Muh Italian renaissance

muh Italian renaissance

if it wasn't for Vasari's propaganda book this Italian trash would have been rightly ignored

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_destroyed_libraries
theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?12344-Charles-Murray-s-quot-Human-Accomplishment-quot
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_scientists
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Reminder that sage goes on the Options field.

Michelangelo was critical of Flemish painters because he thought they focused on cramming in details instead of capturing the spirit.

But right looks better. Not seeing your point, OP. Are you a pleb who thinks art can only be measured by how realistic it looks?

But flemish painters did not understand perspective and the painting looks brighter because they had oil paint before Italy

>snownigger """"art""""

Absolutely disgusting.

Yeah this, it's a different approach to art. The central Italians were influenced by the Northern Renaissance though, especially in portraiture. The Italians dropped the profile portrait of Roman emperors in favour of the 3/4 portrait as seen in OP pic. The north seemed more interested in detail and topography as opposed to the Italians who developed the idea of 'study' via drawing (disegno), Venice to a lesser degree (they opted to paint directly onto canvas instead of over drawn lines, generally)

>t. Waldemar

Ghirlandaio was amazing, you pig.

They can't help painting ugly, cause they're all ugly anyway

Michelangelo hated them, because they focused too much on Landscape, and he hated landscapes.

Michelangelo ONLY liked the human figure and Architecture, and BS'd everything else. Hell, half the backgrounds of the Sistine Ceiling are vague swaths of color

But Baroque is the greatest of all art periods and guess what, it was born in Italy too. French faggots start ruining art with shitty movements like Rococo past this point.

In terms of Rebirth, the Italian Renaissance was closer to the Ancient Past than Early Neatherlandish art was.


The Ancients didn't have Oil Paint, and worked in Encaustic or Tempera, so if you want to look at an Apelles, you want to look at Botticelli or Ghirlandaio, not a Campin or a van der Weyden

i love the cramming of details though. a lot of that stuff is allegorical and i love the attention paid to the minutest objects.

19th century French painting >>>>>>>>>

>trash
can you do better?

>mfw a Neoclassicist posts near me

>my nigga

Post-Impressionism sure, the rest is memes

honhonhon

Learn how to paint using proper perspective first before you talk shit. You're not some "muh tradition" Jap. What's your excuse?

>Catfish wake up, my jealous husband has found us
>Catfish: oh fug :D:D:D act cool

Umm... or both are good?

HIGH ART

if jap art is shit then how come impressionists were obsessed with it

Italy is highly overrated, and so is everything connected to it, like Rome, the Renaissance, and the food.

Have a (You) my man.

Go have some greasy fast food while masturbating over the literal dark ages that were Rome and the Renaissance.

>dark ages
Explain or fuck off.

19th century French painting >>>>>>>>> nothing

The Greek age of scientific progress ended when Archimedes was murdered by a Roman soldier. Can you name one relevant Roman scientist or artist or scientific advancement? Nope, Rome had the merit of spreading Greek achievements to Western Europe through bloody conquest, but its time of dominance was an era of stagnation and inevitable collapse.

After Rome was gone a new civilisation emerged, that of the Middle Ages, centered on France. It created new art and architecture far beyond anything that existed. In science it was at first highly respectful of the ancient Greeks, but by the 13th century it started progressing beyond them, and realising that the Greek scientific reference, Aristotle, was wrong about almost everything. A scientific revolution began, and by the 1300s the universities of Paris and Oxford had established the foundation of the scientific method, and of modern mathematics and physics.

That all ended when France was destroyed by the Hundred Years War, and Italy became the most influential region of the West again. Italians hated France and everything about it, the art and architecture (which they called "gothic") but also the science, which they as "Humanists" (that is students of the Humanities, meaning ancient Latin and Greek) rejected as deviations from their precious Roman "civilisation". They started cosplaying as ancient Romans and burning medieval books, and for 300 years the West once again stagnated and made no significant advancements. Until around 1600 when Italy once again fell into irrelevance, and French and British thinkers like Descartes, Bacon, Pascal, Newton, Lavoisier, Darwin, Maxwell, Ampere, and Pasteur invented the modern world.

Everyone memes about how the Germans destroy civilisation, but really it's always the Italians.

