Re: Moakley's book: text and discussion
Posted: 03 Mar 2017, 03:29
Phaeded wrote
Added March 5: Phaeded later in the thread links to where he retracted this analysis of the painting. Despite the title of the book, he will say, it is actually of Cistercians, as he discovered seeing the painting in the Pinoteca of Bologna. See his post at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1168&start=70#p19143, my post immediately following, then his post immediately following, and my post immediately following that.
The knots are not there, of course; that was part of the legend as reported in the trial document (my translation of the Italian quoted by Filesi, (http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG):
It is possible that I have misread you about the Umliati habit. If so, let me know.
There is also the trial document, about which I quote my translation of Filesi's transcription from Italian, itself probably a translation from Latin. Filesi writes (http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG):
Alternatively, art historian Monike Dachs (Pantheon I, 1992, pp. 175-178) cited by Bendera in the 2013 Brera catalog, p. 52) has suggested that this and others (Justice, Time, Page of Coins, Page of Batons) were retouched by the later artist (Cicognara, she says). The robe does look like the same type of paint and style as the "added cards". In that case, he would have done the whole brown part to look the same, and we wouldn't know what shade of brown the habit on the original was. He might have decided the habit had to have been that of a Poor Clare, due to the knots.
The Fournier also has the knots, but less obviously, due to the way the rest of the robe is painted. (For the two cards side by side, see the beginning of Filesi's essay, either in Italian or in my translation at http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG).
Didn't you once post the following, which you said was from the cover of F. Andrews, The Early Humiliati, Cambridge University Press, NY, 1999 and estimated 14th century? It looks late gothic to me, i.e. 15th century or before.Can anyone produce a 15th century depiction of an Umiliati nun that resembles the PMB trump?
Added March 5: Phaeded later in the thread links to where he retracted this analysis of the painting. Despite the title of the book, he will say, it is actually of Cistercians, as he discovered seeing the painting in the Pinoteca of Bologna. See his post at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1168&start=70#p19143, my post immediately following, then his post immediately following, and my post immediately following that.
The knots are not there, of course; that was part of the legend as reported in the trial document (my translation of the Italian quoted by Filesi, (http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG):
They don't say whether Manfreda would have started wearing her habit like that; probably not, since it would have attracted attention and not been in accord with Umiliati custom. But it is a good identifying detail, for those in the know. For those not in the know, or to the Inquisitors, it is a harmless identifier of a Poor Clare.In this room in the presence of all the summoned people Sister Maifreda said that the lady St. Guglielma had ordained the sister Maifreda to say to all those present that she was the Holy Spirit, true God and true man, and that hence all the aforesaid there present would not have appeared in her presence [otherwise]. Added the aforementioned Sister Maifreda: "Let be for me what can be”. Allegranza also said to remember that the above mentioned lady Carabella in that house then sat on her own habit, and when she got up, she found that the belt or cord of her habit had made three knots that had not been there: and there grew around them then marveling and whispering among them, and many from this same testimony believed it to be a great miracle.
It is possible that I have misread you about the Umliati habit. If so, let me know.
There is also the trial document, about which I quote my translation of Filesi's transcription from Italian, itself probably a translation from Latin. Filesi writes (http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG):
It is possible that the PMB Popess's robe was painted light brown based on paintings such as the one you posted rather than the trial document, or perhaps a nervous Bembo who decided it was safer to paint a Poor Clare. The Fournier Popess would then be a correction based on the trial document.The main religious orders active in northern Italy in the second half of the fifteenth century were the Franciscans, whose robe was brown, the Dominicans, who wore a white tunic and a black hood, the Augustinians, with black robe, and the Umiliati dressed in white. According to the minutes of the Inquisition, the robe of the Guglielmites was "morello,” that is, dark, and that the aforementioned Guglielma wore habits of the color “marrone moreto." By the nuances of the sentence, we can assume that on this occasion the term "morello" refers to a very dark brown, almost black. On the basis of these colors, the habit of the Pierpont Popess seems inspired by the Franciscan habit, and also, if it was a little darker, could be identified with the habits of the Guglielmites, as appears most evident in the case of the Fournier Popess.
Alternatively, art historian Monike Dachs (Pantheon I, 1992, pp. 175-178) cited by Bendera in the 2013 Brera catalog, p. 52) has suggested that this and others (Justice, Time, Page of Coins, Page of Batons) were retouched by the later artist (Cicognara, she says). The robe does look like the same type of paint and style as the "added cards". In that case, he would have done the whole brown part to look the same, and we wouldn't know what shade of brown the habit on the original was. He might have decided the habit had to have been that of a Poor Clare, due to the knots.
The Fournier also has the knots, but less obviously, due to the way the rest of the robe is painted. (For the two cards side by side, see the beginning of Filesi's essay, either in Italian or in my translation at http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 72&lng=ENG).