Tucker J Allan, DeGroft Aaron H
Department of Pathology, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama 36617, USA.
Ultrastruct Pathol. 2002 Jul-Aug;26(4):195-201. doi: 10.1080/01913120290076874.
At the Ultrapath X meeting in Florence, the regular session opened with a presentation of Aaron DeGroft's engrossing story of investigating the authenticity of a portrait of Federico II Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua. In the early 1900s, this work had been deemed to be an authentic production by Titian, a great artist of the Italian Renaissance. A respected art historian, however, discovered a conflict of dates that led to the conclusion that this work was not authentic. In a process sometimes analogous to the practice of surgical pathology, Dr. DeGroft pursued a review of the original materials that refutes this seeming contradiction of dates. Dr. DeGroft also undertook an extensive art historical examination and scientific analysis, including the use of electron microscopy, to persuasively conclude that this portrait is authentic. Further, his work provided a bridge from the conference setting in Florence, rich in Renaissance art, to the contemporary update on ultrastructural pathology provided by the conference.
在佛罗伦萨举行的“超微病理X会议”上，常规会议开场是亚伦·德格罗夫讲述的引人入胜的故事，内容是他对曼图亚公爵费德里科二世·贡扎加一幅肖像画真伪的调查。在20世纪初，这幅作品曾被认为是意大利文艺复兴时期伟大艺术家提香的真迹。然而，一位受人尊敬的艺术史学家发现了日期冲突，从而得出这幅作品并非真迹的结论。在一个有时类似于外科病理学实践的过程中，德格罗夫博士对原始材料进行了复查，驳斥了这种明显的日期矛盾。德格罗夫博士还进行了广泛的艺术史考察和科学分析，包括使用电子显微镜，令人信服地得出这幅肖像画是真迹的结论。此外，他的工作搭建了一座桥梁，将佛罗伦萨这个充满文艺复兴艺术的会议背景，与会议提供的超微结构病理学的当代进展联系起来。