>everything connected to it
like the Alps?

Swiss Alps > French Alps > Austrian Alps >German Alps >>>>>>> Italian Alps

>A scientific revolution began, and by the 1300s the universities of Paris and Oxford had established the foundation of the scientific method, and of modern mathematics and physics

Which were all synthesized and perfected by Galileo, the person whom Einstein and Stephen Hawking called "the father of the modern science". BTFO frognigger.

Their work being lost over time didn't have anything to do with the Renaissance, but the turmoil caused by the black plague. It is also understandable that it didn't become as widespread as the work of Galileo as those were just theories which couldn't be factually proven at the time.

>posting the version that was shooped by a buttblasted Italian to make his country look less shit
lmao are you serious? If I was you I'd avoid calling attention to how pathetic your countrymen can be.

>Which were all synthesized and perfected by Galileo
Galileo discovered precisely nothing in physics. Every one of the laws commonly attributed to him can already be found in the textbooks of Nicole Oresme and Jean Buridan from the 14th century, and it's quite clear that Galileo had access to them as he included in his work exact copies of some of the graphs made by Oresme.

But even for that Galileo had to battle all his fellow Italians, eventually being condemned to lifelong house arrest, all for stating things that had been completely non-controversial knowledge 300 years earlier in Paris, because he had the audacity to contradict the holy Aristotle. What do you call that if not a dark age?

The work of Nicole Oresme and the Oxford calculators was lost everywhere. Why was it an Italian that discovered it and expanded on it instead of those British and French geniuses, huh?

>lmao are you serious? If I was you I'd avoid calling attention to how pathetic your countrymen can be.

I already BTFO'd you about this in that other thread. Those are obviously different versions of the book. Try to find the missing dots circled in the red areas now since you were too dumb to do that next time.

*since you were too dumb to do that before

>huur Romans were copy cats
Look at the very letters you're typing. You're trying to downplay the significance of the Romans conquering Europe which led to the creation of modern day western civilization. Everyone was influenced by the Romans even the Germanics who's civilizations couldn't have started without the Romans.

It does not matter that the Romans never created on their own as they took previously established ideas and perfected them. For the record, aquaducts were a thing of beauty that the Romans innovated on their own. As for the things they perfected? Military formations, roads, concrete, spreading christianity even civil law and medicine we got from the Romans. Their empire falling is nothing suprising as that is the fate of every empire. The fact that the Romans were the peak of civilization when they were at their prime is a testament to their skill and endurance.

>France
A nation that was the off shoot of another that literally claimed we wuz roman? Another interesting fact, the first university was in Italy. The renaissance was not a period of stagnation but the opposite. How can you explain the cultural fever which swepted Europe from Italy?

>always Italians
You haven't even mentioned one time they ruined civilization, faggot.

Because French and British academia was taken over by cancerous Italian humanism as well. The old library of Oxford was burned, and the books of Buridan were banned in France in the 15th century. One Italian stumbling on some old books doesn't excuse the way everyone else in Italy was trying to silence him (and truth be told Galileo was also an arrogant faggot trying to take all the credit for himself).

>Those are obviously different versions of the book.
They're the same scan you blind moron. Look at the page crease. If you zoom in on the shooped version you can even see the repeating artefacts from the Italian copypasting sections of that bar to make it longer.

>1800-1950
Wew. It's like your not even trying.

Fucking hell man, this is sad even by italonigger standards

>Because French and British academia was taken over by cancerous Italian humanism as well.

Nothing was forcing them to adopt it.

>The old library of Oxford was burned, and the books of Buridan were banned in France in the 15th century

Can't find anything about this at all. You're full of shit:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_destroyed_libraries

>They're the same scan you blind moron. Look at the page crease. If you zoom in on the shooped version you can even see the repeating artefacts from the Italian copypasting sections of that bar to make it longer

No. You posted that other map yourself distributing the figures by region. It's not the same as that one. Italy isn't the only thing that's different. Belgium is above Spain.

>samefagging with the same pictures as you did in that other thread

Kill yourself, butthurt frognigger.

>You're trying to downplay the significance of the Romans conquering Europe
I literally mentioned that as the one Roman achievement.

