Talk:Amore-Attis

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Name[edit]

Can someone please give at least a clear reference, where the name, as it is written here, came from. I never came across an "Amore", it might be just the Italian translation. But here we deal with a sculpture that cites traces, symbols and meaning of gods and deities from antique mythology, so usually it is referred to in Greek or Latin or their anglicization, not Italian.

The flimsy bibliography on it:Amore-Attis lists two books. Andrea Ciaroni and Charles Avery on the Bargello bronzes name it "Amore-Atys" with the Attis appearing in an alternative writing (that is confusing, not right, but not unusual; see Attis). The Italian article doesn't refer to it and doesn't discuss the alternative writing at all, although the captions to two images spell it "Attys". (The two external links are dead.) In the text it is referred to a text by Caglioti, Ritorno d'Amore, which doesn't have to mean explicitly Donatello's statue, it seems to be metaphorically or whatever. In the 2022 catalogue, for which Caglioti was responsible, he is named "Attis-Amorino" (entry 5.6), in his own text "Amor-Attis" (p. 72f), as in the Berlin catalogue. Coonin calls him "Atys-Amorino", which derives originally from Janson 1957 (143ff; so in the Florence catalogue it might be just a reference to Janson). "Atys-Amorino" indicates, that it is more of an Attis then an Amor, anyway (No bow, no arrow, but Attis' trousers...). Janson states, that in an 18th ct. Uffizi cat. "our "Atys"" was called a "cupid" (assuming he lost the bow and arrow), in 1903 Meyer first comes up with "Atys", and despite all other interpretations there is also an "Amor-Hercules". Pope-Hennessy and Poeschke both call him "Amor-Atys". The spelling with a 'y' is false or at least misleading and "Attis" is right (again, see Attis), particularly if we consider en:Wikipedia as the context. Here Amore (disambiguation) shows no traces of a god or a cupid, "Amore is the Italian word for "love"", but not Amor. There Amor is Latin, and "the Roman deity Cupid." I hope you catch my drift. "Amor-Attis" may be the best solution, and mentioning with sources the alternatives (w/o ref "Amore-Attis" would not be part of it). MenkinAlRire 21:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The category:Sculptures of Greek gods here is also misleading, especially to find "Amore-Attis" as such a god. Donatello's sculpture is not at all a specific god (there is no crossbred Attis-Cupid, there is no such a god, he doesn't exist, except as in (the exegese of) this figure), that's the point, it is a renaissance invention (or that of art-historians if you want). What Donatello knew about Greek mythology is a whole other thing. The categories I will delete on my own. It's nonsensical. MenkinAlRire 21:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]