¿Fedeltá o animalidad? El perro en las escenas de conversión de María Magdalena en la Italia del siglo XVI

Elena Monzón Pertejo

doi:10.24310/BoLArte.2019.v0i40.5689

Authors

Elena Monzón Pertejo Spain http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4133-3146

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/BoLArte.2019.v0i40.5689

Abstract

Since Antiquity, non-human animals have been used for embodying virtues and vices. The symbolic meaning of the dog moves back and forth between negative and positive attitudes depending on each tradition. This paper seeks to study the presence of the dog in Mary Magdalene’s conversion. The selected paintings are related to sixteenth-century Italian art. Iconography and iconology as well as gender studies are the main methodological approaches to the subject.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Elena Monzón Pertejo

Doctora en Historia del Arte por la Universitat de València (2017).

References

BLOCK FRIEDMAN, John (2016), “Dogs in the Identity Formation and Moral Teaching Offered in some Fifteenth-Century Flemish Manuscript Miniatures”, en en GELFAND, Laura D. (ed.), Our Dogs, Our Selves. Dogs in Medieval and Early Modern Art, Literature, and Society, Brill, Leiden – Boston, pp. 325-362.

COHEN, Simone (2008), Animals as Disguised Symbols in Renaissance Art, Brill, Koninklijke.

DEMELLO, Margo (2012), Animals and Society: An Introduction to Human-Animal Studies, Columbia University Press, New York – Chichester – West Sussex.

HOBGOOD-OSTER, Laura (2008), Holy Dogs and Asses: Animals in the Christian Tradition, University of Illinois Press, Urbana – Chicago.

GARCÍA MAHÍQUES, Rafael (2009), Iconografía e Iconología. Volumen 2. Cuestiones de método, Encuentro, Madrid.

GROSS, Aaron (2012), “Introduction and Overview. Animals Others and Animal Studies”, en GROSS, Aaron y VALLELY, Anne (eds.), Animals and the Human Imagination. A Companion to Animals Studies, Columbia University Press, New York – Chichester – West Sussex, pp. 1-23.

GUINOT, Jean-Noël (2008), “La tradición patrística”, en VV.AA., Figuras de María Magdalena, Verbo Divino, Estella, pp. 15-50.

MANN, Judith W. (2016), “Federico Barocci’s Faithful Fidos: A Study in the Efficacy of Counter-Reformation Imagery”, en GELFAND, Laura D. (ed.), Our Dogs, Our Selves. Dogs in Medieval and Early Modern Art, Literature, and Society, Brill, Leiden – Boston, pp. 127-163.

MENACHE, Sophia (1997), “Dogs: God’s Worst Enemies?”, Society and Animals, vol. 5, nº. 1, pp. 23-44.

PANOFSKY, Erwin (1934). “Jan van Eyck’s Arnolfini Portrait”, The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, vol. 64, N.º 372, Marzo, pp. 117-127.

SÁNCHEZ ORTEGA, María Helena (1992), “Woman as Source of ‘Evil’ in Counter-Reformation Spain”, en CRUZ, A.J. y PERRY, M. E. (eds.), Culture and Control in Counter-Reformation Spain, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis – Oxford, pp. 196-215.

SAX, Boria (2017), “Animals in Folklore”, en KALO, Linda (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Animal Studies, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 456-473.

SCHEICK, William J. (2005), “Animal Testimony in Renaissance Art. Angelic and other Supernatural Visitations”, en POLLOCK, M. y RAINWATER, C. (eds.), Figuring Animals: Essays on Animal Images on Art, Literature, Philosophy and Popular Culture, Palgrave MacMillan, s.l., pp. 65-79.

STEINER, Gary (2006), “Descartes, Christianity, and Contemporary Speciesism”, en WALDAY, P. y PATTON, Kimberly (eds.), A Communion of Subjects. Animals in Religion, Science, & Ethics, Columbia University Press, New York – Chichester – West Sussex, pp. 117-131.

WALKER-MEIKLE, Kathleen (2012), Medieval Pets, The Boydell Press, Woodbridge.