>Military formations, roads, concrete, spreading christianity even civil law and medicine we got from the Romans.
This has nothing to do with science but ok let's see. Roman military formations got absolutely buttraped by Germanics and Huns, at Chalons the Huns didn't even bother attacking the Romans and just focused on the Germanics while the Romans were being useless faggots. Romans didn't invent roads, they just built a lot of them. They also didn't even invent concrete, that's Greek. As for Christianity, the Romans would throw the Christians into arenas to be eaten by lions, yet then still managed to get cucked by them. Ancient Romans did not have civil law, that meme is based on the Byzantine codex of Justinian, which was never even put into practice, so you can thank the French for civil law. And Roman medicine consisted in bleeding people to make them better, yet another amazing Roman heritage we carried around for far too long.

That's all pretty pathetic m8.

>A nation that was the off shoot of another that literally claimed we wuz roman?
Uh, ok?

>Another interesting fact, the first university was in Italy.
lol Bologna? Another interesting fact, the first university that was worth two shits was in Paris, and the second was in Oxford.

>The renaissance was not a period of stagnation but the opposite.
See >How can you explain the cultural fever which swepted Europe from Italy?
Like I said, France got rekt by the Hundred Years War (and the Plague).

>You haven't even mentioned one time they ruined civilization, faggot.
They ruined Greece, and nearly ruined the West. Fortunately the West overcame Italian faggotry thanks to France and Britain, but only after 300 years of Italian dark ages.

Not the same poster but they're obviously the same scan, this is cringy to the max.

>It's not the same as that one.
Can't tell if genuine delusion literally making you blind, or just desperate damage control.

You're behaving exactly like the other persona of the frog faggot in that other thread. Can't fool me. It's almost like the conversation is a direct copypaste.

Here's the image of the pdf version of the book you posted yourself which has a completely different figure distribution than the one I posted:

>Ancient Romans did not have civil law, that meme is based on the Byzantine codex of Justinian,
Biggest horseshit I've read here this month.

Oops.

Not going to bother because anyone reading this can clearly see they're the same scan except for your pathetic shoops. You're just ridiculing yourself.

Just a tip: you might want to look things up next time before outing yourself as this much of a retard.

>anyone reading this can clearly see they're the same scan except for your pathetic shoops

I already told you I saved this pic from /pol/. If it's shooped, then I have to give massive props to the guy who did it, because it looks very convincing. How did he shoop the figure distribution so perfectly and swapped Spain for Belgium?

Holy shit, why are frogs this buttblasted at Italy? Inferiority complex? What family does the language you speak belongs to again? Reminder that your greatest leader was Italian and that you're rapebabbies of the Romans since male Gaulish population was genocided by Caesar and Gaul got colonized massively later.

Here is the original source for those scans:

theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?12344-Charles-Murray-s-quot-Human-Accomplishment-quot

lol I never said anything about being French but it's funny how your little pastanigger brain immediately goes to your eternal asspain at France, as if to further prove what I said earlier about Renaissance butthurt. Though I suppose there's no reason for it to have diminished since, what with Corsica and Nice being owned by France, all the most famous (and overrated) Italian works of art being at the Louvre, your country owing its very existence to France, and all the most beautiful Italian women getting plowed by French dick.

BTW only one country here has such an inferiority complex that you'll resort to shooping graphs.

And the allegedly real graph still shows Italy at the fourth place, included within the "big four." This is leagues above Spain and Austria, two out of the three main dominators. Also, the graph had Belgium and Spain swapped outright, perhaps we're not the ones that are butthurt.

>Italy owes its existence to France

Yes, insomuch they helped starting the process and gave that idea to people in Italy. But, by that Logic, France indirectly created Germany too.

Maybe they were defeated by Huns and Germans because, surprise surprise, tactics change but by that point no One wanted to adapt?

>Roman Law didn't exist

And here I thought you were serious.

So the figure distribution still looks different. I don't know what to think at this point. Maybe they're different editions of the book that got scanned twice in a very similar manner? Don't mistake this for some dumb national/ethnic pride, I'm trying to be as objective as possible here. There's quite a few important Italian scientists, Enlightment intellectuals and stuff from 1600-1800. This other chart seems to ignore them: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_scientists

>Also, the graph had Belgium and Spain swapped outright
Completely irrelevant, you or whoever made this probably did that just to be able to say like you are doing now "it's not butthurt Italians, it must have been butthurt Belgians!"

