Vasari’s Meta-narrative: Views on Stradanus’s Allegory

Johannes Stradanus was a Flemish painter born in Bruges, a landmark city for the Northern Renaissance. He also went by Jan van der Straet or Giovanni Stradano. He eventually left Bruges for Antwerp and then continued on to Florence to further his career by servicing the Medici family. As his most well-known medium was tapestry, he was able to reproduce prints and became quite popular with the people as well. Among his work in tapestries, he also collaborated with Giorgio Vasari’s fresco work for the Palazzo Vecchio. I believe that Vasari would judge Stradanus’s painting Allegory with high regards but with some reservations.

Stradanus’s painting Allegory features three godly female figures representing a variety of symbols such as Justice, Chastity, and Victory. The image holds many representations of qualities that might be highly regarded by those of power. Giorgio Vasari was a man with high standards and dignity. Being familiar with such an infamous group as the Medici family during this time in Florence, it can be assumed that Vasari strived to be on the same level of elegance and reputation as them. He wanted to be equals with scholars and intellects and those of importance. I believe that Vasari was one who thought very high of himself and strived to make that known. And if that was indeed the situation, his appreciation for such noble characteristics such as victory, fortitude, and justice is why he would judge this painting with great regards.

Vasari generally is fond of Stradanus and his work, but he may have some reservations simply because Stradanus is not actually an Italian artist; Giovanni Stradano was his name simply in Italian, but not his birth name. Stradanus is a Flemish painter by nature and later became active in Italy. Understanding Vasari’s ideals and views on Italian art, it is a possibility that he may cast some negative judgment against his paintings Flemish influence. The painting was created during his time in Italy, but still showcases Flemish influences. Allegory, while still realistic, has less focus on being precisely and anatomically correct and switches focus to color and details. Stradanus uses oil paint on wood, popularized because of the Northern Renaissance and later influencing the European Renaissance in Italy. The symbols and colors of this painting are what indicate the noble characteristics and ideals earlier mentioned. The Northern European influences are still representative of the ideals of the Renaissance and Vasari’s views on the entire history of art. However, Giorgi Vasari is rather biased for his current, Italian culture and views most outside lifestyles as lesser. So as for Allegory, the painting is still something Vasari would approve as and regard as a part of the apex, but would most definitely choose Michelangelo or Raphael before Stradanus.

Giorgio Vasari and Johannes Stradanus were acquaintances and worked together. Vasari wouldn’t collaborate on a project such as Palazzo Vecchio with just anyone, so this proves to me that Vasari admired Stradanus on a respectable level. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Stradanus sat atop a high pedestal in Vasari’s eyes. In his major work, Le Vite de' più eccellenti pittori, scultori, ed architettori, the extreme majority of people recorded are Florentine; He obviously favored them above anyone else. Vasari was a very biased, nationalistic, and prideful man based on his attitudes to non-Florentine art and artists. I believe that if Vasari had no indication of Stradanus’s Flemish origin, he may have viewed it even higher.

Buried Forms: Psychoanalysis of Stradanus’s Allegory

Meyer Schapiro popularized the use of psychoanalysis when studying art. He believed that it is possible to discern a person’s subconscious and gain a better look at who the artist is. His most famous study focuses on the transition of Cezanne’s constant painting of fruit. Schapiro believes that the fruit in his paintings are actually representing his repressed sexuality. Before, Cezanne would paint people and landscapes and slowly transitioned into still life paintings. Schapiro took this as a sign that since fruit was a part of paintings with sexualized people that fruit was a connection to sex for Cezanne. In a still-life of apples, Schapiro sees a sexual scenario. It is deeper and unintentional reasonings such as this that Schapiro has popularized in the field of art history. Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, Schapiro might take a look into the reasons why Stradanus chose to depict certain symbolic features and what they all add up to. More specifically, Schapiro may look at this painting and see all the virtues that the Catholic church and art community promotes and sees as good so that he would be a praised painter.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

Practically everything in this image has some other symbolic meaning that is a common understanding to most at this time. Starting with the female in the center, the sword and scaled she holds represent Justice. And the white ermine and the white dress she wears symbolize Chastity, innocence, or purity. The female on the left wears garments and headwear that are obviously armor-like and are intended to be interpreted as the virtue of Fortitude. Not only does she wear the vestments of a fighting security, but she also symbolizes Philosophy and Temperance. At the right, the goddess grasps a palm branch as well as a crown made of laurel leaves. Both of these botanical objects have a correlation to Fame or Victory. Aside from the leaves, the creatures at her feet also have a purpose. It is an old Catholic symbol for Charity as it depicts a pelican picking at itself to feed others. Lastly, the sphinx-like creature being crushed by her foot represents the reigning of Chastity over Lust.

Taking all of these virtues, we can gather that Stradanus chose to include those specific ones to create a broader vision of what the elite, Catholic community in Florence might approve of while painting a non-Biblical image. Being a Flemish painter in a city where being an Italian painter is the accepted standard, Stradanus could have been attempting to put himself in the union-like clique that were Italian painters. It is common for Northern artists to feature more mythical figures so implying virtues of the Catholic church while painting what he knows best is how he sees himself succeeding.

Another way Stradanus sought out approval in his new community, he mayhave looked towards Giorgio Vasari. After Vasari published his book of all artist he finds to good or appropriate, it could be quite traumatic if a painter in Italy (especially Florence) was not on that list. Stradanus was successful in that he was mainly commissioned by the Medici family for a multitude of projects and given some amazing opportunities, but he still was different than the majority of the painters and may have wanted to impress everyone. He needed to make some sort of impression on people that mattered. Putting all of these virtues into a single piece is quite complex and intelligent in that someone of great knowledge and sophisticated would understand it more than someone of the commoner class, making more important people notice and appreciate his work as his painting may make those people feel proud of themselves. And that would lead into an increase of patrons to commission his works. Gaining approval from patrons, members of the high-class, and approval from one of the highest figure in art at the time, Vasari, was vital in being a famous and legendary artist. And painting in the Mannerist style, a movement popularized with the help of Vasari, brings him one step closer to being an accepted Italian-like painter.

All of Stradanus’s approval seeking is what truly lies beneath his intention for this painting. Stradanus is capturing what it means to be a high-class, sophisticated, Catholic person through his Mannerist, Italian-looking painting. This is just one scenario for how Schapiro may read into the work of Stradanus but there could be many other ways to psychoanalyze.

Feminism: The Women of Stradanus’s Allegory

Women in art have historically been portrayed by men in a belittling and unjust perspective. Female art historians, Pollock and Wagner, see how the feminine viewpoint is “culturally imposed” and seen as the “other.” Pollock goes into depth about how women artists were constrained in their subject matter and had less opportunity for subject creativity than men did. Women could only paint scenes of the home and what was accessible to them, not by choice, but by culturally imposed views on women that kept them from being equals with men. Wagner sees that the perspective of women can give light to their “otherness” and can exude something that a man could not. Artists such as Hesse, Krasner, and O’Keefe are a just a few artists Wagner looks at for proving her idea. Artists such as Stradanus, a male artist, could never convey the same viewpoint as women could. In fact, Stradanus uses women as mannequins for symbols of strong virtues rather than have the women themselves be representations of worthy virtues.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

Broadly looking at this piece, it shows three women with a bunch of objects around them. They are not the important aspects to be looking at. What they hold or are wearing is what represents strength and justice and philosophy and not the women themselves. The armor-like dress on one of the women represents armor a man would use in battle, something a woman would never be seen in at this time. Women in the Renaissance had little no authority or power in society. They were at the hands of their family, their spouses, and their government. Women’s roles were in the house or field, but never in circles of larger importance. Portraying the women in this painting as goddesses gave them the attention that normal women in this time would not have received. And a reason Stradanus used women and not a scene with males is because he wanted the focus on the symbols for respectable virtues, not the figures. The women in this painting and of this time or not much more than mannequins or illegitimate ways to represent strength, fortitude, philosophy and every other virtue that is depicted in this painting. It’s odd to see that women were painted to hold such objects that embody a certain characteristic, but women in the Renaissance were not treated with the respect that the people with such characteristics were given. Virtue is not something women are restrained from and it is definitely something that men do not generally have either. This Renaissance view on women is degrading, unjust, and shameful, virtues that go against everything that Stradanus, a male painter, portrayed in his painting.

Formalism: Greenberg’s Disapproval of Stradanus

Among the Formalist community, Clement Greenberg his mark in the field. He takes inspiration from Immanuel Kant that art, like time or space, is a mental construct. Art should be itself according to Greenberg, meaning that art should be a representation of the truest form of the medium. Paint should be a 2D, flat representation and anything with depth and shape should be left for 3D sculptures. He would appreciate artists such as Mark Rothko or Piet Mondrain, artists who truly created art to visualize the true purpose of art. Greenberg only approves of art so long as it does not imply anything but the “correct” use of the medium. Knowing this, Greenberg would absolutely despise Stradanus’s Allegory, a painting of great detail, depth, and narrative.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

So much detail and narrative to a piece automatically implies that Greenberg would be thoroughly be against Stradanus and his work. He says in his essay how “Realistic, naturalistic art had dissembled the medium, using art to conceal art…”(Greenberg, 2). His definition of art focuses on the use of medium versus the subject matter. Art should be about the medium and praising its unique qualities instead of using the medium to recreate another dimension and/or medium. If this piece were to be in the form of sculpture, Greenberg may have better opinions of the piece. For him, 3D artwork is the only correct and supported vessel for depth and dimension in art. He explains it as such:

“As such, representation, or illustration, does not attain the uniqueness of pictorial art; what does do so is the associations of things represented. All recognizable entities (including pictures themselves) exist in three-dimensional space, and the barest suggestion of a recognizable entity suffices to call up associations of that kind of space.”

What he is saying is that things that exist in the third dimension belong only in the third dimension. Modern and abstract art that has no depth that also represents the 2D medium in itself on a flat surface is the only correct way to produce such art. Paint is meant for “the flat surface” and should represent the “shape of the support” as well as the “properties of the pigment” (Greenberg, 2). Any other form of 2D paintings, like Stradanus’s Allegory, is disgraceful and angering in Greenberg’s eyes.

All in all, Greenberg’s views on Formalism are truly as peeled back as it can get. If a painting has any depth, narrative, or is anything but itself, it is no longer art. It can be assumed that he would disapprove of practically all art before his time in the Modernist era, much like how Vasari was mostly approving of his current time too. I see that even though Vasari and Greenberg have quite the opposite opinion of what makes “good art,” they are both extremely picky critic with a pretentiousness for their beliefs. Vasari would highly praise Stradanus’s works but Greenberg would have had no pleasing thought for such art. Stradanus truly represents the opposite of what Greenberg sees as quality art: A Vasari-like disrespectful representation of the form of the medium.

Otherness: Racial Identities in Stradanus’ Allegory

Racism wasn’t a formalized concept in the Renaissance like it is now. However, there was indeed oppression and discrimination against those of color and those who were not Christian. The term “moors” for someone from Arab countries was popularized by this point and African slavery had been around for years. In America, colonists were invading native lands to take over their land while also destroying their culture by imposing their own on the natives. Oppression and discrimination had been around for a while at this point. Stradanus is a white artist who paints from and for white eyes. His painting Allegory exemplifies and highlights how minorities were “othered” from what became the better, white religion.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

The goddesses in this painting are three rather pale, white women. Their porcelain-like skin mimics the years of painting before the Renaissance that depicted godly figures as these idealistic figures. Religious figures in art have most commonly been depicted as muscular, masculine white people much like Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel. His paintings are the epitome of placing a strong, white male image on figures like God or Adam. It’s almost natural for artists to depict historical figures who look similar to them because it creates a sense of relation to their white audience. It also is assumably common that artists paint what is popular and what is accepted as good by the public. And if the public is mostly hierarchal white figures, then artists may feel the need continue this trend of depicting religious figures as these powerful white people, making their observers feel more connected and empowered by the similarities between them.

