I did NOT get a colour picture from Hartung, but we first worked with the publisher's graphic designer to colourise the black and white pictures using the "Colorize picture" application, as you can see on page 253 of my edition." Mark's miniature from the German dealer Hartung and not from Kidd’s blog. He says you originally published this image in its coloured version (fol. Peter Kidd states on his blog that he was the only one to include a colour scan and publication permission for a section of the manuscript ("miniature depicting St Mark"). Questions 4 and 5 do not concern "accusations" of mine, except insofar as I have already addressed the issue of Swiss funding. Please note: I am Professor Rossi's secretary, who is not aware of our correspondence. Since I have not been able to contact you directly, I wanted to make sure that you are aware of the correspondence being conducted by Ms De Santis on behalf of Receptio, since she makes a number of legal threats and tells a number of untruths.Įven using this email address I got a response from "Noemi":
Famous medieval manuscripts series#
I was previously unable to find your email address, so I have sent a series of messages to who contacted me in August, and to the general address at to which Noemi De Santis responded. Someone claiming to be "Noemi De Santis" responded, and I exchanged a few messages with her. Rossi using the general RECEPTIO email pointing out some apparent examples of text and images being re-used from my blog in her book. To provide some context, I will explain that in the days before Christmas, I tried to contact Prof. The whole thing happened while I was travelling for the Christmas holidays and she had permission to answer my mail." Let's look at the second part of that statement: "I regret that my secretary succumbed to Kidd's insistent and unpleasant e-mails, which left no room for dialogue, and responded rudely without questioning me. I leave readers to make up their own minds about whether they find this credible. We never imagined that such squalor could happen." The whole thing happened while I was travelling for the Christmas holidays and she had permission to answer my mail. I regret that my secretary succumbed to Kidd's insistent and unpleasant e-mails, which left no room for dialogue, and responded rudely without questioning me. However, I must honestly say that as the blog did not add anything new or original to what was already being gleaned from the auction catalogues, I did not feel, in the Journal, to quote it on a particular issue. " Simply because the blog was brought to my attention when the drafts of the book were closed, but I mentioned it in the Journal. Why is the reference to the blog missing in the book?" 25), you mention the blogger and his work in relation to the Roucy manuscript.
In a journal article on the same manuscript (TCLA 6/1, Aug.
This question does not get its own answer, but is covered by the answer to the next question: Did you consult Mr Kidd's blog during your research?" I thought it would be immodest to implicitly praise my own work by explicitly citing myself as its author. Third, one reason that I am not named in the Sotheby's description, is because I wrote it. So although the Sotheby's description does not name me, it does allow "credit where credit is due". Second, the Sotheby's description ends: "More than 20 of the miniatures are reproduced online as 'The Courtanvaux-Elmhirst Hours'": this refers to my page here, titled "The Courtanvaux-Elmhirst Hours", as would be immediately obvious to anyone who attempted to Google it. And yet she does not cite it as a source. First, it is notable that Rossi admits that in her book she is "quoting" the Sotheby's catalogue.
0 kommentar(er)
