Talk:Beatrice d'Este

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

On Beatrice's story[edit]

Beatrice, sadly, died in childbirth and in a state of emotional anguish, as during her last pregnancy,her husband turned (romantically, sexually) to another woman - Lucrezia Crivelli, one of her own maids in waiting. Today, she would likely have survived that difficult birth. But she wouldn't have been betrothed at 15 and married off at 16, either. There's a lot more known about her (from Julia Cartwright's immense amount of research) but the pictures that are supposedly of her are not all well-documented. The bust in the Louvre - and the coin struck with her face- would be good illustrations.--LeValley 04:21, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Art historians at Pinocateca/Biblioteca Ambrosiana say it's a Leonardo[edit]

The official placard at the museum where this painting is held does not mention anything at all about de Predis. I can't unearth any recent art historians who disagree with them. At this point, since the museum is very specific about handprints/fingerprints, unless someone can find a way to work de Predis back into this article - this portrait, entitled simply "Duchess of Milan" is a Leonardo. And yes, it is most likely a portrait given to Beatrice at her wedding, where Leonardo was the wedding designer and made party favors and was highly involved in all of it.--LeValley 06:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

There is presently a difference in the attribution of this painting to Leonardo on the article page and to de Predis on the enlarged view page - which is the actual source of the image?
Many of these "Leonardo" portraits of women are still disputed as to their authenticity or painter. (Julia Cartwright's 1903 biography of Beatrice d'Este says no wedding portrait of her, if there was one, survived even in her own day, since her sister Isabella had to beg for the loan of a different Leonardo instead. But the lack of one is odd, especially since this portrait appears on the frontispiece of Cartwright's book. Maybe someone can clear up this "inconsistency" or explain the current consensus, if there is one, on who painted it? --User:SheaWin 18:28, 14 December 2011 (restored by P64 next day)

RESA79 (see also talk on Ludovico Sforza): I am conducting research on this portrait since 2,5 years. The majority amongst art historians say it's not a portrait by da Vinci (contemporary: e.g. Kemp, Zöllner). The way the portrait is painted bears similiarities with the "Angel in Red with a Lute" in the National Gallery London*, for the eyes (and the area around the eye with an "shadow" effect) are painted in a quite similar way. Since the angel was part of the co-production de Predis/da Vinci "Virgin of the Rocks", it is quite difficult to say who painted the angel although the contract says it is de Predis. Morelli was the one who changed the attribution of the portrait from da Vinci to de Predis. One thing is absolutely clear: it is not a portrait of Beatrice d'Este but much more likely of Anna Sforza (compare with http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucrezia,_Bruto_e_Collatino; and a miniature in Anna Sforza's Book of Hours**). There are several portraits of Beatrice d'Este preserved and she looks quite different and by far not so attractive.

*) http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/giovanni-ambrogio-de-predis-an-angel-in-red-with-a-lute
**) "Messale di Anna Sforza", archived at Biblioteca Estense Universitaria (Modena), miniature online: http://www.kleio.org/images/large/sforza/Schiaparelli4.jpg

Sources:

Lermolieff, Ivan (aka Giovanni Morelli), 1890. Kunstkritische Studien über Italienische Malerei: Die Galerien Borghese und Doria Panfili in Rom. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus.

von Bode, Wilhelm, 1889. Ein Bildnis der zweiten Gemahlin Kaiser Maximilians, Bianca Maria Sforza, von Ambrogio de Predis. Jahrbuch der Königlich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, 10. Bd., 2. H. (1889), pp. 71-79.

von Bode, Wilhelm, 1915. Leonardos Bildnis der jungen Dame mit dem Hermelin aus dem Czartoryski-Museum in Krakau und die Jugendbilder des Künstlers. Jahrbuch der Königlich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, 36. Bd. (1915), pp. 189-207.

von Bode, Wilhem, 1921. Studien über Leonardo da Vinci. Berlin: G. Grote’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.

von Liphart, Ernst Friederich, 1912. Kritische Gänge und Reiseeindrücke. Jahrbuch der Königlich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen, 33. Bd. (1912), pp. 193-224.

von Seidlitz, Wilhelm, 1906. Leonardo da Vinci und Ambrogio Preda. Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, Band XXVI, Heft I, pp. 1-48.

Kemp, Martin/Cotte, Pascal, 2010. "La Bella Principessa": The Profile Portrait of a Milanese Woman. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

Navoni, Marco, 2009. Aula Leonardi. Novara: De Agostini.

Cartwright, Julia, 1914. Italian Gardens of the Renaissance. London: Smith, Elder & Co.

Cartwright, Julia, 1920. Beatrice d’Este, Duchess of Milan, 1475-1497: A Study of the Renaissance. 8th Ed. London: J.M. Dent & Sons.

Schiaparelli, Attilio, 1921. Leonardo Ritrattista. Milano: Fratelli Treves.

Pascal Cotte, Lumiere Technology: http://www.lumiere-technology.com/news/Sforziada%20Owners%20Genealogy.pdf.

Iotti, Roberta, 2006. Rinascimento spezzato: Vita e morte di Anna Sforza d’Este (1476-1497). Modena: Edizioni Terra e Identità.

