Talk:Last Supper in Christian art

Third main episode

The material referenced to Zuffi here contradicts Schiller in that Schiller sees the Washing of the Feet as far more common than Christ's Farewell. Schiller devotes 93 column inches of text to the former & 1.5 to the latter, only citing the Duccio we use as an example, & saying depictions "rarely form the subject of a separate image. A few examples are to be found in Italian Trecento painting.. [goes on to mention Duccio]". The washing of the feet is common in East and West from the 4th century on - in fact earlier than she places the earliest Last Supper image at table - & is found in the St Augustine Gospels, Rabbula Gospels etc etc, though becoming less common from the later Middle Ages. I would like to rework the passage & expand on the foot-washing, which I think should be the "third major episode". Is this ok with you? Also I'm beginning to think the gallery should be organized & split by episode, & also maybe moved up below the relevant section? Thoughts? Johnbod (talk) 13:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Conflict of opinion among art historians? Amazing! Actually, I do not mind quoting both sides because short of a large project to go and do a statistical survey I am not sure how they would go about deciding what is most common in an empirical way without what their memory tells them. In the end it will probably be a case of stratified sampling strategy used on the part of Zuffi, Schiller or both leading to Sampling errors. And in the end which is more common will probably not change the world that much, so as long as both issues are mentioned I see no problem. So the best way may be mention the two the major ones that everyone agrees on (betrayal and Eucharist) then just say "other major scenes" include foot washing and farewell. That way no contradiction is asserted since the numbering system ends at 2.

As for gallery rework, I see no problem. The long and short of it is that I just started on this article on Sunday, with no plans whatsoever about it the day before and it just grew and got DYKed all of a sudden. The pieces you have added are pretty good, so I would encourage you to go for it. History2007 (talk) 13:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok - I'll get onto it later. It's a nice & timely article. One day we can do a (discreet) template for "Episodes from the Gospels in art" or something. Johnbod (talk) 13:45, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Fine. And I think the template would be good. There are also other Last Supper pieces that have articles on other language Wikis. By the way, I hesitated to include the quote here from Gloria Fossi, Marco Bussagli about Vasari criticizing Pietro for reusing the figures from Last Supper (Perugino). If the work was hidden up to the 19th century, how could Vasari know? The quote is on the subpage and was specifically stated by Fossi. Ideas? History2007 (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Upper/lower

Minor (less than 1% difference) but if last Supper as an article is caps, this should be too. Rename was done in a hurry I think. History2007 (talk) 18:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Is it "life of christ" or "Life of Christ"

@Johnbod: I wanted to ask about the recent revert from "life of Christ" to "Life of Christ". The page it links to, Life of Christ in art, itself in the lede twice renders the phrase "life of Christ" in plaintext (not italicized) and with "life" lowercased on the first letter. (Later uses of Life of Christ seem to be referring specifically to the title of Ludolph of Saxony's Vita Christi.) What is the reason for rendering the phrase Life of Christ on the Last Supper in Christian art page? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

"Life of Christ" is treated as a title for a series of works on the subject, and the great majority of at least medieval depictions of the LS form part of such a series. Johnbod (talk) 04:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I can understand that Life of Christ is often a title for series of works; but what series of art depicting Jesus is being referred to in the sentence The Last Supper of Jesus and the Twelve Apostles has been a popular subject in Christian art, often as part of a cycle showing the Life of Christ.? This seems straightforwardly to be describing the general concept of the "life of Christ" rather than to series or serieses of art bearing the title Life of Christ. Should the clause instead be phrased often as part of Life of Christ cycles? P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Really, "a cycle showing the Life of Christ" isn't a series? No, it's fine as it is - how does your wording help? "Often" doesn't work with the plural. Johnbod (talk) 04:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The suggested wording helps avoid the sense that "life of Christ" should be un-italicized and in lowercase (which is the sense a reader can get in the article as it is). If Life of Christ is a common title for a cycle depicting the life of Jesus, then why is the sentence phrased as a cycle showing the Life of Christ (underlining added), as if the artwork depicts/shows a work of art titled Life of Christ (rather than is a work of art titled Life of Christ that depicts the life of Christ)? P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 05:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)