Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Text, image, and translations: The marriage of philology and botticelli?

Gabriella Moretti,I Primi volgarizzamenti italiani delle Nozze di Mercurio et Filologia Reperti. Collana del Dipartimento di Scienze Filologiche e Storiche 1 (Trento: Universita degli Studi di Treno, 1995), LIII + 277 pp.

  • Review articles
  • Published:
International Journal of the Classical Tradition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusion

To summarize. Moretti’s introduction is valuable. Examples help, and this reviewer would have welcomed a detailed comparison of Buonaccioli’s and Pona’s translations, mistakes and triumphs, strengths and weaknesses, in one or more telling or fine passages. One might have suggestedDe Nuptiis 1.9–10, thedefectus oraculorum.

More analysis of the translations would have been desirable, but while whoever writes the introduction must clearly be a "Martian," the most suitable critic of the translaions themselves should be familiar with early modern Italian literature too. Now that both Buonaccioli's and Pona's translations are generally availabe, we can look forward to further investigation both of their text, their context, and their influence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. I am grateful to Claudia Lazarro and Sheryl Reiss for bibliographical help with Botticelli and to John Najemy for stimulating disagreements.

  2. E.g., Vincenzo Cartari,Le imagini colla spozizione degli dei degli antichi (Venice 1556). See Moretti, pp. xx–xxiii.

  3. See L.H. Heydenreich, “Eine illustrierte Martianus Capella-Handschrift,” in:Kunstgeschichtliche Studien für Hans Kauffmann, ed. W. Braunfels (Berlin 1956), p. 65, who points out that Martianus exercised very little direct influence on the iconography of theartes in the Renaissance.

  4. See Moretti, p. xxiii.

  5. Moretti, p. xxxv–xxxviii.

  6. Moretti, p. xl–xli.

  7. Moretti pp. xxx–xxxi.

  8. Page references to these texts in Moretti referpassim not to the original pagination, but to Moretti’s continuous numeration in the lower margin.

  9. Moretti, p. xxvi n. 48.

  10. Martianus Capella,De nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii, ed. J. Willis, Bibliotheca Teubneriana (Leipzig 1983).

  11. Moretti, p. xl hints that Buonaccioli’s translation may have lain behind Margherita d’austria’s marriage-intermezzo. For vaguer hints see Moretti, p. xliv. But no smoking guns.

  12. Moretti, p. 8 “la quale essendosi nipote, & figliola singolarmente amata”.

  13. Moretti, p. 5 “gia venti anni”.

  14. Moretti, p. 6.

  15. Moretti, p. 11.

  16. An unusual exception is the tapestry embroidered for Quedlinburg cathedral by Agnes, Abbess of Quedlinburg between 1186 and 1203. See Betty Kurth,Die deutschen Bildteppiche des Mittelalters (Vienna 1926), v. 1, pp. 53–67 and v. 2, pl. 12–22.

    Google Scholar 

  17. See above n. 5. Moretti, p. xxviii thinks that the painting did not form part of the permanent decoration of the room, but was some sort of typical temporary decoration suitable for a nuptial occasion.

  18. Baudri of Bourgueil,Carmen 191.

  19. For more on their sources, see below pp. 82–83.

  20. June 25th, 1997, p. 33, announcing Claudia Villa, “Mercurio ‘retrogrado’ e la Retorica nella bottega di Botticelli,”Strumenti critici 13.1 (1996) pp. 1–28, hereafter “Villa”. My thanks to Dick Gerberding who sent me the newspaper clipping. The article, despite its 1996 date, has not yet appeared, and I am extremely grateful to Professor Villa for sending me a copy of her proofs before publication.

  21. See A. Warburg, “Sandro Botticellis ‘Geburt der Venus’ und ‘Frühling’,” in: id., A. Warburg,Gesammelte Schriften, ed. G. Bing (Leipzig and Berlin 1932), v. 1, p. 38.

  22. E. Wind,Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance (New York 1968), pp. 101–103, sees Flora, the outcome of the metamorphosis of Chloris as described by Ovid.

  23. Villa, pp. 8–12.

  24. Warburg, pp. 32–34 for the analysis of Chloris-Flora.

  25. Villa, pp. 12–13.

  26. Villa, pp. 13–14.

  27. Villa, p. 14.

  28. Warburg, p. 40, points both to Seneca and to Horace,Carm. 1.30.8 to explain Mercury.

  29. Villa, pp. 15–18.

  30. As already in Vasari.

  31. Villa, pp. 18–19.

  32. For a good illustration see R. Lightbown,Botticelli: Life and Work (New York, London, Paris 1989), p. 173 (=pl. 58). For more on their discovery see H. P. Horne,Alessandro Filipepi, Commonly Called Sandro Botticelli, Painter of Florence (London 1908) reprinted asBotticelli: Painter of Florence (Princeton 1980), pp. 142–43.

