![]() His preference for this script was driven by the belief that it was easier on his aging eyes.įlemish, probably Ghent, about 1450 – 1455 Similarly, during the same century, Coluccio Salutati, an early Humanist in his own right, requested a copy of Abelard, a French scholastic philosopher of the 12th century, to be written in the “antica littera” – the Carolingian script – in preference to the Gothic script. Instead, he advocated for a “littera…castigata et clara,” which featured neat and clear letters. He bemoaned the contemporary style of script, which he likened to that of a painter, and which he found to be arduous on the reader’s eyes. In 1366, Petrarch, then sixty-two years old and a celebrated scholar, poet, and Humanist, corresponded with his contemporary, Boccaccio, lamenting the fashion in which his ‘Epistles’ were being copied. Such might have been also the sentiments of Petrarch and Coluccio Salutati, distinguished Italian scholars of the 14th century, as they manifested their desire for manuscripts to be written in a clear and legible script: Mimi numinum niuium minimi munium nimium uini muniminum imminui uiui minimum uolunt Įncountering such a perplexing manuscript may have left one feeling overwhelmed and frustrated, perhaps to the point of tossing it aside and succumbing to a fit of tears. I would suggest reading a bit about the Syrian/Isaurian Dynasty if you want an even better perspective.Support us on Patreon! Source: Unknown. I realize that gets a little off topic from the similarities of Islamic architecture with Carolingian architecture, but I hope it gives context to the connecting thread. But by wiping out the "pitch of decadence", they were able to lay the groundwork for Western Europe's Christianity and Carolingian Empire to became a center for high art. But with the first iconoclast campaign, Islamic art backs away from iconography a bit, and Carolingian architects and scholars who look to the Byzantine's for inspiration, see the Empire after they have already purged a bit of their grandeur. Very early on, Islam is going to start borrowing from Byzantine Culture. Under the Byzantine Empire's Syrian Dynasty, the capital was under siege by Muslim/Arab invaders as early as 717 (before the first iconoclasm). I see a bit what you mean, and it makes sense considering that both architectural styles borrow from the Byzantine Empire. It may be true, however, that Carolingian artists had a different skill set than the Greeks or Romans, as they weren't Greek or Roman - they were Franks. Just as Picasso knew how to paint people realistically and chose not to. ![]() They simply chose to depict the world more abstractly, for several reasons. ![]() The mosaics in Sant'Apollinare in Classe (550) are much more abstract and flat than those in the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia or the Orthodox Baptistery (450), and since they were made by the same groups of people (essentially the same workshops a few generations removed) it's not likely that they lost the skills. If you compare the Early Christian/Byzantine mosaics in Ravenna, for example, you can see a definite style shift over only 100 years. Just because they had the same religion and lived in what we now consider to be Europe does not mean that they all had the same interests and skill sets. ![]() Another way of reading that passage might be to say that 'unlike Carolingian artists, Byzantine artists did not seek to restore the third dimension, and they did not try to create more convincing illusions in space.' Which is to say that that was their choice.įurthermore, comparing "Christian" artists of different media in the Middle Ages is still like comparing apples and oranges. I'm not sure I understand your reasoning. That last line shows that the Christians artists had in fact LOST talents and skills over the centuries that had been accrued over time from the Greeks and Romans and it wouldn't be until the Renaissance that these skills were relearned! It was no conscious decision to make "abstract" and "flat" mosaics and icons, but rather a lack of skill due to perhaps the iconoclastic period and a severing of the direct line of knowledge from the ancients. They used classical drawings as their models and TRIED to create more convincing illusions of space." Unlike the flat, two-dimensional work of Early Christian and Early Byzantine artists, Carolingian artists SOUGHT to restore the third dimension. I have always felt that that is wrong though and here is proof."Figurative art from this period is easy to recognize. Previously within this Khan Academy Art History module we have learned mostly that the Byzantine artists and other artists of this early Medieval period CHOSE to make their art flat and "abstract" as an artistic CHOICE.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |