This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all
LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the
project page or contribute to the
discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
user:Thyra uploaded it to Wiki Commons from a Blog Page.
The blog writer says that it is called the Incarnate Angel and dates from about 1515.
Art historians generally call the drawing the Incarnate Angel and date it at about 1515.
user:Thora cites the blog page and yet calls it Jacopo Saltarelli, and coolly dates it 1475, about 40 years before its assumed date of creation.
The pic closely relates to Leonardo's John the Baptist, a work of his old age. (ie 1515 not 1475)
It almost certainly represents Leonardo's servant/companion Salai.
if this picture is indeed 1475, then it is of great importance in Leonardo's oevre, as it would predate any existing drawing by four years.
I am having great difficulty assuming good faith over this one! I have asked user:Thyra for an explanation as to why it was uploaded as Salatrelli and given a date forty years too early.
It reminded me of an {{afd}} I participated in a few years ago. That {{afd}} claimed an author from the 19th Century wasn't notable -- because he barely rated a handful of passing references through his google search. And the reply I found convincing and very memorable agreed that any author, writing today, who generated that few hits, would not be notable. But, given how rapidly books go out of print they suggested any 19th Century author who is still remembered at all today should be considered notable.
A glance through Archive.org's OCR transcriptions of books shows Saltarelli dealt with in "Leonardo The Florentine A Study In Personality", "Leonardo Da Vinci An Account Of His Development", "LENOARDO DA VINCI THE TRAGIC PURSUIT OF PERFECTION" and a number of non-English works.
Sherurcij(
speaker for the dead) 00:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)reply
I would apply another test: how likely is it that someone will want to find out more information about this man. Considering his pivotal role in the early life of Da Vinci (it landed him in jail) I would imagine there would be quite a few curious. Is there a way to see how many people have accessed an article?
Haiduc (
talk)
02:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)reply
The complaint says he lives with his brother goldsmith (apprentice). There is said to have compensation. Why then is called a male prostitute?--
Enrique Cordero (
talk)
12:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)reply
The Saltarelli File still existing?
Does the Salterelli File still exist? In which Italian archive can it be found? Was Leonardo da Vinci interrogated by the authorities? Was Saltarelli a "top" or a "bottom"?—
Ana Bruta (
talk)
14:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The question of whether the Saltarelli file still exists is very interesting. I have no idea.
As for your other question, I feel drawn to enquire if you ask the same question of gay men of your acquaintance.