3 / 2018 Readings/Rereadings The National Edition of De Prospectiva Pingendi: a Philological Approach to the Drawings in the Treatise Laura Carlevaris The monumental editorial initiative to study on the manuscripts written by the need to ensure the protection, enhan- publish a National Edition of De pro- painter and treatise writer from Sanse- cement and fruition of our literary spectiva pingendi by Piero della Fran- polcro. The initial results of these new heritage and philosophy, as embodied cesca (Sansepolcro c. 1410-1492) has studies was the publication of the Libel- by the written texts of Italian authors: recently been completed. The initiative lus de quinque corporibus regularibus in in fact, these initiatives guarantee the is sponsored by the Ministry of Cultu- 1995 [Piero della Francesca 1995]. publication of the opera omnia of an ral Heritage and Activities and Tourism The Ministry nominated Cecil Grayson, author (or, in some cases, the most im- (MiBACT) and the Fondazione Piero who had edited the vulgate texts writ- portant works of a group of authors) della Francesca [1]. The book, published ten by Leon Battista Alberti [Alberti in editions based on the identification by the State Mint and Polygraphic In- 1960-1973], as chair of the scientific and critical transcription of all perti- stitute, is the third volume in the epic commission. He was later as chair re- nent manuscripts. They propose all the series –the National Edition of Writings placed by another member of the com- published and unpublished texts of an by Piero della Francesca– established by mission, Marisa Dalai Emiliani, currently author and use all available documenta- Presidential Decree 26.2.1974 and ini- assisted by two co-chairs: Ottavio Be- tion to clarify the history and structure tiated in 1985. somi and Carlo Maccagni. of the texts” [3]. The critical edition of De prospectiva The National Edition continued in 2012 pingendi by Giusta Nicco Fasola was with the publication of the Trattato d’A- published in 1942 [Piero della France- baco [Piero della Francesca 2012] and The National Edition of sca 1942]. Although it is undoubtedly two parallel publications about De Pro- De prospectiva pingendi an important critique, the author did spectiva pingendi, published respectively not consider all available texts, in other in 2016 (National Edition of the Parma The enormous amount of work fo- words he did not compare the many Codex 1576, in vulgate) and in 2017 cusing on De prospectiva pingendi was versions of the manuscript, some in the (National Edition of Bordeaux Codex published over a two-year period; the vulgate, and others in Latin. Instead lin- 616, in Latin). The last envisaged publica- study was divided into two separate se- guists are interested in Piero’s writings tion will focus on the Archimedis Opera. ries (each made up of three books) and precisely because of the peculiarities of Every National Edition is a meticulous, is presented in two box sets. the language he uses: a Tuscan vernacu- Herculean, and undeniably scientific The first series, marked by the letter A lar, very different to Florentine, and with task: each one is an extremely intere- and published in 2016, tackles the vul- Umbrian nuances [2]. sting national endeavour backed by gate draft of the 1576 codex housed In 1984 an anastatic copy of Nicco Fa- a substantial financial investment, but in the Biblioteca Palatina in Parma. The sola’s edition was reprinted: it includes it is also and above all pregnant with second series (2017), marked by the several critical essays [Piero della Fran- expectations. The MiBACT website letter B, focuses on Latin Codex 616 cesca 1984]. One year later the need for contains the following paragraph: “Na- preserved in the Bibliothéque Munici- a philological approach led to renewed tional Editions satisfy the basic scientific pale in Bordeaux. https://doi.org/10.26375/disegno.3.2018.20 217 ISSN 2533-2899 3 / 2018 Each series is made up of three books. is contextually compared to the vulgate to examine both the text and graphic The work on the texts is performed version allowed important headway to images. Each investigation was inspired using the same approach and in parallel: be made regarding the glossaries since by another investigation, or better still, Book I presents a critical version of the the latter are crucial when an in-dep- ‘in conjunction with’ another investiga- text; Book II provides a critical edition th study is performed on its contents tion: the effectiveness of this synergetic of the drawings; Book III contains the and the humus that existed when it was exchange was acknowledged by all the anastatic copy of the surviving text. written [4]. scholars who inputted into the success The work was carried out by several