In selecting sources for his invenzione, Equicola’s choice to include Alberti as the primary inspiration is especially appropriate, given that Alberti was not only a frequent guest of the Estense court, but also a major humanist influence on Equicola. Alberti, who was a writer, architect, poet, and philosopher, among other things, wrote a series of dialogues known as the Intercenales. These dialogues consisted of short narratives based around the theme of virtue, and were meant to be read aloud during dinners to spark conversation and lively debate. In 1900, Austrian art historian Julius von Schlosser connected one such dialogue with Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue due to its portrayal of the personification of virtue seeking an audience with Jupiter, only to have her path blocked by Mercury.[83] Virtue, upon her obstruction, is described by Alberti as such: “‘Naked and dirty’, she complained that for a month the Olympic gods did not want to listen to her, with always some excuse ready to avoid her: ‘They say in fact that the gods must make the pumpkins bloom in time or make sure that the wings of the butterflies are beautifully painted’. And even when the pumpkins bloomed and the butterflies flew, the gods did not return to their duties.”[84] This description of the gods painting the wings of the butterflies directly evokes the scene from Dossi’s painting, right down to the presence of Mercury, Jupiter and the painted butterflies.
Some scholars, such as Luisa Ciammitti, have been so utterly taken by this association that they have declared Alberti’s dialogue as the sole inspiration for the imagery of Dossi’s Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue.[85] Marcin Fabianski, however, points out that Alberti’s narrative does not reference Jupiter himself in the act of painting, nor does it contain a character that resembles the gold-clad figure wreathed in flowers. Fabianski’s analysis of the painting is accurate, as the scene, though clearly inspired by Alberti’s dialogue, is not an exact illustration of the story. Besides the ones that Fabianski mentioned, there are other elements of the painting, such as the curious arc of light on the left-hand side of the painting, and the fact that Mercury appears to be silencing the approaching figure by putting a figure to his lips, that are not present in Alberti’s text. All of this suggests one of two things; either Equicola only loosely based his painting on Alberti’s work and added in his own ideas, or there is more than one source that he used as inspiration for his painting.
Along with Fabianski, there are several other scholars who believe that Alberti’s dialogue is but one of several inspirations for Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue. Giancarlo Fiorenza argues that the traditional Alberti-centric theory used to explain the iconography of the painting is deeply flawed in its simplicity.[86] Using formal analysis, as well as a number of Renaissance and classical sources, Fiorenza explores the numerous theories regarding the painting. Based on his analysis, Fiorenza ultimately concludes that it was the artist’s intention to create a work so complex and multifaceted that no single interpretation could possibly explain the work as a whole.[87] This line of reasoning is quite persuasive, especially when one considers the humanist principle of selection, as well as the purpose of Alberti’s Intercenales. Duke Alfonso d’Este was a lover of humanist and classical art and literature, whose court was a center of Renaissance culture, learning, and consumption. Just as Alberti’s Intercenales were meant to act as a catalyst for discussion and conversation, Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue was likely painted for Duke Alfonso to have a similar effect.
Fiorenza’s argument, though helpful in establishing a possible explanation behind the commission of the painting in question, does not effectively answer the most pressing question that surrounds the work: what specific sources did Equicola use as reference when creating the schema for Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue? There must be a source that accounts for the aspects of the painting that do not match up with Alberti’s dialogue, such as the beam of light and Mercury’s hand gesture. Felton Gibbons argues that although much of the painting’s iconography can be attributed to Alberti, the original inspiration for the work came from a dialogue by Lucian.[88]
Lucian, was a second century Assyrian writer, rhetorician and satirist, whose celebrated dialogues were rediscovered during the Renaissance. In one of his dialogues, he described Jupiter ordering Mercury to halt the course of the sun (Helios) for three days so that he may visit one of his loves, Alcmene, in his dreams.[89] Lucian writes from the perspective of Mercury, “Zeus says you’re not to go out driving today, Mr. Sun-god, or tomorrow or the next day. You’ve to stay at home and all that time’s to be one long night; so the Hours can unyoke your horses and you can put out your fire and have a nice long rest.”[90] Gibbons theorized that the scene depicted in this dialogue inspired Dossi’s design of Jupiter, Mercury, and Virtue, which clarifies several aspects of the painting that were left unexplained by Alberti’s text. In Alberti’s dialogue, Virtue is described as “Naked and dirty,” yet in the painting, the third figure is dressed in beautiful and sumptuous gold fabric, and is adorned intricate flower garlands, a far cry from the sordid state described by Alberti. This figure, with her shining robes and elegant appearance, though not reminiscent of Virtue, would make a convincing Helios, the personification of the sun.
With the gold-clad approaching figure now taking the role of Helios, not Virtue, Mercury’s hand gesture and the light effects in the background can be more readily explained. On the right side of the painting, which is where the Helios figure resides, the sky is bright and blue, indicating day. On the left side of the painting, which is where Jupiter sits painting his butterflies, the sky is dark, indicating night. Separating the day and the night, the golden yellow arc bisects the sky, which represents the sunrise, or dawn, alluded to in Lucian’s dialogue. As Helios approaches, Mercury, who is sitting beside Jupiter, puts his finger to his lips to silence the approaching individual, causing Helios to stop in her tracks. As Helios’ path is blocked by Mercury, so the passage from night to day stops as well, which is represented in the painting by the sunrise that appears to be frozen in time, unable to reach Jupiter.
The one aspect of the painting that cannot be explained by Lucian’s dialogue is Jupiter. While in the dialogue Mercury stops Helios so that Jupiter may remain asleep in order to visit his love, the Jupiter in the painting is not asleep, but is actively painting butterflies. While Fabianski argues that Jupiter “Rather than painting, the god with closed eyes is actually dreaming,” this interpretation fails to address that Jupiter is clearly focused on painting butterflies, hence why his eyes appear to be narrowed.[91] The best way to explain this inconsistency is to view the painting as Fiorenza did, not as a reflection of a single work, but an amalgamation of several texts. By synthesizing the dialogues of both Lucian and Alberti, the end result is a story about Mercury halting the path of Helios so that Jupiter may continue painting the wings of butterflies without interruption. Not only does this amalgamated narrative successfully cover nearly all iconographic aspects of Dossi’s painting, from the figures in the foreground to the light effects in the background, but it also reflects the Zeuxian model of selection to which Equicola and Alberti were so committed.