{[Renaissance:] The Conversion of Fra Angelico}[26th April 1991]

[Redbook9:190][19910426:1153]{[Renaissance:] The Conversion of Fra Angelico}[26th April 1991]

.1153

(I tend to fill in times of writing* less and less now, except for the first entry of the day)

‘At about the same date** Fra Angelico was commissioned to decorate the monks’ cells in S. Marco. The nature of the commission – traditional devotional images whose execution required assistants – apparently turned Fra Angelico towards the religious and didactic works that characterize the end of his career;*** e.g., the Capella di Nicolo V in the Vatican.’

****

(I’m not sure how these differed from the earlier subjects, which I either don’t know of or haven’t seen.)

*[ie as here top right]

**(c[irca]1438-40[ce])

2048JG~1408[ce]

64A~1440[ce]

***cf VI.[[Redbook6:41-51)][19881128:2046]{Literary Circles}[28th November 1988]ff,] 41? (Literary Circles)

cf [[Redbook9:192][19910426:1153c]{Andrea de Castagno}[26th April 1991],] 192↓

**** – E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 25:345

[continued]

[PostedBlogger31012025]

{Wisdom and Prudence – and Temperance}[26th April 1991]

[Redbook9:189][19910426:0910b]{Wisdom and Prudence – and Temperance}[26th April 1991]

19910426:0910

[continued]

There is a caution on the attribution to r~ of the Spiritual Gift of Wisdom, because the Virtue of Prudence is attributable to s~, not to r~. But I do not see these two as identical. Dictionary definitions (Latin – sapienta, wisdom – as well as English) imply that prudence is a subset of wisdom. I disagree, seeing some aspects of prudence which are not necessarily wise. It is possible to be over-prudent, at least in modern use; but not, I think, to be over-wise. Nevertheless, they remain closely related:*

**

*{(through C, and their different rotations from C)}

**{All the same, ‘Prudentia’ is regarded as the Classical virtue of Wisdom: Temperance (T.XIV at r~) is another of the 4 Classical virtues}

[PostedBlogger29for30012025]

{Biblical Wisdom Literature Chronology}[26th April 1991]

[Redbook9:189][19910426:0910]{Biblical Wisdom Literature Chronology}[26th April 1991]

19910426:0910

With the exception of The Psalms – which I do not personally consider to be ‘Wisdom Literature[’], given their tone and preoccupations – and Proverbs, all the Wisdom Books of the Old Testament (Job, Ecclesiastes (Qoheleth), The Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus (Ben Sirah)) appear to have been written between c[irca] 500[BCE] and 1BCE, ie within the 2048R~ ¼-cycle, the Spiritual Gift of r~ being Wisdom.

[But see next ts journal entry]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger29012025]

{The Words of God}[25th April 1991]

[Redbook9:188][19910425:0940]{The Words of God}[25th April 1991]

19910425:0940

‘You are therefore asked to read this book with good will and attention and to show indulgence in those places where, notwithstanding our efforts at interpretation, we may seem to have failed to give an adequate rendering of this or that expression; the fact is that there is no equivalent for things originally written in Hebrew when it is a question of translating them into another language; what is more, the Law itself, the Prophets and the other books differ considerably in translation from what appears in the original text.’

*

‘This forward by the Greek translator is not strictly a part of Si and is not usually considered canonical.’

**

{Quite so}

* – Si[rach or Ecclesiasticus] 0:15-26 (N[ew] J[erusalem] B[ible])

**Note a. to Si[rach or Ecclesiasticus] 0:0

[(New Jerusalem Bible)]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger28012025]

{The Renaissance [continued (4)]}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:188][19910424:0902e]{The Renaissance [continued (4)]}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

‘The literature of antiquity revealed that in earlier times both works of art and artists had been appreciated for their own intrinsic merits. Humanistic studies also fostered a tendency already apparent in Florentine art as early as Giotto* to see the world and everything in it in human terms. In the early 15^th century Masaccio emphasised the human drama and the human emotions of “The Expulsion” (Boncacci Chapel, Sta. Maria Novella, Florence) and Fra Angelico in his S. Marco altarpiece seems to be much more concerned with the human relations between the actors in the composition than with the purely devotional aspects of the subject. In the same way, the artist became more and more concerned with the relations between the work of art and the observer.’ [eg by the use of one-point perspective]**

***

****

*[circa1267,-1337ce; cf2048J~1280ce]

**[Square brackets per ms]

***{

}

**** – ibid [Encyclopaedia Britannica 25:] 344

[continued]

[PostedBlogger27012025]

{The Renaissance [continued (3)]}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:187][19910424:0902d]{The Renaissance [continued (3)]}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

→‘The political and economic situation of the Italian Renaissance did not provide the stable conditions * often associated with periods of great art....’**

***

*They are?