>But, by that Logic, France indirectly created Germany too.
Pretty much true, except in Italy's case it was literally France that invaded to liberate you from the Austrians.

>tactics change but by that point no One wanted to adapt?
Which makes Roman military formations completely irrelevant.

>>Roman Law didn't exist
As already explained, "Roman law" is the name given by Westerners to the codex of Justinian, which only ever inspired actual codes of law in the West, and only very sporadically until the Napoleon codex was written and spread across Europe. For fuck's sake I'm sure you can read all about that on Wikipedia.

OK giving you the benefit of the doubt, just look at the scans man. Just zoom in on any part of them other than the shoops and you can clearly see they're pixel-identical. I must say I hadn't noticed he had gone through the trouble of slightly shooping the maps too, but it's not that hard to do.

Trolling aside Italy is obviously one of the "big four" (although mostly Northern Italy, which may explain why taken as a whole it lags a bit behind the other three in this frankly rather imperfect study), but that graph you posted is shooped as fuck and that's just a really petty and embarrassing thing to do.

>Napoleon codex

What is Napoleon's ethnicity again?

>inb4 h-h-he was Corsican, not Italian

No one was Italian at the time. Napoleon is very much an Italic/Mediterranean person though.

I dunno, it would be very hard to shoop that part as perfectly as he did and rather pointless to do so in my opinion. I need to see how many different editions does this damn book have first before I make any conclusive judgements.

What's going on with her head? Is she a xenomorph or something?

1/2
>I literally mentioned that as the one Roman achievement.
Yes, but you made it sound way less important than it actually was. History is one of conquest and dominance and very few groups match up to the Romans in that regard.


>This has nothing to do with science but ok let's see. Roman military formations got absolutely buttraped by Germanics and Huns, at Chalons the Huns didn't even bother attacking the Romans and just focused on the Germanics while the Romans were being useless faggots.
Are you going to ignore literally hundreds of years of Roman military victory all for the sake of cherry picking their losses from when they were at their weakest? The Samnite Wars, Punic Wars, fucking Gaul were all done by adapting to and improving the enemies tactics and strategy. Hell, even at Chalons they were fearsome with Aetius which landed them another "victory".

>Romans didn't invent roads, they just built a lot of them. They also didn't even invent concrete, that's Greek.
Same reasons as above. They had the best roads and made effective use out of them. Also, Greeks didn't invent concrete. Usage of it dates back to the Egyptians. The funny thing is, knowledge of concrete became lost after the Romans fell and the most impressive pieces of architecture in antiquity came from the Romans.

>As for Christianity, the Romans would throw the Christians into arenas to be eaten by lions, yet then still managed to get cucked by them.
Read what I said. They spread christianity which literally defined European history for the next one thousand years.

>Ancient Romans did not have civil law, that meme is based on the Byzantine codex of Justinian, which was never even put into practice, so you can thank the French for civil law
Byzantine? You mean Roman. Also, that's a lie, Justin's code was used. It just mixed with German shit.

2/2
>And Roman medicine consisted in bleeding people to make them better, yet another amazing Roman heritage we carried around for far too long.
And yet most medical terms are latin.

>Uh, ok?
>Romans were overrated!
>What's that? Germans wanted to be Roman too?
Do you see how you sound. Those great Germans/French looked up to the Romans.
France could never come into fruitation without Rome.

>lol Bologna? Another interesting fact, the first university that was worth two shits was in Paris, and the second was in Oxford.
Which influenced the creation of other universities? Ever heard of follow the leader? Also, Bologna produced Copernicus and Marconi.

>See
There was no stagnation you imbecile. Your post doesn't prove anything.

>Like I said, France got rekt by the Hundred Years War (and the Plague).
And they accepted Italian ideas open armed.

>They ruined Greece, and nearly ruined the West. Fortunately the West overcame Italian faggotry thanks to France and Britain, but only after 300 years of Italian dark ages.
Greece was long past it's prime by the time the Romans set foot on the place.

