I think it my intellectual duty to periodically (re-)introduce readers (and web searchers) to the work of art historian Diego Cuoghi. You know all those pictures you’ve seen on the History Channel’s Ancient Aliens show — the ones with UFOs in European paintings? Guess what … they aren’t UFOs.
Cuoghi is a real art historian. The rationale world is blessed that he has taken the time to show, via numerous examples, what these images are really showing. The objects in these paintings are not flying saucers / UFOs. They are well known to real art historians. Cuoghi is just a rare example of an art history professional that decided to answer the nonsense instead of just laugh at it.
The situation is that ‘ufologists’ see possible depictions of ‘ufo’-s, whereas an art history professional sees cases comprehensible within the context of art history, especially religious symbolism. I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.
To cut to the chase:
Is it 100% sure that in all cases the interpretation of art history refutes the ufologist interpretation? I wonder how. If a medieval artist was inspired to depict a religious subject in a way strongly reminding us of 19th and 20th century technology,* it is at least an entertaining subject to contemplate about, and to write about.
(* e.g., here in the middle of the page http://www.sprezzatura.it/Arte/Arte_UFO_2_eng.htm)
(I pay little respect to the UFO idea; there can be other interesting reasons for the striking similarity.)
It’s nice and generous of Mr. Cuoghi to have created that website section. And it is very odd if that’s the most thorough treatment of the subject on the whole planet, to date.
The flaw in the premise is: “inspired by 19th and 20th century technology.” They weren’t inspired by that. The objects (like a ring of angels) have nothing to do with flying craft in the first place. Sun and moon personified? You don’t need UFOs for that, either. It’s an utter disconnect.
What do you think a Byzantine Christian was trying to say by painting a personified sun on the right and a personified moon on the left of the crucified Christ, and both above him at the same level? I get that he did not have UFO’s in mind. I can’t find any detailed information on what it did mean however, other than that it was influenced by Roman Mithraism. I’m wondering if the sun and moon are being personified to depict them as eyewitnesses to the New Covenant.
I think Cuoghi talks about this on his site. I wouldn’t hazard a guess since I’m not an art historian, but here’s an example of a short explanation:
https://books.google.com/books?id=GF4XDp-eSTwC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=personified+sun+and+moon+christian+art&source=bl&ots=MTzRVAnROH&sig=rUFRRmN5EU33slYAKp9CMlRxFts&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjs3N7xysPMAhVH0GMKHfvXCVAQ6AEIPjAK#v=onepage&q=personified%20sun%20and%20moon%20christian%20art&f=false
I studied all said “flying saucer” Art in 19074 and again in 2014. These all look like flying saucers and not angels!
Look at the magnifications of the same pieces on Cuoghi’s website. It shows what they are, and they aren’t saucers.