**{c[ontra] G~?}

*** – E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 25:343

[Source text continued from last previous ts journal entry]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger26012025]

{The Renaissance [continued]}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:187][19910424:0902d]{The Renaissance [continued]}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

(Early Renaissance in Italy)

*

* – E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 25:343

[Source text continued from last previous ts journal entry & continues to next]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger25012025]

{The Renaissance}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:187][19910424:0902d]{The Renaissance}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

*

**

*[Marginal notes & diagrams in order:]

{cf [[Redbook9:184-185][19910423:0920f]{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’}[23rd April 1991]ff,] 184-5}

[Marginal diagram to the left of the reference to landscape in the text:]

[Right marginal note ‘See 187’: unclear to what this refers, as this text is on p187]

[As marginal diagram/s above:]

[or]

[&]

{St Augustine of Hippo 354-430CE cf 2048S~256CE:

In the [...]land of [0], the utopian*** city planned by [RM] but never built was on the inner [...]land at s~ (in the hills North-west of CM), & was known as ‘C.D’,**** abbreviated (in my mind) from Civis Dei, specifically a (rather ignorant) reference to St. Augustine’}

[In the current version of [0] it is referred to, but not by name, as built but (by implication) not populated]

J~{j~}

(was u~)

<920706>

{s}

** – E[ncyclopaedia] B[ritannica] 25:343

[source text continues in next ts journal entry]

***{cf [[Redbook9:198-200][19910428:0955#]{Utopian Landsacpes}[28th April 1991],] 199}

****[And a conscious, but coincidental, reversal of ‘D.C’, as in District of Columbia]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger24012025]

{Inner Doubling [continued]}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:186][19910424:0902c]{Inner Doubling [continued]}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

There at least two possible explanations of this,* one or both of which may be involved.

(1) That the sequence C → M~ → G~ → A~ actually represents the correct or most effective way of approach to the discovery of the C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] pattern itself;

(2) That the first experience, as a child, of the inner presence of C initially identifies** the self, in this newly multiplying sequence, as A~; M~ and G~ follow next, but (at the same time as G~ (in the earlier ‘The Gift’) A~ itself becomes separately identifiable[,] as the Self (at least by the time of the [0] version) tends strongly toward C.

Interesting stuff.

*[See last previous ts journal entry]

**(identifies!)

[PostedBlogger23012025]

{Inner Doubling}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:185-186][19910424:0902b]{Inner Doubling}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

[continued]

I notice that my discovery of Archetypes on the C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] pattern fell naturally into the period-doubling sequence, eg from 4-8, and indeed (in the first draft of [0], called ‘The Gift’) from 2-4.* If I take this back to juvenile ** experiences of the inner presence of Christ*** – so strong that at times my undeveloped awareness found difficulty in distinguishing the Archetype from the Self, which in the relatively pure and innocent Child may not be insignificant (ie, 

(1) C is the perfected self and 

(2) Awareness of a C which both is and is not self may indicate the separation of the qualities of the maturing self away from C) 

– that can be taken as the first doubling. 

There is an interesting shift, though, in that in The Gift +M appears first (if my memory is correct), as the ‘hero’, +C later, +K and +Mk later still as twins; whereas in [0] +C is first, +M soon after, then +K,**** his twin, finally +Mk – a more conventional approach, but still not strictly ‘period doubling’:

*[ie presumably 2 archetypes, then 4, then 8]

**{‘Juvenile’ – continuing much later than one would expect, as a distinction difficulty: up to and even, I think, overlapping with the beginning of creative writing (age c[irca]17) although I found it embarrassing to admit to myself at the time}

***recalled in III []

****[‘inwardly’, yes; but outwardly, +Mk before +K. This might have changed since this ts journal entry was written, although that is unlikely]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger22012025]

{The Nature of C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] Patterns}[24th April 1991]