This undertaking is the product of a of the undertaking as well as by the scientific referents: Chiara Gizzi (critical truly interdisciplinary team, another chair of the scientific commission, Pro- edition of the vulgate text), Franca Ela unique feature of this initiative during fessor Dalai Emiliani. Consolino (critical edition of the Latin which the fourteen scholars pooled The traditional philological approa- text), and Riccardo Migliari (critical edi- their skills and expertise (historians, ch to the manuscript was based on a tion of the drawings) [Piero della Fran- art historians, language historians, phi- documented comparison between all cesca 2016; 2017]. lologists of both the vulgate and Latin, the known surviving texts (in this case Flavia Carderi curated the critical edi- experts in the fields of descriptive ge- three vulgate and four Latin codices tion of the Latin text (Book I, III.A), ometry and perspective). Rather than [Baglioni 2018, p. 7]. It also included a Chiara Gizzi curated the critical edition working separately they adopted an double, ‘diplomatic’ and ‘critical inter- of the vulgate text (Book I, III.B), whi- integrated approach, toiling side by side pretation of the treatise and drawings. le the critical edition of the drawings in order to enhance our knowledge This methodology was elaborated after (Book II, III.A and Book II, III.B) was a of such a key text in Italy’s artistic and many detailed discussions between all joint effort by Riccardo Migliari, Leonar- scientific landscape. Indeed, the topic of the experts and was adopted for the do Baglioni, Marco Fasolo, Matteo Flavio the manuscript –the codification of the first time on this occasion. The need for Mancini, Jessica Romor, Marta Salvatore perspective method during the Renais- a double edition of every drawing is a (Sapienza Università of Rome) and Fe- sance– is indissolubly linked to Italy’s characteristic of the National Edition derico Fallavollita (Alma Mater Studio- culture and its status in the world. of the Writings by Piero della France- rum-University of Bologna). Alessandra In order to get a better understanding sca. The idea was a brilliant intuition by Sorci inputted some philologically criti- of the concept of ‘interdisciplinary’ re- Francesco Paolo Di Teodoro, curator of cal contributions. search –a crucial characteristic of this the first treatise, the Libellus de quinque It is the many different features of this new edition of De prospectiva pingendi– corporibus regularibus. In De prospecti- edition of the treatise that makes it so let us turn to the words written by Mi- va pingendi this mechanism appears important. gliari in another essay: “Interdisciplinary to have been adjusted and updated as First and foremost, it’s important to research is in fact the form of collabo- well as particularly effective in revealing note that the two different versions of ration that produces the best, most fer- features of the text that are not only the text (vulgate and Latin) were stu- tile results. Researchers who are exper- profoundly innovative, but also inspired died in parallel using the same method. ts in their own fields work together, by the culture and science of past cen- This synchronised interpretation provi- compare their findings, and continually turies. ded important data about the language exchange their results. They learn from In addition, after a new and meticulous used by the author who, unlike Alberti, each other because as they study they philological interpretation, the unde- appears to have written in Italian and first clarify the work they are doing in niable progress in the range of avai- only afterwards translated the text into their own minds and then explain what lable options provided by increasingly Latin, not vice versa. Piero della France- they are doing to each other; they com- sophisticated graphic models makes sca wrote the text using the language municate their drive, reasoning, succes- the analysis of the images particularly he spoke everyday and then translated ses and setbacks” [5]. This approach is enjoyable but, even more importantly, it into an aulic language in order to be what makes the publication so radically effective and incisive vis-à-vis the com- considered a humanist. In any event, this innovative. This publication –perhaps prehension of the originality and histo- is the first time the Latin version of the for the first time– exploits an integra- rical importance of the manuscript as treatise has been published. The fact it ted methodology and parallel studies well as future developments. 218 3 / 2018 The De prospectiva pingendi sing each of the graphic images in the As mentioned earlier, when working and the edition of the drawings treatise. This analysis can be used as an