I consider newspaper art reporters/ reviewers to be highly subject to personal bias. I rarely agree with their opinions and doubt their level of research. I don't think I've EVER agreed with film critics and consider art critics the same breed. That's my bias and I have no documentation to say this one is wrong, so I guess I'm no better.

One of the paintings is "Genevra De' Benci". Any relation Gwen? Is that the source of your name?

--------------------

I don't know if the writer of the article is giving an accurate picture of life for women of that time
Oh, everything he says is documentable, he just casts it in the worst possible light. It really sucked to be a noble woman in Italy at this time; I think of Renaissance Italy every time I hear about the Taliban’s position on women. The restrictions and seclusions really only apply to the nobility and anyone connected to them. Middle class, artisans and other working women seem to have had it a bit easier (unlike the Taliban.)

Jeff J says ”The author made the life of a wealthy heiress seem a terrible thing.”
From what I’ve read, it *was* pretty dreadful. Women were pawns in a game of money & political power, breeders and producers of male heirs and female children who could be married off to create advantageous family ties. High born women were taught to read only enough so they could read their books of prayers, and were secluded from all contact with outsiders, especially men. A highborn woman often wasn’t even allowed to see her husband’s brothers or nephews. It was a classic harem situation, complete with cloisters and guards. Sometimes marriages would not be finalized until a woman could prove her breeding abilities by producing a living (usually male) heir. If she couldn’t produce in a space of time she could be sent back to her parents in disgrace, a shamed, used and useless woman who was then considered a liability by her family.

According to existing records, a widow usually got none of her husband’s estate, it all went to the children, and she became the property of her closest male relative. As the children belonged to the husband’s family, a widow could be sent back penniless to her parents while the children remained with her dead husband’s family. If the children were old enough to inherit, a widow became her oldest son’s ward, and he could decide what to do with her. He could pack her off (again, penniless) to her parents, lock her up in a convent, or allow her to remain in the house. It wasn’t a pretty time to be a woman.

”"Ginevra De' Benci". Any relation Gwen? Is that the source of your name?
No. The name “Ginevra Francesca” is a very typical late 15th - early 16th C name combination that appears frequently in birth rolls. Being named “Ginevra” is like the spate of 15 year-olds who are named “Heather” and “Brittany”. Naming fads are not a modern invention!

John says ”It is surprisingly rare to find a journalist/art critic who has anything useful to say about history “
The article’s tone is so hostile I really have no idea what point-- if any-- the writer was trying to make. An outraged expose’ about the horrors of Renaissance Italy seems ridiculously late.

Sorry for the ramble, but the early 16th C. in Italy is my real passion-- I only do 15th C. Burgundian because of Jeff!

quote:

---

From what I’ve read, it *was* pretty dreadful. Women were pawns in a game of money & political power, breeders and producers of male heirs and female children who could be married off to create advantageous family ties. High born women were taught to read only enough so they could read their books of prayers, and were secluded from all contact with outsiders, especially men. A highborn woman often wasn’t even allowed to see her husband’s brothers or nephews. It was a classic harem situation, complete with cloisters and guards.

---

She is quite right. While I hesitate to use a movie as an "example" of anything period, if you have ever seen "Dangerous Beauty" you will get a pretty good idea of the limitations and expectations of a well born woman in Italy--that part at least is fairly accurate based on my study of the time period.

One can certainly understand Veronica Franco's position.

Veronica Franco was one of 2 major poets of the Italian Renaissance who were courtesans, the other being Gaspara Stampa. Veronica was not high born (her mother was a former courtesan), and although she did make an early respectable marriage to a Venetian doctor, she separated from him by the time she was 18, and her mother became her procuress.

Certainly being a courtesan gave a woman certain freedoms, but being so marginalized her socially. No matter how famous or talented, a courtesan occupied a distinct social class apart from the rest of society. A courtesan could (and in many cases hoped) to make a good marriage eventually, but even if she did it would only buy her security and a good husband. It would never buy her respectability.

While it is true that several portraits thought to be of Veronica Franco were produced by either followers or of the school of Tintoretto, I don't think any are included in the above cited show. Courtesan portraiture is an entirely different genre than what the show seems to be focusing on.