Específico e Indeterminado: A arquitetura de Grandjean de Montigny e a Casa França-Brasil

Um ano antes de vir ao Rio de Janeiro, para a conclusão de seus estudos feitos na Itália no decorrer do Prix de Rome, Grandjean de Montigny publicou, em 1815, o livro Architecture Toscane com uma coleção de edifícios do Renascimento italiano de arquitetos como Brunelleschi e Alberti. De modo consciente, Montigny estudou sua coleção de exemplares arquitetônicos a fim de compreender o potencial de produzir, com base neles, novos projetos. Em 2021, um ano após celebrar o s eu segundo centenário, a Casa França-Brasil de Montigny continua a representar um protótipo espacial único que nos permite analisar a importância que sua teoria de projeto pode ter para a prática contemporânea. Palavras-chave: Arquitetura; Grandjean de Montigny; Casa França-Brasil. ABSTRACT A year before coming to Rio de Janeiro, as part of the conclusion of his studies in Italy, during the Prix de Rome, Grandjean de Montigny published, in 1815, the book Architecture Toscane with a collection of Italian Renaissance buildings by architects such as Brunelleschi and Alberti. Montigny consciously studied this collection of architectural prototypes in order to understand the potential of producing new projects based on them. In 2021, a year after celebrating its second centenary, the Casa França-Brasil, designed by Montigny, continues to represent a unique spatial prototype that allows us to analyze the importance that his design theory can have for contemporary practice. Keywords: Architecture; Grandjean de Montigny; Casa França-Brasil

An Expressionist Painter of the Fourteenth Century

Theophanes the Greek was one of the well-known artists of exceptional personality who lived in the second half of the 14th century. His talent stood out on account of the expressionist manner in which he portrayed his art creations and their impact on the school of Russian religious painting. His artistic talent, “swift brush” painting manner and life adventure can be compared with those of Doménikos Theotokópoulos (El Greco), another famous Greek painter, who brought the Cretan dramatic and expressionistic style to the West, influencing the Spanish Renaissance two hundred years after Theophanes. The artistic heritage of Theophanes stands between the short vibrant period of the Palaeologan Renaissance when the Byzantine Empire went through a terminal crisis, and the European Proto-Italian Renaissance. The artist seized the opportunity to unleash his creative work in the ancient Russian cities, unfolding his talent in the creation of large mural paintings. Characterized by his contemporaries as “Theophanes the Greek, icon painter and philosopher”, he enjoyed a high reputation in medieval Russian society. Present article questions Theophanes’ belonging to the hesychast movement and the attribution of the Muscovite icons and manuscripts to the painter. Considering the impact of Theophanes on Russian visual art, D. Talbot Rice stated: “It was thanks to the teaching of Greek immigrants like Theophanes that a sound foundation was established Russian painting, and it was on this basis that local styles were founded.” And it was in the Russian principalities that Theophanes developed his very distinctive style, enjoying carte blanche from the princes and boyars (aristocracy) to apply his creativity in various domains.

Paulo maiora canamus Raccolta di studi per Paolo Mastandrea

This miscellaneous volume in honour of Paolo Mastandrea includes contributions by colleagues and friends dealing with some of the main topics of his scientific interests: intertextuality, late Latin studies, philological problems, the legacy of Classics in Renaissance, digital humanities. The first section, «Literary History and Intertextuality», focuses on special patterns in Latin literature within a very wide chronological range, from Vergil to Optatianus. Specific attention is dedicated to elegy and to mythological characters in elegy and tragedy. The section named «Philological Notes» deals with critical problems within texts by Sallustius, Macrobius and Historia Augusta. The following section, «Late Latin studies», is dedicated to several authors and topics: Simphosius’ Aenigmata, Sidonius, Historia Augusta, Claudianus, Epigrammata Bobiensia, Johannes Lydus and literary topoi used in late Latin texts. The final one, «Classical Reception Studies», examines a few examples of the legacy of Latin authors in the Italian Renaissance. A history of the database Musisque Deoque, along with the future perspectives of this crucial project designed in 2005 by Paolo Mastandrea, are provided in a specific «Appendix».