[Redbook9:185][19910424:0902]{The Nature of C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] Patterns}[24th April 1991]

19910424:0902

One question looms larger as I continue: to what extent do C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] Patterns in history simply describe the way events affect each other at particular times, and to what extent do they represent real impulses of (perhaps psychic) energy with a form of dynamic independence,* perhaps rooted in some kind of Platonic Archetypes? In the end this may be a metaphysical question; it may depend on how you look at it, and be in practice unanswerable.**

*ref III (/IV?) []

**[There is also the possibility, raised elsewhere,*** that they simply reflect the way that human beings, or some of them, perceive matters; and this also might not in practice be distinguishable from either or both of the possibilities outlined above.]

***[See eg []]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger21012025]

{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’ [continued (3)]}[23rd April 1991]

[Redbook9:184-185][19910423:0920h]{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’ [continued (3)]}[23rd April 1991]

19910423.0920

[continued]

{The question* is to what extent a flourishing or impulse in visual Art occurred more-or-less simultaneously in northern and southern Europe but was disguised, eg by the different heritages available as a focus for inspiration, or by the manner of expression. Giotto in Italy is contemporaneous with the end of the Romanesque-Gothic transition (c[irca]1150-c[irca]1250[ce]), leading to the full flowering of the Gothic c[irca]1250[ce] (cf 2048J~1280[ce]), which seems to have been much less pronounced in Italy. So[,] is the Southern Renaissance the expression of the same C[ircles] A[nalysis] & S[ynthesis] impulses as the Northern Gothic?}**

*[See last two previous ts journal entries]

**[See last previous ts journal entry but one, [Redbook9:184-185][19910423:0920f]{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’}[23rd April 1991]]

***{See [[Redbook9:187][19910424:0902#]{The Renaissance}[24th April 1991],] 187,

[[Redbook9:260-265][19910505:1200#]{‘The Northern Renaissance’}[5th May 1991],] 260}

[continued]

[PostedBlogger20012025]

{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’ [continued]}[23rd April 1991]

[Redbook9:184-185][19910423:0920g]{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’ [continued]}[23rd April 1991]

19910423.0920

[continued]

‘… The Southerners were fascinated by the Northerners’ ability to capture light* and to depict nature and human physiognomy in detail. Nevertheless the differences in intention between a painting by Jan van Eyck** and one of similar date by Masaccio (1401-28[ce]) is immense: given a comparable skill in perspective, lighting, the articulation of the human body, and the suggestion of thoughts and emotions, the former draws on the heritage of the Gothic,*** the latter on Classical Antiquity.’****

#

*[See earlier (Vol/s?) [] re the Gothic ‘discovery’ of light, &c]

**(c[irca] 1390-1441[ce])

***{ → [[Redbook9:213-219][19910430:1230#]{Renaissance Sculpture and Classical Influence [continued #]}[30th April 1991],] 214,

[[Redbook9:220-236][19910501:0008#]{Renaissance Architecture [continued #]}[1st May 1991],] 223}

****{ → [[Redbook9:237][19910501:0008#]{The Renaissance (again): Gothic and Renaissance Art}[1st May 1991],] 237}

# – ibid [Encyclopaedia of Visual Art 4:] 624

[See long later footnote in next ts journal entry]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger20for19012025]

{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’}[23rd April 1991]

[Redbook9:184-185][19910423:0920f]{Northern and Southern ‘Renaissance’}[23rd April 1991]

19910423.0920

[continued]

*‘In Italy, where antique traditions were strongest, the revival began about the time of Giotto (1266-1337[ce])** and ended about the time of the death of Raphael (1520[ce]).*** In Northern Europe, on the other hand, the art of Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528[ce])**** provides the first prolonged attempt to assimilate classical models into a Northern style. While a Renaissance style flourished in Italy during the 15^th century,# the North accepted the influence of the Antique only in the 16^th century [ce].’#*

#**

*[[Redbook9:180][19910422:0825]{Renaissance}[22nd April 1991],] 180 →

**2048J~1280[ce]

***2048G~1536[ce]

****2048JG~1408[ce]|G~1536[ce]

#2048JG~1408[ce]

#*2048G~1536[ce]

#** – E[ncyclopaedia of] V[isual] A[rt] 4:622

(cf previous extract, on p180*)

[continued]

[PostedBlogger17for18012025]