Talk:Lady of Elche
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lady of Elche article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hole in the back
editI don't remember whether there was a hole on the back (presumedly to store the ashes of somebody), but I may be confusing it with the Lady of Baza. -- Error 01:06, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I took pictures of the Lady's back and there is a big hole. I plan to upload it one of these years. If you want it earlier, leave me a note. --Error 00:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Tone of the article
editThe tone of this article is not appropriate for an enciclopaedia.
I don't think that things like "The Lady of Elche is either Iberian art of the 4th century B.C., or the Hellenistic or the Roman periods or she is an Art Nouveau forgery showing the influence of Alphonse Mucha's posters." or "remind some viewers of Ozma of Oz" is anything but close to "neutrality". Works of art should not be treated in a contemptuous way, even if they are forgeries.
About the bust being a forgery, the fact that one profesor in the US (John F. Moffitt) says it is a forgery, is no reason to doubt the good work of hundreds of other arqueologists that affirm it is authentic. The fact that other scupltures similar to this one have been found later (Lady of Baza) and that in the same place other iberian rests have been found should put the discovery in context.217.1.135.244 20:42, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- No position as to the authenticity of this piece has been taken in the entry. No third alternative-- that the sculpture is medieval or Baroque rather than Art Nouveau-- has been suggested ever. A photograph would be worth a thousand words in this case. For an anonymous newbie who has contributed nothing previously, to begin at Wikipedia with "The neutrality of this article is disputed" is quite cheeky. Wetman 21:14, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- (Nothing further has been heard anywhere at Wikipedia from User:217.1.135.244 and the NPOV label is being dropped, 2 December 2004.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wetman (talk • contribs) 02:54, 2 December 2004 (UTC)
Two references on the controversy added -- one for forgery (Moffitt), and a more recent one for authenticity (Luxan et al.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Typewritten (talk • contribs) 08:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
What this entry needs
editWhat this entry does need is a discussion of the emotional importance of the Lady of Elche for the Autonomous Community of Valencia, and the media campaign over her return from Madrid. these issues overshadow the mere archaeological questions. --Wetman 02:54, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I'd say it needs some discussion of the claim that the statue is a forgery, as well, even if the controversy is a minor one. At this point, Moffitt's article is listed as a reference, and the statue is said to be controversial, but there are absolutely no details on this in the article. Themill 06:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. Feel free to edit accordingly. Mountolive 06:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I am without access to the Moffitt article, and it seems to be the sole source of contention over the authenticity of this piece. I can't bring myself to edit without sources in front of me. :) Maybe someone who has the article can oblige us? Themill 09:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'd like to know about these controversies too. Perhaps there's an appropriate template that could be added to request work on this page? 87.12.220.88 22:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- There is no mention of a "Lady of Elx' in the professional literature at JSTOR: a search brings nothing up. All notices there are to the Lady of Elche. So the Wikipedia article is headed in a very specific direction from the very start. Moffitt's Art Forgery: The Case of the Lady of Elche received a positive review by Karen D. Vitelli in American Journal of Archaeology 99'.4 (October 1995), p. 755. --Wetman 04:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Relation to painting by James Tissot?
editIs there any relationship between the head dress of the Dama del Elche and Tissot's painting of Sarah and Pharaoh? The bust and Pharaoh both wear the odd looking headdress. The bust was discovered around the same time the painting was made. Are there any respected sources analyzing the possibility the bust inspired the painting? Zulu, King Of The Dwarf People (talk) 22:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- Quite possibly - give us a link to the Tissot & we can see. Johnbod (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sure looks like it. There are at least two Tissot paintings with a similar headdress. See here and here. Ecphora (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Here's another and a statement that Tissot modelled the headress after the Lady of Elche. Ecphora (talk) 14:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- I added a section and image. Thanks Zulu, KoTDP. Ecphora (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- No problem. --Zulu, King Of The Dwarf People (talk) 05:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
- I added a section and image. Thanks Zulu, KoTDP. Ecphora (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- Here's another and a statement that Tissot modelled the headress after the Lady of Elche. Ecphora (talk) 14:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sure looks like it. There are at least two Tissot paintings with a similar headdress. See here and here. Ecphora (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Etymology
editElche ancient greek dialectical palatal konsonant exchange K/CH Helike. Greek Toponyme ! 2A01:C22:34CA:CD00:184E:4078:BE15:E88B (talk) 11:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)