Quintilian in the Italian Renaissance

The century that followed Poggio Bracciolini’s discovery of a complete manuscript of Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria at the Swiss monastery of St Gall in 1416 represents a vital stage within the text’s transmission and reception. The new text fell on fertile soil, at a time when the classicizing movement known as humanism was rapidly reshaping Italian elite education and literary and intellectual culture, and when the introduction of printing would soon begin to transform practices of editing and dissemination. This chapter traces the editorial and transmission history of the Institutio from 1416 to the early sixteenth century, with some consideration of Petrarch’s earlier, enthusiastic reception of the text. After an initial, general overview of the text’s fortunes in manuscript and print, and its gradual, increasing adoption in educational contexts, more detailed discussions follow of Quintilian’s reception by, and influence on, two of the great humanist thinkers of the period, Lorenzo Valla (1407–1457) and Baldassare Castiglione (1478–1529). The chapter argues that, in Valla, Quintilian’s rhetoric became a model for a modern practice of Christian eloquence, capable of rivalling scholastic theology, while, in Castiglione, Quintilian’s human ideal of the orator was recast as a template for the modern court intellectual.

Evgenij Anan'in and the Problem of the Italian Renaissance

Статья посвящена участию русского историка-медиевиста Евгения Аркадьевича Ананьина, проживавшего в Италии, в дебатах вокруг концепции итальянского Ренессанса в первой половине XX в., его попыткам очистить поле ренессансных исследований от укоренившихся клише (в первую очередь от постулируемой антитезы Сред-невековья и Возрождения и представления о Ренессансе как возвращении к античности). Значительная часть публикаций Ананьина в итальянских научных журналах – полемические статьи и рецензии, раскрывающие панораму ренессансных концепций в Европе 1920–1930-х гг. Русский исследователь выступал против зарубежных историков, обесценивающих оригинальность итальянского Возрождения, и в целом против попыток использовать понятие Ренессанса ad usum proprium. В настоящей статье речь пойдет о некоторых ренессансных концепциях и их авторах (Буркхард, Бурдах, Папини, Вальзер, Забугин, Нейман, Нордстрем), о которых говорит (или же, наоборот, умалчивает) Ананьин, и о его собственных взглядах, скрывающихся за критическими замечаниями. В статье затрагивается кампания против оккупации иностранцами поля ренессансных исследований, развернутая в Италии в середине 1930-х гг., и связанное с этой кампанией открытое противостояние Ананьина итальянскому мыслителю и литератору Джованни Папини, ставшему во главе открывшегося во Флоренции в 1937 г. Национального института ренессансных исследований. The reevaluation of the dogmas and canons rooted in the Renaissance historiography was а сommon direction of the studies in this field in the first half of the 20th century. At that time many original concepts emerged that corrected or completely refuted the previous ones. The present article is devoted to the participation of the Russian historian Evgenij Anan’in, who lived and worked in Italy, in the debates around the notion of the Italian Renaissance and to his attempts to contribute to the elimination of cliché from the field of Renaissance studies (primarily to abolish the postulated antithesis of the Middle Ages and Renaissance and the idea of the Renaissance as the revival of antiquity).A significant part of Anan’in's publications in Italian scientific journals consists of polemic articles and reviews, which reveal a panorama of Renaissance concepts in Europe of the 1920-1930s. The Russian researcher was strongly opposed to foreign historians who denied the originality of the Italian Renaissance; he also was against all the kind of attempts to use the concept of the Renaissance ad usum proprium (national, ideological etc.). The article focuses on the Renaissance concepts and their authors (Burkhard, Burdach, Papini, Walser, Zabughin, Neumann, Nordström), which Anan’in analyzed (or, conversely, clearly ignored) in his texts and on his own views that are hidden behind critical remarks. The publication also deals with a company deployed in Italy in the mid-1930s against the foreign «occupation» of the Renaissance field (the primacy in which was believed to belong to Italians) and the case of an open confrontation of Anan’in and Giovanni Papini, who became the head of the National Institute of Renaissance studies opened in Florence in 1937.