  33. The same suggestion appeared in J. Seznec,The Survival of the Pagan Gods (Princeton 1972), p. 137 n. 32.

  34. Horne, pp. 145–46, came up with the right answer long ago.

  35. For an illustration, see Raimond van Marle,Iconographie de l’art profane au moyen-âge et à la renaissance (The Hague 1932), v. 2, p. 216 p. 242. I am assuming these are what Moretti means by “arti liberali a S. Maria Novella” on p. xxxviii.

    Google Scholar 

  36. It goes without saying that Botticelli need not have drawn onthis particular work, but theArtes’ attributes clearly belong in the same iconographical tradition, one that isnot Martianean.

  37. Ed. R. Hollander, et al. (Hanover & London 1986) who (p. xxii) dates the text to 1342/3.

  38. I hope to address some of them in the future in another context.

  39. My only difficulty with the Warburg-Wind hypothesis that sees Spring-Flora-Zephyr or Flora-Chloris-Zephyr here is the colour of the wind. The Zephyr in the “Birth of Venus” is flesh-coloured. Is this another wind, perhaps the colder and more harmful Boreas?

  40. Villa, p. 21.De Nuptiis 2.167sed tamen... et incursandi et nocendi habent... potestatem does not apply to the Genius. Martianus is thinking of thePanes, etc., probably Pan Ephialtes, for whom seeDe Nuptiis 5.425, p. 148.1.

  41. Lack of evidence has not prevented the “Primavera” from being interpreted as a mirror for a newly-wedded woman. See Lilian Zirpolo, “Botticelli’s Primavera: a Lesson for the Bride”, in:the Expanding Discourse: Feminism and Art History, ed. N. Broude & M. D. Garrard (New York 1992) pp. 101–109.

  42. M. Levi d’Ancona,Due Quadri del Botticelli eseguiti per nascite in Casa Medici (Florence 1992) pp. 14 and 26 rightly observes that spouses ought at least to be looking at one another in nuptial paintings.

  43. Viz. the figure’s clearcontrapposto.

  44. Vite de' più eccellenti architetti, pittori et scultori Italiani (Florence 1550), p. 492 “e così un altra Venere che le Grazie la fioriscono, dinotando la primavera, le quali da lui con grazia si veggono espresse”. For a new, and probably correct interpretation of “dinotando la primavera” as a syntagm applying only to the Graces and not necessarily to the whole painting, see Villa, p. 2.

  45. See the conspectus in Levi d’Ancona p. 8.

  46. Moretti, p. xxiii.

  47. See Seznec, pp. 288–289 on Vasari’sRagionamenti and their recycling of help he received from Cosimo Bartoli. For Bartoli’s impatience with his artist-advisse see Seznec, p. 298.

  48. Villa’s thesis requires Botticelli’s acquaintance not just with the text of theDe Nuptiis, but knowledge of illustrated manuscripts of it (specifically Florence, San Marco 190) and commentaries as well.

  49. I.e., some element that canonly come from theDe Nuptiis or a constellation of elements that are both compatible with theDe Nuptiis and leave no awkward questions.

  50. See R. Lightbown (1978), v. 1, p. 57 for an estimate of Botticelli’s culture. “Botticelli certainly knew how to read, but as certainly had ‘no letters’ in the sense of learned scholarship which the term then bore.”

  51. Seznec, p. 225, who does not give details. W. H. Stahl,Martianus Capella and the Seven Liberal Arts (New York and London 1971), v. 1, p. 75–76, lists five that are not reprints: Ed. Fr. Bodianus, Vicenza 1499; (Berthocus, Modena 1500=repr. of 1499); Petrus, Basel 1532; Lyons 1539; Ed. Vulcanius, Basel 1577; Vincentius, Lyons 1592 (repr. of 1539); ed. H. Grotius, Leiden 1599. J. E. Sandys,A History of Classical Scholarship, v. 2 (Cambridge 1908), p. 471, also lists Vienna 1516.

