Foods to Avoid if You Want To Lose Weight

Moreover, many of these foods are not just bad for your weight, but too much of them will also cause health risks in the long run.
Sugars – Generally, sugars are found in sweet preparations that use table sugar as their sweeteners. Chemically speaking, there are many types of sugars. Table sugar is just one of them. There is also another type of sugar, which is found in honey and fruits. A different type of sugar is found in milk. Each of these types of sugars varies in glucose content.
It is the glucose content of these sugars that determine how much calories you will need to burn. Not burning the calories in the food that you take in will lead to weight gain.
Carbohydrate-rich foods are also sugar-rich. This is because carbohydrates are, chemically, large forms of sugars.
Salt – is needed in the diet in order to add flavor to foods. Its chemical components, sodium and chloride, are also necessary for proper cell functioning. However, too much salt in the diet counters one’s health goals.
Salt causes the body to retain too much water, thus, leading to weight gain. Too much salt is also dangerous for the circulatory system and the kidneys.
Fats – are classified as saturated and unsaturated. Many people who go on a weight loss diet choose to limit both their saturated and unsaturated fat intake.
While this is a good step, there are certain types of fats that are good for one’s body. Mono-unsaturated and polyunsaturated fats help in lowering the levels of bad cholesterol in the body. Good sources of these fats are canola oil, corn oil, olive oil and soybean oil.
Cholesterol – Like fats, there are two types of cholesterol, the good and the bad. Good cholesterol are also known as High Density Lipoproteins. On the other hand, bad cholesterols are known as Low Density Lipoproteins.
Because cholesterol are needed in normal body functioning, it is the bad cholesterols that a person should take out from his or her diet. The causes of increase of LDLs are consumption of saturated fats and trans-fats, and certain meat products.
Although these food contents are not good for the health, consuming small amounts of these will not lead to dramatic changes, especially if the person also consumes healthy foods.
12 reasons you’re not losing weight
Here are the 12 common diet mistakes that can play a role in why the scale isn’t showing lost pounds:
1. Not exercising enough – calories burned equals duration and intensity. Weight-bearing exercises like running, walking and aerobics burns more calories than non-weight bearing exercises like cycling and swimming because the gravitational stress on muscles is less.
2. Not getting enough sleep – lack of sleep can affect the proper sequence of hormone release and staying up late can lead to extra calories in late night snacks.
3. Skipping meals – leads to food cravings and overeating later in the day
4. Eating too many calories – portion intake plays a role in counting calories
5. Stress – a study by Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, and the University of Pittsburgh found stress can lead to weight gain in women, particularly middle age women. Why? Possible altered sleep patterns and fat conservation, both possibly hormonally related, and the fact many women manage their feelings by eating.
6. Drinking too many calories – beverages contribute significant calories to daily caloric intake. Sodas range between 150 to 200 calories, no sugar added fruit juice up to 180 and sweet tea about 150, while sports drinks are 100 calories or more. Switch to water to save calories.
7. Sabotaging choices – healthy salads loaded with high calorie dressings and toppings; burning 300 calories walking and then eating a 300 calorie muffin
8. Slipping on weekends – indulgences on weekends can add up quickly like dessert and alcohol splurges.
9. Impatient – Dieting results take time
10. You’ve reached a plateau – a common occurrence. In time weight loss will resume
11. Medical conditions – conditions that lead to decreased mobility and some medications can affect attempts to loose weight. Talk to your physician about exercise in the form rehab activity, adjusting medications and working with a dietician to adjust meal plans.
12. You don’t need to lose more weight – your body may be telling you your weight is appropriate for you height and size. Further attempts at weight loss might lead to muscle loss and a metabolism slowdown

