Read widely and let us know what you decide.
Im seeing different things, i also read Roman or Classical style
Yes. That's the point. "Style" can be interpreted differently by different people.
How has your teacher defined "style" in regards to Medieval and Renaissance art? Start there, and let me know.
It just says to name what style he used. Its not very discriptive. And im not sure if i have to put one set style.. or multiple..
Because i think he used Gothic and classical styles in his works.. but I know he also assisted in the creation of the Renaissance style.
I would not say Gothic! There's a certain amount of "classical" influence in his work, yes. He lived and practiced early in the Italian Renaissance, BEFORE Da Vinci and Michelangelo. Right?
I'd say he was something of a bridge between the heaviness of Medieval art and architecture and the growing lightness (in comparison) of the Renaissance. Keep in mind that these things didn't change overnight. He was in the forefront of what we now call the Italian Renaissance, and his ideas and work were continued by those who came after him and were influenced by him. You can see the progression by studying his work, then Da Vinci's, and then Michelangelo's ... and that of others ... in chronological order.
Yeah i keep reading and i see that when he went to Rome to study the ruins, that's what inspired his own unique style.
Keep in mind that Medieval art and architecture was almost totally controlled by and reflective of the Church and the Catholic doctrines of the time.
When he became interested in the ruins in Rome, he was seeing "classical" (not dominated by religion) art and architecture. This was the renaissance, the rebirth of Greek and Roman lines and themes. Be sure you're clear on what the word means and how we now use it: