Talk:Furietti Centaurs

Talk merged from Old Centaur and Young Centaur
These are the Furietti Centaurs: dividing them into two articles, under obscure names has no defensible rationale. They were conceived as a pair, perhaps both ridden by cupids and illustrating the pleasures and frustrations of love, in youth and in maturity. How can they be considered separately? --Wetman 16:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the Louvre one is only highly likely to have once had a (now-lost) pair, not certain, but I take your point and will instigate a merger, and then can you add something about Furietti? I hadn't heard of him til now, and whenever they're referred to separately in UK museums (eg the label for the casts of them at the Courtauld) or academe, "Old Centaur" and "Young Centaur" are the commonly accepted titles, nothing obscure about it.  Neddyseagoon - talk 16:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Use Of Euphemisms
In this sentence here it says that Napoleon "acquired" this: "It entered the Borghese collection, but was acquired from Camillo Filippo Ludovico Borghese by Napoleon in 1807 and is now in the Louvre Museum"

Why is this word "acquired" used when it has been well established that the French simply stole and plundered Italian art. After all what is the difference between the Nazis plundering gold and the French plundering art? For more info see this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tolentino

With this in mind this sentence would be more accurately written as the following, "It entered the Borghese collection, but was plundered from Camillo Filippo Ludovico Borghese by Napoleon in 1807 and is now in the Louvre Museum" with other plundered Italian art. T.Nuvolari (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2019 (UTC)