summer 2020 Figure 1: Cover of William E. Wallace, Michelangelo, God’s Architect: The Story of His Final Years and Greatest Master- piece. Photo credit: Princeton University Press. stone for the new basilica was laid on 18 April 1506, The artist believed that he was ‘put there by God’ (220). Michelangelo had already connected with the monu- Michelangelo’s efforts focused on the structural prob- mental project. lems in the basilica’s design. On the interior, this involved In the period after Bramante’s death in 1514 and before reverting to Bramante’s centralized plan and buttressing Michelangelo assumed the role of architect of St. Peter’s, the crossing pillars. On the exterior, the work involved the the new basilica continued to take shape under a series elimination of the tortuous ambulatory built by Antonio of notable architects, including Raphael, Fra Giovanni da Sangallo, and the design and construction of the drum Giocondo, Giuliano da Sangallo, Antonio da Sangallo of the colossal dome. The new basilica of St. Peter was the Elder, Baldassarre Peruzzi, Andrea Sansovino and to feature a central nave and a transept of equal length, Antonio da Sangallo the Younger. Wallace’s book focuses and so the plan of the church was to have four arms of on Michelangelo’s dedication to the project, from 1546 equal measure, forming a Greek cross. At the center of this to his death in 1564, and his untiring efforts to finish cross would be an ample empty space above which the a work that, in his mind, would save him for eternity. immense dome would rise. Marinazzo et al: Reviews Summer 2020 Art. 11, page 3 of 13 But Wallace’s book is not solely about St. Peter’s. Wallace the builder of the immense dome of Santa Maria del Fiore gives us a comprehensive background of Michelangelo’s in Florence. life in Rome. The author is meticulous in describing the This book answers the big question, posed by the artist’s relationships with friends, colleagues, helpers and setta Sangallesca, about Michelangelo’s qualifications as patrons. He has the ability and sensibility to describe the an architect. In fact, according to Wallace, ‘St. Peter’s is old artist familiarly and intimately; we see a Michelangelo Michelangelo’s greatest achievement. He devoted more who is human, old, sick, but considered by his contem- time, effort, and expertise to this than to any other project poraries ‘divine’. This is evident in Wallace’s vivid descrip- of his career’. Not only did he recognize ‘the brilliance of tion of the devotion of Urbino, Michelangelo’s beloved Bramante’s initial conception’ and correct ‘its engineering assistant. So attached was Michelangelo to his longtime deficiencies, thereby reinvesting the church with exterior helper that when Urbino fell severely ill, the artist pur- and interior clarity’, but ‘[h]e had the courage and vision to chased several medications, including expensive golden remove much intervening construction, which demanded lozenges. But nothing worked, Urbino died on 3 January enormous faith on the part of both the artist and a succes- 1556, Michelangelo was devastated, according to Wallace; sion of papal patrons’ (239). this was for him the ‘saddest of all deaths’ (150). Indeed, he was an architect, and one of the greatest. ‘His Wallace rightly focuses on Michelangelo’s relationship prodigious creativity operated through others’ (240); he with Pope Paul III (1534–1549). According to the author, was God’s Architect. Wallace has devoted his scholarly tal- the pope was the ‘artist’s greatest patron’ (56). They ent to Michelangelo’s art and life; he is undoubtedly one were friends; both shared the same cultural background. of the most respected and distinguished experts of the They were devout Christians, and they were about the great artist. Luckily, he doesn’t overwhelm the reader with same advanced age. It was in part due to these reasons his outstanding knowledge on the subject, but instead, as that, despite Michelangelo’s reluctance, Paul appointed usual, his style is brilliant and sometimes even funny (a him as the chief architect of St. Peter’s. But this was rarity for art and architectural historians). Michelangelo’s fate; his career was full of commissions that he did not wish. Michelangelo was also favored by the pope for his exten- Models and Architecture’s Longue Durée sive experience. Since his early career, Michelangelo had demonstrated the abilities of an experienced engineer. Stefaan Vervoort In 1506 Sultan Bayezid II asked him to design a bridge Department of Art History, Musicology and Theatre across the Golden Horn, while in 1508, he built a massive Studies, Ghent University, BE and innovative scaffolding for the painting of the Sistine [email protected] Ceiling. Prior to working on St. Peter’s, Michelangelo had also led hundreds of workers in notable building projects Matthew Mindrup. The Architectural Model: Histories of in Florence, including the Basilica of San Lorenzo and the the Miniature and the Prototype, the Exemplar and the city’s fortifications.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reviews Summer 2020
    $UFKLWHFWXUDO Marinazzo, A, et al. 2020. Reviews Summer 2020. Architectural Histories, 8(1): 11, pp. 1–13. DOI: +LVWRULHV https://doi.org/10.5334/ah.525 REVIEW Reviews Summer 2020 Adriano Marinazzo, Stefaan Vervoort, Matthew Allen, Gregorio Astengo and Julia Smyth-Pinney Marinazzo, A. A Review of William E. Wallace, Michelangelo, God’s Architect: The Story of His Final Years and Greatest Masterpiece. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2019. Vervoort, S. A Review of Matthew Mindrup, The Architectural Model: Histories of the Miniature and the Prototype, the Exemplar and the Muse. Cambridge, MA, and London: The MIT Press, 2019. Allen, M. A Review of Joseph Bedford, ed., Is There an Object-Oriented Architecture? Engaging Graham Harman. London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020. Astengo, G. A Review of Vaughan Hart, Christopher Wren: In Search of Eastern Antiquity. London: Yale University Press, 2020. Smyth-Pinney, J. A Review of Maria Beltramini and Cristina Conti, eds., Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane: Architettura e decorazione da Leone X a Paolo III. Milan: Officina libraria, 2018. Becoming the Architect of St. Peter’s: production of painting, sculpture and architecture and Michelangelo as a Designer, Builder and his ‘genius as entrepreneur’ (Wallace 1994). With this new Entrepreneur research, in his eighth book on the artist, Wallace mas- terfully synthesizes what aging meant for a genius like Adriano Marinazzo Michelangelo, shedding light on his incredible ability, Muscarelle Museum of Art at William and Mary, US despite (or thanks to) his old age, to deal with an intri- [email protected] cate web of relationships, intrigues, power struggles and monumental egos.
    [Show full text]
  • Leonardo Da Vinci and the Persistence of Myth Emily Hanson
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) 1-1-2012 Inventing the Sculptor: Leonardo da Vinci and the Persistence of Myth Emily Hanson Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd Recommended Citation Hanson, Emily, "Inventing the Sculptor: Leonardo da Vinci and the Persistence of Myth" (2012). All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). 765. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/765 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Department of Art History & Archaeology INVENTING THE SCULPTOR LEONARDO DA VINCI AND THE PERSISTENCE OF MYTH by Emily Jean Hanson A thesis presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts May 2012 Saint Louis, Missouri ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wouldn’t be here without the help and encouragement of all the following people. Many thanks to all my friends: art historians, artists, and otherwise, near and far, who have sustained me over countless meals, phone calls, and cappuccini. My sincere gratitude extends to Dr. Wallace for his wise words of guidance, careful attention to my work, and impressive example. I would like to thank Campobello for being a wonderful mentor and friend, and for letting me persuade her to drive the nearly ten hours to Syracuse for my first conference, which convinced me that this is the best job in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Simonetta Cattaneo Vespucci: Beauty. Politics, Literature and Art in Early Renaissance Florence
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! SIMONETTA CATTANEO VESPUCCI: BEAUTY, POLITICS, LITERATURE AND ART IN EARLY RENAISSANCE FLORENCE ! by ! JUDITH RACHEL ALLAN ! ! ! ! ! ! ! A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Department of Modern Languages School of Languages, Cultures, Art History and Music College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham September 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT ! My thesis offers the first full exploration of the literature and art associated with the Genoese noblewoman Simonetta Cattaneo Vespucci (1453-1476). Simonetta has gone down in legend as a model of Sandro Botticelli, and most scholarly discussions of her significance are principally concerned with either proving or disproving this theory. My point of departure, rather, is the series of vernacular poems that were written about Simonetta just before and shortly after her early death. I use them to tell a new story, that of the transformation of the historical monna Simonetta into a cultural icon, a literary and visual construct who served the political, aesthetic and pecuniary agendas of her poets and artists.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Di Francesco Caglioti, Ordinario Di Storia Dell'arte