The minority at this time is any one of color. Creating a historical collection of years of predominantly white religious centered paintings creates an underlying message that God is physically white and that he is a God for white people. By indirectly creating this message in art history, people of color are alienated and are put into yet another category away from white people. The perspective coming from white eyes of artists constrains the observers and inadvertently “others” or alienates any one of color choosing to only paint white people. I believe that Stradanus’s painting of Allegory was purposeful in depicting these three goddesses as white because even if racism and oppression wasn’t his intention, it supported the beliefs of the white supremacy in that time. This piece was made for a patron of status, someone who felt power, someone who believed that whiteness is more godly than any other race or skin tone. Most people of color at this time might have been house workers or slaves. And no white Catholic person at this time would appreciate their God and religion compared to such a level as the slaves were in that class system.

Aside from that, white colonists, religious figures and other higher-up people forced their white-centered religious ideas onto everyone and tried to cancel out other cultures belonging to people of color. American colonists tried to destroy Native American culture and religion and later on forced their ideals on African slaves. Stradanus’s painting uses pale white figures to further the ideals that are forced upon non-white people. His figures alienate any one of color to appear not as worthy of God and also to appear that any of the virtues that are put into symbols are not ones that non-whites have. For example, Stradanus creates a symbol for temperance by using a bridle. With white-pride, it could be assumed that people of color were seen as beastly and in need of a birdie to be constrained from their ways. Another example is the sphinx that is being stepped by one of the goddesses. A sphinx is something associated to Ancient Egyptian culture and polytheism. Someone who was white and in power in Renaissance Italy might not be satisfied by a differing religion coming to be historically respected. This aspect of the painting could be another message for the idealistic white religion over the supposedly strange and blasphemous Egyptian religion. It showcases the ideas that any other culture and people of color are seen as lesser and marginalized to the powerful white Catholic church in Renaissance Italy.

Panofsky’s Classes: Breaking Down Stradanus’s Allegory

Irwin Panofsky popularizes a process of breaking down a piece of art in three steps. He starts with looking at a piece for what it is — the factual nature of the piece. He states what is depicted and gives no insight, just the obvious image. This step is referred to as Pre-Iconographical. His next step is assumably referred to as Iconographical. This is where he would start taking cultural and conventional context clues to explain the piece. He explains why the subject or object is acting the way it is and what it is communicating. His last step is a bit more abstract as he is looking psychological explanation. Panofsky takes the image and tries to decode the subconscious meaning of the painting, whether it is intended or unintended. This is referred to as Iconological. Taking these three steps to analyzing art, Stradanus’s Allegory depicts three females and has quite a large amount of symbolism but that deeper meaning is iconographical and not iconological.

In Stradanus’s painting, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure. All this is strictly what the eye sees and is given no meaning; this is the Pre-Iconographical description of Allegory by Stradanus.

As for the Iconographical examination of this piece, almost everything has a contextual and cultural meaning. Every object depicted stands for a virtue or characteristics that a patron or other member of the higher class would understand as a metaphor, making the piece into one giant Allegory. Starting with the female in the center, she as well as the other women are depicted as goddesses. The sword and scaled she holds represent Justice as they are both objects that can bring about balance and peace. And the white ermine and the white dress she wears symbolize Chastity, innocence, or purity. White is the most commonly used color to represent such qualities.

Just how this female goddess’s clothing has an alternative meaning, so does the female on the left. Her garments and choice of headwear are obviously armor-like and are intended to be interpreted as the virtue of Fortitude. Not only does she wear the vestments of a fighting security, but she also symbolizes Philosophy and Temperance. The scepter in her hand and the globe at her feet intend Philosophy because they are tangible ways to visualize ways of ruling, that is of our minds, and ways of international thinking. Temperance is associated with the bridle in her hand because it is an object that genuinely restrains and can control.