The true portrait of Beatrice d'Este is possibly this one (view share by Martin Kemp):

Lorenzo Costa (Elder), ca. 1490. Beatrice d’Este, oil on wood, cm 46.5 x 35. At: Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi. URL: http://www.polomuseale.firenze.it/catalogo/scheda.asp?nctn=00287160&value=1# (Dec 2012). Please note: the Galleria degli Uffizi lists this portrait as a Ritratto di Barbara Pallavicino of the 1510s by Araldi Alessandro.

And here a definite portrait of Beatrice d'Este, as a young girl:

Unknown Artist (Cosimo Tura?), ca. 1485. Ritratto di Beatrice d'Este. At: Paris. URL: http://fe.fondazionezeri.unibo.it/catalogo/scheda.jsp?decorator=layout&apply=true&tipo_scheda=OA&id=25537&titolo=Anonimo+lombardo+sec.+XV%2f+XVI+%2c+Ritratto+di+Beatrice+d%26%23039%3bEste (Dec 2012).

Here her well known bust:

Romano, Giovanni Cristoforo, 1490. Beatrice d’Este, marble, cm 59 (height). At: Paris, Musée du Louvre. URL: http://www.wga.hu/html_m/r/romano/beatrice.html (Dec 2012).

The portrait[edit]

I deleted the portrait because it is not that of Beatrice d'Este unless someone can provide a proper art historical evidence for that. According to the known Leonardo researcher Martin Kemp (2010, p. 63)*, Beatrice d'Este is depicted here:

Lorenzo Costa (Elder), ca. 1490. Beatrice d’Este, oil on wood, cm 46.5 x 35. At: Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi. URL: http://www.polomuseale.firenze.it/catalogo/scheda.asp?nctn=00287160&value=1# (Dec 2012). Please note: the Galleria degli Uffizi lists this portrait as a Ritratto di Barbara Pallavicino of the 1510s by Araldi Alessandro.

See also: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritratto_di_Barbara_Pallavicino

  • ) Kemp, Martin/Cotte, Pascal, 2010. La Bella Principessa. London: Hodder & Stoughton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RESA79 (talkcontribs) 13:38, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
The link you provided doesn't support your argument. All I know about Kemp's book from its reviews is that it deals with an entirely different picture, La Bella Principessa, and his disputed attribution of that picture. Similarly, what is the link to it:Ritratto di Barbara Pallavicino where Beatrice d'Este as subject is explicitly excluded, supposed to prove?
While there is uncertainty about the subject of File:Ambrogio de Predis - Ritratto di una dama.jpg, it's still widely assumed to be Beatrice d'Este, so this article should show that, probably with a caption of "Ritratto di Dama (c. 1490, Beatrice d'Este?) by Ambrogio de Predis". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

@Michael Bednarek: Before you comment, read the books. It seems that you do not have an art historical background, so how does it come that you - more or less - act in this article like a showmaster? Michael Kemp also talks about the portrait in the above cited book which obviously haven't read. Second, my own research arrives at the same conclusion - a project that costed a lot of money and took more than three years including studying the archives in Ferrara and Mantova. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RESA79 (talkcontribs) 12:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean by writing that I act like a showmaster; please explain.
When you remove the lead image from an article without any explanation in the edit summary or on the talk page, you have to expect to be reverted. Now that there is a coherent narration with citations in the article, although Reimann's (your?) paper lacks review and proper publication, the removal of that image as identifier becomes justified. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:27, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

@Michael Bednarek: No, the bust of Romano is definitely not of Isabella d'Este! I do not know to whom you refer when you say "there are competing views" but these must be again those people who never have seen the bust. Check the image on the below website and you can see that the bust bears the name of Beatrice - it's an unmissable inscription on the socket of the bust saying that this is Beatrice, the daughter of Ercole. http://www.wga.hu/html_m/r/romano/beatricx.html

Even the one-eyed man can see that Beatrice d'Este is not the sitter of the Ritratto di Dama. Just compare the basic face features of the Ritratto with all the confirmed portraits of Beatrice, i.e. the bust, the Pala Sforzesca and the sculpture of her tomb in the Certosa di Pavia. Beatrice had a quite stout figure with unfavourable facial features. I can show countless arguments against Beatrice, what are our arguments pro Beatrice? Show me the evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RESA79 (talkcontribs) 13:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons has two files showing the Romano sculpture: File:Gian cristoforo romano, beatrice d'este, 1490 ca. 1.JPG and File:Gian cristoforo romano, beatrice d'este, 1490 ca. 2.JPG. Both were until 20 minutes ago categorised in Commons:Category:Isabella d'Este. Assuming good faith (do you know what that means?), I assumed the uploader of those two pictures, a native Italian I think, had done their home work. I've now corrected the categorisation, something which you might have done just as well. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Date of death?[edit]

The article lists her date of death as January 2 at the start, but January 3 later in the text. Can anyone clarify this?166.249.96.233 (talk) 14:28, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, she died just after midnight, IIRC, on the day following the birth of her last child. I believe Cartwright says it was Jan 3 - I'll try to check and fix if needed.LeValley 18:43, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Beautiful[edit]

Is there a source that she was considered in her time "one of the most beautiful" (lead paragraph)?

The plain appearance of duchess Beatrice is crucial to The Second Mrs. Giaconda, a historical novel for children by E.L. Konigsburg. I have expanded Beatrice d'Este#Literature to show that. With a source I would add to the article on the fiction. --P64 (talk) 19:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)