 I was actually struck by both Orsi and Kira, you open with sort of more modern theories as a way of entree into earlier material. And I wonder just methodologically if you could talk about that more, how does that work for you? How do you avoid the pitfalls of anachronism and why use that technique to get us into these discussions in these earlier periods? Is this? Who goes first? I think I had various reasons to open my talk with this. First, I think I just so difficult to relate to anything medieval for us and I just wanted to make it relevant to us because we tend to think today that we read self have books a lot and it's something new and it's just kind of a modern phenomenon but I think that it's so interesting to see that medieval people have were concerned with very similar issues we are struggling today and they had very similar psychological issues and problems they wanted to deal with and I really wanted to make this to make it relevant or relatable to us. I have some of the same interest as well making it relevant to not being, you're being able to explore ideas that people are exploring now but I also have some reservations in using modern ideas the way I justify it for myself is that these two that I'm thinking of, conspicuous consumption and self-fashioning really resonate with ideas that were contemporary in the 16th century. Conspicuous consumption is reminiscent of magnificence which was known and discussed and used to justify the lavish expenditure of rulers it was seen as a duty even for rulers to spend in this way and then self-fashioning reminds me of something like Castiglione's spritzatura as well. So I come at these with some reservations as well but because I hear these important, I don't want to say echo but these resonances with ideas that were contemporary in the 16th century I think it's acceptable to bring them in especially if they help us understand either the social phenomena or the art in a new way or a deeper way. Thank you and Michelle I really am curious to hear about your broader project and how this study of the Jamalian's fits into what is your broader motivation for the study and part of what I'm thinking is that as a non-Islamic art specialist I feel like when you think of the medieval Mediterranean and cross connections with Western New York you think of Venice and that's very well studied and very well known. So is your project making the connections with France and central France actually more well known? Yes, thank you. Yeah, so centers like Venice, like Sicily have been really over-studied in terms of how they functioned as poles of commerce and trade in the medieval Mediterranean but what I'm interested in more is kind of the reception of Islamic art in Western Europe and what that meant for users and viewers of these Islamic models. So a prominent example is the pseudo Arabic like what I showed and what I'm interested in is this idea of harnessing the exotic and what that means for the social class of the people who are using these exotic models and if that means that by using pseudo Arabic or any kind of other Islamicate images you're kind of elevating yourself. You're situating yourself aspirationally to kind of emulate courtiers and nobles who could afford to for instance travel to that region and so I kind of see, this is why I call my talk enviable possessions, these are objects that you wanted to possess because it was a way for you to assert your social status. So yeah, yeah. Now do you guys, I have questions for each other? I mean especially, I think you're honestly in here your papers really did speak to each other but if you have questions for each other please feel free otherwise I'm gonna open it to the audience. I have a question to care about the members of the confraternity. Do you know anything about it? Who participated this and was it specific to certain social groups or nationalities or? So the Crucifiso was a devotional confraternity so it wasn't a national company and it wasn't a professional association so it's particular to the devotion to the crucifix. It was an incredibly elite society, all of the big names, the who's who of Roman society were members, the Colonna, the Carafa, the Farnese, Alessandro Farnese actually served as Cardinal Protector of the organization, Renuccio Farnese before him. So they're certainly among the most elite. That said, there's a membership list that survives from mid-century 1550 to 1557 and there are over 1,800 names in the culture pieces membership list including artists, artists that work for the company like Perino del Lago in their chapel. So although control was probably exercised by a rather elite group, the membership was diverse and certainly devotion to the crucifix attracted a diverse group as well. I'll say that the elite status has actually presented some problems in setting the confraternity or in people's responses to it. I think because the idea that it's such an elite group comes with it, the idea that these devotions aren't really heartfelt and my project aims to resist that. Thank you, thank you for these papers. Actually, I have a quick question for Kira and also one for Michelle. Kira, to what extent were these practices conceived of as an innovation, a revival, or the perpetuation of practices that had gone on uninterrupted? I mean, in what way were they placed in the context of invention or revival? And for Michelle, if I may, to what extent was this interest in Islamic chivalric practices and Islamic art? To what extent was it consciously thought of as related to Islam or to the Arabic-speaking world? And to what extent was it, and if you will, just sheer novelty? I'm trying to, I mean, obviously, I'm thinking of anachronistic practices too, like, I don't know, the 18th century interested in Chinese or the 1900 Viennese interest in English things. I mean, there we go, those are those. So Kira and Michelle. I'm trying to answer your question. I'm trying to think of the company's own words of the archival records that I've read, if there's any sense in those records or in the statute books of feeling one way or the other. And I can't think of any particular great examples. I will say that obviously nothing develops out of nothing and something