At the right, the goddess grasps a palm branch as well as a crown made of laurel leaves. Both of these botanical objects have a correlation to Fame or Victory. Palm branches have a direct connection to the story Jesus’s triumphant return into Jerusalem in the Bible. It later became a religious symbol for martyrs and victory over the flesh of man. And laurel leaf crowns were awarded to champions in Ancient Greece and Rome, being a reward for victory. Aside from the leaves, the creatures at her feet also have a purpose. It is an old Catholic symbol for Charity as it depicts a pelican picking at itself to feed others. Lastly, the sphinx-like creature being crushed by her foot represents the reigning of Chastity over Lust.

As for the even deeper, psychological ways of interpreting this painting, it is possible to take all the virtues as a whole and insert a way of explaining why these virtues were used. The goddess on the left has many virtues that imply ruling of and ruling of the over-arching ways of life. Next, the goddess of the right truly embodies victory and triumph. And finally, the central goddess embodies justice and purity. Her being the central goddess, the conclusion that justice for the “pure” Catholic followers is the intended purpose for this piece. Stradanus could have created this on the notion that those who would want to purchase this painting are higher class, religious figures and that they would be glad to see a painting that illuminates the correctness of their virtues. And he can be doing that without even realizing.

There is no one correct interpretation of what Stradanus is subconsciously creating, but Panofsky believes that it can be done. There is always a way to directly view this piece for what it is, a way for everything to have a cultural context, and a way for this piece to have an intrinsic meaning.

Psychology of Perception: Internal Unity & Subordination in Allegory

Alois Riegl created a thesis surrounded on his interpretation of a Rembrandt painting on an anatomy class called “The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Tulp.” In his work called “The Dutch Group Project,” he compares that Rembrandt painting to another painting called “The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Sebastian Ebgertsz” by their connection to the observer. He creates the concept of external vs. internal unity as well external vs. internal subordination. To be externally unified, the observer is what completes the unity of the piece whereas internal unity is fulfilled within the painting itself. External subordination involves being drawn into the piece and becoming subordinate to the focal point of the image. To be internally subordinate means that the piece has a clear focus and that everything around it highlights that focus. In Stradanus’s painting, Riegl may have seen it as having internal unity and internal subordination.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

When looking at this painting, one interpretation is that this is a painting for a lesson to be taught. From there, it could be a lesson to the Catholic community in the Renaissance, teaching them the accepted and valued characteristics of what is seen as a “good Catholic.” It could also be taken as a lesson saying that only truly godly figures are the ones who are truly representative of all these virtues and were are mere mortals striving to be god-like. There are a variety of interpretations other than those but, all in all, this painting feel likes we, the observers, are being told something and not that we are a part of it. That being said, this painting contains internal subordination because the observer has nothing to add to the piece. We are there to view and interpret but not to be a part of the piece. Say it is for teaching aspect of what virtues are important in Catholic eyes or respected godly characteristics, then it is possible to say that it is necessary that the observer is subordinated to emphasize that separation of painting to viewer due to the image’s high personal value to the viewers. We, the observer, are seeing internal subordination whereas the focus is on the overall “Allegory” that all the aspects produce. Even though we see internal subordination most commonly seen in paintings with an obvious first glance sort of center, this piece is, as a whole, full and has multiple points for focus. However, this does not require observers to draw themselves into the painting to fulfill it. We are required to think about the piece yes, but we are not required to be drawn into the piece to make it whole due to that subordination as well as unity.

Because of the piece’s internal unity, it is fairly difficult to insert oneself into the piece as a part of it. All the objects and people in this piece are significant on their own and when put together, they cohere to each other and form a larger, important theme. Looking specifically, none of the goddesses are looking at the observer, creating even further disconnection and internal subordination. They each hold important and different items of meaning. There are multiple virtues and values in this image, but they all come together to form a whole. It is internally unified, without required presence of the observer to finish it off. I think any painting will make its observer have some sort of a reaction, but that does not determine whether or not that observer is drawn into to piece. This piece by Stradanus is subordinating the viewer from the scene itself but it is not subordinating its theme and meaning. Because the unity of this piece is internal, being an observer who is not drawn into the piece will not take away from the intention it has, whatever that may be. We, the observers, are still able to interpret, understand, and appreciate this piece despite not being immersed into it.