Try following these seven strategies every day for a few weeks and see if you drop a dress size – or two.
Know your hunger.
Your best friend and magic pill to weight loss isn’t a protein shake or even a dumbbell – it’s the ability to distinguish genuine hunger pangs from cravings. If you’re after something sweet or fatty, the chances are it’s a craving, especially if you’ve recently eaten. Still in doubt? Give it time. Cravings will pass without being fed; hunger will get worse.
Don’t give up chocolate.
If you have a food weakness, probably best to accept that your long term diet plan needs to include it. Whether your food fix is a chocolate biscuit (or two), a bit of Easter egg, salty chips, or a supersized curry, chances are you need to factor-in the occasional splurge.
Know your limitations.
If the biscuit tin, box of wine or another food or drink fix talks to you after a hard day, don’t keep it in the house. You’re only human and a Ben & Jerry’s/Rioja bender will always seem more appealing than a bubble bath or glossy mag. But if you remove temptation, you’ll survive… thrive, even. And be slimmer.
Don’t kid yourself it’s comfort eating.
Comfort eating is the biggest weight loss saboteur going. The comfort is short lived and usually comes from planning and buying high cal stodge; everything after that is anti-comfort: guilt, shame and remorse. These sounds like big emotions to attach to something as benign as a bit of cake eating but after a decade of working with people with a variety of food issues, I’ve come to believe one thing: comfort eating soothes very little.
Beware the office feeder.
Don’t succumb to peer pressure to eat and don’t snack mindlessly – two things that go on a lot in the workplace nowadays. It seems every birthday, pregnancy, resignation and redundancy is an excuse to dash to M&S and splash out on ‘tubs to share’. Don’t do it – even if you stop at just a couple of those mini flapjacks, that’s still 15 minutes on the treadmill, while a slice of your colleague’s homemade cake would take an hour on the cross trainer to burn off.
Lose the liquid cals.
Don’t think drink calories count? Let me give you some numbers: if it’s not factored into your daily calorie intake, a venti latte a day could mean a pound of weight gain in just 12 days. Yes, those liquid calories soon add up. Giving up just one glass of wine a day could mean weight loss of a pound in just over a month. Don’t be clueless, don’t be naive: know the connection between your belt notch and the glass in your hand.
Never eat your workout.
I’m nearly out of space so I’ll be blunt here: you’re probably not burning half as much as you think during your workout. If you think you’ve earned that ‘little muffin break’ after a good workout, be aware that you’ve probably just consumed every last sweat calorie. Eat to appetite only and then eat well: if you’re looking to lose weight, that means unrefined carbs like pulses, brown rice and potatoes with their skins, lean protein and lots of high fibre veg and salad. And not too much of anything either.

For more information on Diet Plan, Lose Weight Naturally, Lose Weight, Healthy Diet, Weight Loss, Healthy Lifestyle, Please visit :

By Tumisu from PixabayIMG_9737R Paolo Veronese. 1528-1588. Venise. L’Adoration des Mages. The Adoration of the Kings. 1573. Londres. National Gallery.
Paolo Veronese. 1528-1588. Venise. L’Adoration des Mages. The Adoration of the Kings. 1573. Londres. National Gallery.


La Renaissance est une époque historique majeure de l’histoire de l’Art, et de l’Histoire générale de l’ Europe. Des affirmations qui font l’unanimité dans tous les manuels scolaires, universitaires et dans toutes les encyclopédies. Et dans toutes les langues.
L’historiographie à usage du grand public a fait de la Renaissance un événement majeur de l’histoire européenne. En réalité c’ est un événement en grande partie factice, inexistant, une reconstruction de l’histoire pour des motifs idéologiques. Le but de cette interprétation de l’histoire européenne est de faire croire que les siècles précédents ont été une période sombre de l’histoire de l’Europe. Ces siècles que la même historiographie orientée a appelé "le Moyen Age".
Malgré les efforts, discrets, de nombreux historiens occidentaux, écrivant dans des ouvrages destinés à un public plus averti, l’histoire racontée par les manuels et les encyclopédies, l’histoire destinée à un grand public, maintient la version officielle.