    Allegato A Curriculum di Francesco Caglioti, ordinario di Storia dell’arte medievale presso la Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa (alla data del 15 luglio 2019). Carriera. Nato a Sambiase ora Lamezia Terme (Catanzaro) nel 1964. Maturità classica a Lamezia nel 1982. Corso di laurea in lettere classiche all’Università “Federico II” di Napoli e laurea in Storia dell’arte moderna nell’a.a. 1986-87 (tesi su Mino da Fiesole, relatore Giovanni Previtali). Dottorato di ricerca in Storia dell’arte presso la Scuola Normale, 1988-91 (tesi sulla scultura fiorentina del Quattrocento a Roma, relatrice Paola Barocchi). Borsa di studio dell’Accademia Nazionale della Crusca (Firenze) nell’anno solare 1992. Assunzione come ricercatore di Storia dell’arte presso la Scuola Normale in seguito a concorso del 1993, e permanenza in ruolo fino all’ottobre 2001. Idoneità all’insegnamento come professore associato di Storia dell’arte moderna in seguito a concorso del luglio 2000, e assunzione presso l’Università “Federico II” di Napoli come associato nel novembre 2001 (conferma nel ruolo a decorrere dal novembre 2004). Idoneità come professore ordinario in seguito a concorso del 2005-06, e assunzione presso la “Federico II” di Napoli come ordinario con decorrenza dal novembre 2006 (conferma dal novembre 2009). Ordinario di Storia dell’arte medievale presso la Scuola Normale dal 1° marzo 2019 in seguito a concorso del 2018. Responsabilità accademiche. Dal 1° novembre 2002 al 31 ottobre 2014 è stato coordinatore dell’Indirizzo storico- artistico del Dottorato di ricerca in Scienze archeologiche e storico-artistiche della “Federico II”, e dal 1° novembre 2014 al 28 febbraio 2017 coordinatore del Dottorato tutto (sino al 28° ciclo); dal 1° dicembre 2016 al 30 aprile 2019 è stato coordinatore del Dottorato di ricerca in Scienze storiche, archeologiche e storico-artistiche del medesimo ateneo (cicli 29°-34°).
    [Show full text]
  • A Proposal That the Rothschild Bronzes, Attributed to Michelangelo, Are Instead the Work of Francesco Da Sangallo
    A proposal that the Rothschild bronzes, attributed to Michelangelo, are instead the work of Francesco da Sangallo by Michael Riddick A proposal that the Rothschild bronzes, attributed to Michelangelo, are instead the work of Francesco da Sangallo Fig. 01: Nude figures riding panthers, bronze (private collection), presently attributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti, ca. 1506-08, here attributed to Francesco da Sangallo, ca. 1520s-30s. Much sensationalism and research have surrounded The bronze group, hereto regarded as the Rothschild the attribution to Michelangelo Buonarroti of a large bronzes, were purchased in Venice in March 1878 pair of bronze nude men riding feline beasts formerly by Julie de Rothschild, sold to her as attributed to in the Rothschild collection and previously on loan to Michelangelo, an assessment she mutually agreed the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge University upon at the time of their purchase.1 (Fig. 01). A proposal that the Rothschild bronzes, attributed to Michelangelo, are instead the work of Francesco da Sangallo 2 Michael Riddick - RenBronze.com The earliest known public appearance of the Rothschild bronzes was at the Exposition Universelle in Paris that same year where they were displayed as works by Michelangelo.2 The origin of the initial attribution to Michelangelo is unknown but it was evidently in question at that event. The art historian, Eugene Piot’s 1879 review of the show proclaimed the Venetian, Tiziano Aspetti, as their maker, noting the attribution to Michelangelo was a “rather large error.”3 However, Piot never published or explained his rather untenable attribution to Aspetti. In 1907 Wilhelm von Bode discussed the bronze group in his seminal volume on Italian Renaissance bronzes, attributing them to Jacopo Sansovino sometime after 1527, drawing upon comparisons with Sansovino’s activity in Venice after that date.4 In 1921 Leo Planiscig rejected Bode’s suggestion, noting their Mannerist quality was inconsistent with Sansovino’s production.