like the Easter Sepulchre practice is an exaggeration of an existing medieval liturgical practice. So this practice of symbolically bearing the host on the altar had happened before, but usually in a small vessel. What is innovative with the company's practices is this incredible ephemeral architectural structure that is built for this ceremony. And I'll say that it also then leads into something like the better known, sometimes better known, 40 hours devotion that is institutionalized at the end of the 16th century by Clement VIII. There's some important differences when it happens, where it happens. And I would say also most importantly that in the Easter Sepulchre, the host is buried. In the 40 hours devotion, the host is exhibited. But these are certainly connected to each other. But I think that there's a sense, especially around the 1575 Jubilee that this is unprecedented and new. In many ways it was the 1575 Jubilee, for instance, attracted 400,000 people to Rome. So something different is happening, something grander, more conspicuous, if you will. So to respond to your question, is it novelty or is it conscious appropriation? I think it's a bit of both. I think there's definitely a novelty aspect that plays into kind of the harnessing of these motifs. But I also think that at this period, in the medieval Mediterranean is also fraught with a lot of military conflict, right? Because the Crusades are happening and there's a million Crusades that we can talk about. So there is this kind of antagonistic relationship that the Western European knights are facing with the Islamic world. And I think they're also living in that region at the time. And so I think this kind of appropriation cannot be nearly seen as just a coincidence. I think there's something a little bit more conscious that's going on there. Yeah. You had a question for Osolia, correct? That was a really fascinating paper and really interesting and quite convincing explanation for how these images are working. The question I have has to do with gender and the fact that you have in your painted in one image of a woman and the other images, men. And I'm curious if in the reconstruction, and perhaps you mentioned this and I missed it, but in the reconstruction that you're suggesting, is it possible that there would have been a female figure who would have been mirroring the female figure in the scene and kind of along the same lines? I was really struck by how the female figure in her destruction, the one element, at least one element that isn't the same as the mirror. And of course, women, I think perhaps in all medieval cultures, this certainly happened in Byzantium as well. Women are often accused of the various ways that their mind wanders. One of the ways their minds often wander is to their own sort of self-cultivation and their physical appearance rather than their spiritual formation and cultivation of the spiritual self. So I guess I'm curious in sort of multiple ways how the image might be gendered if that demands a different kind of reconstruction for the paired image. And I guess finally, and again, I'm sorry if you missed this, I'm sorry if you said this, I missed it, but might it be possible that that entire set of images would be gendered in terms of the person who used it or the setting in which it appeared? In particular, is it perhaps a private, I wasn't really clear on scale, but is it a private set of panels that could have been in a woman's private chambers or in some other environment in which her representation in a private setting would have been particularly relevant and sort of mirroring her own experience? So I think that anything might have been on the other lost half. I just don't have any way to prove it, but there are around 30 surviving images of this iconography and every single case you have two men under the crucifix. And even in the case, the earliest example is coming from the 14th century codex which was made for Benedictine female monastery. And even in that case, the two person is men. And so, but I'm not sure that it posed any problem for the viewer to imagine herself in that place, but yeah, it's cause because that white only man, I don't have any answer for that. And the size of these polyptych is kind of a medium size, I would say. So the panel itself is like that. So I think it's very much speaks for a private environment for use, but whether it was a domestic one or a site or tar or, I don't know, but yes, I think that the size itself is indicative of its function. Sorry, can I just piggyback on that and expand on it? Because I was very curious that you described the panel as unique. And then here you're saying there's 30 or 40 other images, but these other images in manuscript form? No, they are mostly frescoes from small village churches from Sweden and the French Alpine region and all around Europe, but they are very rare. Excuse me. Sorry, go ahead. Question. Oh! This is a second. I'm happy to defer. Okay, I'm on the same topic. The six scenes for the distractiveness, are they consistent in the 30 examples? They are mostly the same, yeah. There are instances, there are small of them, but they are always mostly the same, I would say. The reason I ask is the conspicuous absence in the painted one is that you have a view of the city and one of the scenes is clearly of the country, the trees and so forth. And so it occurs to me that the two things for your hypothetical reconstruction. One, you should ask whether the perspectival open wall on the left is mirrored on the right, which would not be stylistically unsuited to the period. And if so, is the scene, if you would imagine that, the scene on the outside of that side is of the countryside, which is the one missing from your repertoire. This just, I don't know whether that's the question about both, there should be two women or men and that seems irrelevant, I don't think we could know that. But if the repertoire is consistent, you might do better in a reconstruction not to rely on the print, but to use its references of a little more strongly. Thank you, thank you, that's very helpful. Thank you very much for these tremendous talks. I enjoyed them very much and I'm totally envious of each of your fields