"L’histoire à l’endroit" c’est:

1° La Renaissance ne concerne absolument pas les populations européennes. Elle n’a pas d’ existence notable en politique, en économie, en science ou dans les techniques. Elle n’est pas un fait social majeur concernant les peuples.
2° La Renaissance est un fait essentiellement, et même uniquement, culturel. Elle n’intéresse qu’une toute petite élite. Son importance est philosophique et littéraire. La "Renaissance" n’a pas d’incidence sérieuse immédiate en matière scientifique ou technique. C’est seulement au 17è siècle, que la pensée scientifique européenne fait un réel progrès, dans certains domaines. Des progrès qui ont encore peu de prolongements techniques et qui sont toujours sans aucune incidence sur la vie des populations. pour les peuples rien ne changera fondamentalement avant le 19è siècle.
3° Dans le domaine de l’Art, La Renaissance a une importance, certes. Ce terme a dans l’histoire de l’art une signification réelle. A condition de bien en préciser les limites.
La Renaissance n’est aucunement une renaissance au sens d’un Progrès esthétique, ou même technique, par rapport à des temps antérieurs, gothiques, qui seraient moins développés artistiquement, et dont l’art serait plus primitif. Contrairement aux propos de Jean Jacques Rousseau selon lequel "Les portails des cathédrales françaises ne subsistent que pour la honte de ceux qui les ont fait."
En Art la Renaissance correspond :
a/ à un changement dans les normes qui commandent la conception du Beau. L’esthétique de la Renaissance est différente de celle du Gothique. Il est exact que Léonard de Vinci propose un idéal du Beau qui diffère de celui de Jan Van Eyck.
b/ à un élargissement dans les sujets abordés par la peinture et la sculpture : la religion n’est plus l’unique inspiratrice de l’art au 16è siècle.
Pour nommer cette évolution il existe un concept bien plus exact : L’Humanisme.

1° "La Renaissance" n’est pas un fait historique global, majeur.

De nombreux événements ont eu une importance beaucoup plus grande pour l’histoire globale de l’Europe. Toute la société européenne, de bas en haut de l’échelle sociale, a été directement concernée, sur une durée plus ou moins longue, par :
a) la diffusion du Christianisme et la fin des religions païennes.
b) les Grandes Invasions Germaniques et l’effondrement de l’Empire romain.
c) les Grandes Invasions du 9è siècle (musulmans, normands, hongrois)
d) La Renaissance de l’Europe à partir de 950-1000.
C’est en effet aux 11è,12è et 13è siècles que se situe la vraie Renaissance de l’Europe. La Renaissance globale, politique, économique, sociale, culturelle, technique : Les villes, l’agriculture, le commerce terrestre et maritime, les techniques, reprennent vie à cette époque. L’art de l’architecture en est la preuve avec les constructions romanes puis gothiques.
La renaissance vraie, réelle, c’est quand les européens recommencent à construire de grands bâtiments en pierre de taille, et abandonnent la petite pierre noyée dans un mortier (le petit appareil).
La renaissance ce n’est pas quand les européens recommencent à construire dans un style inspiré par les grecs et les romains.
Le Moyen Age, en tout cas à partir de l’an 1000, n’est pas un âge moyen, inférieur ! De nombreux historiens l’ont écrit. En vain. Cette permanence d’un message erroné est une preuve du poids énorme des idéologies imposées par de petits cercles d’Influents.
e) "La Réforme" concernera profondément les peuples, infiniment plus que la "Renaissance".
La raison en est simple : Les enjeux politique et économiques étaient tellement importants que les élites y ont veillé : elles ont contraint les peuples hésitants à se convertir, et les guerres se sont succédées dans toute l’Europe du centre et du nord. Guerres dont les populations ont énormément souffert : l’Allemagne et l’Europe centrale y perdent plus de la moitié de leur population.

