Talk:Giotto

Citations and Language

Overall this article seems to be informative but there are a few areas I feel like the clarity could be improved. In particular, in the middle paragraph of the frescos of the upper church at Assisi are a bit confusing and then a sentence in the sequence section of the Scrovegni chapel about the faded blue color is oddly worded. Additionally, I feel like this article relies heavily on two or three sources of information with just bits and pieces of information from other sources. Although I understand that much of the information about Giotto's life is taken from Vasari's Lives of Artists, this information seems heavily debated and therefore it may be best to find a few more sources. Finally some sections seem to be missing citations entirely. For example, the style section fro the Scrovegni chapel has only one reference and the Stefaneschi TriptychIt section has no citations. It may be that this information is from a previously cited source in the article but it is not clear where this information is coming from. Esmithwick (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Vasari says "Greek"

The verbatim of the full Vasari quote is "Et insieme a Fiorenza inviatisi, non solo in poco tempo pareggiò il fanciullo la maniera di Cimabue, ma ancora divenne tanto imitatore della natura, che ne’ tempi suoi sbandí affatto quella greca goffa maniera, e risuscitò la moderna e buona arte della pittura, et introdusse il ritrar di naturale le persone vive, che molte centinaia d’anni non s’era usato." (i.e. from http://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Le_vite_de'_pi%C3%B9_eccellenti_pittori,_scultori_e_architettori_(1550)/Giotto)

Vasari would have not used Byzantine. --Alessandro Riolo (talk) 20:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The English translation that is quoted here uses the term "Byzantine", which is the style to which the term "greca" referred. Amandajm (talk) 21:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

That English translation is ante litteram. I would never translate that "Greca" with "Byzantine". --Alessandro Riolo (talk) 22:50, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I have fixed the problem by changing the information to a statement, instead of a direct quotation. Amandajm (talk) 04:08, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Giotto's slave, Cimabue, (??)

Is this really correct? It seems strange given that elsewhere Giotto is referred to as Cimabue's apprentice ? Or were there two Cimabues? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.204.150.110 (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Pick a pope... any pope

The article contains an annecdote about Giotto painting a circle to demonstrate his skill to a pope. Last night an anon IP with some history of vandalism changed the numerals for the pope involved from Pope Benedict IX to Pope Benedict XI then Pope Benedict XII, without explanation. I would have reverted, but I did a little checking first and it looks like there is a problem.        

Our original reference was to Pope Benedict IX and this is backed up by this website. But it has to be wrong, as that pope died around 1085 which is a couple of centuries before Giotto was born.

Popes Benedict XI and Benedict XII have dates which make them possible, but I can't find any web references that concur.

The Webmuseum attributes the story to Vasari, and puts Pope Boniface VIII in the frame.

Has anyone got a more authoratative source - a book perhaps? - Solipsist 07:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

According to Vasari's Lives Of The Artists Volume I, it was Benedict IX. I wouldn't be surprised if it was innacurate, however being the definitive work on the life of Giotto I suppose it's at least definitively inaccurate. -209.174.140.100 01:50, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

After reading it again, it seems that either Vasari or the translator of my copy transposed the roman numerals from IX to XI. Later in the same text he references the death of Benedict IX saying he was followed by Clement V- who in reality succeeded Benedict XI. The dates for that work out much more nicely. I will change the article. -209.174.140.100 05:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

This site says Pope Boniface VIII was the pope.

This one however says it was Pope Benedict was the one. I'm getting convinced that this is just a tall tale.

Ghostalker 00:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Placing in the Divine Comedy

I remember this fellow's name from Dante, but I don't remember what transpired or where he was placed. Anyone remember? --24.51.94.14 04:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a reference to Giotto's earthly fame in Purgatory. The lines in question talk about how Cimabue used to "hold the field" as the most famous painter in Italy but now Giotto "has the cry" of the people. I intend to reword this entry altogether and I will include the quote when I do. October 26, 2006

The tercet in question has been quoted with reference. IrlandesLuchador 18:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Cultural depictions of Giotto di Bondone

I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information. I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list. Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article. Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this as a model for the editors here. Regards, Durova 15:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

HELP!