now, because you're all working on objects that are fabulously interesting and I wish I were doing that too. For Michelle, I kind of have an idea or a comment and I'm not sure if it translates into a question exactly. My area is mid-century American painting, but I'm very interested in color. And I'm noticing in the objects that you're looking at that aid their copper as opposed to the Islamic antecedent objects which seem more often to be brass and that the chromatic material, the colors that you see on the jameleons that you presented, which constitute the full set of objects I've seen that I know now, seem to emphasize a vertigree color which is very similar to the color that Kira is wearing in her sweater. Maybe a little bit darker, yeah, there you go. And what's interesting to me about that is in this period in the ancient world, colors often associated with geography. And I mean the most obvious example is lapis lazuli, ultramarine coming from Afghanistan and other colors as opposed to vertigree which is a very kind of locally producible color. And if you're making these jameleons out of copper, that's how you make vertigree, right? And if they're washing their hands or feet with any kind of water that's got an acid in it, like vinegar, if they're doing it to kind of key up the washing aspects, that copper's gonna turn that color. And so I'm wondering if there's not only a kind of referencing of the antecedent imagery but also a kind of play with color that's produced, that you can produce on the spot as opposed to buy, expensively from a remote location. And in fact you can see it sort of turn that color gradually and then you gotta clean it. But the enamel remains as a kind of reiteration of that color you're gonna get if you get that slightly acidic water in the basin. I think that might have a lot to do whether, however with like whether or not these are actually objects that get used or if they're kind of heraldic objects that represent cheaper versions you actually would use. I don't know if any of that is connects to what you've been thinking about in terms of these objects. No, definitely. And so for the color, the most often color that you do see on limo enamel in general, not only on the Jamalians, is this kind of like vertigrate, yeah. And that is the cheapest and the most commonly available color. And so the range of colors that you find on limo enamel ranges from green to being the cheapest, red is the most expensive. So if there's a lot of red on your enamel, that means it costs you a lot of money. But I did not think about kind of like the chemical reaction that Coburn might provoke. So thank you so much. My questions for Orshi and knowing nothing about that fascinating object. I wanted to know if a wandering mind is at all similar to a melancholy mind at the time and like seeing a depiction of a very fraught relationship between a figure's mental states and the sort of surrounding objects that couldn't help but think of like Durr's famous melancholy imprint. Are they like similar at all in terms of historical overlap or sort of mental state or are they totally different sorts of things? I'm not an expert of human theories. And so I would say that, as far as I understand, the wandering mind was a more universal human condition. To be melancholic you were more exposed, more prone to be melancholic if you had certain kinds of humors in your body. But the wandering mind happened to everybody. And that's where I would put the difference between the two of them. Orshi, my question is for you too and along the same lines. I was looking at the wandering mind and all the different, and looking at the different activities and where your mind can go. And I was thinking about like, what about sex and sexual activities? Like is that at all depicted as one of the places where the wandering mind may go or shouldn't go? I think it's, the woman is kind of a subtle signifier for this problem I think. And that's, but there is no more explicit reference for sex, but obviously in contemporary literature it has been addressed as one of the problems which might distract you from looking at a passion. But. There is a bed in the manuscript that illustrates what you showed us. And I have, sorry, you're getting a lot of attention, but obviously it's the richest of your material. I just wanted a clarification, a question for clarification. In the panel with the woman, the lines, I can't quite tell, but they don't seem to be protruding directly from her head in the same way that I could see on the manuscript. They seem less organized, like they're attached to the shelf and the rod. Yeah, they are less organized than in the woodcut. And I cannot tell because it was the exterior. So it's more damaged and that's why the lines are not so well organized. But on the other hand, I think there is an interesting link between the woodcut and the panel because in two cases, the lines are exactly at the same spot, crossing the two fields. And I think it shows two certain kind of connection between the woodcut and the panel. And I wondered if there's one line that seems to go off to the right and if you thought that could potentially have a, do you think that's any kind of connection with another panel, which wouldn't make sense because then you'd have the other figure. There's one that's sort of going off to the right and then it's cut off by the right edge as I'm recalling. All of them are cut there. They are all running to the right. To my left, well, as I'm looking at it, they're all running to the window that's on the left. No. It's not important. Okay, okay. So which, are you talking about the panel? Yes. The panel, so runs to the head of the woman or from the head of the woman to the other side of the lost half. Actually, to the head, is it just that we're not seeing it? Yeah, it's difficult to see on the slides. Sorry. Question? We are at the end of the symposium. How are we doing on time? We're okay? Okay. Maybe we've run out of steam. So unless there are more questions, I think we're gonna wrap it up. And thank you to everybody who participated today and to everybody who came and listened. We're really grateful to have you here. So thank you and I'll see you all on April 15th.