Dans le domaine politique, les formes d’organisation de l’Europe se continuent au 16è siècle. Les types d’organisation politique sont hérités des 11è- 12 et 13è siècles, qui ont vu apparaître dans les cités les "républiques". Les royaumes, les empires, les comtés ou duchés: rien de nouveau à "La Renaissance".
Si l’Etat progresse, notamment en France, c’est selon une tendance longue, et ininterrompue, qui n’a rien de particulier au 16è siècle.
Economiquement l’Europe ne renait aucunement au 16è siècle. La période d’expansion économique a commencé vers l’an 1000 et a pris fin vers les années 1300. Socialement on aperçoit aucun changement majeur.
Techniquement la progression suit son cours, très lent, dans tous les domaines. L’invention de l’imprimerie par Gutemberg, évènement majeur de la Renaissance selon les encyclopédies, se produit à Strasbourg et à Mayence, dans les années 1440-1450, dans une société totalement germanique, "gothique", absolument héritière des siècles précédents. Le premier livre imprimé en latin est évidemment la Bible. Non, l’imprimerie n’est pas une invention de la Renaissance, mais une invention de la société gothique, du "Moyen Age tardif" pour reprendre les termes consacrés par l’histoire idéologiquement correcte.
On aperçoit à la "Renaissance" aucun progrès décisif en médecine, en urbanisme, en hygiène publique, dans les transports terrestres ou maritimes. La caravelle est une belle invention, mais elle dérive absolument des techniques antérieures.
Rien de notablement nouveau dans les techniques agricoles. Sauf quelques récupérations après la chute de population.
Rien de notablement nouveau dans les techniques artisanales.
L’Europe entreprend les "Grandes Découvertes", mais à l’Est, face aux Turcs, elle régresse presque jusqu’aux portes de Vienne. Et la Méditerranée recommence à lui échapper. Il n’y a jamais eu autant d’européens esclaves des musulmans qu’aux 16è et 17è siècles.
Avant et après la Renaissance les populations européennes vivent exactement de la même manière.
Elles sont toujours aussi dépendantes des aléas climatiques, des épidémies, et bien sûr des aléas de la politique.
Sur le plan idéologique la Réforme est bien plus importante et concerne infiniment plus les peuples.
Sur le plan des sciences et des techniques, de l’urbanisme, des transports, de l’agriculture, de l’industrie une nouvelle grande période de développement n’apparaîtra pas avant le 18è siècle pour l’Angleterre, et la seconde moitié du 19è pour le reste de l’Europe dont le développement a été retardé par la révolution française et le premier empire.
En terme de progrès techniques, matériels, il existe deux grandes "Renaissances" en Europe: aux 11è-12è et 13è siècles (au "Moyen Age") et au 19è siècle.

2° La Renaissance est un fait culturel qui concerne les seules élites.

