DISCUSSION:
RESPOND Academically, scholarly and professionally, TO DISCUSSION Politics &art based on and according to text book (s) Pursuit of Italy by David Gilmore, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy by Jacob Burckhardt, Specifically! MUST CITE AND USE these books for references?
1st PART ONE Give an answer to original two-part question in 2 - 3 paragraphs
ORIGINAL QUESTION? MUST ANSWER PART A AND THEN PART B SEPERATELY, as answer part A & answer part B? Do not throw a lot of words together without defining where they belong?
A. Did Florence's political and economic culture create the conditions that made it such a hotbed of brilliant art and science, or did the city's strong humanist thinking shape its politics and economy? What made it so much more successful artistically and culturally than, say, Milan, Rome, or Naples?
B. Which of the Italian city states would strike you personally as the best place for the era? What are the positives and negatives of the relatively stable but somewhat tyrannical Milan? Elite-led commercial republic of Venice? Guild and commerce -driven Lucca and Florence? Church-centered Rome? Naples with its landed gentry?
PART TWO:RESPOND to FOUR CLASSMATES DISCUSSION POST BELOW?
1. " Florentine by LC
Affluent Florentines(if am saying this right) became outstanding patrons of art and culture in Italian culture Leon Battista Alberti and others became powerful men who were able to reform architecture and styles of painting which defined the Renaissance period. Even though he was affluent, Leon Alberti was a humanist determined to use his skill to add to the life of ordinary citizens. (Gilmour, 76)
2. " The art of politics and the politics of artBy PG
Florence, with more justification be called an oligarchy. There was also a large class with no political power whatever, the workers, especially those employed by the wool manufacturers. They were not members of any guilds, were forbidden to form guilds of their own, and were the worst sufferers in time of economic depression. They were one of the earliest examples of a modern industrial proletariat. Their discontent might break out from time to time, but they never succeeded in acquiring permanent political status.
3. " Art of Politics BY FJ
Florence's strong humanist thinking shaped the politics and economy. Beginning with Petrarch and bringing humanism into light, the ruling elites of Florence wanted to look to the past Roman and Greek styles of literature, art and architecture to make the present better. Florence ended up being the cultural center of the Renaissance due to the banking empire brought in by the Medici family. As banking continued to soar, the elite became richer and needed to invest in something. Why not flaunt your money by giving money to artists to create works for you? Patronizing the arts became such a large part of the Renaissance, and it was because of the large increase in disposable income by the elites that allowed it to happen. This further led to investments in architecture (like Brunelleschi's Dome and the doors of the Baptistery). Such a large concentration of capital in Florence led many to flock to the city, such as Leonardo da Vinci. Other cities may have had some level of capital similar to Florence, but the attraction to the city for art certainly overshadowed the other cities for a great while.
Personally, I feel as Venice would have been the best place for the era (and not just because there is an entire chapter dedicated to Venice in the Gilmour book). Other republican governments in Italian city-states had failed in some form or fashion, but the Venetian government was able to stay relatively strong and consistent in the Renaissance period. One note that struck me in the Gilmour reading was that "outsiders noticed that its citizens were more united than in other places and that they shared a community spirit ... that was absent in Florence or Genoa." [1] They had many councils and committees, they had the most stable aristocracy and had religious and racial tolerance. The downside for Venice was its glamour and it becoming more of a Mediterranean power and not a peninsular power - their trading with the Ottomans between wars as well as their political decisions did lead to their decline.
Lucca and Florence both had large numbers of guilds and were able to produce works of art and consistent goods, but a frequent downside was the political situation. The Signori in Florence, as well as the instability with the Medici rulers (as well as the instances with changing ideologies around the time of Savonarola) were certainly a downside, as the power did not reside with the people in many areas. Rome and the Papal States may have had the Church, but it was in a state of disarray - the "ancient centre of the world was a small town with ruins" before the Renaissance came to them. [2] Milan had a strong authoritarian government which provided for stability, but the downside was an "unrealistically radical" leadership. [3] Naples did end up becoming the largest city in Italy, but it did not have the cultural influence that other city-states had.
[1] Gilmour, David. The pursuit of Italy: a history of a land, its regions and their peoples. London: Penguin Books, 2012, loc. 1827. Kindle edition.
4. " Florence BY LC
The Rebublican Florence appeared on the cusps of the Rennaisance with the contribution of Leon Battista Alberti. His addition to the art world with the use of perspective in painting later adopted by renowned artists from the ages we treasure like Michaelango and Leonardo. This city appeared to embrace intellectual pursuits in the arts and the sciences with embrace of secularism. Florence was said to be the center of humanism 1375-1450(Pursuit of Italy, 76-77). This would allow development of a diverse open society unlike one shrouded in authoritarianism so often seen under a religious shroud.