Welcome to TurkoTek's Discussion Forums

Archived Salons and Selected Discussions can be accessed by clicking on those words, or you can return to the Turkotek Home Page. Our forums are easy to use, and you are welcome to read and post messages without registering. However, registration will enable a number of features that make the software more flexible and convenient for you, and you need not provide any information except your name (which is required even if you post without being registered). Please use your full name. We do not permit posting anonymously or under a pseudonym, ad hominem remarks, commercial promotion, comments bearing on the value of any item currently on the market or on the reputation of any seller. Turkotek Discussion Forums - View Single Post - The tile hypothesis

View Single Post
Old March 16th, 2011, 05:39 PM   #10
Filiberto Boncompagni
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 71
Default

Hi Yohann,
Quote:
There's another hypothesis besides the tiles one: It's also possible that certain floor decorations in paintings are imaginary and in tight relation with the scene, only created for its symbolic system value.

Please, have another look at the "Lippo Memmi, Maria lactans,1340s, Staatliche Museen, Berlin" for example. Is there anything else than symbols in this scene?
Fact is that there are more examples of this kind of “carpets”.


Lippo Memmi, Maria lactans,1340s, Staatliche Museen, Berlin

Like this one



Giovanni di Paolo, Virgin with Child 1445, Detail MET New York

Or this



Sano di Pietro, Marriage of the Virgin, 1448 Vatican
And there's no doubt here: it's a representation of a carpet.

In Pierre’s database there are two other paintings of Sano di Pietro with the same carpet.

It is possible that Lippo Lemmi had invented it and the other two artists copied him but it seems improbable to me.

Pierre, the Spanish painting could be very well a tiled floor example.
And the specimen in the Pollaiolo’s work is very un-probable as a carpet, being made only by kufesque borders. I tend more to interpret it as an artist’s license though, like in this Vincenzo Foppa’s Virgin and Child, ca 1480



Where the horizontal border looks definitely wrong. Wronged by the painter or by the weaver? Or it was badly repaired? Who knows?
Regards,

Filiberto
Filiberto Boncompagni is offline   Reply With Quote