Sur le plan culturel la Renaissance est un évènement important.
A la Renaissance les hommes cultivés renouvellent leur connaissance de l’Antiquité gréco-romaine. L’Antiquité est mieux connue, et mieux comprise, au travers des ouvrages en langue grecque, et de nouveaux ouvrages latins. L’élite européenne a traduit en latin et assimilé les textes obtenus grâce à la conquête des bibliothèques arabes en Espagne, au 12è siècle.
Les exilés de Byzance apportent des éléments nouveaux de connaissance, notamment en langue grecque.
La censure doctrinale de l’Eglise catholique sur les textes anciens se fait moins sévère, et l’entourage de la Papauté est très actif dans cette évolution vers plus d’ouverture.
Une connaissance plus complète de la philosophie et des "sciences" grecques ouvre à quelques intelligences des horizons nouveaux. La raison humaine, chez une minuscule élite, et dans des domaines très restreints de la pensée et du comportement humain, est plus indépendante de la pensée religieuse et de la doctrine catholique. Sans les renier cependant.
Cette évolution culturelle s’amorce principalement en Italie, où les souvenirs de Rome sont plus présents et les exilés de Byzance plus nombreux.
En Art, la Renaissance est un événement historique important, qui se traduit dans l’architecture par l’adoption de décors gréco-romains. La conception que l’élite de la fin du 15è siècle du 16è siècle se fait du Beau est inspirée par l’art Grec et Romain. C’est un changement d’Esthétique indéniable.
Dans la sculpture et la peinture cette renaissance se traduit par
1° une imitation des modèles romains demeurés sur place en Italie,
2° l’apparition de nouveaux thèmes tirés de l’histoire et de la mythologie gréco-romaine.
Mais ni en architecture ni en sculpture ni en peinture il n’existe de "Renaissance" au sens de Progrès.
Il n’existe pas de progression manifeste des techniques par rapport à une situation antérieure qui serait inférieure ou primitive.
L’Architecture romane ou gothique n’est évidemment pas en retard techniquement sur celle gréco-romaine.
Une église romane ou gothique est, techniquement, bien plus complexe qu’un temple grec avec son architecture de type plate-bande. Non, l’architecture romane et gothique n’est pas obscurantiste, et celle de la Renaissance plus élaborée.
L’Europe des 11è, 12 et 13è siècle a perdu le secret des très grandes coupoles, mais les voûtes et coupoles romanes et gothiques ne sont pas techniquement inférieures aux réalisations romaines. En fait tout est dans la différence de matériau: la pierre ne permet pas ce qu’autorisent la brique ou "le béton" romain. Ce sont les techniques gothiques qui vont permettre à Brunelleschi de construire la coupole du Duomo de Florence (1420-1436), sur le modèle du Panthéon de Rome.
La sculpture, romane et gothique, des chapitaux et des portails des églises est la démonstration évidente que l’Europe a découvert à nouveau les techniques du bas-relief et du haut-relief, au "Moyen Age". C’est encore au "Moyen Age" que la sculpture a redécouvert les techniques, connues dans l’Antiquité, de la ronde bosse: la sculpture totalement détachée de son support.
C’est seulement au 15è siècle, effectivement, que Donatello et Verrochio retrouveront les secrets du cheval et du cavalier de bronze. "Le Gattamelata" de Donatello (1447-1450) "Le Colléone" de Verrochio(1483-1488) . Mais, comme pour l’imprimerie, c’est l’aboutissement d’ une évolution tout à fait progressive des techniques qui ne justifie pas de parler de Renaissance de la société Européenne.
La peinture gothique tardive, et la peinture gothique dite internationale, ne sont pas inférieures, techniquement à l’art de Masaccio ou de Vinci, dit renaissante. L’esthétique est autre, plus linéaire, plus acérée, et plus symbolique, sans doute moins réaliste.
Il est totalement faux de parler des "Primitifs Flamands" à propos des peintres gothiques de l’école de Bruges (de Van Eyck à David) exactement contemporains des peintres italiens dits de la première Renaissance. La peinture de Léonard de Vinci n’est pas supérieure techniquement à celle de Van Eyck.
Toutefois la peinture est sans doute un des rares domaines où il est possible d’ accepter l’idée d’une Renaissance assimilée à une évolution technique : C’est en effet vers 1500 que les peintres européens arrivent au bout du long chemin qui leur a permis de retrouver, totalement, la capacité de peindre le réel de manière naturelle et réaliste. Comme l’a constaté Giorgio Vasari en 1550: Les peintres européens ont réussi à imiter parfaitement la nature. Le tableau a perdu ses deux dimensions, les peintres sont parvenus, à nouveau depuis l’Antiquité, à représenter, sur une surface plane, le monde en trois dimensions qui les entoure. Et de même à restituer fidèlement les physionomies individuelles et les expressions psychologiques. Mais ce chemin a été parcouru, pas à pas, tout à long de l’époque gothique, et la renaissance est seulement un aboutissement.

C’est l’idéologie contemporaine des "Lumières" qui a fait de l’Humanisme, qui fut un événement important, mais strictement culturel et élitiste, un événement global de l’histoire de l’Europe, un Progrès, et qui a imposé l’appellation de "Renaissance" pour toute cette période.


The Renaissance is a major historical epoch in the history of art, and of the general history of Europe. Assertions that are unanimous in all textbooks, academics, and in all encyclopedias. And in all languages.
The historiography for the general public has made the Renaissance a major event in European history. In reality it is a largely artificial, non-existent event, a reconstruction of history for ideological reasons. The purpose of this interpretation of European history is to suggest that the preceding centuries have been a dark period in the history of Europe. These centuries that the same oriented historiography has called "the Middle Ages".

"The story to the place" is:

1) The Renaissance does not concern the European populations at all. It has no notable existence in politics, economics, science or technology. It is not a major social fact concerning peoples.
2) The Renaissance is essentially, and even solely, a cultural fact. It interests only a very small elite. Its importance is philosophical and literary. The "Renaissance" has no immediate serious scientific or technical impact. It is only in the 17th century that European scientific thought made a real progress in certain fields. Progress which still has few technical extensions, and which still have no impact on people’s lives. For the peoples nothing will change fundamentally before the 19th century.
3) In the field of art, the Renaissance is important, of course. This term has a real meaning in the history of art. Provided you clearly specify the limits.
The Renaissance is not a renaissance, in the sense of an aesthetic or even technical progress, compared to earlier Gothic times, which would be less artistically developed, and whose art would be more primitive. Contrary to the words of Jean Jacques Rousseau, according to which "The portals of the French cathedrals remain only for the shame of those who have done them."
In Art, the Renaissance is:
a / to a change in the standards that command the design of the Beautiful. The aesthetics of the Renaissance is different from that of the Gothic. It is true that Leonardo da Vinci offers an ideal of beauty that differs from that of Jan van Eyck.
b / to a widening in the topics covered by the painting and sculpture: religion is no longer the unique inspiration for the art in the 16th century.
To name this evolution there is a much more exact concept: L’Humanisme.