    [Show full text]
  • Michaelis Angeli Vita FONTES 12
    PAOLO GIOVIO : Michaelis Angeli vita [um 1527] mit drei Übersetzungen herausgegeben und kommentiert von CHARLES DAVIS FONTES 12 [22. September 2008] Zitierfähige URL: http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/artdok/volltexte/2008/579 P A O L O G I O V I O Michaelis Angeli Vita, quam Paulus Iovius, episcopus Nucerinus conscripsit. FONTES 12 (Michelangelo 1) 2 CONTENTS 4 INTRODUCTION 9 OUTLINE AND STRUCTURE OF THE Michaelis Angeli vita 10 THE TEXT ( Latin ) 12 THE TEXT: German version 13 THE TEXT: Italian version 15 THE TEXT: English version 17 INDEXING 19 IDENTIFICATIONS 21 BIOGRAPHY OF PAOLO GIOVIO 25 BIOBIBLIOGRAPHY 26 BIBLIOGRAPHY 29 SOME MODERN EDITIONS OF GIOVIO’S WORKS 30 EXTERNAL LINKS 3 INTRODUCTION Giovio’s very brief Michaelis Angeli vita was presumably written in Rome during the Pontificate of Clement VII (1523-1534) and after 1524, owing to its mention of Janus Coricius’s Coryciana (1524) and its further mention of the presence of Bandinelli’s Laocoön in the courtyard of the Palazzo Medici in Florence (1524). The text is usually dated around 1527, although some have argued for earlier and later dates. A date later than the Pontificate of Clement appears most unlikely. For a recent discussion of the question of dating, see Shearman, Raphael in Early Modern Sources , 2003 ( infra ), vol. 1, pp. 809-810. It is not entirely certain that Giovio used the word ‘ vita ’ in his title, and this characterization may have been supplied later. Nevertheless, ‘ vita ’ and ‘ elogio ’ are two terms that Giovio applied to his biographies, some quite brief and other more lengthy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perspective System Underlying the Low Relief of Sansovino's Annunciation. for a Narration of the Illusory Space of the S
    Proceedings The Perspective System Underlying the Low Relief of Sansovino’s Annunciation. For a Narration † of the Illusory Space of the Scene Alessandra Meschini * and Ramona Feriozzi School of Architecture and Design, University of Camerino, 62032 Camerino, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-0737-404258 † Presented at the International and Interdisciplinary Conference IMMAGINI? Image and Imagination between Representation, Communication, Education and Psychology, Brixen, Italy, 27–28 November 2017. Published: 17 November 2017 Abstract: During the Renaissance, low-relief sculpture addressed the concept of organizing pictures and scenes in narrative sequences, creating real visual objects that aim to transmit a message by constructing an illusory physical space that embraces and accompanies the emblematic episode being narrated. The article presents a procedure and the results of research centred on the work of the Annunciation by Andrea Sansovino placed on the west face of the Holy House in Loreto. The ultimate goal is to identify a means of visual communication capable of rendering geometrical/proportional systems, the underlying perspective structure, and the relationship between the time when the work is viewed and the time represented in the work by reconstructing the depicted space in three dimensions. Keywords: cultural heritage; integrated survey; cognitive drawing; perspective rendering; 3D reconstruction; virtual narration of space; visual storytelling 1. Introduction:
    [Show full text]
  • CLARA Special Issue 2020 No. 1 K
    CLARA Special issue 2020 No. 1 K. Kolrud CLARA SPECIAL ISSUE 2020 No. 1 Colouring the Emperor: Andrea di Sansovino’s Polychrome Terracotta Relief of Galba Kristine Kolrud Abstract. By the time of the publication of Giorgio Vasari’s Vite dei più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori in 1550, glazed terracotta was decidedly out of favour. Yet when the second edition of the work appeared in 1568, Vasari had acquired Andrea Sansovino’s polychrome terracotta relief of the Roman emperor Galba. Sculpted profiles of Roman emperors were popular in Florence in the second half of the fifteenth century, and marble reliefs could also be accentuated with colour, as seen in the series of reliefs by Gregorio di Lorenzo and his circle, dated to the late fifteenth- or early sixteenth century. The production of this type of portrait had dried up long before the first edition of the Vite, and Vasari’s interest in the Galba appears exceptional. The writer’s penchant for coloured stones is well-attested and went hand in hand with his approval of monochrome works, but, for the most part, he does not discuss the use of colour in sculpture in the Vite. This article considers Vasari’s treatment of colour in sculptures of the late Florentine Quattrocento, through the lens of Sansovino’s portrait. During the latter half of the fifteenth century, relief profiles of Roman emperors and other well-known figures from Antiquity appeared in numerous contexts and various media. The fashion for these effigies was particularly important as architectural decoration in northern Italy, but also spread beyond the peninsula.