{{helpme}}If there is any picture of Giotto's artwork when he painted a fly on it and it looked so realistic people shooed it away. let me know [[Wrestling Maniac]] 00:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

A biography apport

I've read a few ago that in 1334, the Florence's Council proclaimed that. I need a page source for it. ( and also, any one could check the ortography and the grammar? thanks) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.27.16.94 (talk) 13:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Please get back to us with more information about this. If you copy what it says in the book directly to this page, I will simplify it if necessary, and insert the info. I've deleted it for the time being, because, although I get the gist of it, it would be good to know exactly what the council said.  :-) Amandajm (talk) 15:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

Is "Italian" appropriate, given that a complete "Italian" country was a few years off? Wouldn't "Florentine" make more sense? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:08, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• Yes it is. Someone should write an essay on why, as the question comes up so often with pre 19th century Italians (but oddly, rarely with Germans). Johnbod (talk) 03:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Renaissance?

No way! Giotto's time is still in the Middle Age! --81.174.44.128 (talk) 00:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

No way? Let's look at what the sentence actually says:

He is generally considered the first in a line of great artists who contributed to the Italian Renaissance.

This doesn't state that Giotto was a Renaissance person. It states most specifically that his work contributed to the Italian Renaissance. The Renaissance didin't happen the instant that the clock ticked over to 1401.

Amandajm (talk) 03:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I added that he was in Florence in the "late Middle Ages". Now everybody is happy.173.69.176.235 (talk) 22:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Giotto seems to have been a Renaissance painter, given my study of European history. Oh, and for the record, most books say the Renaissance began in about 1300. Giotto died in 1337! Classicalfan2 (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Some aspects of the Renaissance began earlier than others. In a broad sense, Giotto is referred to as a Renaissance painter and appears in books on the Renaissance, because of the step forward that his art took. However, its probably more appropriate to classify him as "Proto-Renaissance" which indicatesd that he was part of a developmental stage. While Giotto is often considered Renaissance, none of his successors generally are, until Massacio, 100 years later. Amandajm (talk) 06:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

@Amandajm and Classicalfan2: It's Gothic or Pre-Renaissance, actually. Robert G. (talk) 20:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Mona Lisa

I think it bares mentioning that Divinci was greatly influenced by giotto. Divinci's most recognizable works are the "circle" of the vitruvian man and the deep unnatural shading of the Mona Lisa reminicent of Giottos figures in a scene from the Arena Chapel or Morning of St Francis in Bardi Chaple.

Sparky, Please don't write his name as Divinci! It is da (meaning "of") Vinci. Vinci is a town. He is Leonardo of Vinci. When he was in Vinci they would have called him Leonardo of Ser Piero. Ser Piero (Mr Piero) was his father.

• There is a long line of painters between Giotto and Leonardo. By the time that Leonardo was a boy, many artists since Giotto had painted naturalistic figures and many artists had experimented with light and shade on faces. Of course the Bardi Chapel frescoes would have looked much more impressive then than they do now, and Leonardo would have looked at them, and heard the stories about Giotto. But he would also have seen Massaccio's famous Adam and Eve, and the powerfully drawn faces of the Brancacci Chapel.
• Leonardo knew far more about light than Giotto did. It was one of his subjects of study.
• As for the circle, well, Leonardo had a passion for geometery, and was employed to draw a series of geometric shapes for a book on geometery, call "Divine Proportion" by Luca Pacioli.

The famous drawing of a man in a circle, called the Vitruvian Man doesn't go back to Giotto. It goes back a lot further than that. Leonardo was illustrating an idea written more than a thousand years earlier by Vitruvius.

Giotto is believed to have drawn a circle, freehand. Leonardo drew a circle with a man inside. I ask you to imagine how many artists, architects, sculptors, hat makers, tray makers, shield makers, potters and maths students had drawn circles or made circular things in Florence, in the two hundred years between Giotto and Leonardo. Uccello, for one, was passionate about the geometry of circles. He must have drawn hundreds of them in his lifetime.

• I am not saying that Giotto had no influence on Leonardo. He did. But his influence was filtered through a long chain of people, before it reached Leonardo.

