File talk:Alexander and Aristotle.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Nomination of this image for deletion

[edit]

After some researches, I have found the original publication of this engraving. The original engraving was by Charles Laplante, a french engraver and illustrator.

But the present reproduction is a partial reproduction and not a faithful one. It has been cropt, and in the bottom right corner, particularly, the signature of the engraver has been removed. Many partial reproductions are present on the net. It come from some books where the original engraving was crops, legaly or not, I don't know, but it is frequent in some American books of the XXth century.

A short history of this engraving :

This engraving was first inserted as illustration in the book of en:Louis Figuier, Vie des savants illustres - Savants de l'antiquité (tome 1), Paris, 1866. The subtitle of the illustration is "Education d'Alexandre par Aristote", and is inserted between the pages 134-135 (Chap. Aristote). The signature "C. LAPLANTE" is at the bottom-right. Charles Laplante is dead in 1903 and Louis Figuier in 1894. The book is actually digitalized by Google.

The image was also used more recently in XXth century by some American authors, and is published on the net by the New York Public Library with the English subtitle "Aristotle and his pupil, Alexander".

It seems that in France the image is now in the public domain (70 years after the dead of his author), so since 1974. I think this is important to progress about the situation of this publication of Charles Laplante, who is a member of an important group of French engravers/illustrators of the XIXth century, like Paul Gustave Doré, in relation with many major authors, like Victor Hugo and Jules Verne.

Signification of the two initials F.V. :

I have search in some indexes of signatures, but have not fount the author. Perhaps the original artist who paint the model for the engraver ? Somebody an idea ?

Sorry for this long claim... but I think this is very important to clarify all these multiple nominations for violation of the public domain. I think in the present case that it is necessary to replace the document (to be faithful), not to delete it.

and sorry for my English... I'm not very fluent.

--Michel Hevia (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC) ==[reply]