New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?"

[proto57]

"Were it not for the sunflower [as identified by O'Neill]... I should have thought that it was executed a little earlier, say about 1470. However, since the style of the drawings is fairly provincial, a somewhat later date, even the first years of the sixteenth century, would not seem to be excluded. I would not go lower than ca. 1510-1520 because no influence of the Italian Renaissance style is evident.

So if you don't wish to include the 1410-1430 range, then the only way to read the above is as:
1470 = preferred date or lower end
1510-1520 = upper end
That gives a range of 1470-1520.

Possibly, but it is an odd sentence. Well I would say it was he who no longer included 1410-1430, but in essence "yes" I think that would be one possible representation of Panofsky's "final verdict". We have to allow the 1470 though, in a way, because it is a bit of a clumsy phrase...

1) On the one hand, he seems to be writing that the presence of a sunflower is the "only thing" that draws him away... newer... than 1470.
2) But then he somewhat contradicts this explanation, the "sunflower factor" by stating, "I would go no lower than ca. 1510-1520 because no influence of the Italian Renaissance style is evident"... as though the presence or lack of a sunflower is a moot point, and overriding that possibility is the lack of an "Italian Renaissance" style. Sunflower be damned, in effect.

I'm sort of on the fence about it, and believe we cannot know for sure. One the one hand, he gives that strict lower end with the "lack of the Italian Renaissance" observation. But second guessing his point in that is the fact that (and I don't know that this is reflected in any other work) the absence of a previous style is not evidence that something was made later.

Basically, using his words strictly, his judgement here without second guessing his words, "1510-1520". Parsing them a bit, and applying our own attempt at deciphering his phrasing, one could make a case for "1470-1520". Either is possibly correct, and both are probably splitting hairs.

Are you up for a séance? We can ask him ourselves! He would probably, by now, have a third and forth verdict, like we all do.

Rich.