Amandajm (talk) 11:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

"the crude Greek style"

how about some other opinions on Giotto, like El Greco's? it appears a bit one-sided at least from a byzantine standpoint eh... 87.202.138.112 (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Who knows what El Greco's opinion might have been, considering that he himself abandoned the Byzantine style and imitated the Venetian manner of painting?

The word "crude" is certainly not one that a modern historian would chose in relation to the great masterpieces by Cimabue and Duccio in the "Greek style" as Vasari would have called it. But Vasari was writing in the 16th century and perceives things from that perspective. Other people who had opinions on Giotto's work were his imitators, and they were legion, from his own time, to Masaccio, Fra Angelico and Benozzo Gozzoli more than 100 later. Amandajm (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

"Who knows what El Greco's opinion might have been" - We do know what his opinion was considering that we have his comments on Vasari, however. My basic point was that Vasari's opinion appears right in the intro with almost no further explanation (yes, the real point is the "break" though Vasari himself would have seen it as a break in a better direction), so it looks as if the article is adopting that viewpoint. Imagine if we replaced the comment with "Giotto's simplistic style compared to the Greek manner" right in the intro because another great guy wrote it back then, instead. 87.202.155.71 (talk) 06:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Everything About Particular Works, Nothing About Technique and Style?

Was just reading an essay, actually on Duccio, which mentioned Giotto's experimentalism and his use of the "extreme oblique." I see nothing here about either. Wasn't Giotto's work also a major influence on the development of perspective in the visual arts? 108.48.94.155 (talk) 02:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Not really, no. But the article isn't great, though there is a section on style. I think his techniques were the standard ones of the day. Johnbod (talk) 04:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Agree that the style section could be improved.

Erwin Panofsky considers Giotto's use of pictorial space here (anyone have access to the original?)

Giotto's developments in perspective should be mentioned, there are plenty of sources for that. An interesting essay by Professors Tyler and Kubovy focusing on Jesus Before Caiaphas can be found online here --Hillbillyholiday ^talk 18:58, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Well here really. He is really more important for his innovations in terms of conveying depth and volume than strict perspective, though he had a role here too. Johnbod (talk) 05:38, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Oops, thanks for correcting my link, John. --Hillbillyholiday ^talk 05:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Giotto/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Intro is too long, approximately half the article. It needs in-line citations. Errabee 21:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:30, 12 December 2011 (UTC). Substituted at 04:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Year of birth

According to this source it's "c. 1270".

Encyclopedia Britannica is uncertain as well: (born 1266–67/1276). So I consider that the circa tag is proffered since we already have two major sources supporting it, basically.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Giotto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120920044914/http://shop.getty.edu/products/florence-at-the-dawn-of-the-renaissance-978-1606061268 to http://shop.getty.edu/products/florence-at-the-dawn-of-the-renaissance-978-1606061268
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927191504/http://www.aiwaz.net/gallery/giotto-di-bondone/gc20 to http://www.aiwaz.net/gallery/giotto-di-bondone/gc20

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:33, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Giotto's portrait

The reason for the reversion is that the face in the foliage is probably a self portrait. The statue, on the other hand, is 19th century and purely speculative. Amandajm (talk) 14:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, better. Johnbod (talk) 15:00, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi John! Yes. It was there, ut someone recently replaced it with the statue. Amandajm (talk) 15:39, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

My keyboard is worse than ever!

Ian Wing, there are a number of figures in the various frescos of Giotto that are believed to be self portraits. Giotto is identified as a dwarf (although Vasari, writing 200 years later didn't state this. The remains found recently and identified as his were of a man 4 feet tall. This co-incides with the traditional Florentine identification of him as a dwarf, and with the facial appearance of thissupposed self-portrait from the Scrovegni Chapel.

Amandajm (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Contribution

Good morning, I am a student of the University of Bergamo and for my assignment of Heritage Studies and ICT [1] I have added some lines saying that Palazzo della Ragione has been declared part of a UNESCO World Heritage site and why. I am available in case of any questions or doubts. --MyaJourneyBoo (talk) 17:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)