as the Coronation of the Virgin in Washington, show
the intrusion of Gothic style and iconography into the
local Byzantine tradition. These same ingredients—the
Byzantine, the Gothic, and the Giottesque—are the fun-
damental elements in Paolo’s later works, in which the
Gothic becomes more pronounced. The Byzantine and
Gothic are so harmoniously blended as to suggest their
ultimate common source in the distant classical past;
the same might be said of the Giottesque. The infl uence
of the Saint Cecilia Master and the school of Rimini
may also be detected. The published literature assumes
that, despite the obvious similarities, Paolo attained his
style independendy of direct Sienese infl uence. Such
examples as his Accademia Madonna, which is close
to Duccio’s in the Pinacoteca at Siena; and his fi gures
of Saint Catherine in the Sanseverino polyptych and in
a panel at Chicago, which resemble Simone Martini’s
fresco of that saint at Assisi, suggest otherwise. The bold
patterns and glowing colors give Paolo’s paintings an
opulence unequaled even by the Sienese.
Paolo Veneziano had a profound infl uence on Vene-
tian pictorial art, particularly panel painting, until the
end of the fourteenth century. The style that he instituted
was continued by Lorenzo Veneziano (whose dated
works range from 1357 to 1372) and others into the fi f-
teenth century and the international Gothic style. Paolo
had relatively little infl uence on the mainland, which,
with the exception of Istria and Dalmatia, responded to
more progressive artistic stimuli.
Further Reading
Lucco, Mauro, ed. La pittura nel Veneto: II Trecento. Milan:
Electa, 1992.
Muraro, Michelangelo. Paolo da Venezia. University Park and
London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1970.
Pallucchini, Rodolfo. La pittura veneziana del Trecento. Venice
and Rome: Istituto per la Collaborazione Culturale, 1964.
Il Trecento adriatico: Paolo Veneziano e la pittura tra oriente e
occidente, ed. Francesca Flores d’Arcais and Giovanni Gentili.
Milan: Silvana, 2002.
Bradley J. Delaney
VILANOVA, ARNAU DE
Arnau de Vilanova is a fi gure of unusual interest for his
role in medieval intellectual history. Though he called
himself “Catalanus” and grew up in Valencia, it seems
likely that he came there with his parents from a village
outside Daroca (in Aragón) during the Christian resettle-
ment of the city after its reconquest in 1237/8. We can
infer his medical training at the studium of Montpellier
in the 1260s, but it is only with the 1280s that we can
begin to reconstruct his biography in detail. During that
decade he was in Barcelona in medical attendance on
the kings of Aragón-Catalonia, fi rst Pedro III el Gran
and then Alfonso III. It was in this same period that his
translation of Galen’s De rigore from Arabic into Latin
was fi nished (Barcelona, 1282); Arnau had presumably
learned Arabic growing up in Aragón or Valencia. His
other medical translations—of Avicenna’s De viribus
cordis and of Abulcasis’s De medicinis simplici-
bus—though undated, may also have been completed
in these years.
During the 1290s Arnau was apparently back at
Montpellier, this time as a regent master, though oc-
casionally he can also be found advising the new king,
Jaime II, on his family’s health. This was a period of
great intellectual fruitfulness. Arnau composed a number
of scientifi c works in these years, in which he developed
aspects of medical theory. Simultaneously, his personal
theological views were maturing along Joachimite lines;
like the spiritual Franciscans with whom he was also
beginning to establish close ties, he viewed the contem-
porary church, its institutions and orders, as corrupt, and
he took that corruption to manifest the coming end of a
historical age. When Jaime II sent him to Paris and to
King Philip le Bel in 1300 to negotiate the status of the
disputed Vail d’Aran, Arnau took the opportunity to de-
fend these views as set out in his De adventu antichristi
before the theologians of the Sorbonne: as a result, he
was imprisoned as a heretic and released only at the
intervention of the French monarch.
Seeking vindication, Arnau went now to Pope Boni-
face VIII, treating the pope successfully for the ailment
of a stone and winning his agreement that Arnau’s views,
while rash, were not heterodox. With this assurance,
Arnau renewed his attack on his adversaries, the scho-
lastic theologians—Dominicans, in particular—whom
he accused more harshly than ever of faithlessness, of
having abandoned the study of the Bible for secular sci-
ences. The installation of a friend as Pope Clement V in
1305 gave Arnau still more support and allowed him the
calm to return to intellectual refl ection and composition,
in both his fi elds of activity. His most careful work on
clinical medicinae, the Regimen sanitatis prepared for
Jaime II, was written at this time, as was his Speculum
medicinae, an ambitious attempt to draw current medical
theory together synthetically. Yet simultaneously (1306)
he was composing his Expositio super antichristi, doc-
trinally the most complex of his theological writings. He
looked now to Clement as the authority destined to lead
the reform of the church and society that would enable
them to confront the Antichrist, and he believed that he
had won over Jaime II and his brother Frederigo III of
Sicily (Trinacria) to his program. But in 1309 Arnau
went too far in his claims about Jaime, who thereupon
broke completely with his former advisor and friend.
Frederic, however, continued faithful, implementing
Arnauldian spiritual principles in his kingdom even
after Arnau’s death in 1311.VENEZIANO, PAOLO