1 ° "The Renaissance" is not a global historical fact, major.

Many events have had a much greater significance for the global history of Europe. The whole of European society, from the bottom at the top of the social ladder, has been directly concerned, over a longer or shorter period, by:
A) the spread of Christianity and the end of pagan religions.
B) the Great Germanic and Slav Invasions and the collapse of the Roman Empire.
C) the Great Invasions of the 9th century (Muslim, Norman, Hungarian)
D) The Renaissance of Europe from 950-1000.
It is indeed in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries that is the real Renaissance of Europe. The global, political, economic, social, cultural, technical Renaissance: Cities, agriculture, land and sea trade, and techniques, come back to life at this time. The art of architecture is the proof with the Romanesque and Gothic constructions.
The real renaissance it is when the Europeans begin to build buildings in large stone, and abandon the small stone drowned in a mortar.
The renaissance is not when the Europeans begin to build in a style inspired by the Greeks and the Romans.
The Middle Ages, at least from the year 1000, is not an average age, lower! Many historians have written it. In vain.This permanence of an erroneous message is a proof of the enormous weight of ideologies imposed by small circles of Influence.
E) "The Reformation" will deeply concern peoples, infinitely more than the "Renaissance".
The reason for this is simple: The political and economic stakes were so great that the elites imposed their choices: they forced the hesitant peoples to convert, and the wars followed one another throughout central and northern Europe. Wars whose populations have suffered enormously: Germany and Central Europe lose more than half of their population.
In the political sphere, the forms of organization of Europe continued in the 16th century. The types of political organization are inherited from the 11th-12th centuries, the "republics", which have emerged in the cities . Kingdoms, empires, counties or duchies: nothing new to "The Renaissance".
If the state progresses, especially in France, it is according to a long, uninterrupted trend that has nothing special in the 16th century.
Economically, Europe does not revive in the 16th century. The period of economic expansion began around the year 1000 and ended around 1300. Socially no major changes can be seen.
Technically the progress is ongoing, very slowly, in all areas. The invention of the printing by Gutemberg, a major event of the Renaissance according to encyclopedias, took place in Strasbourg and Mayence in the years 1440-1450, in a totally Germanic, "Gothic" society, absolutely inherited from the previous centuries. The first book printed in Latin is obviously the Bible. No, printing is not an invention of the Renaissance, but an invention of Gothic society, of the late Middle Ages, to use the terms consecrated by the ideologically correct history.
At the "Renaissance" we can see no decisive progress in medicine, town planning, public hygiene, land or sea transport. The caravel is a beautiful invention, but it derives absolutely from the previous techniques.
Nothing remarkably new in agricultural techniques. Except some recoveries after the fall of population.
Nothing remarkably new in artisanal techniques.
Europe undertook the "Great Discoveries", but in the East, facing the Turks, it almost regressed to the gates of Vienna. And the Mediterranean again begins to escape. There have never been as many European slaves of Muslims as in the 16th and 17th centuries.
Before and after the Renaissance, European populations lived in exactly the same way.
They are also still dependent on climatic hazards, epidemics, and of course the vagaries of politics.
On the ideological level the Reformation is much more important and concerns the peoples infinitely more.
In terms of science and technology, urbanism, transport, agriculture and industry, a new period of development will not appear before the 18th century for England, and the second half of the 19th for the rest of Europe whose development was delayed by the French Revolution and the first empire.
In terms of technical and material progress, there are two major "Renaissances" in Europe: in the 11th-12th and 13th centuries (in the "Middle Ages") and in the 19th century.