Wolfflin’s Styles: Looking at Stradanus’s Allegory

Heinrich Wolfflin is probably one of the most commonly used early art historian. He is most recognized for his interpretation of style and how style changes for an artist over time. He categorizes art from different time periods or regions or personal styles. His theory further expanded to see how, that over a span of time, an artist’s personal style would transform in their art from linear to painterly. An artist would start with a linear style, attempting to portray reality and using very intense detail to emphasis realness, and evolve into painterly styles, employing less attempts at reality and use the minimal contrast and detail. Stradanus paints in the period style typical of the end of the High Renaissance, more specifically in the semi-linear, Mannerist style.

Taking a look at Stradanus’s oil painting entitled Allegory, he depicts three female figures holding and touching a variety of objects. The far left figure stands in a squat-like position while holding a golden staff in one hand and a bridle in the other. She wears a blue and gold garment that is complimented with a silver and feather helmet, giving the appearance of feminine armor. Below her feet, a rabbit appears behind her right leg as she stands on a globe with her left. And behind her as well sits a lion in the shadows. Above her, as well as the woman on the right, soars cherubic angels with instruments.

The woman in the center is wearing a white and rosy pink dress with gold accents and accessorizes it with a golden veil. In her right hand is a sword and in her left, she holds an almost balanced scale. Her left foot stands upon a creature as well, mimicking the other woman, and a small, white ermine sits on her right foot. Continuing onto the lady on the right, she is wearing a blue and yellow layered dress (with her bare left leg showing) while holding a palm in her left hand and a laurel leaf crown in her right. At her feet sits a grey pelican picking at its own chest as she steps upon a sphinx figure.

Stradanus’s painting can be associated with the Mannerist group of artists which was popularized in the High Renaissance and further into the 16th Century. The Encyclopedia Brittanica defines the mannerism as “characterized by artificiality and artiness, by a thoroughly self-conscious cultivation of elegance and technical facility, and by a sophisticated indulgence in the bizarre.” Mannerist figures typically have elongated bodies, especially obvious in the neck, and contorted bodies. Most Mannerist paintings appear fanciful, extravagant, and sometimes vulgar due to their odd forms and imaginative, fantastical subjects. Mannerists are known for skewing the scale of bodies/figures and other objects to add to this fantastical kind of aesthetic. The objects that are skewed also attribute to the various and numerous amount of motifs typically placed in Mannerist paintings, much like Bronzino’s “Venus, Cupid, Folly, and Time” or Pontormo’s “Joseph with Jacob in Egypt.” Mannerism is intended for contemplation and emphasizes self-consciousness. Using such elaborate techniques within scale and forms along side the use of motifs is obvious in Stradanus’s work.

Stradanus’s Allegory is a great example of how paintings evolved into more fanciful, colorful, and more imaginative works. In his piece, his figures are not as contorted as most Mannerist painting, but they figures are still standing at awkward angles. His painting is also fairly detailed and contrasted. The recognition of this can be explained by the evolution of Renaissance to Baroque. This painting was made in the late 16th Century, where the style of the High Renaissance was starting to diminish, specifically with perspective and reality. Wolfflin would suggest that Stradanus is still leaning towards more linear than painterly, but is making his way to being painterly. His beginning transition from linear to painterly is also apparent in the time this was created. This painting features attributes belonging to both Renaissance and Baroque art. The amount of clear detail and color mimic the typical High Renaissance painting. The increasing lack of religious means in Mannerist art lead to the genre style painting popularized in the Baroque era. This piece is very obviously in the Mannerist style because it is not as exact and religious as Renaissance, but it is also not to simple/basic and common as Baroque genre painting is. Looking at the period style of Mannerism explains why this piece is loosing touch in linear style, but is not yet painterly.

All in all, Wolfflin would categorize Stradanus’s Allegory into the Mannerist style because of his rather fantastical, full, and obscure natures of his composition. He would also say it is a fairly linear painting, but that Stradanus is taking the steps into being painterly.

A Collection of Analyses on Stradanus's "Allegory"