Reviewing my earlier contention that there was a discrepancy between Shorr and Callman regarding which picture went with which of the two Paris manuscripts, and hence a discrepancy between Callman and Hurst (on Wikimedia Commons), I see that I was quite confused. There is no discrepancy. All I can think of is that I was misled by the order in which the pictures are presented in Callman, in which the later picture is presented first.
Meanwhile, in my attempt to resolve my imagined discrepancy, I came upon another book discussing the Paris pictures, with more information. It is Five Illuminated Manuscripts of Giangaleazzo Visconti
, by Edith W. Kirsch, 1991. She says p. 3)
Around 1335, Azzo invited Giotto himself to Milan to adorn his splendid new palace. Here, in a large room, was a painting of pagan warriors, among them Hercules, Hector, Aeneas, and Attila. Only two Christian princes were included among this company: Charlemagne and Azzo Visconti. Creighton Gilbert has shown that in all probability this was the Triumph of Fame (Vana Gloria) that Giotto is recorded as having painted in fresco for Azzo in 1335. Moreover, Gilbert has demonstrated that the appearance of Giotto's lost work may be reconstructed through illuminations of the same subject in three manuscripts of Petrarch's De Viris illustribus, two of them confiscated by Giangaleazzo, together with the rest of Francesco da Carrara's library, in 1388 (Fig. 1). (8) Irving Lavin has observed that if Gilbert's reconstruction is correct, Giotto must be credited with having invented in Azzo's palace the tradition of monumental grisaille for the representation of worthies of antiquity and of Renaissance princes who wished to identify themselves with these worthies. (9) [Footnote 8: C. Gilbert, "The Fresco by Giotto in MIlan," Arte Lombarda nos. 47/48, 1977, 31-72. Gilbert's article contains a comprehensive bibliography on the subject. The two Petrarch manuscripts expropriated by Giangaleazzo from Francesco da Carrara are now in the Bibliotheque nationale in Paris (Lat. 6069 F and Lat. 6069 I), having been confiscated by Louis XII in 1499. On these manuscripts, see Paris, 1984, nos. 73 and 74. A contemporary description of Azzo's palace appears in Galvano Fiamma's Opusculum de rebus gestis ab Azone, Luchino, et Jahanne Vicecomitibus ab anno MCCCCXXVIII usque ad annum MCCCXLII, RIS, xii, pt. 4, 1011f. Footnote 9: Professor Lavin is preparing a study of this tradition for publication. He kindly communicated his observation on Giotto to me during several stimulating discussions of Visconti patronage.
Paris 1984, is Bibliotheque nationale, Dix siecles d'enluminure italienne (VIe-XVIe siecles)
, ed. F. Avril et al. Fig 1. is the picture that Michael dates "c. 1488". The caption reads:
Fig. 1. Altichiero, c. 1480. Triumph of Fame. Paris, Bibl. nat., Lat. 6069I, fol. I.
In the text, she says "circle of Altichiero" (p. 82, n. 42). But what is the argument? And why "c. 1380", as opposed to Michael's "c. 1388"? (Well, I can see that it had to be before 1388, but why as early as 1380?) And what is the relationship between Giotto's fresco of 1335 and the lost frescoes in Padua on the same theme, before 1388, which Shorr ("Some notes on the iconography of Petrarch's Triumph of Fame", Art Bulletin
20:1 (March 1938)), said were the model for the illuminations? Here Mommsen ("Petarch and the decoration of the Sala Virorum Illustrium in Padua", Art Bulletin
1952) gets me part way, but not enough. Hirsch (p. 82) points out that both the Giotto and the ones for Carrara in Padua were in grisaille (for the latter, Mommsen p. 106 and note 84), and that "The grisaille in Lat. 6069F is echoed in a Thebaid
of Status attributed to Altichiero's associate, Jacopo Avanzo (Mellini, Altichieri e Jacopo Avanzi
, pl. opp. 104)". Probably I need to read the works Kirsch refers to, the Gilbert (a name that Michael mentioned, but what he was talking about I did not figure out until now) and the Avril et al. Well, the libraries will open again soon.
Incidentally: Ross, you don't have to translate the de' Pasti letter. A translation has been published, or so I understand from my reading. On January 2 or 3 a library near me that has the book will reopen.