2. The Renaissance is a cultural fact which concerns only the elites.

On a cultural level, the Renaissance is an important event.
During the Renaissance, educated men renewed their knowledge of Greco-Roman antiquity. Antiquity is better known, and better understood, through the works in the Greek language, and the new works in Latin. The European elite translated into Latin and assimilated the texts obtained thanks to the conquest of the Arab libraries in Spain, in the 12th century.
The exiles of Byzantium bring new elements of knowledge, especially in the Greek language.
The doctrinal censorship of the Catholic Church on the ancient texts is less severe, and the entourage of the Papacy is very active in this evolution towards more openness.
A more complete knowledge of the philosophy and of the Greek "sciences" opens up to a few intelligences of new horizons. Human reason, in a tiny elite, and in very restricted areas of human thought and behavior, is more independent of religious thought and Catholic doctrine. Without denying them, however.
This cultural evolution begins mainly in Italy, where the memories of Rome are more present and the exiles of Byzantium more numerous.
In Art, the Renaissance is an important historical event, which is reflected in the architecture by the adoption of Greco-Roman designs. The conception that the elite of the end of the 15th century of the 16th century has of the Beau is inspired by the Greek and Roman art. It is an undeniable change of aesthetics.
In sculpture and painting this renaissance is reflected in the
(1) an imitation of the Roman models remaining on the spot in Italy,
(2) the emergence of new themes drawn from Greco-Roman mythology and history.
But there is no "Renaissance" in the sense of Progress in architecture, sculpture or painting.
There is no obvious progression of techniques in relation to an earlier situation which would be inferior or more primitive.
The Romanesque or Gothic architecture is obviously not technically lagging behind that of Greco-Roman.
A Romanesque or Gothic church is technically much more complex than a Greek temple with its plate-like architecture. No, the Romanesque and Gothic architecture is not obscurantist, and that of the Renaissance more elaborate.
Europe of the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries has lost the secret of very large cupolas, but the Romanesque and Gothic vaults and domes are not technically inferior to Roman achievements. In fact everything is in the difference of material: the stone does not allow what the brick or "concrete" Roman allow. These are the Gothic techniques that will allow Brunelleschi to build the dome of the Duomo of Florence (1420-1436), modeled on the Pantheon in Rome.
The Romanesque and Gothic sculpture of the chapels and portals of the churches is an evident demonstration that Europe has once again discovered the techniques of the bas-relief and of the high relief in the "Middle Ages". It is still in the "Middle Ages" that the sculpture rediscovered the techniques, known in antiquity, of the round hump: the sculpture totally detached from its support.
It is only in the 15th century, indeed, that Donatello and Verrochio will find the secrets of the horse and the bronze rider. "The Gattamelata" of Donatello (1447-1450) "The Colleone" of Verrochio (1483-1488). But, as with printing, it is the culmination of a very gradual evolution of techniques which does not justify speaking of the Renaissance of the European society.
Late Gothic painting, and the painting called international Gothic, are not inferior, technically, to the art of Masaccio or Vinci, said as Renaissance. The aesthetic is different, more linear, more sharp, and more symbolic, probably less realistic.
It is totally false to speak of the "Flemish Primitives" about the Gothic painters of the school of Bruges (from Van Eyck to David) exactly contemporaries of the Italian painters of the "first Renaissance". The painting of Leonardo da Vinci is not technically superior to that of Van Eyck.
However, the painting is probably one of the rare domains where it is possible to accept the idea of a Renaissance assimilated to a technical evolution: It is indeed around 1500 that the European painters arrive at the end of the long way which has Allowed to recover, totally, the ability to paint the world in a natural and realistic way.
As Giorgio Vasari observed in 1550: European painters succeeded in imitating nature perfectly. The painting has lost its two dimensions, the painters have succeeded, again since antiquity, to represent, on a flat surface, the world in three dimensions that surrounds them. And similarly to restore faithfully the individual physiognomies and the psychological expressions. But this path has been traveled, step by step, throughout the Gothic period, and the renaissance is only a culmination.

It was the contemporary ideology of the "Enlightenment" that made of the Humanism, which was an important but strictly cultural and elitist event, a global event in the history of Europe, a Progress, and which imposed The appellation of "Renaissance" for the entire period.

By jean louis mazieres on 2016-03-23 12:37:51

You might also like More from author

Comments are closed.

All for Joomla All for Webmasters