He thinks some medieval scientific works being lost over time because of the black plague = stagnation. That's a really stupid thing to say. The Renaissance produced great scientists like Leonardo Da Vinci, Gerolamo Cardano, Lodovico Ferrari, Tartaglia, Luca Pacioli, Matteo Ricci, Aloysius Lilius, Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, etc.

Reminder that post-impression is just a ripoff of what Rembrandt had already done 250 years earlier.

If I were Italian I would have killed myself after reading this

Nobles used to bind the head as it grew so it became elongated. White people!

t. envious snownigger barbarian who didn't read the rest of the thread

You can't talk shit about Italian history besides bad performance in wars (result of the failure to industrialize efficiently due to lack of natural resources). Nordcucks don't even have any modern scientist as important as Enrico Fermi besides Niels Bohr (which was a Jew). They only have meme Nobel prizes that they give to themselves while jerking each other like the fags they are.

>WE

>WIR

do you believe yourself

...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_cranial_deformation

...

...

Both is HRE art.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

the right looks like it was built by cavemen

the left looks like it was built by tool users

...

rome and greeks weren't western
EVROPA only awakened more after them

I mean italians and greeks are western now and have been for a long ass time but that's not how things wuz in antiquity

Kek, that's only using the Northern Amerindians for comparison. It would get too humiliating for Nordcucks if you used anyone down south.

...

...

...

...

...

...

How could I forget about this one. It's one of the best.

Ok, that's it for now.

Holy shit you guys are obsessed

At least we developed great men such as Thomas Hobbes, Rousseau, Voltaire, Louis XIV, then women such as Elizabeth I, Georgiana Cavendish, Madame Du Pompadour, the list can go on.

>great scientists like Leonardo Da Vinci

Spot the drooling moron

Napoleon was as French as it gets.

>muh Mediterranean
What do you think France is shithead?

>History is one of conquest and dominance and very few groups match up to the Romans in that regard.
Not really, history is at least as much about culture and philosophy, science and technology. But even in conquest Rome was completely mediocre. Its one impactful achievement, and the reason Rome became so overrated, is that it conquered barbarian Gauls and Britons thus bringing them into contact with Hellenic civilisation, and that those regions happened to become the heart of Western civilisation much later. There are dozens of empires with more impressive conquests, including any given West European nation (except Italy of course).

>Hell, even at Chalons they were fearsome with Aetius which landed them another "victory".
Chalons was a complete humiliation for the Romans, who just stood there like useless faggots getting ignored by the Huns and the Germanics fighting each other.

>Usage of it dates back to the Egyptians.
Doubt it but good that we now agree that it wasn't invented by Romans.

>They spread christianity
lol no, they sure as fuck didn't "spread Christianity", Christianity spread within Rome despite the Romans' pathetic and desperately brutal efforts to stop it. Christianity was first spread beyond the borders of Rome much later by the Franks.

>Byzantine? You mean Roman.
No, I mean Byzantine, the Greek speaking empire centered on Greece and Anatolia which had jack shit to do with Italy. And no it was never used.

>And yet most medical terms are latin.
Most medical terms are Greek. Which either way is completely unrelated to the laughable travesty that was Roman "medicine". Even while desperately goalpost shifting you keep losing points, better take a dive Luigi.

>Those great Germans/French looked up to the Romans.
Yes, looking up to an inferior is the very definition of overrated, that's literally what I've been saying.

>Which influenced the creation of other universities?
Nope. The University of Paris had no connection to Bologna, it was created out of the cathedral school of Notre Dame. The cathedral schools were originally founded by Charlemagne.

>There was no stagnation you imbecile.
Name one relevant Italian Renaissance scientist. inb4 a walltext of literally who Faggotto Faggottinis nobody has ever heard of whose combined achievement is translating some ancient shit from Greek.

>And they accepted Italian ideas open armed.
Thus ushering in a dark age for human progress, yes that's what I said.

>Greece was long past it's prime by the time the Romans set foot on the place.
Some of the greatest Greek minds like Archimedes or Eratosthenes lived around 200 BC, right when Rome came to dominate the Hellenic world, thus plunging it into eternal darkness.

Kek, what a mental breakdown of epic proportions.

They don't call you guys Veeky Forumstronics for nothing.