    [Show full text]
  • Frick Madison | a Guide to Works of Art on Exhibition
    THE FRICK COLLECTION A GUIDE TO WORKS OF ART ON EXHIBITION FRICK MADISON 1 Introduction During the renovation of The Frick Collection’s historic buildings at 1 East 70th Street, the museum’s home is just five blocks away in the structure designed by Marcel Breuer for the Whitney Museum of American Art. For the first time in almost a century, highlights from the collection are displayed outside the domestic setting of the Frick’s Gilded Age mansion. In this temporary location, which we are calling Frick Madison, the rich and varied holdings of the Frick are displayed according to geographic and chronological divisions. Some rooms cut across these boundaries to address the inter- connected nature of artistic production. We hope that Frick Madison fulfills Breuer’s promise to “transform the vitality of the street into the sincerity and profundity of art.” Reconstructing and re-presenting the collection in Breuer’s concrete shrine is an unparalleled opportunity to see the Frick’s holdings in a new light. Xavier F. Salomon, Deputy Director and Peter Jay Sharp Chief Curator 2 3 The Breuer Building second floor Completed in 1966, the granite-clad structure on Madison Avenue and 75th Street is the only building in Manhattan designed by the Bauhaus-trained architect and designer Marcel Breuer (1902–1981). Considered one of this influential architect’s most important projects, it is also one of New York’s most significant postwar buildings. Breuer’s building defies gravity by East 75th Street turning traditional architecture, quite literally, upside down. The dramatic inverted form, punctuated by Breuer’s signature angled windows, embodies Restroom the modernist principles of minimalism, harmony, and elegance.
    [Show full text]
  • De Vasari Consacrée À Vittore Carpaccio
    1. Giorgio Vasari, Page de titre des Vies, 2ème édition, Giunti, Florence, 1568, gravure sur bois. 2. Giorgio Vasari, Dernière page des Vies, 1ère édition, Torrentino, Florence, 1550, gravure sur bois. 3. Giorgio Vasari, Frontispice et dernière page des Vies, 2ème édition, Giunti, Florence, 1568, gravure sur bois, Los Angeles, Getty Research Institute, Special Collections. 4. Cesare Ripa, Lode, image tirée de l'Iconologia, Padoue, édition de 1618. 5. Jacques de Bie, Renommée, image tirée de l'Iconologie de Cesare Ripa moralisée par Jean Baudoin, Paris, édition de 1644, gravure sur cuivre. 6. Jacques de Bie, Bonne Renommée, image tirée de l'Iconologie de Cesare Ripa moralisée par Jean Baudoin, Paris, édition de 1644, gravure sur cuivre. 7. Giorgio Vasari, Fama, 1542-1548, fresque, Arezzo, Casa Vasari, Camera della Fama e delle Arti. 8. Schéma reconstitutif du catafalque de Michel-Ange à San Lorenzo, Rudolf / Margot WITTKOWER, The Divine Michelangelo. The Florentine Academy's Homage on his Death in 1564. A Facsimile Edition of "Esequie del Divino Michelagnolo Buonarroti Florence 1564, London, 1964. 9. Premier dessin pour le catafalque de Michel-Ange à San Lorenzo, plume, encre et lavis, Codex Resta, Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana. 10. Esquisse pour le catafalque de Michel-Ange à San Lorenzo, plume et encre, Münich, Graphische Sammlung. 11. Page du Libro de' Disegni de Vasari consacrée à Vittore Carpaccio. 12. Portrait de Cimabue, 2ème édition des Vies, Giunti, Florence, 1568, gravure sur bois. 13. Giorgio Vasari et collaborateurs, Tombeau de Michel-Ange, 1570, marbre et fresque, Florence, Santa Croce. 14. Frontispice de la vie de Corrège, 2ème édition des Vies, Giunti, Florence, 1568, gravure sur bois.
