Talk:Cosmatesque

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

How does Cosmatesque differ from, say, Opus sectile, Opus tessellatum, Opus vermiculatum, or mosaics?. This article doesn't actually define the term. Zidel333 (talk) 06:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmatesque and Cosmati seems to imply that a Cosmati pavement is one made by the Cosmati family and a Cosmatesque pavement is one in that style but not necessarily by the Cosmati family.

However, [1] and [2] describe the pavement in Westminster Abbey (which was not made by the Cosmati family) as a Cosmati pavement.

Should this ambiguity of the term "Cosmati" be mentioned?

cmɢʟee☺τaʟκ 17:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have made changes, but a) Do we actually know that that the men from Rome who worked at Westminster weren't from the Cosmati team? The links don't say so; and b) if we do, it's more inaccuracy than ambiguity to my mind. But I think Cosmati is used loosely. Johnbod (talk) 01:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the 3rd paragraph, the last sentence:

Laurentius acquired his craft from Greek masters and for a time followed their method of work, but early in his career, freeing himself from Byzantine traditions and influences, he worked along original lines and evolved a new style of decorative mosaic, vigorous in colour and design, which he invariably employed in conjunction with plain or sculpted marble surfaces, making it a decorative accessary to some architectural feature.

is ponderous and difficult. I didn't change it for fear of making an error in fact or omission, but I would submit this:

Laurentius acquired his craft from Greek masters and for a time followed their method of work, but early in his career developed an original style. Freeing himself from Byzantine traditions and influences, Laurentius's style evolved into a decorative mosaic, vigorous in colour and design, which he employed in conjunction with plain or sculpted marble surfaces. Thus, he applied decorative features to architectural necessities.

for your consideration. John Sinclair (talk) 06:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]