Talk:The Death of Procris

A card and a sealing on the back of the panel have the stemma of the Guicciardini, Geronimus notes (p. 83). Shouldn't the attribution be noted as "securely attributed"? There's no doubt, no alternatrive attribution. It just lacks a signature. How many cassone panels are signed? --Wetman (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Piero never signed anything it seems. From Gould the Guicciardini marks seem very late - they had it in the 19th century. Johnbod (talk) 08:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Name of the work
This article is called "The Death of Procris". But the first sentence of the intro calls it "A Mythological Subject" as if this was the name of the painting. It is not the name of the painting. It is simply a gallery or catalogue description of a work the true title of which and true subject matter of which is either unknown or open to speculation. Treating this descriptive term as if it was a real name is a mistake. The same description could be applied to numerous Renaissance works, as well as the decoration of many Greek pots, Roman friezes, Indian Temple sculpture and Australian Aboriginal dot paintings. It isn't a name, so defining it in the intro is pointless. I''ll have a go at fixing it.

Amandajm (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Pitilessly cropped
When Commons eventually gets an image of this painting that doesn't crop the main subject, it should be substituted for the current ruthlessly cropped image.--Wetman (talk) 08:32, 7 March 2011 (UTC)