  52. Pona, p. 125 sticks to the Latin, “non mai si chiamò contenta d’irlo cercando.”

  53. Pona, p. 130 reflects the vulgateanie.

  54. Pona, p. 177 has “Selvatica Linsa.”

  55. Pona, p. 178 has Neverita alone, but he also has the puzzling “Lare il Solitario” forLar omnium cunctalis.

  56. Both produce something strange atDe Nuptiis 2.20, p. 55.16. Pona (who translated Strabo) p. 270 translates ἅπαξ καί δὶϛ έ↪έ⦰ωινα as “gli Dei soli, e promiscui.” Buonaccioli pp. 79–80 comes up with “le potenze di pura sostanza.” See also below n. 87.

  57. Moretti, p. xxviii.

  58. Moretti, p. xxviii.

  59. Moretti, p. xxviii.

  60. See p. 19, “biondi capelli,” p. 26 “biondi...capelli,” p. 30 “biondi chiome,” where no color is specified in the Latin. See Horne p. 151 on “bionde trecce” as one of the “sette bellezze” of the ideal Florentine female. Apollo too, however, on p. 25 is not just “biondo,” i.e. χρυσοκόμηϛ, but also “con la chioma d’oro.”

  61. Buonaccioli, p. 40.

  62. Canzoniere 2. 366. 1; for the text see M. Santagata,Francesco Petrarca: Canzoniere (Milan 1996) p. 1397. Pona, p. 220 ff. tries to stay close to the Latin, “Sali, Vergine bella, del Cielo a Templi, sali,” but likewise cannot resist “Vergine bella.”

  63. Moretti, p. xlv.

  64. Moretti, p. vlvii.

  65. Moretti, p. xlviii.

  66. Moretti, p. li.

  67. Moretti, p. li.

  68. Pona at Moretti, p. 131.

  69. Pona, p. 147. Note however the perhaps personal little cadenza on p. 148 “della pestilenza la mortal forza distrutta” forpestem fugari posse. Buonaccioli’s Greek (p. 25) was better, though redundant: “Il biondo Apollo con la chioma d’oro/Da noi scacciato ha’l pestilente Nembo”

  70. Discussed in Moretti, pp. li–liii.

  71. pp. li–liii.

  72. p. liii.

  73. See for example Remigius’sCommentum in Martianum Capellam, ed. C. Lutz (Leiden 1965), v. 2, p. 175. Also G. Nuchelmans, “Philologia et son mariage avec Mercure jusqu'à la fin du XIIe siècle,”Latomus 16 (1957), pp. 84–107.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Pona, p. 257.

  75. I disagree with Moretti, p. liii about the source of Eloquenza’s thunderbolts—not thears fulguralis, I suspect, but the product of the assimilation of Eloquenza and Rhetorica. SeeDe Nuptiis 5.426, p. 148.16fulmina coruscatione and p. 148.22instar Iovis eadem posset etiam fulmina iaculari.

  76. Pona, p. 152, mistranslates p. 11.6,propinquam as “non albergava molto quindi lontana.” On p. 180Numae multus successor, “many a successor to Numa,” is expanded (incorrectly) to “e’lsucccessor Tullo.” Buonaccioli, p. 39, got it right. Pona, p. 275, bunglesamota Palladis consortione as “e con loro la dea Pallade.” Pona, p. 276, mentions “le leggi Papia, e Pompeia” (sic).

  77. Pona, p. 173 forIovis scriba.

  78. Pona, p. 175 formilites Iovis. Also in Buonaccioli, p. 37.

  79. Pona, p. 175 forregiones. Buonaccioli, p. 37, kept to the neutral“regioni.” Contrade seems to reflect Siena.

  80. Pona, p. 180 foraula caeles. Was he thinking of Naples?

  81. Pona, p. 180 formilites Iovis.

  82. Pona, p. 180 forlibrariae superum.

  83. Pona, p. 202 forsuffragium.

  84. Pona, p. 237 forcantandi quaedam opera.

  85. Pona, p. 121.

  86. Pona, p. 127, a pure embroidering

  87. I see no signs that he knew Grotius’s 1599 edition with its fine conjecture περϊ δαμόνν.

  88. Pona, p. 246.

  89. Pona, p. 256.

  90. One would like to know more about the flavour of apparently colloquial translations such as “un dapoco” (Buonaccioli, p. 34) forrepigratior atDe Nuptiis 1.37, p. 15.17 and “lasiarsi come un Bufolo reggere alla Consorte” (Pona, p. 124) foruxorius atDe Nuptiis 1.4, p. 3.7.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Classics, Cornell University, USA

    Danuta Shanzer

Authors
  1. Danuta Shanzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shanzer, D. Text, image, and translations: The marriage of philology and botticelli?. Int class trad 5, 79–88 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02701313

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02701313

Keywords

Search

Navigation