Talk:Kresilas

Comments

I'm sorry. The German article Kresilas is not better than this. Meyers-Conversationslexikon doesnt help for more.--Mario todte 18:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Wasn't Pericles strategos rather than "official strategist? For "concurrence', read "competition" I think. --Wetman 08:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok! Cleaned up.--Mario todte 16:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal

A new stub Cresilla (female sculptor) was prod tagged as a possible duplicate of this article, possibly based on what was said at her entry here: List_of_women_in_the_Heritage_Floor (copied below). I removed the prod tag but suggested a merge tag so that people who are familiar with this topic can assess if this is the same person or not, and in either case, discuss the Brooklyn Museum position that these are one and the same person and add appropriate text.

Judy Chicago believes she was a female sculptor who won the third honor in a competition to sculpt seven Amazons for the Temple of Diana at Ephesus; the first honor was given to Polyclitus, and the second to Phidias. However, it is believed by the Brooklyn Museum that he was actually a male sculptor called Kresilas who did those things, and was mistakenly included in the The Dinner Party.

Discuss? Montanabw^(talk) 04:36, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw: Nothing to merge. The anecdote about the Amazon sculptural competition comes only from Pliny, and there is no doubt that the sculptor mentioned there is this Kresilas, and there is no doubt that this Kresilas was a man. There are references in 19th century scholarship (such as the one given above) to a female sculptor Cresilla as participating in such a competition, but this must be based on some kind of error. Judy Chicago seems to have been led astray by this same error. The only thing which might be merged here is a mention of this error, but I don't think this is particularly notable. Paul August ☎ 17:26, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Given that the article is apt to simply be recreated later by someone else if it's deleted, I think that a redirect to this one is appropriate, but to avoid people then recreating the content at the redirect if they come here and find nothing on "Cresilla," I do think the error should be noted at this article, at least in a sentence or two, nothing undue; perhaps some of the content and source at List_of_women_in_the_Heritage_Floor could be added here to do so. I don't have any background on this, so I'm willing to do the wikignoming if those who know the topic wish me to do so; just want to get it right. Montanabw^(talk) 21:04, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

I've followed the paper trail as far as I can. Judy Chicago cited Cresilla's existence to Matilda Betham's Biographical Dictionary of the Celebrated Women of Every Age and Country, whose entry was based on the Abecedario Pittorico of Pellegrino Antonio Orlandi and Pietro Guarienti (1753), which says: "CRESILLA Scultrice: dovendosi scolpire a copetenza d'altri Maestri sette Amazoni, per ornamento del Tempio di Diana Efesina, riportò il terzo onore, essendo stato dato il primo a Policleto, ed il secondo a Fidia." They cited Il Riposo of Raffaelo Borghini (1584), which says: "ene fu dato il primo honore è quella di Policleto, il secondo à quella di Fidia, il terzo à quella di Cresilla, e poscia all'altre di mano, in mano." I don't see anything further on Cresilla. So it could simply have been a typographical error in Borghini, who perhaps meant "Cresillas" or "Cresilas"; Orlandi and Guarienti then mistakenly assumed it was a sculptress based on the spelling.

Borghini doesn't cite any earlier work, and mentions Cresilla only in passing, so I think it's probable that it was a typographical error rather than a deliberate assertion that it was a woman. But Judy Chicago didn't mistakenly include Cresilla, as the museum note suggests. She followed her source, which followed an earlier source; and we can hardly ask for more than that, seeing as she was just making a list of names, not a scholarly study of women artists throughout history. Orlandi and Guarienti made a careless mistake in accepting a typo as a distinct personage, without any further investigation; at least they were supposed to be preparing a scholarly work; and that mistake has been passed down in literature for two and a half centuries. P Aculeius (talk) 17:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for digging through this. This is just the kind of error I was presuming. Paul August ☎ 17:39, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