    [Show full text]
  • Pontormo: Portrait of a Halberdier
    Pontormo PORTRAIT OF A HALBERDIER Pontormo PORTRAIT OF A HALBERDIER Elizabeth Cropper GETTY MUSEUM STUDIES ON ART Los ANGELE s Christopher Hudson, Publisher Frontispiece: Mark Greenberg, Managing Editor Pontormo (Jacopo Carucci) (Italian, 1494-1557). Self-Portrait Study, circa 1525. Red chalk. William Peterson, Editor London, The British Museum (i936.io.io.ior). Elizabeth Zozom, Production Coordinator Copyright © British Museum. Jeffrey Cohen, Designer Lou Meluso, Photographer All works of art are reproduced (and photographs provided) courtesy of the owners, unless otherwise © 1997 The J. Paul Getty Museum indicated. 1200 Getty Center Drive, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, California 90049-1687 Typography by G&S Typesetters, Inc., Austin, Texas Library of Congress Printed in Hong Kong by Imago Cataloging-in-Publication Data Cropper, Elizabeth Pontormo : portrait of a halberdier / Elizabeth Cropper p. cm.—(Getty Museum studies on art) ISBN 0-89236-366-5 i. Pontormo, Jacopo Carucci, 1494-ca. 1556. Halberdier. 2. Pontormo, Jacopo Carucci, 1494-ca. 1556—Criticism and interpretation. 3. Portrait painting, Italian—Expertising. 4. Mannerism (Art)—Italy. 5. J. Paul Getty Museum. I. Title II. Series. ND1329.P64A66 1997 759.5—dc2i 97-19822 CIP CONTENTS Introduction i A Portrait of Duke Cosimo When He Was Young? 15 A Portrait of Francesco Guardi? 23 Afterword 99 Notes 112 Bibliography 122 Genealogy of the Guardi Family 128 Acknowledgments 132 Final page folds out, providing a reference color plate of Portrait of a Halberdier INTRODUCTION hen a great painting is the subject of intense study, interpretive possibili- wties proliferate as we change our point of view in the historical landscape, standing up close or taking a distant look.
    [Show full text]
  • The Architectural Commissions and Decorative Projects of the Pucci Family in the Renaissance Carla
    Building Blocks of Power: The Architectural Commissions and Decorative Projects of the Pucci Family in the Renaissance Carla A. D’Arista Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2017 © 2017 Carla A. D’Arista ALL RIGHTS RESERVE ii ABSTRACT Building Blocks of Power: The Architectural Commissions and Decorative Projects of the Pucci Family in the Renaissance Carla A. D’Arista This dissertation analyzes the dates and artistic provenance of key architectural and decorative projects commissioned by the Pucci family for their townhomes, villas, and palaces during the Renaissance. It identifies the family’s insistent identification with prestigious Renaissance architects and artisans as a key element in a political and social stratagem that took its cue from the humanist ethos cultivated by their political patrons, the Medici. Temporally, this study is bracketed on both ends of the Renaissance by architectural commissions related to the Pucci’s long-standing patronage of Santissima Annunziata, the most important pilgrimage church in Florence. Methodoligically, it is an archival project that relies principally on previously unknown letters, wills, payment records, inventories, and notarial documents. i ii iii iv v passion for archival research. This dissertation would not have been possible without the assistance of Veronica Vestri, a paleographer who can read what no one else has been able to decipher for hundreds of years. Aside from her expertise as an architectural historian, I wish to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of Francesca Parrini during my investigation of the family papers preserved in the Pucci archives.
    [Show full text]