P.S. I would delete the existing page without a redirect, as "Cresilla" already redirects here. As long as "Cresilla" is adequately covered here, nobody will be looking for "Cresilla (female sculptor)" (the correct word would be "sculptress" anyway; while "sculptor" is officially preferred, "sculptress" is acceptable when the gender is relevant, which it is in disambiguation, and "female sculptor" is very awkward). P Aculeius (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Paul August ☎ 17:39, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Montanabw and P Aculeius: Shall we include mention of "Cresilla" in the article, as suggested by Montanabw above? Something like: "Kresilas, apparently a man, was included, with the spelling "Cresilla", in the The Dinner Party, the feminist artist Judy Chicago's symbolic history of women in Western civilization." With perhaps some mention of the sources tracked down by P Aculeius.? Paul August ☎ 17:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I suggest something along the lines of "several reference works mention a sculptress named 'Cresilla', said to have received the third honor in the competition to sculpt the Amazons. This appears to have originated from a typographical error in Raffaello Borghini's Il Riposo, an important sixteenth century treatise on art history, in which the 's' was omitted from 'Cresillas'. However, as a result of this mistake, 'Cresilla' is sometimes listed among the women artists of the classical world, and as such she is included in Judy Chicago's modern work, The Dinner Party." Wording it this way, it's clear that it's an error, and the reason is explained; but it should avoid sounding unnecessarily critical of any particular work or author who relied on the list, and it also clarifies that these sources weren't saying that Kresilas (or perhaps Cresilas) was a woman, but believed that she was somebody else entirely. In other words, keeping it neutral! P Aculeius (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• I'd word it with a bit more context. Perhaps this? "Kresilas was mistakenly identified as a woman named "Cresilla" in 1804 by Matilda Betham, said to have placed third behind Polyclitus and Phidias in a competition to sculpt seven Amazons for the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. As a result, Kresilas was mistakenly included in artist Judy Chicago's symbolic history of women in Western civilization, The Dinner Party." Montanabw^(talk) 21:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• And as for the title/redirect, in the feminist community, "sculptress" (or actress, or poetess, etc.) is regarded as a condescending dimunitive to be avoided, so "sculptor" would actually be most correct - but I'm good with any solution that avoids the article being re-created...my thinking is the creator probably saw that Cresilla was taken and proceeded until apprehended. Montanabw^(talk) 21:21, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

[warning, pointless quibbling follows] I'll disagree with it being condescending, when used properly and in context. As for being a diminutive, that's a matter of grammatical gender. Some words, particularly for occupations, are grammatically masculine or feminine, depending on the ending. This is especially true of words derived from Latin, in which -tor is specifically masculine and -trix is specifically feminine. In English -trix becomes -tress. Many Latin words indicate their gender in other ways (Gaius, Gaia), which don't look like diminutives; but some words and names rely on forms that are identical with diminutives, although not necessarily with that meaning. "Agrippina", for example, doesn't really mean "little Agrippa." "Agrippa" is masculine, despite its ending, but has no corresponding feminine form except, it seems, for "Agrippina." And I think that opinion is divided as to whether feminine endings for otherwise masculine words are good or bad. Some women, feminist or otherwise, prefer "chairman" to "chairwoman", others insist on "chairwoman". Despite being masculine myself, I consider myself very much a feminist, which may or may not be relevant; but I'm a stickler for grammar and historical usage of words that aren't intended to indicate inferiority, so long as they're used properly and not to denigrate. All of which, I add, is moot in this case, at least as far as titles are concerned, since nobody thinks we should have an article titled "Cresilla (female sculptor)". As for choosing to describe her as either a "woman sculptor" or a "sculptress," I vote the latter. The former description is potentially confusing (she wasn't believed to be a "sculptor of women"); and if you're worried about your choice of adjective sounding condescending, then the phrase "woman sculptor" suggests that it's some "other" kind of sculptor, while at least "sculptress" is grammatically equal to "sculptor."[end quibble] P Aculeius (talk) 21:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• FWIW, let's just avoid "sculptress." There are regional, cultural and national variants in what is OK or not (I'm in the "chair" or "chairperson" dialect, myself); the best advice I ever heard was "rephrase to avoid needing to use controversial terminology." My phrasing does so, I think. Will it work, or shall we propose some other way of stating this? Montanabw^(talk) 02:34, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, it's essentially inaccurate, as it pretty much says that Betham was responsible for the mistake, when all she was doing was to repeat the erroneous report from the Abecedario Pittorico. It would be better to identify the source of the error, otherwise more people will come along and wonder how we know it's an error at all. An extra sentence or two should make fighting this battle all over again unnecessary. Also, as I tried to explain before, the sources weren't calling Cresilas a woman. They assumed that Cresilla was a different person, rather than a typographical error in Il Riposo. I'd try to maintain the most neutral possible wording, as this was an innocent (if careless) mistake, rather than a deliberate falsification. P Aculeius (talk) 03:32, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kresilas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060517152713/http://forum-rom.de/Faszinierende%20Antike/Fotoausstellung/verwundete%20amazone.htm to http://www.forum-rom.de/Faszinierende%20Antike/Fotoausstellung/verwundete%20amazone.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)